Pupil experiences and pupil learning in the elementary classroom: An illustration of a generative methodology

Teaching & Teacher Educorion. Prmted in Great Britain

Vol. 6. No. I. pp. 27-45, IVY0 0

PUPIL EXPERIENCES CLASSROOM:

ADRIENNE

~1742-051xM~$3.~K)+O.O~1 IYYCIPergamon Press plc

AND PUPIL LEARNING IN THE ELEMENTARY AN ILLUSTRATION OF A GENERATIVE METHODOLOGY

ALTON-LEE

University

of Canterbury,

and GRAHAM Christchurch,

NUTHALL

New Zealand

Abstract-This paper describes the methodology of a research programme designed to develop a grounded theory of pupil learning in elementary classrooms. The methodology involves the interactive use of both quantitative and qualitative data based on extensive observational study of selected case-study pupils. Quantitative data from the first and third of a series of four studies are used to illustrate the nature of this part of the data analysis. Findings examine the relationship of instructional contexts, content variables, and pupil behaviours and utterances to both short-term and long-term learning. The nature of the nascent theory of classroom learning emerging from the first study and the process of developing that theory in the light of findings from the subsequent studies is described.

This paper provides an account of the methodology of a research programme designed to develop a grounded theory of pupil learning in elementary classrooms. We argue the case for in-depth studies of the learning of individual pupils. The approach is both quantitative and qualitative. Qualitative analyses of pupil behaviours and experiences are carried out within a framework of quantitative analyses of variables related to learning outcomes. The primary focus of the research is on long-term learning (content which is learned and remembered a year later). We argue that the specific findings of classroom research are most useful when embedded in an explanatory theory of classroom learning. A selection of results from the first and third studies in our current programme is use-d to demonstrate the research process being developed. We have contrasted the results of a study of the long-term learning of three 9-yearold children with the results of a study of the

long-term learning of four 1 l-year-old children in order to illustrate our claim that the generalizability of findings should be viewed as an empirical question rather than an analytical or a statistical question. The factor? which affect the generalizability of the results are just as significant as the results themselves. Both are needed in order to develop the kind of grounded explanatory theory that teachers can incorporate into their thinking and use to understand and guide their own classroom practice .

Methodology Research Questions The original research design was developed out of a constraint analysis of two questions: 1. What facilitates

pupil learning

in classrooms?

This article is based on a paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco. March 1989. We are indebted to the New Zealand Department of Education, the Social Sciences Research Fund Committee, and the University of Canterbury for their support for this research.

27

ADRIENNE

2x

2. What is the nature rooms?

of pupil learning

ALTON-LEE

in class-

A constraint analysis (Haig, 1987) is a way of generating a research design by considering the ways in which the research question constrains its own solution. A full report of this constraint analysis has been given in Alton-Lee (1984). Traditionally, quantitative research methods in classroom research have been oriented towards hypothesis testing rather than towards hypothesis generation. The aim of this research was to avoid prior assumptions and to develop a design that would uncover those variables most closely associated with learning. This approach required us to obtain as complete a record as possible of pupil experience of the curriculum in the classroom. In order to gather such comprehensive data it was decided to limit the focus of the research to a small number of individual children involved in a class programme during a self-contained unit of curriculum. Limiting the research focus to a small number of pupils rather than a small number of variables forced us to develop an alternative approach to the problem of generalizability. The basic elements of the design, which has now been replicated in four studies (referred to as Study 1, Study 2, etc.) are set out in Table 1. Observational

Data Gathering

Procedures

Recording all potential pupil opportunity to learn specific content required the use of multi-

Table

and GRAHAM

NUTHALL

ple data gathering methods. In the first study overhead microphones were used to record what was said and three observers alternated in keeping continuous coded descriptive records of the behaviour of the three target children. In two of the three later studies continuous video records and microphones worn by the children have been used to supplement the observational records of four observers. The collated data provided a comprehensive and detailed continuous record of pupil behaviour synchronized with records of exposure to verbal, written, and visual content. Validity was ensured by crosschecking data from one source against another. For example, observational records of the frequencies of pupil interactions were corrected using the transcribed data from the microphone recordings. Test and Interview

Procedures

The researchers interviewed the teachers before each unit and used the interview data and the teacher’s planning and resource materials to construct 9&120 item tests of the content each teacher intended to teach. The items were generally multiple-choice and were read to the children before and after the unit of work and again one year later. Structured interviews were used to check the validity of the test data and to provide information about pupil understanding and memories for class experiences. Each of the target children and a selection of other children from each class

1

Basic Research Des&n Serfing up: Discussion with teacher of unit content, initial interviews with pupils. development of content learning tests, selection of case study pupils, training of observers, introduction of recording equipment and observers to class

Preresfing: First administration Observarion

of content learning test

and recording:

audiorecording diagrams, etc

Continuous observation of case study pupils using one observer per child, video and using individual transmitting and public microphones. Copies made of pupils work, blackboard

fmmediatepost-fesft Second administration of content learning test, interview of selected pupils including case study pupils on unit content and class activities, questionnaires on pupils’ status in class and perception of observation process Long-rerm post-tea Third administration of content learning test, interview of selected pupils including case study pupils on recall of unit content, class activities, perceptions of own memory and learning processes

Pupil Experiences

were interviewed on two or three occasions. Both the interviewer and child worked through an unmarked test form with the interviewer asking the child what he or she put for each item and then asking (for all correct and incorrect responses) how the child learned the item and what they could recall of relevant class experience. The interviews also provided information about pupils’ out-of-school sources of content such as television and family discussions. These procedures provided insight into pupil perceptions of the learning process and the ways in which they used what they had learned to answer test items (Nuthall & Alton-Lee, 1982, 1986). Observer Effect The observation procedures were established in each class several weeks before the unit of study and the children were familiar with, and generally ignored, our presence by the beginning of each unit. However, the observational procedures were intensive and we were concerned about how they might affect the target pupils. A questionnaire was administered to all the pupils asking them about observer activities. None of the target pupils was aware that they had been individually observed all the time. The high achieving boy in the first study believed that he had never been individually observed during the 43 hours of observation over 7 school weeks. In the first study, two of the target pupils expressed some concern about the observation procedures and in the later studies we endeavoured to spend more time interacting with the children before the unit in order to help them feel more comfortable with the observers. The use of individual broadcast microphones (worn around the neck) impressed the children. All pupils in the class had similar (apparently live) microphones to wear if they wished and if parental permission had been granted. Only the microphones of the target pupils were live and continuously recorded. In the second study, the observers recorded when target pupils glanced at the observers or the recording equipment, and any occasions when they fiddled with the microphones. Curiously, the frequency of target pupil glancing at the observers or equipment was positively related to pupil learning. Perhaps our presence increased their task focussed behaviour.

and Learning

29

Data Coding Procedures In the first study each half-minute interval of class time was analyzed to see whether the target pupils were exposed to any opportunity to learn content relevant to any one or more of the 90 test items. Once an interval had been coded as relevant to an item, the following characteristics were also coded: task context (teacher-directed lesson, peer-directed small group, individual task, etc.), whether the public talk involved public pupil talk or just teacher talk, the resources being used, and pupil behaviors including peer interactions. The results of the first study were used to develop the more complex coding procedures used in the third study. Because of the irregular patterns in the relationships between pupilpupil interaction and learning we introduced individual broadcast microphones so that we could record the content of all private pupil utterances. A procedure for classifying the item relevance and the nature of private pupil utterances has been developed which identifies, among other things, the pupil’s use of key itemrelevant words and references to relevant outof-class experience (Alton-Lee & Nuthall, 1988). The other major change in the coding procedures has been the introduction of a detailed content coding procedure. The content of what is said, seen, read, or worked with by the pupil, is coded according to whether it provides information which is directly or indirectly related to the item in particular ways (e.g., explicit answer, implicit answer, additional related information, or a reason or explanation for the answer). In addition, the validity of the content is also classified. Content which is clearly true is distinguished from content which is ambiguous, partially correct, incorrect, or involves a synonym or closely related key word or concept. This content analysis procedure is reported fully in Nuthall and Alton-Lee (1987). We have also expanded the repertoire of pupil behaviours that are identified and coded. In the first study we coded interactions with the teacher and peers, hand raises, participation in chorus responses, mime, non-verbal communications, instances of fiddling with pencils or other objects, writing, reading, reading aloud, talking to self, engaging in art work or diagram

ADRIENNE

30

ALTON-LEE

drawing, erasing, organizing, moving, and waiting in a line for the teacher. In the following three studies, 99 categories of pupil behaviours have been coded. These include the ways in which pupils glance at or watch specified resources, facial expressions and body orientations (e.g., laughing, smiling, yawning), movements (e.g., hand raise, fiddling with face or hair, opening desk), and reading, writing, and artwork activities.

and GRAHAM

NUTHALL

Item19116,

s

kern Proposition: 7he sea is an agent of erosion’ Pretest Response:

‘I donY know’

Learning Outcome: Time Spent: Insttwtional

Learned and Forgotten

99 l/2 minutes Teacher-Directed

Contexts:

lndlvidual

(52 l/2 minutes)

Tasks (37 minutes)

Discrete Episodes’ 25 spread over 9 school days

m:

Item Files

Study 1

(Frequencies of 29 behaviours ) e.g. Emily engaged in 9 individual interactions with the teacha

The most critical step in the organization of the data entailed creating individual item files for all pupil opportunity to learn the content of each item. The complete file for each item contained the record of all 30-second intervals (or 15second intervals in the later studies) during which the target pupils had any opportunity to interact with content. Figure 1 provides a summary of the kinds of data (not the actual data) which make up an item file.

during time spent on this content. 12 peer interactions during teacher-directed lessons and 54 peer interactions during individual tasks. Class Iessons included relevant mime and individual tasks involved reading. wrilin&and aM’Ork.

p Day 1. 2.21’30’ Emily participated

in a class dIscussion abwl

the likelihood

of sea being an agent of erosion. She explained that she did not think that wawas could wear down rock because: ‘I thought the rocks would stay hard -. harder than water.

Data Analysis Procedures Day 1. 2.22’00’

Analysis procedure I: comparative frequencies. The complete item files were sorted ac-

cording to learning outcome: content already known, content learned and remembered one year later, content learned and forgotten. content not learned, and content mislearned during the unit. Quantitative analyses of the relationships between the frequencies of the recorded variables and the learning outcomes were carried out for each target pupil and across all target pupils.

erosion on the pancake rocks there

Day 5. Durfng the course of her individual task work. Emily wrote: ‘Sea. The sea washes up the clift (sic) so there gets son of a hoI@ in H.’

Day 6. 2.21’00’

2: controlling

Emily is over+nard to say to another pupil:

’ I think my nwrs

F:igure

Analysis procedure

When the leacher asked about relevant pupil experience

Emily indicaled she had never been to Punakaiki to sse the sea

I. Summary

and seas were easier’.

ot

the contents

ofan item

tile

(Study I )

for time. It

was important at this stage to establish whether particular behaviours were related to learning independently of time spent on relevant content. It was conceivable that the same pattern of behaviours might be related both to learning and to failure to learn and that the critical variable might be simply the time spent on relevant content. In order to determine whether particular variables were proportionately more frequent during time spent on learned content, the frequency per hour of class time (or rate of occurrence) was also calculated and related to learning outcomes.

Anulysis

procedure

3:

reliability

estimates.

The reliability of each of the patterns identified in these first two analysis procedures was calculated by dividing all the item files up into three random sets and using an analysis of variance procedure (Winer, 1962. pp. 124132) to assess the consistency of the patterns across each item set. Analysis procedure 4: investiguting exceptions. Summaries of the quantitative analyses of

the relationships

of the variables

to learning

Pupil Experiences

outcomes identified (a) which variables were consistently related to learning for all target pupils, (b) which variables were strongly associated with learning for one pupil but not for others, and (c)which variables showed inconsistent associations with learning outcomes. This provided the basis for a detailed analysis of exceptions to the general patterns. For example, although there was a strong positive relationship between time spent and long-term learning, there were a number of items for which significantly less class time was spent and longterm learning still occurred. Data for these items revealed particular behaviour and resource-use patterns which were associated with highly effective in-class opportunity to learn. Similar analysis of items where considerable opportunity to learn occurred but the pupils did not learn pointed to the apparent significance of pupil misconceptions in preventing learning. Analysis procedure 5: triangulation and quantitative-qualitive immersion. The next step in the analysis entailed moving systematically from the framework provided by the quantitative analysis back into the detailed qualitative data collated in the item files (the complete record of pupil opportunity to learn specific items). Although the quantitative summaries showed clearly which variables were strongly and positively associated with learning, the work of inferring the nature of the relation of any behaviour or other variable to learning causal or otherwise - had still to be done. Clearly a behaviour which occurred more frequently during time spent on content learned became a candidate for a possible causal relation. However, the behaviour could be mediating the effect of another causal factor or could be merely a symptom of an underlying causal process. Moreover, each individual variable needed to be considered in relation to the context in which it occurred and the pattern of behaviours with which it was associated. This stage of the analysis involved an interactive process of exploratory data analysis and retroductive hypothesis generation and testing. This process is similar in principle to the memo testing procedure described by Glaser and Strauss (1967) and Glaser (1978). The particular strength of the analysis procedures developed in these studies has been the interplay between the

and Learning

31

quantitative summaries of apparent ships and qualitative detail.

relation-

Analysis procedure 6: embryonic theory generation. The final stage of the analysis of the first study involved generating an embryonic theory out of the synthesis of quantitative and qualitative analyses. Two models were generated to illustrate the emerging theory. Analysis procedure 7: inter-study comparisons and theory development. Perhaps the most important point to make about this final analysis procedure is to reiterate that we believe the results of the first study will only be useful when they can be reported in relation to the results from the other studies. Inter-study comparisons provide insights into which variables and patterns of variables are specific to particular contexts and which processes explain the learning of certain pupils and not other pupils, or all pupils across contexts.

Current

Status of the Project

The four studies for which data have been gathered are identified in Table 2. Analysis Procedures 1 to 6 have been completed for Study 1. Analysis Procedures 1 and 2 have been completed for Study 3. The data for Studies 2 and 4 (the two longest studies) have so far only been gathered and collated. In the second part of this paper we report a selection of results for which comparisons can be made between the findings for Studies 1 and 3. In the third part of the paper we outline the embryonic theory generated out of the first study and indicate the kind of theory development that is emerging from the implications of the findings from Study 3. Reference will also be made to an analysis of changes in pupil attitudes to the content in Study 1 and to the results of gender analyses of the content in Study 2 and Study 3. Comparison

of the Results from Study 1 and Study 3

Time and Learning In these studies the terms ‘time spent’ and opportunity to learn’ are used to refer to all op-

ADRIENNE

32

ALTON-LEE

and GRAHAM

NUTHALI.

Table 2 Overview

of Studies

in the Understanding No.

Study

Learning

of

target pupils

Ages

and Teaching Project

of pupils

‘Topic/subjects

Data intervals

of lessons

I

3

Y-IO yrs

Conservation. Erosion, Endangered Animals

2

3

Y-10 yrs

The English Middle Ages

3

3

I1 yrs

4

4

1.5,480(1/2mins)

37,704 (l/4 mins)

New York: A Study of C’ultural Difference

6,176(1/4mins)

Weather

o-IOyrs

portunities that a target pupil had to interact with item content. Opportunities which occurred during formal lessons and while pupils were engaged in tasks (whether the input or activity was in spoken, written, or visual form) were included as were pupil conversations about relevant content during transitions between activities. Homework was also included from records of time and activities which pupils were asked to keep. The results for time spent for Study 1 showed a strong relationship between time and learning with pupil experience of items learned and remembered occurring over 77.7 minutes of class time (see Table 3). Pupil experience of items not learned took up, on average, 15.X minutes

6,7X4 ( l/4 nuns)

of class time, while time spent for items learned and forgotten took up about 48 minutes. The relationship between time and learning was strong and consistent for all three target pupils (I. = .72) but was most consistent for the low achiever (r = .S)h). The interviews revealed that unlike the average and high achiever she had few opportunities to learn test related content outside of the school programme and her results reflected the greater extent to which her learning was dependent on the in-class opportunity to interact with the content. The results for Study I also show a strong consistent relationship between learning and (a) the number of discrete episodes during which target pupils experienced an opportunity to in-

‘I-able3 Relationships in Study I

General

between Mean Time Sper~and Spread

achievement

Itemslearned

level of pupils:

with Item C’ormnt ncros.~ Iluys and Episodes’

GUS

Emily

Diane

High

Average

Low

AVcragc

and wmemhered 7.0

h.3

7.4

6.8

17.5 89.4

13.7 65.6

16.‘) Xl .6

15.x 77.7

Days Episodes Minutes

5.6 13.7 58.6

6.X 14.8 SS.8

4.x

5.x

10.0 20.1

13. I 48.1

Days Episodes Minutes

2.7

3.‘)

3.4

3.4

3.‘) 6.9

6.3 14.8

5.4 1Y.Y

5.4 IS.8

Days Episodes Minutes /term irarnrd

of Opportunityto Interact

and forgotten

Items not learned

‘Episodes

comprised

discrete

references

to content

that were separated

in time by at least three-quarters

of a minute.

Pupil Experiences

teract with content (r = .88), and (b) the number of different days over which time was spent on item-relevant content (r = .85). Although there was also a positive relationship between time and learning in Study 3, there is an important difference between the two studies in the average amount of time involved (cf. Table 4 and Table 3). In Study 3 only 8.23 minutes (compared with 77.7 minutes) was spent on items learned and remembered. This is only twice the average time spent on items that were not learned rather than the ratio of 5: 1 that occurred in Study 1. In Study 3, both the high achievers, Jon and Mia, experienced more opportunity to interact with content than the low and average achievers, Joe and Ann. This is consistent with the pattern for the high achiever, Gus, in Study 1. Given the marked differences in actual time spent per item, the strong similarity between the studies in the results for spread of content (p’ e ISOd es )‘. 15 su p”rtsmg. Although much less time was spent on content learned and remembered in Study 3, the opportunity to learn was spread over more episodes, on average, than in Study 1 (18.3 episodes compared with 15.8 episodes). Instructional

and Task Contexts and Learning

Pupil experience of the content of an item could occur in a single major task context (e.g.,

33

and Learning

teacher-directed activity only) or in two or three of the major types of task contexts. As can be seen in Table 5 there was a strong relationship between experiencing item content in multiple contexts and learning. About 80% of content learned and remembered occurred in at least two task contexts for both studies and about 60% of content learned and forgotten occurred in at least two tasks contexts. The greater opportunity to interact with content in multiple task contexts in Study 3 may partially explain why learning occurred in spite of considerably less time spent than in Study 1. Effectiveness

of Different

Instructional

Contexts

The average amounts of time per item spent in different instructional contexts was converted into percentages in order to explore the relative effectiveness of different contexts, with total time spent held constant. These percentages are reported in Table 6. For Study 3, homework showed the strongest relation to learning, although the total amount of time spent on homework was relatively small and only three of the four case study pupils spent time doing it. Teacher-directed task opportunity showed the next highest relation to learning, with about 45% more time spent in this context for content learned and remembered than for content not learned. By contrast, higher proportions of time spent in individual

Table 4 Relationships between Mean Time Spent and Spread of Opportunity in Study 3

~________

Achievement

to Inreract with Item Conrent across Days and Episodes

_______.~

level

Jon

Joe

High

Low

Average

High

4.18 19.91 8.50

3.13 14.67 5.85

3.00 17.75 7.88

3.48 20.00 9.40

3.41 1X.30 8.23

1.x3 7.67 5.81

3.20 10.20 3.85

2.33 12.33 13.33

2.25 9.06 6.50

I.87 6.53 4.27

2.44 7.33 4.57

I .89 6.89 2.56

2.12 7.08 1.89

Mia

Average

Items learned and remembered

Days Episodes Minutes Items learned and forgotten

Days Episodes Minutes

I.00 5.50 6.17

Items not learned

Days Episodes Minutes _

2.14

7.86 4.13

ADRIENNE

34

ALTON-LEE

and GRAHAM

NUTHALL

Table 5

Relationship of Pupil Learning to rhe Interact with Content

Numberof Major Context Types’ within which Pupils Experienced an Opportunity IO Percent of total time Two major Only one contexts context

All three majorcontexts

No class opportunity

Items learned and remembered Study 1 Study 3

22.4 39.7

61.2 42.5

14.3 12.3

2.0 5.5

23.5 21.1

35.3 42. I

35.3 21.1

5.9 15.x

22.0 37.7

60.9 20.8

9.8 36.4

ltem.s learned and forgotten Study 1 Study 3

ItemsHOIlearned Study 1 Study 3

7.3 5.2

‘The major context types are: teacher-directed

activities,

individual

task activities,

and peer-directed

group activities

Table 6

Relationship of Percentage of Time spent in Major Contexts and Learning in Study I and Study 3

Major Contexts:

Teacher directed

Percent of Time Spent Group Tasks Individual

Not learned Learned & forgotten Learned 6i remembered

62.0 50.X 3X.1

Study One 8.S 15.2 12.6

29.6 34.0 49.3

Not learned Learned&forgotten Learned & remembered

35.1 41.9 51.3

Study Two 16.3 6 7 x.1

46.7 42.1 2H.3

‘Homework was not recorded as a separate included in the individual task context

context in Study 1. The very small amount

and group task contexts were associated with failure to learn in Study 3. For both these contexts, the time spent when item content was not learned was nearly twice as much as when the content was learned and remembered. This pattern was markedly different from the results found in Study 1. In that study the proportion of time spent in individual task contexts was 66% higher for content learned and remembered than it was for content which was never learned, while the time spent in teacher-directed lessons was negatively related to learning. The differences between the relative effec-

tasks

of homework

Homework’

1.x 9.2 12.2 that occurred

was

tiveness of the teacher-directed and individual task contexts for the two studies reflect real differences in the nature of the teacher-directed lessons and individual tasks in the two class programmes. In Study I, the individual tasks were generally designed by the teacher to facilitate pupil learning of tested content. In Study 3, the individual tasks were based on puzzles, activities, and worksheets that were frequently peripheral to item content (see the analysis of Content Type below). In Study 1, a high proportion of teacher talk was associated with failure to learn (with the exception of some very effective lessons involving visual diagrams and dc-

Pupil Experiences

monstrations). In Study 3, teacher-directed lessons were more tightly structured with frequent reviews and use of visual resources. Content Variables and Pupil Learning In Study 3, coding systems were developed to discriminate the type and validity of the information available to pupils from all spoken, printed, and visual sources. The content-relevant information available to pupils was divided into eight major types: 1. explicit item answer, 2. implicit or partial item answer, 3. additional item-relevant information or explanation, 4. contextual information, 5. mention only of key-word or synonym, 6. drawing, writing, or procedural experience, 7. activity instruction or guided practice, and 8. demonstration, display, or visual presentation. The validity of the content was divided into six categories. Information available to the pupils was classified as either: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

valid (clear and correct answer), ambiguous, wrong but corrected, incorrect, unexplained analogy or synonym, and relevant but uninformative procedural formation.

in-

Content type. As might be expected, exposure to information which explicitly provided test-item answers was strongly related to learning. It occurred at three times the rate for content learned and remembered as it did for content that was not learned. However, explicit information was relatively rare, occurring in only 6% of time spent on content learned and remembered. There were, however, complex relationships between the type of content, the instructional and individual pupil differences. context, Within teacher-directed activities, nearly all the content was verbal (spoken or OHP) and there were relatively small differences in the effects of

and Learning

35

implicit, partial, additional, or contextual information. In individual task contexts, a lot of the information occurred as part of writing, drawing or art activities. When these activities were directly relevant to the test-item content they were four times as likely to result in the content being learned and remembered rather than never learned. When these activities dealt with information which was only indirectly relevant to the test-item content, they were more likely to result in the content not being learned. So, although in Study 3, individual task activities were generally not related to learning, when the content of those activities was relevant, the learning effect was substantial. Content validity. Content which was clear and unambiguous was twice as likely to occur for items learned and remembered. However, 49% of the information available to the pupils for the items they learned and remembered was unclear or ambiguous. For items which were not learned the finding was 59%. Incorrect or clearly misleading statements occurred infrequently but were twice as frequent for content not learned. The relative frequencies of relevant synonyms showed no relation to learning across contexts but showed a negative relation to learning within teacher-directed lessons. When the synonym was explicitly linked to a key word, it was positively related to learning during teacher-directed lessons. Combinations of content and validity codes. There is a potentially important relationship between the type of content and its validity. It may be, for example, that the effect of partial or background information depends on its validity explanation may be more (i.e., an ambiguous confusing than useful). Table 7 shows the relationship between the occurrence of partial information and learning when the information is either clear and valid (Category 1 above), ambiguous (Category 2 above) or contained in a synonym or analogy (Category 5 above). As can be seen in Table 7, when the pupils were exposed, during teacher-directed activities, to information which was part of the answer to a test question (partial information) and that information was itself clear and unambiguous, they were more likely to learn and re-

36

ADRIENNE

ALTON-LEE

and GRAHAM

NUTHALL

Table 7 Relationship

of Partial Answers.

the Validity of the Answers,

and Learning

During

Frequency

Jon

Learned & remembered Learned & forgotten Not learned

Joe

12.37 6.73 1.36

10.05 x.00 5.71

Clear and valid information 11.69 0 5.SO

II.13 6.73 10.x5 Synonym

Learned&rcmembered Learned&forgotten Not learned

0

24.00 11.43

member the content. For Jon, Joe, and Ann clear partial answers were always associated, in this context, with learning and remembering. For Mia partial answers were proportionately more frequent during tithe spent on content that was learned and forgotten rather than learned and remembered. The relationship between partial answers and learning changes when the information partial answers contain is unclear or ambiguous. On average, this type of information is associated with items that were not learned. However, Jon seems to have been an exception to this pattern. He was able to use ambiguous partial information in the same way as he was able to use clear partial information. The relationship between partial answers and learning becomes even more strongly negative when the information is contained in synonyms or analogies. Again Jon’s data suggest that, contrary to the general pattern, he has the ability to benefit from content which is less useful to the other pupils. Pupil Behaviour

and Learning

The relationships that were identified between the frequencies of pupil behaviours per hour of class time (rates) and learning in Study 1 were notable for their suprises. One of the behaviours which was most consistently and positively related to long-term learning for all target pupils was erasing or ‘rubbing out’ behaviour

7.42 0 4.07

Lessons

in Study 3

per hour

Ann

Ambiguous Learned & remembered Learned & forgotten Not learncd

Teacher-directed

MU

AWXp!

S.Y4 7.w 4.00

10.01

information 6.23 0 16.4’)

IO.09 7.50 74.00

‘).3X s 56

or analogy 5.45 0 7.33

2.3x 22.50 16.00

S.Sh 2.72

14.26

3.81

I I.63 9.71

during individual tasks. When the pupils were erasing their written work they appeared to be changing their ideas and self-correcting. Examination of the qualitative data indicated, however, that the patterns were different in individual and group task contexts. In group tasks much of the erasing involved time spent on headings and style of presentation and was less closely related to learning of relevant content. In individual tasks the erasing was of specific words and phrases more closely related to relevant content. Another behaviour which showed an Interesting and unexpected pattern in relation to pupil learning was pupil fiddling. Fiddling was initially defined as rapid hand movements involving the manipulation of small objects, clothing or hair. The rates of fiddling were highest when pupils were interacting with challenging or difficult content (content mislearned and content learned and forgotten). The analysis of exceptions showed that fiddling also occurred at higher rates for all three children during opportunity to interact with content that was learned in significantly less time than the average time taken for all learned items. These results led to the subdivision in subsequent studies of the fiddling category into three specific categories: 1. Fiddling with an object (e.g., ruler, pen). fingers or hand. 2. Fiddling with own mouth, face, hair.

Pupil Experiences

3. Fiddling

with clothing.

Figure 2 shows the relationship of fiddling to pupil learning within teacher-directed activities in Study 3. Fiddling with mouth, face, or hair shows the same relationship to learning that occurred in Study 1. It was most closely associated with content that was learned and forgotten. However, fiddling with an object, fingers or hands was positively related to learning, and fiddling with clothing was negatively related to learning. The results for erasing behaviour in Study 3 show considerable individual differences between the pupils (Figure 3). Jon was never observed using an eraser. Mia, who spent a lot of time on artwork and drawing used an eraser fre-

OBJECT. FINGERS. HANDS FACE, “AIR. MOUTH

and Learning

31

quently. As with Study 1, for those three pupils who were observed erasing, the highest frequencies are associated with content that was learned and forgotten. This supports the hypothesis arising from Study 1 that a different kind of cognitive processing may be occurring when content is learned initially but later forgotten. The similarities in patterns for both erasing and fiddling behaviours in Studies 1 and 3 suggest that these findings are not spurious. By contrast, the results for traditionally “on-task” behaviours such as writing and reading showed different relationships with learning between the two studies. These relationships appeared to be a function of the type of task in which these behaviours occurred rather than a function of the behaviour per se. These results suggest that the traditional notions of attending behaviour may be inadequate and support our concern with creating a research design that makes the nature of effective attending behaviour an empirical question rather than a given category. Pupil Utterances and Learning

L :

1

10

0 NOT LEARNED

LEARNED & FORGOmEN

LEAFINED a REMEMBERED

Figure 2. Relationship between fiddling and learning during teacher-directed activities in Study 3.

2

0 NOT LEARNED

Figure 3. Relationship

LEARNED 6 FORGOTEN

LEARNED & REMEMBERED

between erasing and learning in Study 3.

Whereas behaviours such as erasing and fiddling need to be treated as indirect signs of internal cognitive processing rather than as part of the learning process itself, pupil utterances (recorded on individual broadcast microphones) provide more direct information about the nature of pupil content-processing activities. For both studies there was considerable variability in the relationship of peer interactions to learning outcomes. The important implication of this result is that different pupil verbal utterances cannot all be categorized in the same way. The analysis of exceptions to the general relationship of time to learning in Study 1 showed that for items the pupil learned most efficiently (in significantly less time than average), the rates of peer interactions and of talking-to-self were high for all three pupils. However, in some contexts frequent talking was associated with failure to learn for some pupils. It seemed likely that some pupil talk was topic-relevant and some was likely to be irrelevant to the topic. The relation between pupil utterances and learning is more complex than an on-task/offtask distinction would convey. Transcriptions of pupil utterances for Study 3 revealed pupil conversations during teacher-directed lessons to be

3x

ADRIENNE

ALTON-LEE

generally related to the content of the ongoing lesson. The following excerpts from recordings made of utterances by Jon, Joe, and Ann provide insights into the children’s involvement in a lesson about the location and history of New York City. The teacher had just shown the children the location of New York City on a map. Jon (talking to himself): I know what. It’s Manhattan Island! Man. I put it a way down there! Joe (talking to himself): Hi Mom! (allusion to a catch-phrase used by an American baseball player in a current T.V. commercial)

and GRAHAM

NUTHALL

that pupils were only engaging in irrelevant talk during the time they spent on content which they did not learn. Utterances which involved specific discussion or argument about an item answer or relevant concept also occurred most frequently when pupils did not learn (Figure 5). This suggests that pupils may often talk about specific content when they are having difficulty with a concept. We have yet to explore this interpretation by analysing the actual discussions in the qualitative data.

Ann (to peer): I thought it was on the West Coast. Peer: I thought it was west. too. Ann: It’s not the west at all. I always get east and west mixed up Did you bring a raincoat?

Recordings of utterances are valuable because they provide insight into the pupils’ internal processing of the lesson content. In order to provide a scaffolding for the qualitative analyses of pupil utterances a general quantitative analysis of the relevance. status, language, type, and nature of utterances was carried out for Study 3 and some provocative patterns are apparent. Analysis of the content-relevance of the language in pupil utterances showed use of keywords (words referring to key concepts in the item) was positively associated with longterm learning and not short-term learning (Figure 4). The lack of such content-relevant talk may have contributed to the failure to rcmember the content. However, it is not the case

“1 24

KEYWORD

REFERENCE

;I

0 NOT LEARNED

LEARNED h FORGOlTEN

LEARNED 6 REMEMBERED

Figure 4. Relationship of pupil utterances containing keywords and synonyms to learning in Study 3.

0 NUT LEARNED

LEARNED h FORGOTTEN

LEARNED& REMEMBERED

Figure 5. Relationship 01 pupil utterances involving discussion and argument about content to lcarninp in Study 3.

Pupil talk involving synonyms of key words was negatively related to learning (Figure 4). This pattern is interesting because it mirrors the results found for synonym use in public verbal and resource content reported above. The qualitative analyses of pupil behaviour and utterances in Study 1 indicated that pupil discussion of task prcscntation and neatness, and pupil anxiety about ‘finishing’, took up considerable time and appeared to inhibit pupil engagement with relevant content. There is clear evidence in Study 3 that talk between pupils about task requirements, task presentation, and task production is negatively related to learning and provides quantitative support for the earlier hypotheses (Figure 6). This talk appears to occur when pupils are having difficulty with the content and procedures of tasks. and the difficulty is not being resolved by their discussion. Joe was the only target pupil who frequently made and received derogatory remarks. The quantitative results clearly show that when Joe was the object of derogatory remarks. and when

Pupil Experiences

39

and Learning

nascent theory Study 1.

Theory q q q

TASKREWIREMENB TASK PRESENTATlOFl TASKPROCUCTiW

LEARNED I FOR@OllEN

LEARNED 6 REMEMBERED

Figure 6. Relationship of pupil utterances concerned with task requirements, presentation, and production to learning in Study 3.

he was giving derogatory remarks, he was less likely to learn and remember the content. Verbal abuse was prevalent in Study 3, particularly among the boys. Understanding peer abuse may provide an important additional dimension to our understanding of the learning process in classrooms. While the findings about pupil utterances reported above illustrate the potential of a research design that explores the relationships between pupil talk and pupil learning in classrooms, the primary importance of the findings lies in the contribution they will make to theory development. Although we are at the early stages of data analysis in Study 3, the preliminary quantitative analyses suggest how these findings might influence the development of the

q q

LEUNED

LEARNED & FORGOTTEN

MAKESREMAFiK DBJECTOFREMNM

LEARNED& REMEMBERED

Figure 7. Relationship of learning to the derogatory remarks made and received by Joe in Study 3.

grounded

Development:

in the

findings

of

Way to go!

In this section we begin by describing the nascent theory of knowledge acquisition generated out of the first study. Haig (1987) has argued the case for viewing theories as evolving entities with developmental careers. He explains that “theories generated retroductively are properly viewed as nascent theories which stand in clear need of further development” (p. 24). The theory generated from the first study represents just such a ‘nascent’ theory. It was designed to address both the original research questions. Figure 8 illustrates the model of concept learning that was developed to explain the patterns of variables which facilitated long-term learning (the first research question). The second part of the theory addresses the second question about the nature of learning. It should be noted that the theory is specifically an explanation of knowledge acquisition and does not address the skill learning or attitudinal changes that occurred. Figure 8 comprises a model of the interaction of three variable clusters: Variable Variable Variable

Cluster Cluster Cluster

A: Opportunity to Learn B: Pupil Behaviour C: Resource Access.

The Opportunity to Learn variable cluster is made up of three dimensions facilitative of longterm learning: sufficient length and spread of opportunity to interact with relevant content; instructional experiences which challenge and displace inappropriate conceptions; and opportunity to interact with content in both teacherdirected lessons and relevant tasks. The elements of these dimensions which were most facilitative of long-term learning in Study 1 included opportunity to experience a concrete demonstration of the concept, opportunity to attend to teacher-pupil discussion and to diagrammatic representations of the concept, and task related experiences which involved expressing the concept in verbal, diagrammatic, written, or pictorial form. The Pupil Behaviour variable cluster is made

40

ADRIENNE

ALTON-LEE

and GRAHAM

NIJTHALL

PUPIL BEHAVIOUR: NO INTERACTION WITH RELEVANT CONTENT PUPIL BEHAVIOUR :FACILITATES tNTERACTlON WITH RELEVANT CONTENT FAClLtTATlVE OPPORTUNITY NOT EXPLOITED BY PUPlL PUPtLUSESRESOURCES MAXUIIZE INVOLVEMENT RELEVANT CONTENT

TO WITH

FAClUTATtVE OPPORTUNtTY EXTENDS INTO PUPIL RESOURCES E.G. HOMEWORK PUPIL EXPLOITS PRIVATE RESOURCES E.G. ASKS PARENT ABOUT RELEVANT CONTENT POTENTIAL RESOURCES PUPIL CAN USE TO FACILITATE INTERACTION WITH RELEVANT CONTENT

Figure 8. The three variable cluster model of long-term

up of two behaviour types. The first type of behaviour is covert processing and the second type of behaviour is overt and most common during task engagement. The relationships between rates of behaviours, such as fiddling, talking to self, erasing, on one hand, and pupil learning, on the other, provided the basis for inferring the kinds of covert processing that are critical for classroom learning. The Resource Access variable cluster is made up of access to three kinds of resources: relevant prior knowledge, home resources, and in-class resources. Specific home based resources which were related to learning in the first study were: relevant discussions with family members; family provisions of rclcvant experience (for example. experience of mountain terrain); relevant television content; and relevant reference material. In-class resource access was related to information processing skills (for example, reading ability), status among peers-which affected the availability of information or assistance from other pupils-and ownership of, or ability to borrow, technical resources such as pencils, felt-tipped pens, and especially erasers. Understanding Pupil Learning in relation to the Interactiorl of the Variable Clusters The pattern of pupil classroom experience related to long-term learning outcomes is made up

learning of concepts

of the opportunities, behaviours, and resources facilitative of (or associated with) covert learning processes. The model is effective in explaining the variables which facilitate learning only when the interaction of all three variable clusters is taken into account. For example, the relationship between pupil behaviour frequencies and learning must bc interpreted in relation to the Opportunity to Learn variable cluster. Although fiddling bchaviours and public processing during teacher-directed lessons were highly related to learning, these behaviours were rarely sufficient for learning to occur. Covert processing was likely to lead to learning only when followed by overt processing over time. Opportunity to learn was only effective if a pupil had appropriate resources to exploit that opportunity. An example of this principle is the finding that length of opportunity to learn did not relate to long-term learning when pupils did not have relevant concrete experience. In Study 1, for 95.9% of the items the target pupils learned and remembered the interview data provided evidence of relevant concrete experience, while for 41.5% of the items the target pupils failed to learn, there was evidence of relevant concrete experience. In contrast, the target pupils were judged to have relevant concrete experience for only 29.4% of the items learned and forgotten.

Pupil Experiences

Facilitative pupil behaviours were also ineffective when target pupils were limited by lack of resources. For example, reading behaviour was not associated with learning when a target pupil was exposed to item relevant content at a reading difficulty level beyond the pupil’s ability. The teacher in Study 1 offset this problem by putting relevant written material onto a listening post (an audio-cassette player with sets of earphones that pupils can use to listen while reading to a recording of the reading material). Pupils with high access to resources were most likely to have high status amongst their peers. They were able to discuss content difficulties with other high status pupils who had more relevant prior knowledge and wide access to out-ofclass resources. The results of Study 1 demonstrated that many behaviours historically categorized as “on-task” were either unrelated or inconsistently related to learning whereas a number of behaviours historically categorized as “offtask” were related to learning. For example, pupil movements during group tasks were strongly related to learning apparently because they optimised pupil resource access. Inconsistencies in the results for particular behaviours can be partially explained by the interaction of the three variable clusters. For example, writing behaviour was related to learning when that writing occurred as part of a conceptually relevant task. When the task opportunity did not challenge pupil misconceptions, writing behaviour did not relate to learning. The model also provides a way of understanding differences in achievement between the three target pupils. Generally, the facilitative opportunity to learn patterns were similar for all three pupils. However, the high achiever received more opportunity to learn, on average, partly because he was in a reading group which had additional material related to the unit topics. The low achiever spent more time, on average, on item content which she did not learn. The qualitative analyses of her behaviour showed she spent considerable time working on the presentation of her work rather than interacting with content. Although the resource access factors for the case study pupils were clearly related to their achievement levels, in instances where the re-

and Learning

41

source access factor was equalized for specific content, the learning patterns were similar for all three pupils. For example, all three pupils were similarly disadvantaged by lack of relevant concrete experience in relation to an item concerning snow (which none of the pupils had experienced). However, the high and average achievers were more likely to have relevant concrete experience. In instances where the teacher provided concrete demonstrations of relevant concepts, long-term learning almost always occurred for all three pupils. The behavioural patterns associated with learning also showed similar trends for ail three pupils. An interesting exception was the positive relationship between waiting behaviour and learning for the high achiever. The qualitative analysis revealed that he engaged in a recurrent pattern of behaviour whenever he was in a line waiting to discuss a point with the teacher. He would attend to the teacher’s interaction with each child ahead of him and from time to time actively enter into their discussion of critical issues. The negative relation between waiting and learning was a valid reflection of wasted time for the other pupils, The interactions among the three variable clusters in relation to learning can be sumarized in a general description of the degree of overlap among the three variable clusters for different learning outcomes. Long-term learning was most likely to occur when there was a high level of overlap among the three variable clusters. Short-term learning showed either a low overlap between Resource Access and facilitative Opportunity to Learn or a low overlap between facilitative Pupil Behaviour and Opportunity to Learn. Instances of mislearning were associated with the least overlap among the three variable clusters. implications for an Understanding of the Nature of Pupil Learning in Classrooms The second part of the theory addresses the second research question about the nature of learning. The patterns of interaction of the three variable clusters reveal many clues about the nature of learning. The evidence indicates that classroom learning is a process which occurs in stages on a continuum through time. Three stages are postulated:

42

ADRIENNE

ALTON-LEE

1. Awareness and Disequilibrium: The child recognizes the concept is unknown and responds with high rates of behaviours (for example, fiddling) which signal the internal disequilibrium. The more relevant prior knowledge the child has the more likely that the child will become aware of not knowing critical concepts. In cases where a pupil has little or no relevant prior knowledge the lack of any basis for making links inhibits the development of this initial awareness, and passive attending behaviour occurs. That behaviour may appear ‘on-task’ but overt processing behaviour does not occur. 2. Cognitive Restructuring and Integration: The child engages in active processing as he or she attempts to link the new fact or concept to existing schemata and prior experiences. The evidence suggests that the child engages in the process characterised by Piaget as accommodation. Existing misconceptions are challenged and displaced so that appropriate links can be forged. If the new concept is compatible with existing schemata, the child engages in the less demanding process of integrating the new concept into the appropriate existing networks and less time is necessary. Class discussion appeared to provide an important arena for cognitive rcstructuring in a process of ‘public thinking’ as the teacher used pupil experience and rejected inappropriate links. 3. Schema Development and Anchoring: The child actively develops the skeletal schema into a dense schematic network which both serves to rcfinc the concept and to link the concept to other schemata in the child’s conceptual network. In both Study 1 and Study 3, both the number of separate episodes (Tables 3 & 4) and the variety of contexts (Table 5) were clearly associated with long-term learning. This variety provided the child with opportunities to express the concept in a number of different ways. Eventually the new concept becomes part of the child’s readily accessible general knowledge about the world. Implications of the Preliminary Findings from Study 3 for Theory Development Time and learning. The analyses in Study 3 which distinguished clear and explicit reference to item content from more ambiguous or mis-

and GRAHAM

NUTHALL

leading reference (Table 6 above) suggest that there is considerable value in refining the definition of opportunity to learn in relation to content. The marked contrast in the average time spent on content learned and remembered in Study 1 and in Study 3 (Tables 3 & 4 above) raises questions that can only be resolved in the light of further studies. The kinds of questions these disparate findings raise for theory development are: 1. To what extent does the age of the children contribute to the findings concerning time? Nine-year-old children may just take longer to read and to write because they are less skillful, or they may experience qualitatively different difficulties because they cannot USC: abstract thought in the same ways as 11-year-old children. 2. ‘To what extent does the kind of concept studied relate to the results for time? Learning that Manhattan is at the heart of New York City may be a much simpler cognitive task than learning how the process of river erosion affects mountain boulders. 3. To what extent can multiple task opportunities and the spread of opportunity to interact with content over more discrctc episodes compensate for less time spent? Instructional Contexts: The Kelativc Effectiveof Teacher Lrssons and Individual and Group Tasks. The results for the ratio of

mw

teacher-directed time to individual task time in relation to learning were converse for Study 1 and Study 3. The inter-study comparisons should provide the data for a grounded analysis of task effectiveness. It may be useful to employ an external system such as Doyle’s (1083) conceptual framework for analysing classroom tasks to provide an independent analysis of task elements in order to pursue this question. Whereas the patterns for behaviour and learning are remarkably similar across the two studies, the patterns for instructional contexts show both marked differences and similarities. The analyses to date provide a quantitative framework but further development will entail in-depth qualitative analyses within that framcwork. Because there appear to be consistcncics between the studies in the relationship between behavioural patterns and learning. it should be fruitful to identify which aspects of instructional

Pupil Experiences and Learning contexts are most facilitative of learning-related behaviours. The implications for theory development are significant. Although it is important to understand the nature of the learning process in classrooms, explanatory theory which illustrates that understanding in a coherent, holistic account of the elements of effective instructional contexts will be most useful for teachers. Pupil behaviours and learning. The similarity of the patterns of pupil behaviour associated with learning provides evidence to support further development of the second part of the theory concerning the nature of pupil learning. For example, the recurrence of a clear relationship between pupil fiddling during teacher-directed lessons and learning confirms the importance of the original finding, and provides further evidence for making inferences about the nature of covert learning processes. An important implication of theory development in this respect is that it will challenge traditional myths about attending behaviour so that the conflation of obedient behaviour and learning behaviour in classrooms can be unpacked. The fundamental orientation of the research to discovering critical variables and developing explanatory theory has been vindicated by the discovery of relationships to learning of variables hitherto little studied in the field. Pupil talk and pupil learning. The use of individual pupil microphones in Study 3 has provided us with a whole new dimension of insights into pupil learning. Preliminary findings suggest that these analyses will provide invaluable links between learning outcomes, pupil learning strategies, and pupil experience of the social world of the classroom. The finding of a negative quantitative relationship between rates of both receiving and giving derogatory remarks and learning provides a new perspective on our understanding of pupil self-esteem, racism, sexism, classroom status, and learning.

The Limitations of a Theory of Knowledge Acquisition for Understanding Learning in Classrooms The interview

data for the first three studies

43

raised fundamental concerns about the impact of curriculum on the children’s attitudes about themselves, their peers, and their world. Each of the teachers who taught the units involved in the three studies intended the children to develop attitudes of concern and understanding about critical issues. For example: the pollution of the planet and the plight of endangered animal species for Study 1, and the value of cultural diversity and racial integration for Study 3. The patterns of pupil attitudinal changes were investigated for all the pupils in each class (rather than just for the target pupils). The interview data for all three studies showed unexpected and unintended outcomes in pupil attitudes which could be directly related to their unit studies. The genera1 data from Study 1 suggested that not only did the children fail to develop the attitudes of increased concern intended by the teacher, but the attitudinal changes that did occur appeared to be in a negative direction to those intended by the teacher. The children explained that they had not become more concerned about pollution because they had ‘learned’ that there was ‘nothing (they could) do about it’. They were asked whether they would be concerned if all the elephants in the world died out. The two prevalent responses were (a) no strong feeling, and (b) concern because elephants are important for carrying wood and providing skins for human clothing! The responses which demonstrated a concern for the loss of the economic value of elephants to humans were in direct contrast to the attempts by the teacher to encourage children to consider the immorality of the exploitation of elephants. The responses generated about the value of the elephant for human existence included many instances of products which elephants have not provided. It seems the children were employing schemata about the relation of animals to people they had developed outside of the unit. For example: sheep provide wool, cows provide milk so the elephant provides . . . No child in the class studied (nor in three other classes who studied the same unit with different teachers) developed a long-term attitude of concern as a result of the unit. We can only speculate about the kinds of hidden processes at work here but the patterns of unintended attitudinal deterioration raises critical questions.

44

ADRIENNE

ALTON-LEE

A similar effect appeared to work in Study 3 in relation to the unit focus, New York: A Study of Cultural Difference. In spite of the teacher’s intention that the children would become more tolerant of racial differences, and would learn to value cultural diversity, evidence from the pupil utterances and the interviews suggested that instances of racist remarks and verbal abuse among the children became more frequent, partially as a result of the unit. The ways in which curriculum may have affected these unintended outcomes have been discussed elsewhere (Alton-Lee, Nuthall, & Patrick, 1987). A retrospective gender analysis of the curriculum (public talk and resources) for Study 3 and Study 2 revealed the extent to which women and girls were invisible in that content. Out of 554 mentions of people throughout the New York unit only 14 mentions (2.5%) were of women. Out of 13,027 mentions of people in the Medieval unit for Study 2 only 507 (3.9%) of mentions were women or girls. Many of the mentions of women that did occur were derogatory. The interviews revealed that the pupils were influenced by this underlying structure of the curriculum. They perceived the omission of women to be normal and understandable. As Amy explained in a later interview about the Medieval unit, “There would not be so much about women because they were not barons or knights or anything.” Although fewer than 4% of the mentions of people in both units were female the overt message of the curriculum was that the children were studying people, not men. The teacher explained at the beginning of the Medieval unit, ‘So we’re going to be looking at people. How they lived in the Middle Ages, what they did and how they earned their living. What they ate, what happened when they were sick. Who was rich and who was poor. All the sorts of things that happened in everyday life”. The interviews provided two further clues about the impact on the children of the prevalence of men in the content of both the “New York” and the “Medieval” studies. First. target children from both studies inadvertently used the word “people” to mean men. Second, it appeared that the girls were subconsciously identifying with the men in the curriculum. In Study 3 when Mia spoke of the people coming to settle

and GRAHAM

NUTHALL

New York after the Indians she referred to them as being like “us”. The interviewer (female) asked her to extrapolate about the “us”. Mia explained that she meant “civilized people like us” and then went on to express her own surprise that she was not thinking of women but thinking of “us” being European men. These findings emerging from the current studies emphasize the importance of developing a theory that not only addresses how children learn but that also addresses the long-term impact of that learning on their beliefs about themselves and their world. “Opportunity to learn” is not a neutral element of a theory of classroom learning.

Future

Directions

The immediate task for theory development is to proceed systematically with the triangulation and quantitative-qualitative immersion procedures. The data from Studies I and 3 provide a perspective that confirms the potential for theory development. The developing theory will be used to generate predictions about the learning outcomes for Studies 2 and 4. At present we are considering the possible value of using a Bayesian approach to measure the predictive power of the theory to explain the findings from the four studies. However, the unanswered questions raised earlier call for more replications which are specifically designed to address those questions. The best course of action may involve pursuing both courses of action interactively. When we have a broader data base and a more developed theory that addresses unintended as well as the intended outcomes, the next stage may involve testing the theory in action by planning, trialling, and evaluating instructional units based directly on the theory. In addition, we will need to work with teachers to investigate the value of the developing theory for their day-to-day practice. This will involve evaluating its portability and it usefulness in making curriculum, task design, and momentby-moment classroom decisions. References Alton-Lee,

A.

G.

(1984).

Understunding karning

and

Pupil Experiences

teaching: An investigation ofpupil experience of content in relation to immediate and long term learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Canterbury, Christchurch. Alton-Lee, A. G., & Nuthall, G. A. (1988). The content classification of pupil utterances. (Technical Report No. 3, Understanding Learning and Teaching Project). Christchurch: University of Canterbury. Alton-Lee, A. G.. Nuthall, G. A., & Patrick. J. (lY87). Take your brown hand off my book: Racism in the classroom. SET: Research Information for Teachers, No. 1 (Item 8). Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research. Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review of Educa/iona/ Research, 53, 1599199. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensifivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Glaser. B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. Ilaig, B. D. (1987). Scientific problems and the conduct of research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 19,22-32.

and Learning

45

Nuthall, G. A., & Alton-Lee. A. G. (1982). Measuringand understanding the way children learn in class. (Technical Report No. 1) Understanding Learning and Teaching Project. Christchurch: University of Canterbury. Nuthall, G. A., & Alton-Lee. A. G. (1986. November). Children’s test-answering processes and clussroom learning. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Melbourne. Nuthall, G. A., & Alton-Lee, A. G. (1987). Conrenr classification of classroom lessons and activities. (Technical Report No. 2) Understanding Learning and Teaching Project. Christchurch: University of Canterbury. Nuthall, G. A.. & Alton-Lee. A. G. (in press). Researchon teaching and learning in classrooms: Thirty years of change. Elementary School Journal. Winer, B. J. (1962). Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw Hill. Received

I3 September

1989 0