How do you all download the assignment briefs and templates to you computers to work on?

I know I don't have Microsoft office on my laptop, but didn't think it was necessary with the use of cloud?

I'm only getting an option to download to notepad....

Task 2 Chosen Article: Ofsted inspection in the general further education and skills sector in England - 2024

Authors: Dr Bernie Munoz-Chereau Michael Burgoyne Katherine Emms Dr Andrea Laczik

I chose this article as it offers a recent and relevant analysis of the evolving requirements for Ofsted within the Further Education and Skills (FES) sector. The report outlines the key revisions from previous frameworks and aligns with the focus of my research into the quality of apprenticeships by critically examining the associated strengths, limitation, advantages and disadvantages of the change in the model that measures quality. This evaluation of differing perspectives will allow me to review the impact of Ofsted quality measures on the apprenticeship provision. The referenced research source offers an in-depth description of the author’s professional backgrounds and prior work, enabling further exploration of relevant projects. The study used a mixed method approach, incorporating both quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews, however, the quantitative component is somewhat limited since data was collected from only two practitioners within the FES sector, making it difficult to draw broader conclusions. Although the document does not explicitly reference the impact of compliance, it cites several related studies that could inform and support further investigations in this area.

An investigation into the inclusion of children with SEND in mainstream schools, both in theory and in practice. It examines the issues and problems surrounding the definition of inclusion as well its implementation. The report also questions whether mainstream schools or special schools provide the best option for educating children with SEND. The paper appears to be a review of published literature and is cited 4 times in other related work (once in 2024 and 3 times in 2025). The author declares that there was no conflict of interest.  

The report concludes that the teaching of children with SEND should be viewed as a part of the education agenda as a whole and not an addition to the education of students without SEND. It suggested that it is not the school setting which influences student outcome but the classroom experience in that particular setting.  It suggests a redesign of the funding for the provision of inclusive SEND education and that the role of educational psychologist researchers should have a role in future recommendations. This is unsurprising as the author is an educational psychologist herself.

The article fits well with my research question - The difficulty of SEND provision and inclusion in mainstream secondary schools - as it discusses both the implementation and theory of teaching students with SEND in a mainstream setting.  It looks at the outcome of SEND students and the issues around training  and resourcing the teaching students with SEND.

- Underpinning theory.

- Book (194 citations).

- In particular Jo-Anne Dillabough’s (Faculty of Education at University of Cambridge) chapter which outlines historical theories of Gender and research within Education.

A systematic review of the factors affecting girls' participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics subjects. (Mmsamwa, et al., 2024).

- Recent peer-reviewed journal, with 38 citations.

-A systematic analysis of 165 publications on the topic.

-Secondary data, but highlights some key factors for sparking research ideas.

A-level Further Mathematics uptake: barriers for underrepresented young people (Mau, 2024).

- A recent study by Imperial College London.

-Directly related to my title and includes interviews of students and teachers, including quotations.

-References leaders in the fields (for example Louise Archer, who Dr Mau regularly works and writes with). The study itself however, from what I can see, has not been peer-reviewed or cited yet.

Girls’ participation in A level Mathematics and Further Mathematics (FMSP, 2016)

- A briefing document summarising research by the Further Maths Support Programme (now ceases to exist, but the programme was a key support for practitioners).

Raising girls’ participation in A-level mathematics: initial findings from ‘good practice’ case studies (Smith and Golding, 2015).

From Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics 35(1).

-Again, though only cited by 3, the article raises an interesting link between female students' uptake and their rapport with their teacher. Both authors are experts in the field.

1. Own position approach (approx. 150 words) 
    

My results from the Research Philosophy Profiler show that my ontology leans towards constructivism with some realist influence, and my epistemology leans towards positivism with some interpretivist influence. This gives me a fairly balanced position, where I recognise both the importance of measurable data and the value of lived experiences. For my research question, How do FE teachers translate professional learning and CPD into classroom practice, and what strategies appear most effective in improving teaching quality?, I would normally approach the problem by seeking a mix of evidence. I would want to examine quantitative data such as student outcomes, retention, or progression linked to CPD activities, while also gathering qualitative data through teacher interviews and student feedback. Methods like surveys, case studies and document analysis (for example Ofsted reports) would help me triangulate the findings. A strong conclusion from my perspective would combine statistical evidence of improved teaching outcomes with rich qualitative accounts that explain why teachers and students experienced these improvements. 

2. Swapped position approach (approx. 150 words) 

If I were to adopt the opposite stance, which would be realist–interpretivist, I would reframe the research question in a different way. From this position, the problem would not be about whether CPD is effective in measurable terms, but about uncovering the real conditions and structures that shape how teachers interpret and use CPD in practice. Evidence would come from exploring how teachers make sense of CPD within the constraints of workload, policy, and institutional culture. I would focus on interviews, observations and reflective accounts to capture their perspectives, but I would analyse these with an eye to the wider structures influencing them. A strong conclusion in this paradigm would not aim to prove which CPD strategy is most effective overall, but instead would offer insight into the real but complex ways that organisational systems, resources and teacher experiences interact to shape how CPD is translated into classroom practice. 
 

3. Reflection (approx. 150–200 words) 

When I swapped lenses, the methods, evidence and conclusions changed significantly. In my usual approach, I want to see statistical evidence of CPD’s impact, supported by qualitative data that explains those patterns. This reflects my positivist lean, where measurable outcomes feel important for proving effectiveness, but also my constructivist recognition that experiences matter. When I switched to a realist–interpretivist stance, I no longer looked for numerical outcomes, but instead treated teacher perspectives as the main source of knowledge while also recognising the influence of external structures such as policy, workload and inspection frameworks. This made the research question less about identifying which CPD strategies are most effective overall and more about examining how teachers experience CPD within real organisational contexts. I found the interpretivist position useful for surfacing nuance and valuing teacher voice, but I also felt it was limiting because it lacked the ability to demonstrate measurable outcomes. Reflecting on this shows that my own assumptions lean towards a pragmatic balance. I value both quantitative evidence for credibility and qualitative evidence for depth, which confirms why my approach naturally combines elements of both positions. 

Confidentiality and anonymity are also very important. Parents or students might feel nervous about giving negative feedback on the new formative assessment policy. To address this, I would collect surveys anonymously and remove any identifying information from interview transcripts. All data would be stored securely, and any findings reported in a way that prevents individual participants from being recognised. 

Finally, I would think carefully about the dual role as both a teaching assistant and researcher. This could create pressure for students to participate or unrealistic expectations from parents about school action. To reduce this risk, I would make it clear that the research is separate from the day-to-day role, and that the purpose is to explore experiences rather than to make immediate changes. 

I find this relevant as it is a source that supports the use of AI in students to aid them with work but not replacing their capabilities of critical thinking.

This is of interest to me as I am facing everyday challenges to identify how my learners use AI to help them with the every day assignments and how to support them into using this assertively and responsibly.

Essien, A. (2024). “The influence of AI text generators on critical thinking skills”

This is an article that was published after a research on how students interact with AI, especially ChatGPT and concentrates on how the use of this app can affect the ownership of the learner of the task in question and their capacity of reasoning within the work or how the use of the programme can help some students with their critical thinking skills if used correctly.

Generative AI and data protection in schools” gov.uk / Department for Education guidance & related DfE policy

This highlights the guidance of the use of AI in the UK schools, I find this particularly important as enhance the safeguarding, assessment malpractice, policies of how to use the AI in classes and the intellectual property.

These are particularly good for my research as it helps me identify the correct use of AI while complying with the relevant legislation and good practice as well as how schools must comply with the use of AI.

Generative AI for Students (SAGE, 2025)

This book helped me to understand the way in which learners must use AI in an ethical manner and how we must educate students to do so. This is very helpful to ensure that we educate learners on how to embrace suggestions from AI rather than copy/paste the content created in the application. This is helpful at the time of encouraging students to use AI as a guidance and create class activities to encourage genuine work. This book explaines the benefits of encouraging learners to use AI as a tool rather than an application to generate a quick response that the learners can use.

These are some of the sources that I have been looking at and that can be use for my dissertation, all though I am not quite sure if I will change the subject as I am not entirely sure by now.

I have choose the following article: School librarians developing AI literacy for an AI-driven future: leveraging the AI Citizenship Framework with scope and sequence schools from Zakir Hossain, Library Hi Tech News (2025) 42 (2): 17-21 https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-10-2024-0186

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the artificial intelligence (AI) Citizenship Framework, a model that equips teachers and school library professionals with the tools to develop AI literacy and citizenship in students. It is a theoretical framework developed from the author's experience as an information and digital literacy coach and teacher across Asia, The Middle East and Europe. Although there is no empirical data collected for this theoretical paper, the AI citizenship Framework offers a structured approach for school librarians and educators to introduce and develop AI literacy. Future research could focus on testing its practical effectiveness in real-world settings. This article has been widely cited up to 18 times depending on your research platform which shows the interest of AI literacy.

This article fit perfectly well in my research as it goes against my thoughts that AI can be good for the library. But how will the schools afford such new tools?

The article I have chosen is Warnock 40 Years on: The Development of Special Educational Needs Since the Warnock Report and Implications for the Future. Frontiers in Education, 4.  (Lindsay et al., 2020). This article reviews the progress of inclusive education over the last 40 years, analysing secondary data to justify the statements made when recommending how the inclusive education framework can be built upon in England.

As stated by (Lindsay et al., 2020), LAs and schools have experienced reductions in available resources, mirroring the findings in my other articles. Patterns can be seen supporting the need for change in the inclusive educational framework, caused by austerity, lack of training and inconsistencies across LAs.

 It employs a policy review of legislative frameworks, analysis of historical documents and secondary research spanning over 40 years from 1978 to 2020, unlike my other articles (Last & Su, n.d.; Laverick & Baron, 2024; Marsh, 2014; Sales & Vincent, 2018), which focus on a much smaller time period, small-scale studies or soley qualitative/quantitative research. The findings are not original, but they align with other leading scholars in the field of SEND.

In full, the article itself provided a historical policy analysis, reviewing the implementation and using the data available on access to inclusive education beyond “EHC plans and the non-statutory offer to children and young people with lower, but still important, levels of SEN” (Lindsay et al., 2020), meeting the guidance of the original Warnock Report (1978). It addresses gaps seen in the other studies I have reviewed, whilst providing links to other articles relevant to my study with its 19 citations.

Last, G., & Su, F. (n.d.). Ten Years on: To what extent has the 2015 special educational needs and disabilities code of practice influenced professionals’ practice within post-16 education? PRACTICE, 0(0), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/25783858.2025.2473322

Laverick, T., & Baron, R. (2024). Understanding Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Assessment and Review Team experiences to improve and inform special educational needs and disabilities systems in England. British Journal of Special Education, 51(4), 479–490. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12555

Lindsay, G., Wedell, K., & Dockrell, J. (2020). Warnock 40 Years on: The Development of Special Educational Needs Since the Warnock Report and Implications for the Future. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00164

Marsh, A. J. (2014). Statements of special educational needs and tribunal appeals in England and Wales 2003–2013 – in numbers. Educational Psychology in Practice, 30(4), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2014.949628

Sales, N., & Vincent, K. (2018). Strengths and limitations of the Education, Health and Care plan process from a range of professional and family perspectives. British Journal of Special Education, 45(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12202

Article - An Evaluation of Whole-School Trauma-Informed Training Intervention Among Post-Primary School Personnel: A Mixed Methods Study (MacLochlainn, Kirby, McFadden, & Mallett, 2022).

Review - The study examines the impact of trauma-informed approaches (training) on school staff attitudes and wellbeing, which in turn can indirectly influence pupil engagement and wellbeing. However, it does not directly measure pupil outcomes but provides a good basis for understanding what trauma-informed practice may look like as well as providing many references and linked works.
The methods appear credible and reliable, using a mixture of qualitative and quantitative approaches alongside the use of a control group. The researchers have acknowledged their limitations and clearly outlined their ethical considerations.
This academic journal article has been peer-reviewed and cited 81 times since 2022, reflecting the growing interest in trauma-informed education.
The paper is identified as one of the first studies to evaluate a whole-school trauma-informed training programme using a control group, making it a highly original piece of research. The findings demonstrated that short-term, low-cost training could promote more positive trauma-informed attitudes as well as improve teacher wellbeing.

Reference - MacLochlainn, J., Kirby, K., McFadden, P., & Mallett, J. (2022). An evaluation of whole-school trauma-informed training intervention among post-primary school personnel: A mixed methods study. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 15(4), 925–941. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40653-021-00432-3

I have been looking at different articles, journals, and books to find the common misconceptions. I have noted three.

Ethical Considerations:

"Autism can be cured"

Autism is a lifelong neurodiversity disorder and not a disease. Professionals duty to respect and to protect the identity of pupils increasing positive attitudes within their approach to teaching and learning.

"why can't you be normal for once in your life" Singer, J. (1999)

"Autistic people don't have empathy"

why do people think they lack empathy? We are slowly moving away from this. but the stigma is out there.

Understanding and compassion in societal is gaining but still needs to be explored to change perceptions.

"All autistic people are the same"

Autism is a spectrum. We are moving to a more dimensional view of autism and using a more individualised support. To understand each persons needs and difficulties.

There are at least eight common misconception still being used.

My chosen article is an Educational Journal Research Report made by Ofsted, 2022.

Schools need more specialist help for primary age children with additional needs. (2022). Education Journal, 504, 14–17.

This article was published in 2002 and is a qualitative study based on samples from 4 different areas. Including 10 different Primary Schools carried out in 2021. The article can be considered reliable as it was produced by Ofsted, a Government agency responsible for monitoring the quality of education in schools.

Whilst this article is not representative of all schools, the article highlighted some main points such as there being a missing gap between the staff and their understanding of alternative provisions. With some thinking this meant being sent to a school to sort behaviours to some thinking it meant outreach workers being involved with children.

From this, a key part to highlight is that staff didn’t consider internal provisions to count for being Alternative provisions.

It also mentions that funding for schools is an issue when making arrangements with possible outreach support help that can be made In schools to support pupils.

“While there are children who have severe, profound or multiple needs, others are identified as having SEND during key stages 2 or 3, which can be traced back to a poor curriculum and poor teaching in the early years and key stage 1, rather than a genuine need or difficulty.”

This impacts the fact that Early years are extremely important for the development of all children, including those with additional needs, and that more training potentially may be needed for schools and early years teachers in regards to children with additional needs.

Whilst this article highlights some key points around alternative provisions and the importance of early years, I would like to see some more pointed information within the early years sector, alongside primary schools.

 ‘My life is like a massive jigsaw with pieces missing’. How ‘lower-attaining’ children experience school in terms of their well-being. Denise Buchanan, Eleanore Hargreaves & Laura Quick (2021)

This article looks at the well-being of children who are considered to be lower attaining. It draws on Seligman’s theory of well-being and recognises some schools are failing to support well-being causing negative effects. The study looks at how the negative effects on children’s well-being has increased since the introduction of the national curriculum and performance tables, though more research would be needed to ascertain the credibility of those claims.

The study takes place in the South-East of England, over 5 years with a focus on twenty three children age 7 up until they were 12. The children were considered by their teachers to be lower attaining without any health care needs. Studies were carried by three researches and was funded by the Leverhulme Trust.

It was found the pressures of finding school work difficult along with potential consequences for not completing work to a standard had a negative impact on the children’s sense of achievement and ultimately their well-being. “…these children were experiencing challenges to their well-being in relation to their perceived lack of achievement and its associated shame, endemic to the current climate of emphasis on high-attainment in tests of extremely limited curriculum areas.” Buchanan, Denise; Hargreaves, Eleanore; Quick, Laura (2021)

This research interests me due to working in education for over 15 years I have witnessed a decline in children’s mental health in school; emotional based school avoidance, challenging behaviours along with increased pressures on teachers which can sometimes get inadvertently filtered down to the children. Which leads me to wonder of there is a link between children's mental health in school and increased pressures some schools face when driven by results along with what seems to be a lower priority on subjects such as the arts and physical education subjects that would naturally support mental health. To see if my thoughts are credible I’d have to research further.

This article would directly support my research into how children’s mental health is impacted by the national curriculum due to the 5 year qualitive research on 23 children. It has been cited 4 times.

After doing the Research Philosophy Profiler quiz, the result showed that I am more constructivist for my ontological position (however, there were a few answers where I would have prefer answering A and B together), and more interpretivist for my Epistemological position.

So, to start my research, I will try to find as many different experiences or observations done by or for the teachers as it will give a deeper depth on what they experienced every day. (e.g. How do they enhance engagement through interactive and multimedia content?) But also, analysing the result of their success or lesser success with the technology used (e.g. Did it improved digital literacy? Did it prepare students for a digital world) Sending a survey to students to have their point of view is equally important. (e.g. How did they find their personalised learning experiences with adaptive technology?). Based on what is discovered, the conclusion should reflect both teachers and students’ experiences and opinions on the question.

How many students or teachers can one researcher can ask? Does the conclusion reflect only all of the teachers and students of the planet? Or the research has to specify its demography?

Swapped position approach:

If I only take from the perspective of realism and positivism, I will drown myself into survey results and study cases where the numbers will show me that technology use does or does not influence on classroom participation. Nowadays, everything is done on computers. The quantity of information is more transparent and objective. There won’t be any interferences on to what one person will think of it or disagree with! The conclusion drawn by these numbers might be effective, and it seems adequate to say that the result acquired should be final but I can’t stop asking myself; is that it? It feels like it is limiting the researcher to one aspect of the research and that we are missing the personal point of view.

Reflection:

From both position approach, it seems like they both should be mixed research as there are some elements missing on each side of the research which will not make the conclusion as objective as it should be.

When I try to think in the opposite approach of my first choice, it loses its human side of the reflection. Also, we are talking about technology which as we all know doesn’t have a soul. (I am sure others will try to prove me wrong here) I feel like it is important to take someone’s perspective to get into the centre of the problem. The problem is not that we are using technology in class but the outcome of using it. Yes, having a realism approach gives you more rigorous, transparent and objective results but the word “influence” is far from rigorous. It is more like a wave of indirect thoughts. Thoughts and experience from the people who are using the technology. The data is certainly important too, but, in this scenario, it must be interpreted as an add-on to the other findings not just as the main results of the research. In conclusion, I think it is interesting to see both side of the lens but, although I personally prefer the constructivism and interpretivism approach, it is important to say that if we want to be objective, we need to see all of the approaches method.

The results of the research profiler activity suggest that my ontological  perspective is realism which is as I would have expected. However my answers to the questions linked to epistemological perspective are mixed. The results suggest that I have a more positivist perspective but I find it hard to pin my views to either epistemology and believe that there is a place for both objective and subjective research methods depending upon the question posed.

Chosen question - How does homework affect student learning?

If I were to investigate this question my first instinct is to take a realist-positivist perspective. I would look at student attainment and homework participation from a range of classes from each year group (7-11). I would first look to make a prediction based on this data as to whether active participation in homework improves grades achieved. I would focus on the core subjects of Maths and English where core skills are very closely linked to grade achievement. I would set a test period of 1 term initially and monitor homework completion against results in end of topic tests. A strong correlation would show an improvement in assessment grades when homework was completed as set.

If I were to take the opposite perspective I might consider the question from the perspective of the student and whether they felt that homework improved their learning experience.  I would conduct semi structured interviews to explore whether homework does in fact consolidate learning and encourage involvement as it is commonly suggested by teachers. I might also explore the idea of whether certain students, especially those with SEND, might actually benefit from a complete rest from schoolwork in the home environment. From this perspective, personal experiences would be of primary importance and the drawing of measurable conclusions would be difficult. The study may promote further investigation and discussion on the nature of learning itself. 

Reflection:

This exercise has highlighted to me how the interpretation of a research question can change based on the researchers initial perspective. I believe that both aspects I have discussed are useful and worthy of investigation but as the education system measures success (of teachers, schools and students) on the attainment in standardised examinations, I feel the only way to provide measurable conclusions would be to conduct quantitative data research based on test results. The inclusion of students’ perspectives would provide useful information into the practicalities of completing homework and could lead to further investigation about the nature of the homework itself (amount, type, level etc).

This exercise has confirmed that my perspective is in fact mixed. Whilst I lean towards a realist ontology, my research methods and exploration of a question will likely be influenced by both positivist and interpretivist ideas. This may make it harder for me to be specific in my research and has highlighted that I need to carefully consider what I want to achieve before committing to the aims of any research project.

Based on the Research Philosophy Profiler quiz, most of my answers were in the Constructivist and Positivist positions.

Section 2:

Chosen Question:

How does homework affect student learning?

Section 3:

1.     Own position approach

I would typically expect to be able to conduct the research for my chosen question from a Positivist perspective - that evidence would be quantitative, measurable and independent of opinion or feeling from external sources. The main method would involve: two groups of students would be given the same pre-test at the start of a period of time or for a new topic to all students.. A specific process of introducing a homework routine would be given to one of the groups. A control group would not be assigned homework. Following a period of regular classroom teaching for a topic, the same two groups of students would then be compared in terms of their performance in a summative assessment task. The method would be a quantitative action research experiment that evaluates student learning as a quantitative output-driven process. A strong conclusion would depend on the collected data, but ideally the student performance in the pre-test and post-test would align with my initial beliefs regarding the epistemological importance of homework.

1.     Swapped position approach

From a swapped position, I would look to consider the students’ attitudes and feelings towards their learning and the impact of homewaork. I would investigate and explore more about the conceptual and philosophical nature of learning and what it means to learn, taking on more of a Interpretivist approach whereby student learning is about the holistic experience. The methods would involve interviews with a focus group that has been assigned homework. There are opportunities to explore the impacts on other areas, including well-being which could be measured or investigated either through qualitative analysis on a small-scale, but could also be explored on a larger-scale using a survey, Google Form that could widen the scope of the investigation beyond the classroom.

2.     Reflection

When I switched lenses, the whole focus of the research project took a new path with conclusions and emphasis more on students’ feelings, the culture, the well being of the student rather than a purely scientific method approach that would implement a change and analyse the effects of the change from a quantitative perspective. I found taking on this new perspective quite enlightening because it seemed to open up more opportunities to gather feedback and student voice from beyond the classroom. However, the limiting factors of taking on the swapped position are that the more Constructivist approach does leave more potential for the dilution or distraction from the initial aim of the project. Research methods that are based on observation, interview or open feedback survey have the potential for the conclusions to be more vague as less directly correlated to the homework policy that has been implemented. This has helped to reveal that aspects of my research should be quantitative in order to evaluate effectiveness of implementing a new strategy in the classroom, but we also have to reflect that the participants are not robots, they have personal experiences, they have opinions and these opinions and feelings can also important to a study.

Based on my current interest in exploring SEND provision in UK further education, I have selected the UK Parliament Education Committee’s 2024 report “Solving the SEND Crisis” as a key source for my research. This government report directly addresses systemic challenges in SEND support, aligning closely with my potential research question on how effectively students with SEND are supported in FE settings. Its use of stakeholder interviews alongside policy analysis provides both qualitative and quantitative insights, enhancing the report’s credibility and depth. Widely referenced in educational policy discussions and cited in practitioner forums, it stands as a reliable and influential source. The report’s findings, including inconsistencies in provision, the call for national standards, and the challenges faced by families seeking specialist placements, offer a robust foundation for evaluating current practices and proposing improvements in SEND support across further education institutions.

Swapped Position Approach (Realist–Positivist)

If I were to adopt a realist–positivist perspective, I would shift the focus to measurable outcomes. The question would become: How does homework directly affect academic performance for EAL students in Year 10? Evidence would focus on quantitative data such as test scores, homework completion rates and overall grades before and after homework assignments. To investigate this, I would use performance trackers to track students' completion of assignments and compare their academic progress using baseline and diagnostic tests. I might also look at attendance rates and how time spent on homework correlates with success in exams. A strong conclusion would provide statistical evidence of a clear link between the amount of homework completed and academic improvement, offering a solid, data-driven argument for the role of homework in EAL students' learning.

Reflection

Upon reflection I realized that each perspective highlights different aspects of EAL students' learning experiences. As a teacher, I’m deeply aware of the unique challenges EAL students face, including language barriers, different educational backgrounds, and the stress of adjusting to a new system. The constructivist approach allows me to explore these nuances, focusing on individual student experiences and how they interpret homework. It helps me understand that students' struggles with homework might not always reflect their academic abilities but rather the complexities of adjusting to a new language and culture.

On the other hand, the realist–positivist approach provides a clear, objective measure of homework's impact on academic performance, which is useful for understanding the broader trends. However, it feels limiting in not addressing the reasons behind students' struggles or successes. The challenge, I believe, lies in balancing both perspectives: using data to identify trends while also considering the deeper, personal contexts that influence how homework affects learning for my EAL students.

Reedy, A., & De Carvalho, R. (2019). Children’s perspectives on reading, agency and their environment: what can we learn about reading for pleasure from an East London primary school? Education 3-13, 49(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2019.1701514

This article is a case-study that focuses on children’s perspectives on reading. It centres pupil-voice in the hopes to inform “future reading for pleasure strategies within the school setting”. I chose this article as its exploration of “choice” leading to increased volitional reading runs parallel to both my research question and my own observations as a teaching assistant.

It is a longitudinal study that ran for three-weeks in the same two-form entry school in Newham, East London. It focused on year 5 students and used a mixed-method approach of questionnaires and focus group interviews. The questionnaire was used to sort students into two groups: those with a positive view of reading and more “reluctant” readers. Both groups of students highlighted the need for choice to enjoy reading. Other factors included environment, time allocation and access. However, students overwhelmingly expressed the need to choose what they are reading- whether it is a book with more pictures than words, books that are just funny or a child’s umpteenth read of a series favourite like Harry Potter. It is the role of an educator to facilitate love of reading and policing the reading habits of children may lead to aliteracy (being able to read but not having the desire or will to).

The article acknowledges its own research design limits in using a case study approach. However, it counteracts the lack of generalisation by arguing that a “small and narrow” sample allowed for a “specific and narrow” focus. The article only aspires to guide educators in evaluating their own practice in developing reading for pleasure. 

The article concludes by demonstrating the validity of its own research in applicability in real-life school settings. It revealed that library usage had increased in the school as a result of affording children the choice to participate in the creation of a new school library. Children chose the books and decorated the space through school-wide questionnaires in tandem with focus group interviews that allowed for different genres of books such as mangas and comics to be included. Ultimately, granting children the agency to participate in their own learning and reading of books will no doubt lead to more frequent leisure reading. 

Own Position

Constructivist/Positivist

My seemingly contrasting viewpoints of constructivist ontology and positivist epistemology offers me a diverse range of investigative options. Constructivism assumes that reality is socially constructive and would therefore suggest that each learner’s experience would shape their own learning. Leaning more toward qualitative methods, research would need to include interviews or focus groups to understand the students background and perception of homework. Potentially reflective accounts of motivation pre and post homework completion. It could also include observations in relation to how homework is perceived when it is set, and how teachers approach this. This paired with my positivist assumptions would enable me to further investigate the cause and effect of different social realities in more analytical terms. By utilising more quantitative methods to obtain measurable data such as a comparison of test results of students who complete homework and those that don’t for example. I could also look at correlation between the different perspectives and homework marks for instance. An example of strong conclusion could be to identify whether there was a measurable difference in student achievement based on the student’s background.

Swap Lenses

Realist/Interpretivist

From a realist perspective it would suggest that homework has a real effect on learning, and differing perceptions of reality could mean students may not agree or see this fixed reality fully. I would be looking to explain this impact and how homework influences learning by measuring achievement using quantitative data such as exam scores, progress over time and pattern identification and analysis this against homework completion and grades. Combining this interpretivist viewpoint would suggest that there is no single truth to explain how homework effects learning due to the different perspectives of all involved, the student receiving the homework, the teacher setting the work and the parents supporting the student for example. I would investigate using qualitative methods such as interviews with students and teachers, observe the classroom and obtain feedback from all parties. The combined viewpoints would enable me to consolidate data alongside the more human aspects such as the impact of stress or family involvement in homework completion and compare this to the students progress over time.

Reflection

My own position allowed a broad investigative approach looking at combining a view of how each student’s reality of homework and learning is shaped by their experiences and context (constructivist) while also believing that homework’s impact on learning can be measured as an objective fact (Positivist). The opportunity to swap lenses enabled me to look at the perspective that homework impacts learning outcomes whether or not the students perceive them (realist) and that understanding comes from interpreting how individuals perceive and experience homework (interpretivist). I initially struggled to see the difference in the combined viewpoints as they both use quantitative and qualitative methods looking at measurable data and experiential evidence to draw conclusions, however, looking more deeply into the core values of a realist/interpretivist would be to look more into the mechanism that explains how homework impacts learning and understanding the meanings of this rather than measuring outcomes. The benefits of this viewpoint are that it can provide detailed, descriptive evidence of lived experiences alongside contextual explanations, showing what works, for whom and under what conditions. My constructive/positivist approach can be limiting due it its context specific, generalised data requirements which could miss vital insights gained by the opposite approach.

Constructivism/interpretivism

“How does homework affect student learning”

As an apprenticeship Assessor/Tutor, I interact with students age16 + year old. From my constructivist and interpretivist perspective, homework within the apprenticeships, is not just a task where people can write about what has been taught in a class session but gives the learner the opportunity to apply what they have learned into their every day context within work, this help the learner to adapt the lessons learned into their work and demonstrate their understanding. The knowledge acquired, can be also consolidated not just through the homework but through their experiences within their working life and their interaction with other people at work. For my learners, it is an excellent opportunity to apply the lessons learned in class into their work and use their experiences when completing written assignments using specific examples within their job role while explaining this through the homework.

Understanding learners’ specific needs and preferences, can help me choosing the correct method of assessment to minimise the negative impact that written work can have over some learners, being able to chose observations, discussions or Q & A that can make consolidating learning a better experience for the learner.

For this approach, it helps to question learners, to identify what approach works better for them and ensure that learning can be consolidated depending on their own preferences and what method of assessment works for them. Collecting feedback and discussions help me improve my teaching and assessments to meet learning needs.

Swopped Position Approach: Realism/Positivism

If I were to take the realism/positivism approach, I would have to evaluate written assignments, exams, etc that can demonstrate how the learners consolidate the content taught in class.

I would approach homework as a tool to evaluate and reinforce the student's learning. I would identify how the learner has retained information and is able to complete assignments with the content learned. I would concentrate on the grades and the marking of the assignments, the quality of these and I would perhaps compare results before and after completing homework, to evaluate the effectiveness of these assignments. This would be done using standardised homework, assignments and measuring the performance of the class and comparing how much homework has been completed against the grades achieved. This approach would be more objective and evidence-based conclusions. I will use the data to evaluate if homework improves academic performance and use an empirical approach to support the outcomes.

Using this approach is effective, however, I believe for some students would present a challenging task, especially when the learners’ first language is not English or when learners have learning disabilities such as dyslexia. Homework can be a challenging time for some learners not being able to demonstrate their full abilities due to learning needs.

This realistic approach is also necessary be able to contrast the benefits of homework against performance and demonstrate how homework can benefit the learning process.

Conclusion:

I believe both approaches constructivism/interpretivism and realism/positivism can provide valuable perspective in the approach of how homework affects learning in education.

From the constructivist point of view, we can appreciate that homework has a more personal approach, it considers personal experience where the learner is using their own experiences and interpretation and construct their knowledge depending on these experiences. Learners apply their own critical thinking where they demonstrate what they have learned and can apply this to their own everyday work; it is more creative and promotes self-direct learning. In contrast, positivism/realism approach,  concentrates more in a qualitative and quantitative approach, where homework is used as a tool to evaluate outcomes, using qualitative and quantitative data, using homework and standardise assignments, as a tool to evaluate the content learned and how this learning as been consolidated through homework, helping students to achieve better outcomes and promoting the retention of information. It is evidence-based and standardised work to apply consistently to all learners.

It has been interesting for me to compare both approaches and I believe a combination of both approaches is ideal to do both, consolidate learning and  being able to have a empirical approach to demonstrate that homework is effective as well as adopting a subjective approach while promoting critical thinking, personal experiences and reflection that will result in positive experiences for learners.

I have decided to change my research topic to:

A critical review of research on play-based learning as a tool to enhance communication and development for pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN) in primary education.

My own philosophical stance aligns with pragmatism and interpretivism. I value both the practical outcomes of play-based interventions and the individual experiences of SEN pupils. This means I view knowledge as shaped by context and human interaction, not only by numbers. My literature-based review therefore appreciates studies that explore how and why play-based learning enhances communication and development, not just whether it does.

Swapped Position Approach (Positivist Lens)

When viewing my topic through a positivist lens, the focus shifts towards measurable evidence and objective data. Research would aim to quantify outcomes — for example, using communication assessments or developmental scales to statistically test the effectiveness of play-based strategies. From this perspective, children’s subjective experiences or social meanings are less central, as the emphasis lies on reliability, control, and replicable findings.

Reflection

Swapping lenses helped me recognise how different paradigms shape research outcomes and values. The interpretivist lens highlights depth, meaning, and real-world context, while the positivist lens prioritises accuracy and generalisability. Understanding these contrasting views strengthened my ability to critically evaluate the literature I review and justify my own stance. I now see that adopting a balanced, pragmatic–interpretivist approach will allow me to integrate both numerical findings and experiential insights to understand how play-based learning supports communication and development among SEN pupils.

Select studies that portray children respectfully and align with BERA’s principles of dignity and inclusion. Acknowledge any bias or limitations found in sources.Even in a literature review, I must ensure SEN learners are not misrepresented or stigmatised.

2. Researcher bias and interpretation

Maintain a reflective stance, include diverse viewpoints, and use balanced language when analysing studies.Transparency about my own interpretivist–pragmatic stance strengthens credibility and fairness.

3. Use of secondary data and integrity

Apply APA 7th referencing, check originality and review ethical soundness of each study before citing. Upholding academic honesty ensures my review meets both university and BERA ethical standards.

Research on Student Interaction in Peer Collaborative Problem Solving in Mathematics in Students' Collaborative Problem Solving in Mathematics Classrooms (Zhang, 2024):

I have determined that "Research on Student Interaction in Peer Collaborative Problem Solving in Mathematics" (Zhang, 2024) is the ideal article to support my research, as its focus on peer collaboration and problem-solving outcomes perfectly aligns with my title. The paper's academic credibility is high due to its publication by Springer and its affiliation with Beijing Normal University. The research methodology was robust: it used a mixed-methods approach, including video analysis and a detailed coding framework to track pupils' dialogue (this would potentially satisfy the 'strategy use' aspect of my research title) in heterogeneous pairs. Crucially, the finding that large ability gaps lead to communication failure informs my research design and guide my research methods in carrying out the action research task. The research by Zhang concludes that the structure and grouping of students are vital variables that have influence on the student outcomes and progress. These are factors that have to be taken into consideration when I am also carrying out research in this field.

Reference: Zhengyi, Z. (2024). Research on Student Interaction in Peer Collaborative Problem Solving in Mathematics. In Y. Cao (Ed.), Students’ Collaborative Problem Solving in Mathematics Classrooms. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7386-6_8

Power Imbalance

The researcher's role as a Teaching Assistant creates an inherent power imbalance, risking perceived coercion when students are asked to complete the survey during mandatory 'tutor' time. Furthermore, students under 16 require both parental consent and their own assent.

Privacy and Confidentiality Concerns in small-scale feedback situations:

Students and parents may give honest, potentially critical feedback on the new school policy. If this feedback is traceable, it creates a risk of retribution or identification, especially in a small interview group.

The Role of the Researcher and the Context – Dual Role Risks

The researcher is an employee within the school - studying a school policy impacting their own students. This dual role risks biasing the data as participants might feel pressure to give positive or non-critical feedback to a staff member.

Practical Steps:

Voluntary Contribution and Consent::

When asking for participation, ensure that is made clear to the students and teachers using their tutor time that participation is voluntary and non-completion will not affect their grades or standing. As the students are all under 18, secure informed parental consent and student assent using clear, age-appropriate language, emphasising the right to withdraw at any point without penalty. This could be a statement at the beginning of the form similar to a Terms and Conditions form that must be agreed to before commencing the next step.

Anonymity and Privacy:

Ensure the Likert survey is completely anonymous - use of Google Forms that will not collect any personal information if the volunteer does not wish to give it. Use pseudonyms for all interview data and redact specific contextual details that could identify the participants. State in writing that the data will be held securely and anonymity will be preserved.

The Nature of the Study and its Potential Consequences for the School:

Be transparent about the dual role in the consent forms. Speak in advance with the Senior Leadership Team, Headteacher or equivalent to highlight the academic purpose of the study.

As we could read in the example by BERA of a research ethics case studies of “Classroom Observation for “insiders” teacher-researchers” (Courtney & Muijis 2024), it is important to decide not to recruit participants from your own school which could provide an extra safeguard to ensure that potential participants were in a social position vis-à-vis to the researcher would enable them to give voluntary informed consent. Plus, most of us know that we are all pleasing people especially in the work environment. Sometimes, it is difficult to say “no” to a colleague as you only want to help them, but you might forget about the impact on your own life or work life. If, the researcher is still sure that she wants to use his own school for her research, then, the boundaries need to be clear on paper from the beginning with all the research methods used and how the results would be share. All participants should have a close that allow them to leave at any time. “It should be made clear to participants that they can withdraw at any point without needing to provide an explanation” P 8 of BERA

On the top of it, the researcher should be aware of future complication that might occur while entertaining this double role; researcher and colleague. Before making a decision, she should have the approval of her supervisor from university. She should also have done some research of what could happen when researching in her own school in order to be prepared to any scenario.

“Researchers should consider the impact of their research on the lives and workloads of participants” P 37

2.      Informed consent – Obtain all consents from headteacher /governors / teachers / parents of KS3 English / Transparency about her research to the whole school not just to the headteacher, parents or student of KS3 English

As explained above, the transparency of the research, the aim, the methods and the results should be explained to everyone at school and outside of school (parents & close community). Maybe it should be shared on every platform that the school has and also printed on paper for easy access to everyone. The study should not start until everyone’s consent has been received. It will also help the researcher to be aware of the number of participants, so the research doesn't become limited. It is not specified if the researcher has also reached the governors body of the school as they might have questions too. I think it is also important if the headteacher and the governor’s body announce their clear engagement to the research with the rules, the intentions and how it will be communicated in line with the school rules.

3.      Anonymity  

Confidentiality of the participants and interviewed should be stated at the beginning of the research. For safeguarding reason, the parents and the students should not be named at any time and the survey should be done completely anonymously. All need to be pre-approved by the headteacher and the school governor's body. As for the interviews, it was not explained very well how the researcher will conduct them. Where would it take place? It is important that the interviewers feel comfortable and not under any kind of pressure. Plus, as the group being observed is from the same school, it will make it easy to know who we are talking about if the answers from the interviews are shown as they are! So, it is imperative that the researcher use a methodological thematic analysis such as Braun & Clarke’s six stages of thematic analysis as stated!

4.      Respect / Fairness / inclusivity – An ethic of respect to all included the researcher

As it is stated in P1 of BERA “Individuals should be treated fairly, sensitively, and with dignity and freedom from prejudice, in recognition of both their rights and their differences arising from age, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, class, nationality, cultural identity, partnership status, faith, disability, political belief or any other significant characteristic.” How will the researcher makes sure that she is treating everyone fairly and includes everyone in her survey when we know that there is a certain percentage of children that will not have the same possibility of others;  children under care / SEN / Pupil premium, children that are looking after one or more person in their household & or for parents who don’t have access to high technology or Newsletters or that have a disability that will stop them for participating to the survey.

The researcher should approach to the headteacher for help in this regard. He /she will know how best to approach these individuals without sharing to the researcher the limitation or disabilities of some parents and students.

What is the impact of school uniforms on student behaviour?

To research the impact of school uniforms on student behaviour I would feel drawn towards a qualitative study. The study would explore and compare behaviours in schools. Creating a case study of students across different schools, some uniform wearing and some with no uniform. I would collect data from surveys and interviews with students and teachers which would be a methodology that aligns with my ontological and epistemology research.

A strong conclusion would open to more investigations around the thoughts that uniforms impact behaviour and if and how uniform/non uniform impacts children’s attitudes to learning. Recognising that each child’s experience and behaviour is different and impacted by various factors and findings are likely to highlight similarities of behaviours between uniform wearing and non-uniform wearing schools. This is turn would open up to further studies on student behaviour and how it is impacted.

Swap Lenses

To approach the study of how the impact of uniform on student behaviour from a swap lenses to Realism and Positivism it would look more like a quantitative study. Collecting and comparing statistical data such as behaviour incidences, attendance and investigating if there are patterns relating behaviour to uniform or non-uniform wearing. Results will be generalised and find that behaviour is/isn’t impacted by uniform/non-uniform wearing, the findings would not take into account other factors which may influence behaviour that a qualitative study would. So a mixed method approach could be considered to look at data findings and conduct surveys to make sense of trends. Like in my Constructivism and Interpretivism approach the study would likely highlight how behaviour is impacted by various factors.

I find that I am not a ‘statistics’ researcher, being more drawn to studies of experience and peoples voices. So taking time to look from different lenses has actually highlighted the benefits of quantitative studies and how conducting and comparing studies with a combination of ontological and epistemological positions is valid. This leads me to question my approaches and leanings when researching and for future studies to ensure the methodologies I use support the research carried out.

This question sparked my interest as a research topic due to my own personal values and beliefs, as I would identify my ontological position as constructivist and my preferred epistemological position as interpretivist. Evidence would consist of experiences and observations that transcend the perceived reality of data, delving into the experiences of a diverse society of people. I would use a range of interviews and case studies to explore this research topic. I would hope to conclude, with enough evidence, that despite the majority of the UK choosing to opt for uniform within their institutions, uniform can be a disadvantage to students' behaviour.

Swapping my lens to a Realist-Positivist, I would look into quantitative data, using numbers and published documents to see a positive or negative impact on students' behaviour. Rather than viewing beliefs and values, I would need to look at it as a whole reality, rather than multiple realities. The data obtained would be from researchers who would work independently from the studies, removing values and beliefs from the questions provided in order to obtain the results. Strong positive correlations from large-scale quantitative studies would support a strong conclusion and suggest the UK’s consensus on school uniform is the correct choice, irrespective of diverse factors.

On reflection, I understand that I would need to be critical of my own research and swap my own lens to create a strong conclusion to my research. It will be necessary to review the ontological and epistemological approach of the research studies I would use in my own collection, to ensure that I am not wrongly criticising other researchers. To make a strong argument, all parallels of the narrative must be reviewed.

My experiences shape my beliefs and values relating to this research topic due to my passion for supporting inclusive education and the first-hand barriers I have seen in my professional career: SEND needs, economic constraints and diverse social backgrounds. Data excites my brain, but when it comes to education, I do not believe everything is black and white. Therefore, would find the Realist-Positivist approach limiting, as this can indicate a right or wrong answer.

Beforehand, I did not see how strongly my beliefs and values could influence the research I will undertake and have come to the realisation that my own reality is not the only reality out there and look forward to taking on this new view to dive into education studies research.

What is the impact of school uniforms on student behaviour?

This topic piqued my interest. I found this kind of research question to be quite broad, as the word behaviour can cover many different aspects, such as learning behaviours, emotional behaviours, and social behaviours. I think it may be more beneficial to narrow the focus when approaching research.

From a constructivist standpoint, I recognise that students may experience wearing uniforms differently depending on their environment, culture, and relationships. However, following a positivist approach, I would investigate the impact of school uniforms on student behaviour through measurable data, such as attendance, punctuality, and behavioural records, to identify observable patterns or effects. I would collect this data from the same group of children at two different times: once during a period when they are not wearing uniforms and once during a period when they are. This would help streamline the data and limit the influence of personal differences or personalities. A strong conclusion would show differences in behaviour between the two periods, possibly highlighting changes in social behaviours, an increase in behaviour reports, or other measurable outcomes.

The opposite outlook combines objectivism and interpretivism. From this perspective, I would explore how uniforms influence students’ sense of identity, belonging, or discipline by conducting interviews with staff and students or through observations, rather than relying solely on statistics.

If I were to further research this question, I would use both viewpoints, including quantitative data as well as interviews. This approach would allow the views and opinions of the children to shed light on their behaviours, while teaching staff might notice differences within the classroom. Combining these insights with measurable data would add valuable depth to the research question.

Researchers much obtain informed and voluntary consent from all participants, so in this case study, the students, parents/guardians and teaching staff. This consent would be the confirmation that participants understand what is involved and agree to participate. As this is a study on minors, they may not fully understand the implications of participation and therefore additional parental consent would need to be considered.

Practical Suggestions: Due to the intended participants, the researcher could provide written, accessible, age-appropriate explanations of all elements of the study, including methods, purpose, processes, risks and benefits. It could also be beneficial to obtain written consent from parents/guardians alongside student consent to cover all bases.

Confidentiality

Particularly in the environment the research is being conducted, it is vital that the participant’s data is processed appropriately and in line with safeguarding regulations. With the researcher being an employee at the school, this could lend itself to a higher risk in this area due to existing relationships and knowledge of participants. Maintaining the trust of the students and parents/guardians will provide more accurate findings especially in relation to the methods chosen (surveys). If the participants are aware that the data will be anonymised and confidential they could be more likely to provide honest responses.

Practical Suggestions: The researcher should ensure processes are in place to store data securely and anonymously, possibly providing the option of pseudonymisation. Final reports should remove any personal identifiers to maintain this confidentiality.

Power Dynamics

As the researcher is a teaching assistant at the school included in the study, there is a risk of a power imbalance and bias. The researcher has a level of authority within their role in the school and as such students may feel obliged to take part and it could be a further risk to confidentiality. The researcher could have a perceived outcome for the study and therefore influence data recorded with survey questions or existing links with staff, parents and students.

Practical Suggestions: There must be a clear distinction between their role as a teaching assistant and researcher so not to as influence participants or results. This could also be supported by including a third party to minimise the risks further who could be brought in to conduct interviews with known students, for example. The researcher could also provide a private, safe space for students to decline to participate or withdraw from the research without the researcher present to reduce risk of impact.

Lens 1: Realist Ontology / Positivist Epistemology

From a realist and positivist viewpoint, there is only one objective reality that can be measured and tested. Working within this paradigm would aim to find clear, factual evidence of whether school uniform affects behaviour.

You would rely on quantitative data, such as behaviour records, attendance data, or survey results. Collecting information from friendship groups or tracking patterns in behaviour and speaking with teachers and parents regarding changes in behaviour before and after changes to a uniform policy. Conduct short interviews to support the data, then analyse and compare the results to reach a conclusion.

The overall aim would be to determine, through measurable evidence, whether wearing a school uniform in facts leads to an improved student behaviour in a school.

Lens 2: Relativist Ontology / Interpretivist Epistemology (My Lens)

From my relativist and interpretivist perspective, the impact of school uniforms differs for each student. Some may feel comfortable and develop a sense of belonging and pride, while others might find uniform restrictive, uncomfortable, or socially imposed.

I do not believe that wearing a specific item of clothing directly determines how a student behaves. However, uniforms may carry expectations that can indirectly influence behaviour. Family attitudes and personal experiences can also shape how students feel about wearing a uniform.

In this approach, understanding comes from listening to individual voices. I would use qualitative methods such as interviews and open-ended survey questions to explore students’ thoughts and feelings about wearing a uniform.

The aim is to understand how uniform affects their sense of identity, focusing on the individual experience rather than the school’s overall image.

While the positivist lens seeks measurable evidence to find one answer, my interpretivist lens values personal experiences and multiple perspectives.

While the positivist lens seeks measurable evidence to find one answer, my interpretivist lens values personal experiences and multiple perspectives.

Dagar, P. (2024) Building Sustainable and Decent Refugee Livelihoods through Adult Education? Interplay Between Policies and Realities of Five Refugee Groups. British Educational Research Journal, 50(2), 713-731. https://research.ebsco.com/c/qgabbp/viewer/html/r3kum4g665

This article directly relates to my research question, and provides qualitative research that I’m unable to undertake myself by studying 5 refugee groups within India. Though I want to look at more than just one country and their policies, the refugee groups this article looks into are of different nationalities, including Afghans, Rohingya and Somali, all of whom have experienced recent refugee crises within the past 5-10 years. The article looks at the livelihood strategies the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has outlined in order for refugees to build sustainable and dignifying lives, which includes access to vocational and skills training; and whether India are following its guidance to helping the refugees. Dagar, the author, conducted a few case studies and interviews with refugees and staff members within the camps, which show both the positives of what they’ve experienced and achieved towards their goals but also the hurdles they have to overcome to access the education, including hurdles set by the country itself. As the author is also a female, she felt she was able to get more perspectives from female refugees as they felt more comfortable opening up to her than they would a male refugee, which makes this article particularly unique.

The project will involve teachers providing weekly feedback on pupils’ progress to parents via a digital app. The purpose is to strengthen communication between the home and school, promote pupil progress, and enhance parental engagement. Regular, constructive updates aim to celebrate achievement, identify learning needs early, and support continuous improvement.

In line with the British Educational Research Association (BERA, 2024) Ethical Guidelines, will follow the principles of respect, integrity, fairness, inclusion, and responsibility. Participation from staff, pupils, and parents will be voluntary, with clear, informed consent obtained. All participants will be told the purpose of the feedback, how it will be used, and their right to withdraw.

Safeguarding Feedback will be professional, and focused on learning. Any information indicating a safeguarding concern will be shared promptly with the Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL) in accordance with school policy.

A key consideration is the potential emotional impact on pupils whose progress may appear poor. Teachers will promote motivation and wellbeing, ensuring feedback focuses on effort, improvement, and achievable targets.

Inclusion and accessibility Where there maybe language barriers, the use of a translation tools within the app to ensure families can access and understand the feedback.

To support parents with literacy difficulties, the information will be available in an audio format to make communication accessible and inclusive.

To meet the needs of SEND, feedback will be presented using aids where needed. For pupils with SEND the feedback will be clear, age-appropriate, and child-friendly language, with additional support offered where necessary to aid understanding and participation.

There will be training offered to ensure all families can access and understand the information, promoting equality and participation across the school community.

Ethically, Teachers, pupils and families will not be pressured to participate. They will have the right to choose. Confidentiality and respect for each persons.

To determine whether the project is effective, regular reviews will be built into the process. Feedback from teachers, parents, and pupils will be collected by interviews and a survey to evaluate the app’s impact on communication, motivation, and progress. The school’s senior leadership team (SLT), with the SENCO and class teachers, will oversee monitoring and analysis. There will be review outcomes to identify areas for improvement. Any next steps will continue to meet ethical and educational standards.

Reviewing the case study, I can see areas of ethical conduct that could affect the outcome of the research aims, including power and positionality, privacy and confidentiality and inclusivity and fairness.

This research is being conducted by a teaching assistant within the institution. Students are being asked to participate in the study by completing a survey where they will share feelings on the newly implemented policy. Not only does this cause a potential power and positionality clash between student and teaching assistant, moreover, a potential power and positionality issue with the student providing feedback on their feelings about their progression being shared with parents on a regular basis. The research study does not mention that the data received will be anonymous, which could raise fear and anxiety as students may want to follow their parents' thoughts and feelings or in more serious situations, cause a fear or reprisal in safeguarding situations.

The case study states that students will be given time in tutor time to complete the survey. Although it states that they will be asked to complete it, rather than it being compulsory, there could be an element of peer pressure involved as to whether or not the survey is completed. Being in such an open environment does not provide privacy. I believe that this could also cross the barriers of informed consent, as the peer pressures faced could mean that some students are not actually provided with the option to participate.

Inclusivity and fairness is a complicated issue that I believe derives from this research. From a student perspective, completing a survey that has been emailed could cause problems for students with SEND needs. I would question if adaptations have been made to allow the use of screen readers, but then I would argue would this work in the environment that they have been asked to complete the survey as it is not a private and confidential environment. Have adaptions for ESOL learner been made? Is 20 minutes adequate for learners who have cognitive processing of information needs; is additional time being provided for those students?

Parents are asked to complete a interview which is accessible via a QR code. I am unsure how confident I feel about the inclusive practices of this method. Although we live in a world of emerging technology where majority of the population have access to a smart phone, there are economical issues that could create a barrier with accessing technology. Parents with a different native tongue to English could struggle to provide a true reflection of their thoughts and feelings when using a written communication. Parents could have their own diagnosed/undiagnosed SEND needs that would require additional support to be truly inclusive. To both students and parents participating in the study, there are levels of harm that could be caused due to the inclusivity of the methods used to obtain the data.

To ensure that BERA (2024) guidelines are followed, I would recommend that students' responses should be collected in a more private environment opposed to Tutor time, the research aims to have transparency for students, providing informed consent and adaptations to the surveys and interviews to provide a more inclusive response.

British Educational Research Association [BERA]. (2024). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (5th ed.). www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethicalguidelines-for-educational-research-2024

For context on why I chose this question, the students at the school I work at all use iPads. Looking at it first from a constructivist-interpretivist approach, I would define what classroom participation means to me. That could be seeing the rise of more hands when questions are asked, contributing to group activities and discussions, and how the students engage with the work materials provided on their iPads. I would also want to look at how the behaviour of the students change, and whether it’s positive or not as typically bad behaviour and teaching interruptions means not enough class work is being done. I would want to run a case study by observing the classes both before and after the technology is introduced, and also have interviews with the students to find out their perspectives. A strong conclusion on whether technology is a positive influence would be to see less behavioural issues and more discussion and questions about the lesson topic.

By swapping my position approach to realist-positivist, I would want to look at more of the data, for example looking at test scores from both before and after technology was introduced to see if any improvements were made in grades, seeing how much of the class material was completed by using technology as opposed to students writing by hand. We could also look at behaviour points/detention statistics to measure behaviour changes. In theory, using technology would help students “write” faster as they’d be typing, so more students should be able to complete the work in the time given, or even in less time. If this were the case, then the teacher might find that they could cover more material in the classroom because classroom participation would be higher, making it a positive influence. This approach would also make it easier to identify students who are both struggling and progressing as we’d have names to go with the data, rather than looking at the class as a whole.

I find value in both research approaches with this question and feel both would be needed for a comprehensive answer. Statistics and data are useful, and in the case of the school I work at, it has allowed us to see which students need the extra help and we’ve been able to provide interventions and tutoring for them as a result. But that approach is a more individual approach, whereas if we wanted to get the general feel of the class, and see how the class are doing as a whole, we would want to have discussions and interviews with the students on their own and in groups to find out if they think the technology is useful to them, and how it helps them complete their work. These interviews would also give us an idea if the students have doubts or concerns on whether their class participation has been influenced negatively by using technology or not. In my own research going forward, I feel the need to use both sets of approaches so as not to limit my findings, and to also have the data evidence to back up the human experience, if possible.

How will the use of QR codes affect sign up? Will this limit uptake from disadvantaged backgrounds? Will parents with EAL, SEN or SLD be able to access?

Suggestion: allow for alternative sign-up methods, e.g. paper-based, offering multi-lingual versions, offer support to sign-up via text messages or phone calls.

2.     Potential ethical consideration: Power and positionality.

Who will be holding the interviews? Will students and/or parents’ responses be influenced?

Suggestion: Use independent interviewer, give clear intended outcomes, assure anonymity.

3.     Potential ethical consideration: Informed consent.

Have parents given consent for their children to take part in the research project?

Suggestion: Ensure detailed consent forms (with accessible options), allow for verbal consent through face-to-face meetings or phone calls.

Does the researcher have consent from the school’s management (Head, Governors) to conduct the research and will they have any vested interest in the results? Also do the children have permission to complete the survey in school time?

Do the children require their parents permission to take part as well?

2. What will the data be used for?

Are the participants aware of the reason for the research and what the data will be used for? Is the research being conducted on behalf of the school and will the outcomes be any way related to future school practices? If the participants assume that their responses will be used as feedback on this new practice it may influence their decision to take part in the research. 

The researcher will need to be very clearer about the purpose and use of data when seeking consent and declare their position as school staff to all participants beforehand. Providing this has been clearly communicated to all, the issue of professional conflict can be minimised. 

3. Issues regarding inclusion/accessibility to all participants:

Is online communication the standard for the school and are all parents and students contactable this way? Has school feedback been conducted in this manner before? If this is the case then it can be assumed that all potential participants will have the access and opportunity to take part. However, the researcher will need to be very clear as to the purpose of the researchl to ensure that participants are clear what their responses will be used for. 

4. The researcher will need to be very clear about their own perspective and assumptions prior to the research to try and avoid bias when constructing the questionnaire. This may be mitigated by posing questions and asking for a level of agreement/disagreement rather than open ended questions which would require subjective analysis. 

5. Issues regarding storing and anonymity of data

Presuming that all participants reply to online questionnaires the confidentiality of responses should be easier to achieve. Data could be password protected and only disclosed to those previously declared at the start of the project.

If students are to complete their responses in school time, will this ensure that their responses are honest and confidential. It may be advisable to request students to complete a questionnaire at home in a similar way to their parents so that they are confident that the school cannot see or record their answers in any way. 

 Ethics

Do all parents have access to digital technology, could this form of research have the potential to discriminate both parents and students from low income families. This could be seen as prejudiced to these families.

Could the research also be offered in a paper format. This scenario could also be applied to English as an additional language families (EAL), also parents that have SEND needs and how will this research be adapted to included students with SEND needs.

BERA, (2024) believes all research should be ethically fair, with freedom from prejudice. Stating “freedom from prejudice, in recognition of both their rights and their differences arising from age, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, class, nationality, cultural identity, partnership status, faith, disability, political belief or any other significant characteristic,” Bera,(2022,p11,1).

Children with special educational needs, have legal rights when it comes to inclusive education, is this research fulfilling those legal rights? The SEND code of practice 0 to 25, (DFE, 2024) is a legal document providing guidance for staff working with children with SEN. Has the researcher consulted this code of practice, when creating the research tool?

Not enough information given on the inclusivity of the research.

Has permission been gained not only from participants, such as students and parents, but the school head and school governing body. As this research includes minors Head teachers and in some cases the school governing body also need to be consulted and give permission for this study to go ahead. This is due to ethical guidelines, being that the study would involve children.

The researcher also needs to consider the impact of the research on the children involved. Would this research cause them more stress, they have a duty of care to the children involved to ensure that this research would not harm their wellbeing in anyway. Gaining lower grades or not achieving well could be stressful to some students, therefore creating possible safeguarding concerns.

Could the Methodology of this research be seen as biased? The school has 1200 students, a small percentage of those will be included in the study, also not all of the students’ parents will choose to participate and how will the researcher choose which parents do participate? How can this be done in a way that they can justify their choice as being independent.

This leads into my second ethical consideration about the potential harms to participating. The case study hasn’t made it clear whether the research has to be undertaken with both parent and child participating, or if it can be flexible for situations where the parent participates but their child doesn’t, and vice versa. BERA says “researchers should recognise concerns relating to the time and effort that participation in some research can require – the long-term involvement of participants … and the repeated involvement of particular participants … Researchers should consider the impact of their research on the lives and workloads of participants” (2024, p. 21) The concerns that also arise from this case study about this particular point are whether or not this is a one-time thing the students and parents have to participate in, or will students have to fill out surveys periodically, and will parents need to attend regular interviews. From the parents’ participation, will they be expected to make extra time to attend these interviews, or could this be incorporated into parents evening if it is a one-time thing. If parents are unable to attend the interviews, will their child still be able to take part in the research. The parent, on the other hand, might feel they have the time available to participate, but would prefer that their child remains focused on their school work so would decline or wish to withdraw their child’s involvement. If the researcher requires both parent and child to participate, then BERA (2024, p. 16) suggests they’d need confirmation on whether it’s appropriate to select additional participants from another KS3 class to replace those who have declined or withdrawn from the class being researched.

The last ethical consideration that should be explored is about data protection and storage. The type of research taking place could be beneficial for the whole teaching staff within the school to know, if the results are favourable, so the researcher needs to identify whether they need to take steps to protect students and parents identities and research outcomes if presenting to colleagues. BERA suggests “this could involve anonymisation, pseudonymisation or employing ‘fictionalising’ approaches when reporting” (2024, p. 22). This would also apply if the researcher publishes their work for other educational institutions to read about. One also needs to consider how the Likert survey will be distributed and stored when completed. If the researcher uses a third-party company then BERA says the researcher and the company they use must comply with the legal requirements stipulated in the UK by the Data Protection Act 2018, and the researcher must have participants explicit permission to gather, store and disclose personal information to the company (2024, p. 23).

British Educational Research Association. (2024). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research(5). www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethicalguidelines-for-educational-research-2024

1. Data use and storage - Has the researcher though about the legalities and safety precautions that need to be taken in regards to gathering and storage of data. Has the Data protection act been thought about and is the BERA (2004) being taken into consideration. How will the data be used and has this been communicated clearly to all partaking in the research. Is the data paper based and does it need to be physically stored somewhere appropriate, or is it computer based, and are all systems and passwords meeting all relevant legislation and guidances.

Suggestion - Researcher ensures closed systems are used and all information is password protected where possible once gathered. Researcher ensure they are looking at legislation and guidance in relation to data usage and storage, and thinking ahead, as to weather secondary uses may end up happening etc. If researcher is providing separate paper based data, ensuring this is in a safe location and locked away when not being used.

2. Consent - Has the researcher gained consent from all the parties potentially involved. Including, have the Senior Leadership team/management been asked before research has taken place. Have all the parents been informed of what will be happening and where possible have the children been included in giving consent. Has the researcher ensure that during the giving of consent, it is mentioned that consent can be withdrawn at any time etc.

Suggestions - Ensure all relevant parties have given read what is it they are giving consent for clearly in an email/Hard copy including their written consent, and have suitable knowledge of the participants, gaining others knowledge where possible. This can help with ensuring consent for participation has been given by all people the research is being done with. Ensure included in this is the option to withdraw from the research study at any time.

3. Inclusion - Is everyone able to have a voice. How the researcher is undertaking certain parts of the research is important. Some individuals may not be able to access computers or understand what a QR code is and how to use it, this in turn making it hard for them to give opinions, share concerns etc. Are people given access to and help with this if needed, or is there an extra consideration and paper copies being provided where possible. If there are parents and or children that have SEMH that fine meetings difficult are they getting the same level of access in the way the benefits them, or a different form of communication etc.

Suggestions - If there are individuals in the school that need extra support and are included in the research, find the means for them to be able to include their voice in the research. This may mean staff support for some. Have some knowledge of the parents and families and their situations. Ensure there are times is possible there they can be supported to share their feedback, or other means of participation such as paper copies are given if there is no access. Turn to Teaching professionals who know their children if needed. They will know if extra meetings or support may need to be put in place.

(PS: 100 words is too short as I have so many other things to say)

 
Flynn et al. (2021) investigated how research-informed professional development could enhance teachers’ knowledge, confidence, and implementation of systematic synthetic phonics (SSP) in early reading instruction. The study aimed to identify effective approaches for developing evidence-based phonics practice among primary teachers.

Methods:

They used mixed methods by combining quantitative and qualitative approaches. Data were collected through pre- and post-training surveys, classroom observations, interviews, and teacher reflections. Participants included primary school teachers from several English schools, representing a range of experience levels.

Evaluation:

The mixed-methods approach was well suited to the research aims, as it allowed for both measurable outcomes and deeper exploration of teacher experiences. The use of multiple data sources strengthened validity through triangulation, while the focus on research-informed training ensured practical and theoretical relevance.

However, the study’s small sample size did reduce the findings. Reliance on self-reported data also introduced potential bias, and the short-term design prevented assessment of sustained changes in practice or impact on pupil reading outcomes.

Overall, Flynn et al. (2021) effectively demonstrated that research-informed training can improve teachers’ understanding and delivery of phonics. Nonetheless, future studies could build on these findings by including larger groups and direct measures of pupil progress to better evaluate long-term effectiveness.

Padlet

Activity 2 – Research Methods in practice

I think the Morrison et al. (2024) article would be more useful for the lecturer. It looks at a wide range of BAME medical students and explores both the barriers they face and what helps them to do well. I like that it gives a broader picture of experiences, which would the lecturer to reflect on how they improve their practice. The Chakrabarti and Ly (2024) study sounds really interesting too, but because it focuses on a smaller group of BAME LGBTQ+ students, it feels less relevant to the university lecturer.

Since I plan to do small-scale research using general feedback surveys and interviews, Morrison et al.’s broader themes give me a clearer starting point. Their findings can help me decide what questions to ask and what patterns to look out for in my own classroom.