Write a critical comparison of two pieces of research Essay

Write a critical comparison of two pieces of research Essay

Reason When choosing the two pieces of exploration to review, I wanted a topic that interested and was of relevance in my opinion. According to Hammersley and Scarth (1993) the function of educational research is to see policy-makers and practitioners and therefore to improve education (p. 216). Subsequently the essence this composition is not only to draw a crucial comparison between the two bits of research, nevertheless also to inform me, like a student teacher, on the results of the role of teachers’ beliefs of gender in mathematics therefore advise my personal future practice. In my last SE positioning I found personally teaching a mixed 12 months class of which boys made-up two thirds in the pupils, this highlighted in my opinion some of the gender issues that can easily manifest themselves in the primary classroom, I had developed previously not really had experience of. The school a new policy upon gender, which contained techniques for raising the achievement and interest of boys in lessons, especially in literacy. When seeing the male instructor conducting literacy and record lessons I found that many in the texts were tailored to the boys’ interests, such as information texts about robots or perhaps science fictional. In other classes I seen taught by simply female instructors, I did not see the use of virtually any resources particularly targeted at boys. I found that because the category contained even more boys than girls together a guy teacher, most of the talk and topics a new male idea. However , I did find that the boys were strongly motivated and that some of them responded in a very positive method to a male role style, which can typically be missing at major level. It had been clear while i took over the teaching in the class I discovered it more challenging to develop a rapport while using boys than I had inside my previous SONY ERICSSON placement where class instructor had been girl. There has been analysis conducted within the effect of the gender of the teacher particularly in math, but you will discover no results to support my observations. Many teachers indicated that all their gender does not necessarily effect their take care of their own pupils, or the approach that either male or female pupils related to these people. There has been already been research done to examine the affect of teacher male or female on students achievement in mathematics. Li (2001) quotations Saha’s (1993) conclusions that whether a instructor is male or female does make any difference for college student achievement, students with man teachers ought to achievement in mathematics than patients with woman teachers (p. 66). The experience within this category illustrated in my experience the differentiation of boys and girls in major education and how they reply to different stimuli, whether that be professors, work, methods etc . As being a mathematics specialist the fact the fact that topic investigates teachers’ gender-related beliefs within just that subject matter is of particular interest in my experience. I have not had virtually any experience of dealing with teachers who have hold diverse beliefs about girls’ and boys’ accomplishment, but I have never kept a discussion which has a teacher as to what they characteristic their learners success in mathematics to. The research documents provide an regarding teachers’ don and if these are differentiated by male or female. Any effects raised by the outcomes of this research can inform my own future practice. Historical Circumstance of Subject Over the last more than 20 years, there has been many different studies conducted to examine teachers’ beliefs regarding, or remise of, causation of their students’ achievement successes and failures. Research carried out by Clark simon and Peterson (1986) discovered that a teacher’s causal remise are important mainly because perceptions of why his/her students do well or fail in success situations posseses an impact on the teacher’s expectancies for students’ future accomplishment success. In addition they concluded that the sex of a student has not been shown to be a significant factor affecting teachers’ attributions. Nevertheless Fenema ainsi que al (1990) stated that a close studying of the books shows that most studies working directly with teacher don have not included gender being a variable (p. 57). There are some studies to show that experts hold diverse beliefs regarding appropriate learning experiences for boys and girls. Level et ing (1985) reported that educators do not have reduce expectations pertaining to girls’ performance in math concepts than they do for boys’ performance, however teachers have been found to provide more reassurance for kids then for females to learn math concepts. In 1998, the Scottish Exec for Education produced female Schools Support Pack, which details sexuality issues in raising attainment. The record states that research evidence in achievement shows that in mathematics: boys have generally more positive, or sometimes more polarised, thinking; boys convey more confidence, are less dependent on teachers’ explanations, and devise their own methods and short cuts to solutions; girls often underestimate their abilities and are easily disheartened. Research carried out by Gorard ou al (2001) on the habits of differential attainment of boys and girls in school showed that in mathematics, young ladies have a small achievement space over kids at level 2, yet at level 3 to A levels, kids hold a little achievement gap over girls, which raises over time. Circumstance According to Hammersley & Scarth (1993) it is important to understand the circumstance in which a record is developed (p. 217). Fenema ain al performed their study in the United States of America in 1990. Those men were 38 female first grade professors from twenty four elementary educational institutions. Tiedemann completed his analysis 10 years later on in 2k in a North German metropolis. The subjects were 52 3rd and 4th grade educators of which five were guy. It is not crystal clear from the research papers the way they both chose their selections. However , it appears likely that both used a form of cluster sampling. Denscomb (1998) claims that the logic behind cluster sampling is the fact, in reality it is possible to get a good sample by simply focussing upon naturally occurring groupings of the particular area the researcher would like to study and schools make the perfect example of a naturally occurring bunch. (p. 14). Cluster testing comes within the heading of probability sample which is depending on the idea that persons or occasions that are chosen are executed so for the reason that researcher has a idea that these types of will be a consultant cross-section of folks in the human population being examined. Denscomb (1998) adds that cluster sampling can save quite a lot of time that might have been put in travelling to different research sites throughout the land. However , he states the particular one must remember the aim should be to achieve a representative cluster and this could be acquired through randomly or stratified sampling (p. 13). Fenema et ing (1990) made a decision to study simply female teachers; this may be because this is a precise representation with the population, if there were little if any male very first grade instructors. If they had specifically chosen to study female professors attributions and beliefs this will have been mentioned somewhere inside the research newspaper. Tiedemann however , had your five male teachers within his sample of 52. It may be presumed that if a stratified approach was used, male educators therefore , signify approximately 10% of instructors in the human population he researched. Denscomb (1998) acknowledges that random sampling is likely to give a representative cross-section of the complete, however he adds that stratified sampling has a significant advantage more than random sampling in that the researcher can assert several control over selecting the sample in order to ensure that key persons or elements are included in it and are representative of that they are in the wider population (p. 13). Purpose Fenema et ing (1990) states that research had not looked at whether or not teachers hold different beliefs about girls, young boys and mathematics. For that reason their study aimed to recognize successful and unsuccessful mathematics students plus the accuracy with their identification; teacher’s attributions in the causes of successes and failures of girls and boys and teachers’ beliefs about the characteristics of their greatest girl and boy mathematics students (p. 56). They were doing not hypothesise about what that they expected to find, but discussed a set of questions they planned to answer. Tiedemann (2000) study title is extremely similar to that of Fenema et al’s (1990) and this individual quotes Fenema et al’s (1990) research in his overview of the literature. His target is not to re-test all their findings, but for test intended for perceptual prejudice in educator beliefs regarding gender inside their teaching of mathematics for elementary colleges (p. 194). Tiedemann (2000) believes that it is still difficult to draw any kind of conclusions confidently. He is however working a decade later and uses exploration conducted following Fenema ain al’s (1990) to make a hypothesis of what he needs to find pertaining to teachers don and beliefs. Bell (1999) identifies that it is useful to produce statements about relations between variables as it provides a guide to the investigator as to how a original thought may be examined and they may attempt to identify whether it is therefore among the topics in the sample (p. 25). Cohen & Manion (1994) agree that hypotheses and concepts play a crucial part in the technological method, often known as positivism, defined as all real knowledge is founded on sense experience and can only always be advanced by using observation or perhaps experiment. Positivism, however , have been challenged via many sectors (p. 11), Cohen & Manion (1994) quote Kierkegaard’s (1974) theory of existentialism saying that persons should be free of objectivity and having to discover general laws to explain individual behaviour, nevertheless instead consider ones’ very own relationship for the focus of the enquiry, which is the capacity pertaining to subjectivity (p. 23). Tiedemann (2000) says an underlying supposition of his study, there is no difference in sexuality achievements or teacher morals in math concepts. Cohen & Manion (1994) criticise trying to achieve a study having pre-interpreted the world to be researched as the assumptions with the researcher can easily influence after the effects (p. 25). Methods Both equally Fenema et al (1990) and Tiedemann (2000) utilized questionnaires to assemble data. Fenema et ing (1990) employed two types of questionnaires, a single being a organised individual interview the different a non-direct questionnaire, inside their research. Denscomb (1998) states that a organised interview, which involves tight control of the structure of the inquiries and answers, is similar to a questionnaire that is administered one on one. He gives that methodized interviews lend themselves for the collection of quantitative data, which was the type of info Fenema ain al (1990) did collect. There are problems to consider when choosing to conduct a set of questions directly. Denscomb (1998) claims that research shows when questioning people face-to-face informants respond in different ways depending on that they perceive the individual asking the questions. In particular the informant’s answer can be tailored to match what they think fits in using what the researcher expects from them or to what they perceive to be the researcher’s point of view (p. 116). As previously stated the researchers assumptions of the examine can affect the results. For example in Fenema ainsi que al’s (1990) structured interview the instructors might not conveniently admit the pupils not enough success is caused by them certainly not providing the support for the child regardless if it is their belief. In the case of Tiedemann (2000) his fundamental assumption that there is no difference in sexuality achievements or perhaps teacher values in mathematics could be identified by the police informant who changes their respond to this requirement. Cohen & Manion (1994) cite Kitwood’s (1977) analyze of immediate contact questionnaires; he states that there is a trade off among reliability and validity. In case the researcher evolves an atmosphere where the respondent feels comfortable the more likely they are really to disclose accurate information which is necessary to the validity, nevertheless reliability can be enhanced simply by rationalisation, nevertheless the interviewer becomes realistic and determining the more unlikely the situation will certainly contain a individual element plus the more computed the response is likely to be (p. 282). Denscomb (1998) indicates both types stating that questionnaires, that happen to be conducted without direct contact, remove the impact of face-to-face interaction (p. 88). Cohen & Manion acknowledge the bias that can impact upon direct interaction, but “it allows for better depth than is the case with other methods of data collection” (p. 272). By Fenema et ing (1990) applying both types of questionnaires, they have knowledgeable the advantages of both. Tiedemann (2000) applied only the non-direct contact and so his examine as Cohen & Manion (1994) stated could shortage greater interesting depth and a human element. Fenema et al (1990) and Tiedemann (2000) employed similar styles of forms to collect info about teachers’ attributions. Both equally used a non-direct set of questions, which included statements regarding the pupils that the instructors had to estimation on a level. Fenema ou al’s (1990) sex-role belief questionnaire was an variation of another researcher’s method of data collection. The 20 descriptors, with regards to characteristics with the teachers ideal mathematics students, contained a couple of opposing transactions, the educators responded by high arrangement to the proper phrase to high agreement with the kept phrase. The structured interview and questionnaire used by Fenema et ing (1990) plus the questionnaire utilized by Tiedemann (2000) all included closed concerns where the answers are restricted to choices supplied on the questionnaire. Denscomb (1998) appreciates both the advantages and disadvantages of closed questions. He states the structure on this questionnaire provides the researcher with information which can be of the same size and that can easily be compared, quantified and analysed. In the case of both research paperwork where the results were of a statistical nature, it would seem closed concerns were the most suitable to use. Denscombe (1998) paperwork the drawbacks saying there is certainly less opportunity for participants to supply answers which reflect the exact details of the case feelings of the topic and thus of this the respondents can become frustrated by ” not being able to express their landscapes fully in a way that accounts for any sophistication, difficulty or even incongruencies in their views” (p. 101). Fenema ou al’s (1990) questionnaire prevails over some of the limits of shut questions by simply allowing professors to list their contract with the phrases from one particular to 5, allowing them to highly agree with one particular phrase by simply marking one particular or 5, or to show a modification simply by marking 2, 3 or 4. Tiedemann’s (2000) customer survey similarly is structured to permit teachers as a solution on a three-point scale of true, incorrect and to some extent true. Even so Bell (1999) cautions up against the use of unclear words these kinds of a partly true, which might mean something different to each respondent (p. 121). In Fenema et al’s (1990) attribution interview every teacher select their 5 most effective mathematic learners and some most un-successful students to attribute the reason for their success or failure. The conventional paper does not express the criteria intended for how the learners were labeled as most or least successful, this information nevertheless is crucial to comprehend the teachers’ beliefs of what constitutes success or failure in mathematics, which can be central to the research problem. Tiedemann (2000) however says the criteria of a successful or perhaps failing math student. He chose three bands of performance level that the learners would get caught in, 2 from the upper level, 2 from medial and 2 through the lower functionality level. The bands were created from performance grades attributed to the children in a similar way children in the UK are levelled by performance in QCA or perhaps SATs testing. One of Fenema et al’s (1990) aims however was to discover how accurate the professors were in selecting their particular most and least good students. This was done by screening all 314 girls and 368 kids taught by the teachers and matching the results to the accuracy from the teachers’ choices. Therefore , it had been important that the teachers find the students as it gave a better insight into whether they were able to discover their the majority of and least successful students. However , it is important to note that there will always be a defieicency of whether the test out results from the students happen to be wholly valid. The test concerns were read to the college students by a trained tester. This immediately puts visual scholars or kids with poor memory for a disadvantage. In respect to Felder & Silverman (2002) visible learners keep in mind best the actual see – pictures, blueprints, flow charts, time lines, films, and demonstrations, verbal learners however get more out of words, spoken or perhaps written and so could have a benefit in this type of spoken evaluation. Dyslexic pupils may also be put at a disadvantage from this style of test. These kinds of children, who are often ready mathematicians, based on the British Dyslexia Association (2002) tend need to know more time once completing numerical activities due to contributing factors such as poorer short-term storage and reduced writing rates of speed. They can also have problems with oral processing. Fenema et al’s (1990) evaluation had a time limit, again placing some children at a drawback. Results Fenema et al’s (1990) and Tiedemann’s (2000) results opposed each other in two particular aspects. Fenema et al (1990) concluded that in the most and least capable categories, professors attributed girls’ success and failure to effort somewhat more so than for young boys. Tiedemann (2000) however discovered that professors thought that young ladies profited less from additional effort than males and had to exert relatively more efforts to achieve the level of actual efficiency in math concepts. Under the class of ability, both equally research documents contrasted each other in their results. Tiedemann (2000) states that teachers ascribed failure in girls more to low ability, although Fenema ain al (1990) found that boys achievement was linked more to ability than girls’ accomplishment. When analysing the results obtained by both parties one must consider the differences in their very own research methods and situations. The research workers did not examine children of the identical age, actually the children in Fenema ainsi que al’s (1990) research were 3 to 4 years younger as compared to Tiedemann’s (2000). The research was conducted in differing countries and Fenema et al’s (1990) sample size (pupils) was dual that of Tiedemann’s (2000). Denscomb (1998) reflects on issues when utilizing a sample of 300 or perhaps less (Tiedemann’s (2000) becoming 312). This individual states that extra attention needs to be paid to the concern of how rep the test is and caution is needed about the extent to which generalisations can be made based on the research studies (p. 24). Does this mean therefore that Tiedemann’s the desired info is less feasible than Fenema et al’s (1990) due to his sample size? This may have to be looked at in relation to how representative his sample was. Fenema ainsi que al (1990) may have got a larger test but there is not any information on how representative it is. Denscombe (1998) as well states the smaller the test the less difficult the examination should be, in the sense that the data should be afflicted by fewer neighborhoods (p. 24). Tiedemann however divides his questionnaire in 6 classes containing 21 items; in accordance to Denscomb (1998) this can ‘dilute’ results (p. 24). The issues of bias and validity with regards to Fenema ou al’s (1990) interview must also be taken into consideration. As recently discussed problems can affect effects and more here is how the interview was done is needed ahead of an evaluation of its reliability can be conducted. To shut, it is difficult to draw obvious and unequivocal conclusions coming from both these pieces of exploration, although Fenema et al’s (1990) research follows many advice for gaining trusted results, just like more than one way of data collection and a sizable enough sample size. Bells (1999) declares that inside the analysis, interpretation and business presentation of data, care has to be taken not to declare more intended for results than is warranted. Li (2001) states that when studying each of the literature, which include both the analysis papers analysed here, in gender-related beliefs in professors, the answers are inconclusive. Bibliography Bell, L. (1999) Doing all of your Research Project Cash: OUP Cohen, L. & Manion, M. (1994) Analysis Methods in Education London, uk: Routledge Denscomb, M. (1998) The Good Study Guide Maidenhead: OUP Li, Q. (2001) Teachers’ morals and gender difference in mathematics: an assessment Educational Study Vol. forty one No . one particular pp. 63-76 The United kingdom Dyslexia Affiliation (2002) Math and Dyslexia http://www.bda-dyslexia.org.uk/main/information/education/e07maths – 01/06/03 Tiedemann, J. (2000) Gender-Related Values of Professors in Grammar school Mathematics Educational Studies in Mathematics Vol. 43 pp. 191-207 Felder, R. M. & Silverman, L. E. (2002) Learning Styles and Strategies http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSdir/styles.htm – 01/06/03 Fenema, Electronic. Peterson, S. L. Carpenter, T. G. & Lubinski, C. A. (1990) Teachers’ Attributions and Beliefs About Girls, Young boys and Mathematics Educational Studies in Mathematics Volume. 21 pp. 55-69 Gorard, S. Rees, G. & Salisbury, L. (2001) Checking out the Habits of Gear Attainment of Boys and Girls by School Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 28 No . 3 pp. 411-428 Hammersley, Meters. & Scarth, J. & (1993) Avoid wise men bearing items: a case analyze in the misuse of educational research in Gomm, Ur. & Forest, P. (ed) Educational Study in Action London, uk: Chapman Limited

Related Essays