The Privileged Status of Knowing Mechanistic Information: An Early Epistemic Bias

Four studies with 180 5–7 year olds, 165 8–11 year olds and 199 adults show that young children appreciate the distinctive role played by mechanistic explanations in tracking causal patterns. Young children attributed greater knowledge to individuals offering mechanistic reasons for a claim than others who provide equally detailed nonmechanistic reasons. In Study 1, 5–7 year olds attributed greater knowledge to those offering mechanistic reasons. In Studies 2 and 3, all ages (5–7 and adults for Study 2; 5–7, 8–11 and adults for Study 3) assigned greater knowledge to those offering mechanistic reasons about causally central features than those offering nonmechanistic reasons. In Study 4, all ages (5–7, 8–11, adults) modulated the epistemic bias as a function of embedding goals.     

Feeding forward from summative assessment: the Essay Feedback Checklist as a learning tool

Owing to the increasing diversity of assessments in higher education, feedback should be provided to students in a format that can assist future and alternative work. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the Essay Feedback Checklist on future alternative assessments. Participants were assigned to one of two groups, one of which completed the checklist prior to assessment 1 (essay) and received feedback using this method. Attainment on assessment 1 and assessment 2 (examination) were taken as pre- and post-test scores. Results revealed increased assessment scores for the checklist group, compared to those who received conventional feedback. Focus group data indicated that students particularly liked elements of the checklist as a feedback method, but potential drawbacks were also highlighted. Implications and future use of the checklist is then discussed.     

The effect of orthographic depth on letter string processing: the case of visual attention span and rapid automatized naming

The present study investigated whether orthographic depth can increase the bias towards multi-letter processing in two reading-related skills: visual attention span (VAS) and rapid automatized naming (RAN). VAS (i.e., the number of visual elements that can be processed at once in a multi-element array) was tested with a visual 1-back task and RAN was measured in a serial letter naming task that introduced a novel manipulation (some letter sequences formed frequent words). Spanish-Basque and French-Basque bilingual children were tested at early (30 children in 1st and 2nd grade), and more advanced (24 children in 3rd, 4th and 5th grade) stages of reading acquisition to investigate whether they would be differently biased towards multi-letter processing due to reading in two shallow (Spanish, Basque), or a deep and a shallow (French, Basque) orthography. The French-Basque bilinguals, who read in a deep orthography, were expected to rely on larger orthographic units in reading and thus to be more biased towards multi-letter processing in both tasks. This was expected to be reflected by: (a) a uniform distribution of attention across letter strings in the VAS task, and (b) a greater interference of the embedded words on letter-by-letter naming in RAN, leading to longer naming times. The expected group differences were observed in the more advanced readers, with French-Basque bilinguals showing a wider distribution of VAS across letter strings and longer naming times in RAN.     

The middle years slump: addressing student-reported barriers to academic progress

First-year university student attrition has been widely explored. However, there is a gap in our understanding when it comes to later years. Why do students who successfully navigate the hurdles of transition into university become at risk of exclusion in the middle years of study because of poor academic progress? This qualitative project develops a student-centred understanding of the problem of attrition through academic failure. It investigates the reasons given by students wishing to avoid involuntary exclusion from their course. Specifically, we address why middle-year students say they fail when they wish to succeed by examining self-reports. We find six main self-reported themes in three categories. The problems faced by mid-degree undergraduates are broader and more complex than those encountered in the first year. Our findings contrast with previous work on first-year attrition, which found that negative expectations of their own ability to succeed were a major factor in students’ decisions to drop out, although our study is constructed differently in that we analyse people wishing to continue their studies. The results expand our understanding of student involuntary attrition in the middle years. The overarching major issues in the themes we identified were financial, family/personal issues and health problems. In particular, mental health issues were remarkably apparent. This has significant implications for future student support. We find that there are commonly multiple reasons underlying each student’s at-risk status and provide suggestions for managers of programs that help students succeed.     

Targeting Parenting in Early Childhood: A Public Health Approach to Improve Outcomes for Children Living in Poverty

In this article, the authors posit that programs promoting nurturing parent–child relationships influence outcomes of parents and young children living in poverty through two primary mechanisms: (a) strengthening parents' social support and (b) increasing positive parent–child interactions. The authors discuss evidence for these mechanisms as catalysts for change and provide examples from selected parenting programs that support the influence of nurturing relationships on child and parenting outcomes. The article focuses on prevention programs targeted at children and families living in poverty and closes with a discussion of the potential for widespread implementation and scalability for public health impact.     

School leadership for equity: lessons from the literature

Responding to Thrupp's [2003. “The School Leadership Literature in Managerialist Times: Exploring the Problem of Textual Apologism.” School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation 23 (2): 169] call for writers on school leadership to offer ‘analyses which provide more critical messages about social inequality and neoliberal and managerialist policies’ we use Foucault's [2000. “The Subject and Power.” In Michel Foucault: Power, edited by J. D. Faubion, 326–348. London: Penguin Books] theory of power to ask what lessons we might learn from the literature on school leadership for equity. We begin by offering a definition of neoliberalism; new managerialism; leadership and equity, with the aim of revealing the relationship between the macropolitical discourse of neoliberalism and the actions of school leaders in the micropolitical arena of schools. In so doing, we examine some of the literature on school leadership for equity that post-dates Thrupp's [2003. “The School Leadership Literature in Managerialist Times: Exploring the Problem of Textual Apologism.” School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation 23 (2): 149–172] analysis, seeking evidence of critical engagement with/resistance to neoliberal policy. We identify three approaches to leadership for equity that have been used to enhance equity in schools internationally: (i) critical reflection; (ii) the cultivation of a ‘common vision’ of equity and (iii) ‘transforming dialogue’. We consider if such initiatives avoid the hegemonic trap of neoliberalism, which captures and disarms would be opponents of new managerial policy. We conclude by arguing that, in spite of the dominance of neoliberalism, head teachers have the power to speak up, and speak out, against social injustice.     

Public Policy

GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY RELATIONS: KEY ISSUES IN THE US TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY by Dr. D.C. Pitt (Economic and Social Research Council, 160 Great Portland St., London WIN 6BA—L3.50, paper)

STATE GOVERNMENT RESEARCH DIRECTORY edited by Kay Gill and Susan E. Tufts (1987—price not given)

GOVERNMENT RESEARCH DIRECTORY edited by Kay Gill and Susan E. Tufts (1987—$350)

RESEARCH SERVICES DIRECTORY edited by Robert J. Huffman, and Mary Michelle Watkins (1987—$290)

PROTECTING THE BEST MEN: AN INTERPRETIVE HISTORY OF THE LAW OF LIBEL by Norman L. Rosenberg (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986—$29.95)

MEDIA LAW by Ralph L. Holsinger (New York: Random House, 1987—price not given)

COMMONSENSE COPYRIGHT: A GUIDE TO THE NEW TECHNOLOGIES by R. S. Talab (McFarland & Co., Box 611, Jefferson, NC 28640—$14.95, paper)     

Qualifying resistance: Some comments on methodological dilemmas

This essay raises questions about the category of "resistance" in educational research and the methodological dilemmas posed by its interpretation. It suggests that psychoanalytic theory provides a way of thinking about resistance that might be helpful for thinking about the gap between the narration of experience and the interpretation of experience. The essay provides a brief overview of conceptualizations of resistance in educational research, discusses the notion of the psychoanalytic dialogue and the qualities of resistance it offers, and brings a psychoanalytic understanding of resistance to bear on a research story that, at first glance, does not appear to qualify as a story of resistance. Finally, the essay explores the implications of these interpretive strategies for critical education research.     

Speculations on qualities of difficult knowledge in teaching and learning: an experiment in psychoanalytic research

This paper explores two questions in relation to the authors' project, “Difficult Knowledge in Teaching and Learning: A Psychoanalytic Inquiry.” They describe how their original question, “What makes knowledge difficult?,” transformed into “What is it to represent ‘difficult’ knowledge?” They speculate on the resonances that this crisis of representation leaves in narration by way of three psychoanalytic concepts: deferred action, transference, and symbolization. They consider constructions of difficulties in teaching and learning from the vantage of psychoanalytic writing and their own attempts to interview university teachers and students on how they think about difficult knowledge. They offer a conceptual archeology of their project that highlights the shift from the first to the second research question, some clinical discussion on the difficulties of narrating teaching and learning, some constructions of difficulty proposed in their research protocol, and constructions of difficulty in their interviews. They conclude by discussing how the very design of their research enacted the crisis of representing teaching and learning.