Motivating Boys and Motivating Girls - Essay Example

The articles, Motivating boys and motivating girls: does teacher gender really make a difference? by Marsh and Martin and You don’t bring me flowers any more: a fresh look at the vexed issue of teacher status by Rice, explore into the problem areas that have come up in the recent educational discourse of the Australian educational system. It is understood from the article titles that student motivation and the teacher status factors have become pressing issues that require immediate attention. The articles present accurate pictures of the said topics on the basis of thorough research. At the same time they aim to deliver specific suggestions through analysis of the research outcomes. The suggestions would be of much benefit to education and in making educational decisions. The Research Paradigm: A Comparative & Analytical Study of the Articles a) Motivating boys and motivating girls: does teacher gender really make a difference? Holistic Research Paradigm The article, Motivating boys and motivating girls by Marsh and Martin, supports positivist and anti-positivist research paradigms (Babbie, 2006) to explore the effect of gender as well as other educational constructs on student motivation from different levels of understanding. This combined paradigmatic model on one hand is necessary to dig into the psyche of those who believe in the gender stereotypic model and that of the students who are at the centre of all discussions. On the other hand it would help in accumulating tried and tested factual details of the factors affecting motivation and engagement. While the qualitative or the subjective approach helps in generating meaningful responses from the groups, the quantitative or the objective approach backs the subjective findings by providing with significant data. Depending upon the nature of the research topic, this combined approach is undertaken as any one approach would have been insufficient in critically assessing and evaluating the validity of the research outcome. Qualitative Approach A qualitative approach based on interviews and case study of students and teachers gives the research its basic direction. An approximate idea could be formed about the practicality of each model. The authors held interviews with teachers, educational practitioners and students of either gender. The subjective interrogation has been of much help in comprehending the standpoints of the two groups. While the educational practitioners hold the gender stereotypic model functional in student motivation within the class room, the students have been observed to hold neutral views implying the need of good teachers rather than fussing over teacher gender. The subjective approach has actually established the relevance of the gender invariant model within the classroom. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) It has also helped to locate the other significant educational and student constructs in relation to student motivation for instance, classroom, grade, and educational outcomes. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) Quantitative Approach The authors have pointed out that while the qualitative paradigm works best for subjective testing like interviews, case study and general surveys, the quantitative method is indispensable to gather exact and accurate data. The authors have employed a statistical analysis to obtain a full proof version of various factors affecting student motivation and engagement. They went for a survey of about 964 high school students and rated them on a number of constructs both educational and personal on a Student Motivation and Engagement Scale. The scale assesses motivation from the cognitive, behavioural and affective dimensions. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) The results obtained helped in clearing a lot of misconceptions regarding motivation and also in accepting some facts essential for promoting student motivation. b) You don’t bring me flowers any more: a fresh look at the vexed issue of teacher status Anti-positivist Research Paradigm The anti-positivist research paradigm, that the article You Don’t Bring Me Flowers Anymore supports, is the current trend of research in the field of social reality. It is in fact an answer to the conventional empirical approach to research. (Babbie, 2006) The anti-positivist pattern cropped up from the modernist thinking on individual perceptions as against the typical mentality to generalize. It stresses on qualitative or subjective approach as the only way of reaching to the truth. Qualitative/Subjective approach As the topic of Rice’s (2005) article, You Don’t Bring Me Flowers Anymore deals with individual perceptions of teachers about their social positions, the subjective methods that the paradigm calls for works best for data collection. Rice (2005) in her article You Don’t Bring Me Flowers Anymore has solely banked on the qualitative approach to probe into the issue of teacher status. Her choice of the anti-positivist research paradigm is due to a practical problem in quantifying the research data as the issue is more of teacher grievance related than based on concrete factors. Data was collected through semi structured interviews with teachers as well as through random surveys (Babbie, 2006) of the Australian public. In this connection it should be mentioned that semi-structured interviews help to cover a whole lot of dimensions of a given topic. However, Rice (2005) did allude to a quantitative approach as well to come out with specific details and accurate figures. Critical Theory Approach The research on teacher status also calls for a critical interpretation to judge and evaluate the justification of teachers’ concern over their social status. The critical approach questions the basis of the idea that teachers possess regarding their poor social status. It points out the discrepancy between the notions harboured by the teachers themselves and that of the general public who thinks teaching to be a highly respectable and serious job. (Rice, 2005) The critical theory paradigm helped to discern matters of concern if teachers do not change their negative thoughts about the profession. It indicates that school education would in general suffer from having good or devoted teachers. Moreover, it suggests that teachers should be given re-assurance of their worth and the profession, a complete facelift. Design a) Motivating boys and motivating girls: does teacher gender really make a difference? Strength The basic advantage in the design or the methodological framework of the research in the field of student motivation and gender effect is that the design is based on the conceptualization of a twofold approach. The choice of the research method is an effective one. (Babbie, 2006) The subjective analysis carried out through surveys and interviews of teachers and students help in gathering different viewpoints and indicating the conflicting ideas. But it is the quantitative approach through a statistical analysis that actually came up with the true picture of the requirements and perceptions of students on the issue of motivation and gender influence. Moreover it also helped in discovering the other salient factors that play important roles in student motivation apart from countering the pre-conceived notion of gender influence. The Student Motivation and Engagement Scale was structured keeping in mind a multi-dimensional (cognitive, behavioural and affective dimensions) probing of the student psyche and responses. To this purpose, it was designed to include a total of 44 items on which the student responses would be rated. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) This helped in the overall analysis of the constructs affecting motivation. The design is scientific, well executed and has clarity of purpose. Moreover it leaves the students to decide for themselves their responses without external interventions. As they get to mark themselves they would also get the chance to analyse their shortcomings in the particular subject (mathematics in this case). The results are therefore expected to be varied, authentic and unique. Limitations The quantitative approach makes the research in cases of social reality extremely mechanical. It tends to reduce emotions into countable digits. It is doubtful how far abstract and personal issues like motivation and engagement could be assessed through statistical analysis. The design is chiefly focussed on statistical analysis with less emphasis on subjective methods. It should have consisted of more structured interviews and observations. The research is so designed as to assess student motivation subject wise. In this instance, the factors working for student motivation in mathematics are measured. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) It does not have the scope to figure out a student’s interest in other subjects or fields which would perhaps had been encouraging for students and resourceful for educational practitioners and teachers in approaching individual talent. b) You don’t bring me flowers any more: a fresh look at the vexed issue of teacher status In comparison to the design of research in the article on motivation, the design that is chosen for research on teacher status is based on the qualitative approach which best suits the purpose of research that is to find the truth relating to teacher status. Strength As the design is based on subjective approach, it has made use of semi structured interviews of teachers. (Rice, 2005) The semi-structured interview on one hand keeps the interview from digressing from the main topic and also approaches the topic from different perspectives. On the other hand it leaves scope for improvisation on the part of the interviewer and flexibility on the part of the interviewee. For example, in the case of concern over teacher status among teachers the interviews have been able to wring out grievances about the limitations and risks of the profession. It tried to cover a wide range of professionals thereby selecting professionals both male and female, belonging to three different age groups and professional designations. This was to ensure maximum sample variation. (Rice, 2005) The random survey method (Babbie, 2006) was an important part of the design as it helped in divulging people’s unbiased views on teacher status. Limitations The interviews and surveys are restricted within the city of Melbourne. As a result large scale generalization (de Vaus, 2001) cannot be made. It should have been able to take into consideration rural areas and some of the other developed countries, where teachers have similar complaints, for a comparative study. (Rice, 2005) In keeping with the exploratory nature of the research, the design was concentrated on qualitative or subjective analysis. According to the author, a quantitative approach would have been effective in arriving at an accurate analysis of the outcome. (Rice, 2005) As a result of the restricted nature of the design, the study in general was on a smaller scale leaving quite a number of aspects unattended for example teacher eligibility and personal commitments of the participants. Moreover, the qualitative field research design (Babbie, 2006) is not well explicated. Data Collection a) Motivating boys and motivating girls: does teacher gender really make a difference? Strength In assessing student motivation and gender influence, the research procedure involved the instrument ‘Student Motivation and Engagement Scale’ consisting of sound psychometric properties and considered a viable mode of data collection. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) Multi-dimensional approach to the cognitive, behavioural and affective aspects of student motivation and engagement forms the basis of data collection. This approach has increased the effectiveness of data analysis. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) Data collection was structured, systematic and goal-oriented in the way it fixed upon its unit of analysis (de Vaus, 2001), that is, the target students of the most sensitive age group, the mean age being 14.30 from among all of the 964 school students, surveyed not less than 68 classrooms and made observations. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) Limitations Regarding data collection, more sources could have been used like that of the accounts given by teachers and parents of the factors they find affecting their students/children motivation, including student achievement data. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) Data could have been collected from more number of schools than the five of them only. At the same time it has limited data collection to only middle high school students, not taking into consideration the students of junior schools or those at the transition from junior to middle high school. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) Data was collected at a given point in time. (de Vaus, 2001) It does not ensure the stability and variability of motivational factors or the constructs affecting it. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) b) You don’t bring me flowers any more: a fresh look at the vexed issue of teacher status In comparison to data collection aspect of student motivation, that of research over teacher status is simpler and one-dimensional. Strength The use of audiotapes to record and conserve the interviews (Rice, 2005) as well as telephonic interviews (Churchill et al, 1999) has been of much help in furthering the research process by this effective mode of data collection. Semi-structured interviews provided data on a wide range of related topics, broached the issue of teacher status like, teacher accountability, educational leadership and also about the individual professional’s take on the profession and standpoint in the issue. Voices of teachers are provided for authenticity and figures 1 and 2 provide graphic presentations of concrete and substantial data on the different aspects directly and indirectly related to the issue of teacher status. Limitations Data collection and storage process was one dimensional that is only through audiotapes. It lacks detailing and a serious approach. Data was collected on the basis of the accounts provided by a handful of teachers. Though there was variation in sampling but it was inadequate to speak for the entire teaching fraternity. The factors working behind the negative attitude of teachers about their social status are also not clear from the data collection. (Rice, 2005) Analysis a) Motivating boys and motivating girls: does teacher gender really make a difference? Strength Multi-level analysis (Goldstein, 2003; Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002) of the constructs at the three different levels like students, class and school (Marsh & Martin, 2005) helped in determining the impact of each on student motivation and effect of gender. The Confirmatory factor analysis or CFA is instrumental in confirming the psychometric properties of testing. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) This ensures the reliability and validity of the scale on which the constructs are measured. The analysis came up with the variance component model that pointed to maximum variance at the student level. It also pointed out that class level variation involved teacher-student relation and that student motivation is independent of teacher gender. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) Limitations The analysis does not mention of the emotional inclination of boys or girls to the teacher of the same gender with whom they can relate. (Marsh & Martin, 2005) Analysis is based on statistical data collection and hardly on subjective findings. The analysis is not applicable for junior school students (Marsh & Martin, 2005) and this questions the universality of its relevance. b) You don’t bring me flowers any more: a fresh look at the vexed issue of teacher status In comparison to the rigidly statistical data based analysis of the findings on student motivation and gender effect, the analysis of the findings of teacher status is flexible and prone to modifications. Strength The analysis involves grouping of factors into structural issues and contextual causes separately for better identification of the problems enhancing the feeling of neglect in teachers. (Rice, 2005) The analysis, based on first hand interaction with teachers, is an in depth and vivid study of the forces playing behind the negative attitude of teachers about their profession. The analysis has brought forth the discrepancy between the view of the teachers and that of the public about the social status of teachers. (Rice, 2005) Limitations The factor analysis (Babbie, 2006), based on subjective approach, is prone to changes with time and situation. It is tentative in nature. (Rice, 2005) As it is based on a small scale of data collection, the analysis lacks multi dimensional approach. The analysis does not have the support of empirical findings and is based on concepts rather than factual proofs. As a result it might be biased. Conclusion In conclusion it could be said that the articles supported two different approaches depending on the nature of the topics they dealt with. But it is best when both the qualitative and quantitative approaches complement each other within one unit of research. The design, data collection and analysis of the research work in both the topics have revealed the salient factors or a lack of them, thereby prompting to fill in the loopholes accordingly. The educational impact of both the articles is far reaching. Reference Babbie, R. Earl. (2006). The Practice of Social Research. Published by Thomson/Wadsworth. Churchill, R., Kelly, M., & Mulford, B. (1999). A report card for our schools: A national survey of public perceptions of education in Australia. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education. Retrieved on September 29, 2008, from www.aare.edu.au/99pap/chu99379.htm De Vaus, A.D (2001). Research Design in Social Research. Published by Sage. Goldstein, H. (2003). Multilevel statistical models (3rd ed.). Hodder Arnold. London Martin, A. & Marsh, H. (2005). Motivating boys and motivating girls: Does teacher gender really make a difference? Australian Journal of Education, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 320-334. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Sage. Thousand Oaks, CA Rice, S. (2005). You don’t bring me flowers any more: A fresh look at the vexed issue of teacher status. Australian Journal of Education, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 182-196. Read More