ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
VALUING PRIMARY STUDENTS' PERSPECTIVES
PREPARED FOR THE EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH – LILLE 2001
Please do not quote without permission
Bob Jeffrey,
The Open University
Walton Hall,
Milton Keynes
England
MK7 6AA
[email protected]
1
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
INTRODUCTION
Research on primary student perspectives has focused on student's attitudes, dispositions
to and evaluations of school and classroom conditions of learning, relationships with
teachers, and agency, that incorporates student’s classroom and learning strategies
(McCallum, Hargreaves, and Gipps 2000; Newman 1997; Pollard et al. 2000; Pollard
1985). Research into primary student’s: identity development and school "career"
(Pollard and Filer 1999); the assessment of primary students (Davies and Brember ????;
Filer and Pollard 2000; Gipps 1995); critical events (Woods 1993); creative teaching
(Woods 1995; Woods and Jeffrey 1996); creative learning [Jeffrey, 2000 #212];
comparative cultural research (Osborn 1997); racism and sectarianism (Connolly 1997a;
Connolly 1997c); children and work [Hutchins, ???? #303], mixed ability grouping
(Lyle 1999) bi-lingualism and creativity (Woods, Boyle, and Hubbard 1999), have also
incorporated student perspectives.
These research studies show the knowledge primary school students have of educational
processes and the competence with which they engage in discussion of these processes
and their implementation. However, a series of reforms in English education over the
last ten years together with an increasing public focus on schools via the media have
affected primary school cultures, policies and processes. Recent reforms of primary
education have included, the introduction of a National Curriculum, a national,
externally constructed assessment programme, regular national inspections by the Office
for standards in Education (Ofsted), and prescribed literacy and numeracy programmes.
Added to these structural innovations, a performativity discourse has pervaded primary
schools. Its main influence has been to force schools to ‘market’ themselves and to
ensure that they strive to achieve continual improvement in the schools’ achievements in
national Standardised Assessment Tasks (SATs), on which the construction of published
‘league tables’ are based. Ofsted is a form of ‘audit accountability’ (Power 1994),
whose findings are also published and add to pressure on schools to appear to be
publicly successful.
The extent to which primary school students have understood and reacted to these events
is the subject of this paper. The sample is 30 year five and six (aged 9 and 10) bilingual,
2
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
mainly Bangladeshi students from three classes attending an inner-city primary school .
The school is considered to be a deprived school that works well with the local
community and prioritises creative curriculum experiences and pedagogies.
Ethnographic research was carried out over a year and educational experiences included
in the research programme were the national curriculum, the literacy and maths
prescribed hours, an Ofsted inspection, a school journey, special events and the annual
year 6 SATs examinations. Classroom observations, field notes, discussions with
teachers and with school students constituted the site’s data collection. Conversations
were tape-recorded and have been transcribed. Both teachers and schools students were
assured that every effort would be made to ensure that the conversations would be
confidential and unattributable. The data used in this paper relies solely on the students’
conversations with the researcher, usually in groups of four, at least three times during
the year. The researcher used photographs of classroom and school activities as a
stimulus for conversation and to encourage discussion and argument, if appropriate,
within the group.
We found that these primary students:

were knowledgeable about the nature of the reforms in education;

were capable and competent at observing and interpreting a broad range of
conditions of classroom teaching and learning;

were able to identify and discuss educational issues,

evaluated the educational process, made recommendations to improve the quality of
teaching and learning and also acted strategically where and when they felt it
appropriate.
They were informed participants, observers and interpreters, issue developers, advisors
and strategists. Student experience of inspection, national assessments and national
curriculum studies are the contexts in which these findings were generated.
INFORMED PARTICIPANTS
Research with secondary students suggested that inexperience restricts them from
perceiving the curriculum as a whole. They are likened to the working sailors, who on a
voyage of discovery, only concern themselves with day-to-day living. It is only the
ship's captain and navigator – policy makers and teachers - who have a picture of their
3
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
position and route on a map (Rudduck, Chaplain, and Wallace 1996). However, we
found our students to be very informed about the current purposes and processes of
education and schools. They understood the role of inspections within a market
discourse, their role in the school’s corporate culture, the administrative processes of an
inspection, the role of SATs in terms of career, selection, teacher grading and policy
derivations and they engaged with learning theories.
Inspections and the market discourse
They understand the role of national inspections within a performativity and market
discourse, ‘If the report said that behaviour was good and we were good at listening then
people would want to come to school because we give a good education’ (Reenha).
They felt themselves to part of the corporate culture of the school, ‘I felt responsible
because I was year six and I should know things and behave properly. They were really
looking at year six and our behaviour, presentation and our work (Reenha). The
students understood that SATs results and ‘market’ position are closely related, ‘if I get
lower marks I would be letting the school down because the teachers are supporting us
in our work and if we get lower marks than other schools, we would feel embarrassed’
(Lutfa). They understood the supportive role of team work in a corporate culture (Jeffrey
2001a), and the consequences of failure, ‘It is hard for teachers to teach us such a lot and
they spend a lot of time doing it. If we don't get level four it looks like the teachers have
not worked hard enough (Babul).
The administrative process of inspections was understood as was the hierarchical and
supervisory role of the inspectorate, ‘I would not like to be in inspector because I would
not like to have to tell the truth about children to other people. They have to tell the
truth, (Nipa).
The Role of SATs
They understand the role of SATs in terms of: career, ‘to help you get a good job’
(Shuheema); assessment, ‘They test what you have learnt in the last few years’ (Parvin);
selection, ‘it's for your teachers to know what level you are, what stage to put you when
you go to secondary school’ (Mehidi); teacher grading, ‘If we get good marks then they
4
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
think our teacher is good’ (Shuheema) and policy derivations, ‘the law uses them, the
government says everyone has to do them’, (Bodrun).
They had an understanding of SATs usefulness: for learning practices, ‘they help show
what I know and also they show what I do not know so I can improve (Parvin);
achievement, ‘If you get a good grade people might think you are clever’ (Bodrun) and
for status, ‘So we can be clever and everyone might respect us when we grow up’
(Raju). Respect was conceived of as a desirable value alongside knowledge of the
remuneration to be gained from working hard, ‘I am not going to work just for money. I
want to have a good name’, (Shameena). The Pollard et al (2000) research only
identified the summative aspects of assessments as prevalent in student perspectives, but
these student’s enhanced experience of SATs appears to have made them more aware of
the formative role of assessment.
Knowledge of Learning Theories
Cleverness is understood as, ‘your brain ticking’ (Mehedi), ‘that you are wise’ (Shazia),
‘that you know things’ (Masun), that ‘you can be clever at some things and not clever at
others’ (Mehedi) and that ‘you can be clever and not have to work hard’ (Shazia). They
appreciated the satisfaction to be gained from: being in control of learning, ‘I learnt how
to make yoghurt. I have never planned things like that in my life. I learnt that I have to
think about it’ (Nipa); empirical experimentation, ‘I thought that if you put food
colouring in it would change the flavour but it didn't’ (Shazia); investigating variables, ‘I
learnt that taste is not everything and that you have to think about colour, texture and
how the package looks’ (Farida); decision making, ‘I was unsure whether putting
chocolate in would make it taste good or not. I learnt that you have to experiment’
(Parvin).
The positive features of collaborative work were also understood,
In our team we had to talk together and get ideas from each other. You had to
know who was going to do each job. We then shared the jobs out in our team. It
was enjoyable lifting the wood and collecting the leaves and getting mud on your
hands. We learnt team work.
5
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
However, like teachers caught up in the new ‘team’ work corporate culture they were
also aware of some of the disadvantages of team competition, (Jeffrey 2001a)
It was a challenge to see which team could get the most mud and cover their
shelter. However if one team wins the other teams might be quite depressed
because they tried hard and didn't win. We like challenges where it is ‘win win’
because everybody tries.
They were able to differentiate between different qualities of learning experiences, ‘I
don't like doing comprehension where you have to go back and find the answer. In story
writing you can make things up. You can write whatever you like. When doing
comprehension you have to write what it says’ (Ishatt). They may not have known of the
concept of status passage but they experienced and generalised it in their own terms,
The school journey was a challenge. It was a big step for us, like leaving a family
and we were brave to do it. It taught us how to do it when we have to leave home.
It taught us braveness.
OBSERVERS AND INTERPRETERS
Whilst being subject to the culture of classrooms, primary school students observe and
interpret behaviours and events. They use their experience of life outside school and
their school experiences to interpret situations meaningfully for them as students and
individuals. In more formal contexts primary school students observations and
interpretations have been used to carry out specific research tasks, (Pollard 1985;
Schratz 2001). They recorded observations and interpretations of climates and
atmospheres, social relations and subjectivity.
Climate and atmosphere
The climate and atmosphere of a classroom determines relations, strategies and
processes and although it may appear that students adapt to the disposition of the
teachers (Pollard et al. 2000; Rudduck, Chaplain, and Wallace 1996; Woods and Jeffrey
1996) climates and atmospheres are also a matter of continual negotiation between
teachers and students. (Cooper and McIntyre 1996; Pollard et al. 2000; Spaulding 1997;
Woods 1990).
6
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
During the inspection the students identified changes in atmospheres by noting changes
in teacher disposition,
I think the teachers were nervous. They also seemed to be everywhere. I think
they were worrying about how they class was going to be. You could tell by the
look on her face (Ruehanara).
The teachers ‘did not want anything to go wrong. Everyone was acting differently’
(Shaheema). Even when teachers managed to maintain their normal disposition students
discerned the extra pressure placed upon them,
Our teacher didn't give any impression of being nervous. You couldn't tell by
looking at her face. She was acting normally. She told people off if they were
naughty on the carpet. However, I could tell by the end of the day she was
relieved, especially at the end of the week. (Mobin)
As well observing and interpreting climates the student’s were reflective, ‘It is very
quiet when we do SATs work and you can concentrate. I am not sure why I like this
activity but I like concentrating a lot’ (Nazma). These reflections are also evaluative, ‘I
panicked and I put down things that didn't make sense. I was too nervous. My head was
not straight’ (Shereena). Evaluations were also qualitative,
The lesson was fine and exciting because I like a lot of noises in the classroom.
When it is quiet it is dull and boring. When it's noisy it’s like a funfair going on in
our class. When it's like this I really get into things. It’s really fun, hearing their
laughing and listening to their talk. I liked walking around the classroom getting
them to taste my yoghurt. I really liked it because it was noisy and fun.
Social relations
Personal interaction is valued more by primary schools students than qualities related to
teaching and learning (Cooper and McIntyre 1996; Pollard et al. 2000; Spaulding 1997;
Woods 1990), although this is not necessarily the case in different cultures, for example
French elementary schools (Osborn 1997). Students manage relationships with teachers,
becoming knowledgeable about teacher disposition and adjust their behaviour
accordingly (Pollard et al. 2000). They
demonstrate strategic sophistication and acumen when seeking to maximise their
own interests. Teachers can be outmanoeuvred, and the stability and order they
7
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
strive to create in their classrooms is always a precarious one subject to change as
the nature of interactions between people change. (Crawford ???? p. 95)
The students were capable of analysing interactions, appreciating qualitative interactions
and awareness of micro politics.
The inspector thought we were laughing at her but we were not. We were
laughing at a word a boy had used in his writing. When she had told the teacher
she looked at us and I looked at her and she looked away. That’s how I knew she
had told the teacher. (Rheena)
They used their understanding of gestures to assess outcomes ‘During a news session on
the carpet we were all talking at once about the cyclone in India and somebody also
started hiccuping. The inspector who was there looked very angry. He wrote things
down and frowned while he was doing it’ (Nadia).
Trust relations figured highly ‘We know the class teachers and we know how they work,
but we don't know what the inspectors might do. We don't know whether they might
write bad comments or good comments in their notebooks’ (Shaheema). An unjustified
critical comment is not easily forgiven ‘When I was making slippers our teacher said
that I had not put enough effort into it. But I thought I had worked hard. Afterwards she
said she was joking. But I still didn't like it (Farida). The quality of day to day
exchanges affects self esteem amongst English primary school students (Davies and
Brember ????)
The respect of their peers also mattered to them, particularly where teachers
differentiated a group of them by excluding from taking part in SATs revision, ‘The
other children might be saying something to their friends. They might whisper that we
can't do it, that we are babies’ (Shaheeda). They were aware of the consequences for
social relations resulting from being assigned a social identity (Ball 1972) based on test
achievements, ‘my brother and sisters and cousins tease me because they are competing
with me. In the London reading test I got higher than them which is why they are jealous
(Wahidua). Those who were identified as being ‘clever’ were also concerned ‘I want to
be just like the other people. I can't help getting the words right’, (Mehedi). The peer
culture that in English schools downgrades cleverness and test achievement (Pollard and
8
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
Filer 1999; Pollard et al. 2000; Rudduck, Chaplain, and Wallace 1996), also values
social relations not based on test achievement.
Subjectivity
In a summary of research literature in their edited collection Pollard et al (Pollard,
Thiessen, and Filer 1997) conclude that young children value:

affirmation of personal identities during the teaching and learning processes and
through classroom relationships

recognition that home, communities and friends are ever present contexts within
which primary pupils’ classroom meanings and responses are located.

awareness that engagement with classroom tasks and learning processes are
emotional and social acts, as well as cognitive challenges;

acceptance that curriculum ownership, relevance, power and personal identification
are legitimate topics for questioning and concern (op.cit. p.10)
These students observations of their teaching and learning contexts reflected these
research findings. They were expresssive, emotional, empathetic and self reflective.
Learning preferences were communicated expressively.
I love school because we do fun activities. This time I had a chance to do
something on my own. When I am at home my mum is always there to help me
and I don't like that. I liked making the yoghurt because chocolate was included
and I love chocolate. (Nadia)
Teacher emotions are considered to be an important factor in teacher training,
development and practice (Hargreaves 1998) because they effect teachers’ commitment,
interest and personal welfare. Emotions are also significant to student’s connections to
learning contexts (Woods 1993; Woods and Jeffrey 1996).
One of the inspectors came to look at my work on Romeo and Juliet in literacy.
My heart was beating very fast. I didn't understand her and then she repeated her
question again because I did not say anything. I was not ready to answer her
question. I did understand the second time but I was lost for words. I needed to be
relaxed. She asked if I understood the work I was doing and what happened if I
made a mistake and I didn't have a rubber. She asked me if ‘I would sit there all
9
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
day and do nothing about it’. I didn't answer her because I did not know what to
say (Raheena)
Teachers suffered from anxiety during an inspection (Jeffrey and Woods 1998) and so
did students ‘I had to read to an inspector and was so scared that I might make a mistake
I thought she might ask me to spell a word without looking at it’ (Nadia). This was in
spite of being told that ‘they had come to look at the teachers. They were trying to find
out if the teachers were teaching well or badly and whether they were teaching the
children what they are supposed to be taught, suitable things’ (Nipa).
Anxiety, in one student’s case led to subterfuge and increasing anxiety,
People sometimes don't come to school because they know they will get a lower
mark. Sometimes you get scared and you pretend that you are ill. When we did a
science test I did that once. Will you tell the teacher that?’ (Kumol).
Feelings of humiliation, ‘Yes. I was very upset. If you have the lowest mark in your
class you feel very ashamed. You feel alone. Sometimes people laugh at you’ (Kumol)
and hopelessness were subjective reactions,
I think I'm going to get low marks in my English and my family is going to say “I
am useless and I don't learn anything”. It's upsetting because I really try hard
(Wahidua).
Anxiety was not diminished by knowledge of reality, ‘I worry that I will get low marks
and my family will be angry. I know they won't really but I still think that (Shumeena).
Students feel the effect of praise for a high achiever, ‘I was happy for her but at the same
time I thought I could have done better’ (Lutfa), ‘You think you haven't done as well as
you could’ (Nazma), ‘I thought we were the odd ones out’ (Masun), ‘I thought I didn't
revise properly at home’ (Shazia). Students take responsibility for their own
performance (Rudduck et al 1996, Pollard and Triggs 2000),
One day I only got two marks for spelling and everybody said "you're dumb”. I
became very depressed with myself because I only got two right. I was angry with
myself, not with the teacher for calling out the marks. (Eiman)
In spite of their anxieties some found time to empathise,
I don't like the hard part. When they are difficult questions and you can't do them.
I worry about losing a mark and that I might get a lower level. A level is like the
10
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
stage you are at. We are at level 4 and 5. The level 2 children must feel down and
sad (Nazma).
They also acted to challenge negative emotions and to manage them through self
examination and reflection , ‘Sometimes when you get a low mark you know you are
better than that. You know that you didn't try very hard. That happened to me once. I
sort of knew I had not tried very hard so I was not that disappointed with the low mark’
(Lutfa).
ISSUE DEVELOPERS,
Involvement of young people’s perspectives in evaluating the conditions of their lives
can be seen in areas such as: disability, (Davis, Watson, and Cunningham-Burley 2000;
Nicholls, Thorkildsen, and Bates 1997); institutional care, (O'Kane 2000); youth
disaffection (Willis 1977) and sexuality (Mac An Ghaill 1994). Research has also
focused on discussion and debate by young people of specific issues such as racism
(Connolly 1997b), sectarianism (Connolly 1997c), gendered stereotyping (Epstein
1998), work at home and school, [Hutchins, ???? #303] and classroom ethos (Burdon
1988). This research showed the students identifying moral, performativity, learning
theory and pedagogical issues.
Moral Issues
Moral issues were raised, if a little imaginatively, ‘I would not like to be an inspector
because if you have to put someone in jail you would be very sad, (Nadia). They drew
on humanist values in their observations, ‘I would not like to be an inspector and go and
tell the teacher about the children because the children would not like me. They would
think I looked on their bad side’ (Shameena). Issues of injustice and fairness figure
highly in English school student’s priorities ((Pollard et al. 2000; Rudduck, Chaplain,
and Wallace 1996).
In the literacy hour we were playing snakes and ladders but we didn't really know
how to play it. The inspector told our teacher that it was a nightmare and we were
arguing. But we were trying. I was shocked because I thought the inspectors were
going to be helpful and kind. (Ruehanara)
11
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
Performativity issues
Performativity issues relating to possible student failure and corporate relations were
prominent,
The thing that frightens me is that you do not know what paper you're going to get.
If I don't understand it and cannot do it I will get lower marks than other people.
Then I will feel I have let myself and everyone else down. It means that other
people will have understood something and it feels like I have done something
wrong if I get lower marks. I would be letting the school down, (Lutfa).
Inconsistent performance was a worrying issue, ‘I got 17 out of 28 for maths and one of
the children said ‘you were so good before the holiday and now you're no good’. I felt
sad and upset (Shumeena).
Relationship issues resulted from performativity practices (Jeffrey 2001a).
What do you feel when the teacher says this child is clever and has got lots of
good marks? (Researcher),
I feel upset with the teacher when she doesn't tell us that we have worked hard,
(Aklima). I feel they are better than us. I am angry with myself for not doing as
well as she did and angry with the other person because they got good marks
(Shumeena).
Teacher assessment was not seen as a solution but an issue, ‘The problem with that is
that, if you are the teacher's pet, you get higher marks’ (Shumeena). They anticipated
problems with proposals to amend time allowances for SATs, ‘I would give extra marks
for those who did it quickly but allow lots of time for all of us, (Shereena). The problem
with that is that it might encourage some of us to rush it, (Parvin).
Exception from the SATs revision process was, perhaps surprisingly, not perceived of as
a benefit.
I wanted to do them all especially the maths. But in some ways I didn't want to do
them because they are too hard, (Farheena). You don't understand. We want to do
them but we want to understand them so we can do them, (Rogina). So we can be
brave and good, (Shaheeda).
12
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
Learning Theory Issues
The relationship between cleverness and hard work was explored as an issue.
‘If you're a clever person do you have to work hard to get to a level?’ (researcher)
‘Yes, no, yes, no’ (group of four). ‘If they are really clever they don't have to go to
school’ (Shumeena), ‘Kusheeda is clever but she still works hard’,(Aklima), ‘She
gets the most help from the teachers’ (Wahidua)
The ability to express uncertainty was part of their reflectivity,
Can you get a level six by not working hard? Researcher),
I'm not sure about that question, (Shazia).
Valuing improvement was another solution to the issue,
‘If people at level 2 tried hard they might not get a level six but at least they tried.
They might have tried their best. (Mehedi). ‘If you work hard day and night you
would improve but you might not get a level six’, (Masun). ‘If you get used to the
tests you can get a better mark’ (Mehedi). I improved on my writing stories and.
first I've got level 3 then I improved and got level four (Shazia).
Alternatively, an optimum level of ability was perceived of as another position to hold,
‘Do you know someone who has worked hard but has not improved their level?’
(Researcher) ‘Yes, but it is a good level for her’ (Kumol).
The relationship between achievement, effort and improvement are major issues at the
highest level of education and of government policies. These primary school students are
aware of them and capable and competent to engage in discussion of them.
Pedagogic Issues
Fundamental pedagogical questions were posed,
Sometimes and we are sitting on the carpet and we do not understand it. We make
every effort to try and understand but sometimes teachers say we fidget too much
and that is what stops us understanding. That is what I don't like about it. If I do
not understand how can I answer the question. Then they say I didn't listen and
tell me off. I don't like it because, if I don't understand, how can I answer the
question? (Rheena).
Intensification of work was as much an issue as for students as for teachers (Woods et al.
1997).
13
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
We are always changing our work. We never have time to make our work good.
We never get to read it out and tell people about our work or get people who tell us
how good it is. (Reena)
I do not like it when I do not understand the work and there is no time for the
teacher to explain it to me. Then I am told off for not understanding it.
(Shaheema):
Pedagogic effectiveness is also an issue for school students, ‘It was hard making notes in
the interview with the cook because you had to write quickly and if you wrote messily
you couldn't read it. It was hard to listen and write at the same time’ (Asheema).
Preferred learning practices have always been an issue in primary schools but recent
pressure in schools to conform to more uniform pedagogies (Alexander, Rose, and
Woodhead 1992; Galton et al. 1999) including the prescriptive literacy and numeracy
hours (Woods, Jeffrey, and Troman 2000), is highlighting the issue. ‘I don't like staying
on the carpet time when we know what to do, like when Joanne kept on asking us about
the orientations of the story. I knew what they were and I just wanted to get on with it’.
(Ishatt). Reactions to the increase in teacher led practices were sometimes decisive, ‘I'd
like to just get straight on to it and do things. I don't like the literacy hour on the carpet.
I don't like answering questions. I would prefer to do comprehension than sit on the
carpet’, (Kibria). However, they were also reflective,
It is better learning by doing things because you learn by your mistakes and you
can improve things than it is sitting on the carpet and listening to someone
(Asheema), You use more of your own ideas when you're doing things,
(Shameena), However you can generate ideas and ask questions on the carpet
(Farida).
Primary school students are able to recognise and appreciate sophisticated pedagogic
purposes that enhance control and ownership of learning (Woods 1990), ‘I like making
things and being able to choose things. I liked the fact that we had to choose between
the ingredients for the yoghurt without having have enough money to choose all of
them’ (Asheema). This observation raises the question of whether choice based on a
series of dilemmas for learning would enhance learning and commitment. The
opportunity for students to ‘improve’ specific learning experiences might also be
14
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
considered an effective learning practice, ‘I liked doing the design of a shelter and
constructing it because I liked improving it, putting on more detail. We had a choice to
do it the way we wanted to’ (Ishatt).
ADVISORS AND STRATEGISTS
Being informed observers who were able to generate issues means that primary students
can be considered for the role of advisors and strategists. These students proposed that
teaching and learning policies and procedures should be flexible and incorporate breadth
and balance. They included justifications for their recommendations and showed how to
act strategically.
Recommendations
It was suggested that SATs exams should be more flexible so that,
The children who can do it well should be able to do it on their own without the
teacher. They should just be told briefly what to do and then get on with it. Those
who are less confident should have teachers to help them more so that the others,
who can do it won't get bored, (Farida).
Reasons were offered as to why some students might have problems and flexible
solutions proposed ‘It might be because their English is not good enough. It is not fair
but teachers could help by reading the questions out’, (Mehedi). Recommendations
concerning flexible classroom climates were proposed, ‘I think there should be quality
noise in a classroom. When we were doing something like making the yoghurt it could
be quite noisy, but when we are reading it needs to be quiet, so that we can concentrate,
(Asheema), and it was proposed that the ‘doing and sitting’ issue was solved with more
flexibility, ‘I think I would prefer to do little bit on the carpet then have a little bit of
doing and then come back to the carpet so that I remember each part easily’ (Rheena).
They recommended that assessment policy and procedures should include a wide range
of options. These included: the introduction of graded tests, ‘Those people who didn't do
well in the first test should be able to have another one that was easier for them’ (Raju);
streaming, ‘I would have groups doing tests that are similar. Those that can to the hard
tests would do them together and those that could only do the easier ones would do them
15
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
together’, (Raju); adjusting the test instrument, ‘I would have tests with answers in,
where they give you a clue, (Wahidua) and others proposed less testing and more
effective assessment for learning ‘You could put a everyone’s ideas together and choose
an answer. That would help everyone as well, it would help them to understand’,
(Shumeena). All these suggestions give legitimacy for widening assessment procedures,
rather than narrowing them, to enhance teaching and learning experiences (Broadfoot
1996; Gipps 1996).
A modular approach to assessment rather than the end of year assessment policy was
proposed to bring a better balance to learning and assessment. ‘I would prefer to do
project for week or some maths for a week and then have a test. You would do better
this way because you knew the work’ (Shereena). A balanced curriculum was preferred,
‘I like tests and doing because tests get your brain to work and it is nice to do things like
make slippers. It is fun and you get to relax, but I like my brain working too’, Mehedi).
The students included justifications for their recommendations,
It is better to be in a group so you are not on your own and you can ask someone
else, (Nazma). If you learn in mixed groups then when you grow up you are not
silly learning with girls (Mehedi). It is good working on your own because when
you get your SATs test you have to do it on your own. It is like a challenge to
yourself to see how independent you can be, (Farida). The teacher should talk to
you on your own about your marks. Sometimes they embarrass you front of
everyone. You work so hard but sometimes you get the questions wrong and then
people laugh at you, (Kumol).
Strategists
Primary school students, from the time they enter school, act strategically to serve their
interests (Pollard and Filer 1999). This includes engaging actively in power relations
with teachers (Crawford ????; Pollard et al. 2000; Spaulding 1997), adapting to teacher
disposition (Rudduck, Chaplain, and Wallace 1996), challenging and resisting
institutional processes (Mac An Ghaill 1994; Willis 1977), managing learning
experiences (Woods and Jeffrey 1996) and developing creative learning (Jeffrey 2001b).
The students in this research explained the benefits of strategic action.
16
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
They played the corporate and performativity game (Woods and Jeffrey Forthcoming)
forthcoming)
‘We work hard to make our teachers proud of us. So that teachers can say ‘ you
have got the highest marks of the schools in our area’. So they can say we are the
best group’, (Kumol).
They were aware of the opprobrium that would result from poor performativity, ‘All the
children were really sensible because they wanted to show that our school was the best
school. We wanted to get a better report and we were told that if we didn't get a good
report we would get into the newspaper. (Shameena). Other reasons were more
corporate, ‘We behaved better to help us all. To make the inspectors realise that our
teachers were the best, teaching us some manners. We really put effort into it. If they
think that our teachers and a classes are good they think the school is good (Nipa). Some
reasons were more altruistic, ‘I think we behaved ourselves for our teachers’ sake, to
make them happy’, (Fareena).
They showed how their strategic action was a considered one and appropriately applied.
One inspector came in the second day he was quite fun. She laughed and she
came to our table. She did not seem as though she wanted to write too many bad
things. She explained things patiently to me. She asked me what I thought of the
school and I told her that it was OK and that a lot of exciting things happening
here. She asked me what my teacher was like and then she asked me if I find
some things difficult in the class. I told her my teacher was really lovely and fun
to have. I told her she was quite patient. (But I wouldn't have told the inspector
that my teacher was impatient), (Ruehanara).
Strategies for enhancing achievement levels were wide ranging.
You get a better grade by putting sentences together that make sense. Making sure
the examiner can understand what you are writing. You should explain yourself
properly on paper. (Mehedi), You have to revise very hard, (Masun). You go home
and look at the books and then you close it and you try to remember it, (Mehedi).
Take all the books home and look at each one for 10 minutes, (Shazia). When you
first see a SATs paper you may be nervous and forget everything. If you remember
to be confident and think about the facts you have been taught it will help you,
(Nazma).
17
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
Assessment marks can be seen as positive and the students showed how they could be
appropriated (Woods 1995) as self identifiers and self improvers,
‘I love it when Tricia gives me back my marks. Then I tell other people what I got
and they tell me their results and we can see how good we are. If someone gets
more than me then I think I should work harder and become as good as them,
(Shuheema), ‘I like getting the marks because I can be clever and everyone in my
house will respect me’ (Raju), ‘I like getting the marks because I like knowing
where I have gone wrong so I can put it right. And then I can improve’, (Parvin)
CONCLUSION
The identification of students as informed participants, reflective observers, issue
developers, and strategists implies that students are interpreters of experience. In
particular, their qualitative interpretations have surfaced in this research. Their lack of
malice, their generosity, maturity and non- competitative approaches. Pollard et al
(1997) that schools as well as teachers and pupils are embedded in a dynamic network of
personal identity, values and understandings that are constantly developing in the light
of internal and external interaction, pressure and constraint. The result is that policy
directives are translated into classroom practice through a series of mediations, creative
reinterpretations by the actors involved at each successive stage of a process of
delivering education. If this perspective is accepted as valid then it is essential that the
student is not conceived of as the ‘developing child’ (James, Jenks, and Prout 1997) for
we may then assume that young children lack competencies needed to engage in the
research process (Pollard et al. 2000; Rudduck and Flutter 2000). The ‘child’ needs to be
perceived of as a full participant and actor contributing and affecting the educational
context ). The conceptual construction of the ‘social child’ (James, Jenks, and Prout
1997) becomes the appropriate theoretical frame for examining and working with
student perspectives.
From a research validity perspective, it should also be recognised that primary school
students perspectives will alter according to context. There is no authentic voice of the
student (Connolly 1997a) just as there is no authentic voice of the adult. The issue of the
authenticity of perspective is a central consideration of qualitative research methodology
and research into student’s perspectives should be dealt with in the same manner that
18
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
other qualitative research is legitimised, through for example, ‘researcher reflexivity’
(Connolly 1997a; Jeffrey 1999) and triangulation (Glaser and Strauss 1967). Nor should
student opinions be regarded as the definitive basis for policy making (Thiessen 1997).
One possibility is to work at three levels of research on student perspectives: reorientating the policy field to include student perspectives, acting on behalf of students
and working with students in educational contexts (Thiessen 1997).
Our research seems to show that the publicising of educational priorities and practices
by the government over the last 12 years has resulted in more understanding by primary
school students of education policy and its implications and practices. They also
understand more fully the formative nature of assessment. They have always been
observers, interpreters, and strategists. However, the market discourse is one dominated
by the concept of the consumer and customer of education (Ball 1997). Although there is
some confusion about how far the customer is the student or the parent (Woods 1998)
the discourse elevates the importance of the consumer in the identification of a quality
education service. Although in practice this accountability is determined by test results
and Ofsted inspections the principle of involving parents and students in determining
what is a good education has been established. We would argue that this research
legitimises the practice of involving primary school students in this process.
The quality of student’s engagement in the educational process also needs considering.
There is a strong argument for highlighting the pragmatic advantage of taking student
perspectives into account (Pollard et al. 2000; Rudduck and Flutter 2000) in order to
support school improvement is a vehicle for improving schools (Rudduck, Chaplain, and
Wallace 1996). The pragmatic approach further suggests that incorporating student
perspectives into educational programmes enhances commitment to school programmes
(Rudduck and Flutter 2000) and can assist new goals such as ‘learnacy’ for lifelong
learning (Claxton 1999). However, as research into the current performativity discourse
shows, (Ball 2000; Jeffrey 2001a) school improvement, commitment and ‘learnancy’
can be developed as an instrumental practice (Pollard et al. 2000), and some of the data
from this research also indicates this. An education policy that promotes a culture of
diploma currency, ‘a debtor and creditor principle of virtue’, (Coleridge in Foakes 1987)
may limit participants understanding and experience of education and will influence a
19
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
more general social construction of what defines education. Decisions have to be made
as to whether the participation of student perspectives into the educational process
should be based purely on pragmatic terms or whether a moral or a ‘critical’ political
perspective should be included. Pollard et al (1997) ‘assert that ours is not a romantic
argument, and nor do we choose to press the moral case which could be put’, (op.cit.
p.11).
The challenges to the inclusion of student perspectives in educational programmes
includes: the consideration of alternative constructions of childhood; the legitimacy of
student perspectives; the value attached to their perspectives and the limits of their
influence. Pollard et al (1997) suggest that these challenges should also include a
questioning of ‘our readiness to hear pupil perspectives and to allow children a share of
the sort of power we, as adults, have in their classrooms and lives’ (p 11). However,
primary teachers are themselves feeling constrained in their opportunities to exercise
power (Smythe et al. 2000; Woods et al. 1997) due to the effects of reform. Perhaps
teachers might consider not only sharing power but making alliances with students to
open up the possibility of questioning current performativity practices and educational
policy. This might prove productive for both teachers and students.
20
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
Alexander, R., Rose, J., and Woodhead, C. (1992). Curriculum Organisation And
Classroom Practice In Primary Schools: A Discussion Paper. London: HMSO.
Ball, D. (1972). Self and identity in the context of deviance: The case of criminal
abortion. In Ball, D. (ed.) Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance. New York: Basic
Books.
Ball, S. (1997). Good School/Bad School: paradox and fabrication. British Journal of
Sociology in Education 18 (3): 317-337.
Ball, S. J. (2000). Performativities and Fabrications in the Education Economy: Towards
the Performative Society? Australian Educational Researcher 27 (2): 1-23.
Broadfoot, P. M. (1996). Education, Assessment and Society. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Burdon, B. (1988). Studying classroom ethos by gaining participants' perceptions. Paper
read at Education Section Conference, at ????
Claxton, G. (1999). Wise up: The challenge of life long learning. London: Bloomsbury.
Connolly, P. (1997a). In search of authenticity: researching young children's
perspectives. in Connolly, P. (ed.) Children and their Curriculum: The perspectives of
Primary and elementary school children. London: Falmer.
Connolly, P. (1997b). Racism, Gender Identities and Young Children: Social relations in
a multi-ethnic, inner-city primary school. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Connolly, P. (1997c). Sectarianism, Children and Cross Community Contact schemes: A
study of 10 and 11 year old children's perspectives in Northern Ireland. Paper read at
British Educational Research Conference, at York
Cooper, P., and McIntyre, D. (1996). The importance of power-sharing in classroom
learning. In Cooper, P., and McIntyre, D. (ed.) Teaching and Learning in Changing
Times. Oxford: Blackwell.
Crawford, K. (????). Power in Primary classrooms: the rules of engagement. Primary
Teaching Studies 6 (1): 92-106.
Davies, J., and Brember, I. (????). Did SATs lower year 2 children's self esteem: A four
year cross sectional study. Educational Psychology:
21
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
Davis, J., Watson, N., and Cunningham-Burley, S. (2000). Learning the lives of disabled
children: developing a reflexive approach. In Davis, J., Watson, N., and CunninghamBurley, S. (ed.) Research with Children. London: Falmer.
Epstein, D. (1998). 'Are you a girl or are you a teacher?' The 'Least Adult' role in
research about gender and sexuality in a primary school. In Epstein, D. (ed.) Doing
Research about Education. London: Falmer.
Filer, A., and Pollard, A. (2000). The social world of pupil assessment. London:
Continuum.
Foakes, R. A., ed. (1987). Coleridge's Literary Lectures - Lectures 1808-1819: On
Literature. London: Routledge.
Galton, M., Hargreaves, L., Comber, C., Wall, D., and Pell, T. (1999). Changes in
Patterns of Teacher Interaction in Primary Classrooms: 1976-96. British Educational
Research Journal, 25, 1, pp. 23-37. 25 (1): 23-37.
Gipps, C. (1995). Intuition or evidence? : teachers and national assessment of sevenyear-olds, Assessing assessment. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Gipps, C. (1996). Assessment for the millennium : form, function and feedback,
Inaugural lecture / University of London. Institute of Education. London: University of
London Institute of Education.
Glaser, B. G., and Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago:
Aldine.
Foakes, R, A. (1987) (Ed) Coleridge's Literary Lectures - Lectures 1808-1819: On
Literature Routledge London
Hargreaves, A. (1998). The Emotional Practice of Teaching. Teaching and Teacher
Education 14 (8): 835-854.
James, A., Jenks, C., and Prout, A. (1997). Theorising Childhood. Cambridge: Polity
Press.
Jeffrey, B. (1999). Distancing Research Objects Through the Involvement of the Self. In
Massey, A. Walford, G (ed.) Studies in Educational Ethnography: Explorations in
Ethnography. Stamford Connecticut: Jai Press.
Jeffrey, B. (2001a). Performativity and Primary Teacher Relations. Paper read at
Ethnography and Education, at Oxford
Jeffrey, B. (2001b). Primary Pupil's Perspectives and Creative Learning. Encyclopaideia
(Italian Journal) 9 (Spring):
22
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
Jeffrey, B., and Woods, P. (1998). Testing Teachers: The effects of school inspections on
primary teachers. London.: Falmer.
Lyle, S. (1999). An investigation of mixed ability grouping to enhance literacy in
children aged 9-10. Educational Studies 25 (3): 283-296.
Mac An Ghaill, M. (1994). The Making of Men. Buckingham: Open University Press.
McCallum, B., Hargreaves, E., and Gipps, C. (2000). Learning: the pupil's voice.
Cambridge Journal of Education 30 (2): 275-289.
Newman, E. (1997). Children's Views of school - a vehicle for developing teaching
practice. Paper read at British Educational Research Conference, at Oxford.
Nicholls, J. G., Thorkildsen, T. A., and Bates, A. (1997). Experience through the eyes of
Quiet Bird: Reconnecting personal life and school life. In Nicholls, J. G., Thorkildsen,
T. A., and Bates, A. (ed.) Children and their Curriculum: The perspectives of Primary
and elementary school children. London: Falmer.
O'Kane, C. (2000). The development of participatory techniques: facilitating children's
views about decisions which affect them. in O'Kane, C. (ed.) Research with Children.
London: Falmer.
Osborn, M. (1997). Learning, Working and climbing the ladder: Pupil perspectives on
primary schooling in England and France. Paper read at European Conference of
Educational Research, at Frankfurt
Pollard, A., and Filer, A. (1999). The Social World of Pupil Career. London: Cassell.
Pollard, A., Thiessen, D., and Filer, A., eds. (1997). Children and their Curriculum: The
perspectives of primary and elementary school children. London: Falmer.
Pollard, A., Triggs, P., with, Broadfoot, P., McNess, E., and Osborn, M. (2000). What
Pupils Say: Changing Policy and Practice in Primary Education. London: Continuum.
Pollard, S. (1985). The Social World of the Primary School. London: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Power, M. (1994). The Audit Explosion. London,: Demos.
Rudduck, J., Chaplain, R., and Wallace, G. (1996). School improvement: what can
pupils tell us. London: David Fulton.
Rudduck, J., and Flutter. (2000). Pupil participation and pupil perspective: 'carving a
new order of experience'. Cambridge Journal of Education 30 (1): 75-89.
Schratz, M. (2001). A visual approach to evaluation in schools. Paper read at Second
Annual Care Conference, at Norwich
23
ECER 2001- Valuing Primary Students’ Perspectives – D3a
Smythe, J., Dow, A., Hattam, R., Reid, A., and Shacklock, G. (2000). Teachers' work in
a globalizing economy. London: Falmer.
Spaulding, A. (1997). The politics of primaries: The micropolitical perspectives of 7
year olds. In Spaulding, A. (ed.) Children and their Curriculum: The perspectives of
Primary and elementary school children. London: Falmer.
Thiessen, D. (1997). Knowing about, acting on behalf of, and working with primary
pupils' perspectives: Three levels of engagement with research. In Thiessen, D. (ed.)
Children and their Curriculum: The perspectives of Primary and elementary school
children. London: Falmer.
Willis, P. (1977). Learning to Labour: How working class kids get working class jobs.
Farnborough: Saxon House.
Woods, P. (1990). Teacher Skills and Strategies. London: Falmer.
Woods, P. (1993). Critical Events In Teaching And Learning,. London,: Falmer Press.
Woods, P. (1995). Creative Teachers in Primary Schools. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Woods, P., Boyle, M., and Hubbard, N. (1999). Multicultural Children in the Early
Years.
Woods, P., and Jeffrey, B. (1996). Teachable Moments: The Art Of Creative Teaching In
Primary Schools. Buckingham,: Open University Press.
Woods, P., and Jeffrey, B. (Forthcoming). The Reconstruction of Primary Teachers'
Identities. British Journal of Sociology in Education 23 (1): .
Woods, P., Jeffrey, B., and Troman, G. (2000). The Effects of New Labour on Primary
Schools. In Woods, P., Jeffrey, B., and Troman, G. (ed.) Taking Education Really
Seriously: Three Years Hard Labour. London: Falmer.
Woods, P., Jeffrey, B., Troman, G., and Boyle, M. (1997). Restructuring Schools,
Reconstructing Teachers. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Woods, P. A. (1998). School choice and competition: markets in the public interest.
London: Routledge.
24