Upload
nicola
View
212
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Laurentian University]On: 11 October 2014, At: 05:48Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Cambridge Journal of EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccje20
Making sense of learning at secondaryschool: involving students to improveteaching practiceRuth G. Kane a & Nicola Maw aa Massey University , New ZealandPublished online: 20 Aug 2006.
To cite this article: Ruth G. Kane & Nicola Maw (2005) Making sense of learning at secondaryschool: involving students to improve teaching practice, Cambridge Journal of Education, 35:3,311-322, DOI: 10.1080/03057640500319024
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057640500319024
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Making sense of learning at secondary
school: involving students to improve
teaching practice
Ruth G. Kane* and Nicola MawMassey University, New Zealand
Consulting students on their experiences of learning and teaching in schools, while signalled as a
potentially valuable research practice fifteen years ago by Michael Fullan, is now gaining
prominence in educational research within New Zealand. The Making Sense of Learning at
Secondary Schools research began with the premise that to improve classroom practice in secondary
schools we need to ask for and attend to the needs and views of students. This paper draws on
aspects of one research project to consider the ways in which teachers can examine and improve
their own teaching practice through involving students in the identification of how they make sense
of learning in the classroom and how teachers can make it happen. We demonstrate how this
research project reflects values, principles and conditions that support authentic student
involvement.
Introduction
There is a sense, both within New Zealand and internationally, that in spite of
widespread curriculum reform, schools have changed less over the past 20 years than
have the young people whom they serve (Rudduck & Flutter, 2000). Making Sense of
Learning at Secondary School: an exploration by teachers with students1 has its genesis in
teachers’ concerns that their teaching may not be connecting with the reality of
students’ lives and interests. It began with the premise that for teachers and
researchers to be able to understand and improve learning and teaching, we need to
ask for and listen to students’ needs and views. This article argues that good practice
must necessarily be informed by students’ needs and therefore by consultation with
students. It draws on the research experiences within one school2 to highlight the
need for research processes to reflect the principles, values and conditions of
authentic student involvement.
*Corresponding author. College of Education, Massey University, Private Bag 11 222, Palmerston
North, New Zealand. Email: [email protected]
Cambridge Journal of Education
Vol. 35, No. 3, November 2005, pp. 311–322
ISSN 0305-764X (print)/ISSN 1469-3577 (online)/05/030311-12
# 2005 University of Cambridge, Faculty of Education
DOI: 10.1080/03057640500319024
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
New Zealand context and research
The pioneering work of New Zealand educational researchers Graham Nuthall and
Adrienne Alton-Lee investigating the nature of pupils’ learning in primary schools is
helpful in informing this secondary-based project. Their Understanding learning and
teaching project comprised six studies of children’s learning within the context of
instructional units (a series of lessons or tasks). The research focused on long-term
learning with the goal of developing a grounded explanatory theory for teachers to
incorporate into their thinking and classroom practice (Alton-Lee & Nuthall, 1990).
Utterance data collection was used (Alton-Lee et al., 1993; Nuthall & Alton-Lee,
1993) to explore students’ public and private cognitive and emotional responses to a
lesson in order to help understand children’s experiences with the curriculum and in
the classroom (Alton-Lee et al., 1993) and to develop a model of student learning as
the creation of specific learning constructs (Nuthall & Alton-Lee, 1993). This was
followed by the Project on learning (twelve studies) focusing on students in their
middle school years (seven to ten) using miniature videocameras, individual
microphones and trained observers to capture student experiences in the classroom
(Nuthall, 1999a, 1999b).
From their research, Alton-Lee and Nuthall (1990) developed a model of how
children learn in classrooms and suggested that teachers need to understand how
their pedagogical practices are likely to affect children’s learning. Subsequently,
Alton-Lee and Nuthall (1998) demonstrated that effective teaching must be
coherent with the ways in which students learn. Nuthall (2002) suggested that to
provide New Zealand teachers with an understanding of how their activities affect
student learning, we need to know how student learning is shaped by teacher
thinking, teacher activities and by classroom experiences.
Working with secondary school teachers and students, Gavin Brown of the
University of Auckland included a study within his doctorate that identified tensions
in the ways in which both teachers and students understand learning (Brown,
2002a). Students conceived of learning as surface level mastery of information
and facts, while secondary teachers agreed more strongly with a deep view of
learning (Brown, 2002a). Brown (2002a, 2002b) argues that the students’ views of
learning actually reflect activities that teachers provide for them and the values
teachers convey as being important, primarily attaining good grades in final
assessments. Thus, Brown asserts that students were construing learning in ways
that they have been socialised to do, through their perceptions of what teachers
value.
Alton-Lee and Nuthall (1990) and other New Zealand researchers such as Hattie
(2002) and Purdie and Hattie (1999) argue that successful learning requires that
students (and teachers) have a wide variety of learning processes that can be used
flexibly, yet Brown (2002, p.72) demonstrates that teachers and students in
secondary schools continue to ‘talk past each other in terms of their conceptions of
learning’. These studies signal the need for greater understanding of students’
perspectives of learning and teaching, and for research that consults students directly
about aspects of their schooling.
312 R. G. Kane and N. Maw
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
The most influential research currently underway with New Zealand secondary
school students can be found in the work of Russell Bishop of Waikato University.
Bishop’s Te Kotahitanga3 project with young Maori adolescents in schools (see for
example Bishop, 2003; Bishop et al., 2003; Ministry of Education, 2004) reveals that
children and young people are able to articulate and theorise the important elements
of schools and teaching that both foster and stymie their willingness to engage and
their sense of belonging in schools. Te Kotahitanga seeks to improve the educational
achievement of Maori students in mainstream education through identifying and
supporting good teaching practice. In its first phase (2001–2002) the project
gathered narratives of students’ classroom and school experiences through the
process of collaborative storytelling (Bishop, 1996). Students were able to articulate
the main influences on their educational engagement and achievement in school and
make suggestions as to how teachers could create classroom contexts that would be
more conducive to learning. Through examining the messages within the narratives
of young Maori students, Bishop et al. (2003) were able to identify conditions
necessary for supporting the engagement of Maori youth in school-based learning as
a means to enhance achievement. Central to the results was the discovery that young
Maori students valued teachers who would enable them to bring their cultural
experiences to the learning conversation (Bishop, 2005). From the initial phase
located in four pilot schools, Te Kotahitanga is currently active within numerous
New Zealand secondary schools, with researchers working alongside teachers
actively seeking to change their classroom practices to ensure enhanced achievement
for Maori youth. Bishop’s research advances our understanding of how teaching and
learning can be improved by listening to students.
Vaughan (2003) reveals a less than consultative picture of New Zealand research
on the experiences and thoughts of young people in New Zealand (including those
about their schooling). She suggests that within New Zealand there is a lack of
research that seeks to prioritise the views of young people and that current policy
doesn’t entirely match with the lived experiences of young people. She argues that if
we really want to make a difference to the lives of young people, we need to put
young people’s perspectives at the centre of our research and policy development as
demonstrated in the work of Bishop et al. (2003). This is the national context within
which the Making Sense of Learning at Secondary School Project was developed.
The Making Sense of Learning at Secondary School Project
The Making Sense of Learning at Secondary School Project faced two central
challenges: to make student learning explicit through asking secondary students
how they understand and make sense of learning at school (Challenge # 1); and to
support teachers as they bring together and examine the ways in which they and their
students construe learning as a means to improve their own teaching practice
(Challenge # 2). In seeking to address Challenge # 1 (above), we worked from the
assumptions that: students know more than they think they know; students know
more about what they know than the researcher or their teachers do; and most of
Involving students to improve teaching practice 313
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
what students know, they know implicitly (Burnard, 2002). Put simply, if we wanted
to find out how to improve teaching practice to enhance student learning, we needed
to ask the students.
This paper uses the experiences of the first school in the Making Sense of Learning
at Secondary School Project, a relatively small (330 students), special character4
secondary school, to illustrate the ways in which student consultation can inform
enhanced teaching practice. We first briefly present the research design and
strategies used and subsequently examine the ways in which the Making Sense of
Learning project reflects the principles, values and conditions identified within the
international literature as important to authentic student consultation.
The research design
University-based researchers, responding to an approach by the deputy principal of
the school, presented initial ideas at a whole-school staff meeting and subsequently
met with the small group of volunteer teachers (six) who were interested in
examining their own teaching through seeking student insights on learning and
teaching. Each teacher nominated one class to work with during the project. The
classes nominated were all in the senior school (years 11–13) and included
geography, chemistry, mathematics, Bible studies, English and English for academic
purposes. The researchers, teachers and students worked together over a school
term (ten weeks).
The research was designed to allow researchers to observe teaching practice
directly, to capture what students and teachers think and say about student learning,
and to reveal the thinking, beliefs and conceptions that underpin students’
experiences and teachers’ practice (Kane et al., 2004). A multi-method research
design was adopted including the use of questionnaires, initial interviews, learning
journals, fast feedback, video-taped teaching sessions and video stimulated recall
interviews.
Principles and values of student involvement
On the international stage, over 15 years have passed since Delpit suggested that the
‘teacher cannot be the only expert in the classroom’ (1988, p. 288), and since
Michael Fullan alerted us to the historical absence of students’ voices in research
about learning and schooling by asking ‘What would happen if we treated the
student as someone whose opinion mattered?’ (Fullan, 1991, p. 70, in Rudduck &
Flutter, 2000, p. 81). This challenge has been taken up by others who seek to
authorise students’ perspectives, including, Cook-Sather (2002a); Fielding (2001a,
2001b), Groundwater-Smith (1998), Rudduck & Flutter (2000) and Soo Hoo
(1993). Emerging from this research are a range of principles, values and/or
conditions regarding the involvement of students as collaborators or partners in
teaching and research. While these are expressed variously as guidelines (Delpit,
1988), principles and/or values (Fielding, 2001b; Rudduck, 2003; Rudduck &
314 R. G. Kane and N. Maw
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
Flutter, 2004), observations (Rudduck & Flutter, 2000), issues and conditions
(Fielding, 2001a, 2001b; 2004), and challenges (Cook-Sather, 2002a), together they
seek to illuminate aspects critical to effective involvement of students in research on
teaching and/or schooling practices.
The following section of this paper identifies the underlying principles that were
fundamental to the research process and strategies in the Making Sense of Learning
project. We are reluctant to propose yet another set of principles necessary for
student involvement; rather, we present evidence of the ways in which our project
reflects principles and values previously identified, organised within three key areas:
the positioning and autonomy of the students, the role and dispositions of the
teachers, and the conditions for authentic student involvement. While these areas
are presented below as distinct, in practice they are closely inter-related and difficult
to separate.
Positioning and autonomy of the students
1. Students have something worthwhile to say about learning
Central to this research project is the assumption that students have something
worthwhile to say about learning coupled with an understanding that it is their
choice to contribute (or not). We were confident that given appropriate questions
and conditions, students could shed light on the process of learning, explain what
helps them to learn, and identify barriers to effective learning in the secondary
classroom. At the outset we were seeking a research relationship with students that
relied significantly on the degree to which they were prepared to contribute. Bishop
et al. (2003) and Bishop (2003, 2005) demonstrate that students have the capacity
to provide well-articulated and theorised views on learning and the practices that
support learning in schools. Bishop’s work also demonstrates that students must
participate on their own terms and draw from their own discourses to explain their
classroom experiences. In our project all students within the nominated classes
completed questionnaires focused on eliciting their conceptions of learning, the
teaching practices that support or stymie learning, and open questions inviting
students to complete sentences about what they like, don’t like, and would like to
change about their teacher’s practice.
2. Students have the authority to nominate who speaks for them
The research strategies employed enabled students some measure of control over
their level of participation, over who spoke on their behalf and, towards the latter
stages, over the direction of the project. During initial class meetings with the
researcher, each class was asked to appoint a focus group of up to five peers from
their class who would represent them through the course of the project. In all classes
students took ownership of this process and led the elections of focus groups. While
more girls showed an interest in participating than did boys, students actively
encouraged their male peers to ensure what they considered to be fair representation
Involving students to improve teaching practice 315
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
of the students within the class. During the course of the project, in response to focus
group students’ concerns about being the ‘chosen few’ speaking on behalf of the
class, a form of fast feedback ‘Tickets out of Class’ was introduced to enable all class
members to feed back insights and reflections on learning and teaching.
3. Students are able to explain learning in a language that conveys meaning and authority
Students were encouraged to use their own language for expressing their ideas and
understandings. The initial interview enabled them to begin to establish a language
of learning (Cook-Sather, 2001, 2002a; Rudduck & Flutter, 2000) in preparation for
the subsequent video stimulated recall interviews (SRI). During the SRI, students
took control of the video remote control enabling them to stop and start the video
tape at any time to comment on what was happening in the lesson and to explain
what was influencing their learning. In this project the students were regarded as
authorities on learning and on teaching (Cook-Sather, 2002b), a position they found
increasingly comfortable as they realised that the teachers were accepting their
insights and reflections as meaningful and authentic feedback.
4. Students need to trust and see value and relevance in the research focus
Engaging students as authentic collaborators in research on teaching and learning
cannot be achieved through mandate or through manipulation. Students revealed
that they were willing to contribute initially because the focus of the project had
relevance to them as secondary students and they had established relationships with
their teachers and with each other. They were willing to respond to the questionnaire
and to the initial interviews and focus group SRI, although their commitment to
writing in the learning journals was variable over the course of the project and
signalled their preference for engaging in direct feedback and relevant conversations.
5. Students need to be aware of the outcomes and uses made of data through established
feedback cycles—listening, hearing and action
The students were initially sceptical that their input would be considered seriously
by the teachers; however, they became more confident in sharing their insights and
feedback as the project progressed, and the impact of their critique was ‘fed back to
them’ through transformed teaching practice. Being able to communicate
respectfully and purposefully with teachers and to have their voices contribute to
change within their classrooms gave students the confidence to view themselves as
able to contribute to teaching improvement.
This whole research project helped me to better appreciate not only the teachers we
were working with but all my teachers, as I learnt to evaluate and spot qualities I hadn’t
noticed before. In trying to find fault with them I realised how good they actually were.
So much depends on the teacher. Regardless of the subject, the teacher has the power to
make you look forward to the class, or to dread it. If they are grumpy they can
intimidate you to keep you quiet or make you read really big textbooks. They can
316 R. G. Kane and N. Maw
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
encourage you to learn or without realising it put you off the subject they teach, merely
because of their attitude and the way they teach it and how fascinating they make it
seem. So our job was to open that up and try to encourage them to improve that. I’ve
learnt during this research that it’s possible for us to improve our learning environment
by opening up that respectful dialogue with the teacher. For me establishing that level of
communication in student teacher relationship was a key part of the research. It’s just
that both sides must be willing to open that door (Year 11 Student).
The role and dispositions of the teachers
6. Teachers are committed to improvement of their own teaching practice
The Making Sense of Learning project was initiated by teachers who were concerned
that their teaching may not be relevant to the students in their classes. They were
motivated first and foremost by their interest in improving their own teaching
practice as a way to enhance student learning. Throughout the research process,
regular meetings between researchers and teachers provided supported opportu-
nities for the teachers to examine the feedback of the students and the messages
therein for improving practice. In opening their practice up to the critique of
students, teachers placed themselves in a vulnerable position thus demonstrating a
degree of trust in the research process and in the insights of the students.
I suppose you never get to a point where you’re perfect in your career. I had to come to
grips with that, to know that I wasn’t [perfect] and something that would be valuable for
me would be to hear what my students actually felt, what they thought about the
process through which I taught them, the process in which they actually participated in
the class (Teacher Researcher).
7. Teachers are open to listening to students and to meeting student needs
Participating teachers, with the support of the university researchers, examined and
then shared transcripts of their own interviews and data from questionnaires to
identify the ways in which they conceptualised student learning. Transcripts of the
students’ SRI were discussed with the teachers each week, providing a way of
bringing together understandings of both teachers and students with respect to
learning and teaching. Reflecting on student transcripts was critical to the teachers’
self-study as students’ perspectives were acknowledged and examined within the
context of the intentions and goals of the teachers. What students said encouraged
teachers to examine more carefully their own practice and the assumptions
underlying their practice and, invariably, to engage in pedagogical reform. What
was critical in these weekly cycles of supported reflection was the teachers’
willingness to listen carefully to the students’ data with the underlying intent to
improve practice.
8. Teachers engage in power sharing with students in classrooms and in research
Teachers demonstrated openness to listening and attending to the insights and
reflections of students in their classes. As noted by Delpit, it is teachers, ‘those with
Involving students to improve teaching practice 317
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
the most power, those in the majority, who must take the greater responsibility for
initiating the process’ (1988, p. 279). In so doing, teachers in this study acknow-
ledged students as ‘co-authorities on teaching and learning’ (Cook-Sather, 2002b,
p. 22). Through attending to the feedback of students, teachers created the
opportunity for purposeful dialogue with students that had hitherto not been part
of their teacher–student relationship. As the research progressed and the teachers
began to acknowledge and respond explicitly to students’ data, so too did the
students become more confident in providing critique and comment. A cycle of
purposeful and respectful dialogue through the medium of the research process had
been initiated.
I’ve spent a fair bit of time this year not only critiquing myself but actually coming to
accept what the critique of the students is and listening to and dialoguing with the
students. You always heard them but you didn’t necessarily listen. But when you have it
on paper in front of you, and when it’s on video going in front of you, you can’t ignore
it, you see yourself in a slightly different light (Teacher Researcher).
Conditions for authentic student involvement
9. Openness, transparency of purpose and ethical process
Initial whole class meetings with a university-based researcher provided an
opportunity for students to gain an understanding of the research project, its
fundamental focus on learning and teaching and their potential role within it.
Students were encouraged to raise questions about process and purpose. While every
effort and opportunity was taken within the project to ensure that students were fully
informed and able to contribute as research collaborators, barriers to effective
partnerships with teachers and students are almost inevitable, both in the complex
protocols and daily lives of secondary schools and the rigid ethical requirements of
university research committees. Nairn and Smith (2003) signal that requirements for
ethical approval and protocols for access to schools are both determined and
controlled by adults (the first, by the university ethics committee and the second by
the principal and/or board of trustees), and must be satisfied prior to approaching
students as research collaborators. Thus, while genuine in our commitment to
consulting students, this project was initiated and developed without their input—
something which is still to be resolved in the goals of student research within New
Zealand.
10. Ensuring the safety of students and of teachers
The Making Sense of Learning project adopted a research approach that sought to
protect the rights of both teacher and student participants and respect each as co-
authorities on teaching and learning. Through positioning the researcher as a conduit
for student feedback, students were able to provide feedback with the assurance that
it would not, unless they specifically wished, be directly linked to individuals.
Transcripts of student stimulated recall interviews were discussed with the teacher
318 R. G. Kane and N. Maw
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
without naming student contributors. While this initial attempt at confidentiality was
appreciated by both students and teachers, once a cycle of respectful dialogue was
established both students and teachers sought to communicate directly on matters of
pedagogy and learning and the researcher was able to increasingly withdraw.
After the research, I felt I was one step closer to becoming a better teacher. I’m better
because I’m more responsive to my students, more thoughtful about my actions in the
classroom, and more creative in lesson planning and most of all this research has given
me a clear picture of what I would like to become in the near future, an inspirational
teacher who is knowledgeable, practical, humorous, and has the ability to cater for
students with different needs (Teacher Researcher).
11. Providing a space and the time for dialogue
Rudduck and Flutter advise that there is a need to take the time to establish a climate
that is safe and comfortable when engaging in research that involves student
participation (2000, p. 83). Initial meetings with the six teachers provided space for
them to contribute to the research design and discuss any concerns surrounding
their participation. Early weekly meetings with student focus groups enabled us to
establish a rapport with the students, to share ideas about the project and explore
potential benefits. Establishing the trust of the students was crucial to any progress
in the project and this was achieved through regular meetings, open conversation
and securing a private space where the students and researcher would not be
interrupted. The project extended over a full school term, enabling the students and
teachers to take seriously the commitment of researchers to supporting the process
over time.
12. Allowing for a flexible and responsive process
As previously noted, the Making Sense of Learning project was initially designed by
the researchers in collaboration with the teachers without student input. As the
project progressed, however, it became evident that the students sought greater
input in its direction and scope. The researchers were able to respond to the
students’ calls for increased autonomy through introducing the ‘Tickets out of Class’
and facilitating meetings of teachers and students to discuss goals for further student
involvement in teaching and school-wide concerns.
Making sense of the Making Sense of Learning at Secondary School Project
The Making Sense of Learning project confirms the findings of other studies involving
student consultation, that students have well-formed and articulate views of their
own learning and the conditions that support learning (Rudduck & Flutter, 2000;
Bishop, 2003; Bishop et al., 2003). Through supportive engagement with the
researcher in the stimulated recall interviews, students began to ‘develop a language
for talking about learning and about themselves as learners’ (Rudduck & Flutter,
2000, p. 76). Students began to identify and articulate those aspects of the teacher’s
Involving students to improve teaching practice 319
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
practice and the classroom interactions that engage their learning and, conversely,
aspects that serve as barriers.
Participating teachers reported significant transformations in their own pedagogy
which were substantiated by students in their classes. There is evidence of what
Fielding (2001b, p. 129) terms ‘radical collegiality’ where teacher learning has been
enhanced through dialogic encounters with their students as they share responsibility
for the success of teaching and learning in the classroom.
The research has given me more valuable feedback and insights from my students than
any of the weekly ‘professional development’ that I attended in the last four years of my
teaching career. The feedback from the students has shown me a different perspective
about teaching in schools. And the students’ voices have inspired me to try other
methods of teaching in class (Teacher Researcher).
Michael Fielding’s four-fold model which distinguishes between students as
sources of data, as active respondents, as co-researchers and as researchers (2001b,
p. 135) provides a useful frame for considering the ways in which students within our
project were first positioned by us, and more recently have begun to position
themselves. While the project began with a strong researcher and teacher
commitment to consulting students and taking account of their perceptions, we
were unprepared for the level of independence, autonomy and initiative that was to
be displayed by the student participants. With the completion of the cycles of
stimulated recall interviews, both teachers and students called our attention to ‘so
what happens now?’ In recent meetings with the students and teachers we have been
required to consider the responsibilities of moving in and then out of a school, the
ethics of speaking about others and the potential for students as researchers
(Fielding, 2004). Students especially have called us to account for ongoing support
in enabling them to address each of the elements that Rudduck and Flutter include
in their model, ‘The conditions of learning in school’ (2000, p. 85).
The Making Sense of Learning in Secondary School Project was modest in its goals,
working with a small group of teachers interested in transforming their own
classroom practice in response to student feedback. Its original conception did not
presume to reach beyond the participants’ classrooms to grapple with whole school
improvement. Within this participating school there were signs of ‘transformative
momentum’ (Fielding, 2001b, p. 129) taking hold with both participating teachers
and students examining ways of broadening the impact and effect of the initial study.
The project began with researchers ‘working with the willing’, yet emerging results
have drawn attention to the potential for whole school improvement. Participating
teachers report senior management and colleagues’ interest in observable
pedagogical change and students’ calls for opportunities to develop cycles of
respectful, productive dialogue with teachers in other classes.
The challenge facing the research team as this paper is being prepared is how best
to effect the transition from research project involving student consultation, to a
school-based sustainable commitment to student consultation and involvement.
There are ethical obligations of the university researchers who initiated this project
to ensure that teachers and students are supported in their combined commitment to
320 R. G. Kane and N. Maw
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
advance student involvement in the enhancement of learning and teaching. There
are pragmatic time and resource challenges in ensuring that spaces are created for
teachers and students to engage in what they themselves have termed ‘respectful,
productive dialogue’ in the busy, unpredictable lives of schools. To date this is
proving to be a slow process involving researchers, teachers and students advocating
for students to be situated and acknowledged as more than just learners within the
school. A recent school community meeting focused on explicating the potential of
student involvement in improving teaching practice signals the emerging support of
the wider faculty and management. As a result, the focus of our work in 2005 is to
allow the students and the teachers to identify, define and drive the research process
in a more authentic partnership towards making sense of learning and teaching in
secondary schools.
Maybe if the teachers or the school people actually really listened to us they could have
a deeper much clearer view and understanding of what we are going through in school
(Year 12 Student).
Notes
1. Funded through the New Zealand Ministry of Education Teaching and Learning Research
Initiative.
2. Making Sense of Learning at Secondary School is a two-year project conducted in three New
Zealand secondary schools throughout 2004 and 2005. The first school’s experiences alone
are used to illustrate the arguments of this paper.
3. Te Kotahitanga: The unity.
4. In New Zealand special character schools are integrated into the public school system while
retaining their special Christian or cultural foundations.
References
Alton-Lee, A. & Nuthall, G. (1990) Pupil experiences and pupil learning in the elementary
classroom: an illustration of a generative methodology, Teaching and Teacher Education, 6(1),
27–45.
Alton-Lee, A. & Nuthall, G. with Patrick, J. (1993) Reframing classroom research: a lesson from
the private world of children, Harvard Educational Review, 63(1), 50–84.
Alton-Lee, A. & Nuthall, G. (1998) Inclusive instructional design: theoretical principles emerging from
the understanding learning and teaching project (Wellington, Ministry of Education).
Bishop, R. (1996) Collaborative research stories: Whakawhanaungatanga (Palmerston North,
Dunmore Press).
Bishop, R. (2003) Changing power relations in education: Kaupapa Maori messages for
‘mainstream’ education in Aotearoa/New Zealand, Comparative Education, 39(2), 221–238.
Bishop, R. (2005) Messages from Te Kotahitanga for teacher education, keynote address to the
biannual meeting of the Institute for Studies of Teachers and Teaching (ISATT), Sydney, July.
Bishop, R., Berryman, M., Tiakiwai, S. & Richardson, C. (2003) Te Kotahitanga: The experiences of
year 9 and 10 Maori students in mainstream classrooms (New Zealand, Ministry of Education).
Brown, G. (2002a) Student beliefs about learning: New Zealand students in year 11, Academic
Exchange Quarterly, 6(1), 110–114.
Brown, G. (2002b) Teachers’ conceptions of assessment. PhD thesis, University of Auckland.
Burnard, P. (2002) Using image-based techniques in researching pupil perspectives,
Communicating … The ESRC Network Project Newsletter, 2–3 (UK, Economic and Social
Research Council).
Involving students to improve teaching practice 321
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4
Cook-Sather, A. (2001) Between student and teacher: learning to teach as translation, Teaching
Education, 12(2), 177–190.
Cook-Sather, A. (2002a) Authorizing students’ perspectives: toward trust, dialogue, and change in
education, Educational Researcher, 31(4), 3–14.
Cook-Sather, A. (2002b) Re(in)forming the conversations: student position, power, and voice in
teacher education, Radical Teacher, 64, 21–28.
Delpit, L. (1988) The silenced dialogue: power and pedagogy in educating other people’s
children, Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280–298.
Fielding, M. (2001a) Beyond the rhetoric of student voice: new departures or new constraints in
the transformation of 21st century schooling? FORUM, 43(2), 100–109.
Fielding, M. (2001b) Students as radical agents of change, Journal of Educational Change, 2(2),
123–141.
Fielding, M. (2004) Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical underpinnings,
recalcitrant realities, British Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 295–311.
Fullan, M. G. (1991) The new meaning of educational change (London, Cassell).
Fullan, M. G. (1993) Changing forces (London, Falmer Press).
Groundwater-Smith, S. (1998) Students as researchers: two Australian case studies, paper
presented at the BERA Annual Conference, University of Sussex, Brighton.
Hattie, J. A. C. (2002) What are the attributes of excellent teachers? in: B. Webber (Ed.) Teachers
make a difference: what is the research evidence? Conference Proceedings (Wellington, New
Zealand Council for Educational Research), 3–26.
Kane, R. G., Sandretto, S. & Heath, C. (2004) An investigation into excellent tertiary teaching:
emphasising reflective practice, Higher Education, 47(3), 283–310.
Ministry of Education (2004) Te kotahitanga. Available online at: http://www.minedu.govt.nz
(accessed 9 July 2005).
Nairn, K. & Smith, A. B. (2003) Taking students seriously: their rights to be safe at school, Gender
and Education, 15(2), 133–149.
Nuthall, G. A. (1999a) The way students learn: acquiring knowledge from an integrated science
and social studies unit, Elementary School Journal, 99, 303–341.
Nuthall, G. A. (1999b) Learning how to learn: the evolution of students’ minds through the social
processes and culture of the classroom, International Journal of Educational Research, 31(3),
139–256.
Nuthall, G. (2002) Knowing what we know and need to know about effective teaching, in:
B. Webber (Ed.) Teachers make a difference: what is the research evidence? Conference
Proceedings (Wellington, New Zealand Council for Educational Research), 41–63.
Nuthall, G. & Alton-Lee, A. (1993) Predicting learning from student experience of teaching: a
theory of student knowledge construction in classrooms, American Educational Research
Journal, 30(4), 799–840.
Purdie, N. & Hattie, J. (1999) The relationship between study skills and learning outcomes: a
meta-analysis, Australian Journal of Education, 43, 72–86.
Rudduck, J. (2003) Pupil voice and citizenship education (Cambridge, Faculty of Education,
University of Cambridge).
Rudduck, J. & Flutter, J. (2000) Pupil participation and pupil perspective: carving a new order of
experience, Cambridge Journal of Education, 30(1), 75–89.
Rudduck, J. & Flutter, J. (2004) How to improve your school: giving pupils a voice (London,
Continuum).
Soo Hoo, S. (1993) Students as partners in research and restructuring schools, The Educational
Forum, 57, 386–393.
Vaughan, K. (2003) Changing lanes: young people making sense of pathways, in: B. Webber (Ed.)
Educating for the 21st Century: rethinking the educational outcomes we want for young New
Zealanders: Conference Proceedings (Wellington, New Zealand Council for Educational
Research), 3–17.
322 R. G. Kane and N. Maw
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Lau
rent
ian
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
5:48
11
Oct
ober
201
4