j o u r n a lo f e d u c a t i o n

Mauritius Institute of Education

Vol. 6 No. 2 2011

2

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n

Members of the Editing Team

Chief Editor :

Rada Tirvassen

Members :

Vandana Hunma

Margaret Li Yin

Brinda Oogarah Pratap

Shalini Ramasawmy

The Journal of Education is an interdisciplinary research journal. It addresses issues in the field of pedagogy, education, curriculum, evaluation and teacher education. It aims at opening discussion across subject areas by involving all those who share an enthusiasm for learning and teaching.

Journal of Education, Vol. 6, No. 2

Designed by: Graphics Section, MIE

© Mauritius Institute of EducationRéduit, Republic of Mauritius

The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of the Editorial Board or of the Mauritius Institute of Education.

3

Note from the Editor

The Research Unit of the Mauritius Institute of Education is actively involved in an effort aiming

at encouraging a research-grounded mindset, in line with the Institute’s mission and commitment

to promote the advancement of knowledge and innovation in education. Such an avenue as an

institutional journal will obviously help to firmly posit the MIE as an academic body and to contribute

to the professional upliftment of its staff members. While many of us have very often underlined

the difficulties with which we are faced in translating this vision into reality, we also need to seize

the different opportunities, and make the most of the platforms which exist and which are being

created. We therefore believe that the journal is an excellent forum to disseminate findings of

research projects undertaken by colleagues. However, in order to avoid a self-centred approach,

we have refrained from limiting the publications to colleagues of the MIE. A journal should be of all

platforms, one which allows for sharing, and as such, it should be a forum for the whole academic

community. All in all, these can be said to be the principles underlying the issue of the Journal.

The article by Ajay Ramful, fills a void which we have felt for a long time. When researchers start their

projects, they tend sometimes to forget the importance of a conceptual framework which has a

major influence on the research questions, the kind of data they look for and the interpretation of

these data. In his article, the author deals with the issue, and adopts a practical approach when he

compares two theoretical frameworks to show their essential features.

The three articles that follow draw our attention to the narrow implementation of three secondary

school curricula issues that require our immediate attention. In her paper, Vandana Hunma examines

the implementation of secondary school science and argues that the current practices of teaching,

learning and examination impact on students’ learning and self-esteem and subsequently foster

underachievement. She highlights the need to re-think the whole process and find a new focus to

prevent the delivery of secondary school science as a ‘rhetoric of conclusions’ for examination success.

The author of the paper also hints at one of the many limitations of our ‘stringent examination-

driven’ pedagogical practices. Basing herself on the teaching and learning of science, she highlights

how teachers tend to neglect all that is non-examinable, and the lack of support for children who

would need some additional attention in order to succeed.

Hurryramsingh Hurchand, Ajeevsing Bholoa and Vijaysing Bundhoo explore the implementation of

‘O’ level Mathematics Syllabus A, which was introduced to enable less-able students acquire at least

4

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n basic competencies in the subject. Adopting statistical techniques, they analyse data available

from 2002 to 2009 and conclude that although the number of students opting for Mathematics

Syllabus A is increasing, this trend towards the easier syllabus, which is founded on the belief that

students can increase their chances of obtaining a pass grade by opting for this syllabus, has not in

practice resulted in improving the performance standards. Half of the students fail in the subject

and only around 11% obtain a credit. As a result, they come up with three recommendations:

more readily available teaching and learning materials; change in the pedagogical practices

employed in preparing students for the curriculum content of this syllabus, as well as in

teacher attitudes.

Although Aditi Hunma deals primarily with the issue of the implications of the internationalisation

of university education, she analyses the problems of first-year university students which are

both academic and cultural. With a focus on academic writing, she observes how the texts

they produce at university exemplify the contradictions they face between their identities as

Mauritians, students and writers. An interesting conclusion at which she arrives is that if we

want to assist Mauritian students in managing their first year at university, the issue must be

addressed during their secondary school studies.

The following article by Chenicheri Sid Nair and Patricie Mertov explore the various intricacies of

implementing a quality model in higher education. To quote the authors, their paper “describes

how Monash University, a large Australian internationalised, multi-campus, research-intensive

institution that is home to about 56,000 students from over 100 countries has developed a

systematic approach to collecting student feedback and how such information provides an in-

road to address barriers to learning.”

Finally, Yvon Rolland provides some insight into the integration of a motivational dimension in

the teaching of a second language. The author critically analyses didactic methods and ponders

on the fact that they neglect to consider this most important aspect of language teaching and

learning, before giving some concrete examples of how trainee educators have successfully

implemented pedagogical practices, based on motivation, to engage their students in learning

meaningfully a second language.

I would like to thank all the contributing authors, reviewers, editors and the graphic artists for

their exceptional support and look forward to the next issue of the Journal.

Rada Tirvassen

5

Table of Contents

Choosing and implementing a conceptual framework in qualitative research: Issues and practical suggestions from field experience.

Ajay Ramful 6

School science and underachievement.

Vandana Hunma 22

The O-level Mathematics Syllabus A: A better alternative for students in Mauritius?

Hurryramsingh Hurchand, Ajeevsing Bholoa and Vijaysing Bundhoo 36

Identities in transit and academic writing: An ethnographic study of first-year Mauritian students at a South African university.

Aditi Hunma 53

Student feedback - a critical component in building an effective quality assurance system in higher education: The evolution of needs.

Chenicheri Sid Nair and Patricie Mertov

70

La motivation pour la L2: Un véritable défi didactique.

Yvon Rolland 89

6

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Choosing and implementing a conceptual framework in qualitative research: Issues and practical suggestions from field experience.

Ajay Ramful,

Department of Mathematics Education, Mauritius Institute of Education.

Abstract

The conceptual framework is a central element in a qualitative inquiry and influences the design of the study, the research questions, the tasks given to the subject, data collection and analysis, as well as claims and conclusions. In this analytical paper, I scrutinize the structure and function of a conceptual framework. By putting this orienting frame into perspective both from theoretical and practical standpoints, I illustrate the multifaceted dimension of such a skeletal structure in guiding the research process in education. I intentionally compare two theoretical frameworks to show the two essential features of a framework, namely the philosophical assumptions and the analytical constructs. I show how Steffe’s and Vergnaud’s theoretical frameworks pay attention to different knowledge features, though both of them study students’ cognition in the field of Mathematics Education.

7

1. Introduction

When we embark on a qualitative research in the field of education, one of the methodological issues that crop up, is the choice of the theoretical or conceptual framework. Understanding the different dimensions of a conceptual framework can be challenging. Moreover, research methodology textbooks do not always treat this issue at a practical level. For beginning researchers in the field of education, the notion of ‘conceptual framework’ may be enigmatic. Lester(1991) raised this issue in a commentary on conceptual/theoretical frameworks: “It is no exaggeration to say that as they (doctoral students) begin their doctoral dissertations almost all of them have very little, if any, understanding of what it means to have a conceptual or theoretical framework for their research” (p.194). Further, he points out that students: “only very infrequently see evidence of explicit frameworks in the published research papers they are asked to read” (p. 194). This article is the outcome of the challenges I experienced in my attempt to make sense of the nature and purpose, and implementation of a conceptual framework in the qualitative research tradition. It has also been motivated by the comments made by reviewers of one of my research papers that was not accepted on the grounds that I mixed theoretical constructs which were not compatible since they make different assumptions about the way children construct mathematical knowledge.

In general, educational research methodology literature discourses tend to follow two main lines. Firstly, they cover theoretical issues like ‘What is research?’, ontological debates, epistemological considerations or philosophical perspectives. Secondly, they treat the practical aspects of methodology like research methods, sampling, data gathering tools, data analysis procedures, ethical issues, and so forth. Though they address the importance of a conceptual framework or the use of theory, yet they treat the application side of these methodological orientations quite parsimoniously. I consulted a range of educational research methodology books (over 50) in my attempt to understand what are the key characteristics of a conceptual framework and what is its function. This article is primarily addressed to novice researchers in the field of education and has two main objectives. Firstly, it scrutinizes the theoretical dimension of a conceptual framework. Secondly, it makes a comparative analysis of two theoretical frameworks to show how such a skeletal structure influences the conceptualization of a research study.

2. What is a conceptual framework?

First of all, it is important to differentiate between the theoretical and empirical context of research. Brown and Dowling (1998) refer to the theoretical field of research to mean the ensemble of scholarly debates and research or professional knowledge that constitute a particular discipline or where the research is situated. In any research venture, the researcher will be dealing with one domain of this

8

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n field. The theoretical field includes the theoretical ideas, propositions or hypotheses or research questions that the researcher is interested in answering. On the other hand, the empirical field is the general area of practice or activity or experience where claims about cause and effect relationships, impact of critical factors, or other forms of associations or explanations are being envisaged. The empirical field refers to the observed setting or experiences where the researcher wants to make assertions. Thus, in a research enterprise, the researcher is operating between two fields, the theoretical and empirical. We negotiate from one setting to the other through ontological (the structure of reality), epistemological (understanding and explaining how we know what we know), methodological (the strategy used in the research process), axiological (the values that the researcher shares) and rhetorical (the language used to describe events) assumptions. In the empirical setting the researcher collects data to verify, expand, refine or change existing knowledge in the theoretical field. This is where the need for an investigative framework has its relevance.

Virtually, all researches are conceptualized on the basis of a framework which may be either explicit or implicit. The framework depends on a number of factors. It may emanate from the research problem or the research questions following the analysis of prior work or review of literature. It may depend on the orientation that one may wish to bring in his or her study. It may also be commonsensical and may depend on experience. As stated by Merriam (1998),

“the framework of your study will draw upon concepts, terms, definitions, models, and theories of a particular literature base and disciplinary orientation. This framework in turn will generate the “problem” of the study, specific research questions, data collection and analysis techniques, and how you will interpret your findings” (p.46).

For Miles and Huberman (1994),

“A conceptual framework explains either graphically or in narrative form, the main things to be studied – the key factors, constructs or variables – and the presumed relationships among them. Frameworks can be rudimentary or elaborate, theory-driven or commonsensical, descriptive or causal ” (p.18).

Merriam (1998) further points out that the theoretical framework can be pictured as a set of interlocking frames.

“The outermost frame – the theoretical framework – is the body of literature, the disciplinary orientation that you draw upon to situate your study. … [The] problem statement is represented by a second frame that is firmly lodged in the larger framework. Finally, the exact purpose of the study is within the problem statement and can be pictured as the third, inner-most frame in this set of interlocking frames” (p. 47).

9

Research methodology literature (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Cresswell, 1998; Merriam, 1998; Lancy, 1993) uses a range of terminologies such as philosophical framework, theoretical framework, conceptual framework and analytical framework to refer to the lens that the researcher uses to look at his/her study. Often the terms conceptual and theoretical framework are used interchangeably. Is there a difference between these terms and is it necessary to make such a difference? In this section, the subtle nuances among these concepts are scrutinized. Eisenhart (1991) distinguishes among three types of frameworks: theoretical, practical, and conceptual. She considers a theoretical framework as “a structure that guides research by relying on a formal theory” (p. 205). In selecting such a theoretical framework, the researcher is bound to follow a programmatic research agenda as devised by the advocates of the theory. The application of the theoretical framework therefore requires that one conforms to the accepted conventions of argumentation and experimentation advocated by the proponents of the theory (Eisenhart, 1991). In some way, one is bound by the ways of thinking of the theorists. As I will illustrate in section 2.2, the application of Steffe’s theory based on Radical Constructivism requires the rigid adherence to the dogma of his proponent.

The second type of framework that Eisenhart refers to is termed “practical framework”. As its name suggests, this framework is meant to serve the purpose of practitioners in the system being investigated and where theoretical understanding is relegated to a second position. This type of framework is not theory-driven but is informed by the experience of practitioners. For example, if one wants to determine the teacher education/training needs of an educational institution, then one need to choose a practical framework based on the accumulated knowledge of teacher educators, school administrators as well as teachers. A theoretical framework may be too pedantic to serve the practical purpose here. As an example, in a strategic report for the Mauritius Institute of Education and Mauritius Research Council, Morrison (1997) used a practical framework to look at the teacher from four perspectives: as a perceiver, as a professional, as a person, and as a proponent.

The third type of framework, i.e., the conceptual framework refers to “a skeletal structure of justification, rather than a skeletal structure of explanation based on formal logic (i.e. formal theory)” (Eisenhart, 1991, p. 209). In Eisenhart’s categorization, a conceptual framework differs from a theoretical framework in that the former can borrow constructs from different theories as well as practical wisdom provided that these choices of constructs are justified. I have found this approach useful in analyzing children’s mathematical thinking where I borrowed three constructs, namely Steffe’s (1994) idea of unit structures, Vergnaud’s (1988) notion of concepts- and theorems-in-action and Thompson’s (1990) concept of quantitative reasoning. These constructs allowed me to scan my data with different lenses to provide a comprehensive account of children’s knowledge of fractions.

It should also be pointed out that conceptual frameworks may also evolve from the analysis of data (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). A conceptual framework generated from data is dynamic in nature. “Conceptual frameworks can evolve and develop out of fieldwork itself” (Miles and Huberman, 1994, p. 21). The framework keeps on changing as new insights are developed towards the research problem. It may be modified at different stages of the research process. At the outset of the research,

10

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n one uses a commonsense framework (involving experience, ‘folk categories’ (Delamont, 1992, p.150), logical relationships or assumed relationships) to approach the research problem. The objectives of the study may also influence the development of the research skeleton. With the support of the literature review, this initial framework is expanded or improved or refined to better map assumed relationships. The conceptual framework may also influence the literature review. It should be noted that these relationships may be two-sided. Data analysis can further contribute in changing or in fine tuning this schema. According to Miles and Huberman (1994), the conceptual framework may also lead to the formulation of the research questions and the latter may operationalize the former. A research study does not end up in only answering the research questions but may also result in improving or modifying an existing framework just like it may generate a new framework.

Having outlined the essential theoretical ideas on which the theoretical/conceptual framework is premised, I now present two theoretical frameworks to be used comparatively to highlight the key features of such an orienting structure. I raise and answer different questions that I consider crucial in choosing and implementing a theoretical/conceptual framework. I choose two frameworks that describe cognitive processes in mathematics education, namely Steffe’s Radical Constructivist Theory (1992, 1994) and Vergnaud’s Theory of Conceptual Fields (1983;1988;1997;1998). By making such comparisons, I intend to show how two different approaches (both of which are based on Piaget’s theory) may give different perspectives on a similar research problem. I first give an overview of both frameworks so that I can refer to them as I answer the different questions that I pose. I specifically chose these two frameworks because they are based on two different philosophical foundations though both of them explain cognitive processes. The overview that I present here is not meant to be comprehensive but it serves to orient the reader.

2.1 An overview of Vergnaud’s Theory of Conceptual Fields

Vergnaud’s theory provides a theoretical framework that permits the articulation between the mathematical problems to be solved, knowledge deployed, schemes, concepts and symbols involved in the solution procedure. Its usefulness resides essentially in conducting semantic analyses of mathematical concepts on the one hand and the corresponding conceptual analyses of students’ understanding on the other hand. Mathematical concepts exist in relation to each other and draw their meaning from a variety of situations. To analyze the complexity of the interrelatedness of concepts, Vergnaud (1988) introduced the theory of conceptual fields. He defines a conceptual field as “a set of situations, the mastering of which requires the mastery of several concepts of different natures” (p. 141). Apart from mathematical concepts, it also encompasses students’ ideas (both competencies and misunderstanding), “procedures, problems, representations, objects, properties, and relationships that cannot be studied in isolation” (Lamon, 2007, p. 642). Vergnaud (1998) asserts that: “a major part of students’ behavior,

11

in problem solving, is generated by hypotheses, analogies, metaphors, extensions of former knowledge or reductions” (p. 173). To characterize how students conceptualize problem situations he extended Piaget’s definition of scheme. Vergnaud (1997) considers a scheme as “the invariant organization of behavior for a certain class of situations” (p.12). A scheme is regarded as consisting of four elements: goals and expectations, operational invariants (concepts-in-action and theorems-in-action), rules, and inference possibilities. Figure 2.1 (modified from Andrés et al., 2006) shows the essential components of Vergnaud’s theory and how they are related to each other. In the next section, I describe how Steffe’s theory redefines Piaget’s scheme from another perspective.

Figure 2.1. Key components of Vergnaud’s Theory

12

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 2.2 An overview of Steffe’s Radical Constructivist Theory

Steffe’s framework is also an extension of Piaget’s theory and aims at describing how students construct new mathematical ways of operating based on their previous ways of operating. The focus is on investigating schemes and operations that underlie the construction of particular mathematical concepts as pointed out by Steffe & Thompson (2000): “in particular, our goal is to bring forth the schemes that students have constructed through spontaneous development …” (p. 290) and “the interest is in understanding the students’ assimilating schemes and how these schemes might change as a result of their mathematical activity” (p. 291). Further, the aim of Steffe’s research is to make models of children’s mathematical knowledge.

Steffe’s theoretical framework describes cognitive structures on the basis of schemes of action and operation. Learning mechanism is explained through the process of re-presentation, internalization, interiorization, abstraction, assimilation and accommodation in the course of mathematical activity. According to Steffe (2001), a scheme is a goal-directed system of action and operation and consists of three interrelated components: an experiential situation, an activity, and a result. Figure 2.2 gives a schematic illustration of Steffe’s conception of a scheme (Olive & Steffe, 2002). To start the activity of a scheme, the cognizing body must first recognize the experiential situation as one that has been experienced before through the process of assimilation, where records of past activity are activated. The perceived situation triggers the second component, i.e., the activity of the scheme which may be mental, physical or both. Finally, there is the expectation that the activity produces an anticipatory (or previously experienced) result. Schemes can be regarded as dynamic entities or as feedback loops because of their capacity of self-regulation through assimilation and accommodation. Steffe’s research shows that his aim is to characterize students’ mathematical knowledge in terms of specific schemes.

Figure 2.2. The structure of a scheme

13

2.3 What are the elements of commonalities and differences between the two frameworks?

As theoretical frameworks, Steffe’s Radical Constructivist theory and Vergnaud’s theory of Conceptual Fields share a number of characteristics. Both are constructivist-based paradigms in that they emphasize the role of prior knowledge in learning. Both of these approaches use a bottom-up strategy, starting with children and the knowledge they bring to the tasks (i.e., student-generated knowledge). An important question that both lines of research ask is how do students coordinate knowledge elements. Another point of commonality between the questions that these two lines of research attempt to answer is that they both attend to fine-grained details of conceptual change. They are both concerned with answering questions about children’s evolving knowledge construction and the complexity of cognition. Both of these lines of research focus on exploring students’ ways and means of operating as well as their spontaneous development. One observation is that the two frameworks acknowledge the importance of social interaction in learning but it is not a central element in the two theories. They do not have explicit constructs to enable the researcher to account for the social element in knowledge transformation.

How are the two frameworks different?The research questions that can be answered through the two frameworks depend on the explanatory mechanisms that the latter afford. Steffe’s analytical constructs focus on schemes, operations, subtle processes (e.g., interiorization, assimilation, and accommodation) as well as constraints that students encounter in a problem solving situation. Steffe shows how students construct more and more elaborated knowledge structures as they are confronted with more and more demanding problem situations over a prolonged period of time in Teaching Experiments (Steffe & Thompson, 2000). On the other hand, studies conducted via Vergnaud’s theory tend to use Clinical interviews. Because these two lines of research attempt to answer different questions, though related to the same topic, their methodologies to approach the research problem are different. With its emphasis on the progressive development and reorganization of schemes, research framed under Steffe’s theory considers students as moving from one level of operation to another level. He attempts to determine the boundaries of students’ ways and means of operating. Vergnaud’s framework does not describe cognitive structures using the idea of levels but rather characterizes the mathematical principles that students may be using in solving a problem. Thus, if one reads a research work framed under Vergnaud’s theory, one will observe the description of the mathematical rules (which may also be flawed) that students deploy in a problem situation. Steffe’s theory is much more focused on internal cognitive structures like schemes and internal processes like assimilation, accommodation and interiorization and does not attribute much attention to mathematical symbolism like Vergnaud. The theory of conceptual field does not restrict its explanatory mechanism to a fixed set of knowledge elements and processes. Another difference between the two theories is that Steffe does not pay explicit attention to the mathematical structure of problems whereas the application of Vergnaud’s theory requires a mathematical analysis of the problems that the subjects are to solve. This analysis

14

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n is important in designing the type of tasks to be given to students. Table 1 summarizes the differences between the two frameworks.

Steffe’s theory Vergnaud’s theory

Focuses explicitly on students’ thinking.No explicit mathematical analysis of the concept being researched is required.

Focuses on students’ thinking as well as mathematical structures simultaneously. The application of Vergnaud’s theory requires a mathematical analysis of the situation.

It works at the level of schemes and mental operations almost explicitly.

It characterizes the mathematical principles that students use.

Focuses on one concept at a time. Focuses on the conceptual field involving different concepts.

The theory does not have explicit constructs which focus attention on the role played by language.

Pays attention to the part played by language by making the distinction between signifier and signified. The link between action and representation is explicitly articulated.

In Steffe’s theory there is no defined construct that requires researchers to characterize implicit knowledge.

Vergnaud gives much attention to implicit knowledge through the idea of theorem-in-action.

Emphasis on knowledge representation is in terms of unit structures.

Emphasis on knowledge representation is in terms of symbols and language.

Interest is on knowledge growth over extended period of time.

Interest is much more on immediate knowledge structures.

Uses Teaching experiments and generally starts with hypotheses.

Uses Clinical interviews and does not start with any explicit hypotheses.

Type of tasks posed to students: Problems which make the unit structure of tasks apparent.

Type of tasks: Tasks are generally designed after a mathematical analysis of the situation is made.

Table 1. Differences between Steffe’s and Vergnaud’s frameworks

3. The philosophical dimension of a framework

Researchers approach their studies with a set of beliefs or assumptions that guide their inquiries (Cresswell, 1998). These assumptions are based on ontological, epistemological, and methodological foundations and may be regarded as constituting the philosophical framework. They are often implicit and may not be explicitly formulated. Silverman (2000) uses the term ‘model’ rather than philosophical framework to denote such an overall paradigm for looking at reality. In the words of Silverman, “models tell us what reality is like and the basic elements it contains (ontology) and what is the nature and status of knowledge (epistemology)” (p. 77). Examples of

15

models include functionalism, behaviourism, symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, naturalism, emotionalism (Gabrium and Holstein, 1997), feminism, post-modernism, post-structuralism, and critical theory. As argued by Vergnaud (1990, p.22): “Epistemological considerations on the nature of concepts are probably the best way to detect the weakness of a theory or model.” In terms of cognitive research, the philosophical underpinnings of a framework determine what knowledge features one pays attention to and what is suppressed. The researcher’s explanation of reality as s/he perceives it, depends on these philosophical parameters. I now highlight the philosophical dimension of Steffe’s and Vergnaud’s theory.

The philosophical dimension of Steffe’s theorySteffe’s cognitive framework is rooted in Piaget’s constructivist theory and is based on Ernst von Glasersfeld (1985/1995) philosophy of Radical constructivism which has two premises. First, people actively build up knowledge, rather than passively receive it. Secondly, the function of cognition is to organize the experiential reality of the knower rather than discovering an ontological pre-existing reality. To ascertain whether human knowledge matches the way the world is, a person would have to be able to compare his/her knowledge with a true representation of the world and assess the degree of match (Hackenberg, 2005). But as observer we cannot step out of our ways of perceiving and conceiving to understand the reality that the observed have. Thus, one of the constructs in Steffe’s theory is what he defines as the “mathematical experiential world” which consists of those understanding and interpretative constructions that a person develops as a result of his or her exposure to mathematical experiences (or in the fabric of his/her living experiences). It consists of elements of experience - durable perceptual and conceptual structures in the flow of mathematical experience. It may also consist of invariants (e.g. the sum of angles in a triangle is 1800) and constancies that we compute on the basis of our individual mathematical experiences. We make sense of our mathematical experiential world by organizing it through the schemes and operations that are available to us as a cognizing body. The process of assimilation and accommodation are two central processes in assembling our mathematical experiences. The elements of the mathematical experiential world are also assembled through comparison, regularities, repetition or induction. In sum, Steffe orients us to make a clear distinction between our knowledge and understanding as researchers and those of the students being researched.

The philosophical dimension of Vergnaud’s theoryLike Steffe’s theory, Vergnaud’s theory is a redirection of Piaget’s constructivist theory. He emphasizes that understanding mathematical cognition involves asking questions like what is the role of action, perception, language and symbolism in the development and functioning of knowledge? Vergnaud believes that knowledge is organized in conceptual fields. He asserts that knowledge acquisition is shaped by situations, problems, and actions of the subject. Symbols and language (signifier and signified) occupy an important part in his theory in line with Vygotsky’s ideas. He emphasizes the role of prior knowledge in the knowledge construction process. Vergnaud maintains that knowledge is constructed around concepts and as such it is very important to pay attention to the conceptual

16

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n aspect of schemes. Further, knowledge construction involves both implicit knowledge (contained in actions) and explicit knowledge (as articulated in the form of mathematical principles, for instance). Vergnaud (1998) asserts that mathematical concepts have their first roots “in the action on, and in the representation of, the physical and social world” (p. 167). The role of representation as an interface between the subject and reality is emphasized. Problem conceptualization is regarded as a central element in his theory and this is articulated through his notion of schemes. He also maintains that “a major part of students’ behavior, in problem solving, is generated by hypotheses, analogies, metaphors, extensions of former knowledge, or reductions” (p.173). Vergnaud asserts that a sound cognitive analysis involves paying attention to both the signified (e.g., functions, variables, equations, etc) and the signifier (e.g. axes, dots, graphs, intersection points, etc).

4. Analytical dimension of a framework

Articulating the constructs of a theory can be a challenging task. The theoretical ideas have to be split in ways that are manageable in the empirical field. Brown and Dowling (1998, p.24) use the term operationalization to denote ‘the move from the statement of a theoretical proposition to its empirical measurement’. In other words, operationalization enables the empirical measurement of theoretical propositions. This is where analytical constructs are significant, another dimension of a conceptual/theoretical framework, consisting of core constructs that serve as explanatory mechanisms. The qualitative researcher faces the problem of systematically organizing and analyzing a voluminous amount of data that is collected through observations, interviews, qualitative questionnaires, focus group discussions or other forms of data gathering techniques. The analytical dimension of a framework helps to categorize the data and capture the patterns that emerge. In grounded theory, the analytical frame may emerge from the data as patterned by the perceptions and understandings of the researcher. The analytical constructs may be regarded as the operational end of the conceptual framework. Table 2 compares the analytical constructs in Steffe’s and Vergnaud’s theory to show how the two theoretical frameworks pay attention to different knowledge features. As mentioned earlier, both frameworks are offshoots of Piaget’s theory and consider a scheme as the basis of cognition. However, they conceptualize a scheme in different ways. Similarly, the mechanism of knowledge growth and change differs.

17

Cognitive element Steffe’s theory Vergnaud’s theory

Basic element of cognition

Scheme and operations Pay much attention to unit structures as units of analysis

SchemeUnit structures are not involved.

Conception of a scheme

A scheme consists of an experiential situation, an activity, and a result.

A scheme consists of goals/ expectations, operational invariants, rules to generate actions, and inference possibilities

Mechanism to explain knowledge growth and change

Explained in terms of interiorization, internalization, assimilation, and accommodation. Students are given opportunities to modify their schemes by providing them with more and more demanding situations.Defines different mental operations.

Explained in terms of identification of concepts-in-action and articulation of theorems-in-action. Attention paid to signifier and signified.

Mental operations are not specifically characterized.

Table 2. Comparison of analytical constructs in Steffe’s and Vergnaud’s theory

5. Conclusion

Understanding the role and function of a conceptual/theoretical framework is a crucial step before embarking on a qualitative research if one is to give a robust account of a research phenomenon which is likely to be accepted by the academia. I would argue that the researcher who enters the field with a knowledge of different theoretical perspectives is more armed to explain the research problem and scrutinize subtleties. Letting the data drive the choice of the conceptual framework is a productive strategy.

The main argument in this paper is the centrality of the conceptual/theoretical framework at almost every stage in the research process. Providing a frame, concept map, template, structure or scaffolding of the research increases the opportunity to scrutinize the research phenomenon at depth. The conceptual framework explicitly prompts the researcher to spell out the variables under consideration and possible interrelationships. This framework instructs the researcher to posture his/her investigation to explain the complexity of events, processes or slice of reality in qualitative research. Further, as a platform, the conceptual framework illuminates us to detect emerging trends. There is no single way of designing a conceptual framework. It should be appropriated to the specific needs of the research aim. It demands a good deal of creativity and imagination, especially when it comes to adapting an existing framework to one’s work.

18

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n The two essential features of frameworks that I have discussed do not function in isolation. The philosophical dimension is implicit whereas the analytical constructs are the ones that are more visible. Further, the conceptual framework has a dynamic nature and is continuously refined as the researcher’s understanding of the terrain increases. Borrowing ideas from diverse disciplines such as philosophy, psychology, sociology, and other relevant fields to construct a conceptual framework may reveal important aspects of the research problem that may not have been scrutinized by previous research. This interdisciplinary research has in fact, resulted in productive understanding of the teaching and learning process in mathematics education. As is emphasized by Eisenhart (1991) and Lester (1991), it is important to give strong justifications why the research question is being looked at from a particular perspective and why the tools selected for analysis are suitable. However, as argued by Connors (1990), such an interdisciplinary venture should be carefully negotiated since a researcher in one field (e.g. mathematics education) may not be always aware of the issues in another field (e.g. sociology) where the perspective is being borrowed from.

The design and application of frameworks require some elements of caution. It is necessary to take into consideration the assumptions on which the framework is built. For instance Steffe’s theory is philosophically based on radical constructivism and this influences the outlook that he has on children’s mathematical knowledge. Moreover, in applying a framework, the researcher has to make sure that s/he is using the constructs as required by its proponents. Such frameworks are often complex and the constructs are not explicitly defined.

A research study without a conceptual framework is bound to lack academic rigour. The power of a conceptual framework is that it reveals aspects of data which may be left unattended. The conceptual framework forces us to be selective i.e. to decide which variables are more significant, and which relationships are meaningful. It specifies ‘who and what will and will not be studied’. It is an evolving map of the territory being investigated. As a yardstick, it also delineates the boundary of the research. It points out where attention should be focused. In addition, by framing our categories of thinking, the conceptual framework allows us to further identify problematics and reframe hypotheses and questions. It helps us to detect overlaps and contradictions or missing ideas and links. Investigating the same phenomenon through different frameworks may lead to different understanding of the research problem. The researcher should always bear in mind that theoretical perspectives shape research questions, data collection, and analysis and portray some aspects of phenomena while suppressing others.

19

References

Andrés, Z, M., Pesa, M., & Meneses, J., 2006, “A learning model (MATLaF) for conceptual development in laboratory: Mechanical waves”, in van den Berg, E., Ellermeijer, A.L., Slooten, O. (eds.), GIREP Conference: Modelling in Physics and Physics Education, Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, p. 753-759.

Brown, A. & Dowling, P., 1998, Doing Research/Reading Research – A mode of interrogation for education, London, The Falmer Press.

Connors, J., 1990, “When mathematics meets anthropology: The need for interdisciplinary dialogue”, Educational Studies in Mathematics, no 21, p. 461-469.

Cresswell, J.W., 1998, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design – Choosing among the five traditions, Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications.

Delamont, S., 1992, Fieldwork in educational settings – Methods, pitfalls & perspectives, London, The Falmer Press.

Eisenhart, M.A., 1991,Conceptual frameworks for research CIRCA 1991: Ideas from a cultural anthropologist; Implications for mathematics education researchers. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting, North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1, October 16-19, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.

Gabrium, J. & Holstein, J., 1997, The new language of qualitative method, New York, Oxford University Press.

Hackenberg, A. J., 2005, Construction of algebraic reasoning and mathematical caring relations, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia, Georgia.

Lamon, S. J., 2007, “Rational numbers and proportional reasoning: Towards a theoretical framework for research” in Lester, F.K., (ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Charlotte, NC, Information Age Publishing, p. 629-667.

Lancy, D. F., 1993, Qualitative Research in Education – An introduction to the major traditions, New York, Longman.

Lester, F.K., 1991, The nature and purpose of research in mathematics education: Ideas prompted by Eisenhart’s plenary address. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting, North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1, October 16-19, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.

20

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Merriam, S.B., 1998, Qualitative Research and Case Study – Applications in Education (Revised and Expanded from Case Study Research in Education), San Francisco, John Wiley.

Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M., 1994, Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications.

Morrison, T.R., 1997, The universe of the teacher – Teaching, schools and the prospects for educational change in Mauritius, Mauritius Research Council and Mauritius Institute of Education.

Olive, J., & Steffe, L. P., 2002, “Schemes, schemas, and director systems: An integration of Piagetian scheme theory with Skemp’s model of intelligent learning”, in Tall, D. & Thomas, M., (eds.), Intelligence, Learning, and Understanding in Mathematics: A tribute to Richard Skemp, Australia, Post Pressed, p. 97-104.

Silverman, D., 2000, Doing qualitative research – A practical handbook, London, Sage Publications.

Steffe, L. P., 1992, “Schemes of action and operation involving composite units”, Learning and Individual Differences, vol.4, no 3, p. 259-309.

Steffe, L. P., 1994, “Children’s multiplying schemes”, in Harel, G. & Confrey, J. (eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics, Albany, State University of New York Press, p. 3-39.

Steffe, L. P., & Thompson, P. W., 2000, “Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements”, in Kelly, A. E. & Lesh, R. A., (eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education, Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p. 267-306.

Steffe, L. P., 2001, “A new hypothesis concerning children’s fractional knowledge”, Journal of Mathematical Behavior, vol. 20, no 3, p. 267-307.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J., 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research – Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, London, SAGE Publications.

Thompson, P., 1990, A theoretical model of quantity-based reasoning in arithmetic and algebra. Progress report to the National Science Foundation. San Diego State University, Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education.

Vergnaud, G., 1983, “Multiplicative structures”, in Lesh, R. & Landau, M. (eds.), Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes, New York, Academic Press, Inc., p. 127-174.

Vergnaud, G., 1988, “Multiplicative structures”, in Hiebert, J. & Behr, M., (eds.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades, Reston, VA, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics & Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p. 141-161.

21

Vergnaud, G., 1990, “Epistemology and Psychology of Mathematics Education”, in Nesher, P. & Kilpatrick, J. (eds), Mathematics and Cognition: A research synthesis by the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p.14-30.

Vergnaud, G., 1997, “The nature of mathematical concepts”, in Nunes, T. & Bryant, P., (eds.), Learning and teaching mathematics: An international perspective, Hove, UK, Psychology Press, p. 5-28.

Vergnaud, G., 1998, “A comprehensive theory of representation for mathematics education”, The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, vol. 17, no 2, p. 167-181.

Von Glasersfeld, E., 1985/1995, Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning, London, RoutledgeFalmer.

22

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n School science and underachievement.

Vandana Hunma

Abstract

This paper founded on empirical research situates the inadvertent repercussions of the current practices of school science on students’ learning, self-esteem and subsequently their failure to achieve what they are capable of. This is systemic underachievement as it is fostered by the formal education and examination system.

This paper highlights different types of underachievement that remain unnoticed and unresolved and attempts to identify some of the systemic factors responsible for this underachievement. It also underlines the need to implement corrective measures so as to bridge the gap between students’ potential and actual achievement.

23

Introduction

In the last two decades of my research work, I have come across many science students and science teachers who, with a tenacious focus on examination results, appeared to be sincerely engaged in the teaching learning process both at school and after school.

This educational venture produces satisfactory results with around two thirds of the students managing to pass the examinations. However, we fail to scrutinize the quality of these results and cheer with pride the quantitative improvements in pass percentages. And with equal ease we try to attribute the occasional quantitative deteriorations to causes such as difficult examination paper, unfamiliar paper format, stricter marking criteria and other unavoidable logistical constraints that schools are made to cope with. These reasons rarely prompt us to systematically evaluate what happens inside a classroom when the teacher and students meet. Nor do we try to put in place an accountability system with a view to enhancing the quality of classroom experience for each student.

Moreover, any questioning concerning the pedagogical significance of school science practices is difficult. This is partly due to the general consensus regarding the relevance of science subjects in everyday life, their indisputable special and superior position in the school curriculum, their perceived difficult nature, their specific laboratory requirements and the discipline that the study of sciences requires. Most science teachers work conscientiously in their laboratories.

Also, the relatively brighter cohort that opts for science subjects and that appears to be engaged in some promising pursuit further freezes any attempt to evaluate the pedagogical significance of the practices of school science. We thus accept school science, its practices, its place in the school curriculum, its role in producing scientifically literate citizenry and its results per se.

Nevertheless, during the course of my research on ‘A’ level science practices, students with good ‘A’ levels in science subjects expressed their dissatisfaction with the practices of school science.1 They complained that they sometimes lacked the crucial knowledge and background to understand topics, that there were not enough illustrations and practical work for them to understand the principles and see how these are manifested in practice. As a result they were not able to discern the relevance of school science to everyday life. At other times, they wanted to delve deeper into the related fields that stretched beyond the confines of the examination syllabus. This was not always possible because of the inadequate time and facilities needed for such illustrations and discussions.

They alleged that their teachers, on the other hand, rarely stepped beyond any topic. Most teachers ‘focused’ on the learning outcomes, completed a topic and then moved on to the next one without even making sure whether or not most students had understood the topic. Their priority was to complete the syllabus within the given time frame. The number of topics covered had precedence over the quality of the learning that took place.

..................................................

1 Hunma, V., 2009

24

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

nMost students thus studied the course for the examination using time tested strategies of working out the past years’ question papers and rote learning answers to all prospective questions.2 ‘Practice makes perfect’ seems to be the guiding principle. ‘Hard work pays in the end’ being the motto. Such practices and attitudes raise many questions. The most important one concerns the aims of school science. Why do we study science? Is it merely to pass the examinations?

Why School science?

The National Curriculum Framework of the Ministry of Education & Human Resources (2009) for secondary education stresses the need for a scientifically literate citizenry in its rationale for science education.

Scientifically-literate citizens equipped with skills and knowledge to study and solve complex problems, are essential to sustain and improve quality of life on earth, to enhance democratic societies and promote global economy. (p.84)3

Such objectives place tremendous challenges on school science which then not only has to communicate the established body of scientific knowledge effectively but must also help students develop the skills and abilities that are crucial for solving problems, taking decisions, research and innovation. These expectations are not new. Similar emphases have been expressed in previous curriculum frameworks.

However, my earlier research pointed out the gaps between the practices of school science and the developmental priorities of the country. Not all these objectives are addressed inside a science classroom.4,5 The main reasons behind the disparities between the intentions and what gets done in practice include our failure to reckon the differences between the nature, methods and practices of science and science education, the system of examination that regulates the access to further education, and other related pedagogical and logistical factors.6

Systemic Underachievement

For the purpose of this paper, underachievers are defined as those students whose performance does not reflect their real potential. They can achieve much more given the appropriate direction and support.

..................................................

2 Ibid3 Ministry of Education & Human Resources, 20094 Hunma, V., 20015 Hunma, V., 20036 Hunma, V., 2009

25

This unfulfilled potential is not due to any inherent weaknesses in the students themselves but due to the external pedagogical factors and their consequent impact on students’ affective characteristics. This results in limited cognitive engagement by these students. They half-learn many things and are not in a position to effectively apply this learning to solve problems, take decisions, innovate, as they are expected to.

This is systemic underachievement for it is prompted and fostered by the formal education and examination system.

However, not all underachievers are the same; they have different learning difficulties and require attention that is specific to their needs.

2. Research Study

This paper is an offshoot of a research carried out in 2006 and 2007 to capture the views of students regarding current practices and provisions of school science. Students’ answers to three questions of the study namely: ‘what are the topics you enjoy and why?’ ‘what are the topics you find difficult and why?’ and ‘any other comments that you would like to make regarding the practices and provisions of school science’, hinted towards limited achievement. These answers were then explored further in interviews for this study.

Sample of the study

The sample of this study was selected in two stages. It started with a sample comprising 130 University of Mauritius (UoM) and 108 MBBS Year 1 students of the Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam (SSR) Medical College. They had all studied science subjects up to ‘A’ level. The purpose at this stage was to gather information on the practices of school science. It is important to state here that the sample was not a representative sample of the school population as it included mainly those who had obtained good results in their HSC/ ‘A’ level science examination.

It was felt that these students were in a better position to reflect objectively and freely on their school science learning now that they were out of the school system and also evaluate this learning in the light of the demands of their tertiary courses and their ability to cope with these. The students in the sample were asked to reflect on their experience of school science to respond to the questionnaire and interview. A quarter of the sample was interviewed either individually as they handled practical work in the UoM science laboratories or in groups constituted by a Professor of Anatomy at the SSR Medical College.

26

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n

Underachievers

The sample for the second stage comprised 20 (mostly girls) students studying at the University of Mauritius. They were identified on the basis of their responses to the items in the questionnaire and the interview and also their performance at the ‘A’ levels and at the University (as reported by them). It was apparent that they were not achieving what they were capable of. It is important to state here that no psychological tests were administered to identify underachievers.

The medical college students were not selected for this part of the study though some of their responses (very easy, not challenging enough, we worked very hard, you prepare for the examination, …chemistry is so boring, there is so much to cram, there is no link to everyday life, I could have joined the medical college without studying any science at school, it is not helping me,…) were explored with the sample of underachievers.

Table 1: Sample of the study

Year University of Mauritius SSR Medical College Total

Boys Girls Country Boys Girls

2006 B.Sc. 1 15 23 - - 38

2006 B.Sc. 2 5 11 - - 16

2006 B.Sc. 3 11 26 - - 37

2007 B.Sc. 1 11 14 India 16 16 57

2007 B.Sc. 2 - - Mauritius 36 32 68

2007 B.Sc. 3 2 12 South Africa 2 6 22

Sub 44 86 54 54

total

Total 130 108 238

27

3. Research findings

Three distinct groups of underachievers emerge from the study.

Group 1: Students who focus on examination success

This first group of students is frequently observed but is rarely labeled as underachieving for the simple reason that we measure achievement in terms of examination results. We often accept the results at face value and at best hold the students responsible for their performance. And in this way we ignore the gaps between students’ potential and their attainments and do not examine the factors underlying their performance.7 We also overlook the gaps between the intended, the implemented and the achieved curricula.

This group comprised highly motivated students from ‘good’ secondary schools. These schools enjoy the reputation of producing good results at the HSC examinations. These students worked with a clear focus on scoring good marks in the examinations. They took private lessons so as not to miss out on any of the examination requirements. They unanimously agreed that the main aim before them was to score good grades and then move on to the next level, till they finally obtain “a good job”. With ‘passing the examination’ as the main aim, it made perfect sense to neglect all that was not amenable to examinations. Why waste time?

As far as the examination results are concerned, some managed to get the grades they aimed for and some did not. The credit for those who managed to get good grades goes to their hard work and to their teachers who managed to decipher the examination success code more accurately. This is not a difficult task as all information regarding examinations is readily available in the form of learning outcomes, past years’ question papers, practice papers, marking criteria, mark schemes, model answers and examination reports. In addition, over the years and with the increase in the number of candidates, there has been a simplification of examination demands with objectivity, reliability and management priorities overriding the validity concerns. One example is the introduction of the SC/’O’ level written alternative to the practical paper.

Against this backdrop, it was not surprising when this group confessed that it had not acquired some of the crucial knowledge, understanding and skills that could have facilitated their transition to the university. It was not easy for them to adjust and learn. The courses were new, the place was new and not all lecturers were willing to ‘spoon feed’ them.

..................................................

7 Hunma, V., 2009

28

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Group 2: Students who give up due to boredom

It is important to understand how teaching takes place in most classes before we discuss this group of students. Good teachers select a topic and its learning outcomes and plan their lesson. They focus on the importance of each outcome, its many salient features that may appear in the forthcoming examination paper and also the logistics, which include the facilities and the time available for the class.

Often in the process, the emphasis shifts to the smaller and more trivial parts and many questions, how, why, why not, under what conditions, what if,… relating to the wider theme are postponed for the ‘next class’ when the topic would be dealt with again or remain unexplored. It is not that the details are not important but on their own they are insignificant and blur the bigger picture. This absence of a perspective soon negatively affects students’ interest and makes learning tedious.

This second group of underachievers thus comprised students, who gave up bored because they found the tasks so unchallenging and irrelevant to their needs and to everyday life. They saw no point in handling them and deliberately stopped engaging in learning. There were not many opportunities for them to explore and pursue their interests and queries. Nor was there any encouragement or time for what is often seen as unproductive digressions.

This group did the minimum that was needed to survive the class. Soon they managed to acquire the labels of ‘average ability,’ ‘weak’ or ‘not interested.’ They appeared to be indifferent to these labels.

Group 3: Students who give up feeling dejected

At some point in their school cycle, for some reasons which include medical, late admission, peer group pressure, extra- curricular activities, teacher behavior and prejudices, students of this third group either missed some classes or did not learn some lessons. With no focused attempt from teachers to help them catch up with what they had missed, they started lagging behind and eventually experienced failure in class work, home work, and class tests.

This failure had an adverse effect on their self-concept. They started questioning their capacity to handle the demands of the science course, stopped making adequate efforts to understand their learning and gave up feeling dejected. The research work of Black & Harrison has also shown similar cases of ‘retire hurt’ students who they state “avoid investing effort in learning which could lead to disappointment.” (p. 32)8

..................................................

8 Black, P.J. & Harrison, C., 2000

29

These students, with little faith in their own abilities to succeed, continued with their studies because there was no other alternative. They could not opt for another course. Nor could they drop out of the course.

It was not difficult to identify these students in the UoM practical classes where they pretended to be involved in some important work from which they could not be disturbed. They started fiddling with the apparatus, noting observations or taking readings that were not there each time they saw their teacher approaching. They did not want their teachers to know of their failings and difficulties.

However, behind this façade they had already accepted failure. It was hardly surprising that they stated that they rarely sought help to understand a topic. Instead they accepted their weakness. They receded into their shell when faced with difficulties. The signs of ‘learned helplessness’9 among students of this group were easily recognisable.

It is important to point out that most of these students were from secondary schools with a less favorable academic reputation. They lived up to the relatively poor expectations of their performance and confirmed the labels assigned to them on the basis of their performance in the CPE examination.

The existence of such ‘Pygmalions’10 was further confirmed when some students even told me that they were of ‘average intelligence’ and could not achieve better results. The data on which such judgments were made is certainly questionable. A rough estimate would indicate that with elimination at different stages (CPE, SC and HSC), all students who reach the university level would be at least among the top 20 percent of the student population.

When I insisted that they could improve their learning by changing their study habits, some of them promptly replied, “It is not easy to learn science.” They conveniently used the public perception of science as a difficult subject as an excuse not to work harder. They thus tried to remain unaccountable for their attainments.

..................................................

9 Seligman, M., 197510 Rosenthal, R. & Jacobson, L., 1968

30

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 4. Discussion: School science silo - an end in itself!

It is clear from the above that the system initiates and then perpetuates underachievement. The sampled students repeatedly indicated their narrow view of science which they allegedly failed to enjoy, to understand and to relate to their everyday experience.

Why has science assumed such a narrow role? An attempt is made in the following paragraphs to explore some underlying factors that may be responsible for this.

From a vocational to an academic subject

Historically, the vocational bias of science subjects was recognized and special classes were organized at the Royal College of Mauritius.

Enfin, prenant en considération l’état de nos manufactures, de nos usines, et la nécessité de donner à notre agriculture le plus grand développement possible, on devra doter le college Royal de divers cours où l’on enseignera la chimie et la mécanique appliquées aux arts, la théorie des machines à vapeur, & c. ... L’importance des cours d’ Histoire Naturelle, de Physique et de Chimie est trop évidente pour avoir besoin d’être démontrée. On ne saurait donc moins faire que d’ouvrir une fois par semaine, tous les jeudis, de 8 à 10 h., des cours spéciaux pour l’enseignement de ces trois sciences si essentielles. (p.10)11

Such utilitarian concerns prompted the Royal College of Mauritius to open a ‘Modern’ section in 1861. Science subjects were introduced as part of the Natural Philosophy curriculum.

The college is divided into classical and a modern section, with a view of enabling the students to follow one or the other accordingly as he may be destined either for a learned profession or for a career where the higher classical attainments are not considered indispensable.” (p.5)12

This low status of science subjects was in line with the contemporary thinking of those days where “science was seen as a subject that was utilitarian, intellectual but inferior because it was not cultural.” (p.55)13

..................................................

11 H.A., 184212 The Royal College of mauritius, 186113 Nott, M., 1997

31

The status of science subjects changed when the Art. I and II of Ordinance 15 of 1892 stipulated one English Scholarship for the Classical side and one for the Modern side students.14 However, they became academic, bookish and insulated from technology of local import.

The emphasis in the science course should be shifted so as to provide for the needs of the country in which the agriculturist is the chief user of a scientific knowledge and technique. I do not imply that commercialism should govern the curriculum…. The existing college curriculum goes almost to the extreme of remoteness from everyday life and could be recalled with advantage. (p.40)15

This has remained the case.

From natural philosophy to many sciences

Moreover, over the years, with the expansion of knowledge, we have moved from Natural Philosophy to many distinct branches of science. Each branch acquires its significance by isolating itself from other branches. Different branches may deal with the same topic in different ways. Different topics may not have any linking strands at all, even in the same branch. In fact it appears that school science has achieved such levels of sophistication that in some schools even Form I science is taught by three different teachers!

Within this framework, the emphasis obviously shifts to communicating the mere knowledge of each branch for there seems to be a lot of content to transmit. There is little time for exploring the links between science and technology and the history and philosophy of science that could have helped students acquire a larger perspective. This bigger picture is crucial to understand the nature, relevance and methods of science. However, we tend to cut out the frills and communicate the essentials. Kuhn (1977) describes the practices of normal science education in the following words:

Information about how that knowledge was acquired (discovery) and about why it was accepted by the profession (confirmation) would at best be extra baggage. (p.186)16

..................................................

14 Council of Education, 198315 Ward, W. E. F., 194116 Kuhn, T. S., 1977

32

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Science learning for examination success

In this way, science subjects have come to be taught and learnt in isolation while exclusively focusing on examination success. There is nothing wrong in aiming to get good results except that with so much content to transmit the emphasis has shifted towards teaching it as ‘rhetoric of conclusions.’17 There is no time to address the ‘extra baggage.’18

We teach what gets tested in examinations and we test what is reliably measurable. It would be worthwhile to question this limited view of science and also the validity of examination results. Validity is not merely concerned with the extent to which the examination covers the curricular objectives but goes on to encompass, as Messick explains, the inferences drawn and actions that are taken on the results. The usefulness and appropriateness of the inferences become equally important.19 This raises serious assessment and pedagogical concerns as well as psychological, social and moral dimensions of the ensuing actions.

5. Conclusion

The limited educational opportunities for secondary and tertiary education and the associated external examinations to select the ‘best’ for further education have transformed the system into what it is today.

The stringent examination-driven preparation not only results in a neglect of all that is non-examinable but also offers a narrow view of science. As a result, students may not acquire certain knowledge, abilities and skills that are crucial to becoming responsible users of science in everyday life. Sadly, some remain ignorant of their limited learning while others find this examination-driven process uninspiring and give up bored.

On the other hand, there is a group of students that does not get the support it requires, gives up dejected and accepts failure with the belief that it cannot do anything about it.

It is therefore important to review the practices of school science, especially when we know that the sample of the study comprised the top 20% of the CPE cohort. There is no doubt that these practices have yielded results needed to get admission to tertiary level courses and jobs.

..................................................

17 Schwab, J. J., 196218 Kuhn, T. S., 197719 Messick, S., 1989

33

But beyond that, the questions that emerge are as follows: Do they help students in sustaining their further learning? Do they help them acquire skills and abilities crucial to innovate, explore, and solve problems? Do they help them become responsible users of science in their everyday life? Do they help them realise their own potential? The list of questions is long.

This review is all the more important at a time when the Government20 is stressing the need to enhance access to tertiary education, develop Mauritius into a knowledge hub and promote scientific research of local relevance. We cannot allow any student to lag behind.

Consequently, it becomes important that we take appropriate remedial measures to effectively bridge the gaps between the intended, the implemented and the achieved curricula, between students’ potential and their actual achievement.

..................................................

20 Government Programm 2010 - 2015

34

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n References

Black, P. J. & Harrison, C., 2000, “Formative Assessment”, in Monk, M. & Osborne, J., (eds.), Good practice in science teaching, Buckingham , Open University Press, p. 25-40.

Council of Education, 1893, Minute Number 6, Port Louis, Colony of Mauritius.

Hunma, V., 2001, “Examinations, Scholarships and Higher School Science Practical Work”, Journal of Education, 1(1), p. 11-20.

Hunma, V., 2002, “Secondary School Science and Technology in Mauritius”, Science & Education, 11 (5), p. 497-511.

Hunma, V., 2003, “Do ‘A’ Level science laboratory practices in Mauritius cater for the requirements of Cambridge International Examinations?”, Journal of Education, 2(1), p. 9-28.

Hunma, V., 2005, “Assessment for assessment’s sake or for learning: what can trigger the change?”, Symposium Report, Reduit, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, p. 53-67.

Hunma, V., 2009, “Chemistry education for socially responsible and sustainable development: What are the challenges for a developing country?”, in Gupta Bhowon, M., Jhaumeer Laullloo, S., Li Kam Wah, H., Ramasami, P., (eds.), Chemistry in the ICT Age, Springer Publications, p. 377-392. http://www.springer.com/education+%26+language/science+education/book/978-1-4020-9731-7

Kuhn, T. S., 1977, The Essential Tension, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

Messick, S., 1989, “Validity”, in Linn, R. L.,(ed.), Educational Measurement, London, Macmillan, p.12-103.

Ministry of Education and Human Resources, 2009, The National Curriculum Framework: Secondary, Republic of Mauritius, Ministry of Education & Human Resources. http://www.gov.mu/portal/goc/educationsite/file/Secondary%20Curriculum%20Framework.pdf Accessed on 20.01.11

Nott, M., 1997, “Keeping scientists in their place”, School Science Review 78 (285), p.49 - 60.

Republic of Mauritius, 2010, Government Programme 2010-2015, http://www.gov.mu/portal/goc/assemblysite/file/GovtProgramme2010-2015.pdf Accessed on 20.01.11

Royal College of Mauritius, 1861, Rules and regulations of the Royal College of Mauritius, Port Louis, General Steam Printing Company.

35

Rosenthal, R. & Jacobson, L.,1968, Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectations and pupil’s intellectual behaviour, New York, Holt, Rienhart & Winston.

Schwab, J. J.,1962, The teaching of science as enquiry, in Schwab, J. J. & Brandwein, P. F. (eds.), The teaching of science, (p. 3-103). Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Seligman, M.,1975, Helplessness: On Development, Depression, and Death, New York,W. H. Freeman.

Ward, W. E. F., 1941, Report on education in Mauritius, Port Louis, Colony of Mauritius.

36

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n The O-level Mathematics Syllabus A:

A better alternative for students in Mauritius?

Hurryramsingh Hurchand, Ajeevsing Bholoa and Vijaysing Bundhoo

Department of Mathematics Education, Mauritius Institute of Education.

Abstract

At O-level, students in Mauritius can choose to take one of two available syllabi options, referred to as Syllabus D (4029) and Syllabus A (4021), in mathematics. The Syllabus D is a comprehensive programme while the Syllabus A is lighter in content for learners. Historically, Syllabus A was offered with the aims of enabling less able students, at least to acquire basic competencies in the subject and increase their chances of obtaining a better grade. In this study, we employ state-of-the-art statistical techniques to analyse available data from the years 2002 to 2009 on these two syllabi. The analysis shows that half of the students taking Syllabus A fail in the paper and only around 11% obtain a credit in it. Nevertheless, it is found that an increasing number of students are opting for Syllabus A. The autoregressive model predicts this tendency to persist in the coming years. Teachers from eight different schools were interviewed to find out the reasons for the on-going motivation of students to take this syllabus and to understand the factors leading to their poor performance. The unavailability of teaching and learning materials is found to be an important issue. We also raise concern in this paper about the pedagogy employed in preparing students for the curriculum content of this syllabus and about teacher attitudes.

Keywords:

Syllabus A, Syllabus D, gender, odds ratio, autoregressive model

37

1. Introduction

Mathematics is widely regarded as an important subject and it occupies a central place in the primary and the secondary school curriculum worldwide [1]. Through mathematics a number of skills and competencies such as problem solving and creativity can be fostered. These are desirable qualities any nation would like its emerging generation to possess in order to remain competitive in the context of globalisation. The extent to which success is achieved in these areas is intricately linked to the richness of mathematical content learners are exposed to [2], and which is specified by the curriculum document.

Over the years scoring a passing grade or improving the overall percentage pass rate has become predominantly important as a measure of success. This makes that an increasing number of students are opting for less demanding syllabi whenever these are available.

In Mauritius, at O-level, two mathematics syllabi are available: Syllabus A (4021) and Syllabus D (4029). Syllabus A is a restricted one and exposes students to limited mathematics contents compared to the Syllabus D option. Syllabus A is a programme for Mauritius only and it was first introduced in 1999. It was broadly inspired by the core part of the IGCSE syllabus. The introduction of the syllabus came as an acknowledgment by policymakers of the differential that exists between students in terms of their ability to acquire the wide range of mathematical skills and competencies prescribed in a conventional syllabus. It was believed that the extensive Syllabus D option was too demanding for the less able students in mathematics. By offering the choice of a lighter syllabus, it was hoped that they would have more possibility to acquire the essentials in mathematics and, as a result, obtain better grades than what they could expect in Syllabus D. It was hoped that the new syllabus would be more convenient for teachers as well, as the reduced syllabus would enable them to devote more time on students’ weaknesses.

In 2009, 78 private secondary schools and one state secondary school provided the choice of Syllabus A to their students. Till date there has been no study which has investigated whether the introduction of Syllabus A has been worthwhile. In this paper we take up the question. Such an analysis is important to better inform students and teachers whilst making a syllabus choice, as opting for a weaker syllabus has a number of implications both in terms of the quality of mathematics a learner experiences and also on the learner’s self-belief and attitude about his/her mathematical potential at both immediate and later stages.

38

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 2. Differentiation between Syllabus A and Syllabus D

2.1 Comparison of contents

Syllabus D comprises the main part of mathematics contents covered by students at the end-of-secondary cycle. It has a comparable standard to mathematics papers taken by the 16+ age group internationally. The syllabus A option requires students to prepare for only a subset of the contents of Syllabus D. Syllabus D has existed for a number of years and has undergone a number of revisions, whereas the current version of Syllabus A, which was first published in January 1999, has been revised in 2009 and will be first examined in 2012. The difference in contents between Syllabus A (the most recent and the earlier one) and Syllabus D is significant. For instance, the topics “functions”, “sets”, “sine/ cosine rule” and “matrices” prescribed in Syllabus D are not covered in Syllabus A. For common topics, the extent of coverage is generally dissimilar. A much lighter coverage is required in Syllabus A. For example, for the topic “Straight Line Graphs” the following are present only in Syllabus D: (1) gradient of a straight line given the coordinates of two points on it, (2) calculate length, and (3) coordinates of midpoint. An idea of the parts which are covered in Syllabus D and not in Syllabus A can be obtained from the IGCSE syllabus [3].

2.2 Comparison of assessment scheme

Students taking Syllabus A or Syllabus D are both examined on two papers. No parallel can be drawn between the papers although there may be a few questions which are similar or test similar competencies or skills. In table 1 a description of the structure of the papers is provided.

Syllabus Component Time Type of Maximum Weighing Allocation Questions Marks (%) (hours)

D Paper 1 2 Short Answer 80 50 Paper 2 2.5 Structured 100 50

A Paper 1 1 Short Answer 56 35 Paper 2 2 Structured 104 65

Table 1: Structure of papers taken for both Syllabus A and Syllabus D.

39

2.3 Use of calculators

The use of a calculator is only permitted in Paper 2 for Syllabus D whereas there is no restriction on its use for both papers in Syllabus A. Nevertheless, there are situations where students need to demonstrate the ability to manipulate numbers without the use of calculators. Generally, there is little requirement from students taking Syllabus A to show competence in mental computation and manipulative skills with numbers.

2.4 Grading structure

The student’s attainment in mathematics at O-level is measured through examinations set by the Cambridge International Examinations (CIE). The grade system employed by CIE to annotate student’s attainment has two versions - one is numeric and the other is alphabetic. We consider the numeric system here. For Syllabus D, one can score from grades 1 to 9 whereas for Syllabus A the grades range from 5 to 9 only. Grades 1 and 2 are qualified as “distinction” and are the best possible grades and grade 9 corresponds to “fail”. Grades 3 to 6 are termed as “credit” and the remaining grades (7 and 8) are referred to as “pass”. It should be noted that no mention about the choice of syllabus is made on a student’s certificate.

3. Methodology

This study is both quantitative and qualitative in nature. Data on the performance of students in Mathematics Syllabus D and Mathematics Syllabus A, from 2002 to 2009 [4]-[11], are analysed statistically. The assumption made is that grades 5 – 9 in Syllabus A should be compared identically with grades 5 – 9 in Syllabus D.

The data are regularly presented in a 2x2 contingency table enabling computations of chi-square statistics (to test for independence), odds ratio and phi coefficients (to measure association) between dichotomous variables: gender and performance (Pass/ Fail).

Multivariable regression analysis is used to measure the contribution of students in both syllabi in the overall pass grade, i.e., the percentage of students who succeed in Mathematics (Syllabus A or D). Trends in the intake and performance of students are studied as time series using the autoregressive model of order one. The expected value criterion has been employed in order to determine the long term expected benefit of choosing Syllabus A. An overview of most of these techniques is provided in the appendix.

40

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n In order to have a deeper understanding of the motivation behind the choice of Syllabus A and teachers’ perception of the syllabus, eight teachers from eight different private secondary schools were interviewed, post statistical analysis of data on Syllabus A and Syllabus D. Interview questions were framed in light of this analysis. The questions primarily focus on various issues related to Syllabus A, namely (1) implementation, (2) aims, (3) teaching, (4) performance, (5) teacher attitudes. The following questions are illustrative of what was asked to the eight teachers during the interviews:

1. Who has initiated the teaching of Syllabus A in your school?2. Is Syllabus A fulfilling its aims of learning and testing basic competencies in mathematics?3. How do you teach the Syllabus A contents at school?4. How would you describe the performance of students taking Syllabus A examinations?5. What are your views on Syllabus A?

4. Analysis of statistical data

4.1 Trend in intake of Syllabus A

From 2002 to 2009, the number of candidates opting for Syllabus A has steadily grown (see Figure 1) and a net increase of 133.6% is recorded. An equivalent rate of decrease is seen in the intake of the Syllabus D option. This is to be expected, given that the syllabus options are mutually exclusive.

Figure 1: Trend for the intake in Syllabus A from 2002 (t = 1) to 2009 (t = 8).

41

From figure 1, it is clear that a definite increasing trend has been established with around 20% of students taking the Syllabus A option. Refined forecasts for the percentage intake in Syllabus A for the next four years (2010 – 2013), based on the autoregressive model of order one y(t+1) = 0.7570594y(t) + 5.5580912 (MSE = 1.3732), are 21.83%, 22.09%, 22.28% and 22.42%.

The data also show that the selection of Syllabus A is gender dependent. The differential in gender choice has remained stable over the eight year period (see figure 2).

4.2 Trend in performance

Over the last 8 years the average pass rate in Syllabus A has been around 45.1% with a standard deviation (s) of 4.3%. Therefore more than half of the candidates failed in Syllabus A. Moreover, the average percentage of pupils who have taken Syllabus A and have managed to score a “credit” (grade 5 or 6) is 10.8% ( s = 2.6%). Using the expected value criterion (see table2), in the long term, we expect students having selected Syllabus A to either pass with a grade 8 or fail (grade 9).

+ 1 = 0.7570594 + 5.5580912

= 1 = 8 = 2.6%

5 6 7 8 9 = 0.0278 0.0889 0.1555 0.2100 0.5178 = , = ∑ = = 8.1011

= + + + + +

= 0, … ,5

−

+ 1 = 0.7570594 + 5.5580912

= 1 = 8 = 2.6%

5 6 7 8 9 = 0.0278 0.0889 0.1555 0.2100 0.5178 = , = ∑ = = 8.1011

= + + + + +

= 0, … ,5

−

+ 1 = 0.7570594 + 5.5580912

= 1 = 8 = 2.6%

5 6 7 8 9 = 0.0278 0.0889 0.1555 0.2100 0.5178 = , = ∑ = = 8.1011

= + + + + +

= 0, … ,5

−

42

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 4.3 Contribution of Syllabus A in the overall pass rate

From 2002 to 2009, the overall pass rate in mathematics, α, (obtained by expressing the number of passes in Syllabus A and D over the total of students taking Mathematics (A or D)) has increased from 65% to 73%. The major part of the increase (around 6%) occurred between 2002 to 2005. After that period, α remained relatively stable. The contribution of each category of students can be estimated using a multivariate linear model of the form

+ 1 = 0.7570594 + 5.5580912

= 1 = 8 = 2.6%

5 6 7 8 9 = 0.0278 0.0889 0.1555 0.2100 0.5178 = , = ∑ = = 8.1011

= + + + + +

= 0, … ,5

−

+ 1 = 0.7570594 + 5.5580912

= 1 = 8 = 2.6%

5 6 7 8 9 = 0.0278 0.0889 0.1555 0.2100 0.5178 = , = ∑ = = 8.1011

= + + + + +

= 0, … ,5

−

+ 1 = 0.7570594 + 5.5580912

= 1 = 8 = 2.6%

5 6 7 8 9 = 0.0278 0.0889 0.1555 0.2100 0.5178 = , = ∑ = = 8.1011

= + + + + +

= 0, … ,5

−

43

4.4 Analysis of performance by gender

Table 4: The performance of candidates (Pass or Fail) in Syllabus A is not independent of gender. This association is very weak and in favour of girls passing Syllabus A.

44

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n

Figure 4. A weak measure of association between gender and performance in syllabus A (in favour of girls) for the period from 2002 (t = 1) to 2009 (t = 8).

5. Analysis of teacher interviews

5.1 Implementation of Syllabus A

In-depth interviews of teachers indicated that the choice of syllabus A is a school policy decision. It is strongly believed that at this level students who are weak in mathematics have a better chance to pass in Syllabus A than in Syllabus D. The decision to offer syllabus A is motivated by the fact that students in these schools generally fared poorly in mathematics examinations at the end of the Certificate of Primary Education (CPE). However, in most schools students are offered the possibility of both syllabuses. The choice of the syllabus they should take is made at the end of Form III (third year of secondary schooling), and depends on their performance in the end-of-term Form III examinations. Although the decision to offer syllabus A is taken by the school board, some teachers teaching it believe that they are compelled to do so as it is imposed by management.

The following comments summarise the predominant views of the teachers.

“Some teachers have requested Syllabus A to school management. It was implemented in my school in 2005 due to many failure cases from Syllabus D.”

“At first our school catered for slow learners only, i.e., students with grade D and grade E at the CPE level. Therefore our school opted for Syllabus A for mathematics.”

45

“We are compelled to teach Syllabus A contents because it is in some way imposed on us by management. Management of school aims at improving the quantity of results rather than quality.”

5.2 Aims of Syllabus A

With regards to whether Syllabus A is fulfilling its aims, two contrasting opinions have emerged from the interviews. On one hand, teachers believe that it is the best existing option for those students to whom it is offered. In particular, they are of the opinion that the possibility to use a calculator in the Syllabus A papers and to answer low order questions are of immense support to them. On the other hand, some teachers claim that the students are not developing basic competencies as they are totally dependent on calculators for trivial computations such as 4 + 5 = 9. These teachers are also of the opinion that the students are not being sufficiently trained, through Syllabus A, to meet the requirements for occupational fields requiring higher education studies and logical reasoning. The following comments describe the salient views of the teachers on the issue.

“It motivates the students to work better. Its contents are about of those of Syllabus D and it has lower order questions. It is an advantage for students having poor computational skills to use a calculator.”

“The students have a poor background in mathematics from CPE level. They can hardly do any calculation mentally. The use of a calculator helps them a lot.”

“I am against the use of a calculator for operations such as 4 + 5 = 9. This does not fulfill the aim of learning basic mathematical competencies.”

“Though it is less demanding there are still many failure cases. Thus, it is not fulfilling the aim of testing the basic arithmetic skills as calculators are being used in both papers.”

“The aim is just to enable the student to score a pass grade, but this is not sufficient to make him mathematically literate. No matter what field he chooses later, he will encounter maths and he has not received enough training through Syllabus A.”

5.3 Teaching of Syllabus A contents

The type of pedagogy employed by the teachers for syllabus A is no different from their approach for Syllabus D. It is grossly expository and relies very much on practice of examination type questions. In addition, the time frame for teaching the same topic in Syllabus A and Syllabus D appears to be the same. Concerning teaching materials it is found that until recently no specific textbook was

46

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n available for Syllabus A. Students depend on the textbook prescribed for Syllabus D itself. The only textbook known to be available by the teachers, was generally found not to be adequate.

The following are the main appraisals on this issue by the teachers.

“I use a lot of resources from the Syllabus D programme to teach Syllabus A contents because of the variety of problems contained in the former. This enables the students to engage into deeper thinking of mathematics and this helps them in their preparation for their examinations.”

“I take practically the same number of periods to teach a common Syllabus D and Syllabus A topic .”

5.4 Performance of students in Syllabus A

As shown by the statistical analysis in the previous section, about 55% of students fail in examinations in Syllabus A and only about 11% score a “credit”. This tendency is observed in most of the schools selected for the interview. In one of the schools the percentage pass rate in Syllabus A was comparable to that in Syllabus D. In another school, however, the percentage pass rate was 100% in Syllabus D while the corresponding figure for Syllabus A was much lower.

An illustrative view expressed by the teachers regarding the performance in Syllabus A is provided below. In general, most of the teachers have no doubt that the students opting for Syllabus A could not have done better as they lack basic knowledge and skills in the subject. However, some of the teachers have suggested that if more time is spent teaching Syllabus D, students could gain more in the long run and the pass rate will be higher.

“The quality of results of Syllabus A is very bad. Very few, approximately 3 out of 20, are reaching grade 5 or 6.”

“If I would have been given more time to teach Syllabus D and students were given more motivation from teachers and management, I think it would be a plus mark for the teaching of Syllabus D. In these situations, I can foresee better results in terms of quantity and quality.”

5.5 Teacher attitudes

Most of the private secondary schools cater for slow learners – mainly students around the C – E grade range at the CPE level. Many teachers believe that these students do not possess basic knowledge in mathematics. Most of teachers interviewed claim that someone who fails in Syllabus D has chances to pass in Syllabus A. However, they are uncertain on the outcome of

47

a candidate who follows the Syllabus A programme but sits for examinations in Syllabus D. It has also been found that some teachers find it easier to teach the Syllabus A content to this category of students.

The following comments describe some of the common teacher attitudes and beliefs on the subject matter.

“Since the students are low achievers, they will face many difficulties to follow the Syllabus D programme.”

“I know someone who took Syllabus A and obtained grade C. The following year the same student took Syllabus D and failed.”

“The students have a poor background in mathematics from the Primary school level. I think Syllabus A is the best option offered to them.”

“Some teachers prefer Syllabus A because they find it easier.”

6. Discussion

Following the disconsolate and discordant outcomes as revealed by this research, a number of questions related to Syllabus A arise:

1. Is the implementation of this ‘diminished’ syllabus the only resort for the so-called weak students?2. Did the idea and emergence of Syllabus A gain acceptance by competing groups such as teachers involved in the teaching of Syllabus D?3. To be effective, schools offering Syllabus A need rich resources, for instance, high-quality instructional materials. From the teachers’ interview it is apparent that this criterion has not been met. Thus, one can ask whether teachers and stakeholders had their reflections about ensuring the availability of adequate resources for teaching Syllabus A?4. Was there any trial stage before the implementation of Syllabus A?5. Have the congruent issues of evaluation and quality control been judiciously adhered to?6. How far teacher attitudes affect the motivation and performance of the students involved in the Syllabus A programme?

48

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 7. Could it be assumed that those who score the highest grade in Syllabus A would reach the same level or less in Syllabus D?8. Is it possible that, through more pedagogically oriented teaching and learning, those who reach “pass” level in Syllabus A could have reached the same level (or better) in Syllabus D examinations?9. To what extent have ‘rich’ contents been filtered in Syllabus A?10. Mathematics is a value-based subject. Has this been taken into account in a global perspective with the introduction of Syllabus A?11. Are the school decisions about whom to enroll for either syllabus A or Syllabus D, based in many instances on the performance of pupils in locally conducted school assessment and even earlier mathematics performance such as CPE results, judicious?

These questions have remained unanswered as they are beyond the scope of this study. However, they appear to be of a serious nature and should call for further research along these lines.

7. Conclusion

In this paper we have analysed the performance of students taking Syllabus A in mathematics. Over the last 8 years, although there has been an increase in the overall percentage pass in mathematics, it is found that the contribution of those taking syllabus A to this figure is negligible. Only a marginal proportion of students opting for Syllabus A manage to score a credit. The big majority either fails or simply obtains a pass grade in the syllabus.

It is also found that an increasing number of students opt for Syllabus A and that the choice is slightly dependent on gender. Currently around a fifth of the students take Syllabus A and it is predicted that this proportion will rise in the foreseeable future. Thus, the flux towards the easier syllabus has not translated into a perceptible increase in the overall pass rate. There is no evidence that, in the coming years, these ratios will be altered in favour of students taking Syllabus A.

There is a prevailing belief that by taking this syllabus students, who have little chances to score a pass grade or to obtain a credit in syllabus D, can increase their chances of doing so in Syllabus A. In this work, this belief is supported through teacher interviews. However, concern is raised regarding the aims, motivational attitudes of teachers, availability of adequate resources and pedagogical approaches related to Syllabus A.

49

This research has raised a number of questions which would undoubtedly rekindle thinking, and perhaps, lead to a revival in the actual process of teaching and learning mathematics at O-level.

8. Appendix

We briefly outline the main statistical techniques that we have employed in this paper. For an in-depth discussion on these techniques see for example [12]-[16].

8.1 2x2 contingency table

A two-dimensional contingency table is formed by classifying subjects by two variables. One variable determines the row categories; the other variable defines the column categories as shown in table 5.

Outcome 1 Outcome 2

Group 1 a b Group 2 c d

Table 5: A 2x2 contingency table.

8.2 Chi-square test

The chi-square test provides a method for testing the independence between the row and column variables in a two-way table. The null hypothesis assumes that the variables are independent, while the alternative hypothesis claims otherwise. The chi-square test is based on a test statistic that measures the divergence of the observed data from the values that would be expected under the null hypothesis of no association. For a 2x2 contingency table, the chi square statistics, with 1 degree of freedom, is computed using the formula

50

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 8.3 Odds ratio

In general, the odds ratio, θ, compares the odds of outcome 1 proportion in row 1 (Group 1) to the odds of outcome 1 proportion in row 2 (Group 2). The odds ratio calculated by the cross-product ratio

8.4 Phi coefficient

The phi coefficient, denoted by , is a measure of association for two variables and is obtained from the formula

8.5 Multiple Regression model

Based on the sample data, the estimated multiple regression model is of the form

A measure of the percentage of explained variation in the dependent variable that takes into account the relationship between the number of cases (n) and the number of independent variable (k) in the regression model is the adjusted R2 given by

51

8.6 Autoregressive model of order one

The autoregressive model of order one is a time series forecasting technique of the form

8.7 Expected Value Criterion

It is a decision criterion that employs probability to select the alternative that will produce the greatest average payoff or minimum average loss. The expected value, E(X), is computed as follows:

9. Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the teachers interviewed and members of staf from the Mauritius Examinations Syndicate whose contributions have been valuable.

52

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 10. References

[1] Mathematics programme of study for Key Stage 3 and Mathematics programme of study for Key Stage 4, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority [Online: http://www.qca.org.uk/curriculum] (2007).

[2] Baker, R. N., The Mathematics Syllabus and Adult Learners in Community Colleges: Integrating Techniques with Content, Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 25, 391-402, 2001.

[3] IGCSE Syllabus, Cambridge International Examinations [Online: http://www.cie.org.uk/qualifications/academic/middlesec/igcse/subject?assdef_id=872] (2012).

[4] Examinations Statistics 2002, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, Mauritius (2002).

[5] Examinations Statistics 2003, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, Mauritius (2003).

[6] Examinations Statistics 2004, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, Mauritius (2004).

[7] Examinations Statistics 2005, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, Mauritius (2005).

[8] Examinations Statistics 2006, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, Mauritius (2006).

[9] Examinations Statistics 2007, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, Mauritius (2007).

[10] Examinations Statistics 2008, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, Mauritius (2008).

[11] Examinations Statistics 2009, Mauritius Examinations Syndicate, Mauritius (2009).

[12] Rice A. J., Mathematical Statistics and Data analysis, 2nd Ed., Duxbury Press, California (1995).

[13] Groebner D. F., Shannon P. W., Fry P. C. and Smith K. D., Business Statistics: A Decision Making Approach, 5th Ed., Prentice Hall Inc., New Jersey (2001).

[14] Mason L., Gunst R. F. and Hess J. L., Statistical Design and Analysis of Experiments With Applications to Engineering and Science, John Wiley and Sons Inc., USA (1989).

[15] Zar J. H., Biostatistical Analysis, 2nd Ed., Prentice Hall Inc., New Jersey (1984).

[16] Agresti A., An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis, 2nd Ed., John Wiley and Sons Inc., USA (2007).

53

Identities in transit and academic writing: An ethnographic study of first year Mauritian students at a South African university.

Aditi Hunma,

University of Cape Town, South Africa.

Abstract

Universities are currently implementing internationalisation policies and welcoming an increasing number of international students, while undertaking more collaborative research across borders. This paper explores the reality on the ground. Through an ethnographic study of first year Mauritian students at the University of Cape Town, the paper outlines their difficulties in academic writing and by extension, in engaging fully in the socio-academic environment at UCT. It demonstrates that international students often struggle in their first year of study both academically and otherwise because they are under-prepared for the university experience, not to mention the significant culture shock. The study suggests that secondary schools need to question their teaching approach and nurture students’ creative and critical potential so that students may be better equipped to cope with future challenges.

54

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 1. Introduction

The intake of growing numbers of international students at universities worldwide is having repercussions on lecture dynamics, "throughput" support structures and curriculum design. The experience of first year international students on their arrival is quite different. Their journey to new spaces calls into question their socio-academic identities, what they choose to project and what they choose to mask. This would also apply to Mauritian students’ academic and social experience at the University of Cape Town (UCT) especially in their first year of study.

Through an ethnographic study of students’ academic essays, I explore how their difficulties in academic writing could be indexical of their transitional socio-academic identities. To analyse the writing and identity link, I use Ivanič’s clover model of writer identities. In this paper, I demonstrate how this link is enacted by three first year Mauritian students, followed by a discussion of its implications for education stakeholders in Mauritius.

2. Methodology

First year Mauritian students’ identities in writing were explored using an ethnographic methodology, which often involves small-scale participant observations in the field as well as interviews and documentary evidence. For Hammersley, this methodology provides the researcher with rich qualitative data to interpret the underlying structures, ‘the meanings, functions, and consequences of human actions and institutional practices’ (1995:3).

Reflecting on the process, Van Maanen holds that ethnography is not a mere ‘pleasant, peaceful, and instructive form of travel writing’ but can at times become ‘something akin to an intense epistemological trial by fire’ (1995:2). In this research, ethnography was a trial by fire because it involved stepping in and out of the field and recontextualising the story for readers in a reliable manner, despite one’s inevitable subjectivity in the rendition of facts. To minimize the bias, I used a variety of methods and triangulated my findings. The ethnographic methods used were observations, textual analysis, interviews and a focus group session. In this paper, I focus on my findings from the textual analyses and interviews.

55

2.1 Data collection and analysis

Nine first year students volunteered to participate in the research and a few days later, handed me their first essays. I analysed the essays closely and requested for a brief interview to confirm my initial findings. The interviews were semi-structured and the questions pertained to students’ writings and their socio-academic experience in Mauritius and in Cape Town.

The texts and ‘talk around texts’ were analysed using Ivanič’s clover model of writer identity. This model is a useful heuristic tool to distinguish students’ multiple identities in writing. Clark and Ivanič (1997) describe writing as a lively interaction between participants’ ‘autobiographical self’, the ‘authorial self’ and the ‘discoursal self’ as shown in the diagram

The writer’s ‘autobiographical self’ is reflected in his/her use of personal history, regional, cultural, linguistic and academic background in the text. The ‘discoursal self’ is used here to designate elements in students’ writing which show use of specific conventions, past and present. The term ‘autobiographical self’ on the other hand, refers to elements in the writing that signal broader socio-cultural aspects of their identity. Finally, the ‘authorial self’ refers to his/her handling of content and style to display voice and credibility in the writing. I operationalised the concepts as follows:

(Clark & Ivanič, 1997:137)

56

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n

An exploration of students’ writer identities using the clover model can provide useful hints on their identities beyond the text. The findings were organized into individual case studies. According to Hammersley, case studies allow the researcher to construct a deep understanding of issues because the observed is also consulted and given agency in the research process (1992:196).

3. Case studies

This section presents the case studies of three Mauritian students, Sarah, Yash and Ali and explores their writer identities in and out of the academic texts produced at the university, locating possible disjunctions.

Sarah

In her first year as Health Science student at UCT, Sarah took a compulsory course ‘Becoming a Professional’ (BOP). Unlike other Health Science courses, this course was designed to foster:

The development of interpersonal skills, which include being non-judgmental, sensitive, ethical and respectful of human rights when working with colleagues, clients, patients and community members who may have different values and traditions… (Faculty of Health Sciences Handbook, 2009).

Autobiographical self: Sarah did her secondary schooling at one of the country’s ‘star’ schools. For her HSC/ A-Levels exams, she scored an A in all three science subjects, with a B in General Paper. She then sat for an entrance exam to secure admission into the faculty of Health Sciences at UCT. She topped in the exam and was granted admission to UCT in 2009.

Content Structure and StyleAutobiographical self Knowledge of topic, ori-

entation towards issues of interest, examples from life experiences.

Perceived fluency in English, intervening styles from other languages.

Discoursal self Facts versus personal views, referencing of sources, elabo-ration, attention to word count.

Introduction-body-conclu-sion, use of tables, diagrams and subheadings.

Authorial self Individual/critical thinking, taking responsibility over content.

Use of ‘I’, active versus passive voice, originality in structure, assertiveness in style.

57

At UCT, Sarah’s lack of familiarity with spoken English hindered her interaction with others and her participation in tutorials, for she could no longer code-switch to French or Creole.

At times I would have the word at the tip of the tongue, and would be tempted to say it in French. I became more sensitive to my friends’ tones, accents and their colloquial terms. I also decided to learn Xhosa by myself using books and CDs from the Medical School library.

Sarah’s decision to learn Xhosa could signal her need to be absorbed within the local community, to understand and be understood. In her essay, the ‘autobiographical self’ surfaced partly in the ‘empathetic dimension’ section and more saliently in the ‘reflective dimension’ section where she reflected on how she ought to behave as a health professional.

I should constantly reflect on my actions […] Questions like ‘why did I do that’ or […] ‘is what I am doing right or can it be improved’ should be asked during or after the time of action.

In terms of vocabulary, there were minor lapses arising due to Sarah’s French influence. For example, Sarah wrote ‘counting us their problems’, a direct translation from the French ‘nous content leurs problèmes’ instead of ‘sharing their problems’.

Discoursal self: Sarah’s choices of particular writing conventions indicated that she was still constructing a full-fledged discoursal self. In Sarah‘s first BOP essay entitled ‘Professionalism, Empathy, Reflection & Knowledge’, she had to discuss the importance of these values in her future role as a Health Professional. The task not only required knowledge but a metalanguage to engage in reflexive writing.

Back in secondary school, self-reflection was not encouraged because ‘facts mattered more than feelings’. Also due to lack of motivation and her teacher’s pessimistic attitude, Sarah’s attendance in General Paper classes was poor and she recalls writing only two essays at school in two years. In private tuition, on the other hand, the exam preparation was intensive.

In tuition, we would write two essays per week and three towards the exam period for practice sake. At times we would write essays on the spot in exam conditions.

The private tuition teacher shared his notes with students and rarely welcomed students’ views. The information load encouraged Sarah not to spend much time and effort on research prior to writing her General Paper essays. For her, it was ‘a luxury at the expense of my science subjects’.

58

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Sarah’s essay writing in tuitions was mainly motivated by marks. She displayed a preference for argumentative essays over narrative or descriptive ones because ‘I had more points (ideas) to give’. The equation was simple for Sarah: more ideas meant more marks. Her prior writing experience thus involved adapting a model supplied by the teacher and did not encourage self-reflection. While she was glad to have more freedom to explore her ideas at UCT, she realised that more freedom implied the need for more intensive research.

I had to put my understanding in my own words. Go over it several times, explore more.

Authorial self: Clark and Ivanič (1997) define ‘authorial self’ as ‘the writer’s sense of authority and authorial presence in the text’. Initially, Sarah lacked interest in the writing task.

Medicine is about understanding your body, it’s not about writing […]

However, the objectives of the writing task for the BOP course clashed with her motivation to study Medicine. Later realising the importance of communication in the profession, she assumed more agency in her writing. When broaching on the issue of ‘empathy’, she altered the subject’s gender to assert her authorial presence as a woman writer more strongly.

For Sarah, reflection was an individual experience, and was intricately linked to one’s actions and accountability for them, especially in the case of a health professional; hence the use of the pronoun ‘I’. Still Sarah used evidence from various sources to support her claims e.g. ‘as clearly pointed out by Hudson in Health24’. The use of ‘clearly’ hints that Sarah assigned more truth value to expert comments, than her own insights for which she used hedges such as ‘may’. The power of her ‘authorial’ voice varied depending on her confidence in her own views.

Thus, while Sarah’s ‘autobiographical self’ especially her linguistic background, reduced her participation in tutorials, it did not hinder her engagement with the writing task. In some cases, readers would notice a disjunction between Sarah’s ‘discoursal self’, arising from the rigid writing conventions she had been inducted into and the leeway she was now given to explore her ‘authorial self’.

Feedback on first essay: While the tutor’s comments matched some of the issues identified by the researcher during the textual analysis, the former did not consider the student’s background, motives and attitudes towards the writing task.

Content: Your essay shows that you understand the concepts of professionalism and the 3 dimensions of the IHP. There is good use of examples; however you could have integrated all 3 aspects of the IHP (integrated health professional) to show that they are interrelated.

59

Structure Introduction, Body, Conclusion: The essay [was] not divided by use of subheadings, these would have helped to make it easier to read.

Referencing In-text referencing, Reference list: Both forms of referencing are well done.

Overall comment: Your essay shows evidence of your own voice in some sections, you could have improved on it by integrating the 3 aspects of an IHP.

In her essay, Sarah scored 69%, a second division score. Her classmates’ marks are not available to draw comparisons and make quantitative deductions. However, the written feedback is more significant for our purposes for it sheds light on the essay’s actual shortcomings and Sarah’s possible writer identity struggles. The comments reveal that Sarah scored less well on the aspect of individual thinking, or lack of ‘authorial voice’ and the absence of subheadings, which relates directly to a lack of awareness of UCT’s writing conventions, rather than lack of content knowledge. To improve her grade in future, Sarah would need to revisit her prior ‘discoursal self’ which may have inhibited her ‘authorial’ voice and adopt the new writing conventions at UCT that would enable more space to display her own reasoning.

Yash

Yash was a first year Actuarial Science student. He wrote his first essay at UCT for a compulsory Economics course ECO 1010F. This course ‘focuses on demand and supply analysis consumer behaviour; production functions and production costs; market forms and selected applied economic topics’ (Commerce Faculty Handbook, 2009).

Autobiographical self: Yash did his schooling at a state secondary school in Mauritius. For his A-Levels, he opted for science subjects and scored a C both in General Paper and in subsidiary French while excelling in Mathematics and Physics. Yash’s transition into UCT was a smooth one since he had the support of his two elder sisters who preceded him in Cape Town and were in the same field.

Nevertheless, the English language initially hindered his communication with non-Mauritians.

I am conversant in Creole, Bhojpuri and French. Now you ask me to think in English, it’s a bit hard. And I do have trouble with the accents.

To cope, Yash became an avid reader of English magazines, especially SA Motors, a South African motoring magazine. Learning the ‘lingo’ through magazines was less daunting than actually conversing with other South African students; it was perhaps a face-saving strategy.

60

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n In his essay, Yash’s ‘autobiographical self’ rarely surfaced because of his desire to write objectively. A closer look did reveal the presence of some misplaced prepositions eg. ‘the variation of the price of oil’, and phrases that may undermine understanding eg. ‘the future becomes more promising on the basis of production’. On the whole, Yash’s ‘autobiographical self’ was understated throughout the essay.

Discoursal self: For a former science student, Actuarial Science could have constituted a major challenge. However, Yash used his prior life experience to his advantage. In Nomdo’s terms, he had made apt use of his ‘collateral capital’ (2006:180).

When helping out my parents in their businesses, I developed some accounting skills and learnt how prices were regulated. I tried to apply that knowledge in my new courses.

In terms of essay writing back in school, Yash would always begin his essays by ‘setting the scene’. He wrote the essays for the sake of meeting teacher’s requirements and scored satisfactory marks. Gradually, essay writing became a ritual, ‘there was a set pattern in place’ and presumably less and less of reflection.

In his first essay at UCT, Yash was required to ‘explain why oil prices increased so suddenly during the 1970s and so gradually in the 2000s’ using ‘appropriate supply demand diagrams in your explanation’ and additionally covering ‘the long-term responses to high oil prices and the role of OPEC and Saudi Arabia in setting the oil price’.

He began by browsing through ‘well-established internet sites’ such as the economist.com and fin24.com to compile the relevant background information. He then drafted the essay and consulted with his eldest sister for feedback. She explained that ‘this is a data sheet. Lecturers already have the scenario. I don’t need to explain’. Following this advice, Yash skimmed through the data and classified them into ‘basic’, ‘important’, ‘very important’ and ‘to be considered if space permits’. The ideas were ordered in terms of priority rather than cohesion to the other parts. Two main obstacles at that stage were the word count which prevented him from elaborating on his ideas and referencing which he found ‘new and confusing’. In the essay, he swapped the in-text references with the bibliography. He provided detailed references in the text and a mere list of websites in his bibliography.

Authorial self: During the interview, Yash elaborated on his essay and reiterated,

There’s no need to reorder the ideas, they are looking for the facts on their checklist. Order does not matter.

This suggested that he was eschewing his authority as a writer and allowing conventions to structure his work, and the facts to speak for themselves.

61

Yash never articulated his essay plan in written form. He started typing straight away with a specific plan etched in his mind. Phrases such as ‘tossing the coin’ were borrowed directly from his readings. These served an aesthetic purpose and were not referenced because according to him, ‘I’m not borrowing any new idea’. It would appear that as Yash effaced himself in his writing, he also began investing more credibility in external sources, like Sarah, allowing them a voice in his essay. Ironically, the more phrases he borrowed, the more writer space and authority he lent to the sources and the less agency he asserted for himself.

Eventually, Yash’s essay lacked his initial flair of ‘setting the scene’. The essay structure was linear and had four main headings, namely: ‘introduction’, ‘what happened in 1973 and what were the outcomes’, ‘what happened in 2007-2008 and what were the outcomes’ and ‘conclusion’. The headings in the body of his essay resembled detailed questions to compensate for the essay’s lack of structure. Each paragraph was packed with facts in sequential order, and elaboration or illustrations appeared mostly in the form of graphs, signaling a lack of coherent argumentation.

In 1972, the price of crude oil was about $3.00 per barrel and by the end of 1974 the price of oil had quadrupled to over $12.00. The year 1973 marks one of the most important turning points in the history of the twentieth century….

Yash wrote in his own words but the style lacked individual thinking and readers might feel they were reading excerpts from the Financial Times rather than an academic essay. There was also a long, complicated formula that was left largely unexplained, though the source was referenced.

ε – |∆ln Q| – ln 90.5 –ln 85.5 – 0.06 ∆ln P ln 142 – ln 55

Yash stated, ‘I didn’t elaborate on it, but I understand it’. He assumed that lecturers would know the formula and that this technical knowledge would boost the essay’s appeal. Still, he did not compare the oil crisis or 1973 with that of 2007-2008 but presented the two in separate blocks. The question did require students to compare the two crises by using the terms ‘so gradually’ and ‘so suddenly’, but it was not explicitly stated. Also, the question’s requirements were so lengthy that one could lose sight of the comparative component. In fact, Yash’s essay title illustrates that he had missed this point, ‘the oil price shocks of 1970’s and 2007/2008’ as though the two crises could be simply juxtaposed.

While the conclusion allowed for personal opinion, Yash could not do full justice to it. He explained in the interview:

The recommended readings had only been updated until 2008. How could I comment on the oil situation in 2009? The investment banking crash[…] The lecturer may think, who am I to make such claims?

62

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n His hesitation to make additional points throughout the essay stemmed from his fear of losing marks by using ideas that did not emanate from the teacher. A similar attitude prevailed back in school, where students seldom gave their opinion for fear of being penalized by the teacher or being jeered by their peers for being too ‘pompous’. Commenting on academic writing, Yash stated,

It’s like in Maths, without poetry. I don’t need to give my opinion because I am narrating events that have already occurred, not making up anything new.

He compared his assignment to Maths, because he believed he only had to refer to historical facts that were unquestionable. It would seem that for Yash, history was an uncontested terrain of previously proved facts and this attitude greatly influenced his deference to the facts and his detached writing style.

During the interview however, his explanations of the oil crisis were more engaging. For instance, he explained the Arab War by making allusion to conflicts arising in ‘Voisin Voisine’. It would appear therefore that the assumed strictures of academic writing were stifling Yash’s creative ‘authorial’ voice, or perhaps he allowed them to negate his critical thinking agency to simplify the writing process altogether. On the whole, it was evident that Yash had to negotiate between his evolving ‘discoursal self’ and his ‘authorial self’ in writing.

Feedback on first essay: Yash obtained 62.5% in his essay. He reported that his essay was marked and returned to him without any comment from the tutor. In that case, the faculty’s expectations remained a ‘mystery’ (Lillis, 2001).

Ali

Ali was a first year Engineering student majoring in Construction Studies and Quantity Surveying. His first essay at UCT was for the Evidence Based Management (EBM) course. This course focuses on:

The development of critical reasoning skills, including the ability to analyse and construct logical arguments, to research problems, to articulate competing viewpoints and to form independent judgments about contentious issues of policy and practice (EBE Faculty handbook, 2009).

Autobiographical self: Ali did his first five years of a State Secondary School before moving to a confessional school for his final two years. He scored a B General Paper in his A-levels. Ali’s transition into UCT was challenging for various reasons. He had opted for entirely new subjects, he had to converse in English and adapt to a totally new and more interactive classroom environment.

63

To cope with academic work, I try to read my textbook every week, prepare my own notes progressively and practise questions… To become more fluent in English, well… in the first few days, I would speak to my local guardians frequently. I also befriended non-Mauritians at UCT, especially those from Durban. I find their accent easier to grasp.

In his essay, Ali’s ‘autobiographical self’ was stifled, though ironically the essay required students to write about their experience of the Outcomes-Based Education (OBE) system and discuss whether it was an appropriate model for South Africa. This is because Ali, as a Mauritian student had had no experience of the OBE system. The only time he validated his ‘autobiographical self’ was when he wrote: ‘Personally, I have had no experience of an OBE system since I went through the Mauritian education system’. Rather than an assertion of self, this was an assertion of what he was not. It not only signaled difference but in this case, also a deficit, which proved to be detrimental to his writer identity and to some degree, to his performance in the essay.

Discoursal self: In secondary school, Ali’s General Paper class was spent in idleness and he hardly wrote any essay in two years for the teacher was apparently more engrossed in discussions about national politics rather than the ‘prescribed’ GP essay topics. Therefore, Ali depended heavily on private tuition where two essays were written weekly. The tuition teacher did his own research and provided most of the input himself. Ali enjoyed the comfort of being spoon fed at that time and recalls that it was the norm. There were only two ‘rebellious’ students in class.

They had the guts to challenge, rather to spice up the class by questioning the teacher.

To this day, Ali sees himself more as a listener rather than a conversationalist in class. One wonders whether these conditions enabled Ali to develop the critical thinking skills.

Ali’s first essay for the ‘Evidence Based Management’ course required him to share his experience of the OBE system about which he was totally ignorant.

I spoke to the tutor about this and he said I could mention that I was not familiar with the OBE system.

The other part of the essay was more manageable since he had to evaluate the system in the South African context. Yet Ali was initially reluctant to engage in the essay. He admitted that ‘the course did help one write reports’ but that was not customized specifically to the needs of Quantity Surveying students. Contrary to his GP class, guidelines in tutorials focused more on submission rules than content. A lack of familiarity with the actual rules made him exceedingly cautious around his interaction with classmates.

I did interact with other Mauritian peers in class. But just in general. Not about the assignment, because […] we have to be careful about plagiarism.

64

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Authorial self: In response to the first component of the question, Ali followed his tutor’s advice and stated that:

I have had no experience of an OBE system since I went through the Mauritian education system.

He did not elaborate on the issue, while he could have actually compared the two countries’ education systems and written about his own experience.

In response to the second component, his first paragraph began with ‘What is OBE though?’ This question mirrored his own conceptual journey through the writing task, requiring him to find out for himself first what OBE really meant. The OBE issue was mostly addressed globally through statements such as ‘those who implement it’ with the assumption that the OBE measures taken in other countries would prove as useful in the South African context. Each time he embarked on the issue of OBE in South Africa, he quickly digressed to generalizations. This was signaled by the use of words such as ‘many’, ‘either’, ‘or’ which were anything but specific.

The introduction of the OBE system in South Africa did not come without problems though. Among the shortcomings put forward by OBE opponents are the proposed outcomes. Many believe that the standards set are either too undemanding or too high or simply incorrectly conjured up. (Wikipedia, 12/03/09)

On the whole, Ali was a proficient writer with a good grasp on language and structure. The second component of his essay was neatly divided in the pros and cons of the OBE system, with well-integrated references and an evaluative component of the pros and cons in the conclusion. However, his authorial presence was less felt since he could not establish the link between his readings on OBE’s status in different parts of the world and their implications in South Africa. In all fairness, part of the writing challenge did stem from a lack of background knowledge about the essay topic. However, the fact that Ali was successful in researching some aspects for the essay, would hint that the lack of knowledge was not the only issue here. The difficulty possibly pertained to a lack of ease in appropriating general research findings about the OBE and contextualizing them in the South African context. From the interview, it also appeared that there were misconceptions around the assertion of an authorial voice in academic essays. It was assumed that such ventures might be equated to ‘bias’. This might be another reason for resistance to critical engagement in the EBM essay.

In view of the above, readers would note that there was a tension between Ali’s ‘discoursal self’ and his ‘authorial self’ and an anxiety not only to follow the rules but also to avoid breaking them at all costs, which made him excessively cautious to the detriment of his writing agency.

65

On the other hand, given the nature of the topic and Ali’s lack of familiarity with the OBE system, he could not write from experience or convey his ideas with confidence. Hence there was also a clash between his ‘autobiographical self’ and his ‘authorial self’.

Feedback on first essay

Thesis of the paper is unclear or absent

/ The thesis statement is clearly stated

Does not answer the essay question

/ Answers the question

Does not define/understand key terms

/ Defines/understands key terms

No critical understanding of literature

/ Critical understanding of litera-ture

Not a clear and cogent argument / Clear and cogent argument

Does not deal with possible objections

/ Objections raised and adequately met

Essay rambles or lacks structure / Essay is structured logically

Many grammatical and spelling errors

/ Few/no errors

Essay contains excessive quoting / Excessive quoting is avoided

Referencing is not acceptable / Referencing acceptable

Ali scored 58% on his essay. The tutor’s main concern was the lack of detail and engagement in the essay.

This is a very good introduction to the concept of OBE but you have not provided much of an argument to show why/how it might work in SA, basically this was too theoretical & lacking in detail. You needed to consider some of the practical issues with implementing OBE here.

Hence, Ali was penalized less on content knowledge, since the tutor conceded that he had no experience of OBE, and was penalized more because his prior writing conventions restricted his critical thinking.

66

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n 4. Findings: Different essays, similar student narratives

To use Lillis’s (2008) words, the essays were ‘indexical’ of students’ multiple and transitional socio-academic identities at UCT. The forms of writer identities enacted in the text might not directly map onto to students’ actual identities, but provided cues about who the students were as individuals, social beings, students and writers.

Still, it appears that due to the students’ former conditioning and dispositions, they had differential access to their new academic space, and that some aspects of the writer identity were promoted at the expense of others. Their writing here became ‘indexical’ of possible moments of contestation between forms of writer identity in the text, as well as those transcending the text. In this paper, while the essays from three different faculties were analysed, they had a similar story to share about their writers.

In terms of their ‘autobiographical’ selves, Sarah, Yash and Ali struggled with conversational English and resorted to interaction with South Africans and reading of magazines to improve their fluency. Also, coincidentally, all three participants had a science background. This not only signified that they had less writing practice than other secondary school students from the Arts or Commerce stream, but could also potentially explain, given more evidence and research, reasons behind their disinterest in the writing tasks.

Participants’ emerging ‘discoursal self’ at UCT was shaped primarily by their prior writing experience and to some extent by tips from seniors. While tutors’ feedback could assist students during the development of their ‘discoursal self’, it would first require an ‘orientation’ or response to the text that took into account students’ previous ‘discoursal’ selves (Lillis, 2008). This may not always be feasible given the highly heterogeneous nature of the tutorial groups.

As far as the ‘authorial self’ was concerned, the writing task appeared to promote critical engagement, however students’ prior school experience and their apprehensions around ‘bias’ and ‘irrelevance’ stifled their writing agency. Even Sarah, who used her own examples in the essay, appeared to value external sources more than her own voice.

On the whole, if the participants had not scored high marks in their essays, it was primarily because of conflicts between their ‘discoursal’ and ‘authorial’ selves in their first essays at UCT. A case study of other Mauritian students, not presented in this paper, demonstrated similar trends. In the case of Ali, the challenge was compounded by the perceived irrelevance of the essay question, which could be attributed to his ‘autobiographical self’.

67

5. Implications for secondary schools in Mauritius

One would assume that the Mauritian secondary schools’ implemented curriculum, influenced by the Cambridge International Examinations (CIE), would adequately prepare Mauritian students for University studies. The CIE General Paper syllabus for instance proposes to:

• Promote the skills of rational thought, persuasion, analysis, interpretation and evaluation;• Encourage candidates to explore and appraise social, cultural, economic, philosophical, • scientific and technological issues;• Promote maturity of thought and clarity of expression;• Promote understanding and appreciation of individual, societal and cultural diversity;• Encourage independent, critical, reading (CIE General Paper syllabus, 2007).

However, there seems to be a significant gap between the syllabus objectives and the classroom practices. The excessive spoon feeding characterising Mauritian secondary schools is far from conducive to ‘maturity of thought’, ‘persuasion’, ‘independent, critical reading’. As previously mentioned in the 2007 CIE report:

It was sometimes concerning to find such uniformity across particular Centres and suggested that candidates were relying completely on ‘learning’ material from issued templates to offload in the examination. (ibid).

This illustrates the high incidence of spoon feeding in secondary schools and private tuition. The report stated furthermore that even the best students relied on ‘prepared’ material though without necessarily ‘rehashing’ in a rational manner.

It is thus not surprising that high performing students failed to engage in the kind of ‘individual thinking’ required by UCT, where their prior reliance on ‘prepared’ material could even count as plagiarism. This partly explains why participants who succeeded with flying colours in their A-Levels, were suddenly reaping average marks, for reasons other than flawed content knowledge.

The issue is not an isolated one, but may affect most Mauritian students enrolling for tertiary studies. This would account to an annual figure of about twenty-six thousand Mauritian students, out of which approximately five thousand study overseas (TEC Report, 2004).

It is clear that secondary school teachers as well as tuition teachers must pay due attention to the letter and spirit of the CIE syllabus and avoid easy shortcuts like spoon feeding, which could contribute

68

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n to failure at tertiary level and jeopardize the students’ future. An effective implementation of the curriculum would require among other things adequate teacher training and strong school management. Also, school activities should be geared towards the development of life skills and ownership of learning so that students may cope with broader socio-academic adaptation issues at university. These could be integrated within the curriculum or be framed within a short programme for university preparedness after students’ A-Level exams.

6. Conclusion

To conclude, this paper demonstrates through an analysis of first year Mauritian students’ writing at the University of Cape Town, their deep-seated challenges in reconciling their prior and current writer identities. By extension, it also suggests broader social issues they may be facing during their first year, which I refer to as the transit year.

To assist Mauritian students in successfully managing their first year at university, it is crucial that secondary schools question their approaches to teaching writing, address the university preparedness issue and look beyond curriculum content. From the different narratives, it becomes clear that universities can be ruthless arenas for ‘the survival of the fittest’. Hence, schools now need to strive towards a holistic development of the individual both academically and socially by encouraging the assertion of self through writing and otherwise, critical thinking, openness to new experiences and social responsiveness so that students may be better prepared for the trials and opportunities awaiting them.

69

Bibliography:

Clark, R. and Ivanič, R., 1997, The politics of writing, London, Routledge.

Hammersely, M.,1995, Ethnography: Principles in Practice, London, Routledge.

Hammersley, M., 1992, What’s wrong with Ethnography? Methodological Explorations, London, Routledge.

Hunma, A., 2009. Identity and coping strategies in academic writing: A study of first year Mauritian students at a South African University, Masters Thesis, University of Cape Town.

Lillis, T.: 2001, Student Writing: Access, Regulation, Desire, London & New York, Routledge.

Nomdo, G.: 2006, 'Identity, power and discourse: The socio-political self-representations of successful ‘black’ students' in Thesen, L. and van Pletzen, E. (eds). Academic Literacy and the Languages of Change, London, Continuum.

Van Maanen, J.: 1995, 'An end to innocence. The ethnography of ethnography' in Van Maanen, J. (ed) Representation in Ethnography, London, Sage.

Online electronic resources:

‘Engineering and Built-in Environment Handbook 2009’. Available online: http://www.uct.ac.za/downloads/uct.ac.za/apply/handbooks/fac_ebe_2009.pdf. Accessed on 12 April 2009.

‘Health Science Faculty Handbook 2009’. Available online: http://www.uct.ac.za/downloads/uct.ac.za/apply/handbooks/fac_health_09.pdf. Accessed on 12 April 2009.

‘CIE General Paper syllabus’. Available online: http://www.gov.mu/portal/sites/mesweb/CIE%20Sullabus%20and%20support%20for%20Cen%20(E)/pdf/8009_w07_er.pdf. Accessed on 25 May 2009.

‘CIE Report 2007’. Available online: http://www.gov.mu/portal/sites/mesweb/CIE%20Sullabus%20and%20support%20for%20Cen%20(E)/pdf/8009_w07_er.pdf. (Also visit http://www.cie.org.uk/docs) Accessed on 23 May 2009.

‘Ministry of Education, Government of Mauritius’. Available online: http://www.gov.mu/portal/site/education. Accessed on 21 June 2009.

‘TEC Report 2004’. Available online: http://tec.intnet.mu/tertiary%20education%20system.htm. Accessed on 4 July 2009.

'UCT - policy on internationalization'. Available online: www.uct.ac.za/downloads/uct.ac.za/about/iapo/internat_pol.doc. Accessed on 3 March 2009.

70

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Student feedback - a critical component in building an effective quality assurance system in higher education: The evolution of needs.

Chenicheri Sid Nairaa and Patricie Mertovabb

aCentre for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.

bDepartment of Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Abstract

Fundamental to any quality model implemented in higher education is the recognition and acceptance of the importance of collecting feedback from students about their study experiences. Supporting this acceptance is a significant body of research which shows a strong correlation between classroom environments, student learning and satisfaction.

This paper describes how Monash University, a large Australian internationalised, multi-campus, research-intensive institution that is home to about 56,000 students from over 100 countries has developed a systematic approach to collecting student feedback and how such information provides an in-road to address barriers to learning.

Keywords:

Student feedback, higher education, quality assurance system, student experience, improvement, Australia.

71

Introduction

In the past, tertiary institutions did not take serious account of student views on teaching and learning. However, in the last decade or so, with significant changes in the student population (a more diverse range of students, including mature-age students), a large intake of international students and also a general massification of Australian higher education, students have become one of the most important stakeholders in higher education. The student cohorts are more diversified than was the case in the past. They now display more varied levels of academic, cultural and linguistic preparation for tertiary study. As a consequence, they also exhibit a more diverse range of expectations and needs. Despite a realisation of the changing student needs and expectations, universities in general have been slow to recognize the role of student views in monitoring and changing the learning and teaching environments (OECD, 1998; Meek, 2000; Fiocco, 2005).

Research over the past decade has recognised that student perceptions are important parameters of the social and psychological aspects of the learning environments (Fraser, 1998; Ramsden, 2005). Research studies have consistently confirmed a strong correlation between learning and teaching environments and levels of satisfaction (Fraser, 1998; Nair and Fisher, 2001). Recently, many providers in the higher education sector have realised the need to re-evaluate their approaches to provision by placing a greater emphasis on meeting the expectations and needs of their stakeholders, including their students (Cheng and Tam, 1997; Griffin et al, 2003).

Lee et al (2000) highlighted that the determinants of student satisfaction are not only multi-factorial, but that they vary between students, institutions, and over time. However, there is a rich body of literature that provides insights into the characteristics of productive and satisfactory pedagogical environments. These range from intellectual challenge to understanding teaching as a process of enabling learners (Ramsden, 2005; Walberg, 1984). Thus, knowing the current levels of student satisfaction is critical for good university management. Dissatisfied students can have powerful effects on reputations, income streams and the realisation of the missions of tertiary institutions (Nair and Pawley 2006; Mavondo et al 2000).

Although there is a large body of research concerning the effectiveness of student evaluations, some still question its validity. One common criticism is that students lack the wisdom and experience to evaluate the effectiveness of their course or teacher performance (Bonetti, 1994; Marsh and Dunkin, 1997; Nasser and Fresko, 2006). However, other research shows a high correlation between course-end ratings and ratings by peers, administrators and alumni (Marsh and Dunkin 1997). Research by Marsh and Dunkin (1997), and Marsh and Roche (1993) has shown that feedback from student evaluations can lead to improved effectiveness of teaching. Therefore, a critical role has recently been ascribed to student evaluations (or, as they are commonly referred to, student feedback) by tertiary institutions. Bennett, Nair and Wayland (2006) identified a number of purposes for student feedback; these included:

72

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n (a) diagnostic feedback to faculties about their teaching that will aid in the development and improvement of teaching;(b) research data to underpin further design and improvements to units, courses, curriculum and teaching;(c) a measure of teaching effectiveness that may be used in administrative decision making; for instance, in performance management and development appraisals;(d) useful information to current and potential students in the selection of units and courses; and(e) a measure for judging quality of units and courses increasingly becoming linked to funding.

The first two purposes have been universally recognised as the basis for many evaluations, not only student evaluations. The latter three are relatively new to many universities, especially in the Australian context (Fraser, 1998; Nair and Fisher, 2001; Nair et al, 2006).

Background

Monash University is one of the Group of Eight (Go8) leading Australian universities. It is a large, research-intensive and highly internationalised institution that is home to more than 56,000 students from over 100 countries. Monash University started as an exclusively Australian institution, however, over time it has evolved into an international institution. Monash University is a diverse institution, operating across six Australian and two overseas campuses (in Malaysia and South Africa). It also offers a number of courses in partnerships set up in other countries, such as, Singapore, Hong Kong and Indonesia. Programmes offered in offshore locations are not only subject to regulations and the quality assurance processes within the Australian higher education context, but they are also subject to regulations in place in the overseas locations.

In that respect, Monash University realises the need and usefulness of evaluation measures related to the quality of the units, courses, and student experience in general. These are, for instance, highlighted in the University’s strategic document Monash Directions 2025 which reflects the values, aspirations and strategic mission of the organisation until 2025 (Monash University, 2004; Monash University, 2005). The need for determining and evaluating student experience in their study and the expectations of other stakeholders involved with Monash University was also acknowledged by establishing the Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ), the central quality unit, in September 2000.

73

Quality at Monash University

The concept of quality at Monash University is primarily defined in terms of a “fitness for purpose” approach. The planning and review cycle at Monash University consists of four elements: Plan, Act, Evaluate, and Improve. Figure 1 below outlines the notion of the quality cycle.

Plan: denotes formal planning at all levels, including the university-level, faculty and divisional planning, school, departmental or unit planning, course or work team planning. At the individual level it reflects the planning that people do either by project, or over time, including yearly or daily planning.

Act: includes all the intentional activities that are undertaken to meet objectives, implement plans and produce outcomes.

Evaluate: includes two major aspects – monitoring and review. Monitoring is a short- and medium-term activity mainly for developmental or formative purposes. It may use formal or informal methods and can make use of existing data, or generate new data. Action and monitoring usually develop together, informing each other. Review is a longer-term and more formal process that has both formative and summative purposes.

Improve: identifies the process by which the results of evaluation (both monitoring and review) are fed back into the system in order to generate improvement. Often this causes modification to an existing plan or development of a new plan, and then the cycle commences once again.

(Monash University, 2000)

Plan

Improve Act

Evaluate(Monitor & Review)

Figure 1: Monash University Quality Cycle

74

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Approach to Collecting Student Feedback

While statements about aspiring for “excellence in education” can be found in all universities’ mission statements, the contention is that the major impetus for the increased use of feedback mechanisms, such as surveys, has primarily been driven by funding and quality assurance imperatives (e.g. Monash University, 2005; 2004). This trend towards compliance and accountability was spearheaded by the establishment of the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) in 2001 and the introduction of the competitive Learning Teaching Performance Fund (LTPF) in 2006. A greater reliance on discerning international and domestic full-fee paying students also significantly contributed to the need for universities to demonstrate the quality of programmes on offer. In particular, the need for organizations to answer to a range of stakeholders, such as customers (students), clients (employers/sponsors), shareholders (tax payers), governments and other funding agencies, requires universities to demonstrate and report on their performance against stakeholder expectations and targets.

The quality assurance and enhancement function at Monash University is fulfilled by the Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ). The Centre has a wide ranging mission to lead and support quality assurance and improvement across the University. To achieve this broad mission, a need has arisen to gather data to inform and initiate change in the teaching and learning environments within the University. This led to the initiation of the conduct of student and later staff and also employer evaluations at Monash University.

The Beginnings

At the time of CHEQ’s establishment in 2000, only two types of core evaluations were operational at Monash University: teacher evaluation (provided centrally), and a range of unit evaluations (conducted in individual faculties). The primary aim of the evaluation area – to provide a range of evaluation services for corporate, academic, research and support service areas – was insufficient at the time of CHEQ’s inception.

The Change

There were many reasons why, with time, Monash University embarked on a more systematic approach to collecting student feedback. The two main drivers that brought about the change were:

75

(a) the realization that quality quickly became a part of the higher education sector in Australia (Griffin et al, 2003). This factor played an integral role in increasing the number of surveys carried out at Monash University. The University also recognised the importance of student evaluations, which was supported by the research literature showing the correlation between student satisfaction measures, student learning outcomes and the tracking of improvements (Marsh, 1987; Marsh and Dunkin, 1997); and

(b) the need for institutional measures of academic activity as identified in Still Learning: the Report of Our Self Review, a self-evaluation document prepared by Monash University in 2002 (Monash University, 2002).

These drivers led to the expansion of the evaluation services at Monash University over the last eight years from a “boutique” process to eleven core University-wide systematic evaluative instruments (in academic and support service areas), as well as the handling of three national surveys (Graduate Destination Survey (GDS), Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) and the Postgraduate Research Experience Questionnaire (PREQ)).

Tables 1 and 2 below provide an overview of the core institutional and national surveys that are conducted by Monash University for quality and improvement purposes.

Table 1: International Surveys at Monash University

Instrument What is it? Who initiates it? Who ‘does’ it?

Monash Questionnaire Series on Teaching (MonQuest)

Eleven different questionnaires. Each questionnaire is focused on a different type of teaching and is designed to enable student feedback to be obtained on specific aspects of an individual's teaching. Conducted by teachers on a voluntary basis.

The lecturer or tutor initiates the ordering of a monQueST evaluation.

A survey is requested by completing an online order form.

Students enrolled in the class of the requesting staff member.

Unit (Subject)Evaluation

Evaluation of units (subjects0 to obtain student views on unit quality. Consists of 8 quantitative and 2 qualitative University-wide items, with an additional 10 Faculty-specific items.

Initiated by the faculty in collaboration with CHEQ.

Students enrolled in the unit.

Postgraduate Research Supervision Survey (PRSS)

A survey designed to meausure the quality of postgraduate research supervision and departmental support for students.

Initiated by the Monash Research Graduate School.

(MRGS), in collaboration with CHEQ.

Students enrolled in postgraduate by research course (PhD and Research Masters).

76

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n

Table 2: National Surveys at Monash University

Instrument What is it? Who initiates it? Who ‘does’ it?

Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ)

National survey (required by Australian government) collecting recently graduated (undergraduate and postgraduate coursework) student attitudes towards their course and the skills they acquired.

Graduate Careers Council of Australia (GCCA) in collaboration with CHEQ for the University.

All graduated coursework students in a year.

Postgraduate Research Experience Questionnaire (PREQ)

National survey (required by Australian government) of students graduated with postgraduate research qualifications seeking information on student attitudes towards their courses and the skills acquired.

Graduate Careers Council of Australia (GCCA) in collaboration with CHEQ for the University.

All graduated research students in a year.

Graduate Destination Survey (GDS)

National survey (required by Australian government) of all recent university graduates obtaining feedback on their employment status, type of work performed, further study undertaken.

Graduate Careers Council of Australia (GCCA) in collaboration with CHEQ for the University.

All graduated undergraduate and postgraduate students.

Learning and Growth Survey(L & G)

This survey seeks opinions on the opportunities for the learning and growth of staff within departments and divisions of the University. Provides evidence for the learning and growth quadrant of a Balanced Scorecard and for departmental/divisional review.

Initiated by the Division/Department.

Staff in Departments/ Divisions.

Employer Survey

A survey to obtain employer feedback on the extent to which Monash graduates demonstrate desired attributes.

Initiated by the Quality Development Committee.

Employers of recent Monash graduates.

Heads of School/Department Survey

The survey provides staff perception of the performance of the Head of School/Department.

Initiated by Head of School/Department.

By all staff within the School/Department.

Monash Experience Questionnaire (MEQ)

This survey is designed to assess the overall student experience at Monash University.

Initiated by the Vice-Chancellor's Group (Quality)

Students currently enrolled in Monash programmes.

Monash Support Experience Questionnaire (MSEQ)

This survey asesses the overall student experience with administration and support services at Monash University.

Initiated by the Vice-Chancellor's Group (Quality)

Students currently enrolled in Monash programmes.

Monash Residential Survey (MRS)

A survey designed to provide feedback on residents' satisfaction and importance ratings for residential services.

Monash Residential services.

Students staying at Clayton campus residences.

77

Re-engineering Technology to Meet Demand

With a substantial increase in the number of evaluations, and to facilitate the opportunity for all students to be involved in the evaluation process, CHEQ introduced a new University-wide Survey Management System (SMS) in 2005. This change not only allowed the administration of both traditional paper-based and online surveys on all domestic and overseas campuses, but also enabled a greater access to valuable global data housed in a central location. This allowed more detailed analyses, informing the University community about what may be improved in the services it offers its “customers” – the students.

Other Initiatives

Other initiatives which were set up during the period of change are summarised below:

Evaluation Standard

In order to ensure the quality of questionnaires and surveys, a process was developed where only those questionnaires and surveys designed in consultation and with the endorsement of the central quality unit, CHEQ, were analyzed and reported (CHEQ, 2008a). This ensured that all aspects of questionnaire development were considered and all safeguards were in place, prior to the administration of a survey. The benefit in introducing such a measure was to ensure that surveys and questionnaires administered at the university-level were credible and valid.

Fee for Service

CHEQ has introduced a fee for services for surveys that were not budgeted. This area has shown an increase since it was implemented in late 2003, with the average number of surveys/questionnaires in this category rising to over 40 in 2007. The increase in fee-for- service surveys has arisen primarily as a consequence of the information provided in the core Monash University evaluation surveys.

A Further Change – Equity and Diversity

The new evaluation process ensures that every student enrolled at the University has the opportunity to provide their feedback. In the initial phase of the process, visually impaired students (who informed Monash University about their condition) were given assistance to complete unit evaluation

78

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n questionnaires. They were given the option of completing the survey over the telephone, and, in some cases, they were provided with customised surveys built so as to utilize screen readers. In 2006, this issue was initially resolved for the unit evaluation process, and, at present, this applies to all other institutional surveys hosted by the Monash University SMS system, thus providing the same accessibility to a diverse student population. Initial feedback from other Australian universities suggested that Monash University was in the forefront of inclusive practices in evaluations.

Breadth of Impact

Internal

Some of the key changes that have been noted since the implementation of the new evaluation system and processes include the following:

a) Every student enrolled in a unit at Monash University is now given the opportunity to provide annual feedback on the quality of the unit. For example, in 2007, over 8,500 units were evaluated in comparison to less than 700 units typically being evaluated each year under the previous policy.

b) All aspects of student feedback on learning and teaching environment are being collected.

c) There is a wide range of reports on different evaluations available on the CHEQ website. For instance, on unit evaluations, there are more than 45 reports available (at campus, faculty, department and university levels). These reports are used by faculties to identify improvement priorities and good practice. This data is provided to committees throughout Monash University with responsibility for monitoring comparability of academic standards. Since student satisfaction measures are correlated with student learning outcomes (Marsh, 1987; Marsh and Dunkin, 1997), the University now has a robust mechanism for directly improving and monitoring further improvement of learning and teaching in the institution.

d) An important component of the quality cycle concerning student learning is the opportunity for students who have participated in the survey/s to view the results and improvements that have been made as a consequence of their input. Monash University students are now notified by email as soon as evaluation reports are published online. As a consequence, students are now informed of the actions being taken as a result of their evaluation.

79

An example of this is in the unit evaluation process. Units that are evaluated now have not only the feedback displayed on the internet, but changes as a result of student feedback are also communicated back to students in their classroom and documented in the unit outline. This demonstrates that the University takes seriously the educational experience it provides and allows students to see that the feedback they provide is considered and acted on. The knowledge that faculties utilise student evaluation data in their improvement efforts has resulted in students’ gaining confidence in the evaluation process. This was indicated by an increase of survey response rates among students. Response rates for unit evaluations have increased from over 30% in 2005 to nearly 45% in 2007. This is consistent with research findings concerning the issue (Leckey and Neill, 2001).

External

Externally, the increasing sophistication of evaluations undertaken by Monash University has been recognised on a number of occasions. Firstly, an external review of the Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ), undertaken in 2003, highlighted a dramatic change in the landscape of evaluations carried out in the University:

“The dramatic expansion of the university’s quality tracking and improvement processes, from a focus on the use of teaching evaluations when the Centre was first constituted to the currently extensive suite of instruments and their associated administration, processing, analysis and reporting strategies [is noticeable].”

(Monash University, 2004)

Secondly, the breadth of the impact of the evaluation process established by the CHEQ was also recently acknowledged by the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) audit of Monash University:

“AUQA commends Monash University for the systematic implementation of its considerable suite of evaluation instruments, which are supported by the Centre for Higher Education Quality’s training activities, and administered and reported systematically…

AUQA commends Monash University for its rigorous evaluations of student satisfaction with the study experience, through the Monash Experience Questionnaire and unit evaluations, that have contributed to the improvement of satisfaction with the experience.”

(Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA), 2006)

80

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Discussion

A key element of any quality assurance process is evaluation and improvement. Historically, many organizations have collected feedback but frequently did not act upon the findings, suggesting to the customer that their views were not critical (Leckey and Neill, 2001). Change does not mean digesting data without action. This is best summarized in a paper presented by the Graduate Careers Council of Australia (GCCA) as follows:

“It is a myth that all you have to do is to send back the result of a survey to those concerned and action, improvement and innovation will automatically occur. Such an assumption ignores all the research on motivation and change management in universities.”

(Graduate Careers Council of Australia (GCCA), 1999)

Monash University, like many other universities, have approached evaluations seriously. This is exemplified in the quality process the institution has developed, embedding a well-defined evaluation process and tools within the parameters. The tools themselves are regarded as valid and robust within the Monash community, and are used by the institution in their internal and external performance indicators. Moreover, overall, there is a general recognition within the academic community of the richness of the information provided by student experience evaluation.

The AUQA (2006) audit further reinforced the significance of the broadening of the range of student evaluations at Monash University and increasing student participation in evaluations. These aspects were highlighted by AUQA as an effective tool of improving the quality of teaching and learning and other aspects of student experience at Monash University.

Even though there is recognition, nationally and generally within the University, of the importance of student feedback, there are also some who question the validity of such feedback. One common criticism is that students lack the wisdom and experience to evaluate the effectiveness of their course or teacher. However, research shows a high correlation between course-end ratings and ratings by peers, administrators and alumni (d’Apollonia and Abrami, 1997; Marsh and Dunkin, 1997). Further, there is evidence supporting the argument that student feedback can lead to improved teaching effectiveness (Marsh, 2001; Marsh and Dunkin, 1997). The claim that student evaluations are just popularity contests has been shown not to be valid, similarly to the assertion that to gain good evaluations, teachers should simply make the course easy (Centra, 2003; Dee, 2004; Feldman, 1997).

81

In short, when the total volume of research undertaken in the area over the last 40 years or so is considered, especially the meta-analyses of this research, there is strong evidence that student evaluations provide a valid and reliable assessment of teaching effectiveness which in turn is correlated with learning outcomes.

Considering the strong research evidence showing the validity and reliability of student feedback, there are two examples of areas where student feedback has been integral to improving student experience at Monash University. The two areas are the current student experience measured by the Monash Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) and also the student experience as reflected in unit (subject) evaluations.

In the current student experience questionnaire, the MEQ, there has been a steady increase in student satisfaction rates since 2003 (when the University started obtaining feedback from students). Figure 2 below shows the increase in satisfaction over the last four years in nearly every area of student experience. This has been most significant in their overall satisfaction. These increases were the result of the University making changes based on student feedback. For example, the University recognised that long feedback return times was a major issue faced by students. In order to address this shortfall, the University introduced a policy that all assessed work had to be returned within reasonable timeframes and that no further assignments were to be given to students before their previous assessed work was returned by teachers. Other areas of improvements put in place were greater access to computer and library facilities. Anecdotal evidence prior to the administration of such a questionnaire suggested that these areas were of concern to students. Contrary to the suggestions of this anecdotal evidence, the results of the feedback indicated that these issues were not isolated to certain disciplines but were faced by students across all the University campuses. The information provided by students was thus utilised by the University to address these issues constructively.

82

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Legend: Aspects of the Teaching and Learning environment

1 Good Teaching 6 Monash Approach to Teaching & Learning

2 Generic Skills 7 Other Important Areas of Teaching & Learning

3 Learning Community 8 Global Item - 1. Overall satisfaction

4 Monash Graduate Attributes 9 Global Item - 2. Matching expectations

5 Student Support/Resources

Figure 2: Comparison of means for the major scales and global items, MEQ03, MEQ05 and MEQ07

Similarly, when examining unit (subject) evaluation data, there has been a steady increase in the number of units which were performing well, while, at the same time, the number of units at the bottom end has fallen significantly (CHEQ, 2008b; CHEQ, 2008c; CHEQ, 2008d). Figure 3 below shows that over a three-year period the quality of units has improved significantly with only about 5% of units performing poorly (below 3.00 on a 5-point Likert scale).

Figure 3: Unit evaluation performance trends.

83

Since the introduction of the new Survey Management System (SMS) in 2005, a “phenomenon” of increasing response rate has generally occurred at Monash University. At the time of the introduction of the systematic evaluation process, the response rate was around 30%. Currently, three years into the quality cycle, the response rate is over 50%. There are many reasons for this increase. One of the primary reasons is that students have recognised that the university is taking their voice seriously and thus they provide critical feedback so that improvement can be initiated. This trend of increasing response rate and recognising the student voice corresponds to research that suggests that “closing the loop” is an important issue in terms of total quality management. If students do not see any action resulting from their feedback, they may become sceptical and unwilling to participate (Leckey and Neil, 2001). Harvey (2003) confirmed this finding by pointing out that not only must the action take place on the basis of student views, but students must also be convinced that change has indeed occurred.

All the improvements described above have not been incidental. They have happened due to Monash staff significant effort and careful consideration of the student evaluation data. The results of student evaluation at Monash University have underlined the fact that there is a critical need to engage students and other key stakeholders in the evaluation processes at universities. Further, to make quality assurance systems in higher education more effective, there is a need to establish an explicit link between evaluation, quality and engagement. In this endeavour, it is important to embed in the student mindset the perception that their feedback provides valuable information which the institution will act upon.

Concluding Remarks

What has been described in this paper is a start in the direction where the University has taken note of student feedback to effect change. By no means is this paper advocating that the approach taken is satisfactory as it stands. However, in line with recent research, the University has moved in the direction where student feedback is not only used for administrative decision making but current and potential students can view overall student feedback and are also informed of the proposed actions on the basis of their feedback. Apart from this, there is also evidence that funding has been tied into the collection and use of student feedback to effect change.

In terms of administrative decision making, the University has been advocating the use of teacher evaluation in performance management. However, this is an issue within the Australian context, as teacher evaluation is confidential to the academic and is for formative purposes. The University is currently working on resolving this issue. Nevertheless, until this is addressed the University has advanced administrative decision making by utilising unit (subject) evaluation data, which is

84

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n currently the official quality tool for teaching at the University. The results of the feedback given by students for all units evaluated in a year are available on the internet for all students (both current and potential) to review. This makes the approach transparent but also provides useful information to students to select the appropriate units.

Further, the link between units, courses and funding was formed by the introduction of the Learning and Teaching Performance Fund (LTPF). The LTPF was announced in 2003 as part of the Australian Government's Our Universities: Backing Australia's Future initiative. The purpose of the fund, with a total pool of about $250 million, was to reward higher education providers (on top of their normal funding) that best demonstrate excellence in teaching and learning. A major component of this fund was tied to student feedback and how universities demonstrated the improvements that have resulted from this feedback.

In summary, an effective quality system, as embodied in the Monash University Quality Cycle, relies on the effectiveness of the evaluation system that is employed at the institution. In the case of Monash University, the institution has risen to the challenge as its quality unit (CHEQ) evolved. The CHEQ at Monash University has evolved not only as an area charged with the responsibility for implementing effective quality feedback tools, but also as a central repository of data collected from a range of feedback surveys and questionnaires.

85

References

Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA), 2006, Report of an Audit of Monash University, Melbourne: AUQA, online, available at:

http://www.auqa.edu.au/qualityaudit/sai_reports/index.shtml (accessed August 2008).

Bennett, L., Nair, C.S., and Wayland, C., 2006, ‘Love it or Hate it: Participation a Key Ingredient in Closing the Loop’, paper presented at the 2006 Australian Universities Quality Forum, Perth, Australia.

Bonetti, S., 1994, ‘On the use of student questionnaires’, Higher Education Review, 26 (3): 57 – 64.

Centra, J.A., 2003,‘Will teachers receive higher student evaluations by giving higher grades and less course work?’, Research in Higher Education, 44(5): 495-517.

Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ), 2008a, The CHEQ Survey Standards, Monash University, online, available at:

http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/cheq/evaluations/standards.html (accessed August 2008).

Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ), 2008b, Unit Level Reports, Semester 1, 2008, online, available at:

https://emuapps.monash.edu.au/unitevaluations/wr/uewr_rp1_public_faculties.jsp?semester=1&year=2008 (accessed August 2008).

Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ), 2008c, Unit Level Reports, Semester 2, 2006, online, available at:

https://emuapps.monash.edu.au/unitevaluations/wr/uewr_rp1_public_faculties.jsp?semester=2&year=2006 (accessed August 2008).

Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ), 2008d, Unit Level Reports, Semester 1, 2005, online, available at:

https://emuapps.monash.edu.au/unitevaluations/wr/uewr_rp1_public_faculties.jsp?semester=1&year=2005 (accessed August 2008).

Cheng, Y. C., and Tam, M. M., 1997, ‘Multi-models of quality in education’, Quality Assurance in Education, 5: 22-31.

D’Apollonia, S., and Abrami, P. C., 1997, ‘Navigating student ratings of instruction’, American Psychologist, 52(1): 1198-1208.

Dee, K. C., 2004, ‘Reducing the Workload in Your Class Won't Buy You Better Teaching Evaluation Scores: Re-Refutation of a Persistent Myth’, paper presented at the ASEE Annual Conference and

86

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah:USA, June 2004, online, available at: http://md1.csa.com/partners/viewrecord.php?requester=gs&collection=TRD&recid=200502994CO&recid=2005078022969CE&recid=2005078029198MT&q=related%3AlJDKdf5nWGoJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F&uid=1024956&setcookie=yes (accessed November 2008).

Department of Education, Science and Training ‘Our Universities: Backing Australia’s Future’, online, available at:

http://www.backingaustraliasfuture.gov.au/ (June 2009).

Feldman, K., 1997, ‘Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings’, in Perry, R.P., Smart, J.C. (eds) Effective Teaching in Higher Education: Research and Practice, New York: Agathon, pp. 368-395.

Fiocco, M., 2005, ‘Glonacal’ Contexts: Internationalisation Policy in the Australian Higher Education Sector and the Development of Pathway Programs, digital PhD, Murdoch University, Australia, online, available at:

https://wwwlib.murdoch.edu.au/adt/browse/view/adtMU20060502.154739?PrintFriendly=1 (accessed August 2008).

Fraser, B.J. (1998) ‘Science learning environments: Assessment, effects and determinants’, in B.J. Fraser and K.G. Tobin (Eds.) The international handbook of science education, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, pp. 527-564.

Graduate Careers Council of Australia (GCCA), 1999, Institutional Arrangements for Student Feedback, GCCA: Australia, p. 20.

Griffin, G., Coates, H., McInnis, C. and James, J., 2003, ‘The development of an extended course experience questionnaire’, Quality in Higher Education, 9(3): 259-266.

Harvey, L., 2003, ‘Student Feedback’, Quality in Higher Education, 9(1): 3-20.

Lee, G., Jolly, N., Kench, P., and Gelonesi, B., 2000, ‘Factors related to student satisfaction with university’, paper presented at the Fourth Pacific Rim - First year in Higher Education Conference: Creating futures for a new millennium, Brisbane, Australia.

Leckey, J., and Neill, N., 2001, ‘Quantifying Quality: The Importance of Student Feedback’, Quality in Higher Education, 7(1): 19–32.

Marsh, H.W., 2001, ‘Distinguishing between good (useful) and bad workloads in student evaluations of teaching’, American Educational Research Journal, 38(1): 183-212.

Marsh, H. W., 1987, ‘Students’ evaluations of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research’, International Journal of Educational Research, 11: 253-388.

87

Marsh H.W., and Dunkin, M.J., 1997, ‘Students’ evaluation of university teaching: A multidimensional perspective’, in R. P. Perry and J.C. Smart (Eds.) Effective Teaching in Higher Education: Research and Practice, New York: Agathon Press, pp. 241-320.

Marsh, H.W., and Roche, L.A., 1993, ‘The use of students’ evaluations and an individually structured intervention to enhance university teaching effectiveness’, American Educational Research Journal, 30: 217-251.

Mavondo, F., Zaman, M., and Abubakar, B., 2000, ‘Student satisfaction with tertiary institution and recommending it to prospective students’, ANZMAC 2000, Visionary Marketing for the 21st Century: Facing the Challenge, online, available at:

http://smib.vuw.ac.nz:8081/www/ANZMAC2000/CDsite/papers/m/Mavondo1.PDF (accessed August 2008).

Meek, V.L., 2000, ‘Diversity and marketisation of higher education: incompatible concepts?’, Higher Education Policy, 13 (1): 23 – 39.

Monash University, 2005, Monash Directions 2025, online, available at: http://www.monash.edu.au/about/monash-directions/ (accessed August 2008).

Monash University, 2004, Report on a Review of the Centre for Higher Education Quality, online, available at:

http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/cheq/about/cheq-docs/cheq-review-panel-report.doc (accessed August 2008).

Monash University, 2002, Still Learning: The Report of our Self-Review, online, available at: http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/cheq/reviews/still-learning/contents.html (accessed August 2008).

Monash University, 2000, Quality at Monash: Values and Principles, online, available at: http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/cheq/quality/quality-at-monash-values-principles.html (accessed August 2008).

Nair, C.S., and Fisher, D.L., 2001, ‘Learning Environments and Student Attitudes to Science at the Senior Secondary and Tertiary levels’, Issues in Educational Research, 11(2): 12-31.

Nair, C. S., and Pawley, D., 2006, ‘Quality and Feedback: The Duty of Care’, Paper presented at the Annual Conference for the Foundation of Tertiary Institution of the Northern Metropolis (FOTIM), Johannesburg, South Africa.

Nair, C.S., Adams, P., Ferraiuolo, S., and Curtis, A., 2006, ‘Student engagement the key to better response rates’, Proceedings of the 2006 Australian Universities Quality Forum (AUQF): Evaluating to Improve the Student Experience, online, available at:

http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/evaluationforum06/program.html (accessed August 2008).

88

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Nasser, F., and Fresko, B., 2006, ‘Predicting student ratings: the relationship between actual student ratings and instructors; predictions’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(1): 1-18.

OECD, 1998, Redefining tertiary education, Paris: OECD.

Ramsden, P., 2005, Using Research on student learning to enhance educational quality, Deliberations, online, available at:

http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/deliberations/ocsld-publications/isltp-ramsden.cfm (accessed August 2008).

Walberg, H.J., 1984, ‘Improving the productivity of America’s schools’, Educational Leadership, 41(8): 19-27.

89

La motivation pour la L2: Un véritable défi didactique.

Yvon Rolland

Université/IUFM de la Réunion

(CRLHOI) EA 4078

Résumé

Les enseignants disent éprouver des difficultés à intégrer la dimension motivationnelle dans leurs pratiques enseignantes. Cet état de fait peut s’expliquer, d’une part, par l’impact des théories de l’apprentissage qui sont à la base, qu’ils en soient conscients ou non, de leur pratique et, d’autre part, par les influences institutionnelles contradictoires dont ils sont l’objet.

Cet article à visée qualitative tend à explorer une vision plus humanisante des fondements scientifiques en intégrant la notion de motivation intrinsèque basée tout d’abord sur la dimension sociale de la motivation qui implique un minimum d’autonomie et de coopération, puis sur la dimension affective qui implique une dimension émotionnelle et la multisensorialité. Cette exploration débouche sur des suggestions en matière de stratégies motivationnelles.

Mots clés:

Didactique, motivation intrinsèque, dimension sociale, dimension affective.

90

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n

Abstract

Teachers find it difficult to integrate a motivational dimension to their teaching. This situation can be explained, first by the impact of well-grounded learning theories on their teaching, whether they are aware of it or not, and then, by the contradictory institutional influences under which they are.

From a qualitative perspective, this paper aims at analysing the theoretical data with a humanising outlook by integrating the notion of intrinsic motivation based firstly on a social dimension of motivation, which implies some autonomy and secondly on an affective dimension which implies an emotional dimension and multisensory channels. This analysis leads on to suggestions related to motivational strategies.

Keywords:

Second language learning, intrinsic motivation, social dimension, affective dimension.

91

Selon Dörnyei (2001 : p.2), « la motivation est liée aux aspects les plus basiques de l’esprit humain, et la plupart des enseignants et des chercheurs seraient d’accord pour dire qu’elle joue un rôle déterminant dans le succès ou l’échec d’une situation d’apprentissage. »

Par motivation, il faut entendre «  ce qui concerne le désir ou le besoin que les individus ont d’apprendre quelque chose et les efforts qu’ils sont prêts à y consacrer. » (M.F. Narcy-Combes, 2005 : p.149).

La motivation pour la L2 est désormais perçue comme un facteur-clé de l’apprentissage parmi les chercheurs (Dörnyei, 2001, 2003  ; Van Lier, 2007), ainsi que par les enseignants qui reconnaissent volontiers son importance. Cependant, ces derniers semblent rencontrer parfois des difficultés à stimuler et à préserver la motivation de leurs élèves (Raby, 2007, 2008). Nous avons été, pour notre part, confronté à cette question lors de la formation didactique de professeurs stagiaires d’anglais en responsabilité, à l’IUFM de la Réunion. Lors d’une des séances (le 13 septembre 2007), les vingt-quatre collègues stagiaires étaient regroupés sous l’égide de l’auteur de cet article, formateur et enseignant chercheur. Un sondage leur fut proposé, notamment sur leur perception de la motivation de leurs élèves.

Nous allons donc dans un premier temps nous pencher sur les représentations de ces collègues et sur le ressenti des élèves.

Puis nous analyserons les causes de ce malaise d’un point de vue scientifique qui révèle à quel point ces représentations constituent un véritable défi didactique.

Nous tenterons ensuite d’élargir ce spectre scientifique en y intégrant des données humanisantes.Puis, nous proposerons une séquence intégrant des stratégies motivationnelles et nous relancerons un nouveau sondage auprès des mêmes élèves, avant de retenir des principes méthodologiques.

92

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Analyse du malaise

Le sondage des enseignants

Leurs réponses furent ainsi collectées.

Oui NonÊtes-vous impliqué dans la mouvance institutionnelle ? 22 2Privilégiez-vous la composante linguistique et culturelle ? 23 1Tenez-vous compte des choix des élèves ? 4 20Grammaire et phonologie suscitent-elles de la motivation ? 2 22Utilisez-vous le manuel de la classe ? 21 3L’interaction orale est-elle liée à la motivation ? 5 19Le type d’évaluation a t-il un impact sur la motivation ? 1 23 Arrivez-vous à intégrer le savoir-être ? 1 23Vos élèves vous semblent-ils motivés ? 2 22

Les collègues concernés, de collège et de lycée, font preuve d’un grand sens de responsabilité pendant leur année de formation professionnelle et ont à cœur d’apporter tout leur soutien à leurs élèves.

Le cadre de l’expérience

Ces enseignants sont répartis en stage dans l’académie de la Réunion. La Réunion est la 23ème région française. La L1 est le créole, la L2 est le français et l’anglais est la première langue étrangère. L’apprentissage de cette dernière langue démarre au primaire dès l’âge de 7 ans. La majorité de ces enseignants a admis être impliquée dans la mouvance institutionnelle, et vouloir privilégier la composante grammaticale et phonologique.

Ils avouent ne pas prendre en compte les choix des élèves.

Les composantes grammaticale et phonologique, si elles sont considérées comme importantes, ne sont pas considérées comme pouvant susciter la motivation.

Sur le problème des manuels utilisés en classe, la majorité des enseignants avoue se fier au manuel en vigueur dans leur établissement.

93

Il est frappant de constater que, pour ces enseignants, l’interaction orale en tant qu’activité langagière, ne semble avoir un lien quelconque avec la notion de motivation.

Enfin, ils ne font pas clairement le lien entre leurs pratiques évaluatives et leur impact sur la motivation de leurs élèves.

La notion de motivation apparaît donc comme souvent négligée par ces enseignants de langue dans la planification de la tâche ou dans leurs pratiques professionnelles. Nous l’avons vu sur le plan des buts poursuivis, des thèmes choisis, des instruments utilisés ou encore des pratiques évaluatives.

Ce sondage exprime enfin la non prise en compte du savoir-être de l’élève et constate le manque de motivation de ce public scolaire.

Nous avons par la suite assisté à une séance d’une classe de quatrième suivie par l’un de ces professeurs stagiaires et nous avons procédé à un sondage de ces élèves.

Le stagiaire est un collègue de 24 ans créolophone et francophone qui a étudié l’anglais localement et à l’étranger (dans le cadre des échanges Erasmus avec la Grande Bretagne). Titulaire du CAPES (Concours national d’aptitude au professorat de l’enseignement secondaire), il effectue son stage dans plusieurs classes dont une classe de 4è de Sainte Marie (Collège Beauséjour). Il est visité trois fois dans le cadre de sa qualification professionnelle par l’auteur de cet article qui est à la fois chercheur, formateur et évaluateur.

La classe est de niveau B1 (Niveau seuil du CECRL-Cadre Européen de Référence pour les Langues) et comporte 25 élèves de 13 ans. On y dénombre une majorité de filles à la personnalité inhibée et introvertie. Personne ne s’est rendu dans un pays de langue anglaise.

La séance observée en classe

La séance observée était construite autour d’un enregistrement d’un manuel scolaire (Spring, classe de 4è LV1, Hachette, 2002, p. 22). La thématique, celle du détective Sherlock Holmes, s’articule autour de la notion de passé. L’intérêt pour l’enseignant était de se centrer sur un objectif linguistique avec en toile de fond un apport culturel facilitateur. Le public n’a pas été consulté pour le choix de ces thèmes. Le manuel sert de trame à cette séquence. Les activités langagières développées sont la production en continu (description de l’illustration) et l’écoute.

Le déroulement de la séance observée commence par l’accueil et des rituels effectués par l’enseignant. Les élèves répondent.

94

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n L’illustration est décrite et l’enseignant en profite pour introduire le nouvel énoncé « What was he doing when he heard the shot ? » Les apprenants sont invités à reproduire la question et la réponse « He was reading the paper when he heard the shot. »

L’écoute du document sonore est amorcée avec une fiche dans laquelle les élèves sont invités à associer les noms propres et les actions de ces derniers. La correction de cette tâche est accompagnée d’une manipulation du nouvel énoncé.

Une phase de réflexion sur la langue suit : les élèves sont amenés à distinguer une action révolue qui a duré ou pas. Une trace écrite clôt cette séance.

Le sondage des élèves

Les élèves de cette classe furent ensuite sondés. Voici leurs réponses. oui nonCette séance vous a t-elle apporté du plaisir ? 4 21 Les activités proposées vous ont-elles apporté de la satisfaction ? 3 22

Il ressort que le malaise observé chez les enseignants sondés réapparaît chez ces adolescents. Les notions de plaisir et de satisfaction ne sont pas perçues.

Nous constatons ici à quel point le défi didactique annoncé pose problème. Nous allons nous pencher sur les théories de l’apprentissage qui sous-tendent ces pratiques professionnelles.

Un défi didactique

Nous allons analyser en quoi la notion de motivation n’est pas centrale dans les grands courants théoriques liés à l’apprentissage. Puis nous nous attarderons sur des formes de motivation couramment citées et qui ne répondent pas nécessairement aux attentes de l’apprentissage d’une L2.

Des courants théoriques peu porteurs

L’institution a peu mis en avant la dimension psychologique de la motivation. Elle préconise des méthodologies issues, notamment depuis l’approche communicative, de théories de l’apprentissage multiples et antinomiques qui peinent à intégrer la dimension motivationnelle de façon structurée.

95

La psychologie béhavioriste

Dans les théories béhavioristes, dont les méthodologies audio-orales sont l’émanation, le moteur de l’apprentissage est extérieur aux mécanismes de l’apprentissage: on parle de motivation à apprendre. L’environnement du sujet contrôle, certes, les comportements et les apprentissages. Mais D. Gaonac’h (1987 : p. 25) s’étonne néanmoins que

« les techniques béhavioristes fassent une si belle part aux aspects formels du langage, alors même que la théorie en considère en principe comme essentiels les aspects fonctionnels, l’insertion du comportement dans son environnement physique et social ».

Cette approche comportementale de la motivation issue du courant béhavioriste insiste sur la vision énergétique de la motivation lors du développement d’un comportement en réponse à un stimulus. Ce courant théorique ignore pourtant les significations que le sujet élabore à partir de l’action environnementale et le rôle des représentations que ce dernier projette dans ce processus de construction de significations.

Certes, cette vision relève du passé, mais certaines pratiques perdurent dans l’apprentissage linguistique lié à la pratique de la langue et à la discrimination des phonèmes de l’anglais.

La psychologie cognitive

Dans les théories cognitives, qui prédominent dans les orientations institutionnelles actuelles par le biais de l’approche communicative, la notion de motivation n’est pas centrale, car elle est orientée sur le désir de savoir. Or l’approche cognitive met surtout l’accent sur les connaissances, les pensées, les réflexions des individus et leur manière d’interpréter l’expérience.

Le principe de base est que, contrairement au courant béhavioriste, l’activité d’apprentissage est guidée par des représentations que le sujet se fait de lui-même et de la situation d’apprentissage. La motivation naît de l’interaction avec l’environnement. Mais la prédominance de la cognition, compréhensible pour une approche cognitive, conduit à négliger les autres éléments qui font partie de la dimension motivationnelle, à savoir l’effort, le besoin, l’affect (Gardner, 1985) et la dimension sociale du phénomène (Bandura, 2004).

Nous allons analyser maintenant le décalage entre des formes de motivation couramment citées et un contexte didactique en L2 complexe.

96

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Formes de motivation décalées par rapport à un contexte didactique en L2 complexe

La motivation se compose d’effort, de désir et d’affect, nous dit R. Gardner (1982). C’est ce que pense aussi Z. Dörnyei (2001 : p.2), pour qui la motivation en L2 relève de fonctions conatives (ce que l’on veut ou désire), cognitives (ce que l’on pense de façon rationnelle) et affectives (ce que l’on ressent).

Nous allons nous pencher sur les travaux de Gardner (1985) qui ont porté sur la motivation pour la L2. Les concepts clés en sont la motivation intégrative qui pousse à l’identification à la communauté qui porte la culture cible, et la motivation instrumentale, plus orientée sur la promotion du sujet dans son cursus. Elles relèveraient toutes deux d’un processus à long terme.

Motivation intégrative et instrumentale

La motivation intégrative souvent testée par la psychologie sociale à travers les tests de motivation et d’attitude (Attitude/Motivation Test Battery, Gardner, 1985) est souvent opposée à la motivation instrumentale alors qu’on reconnaît aujourd’hui qu’elles sont souvent associées dans un même processus (Brown, 2000). Crookes et Schmidt (1991) avancent la nécessité « d’adopter une vision plus large de la motivation que celle notamment adoptée par Gardner ». Les types de motivation mentionnés, appliqués à la L2 (Raby, 2008), ne sont peut-être pas les mieux à même de caractériser le public de jeunes adolescents peu en contact avec l’étranger ou peu arrêtés sur leur avenir. Il s’agit ici d’apprenants en milieu scolaire forcément coupés du monde étranger et sujets à de nombreuses interrogations compréhensibles sur ce qu’ils vont devenir. Les travaux de Gardner ont, certes, porté sur le contexte éducatif, mais au Canada bilingue, où la notion d’immersion et de contact linguistique est spécifique. Par ailleurs, l’hypothèse résultative selon laquelle l’apprenant réussit mieux grâce au succès de ce qu’il fait (Savignon, 1972) est forcément limitée au critère de réussite.

L’impasse institutionnelle

La perspective actionnelle, qui caractérise l’orientation institutionnelle en France depuis les années 2000, est intéressante sur le plan motivationnel puisque l’apprenant y devient un acteur social et les activités langagières contribuent à élaborer une tâche communicative qui a du sens (Goullier, 2005 : p. 21). Mais le terme de « motivation » est simplement cité dans le Cadre Européen de Référence (2005  : p.84) en trois lignes de onze mots, dans un document de 192 pages. Le CECRL énumère simplement les types de motivation (interne/externe, instrumentale/

97

intégrative) et parle de désir de communiquer et du besoin humain de communiquer, sans aucune explication. Il s’avère que les orientations institutionnelles d’influence cognitive négligent ce facteur de l’apprentissage.

Variabilité didactique pénalisante

Par ailleurs, il semble que le problème de l’autonomie de l’apprenant soit un facteur décisif, négligé par Gardner et son modèle socio-éducatif (1982). En effet, la maîtrise des stratégies d’apprentissage est révélatrice. Un apprenant de L2 qui saura inférer le sens d’un élément lexical inconnu témoignera de plus de motivation qu’un autre qui ne sait pas. Encore faut-il qu’il ait eu un exemple déjà résolu, qu’il ait pratiqué plusieurs fois avant de transférer son savoir-faire et développer ainsi cette notion d’autonomie dont nous parlons.

Il semble aussi qu’il faille prendre en compte la nature dynamique de la motivation ; la notion de motivation serait plus variable, sujette à des changements constants et peut-être même éphémères (Lantolf & Gening, 2000). Il ne faut pas oublier que tout apprentissage d’une L2 déstabilise sur le plan affectif et déstructure sur le plan cognitif (Develay, 1993). Cela se traduit par des situations de doute qui engendrent des variables inéluctables dans le processus d’apprentissage de la L2 (Raby, 2007). Il nous faut donc accréditer l’idée que la motivation relèverait d’une variable didactique qui influence le processus d’apprentissage (Viau, 1994 : 24).

Nous avons noté le décalage entre les formes de motivation généralement citées en didactique et mesuré à quel point le contexte d’apprentissage de la L2 est complexe. La notion de motivation est d’autant plus difficile à cerner que la variabilité des paramètres didactiques est forte.

L’apport de fondements scientifiques plus humanisants

Les réactions des enseignants sollicités témoignent de l’existence d’un mur cartésien isolant l’esprit humain de la société. Il faut ainsi élargir l’éventail du spectre scientifique et se pencher sur la notion de motivation « intrinsèque » qui peut être une réponse à la dérive béhavioriste, à la prépondérance cognitive et à la complexité du contexte didactique d’apprentissage de la L2. Dans la motivation intrinsèque, «  l’activité est effectuée pour la satisfaction qu’elle apporte  » (Thill, 1997  : p.377). « L’individu est poussé à agir pour le plaisir et le défi pour des satisfactions inhérentes à l’activité » (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Il s’agit d’une tendance motivationnelle naturelle qui est un élément critique du développement cognitif, social et affectif. Nous allons aborder la dimension sociale.

98

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n La dimension sociale

Ehrman et Dörnyei (1998  : p.253) explorent comment la dynamique interpersonnelle dans l’apprentissage coopératif influe sur la motivation et l’acquisition langagière. Des facteurs comme l’orientation vers un but collectif, la cohésion du groupe, la confiance en soi et l’intérêt intrinsèque favorisent l’apprentissage coopératif.

Paradoxalement, cette coopération ne doit pas engendrer de pression liée à la compétition et elle doit préserver un minimum de libre choix, voire d’autonomie. Reprenant Deci & Ryan et la Théorie de l’Auto-détermination (1985), Ehrman et Dörnyei concèdent qu’un degré d’autonomie est un pré-requis pour tout comportement intrinsèquement gratifiant.

La Théorie de l’Activité, développée à partir des travaux socio-constructivistes de Vygotsky, considère que apprentissage et motivation prennent leurs racines dans la dimension sociale des processus psychologiques. Contrairement aux approches traditionnelles qui partent d’une dualité entre l’individu et l’environnement qui l’entoure, cette dernière regroupe le comportement individuel et social. Il faut y inclure la médiation culturelle qui « casse le mur cartésien qui isole l’esprit humain de la culture et de la société » (Engelström, 1999 : p.29). En apprentissage d’une L2, cette médiation s’opère par exemple lors de la réalisation d’une tâche où les apprenants sont amenés à prendre le rôle du tuteur ; ou encore quand un groupe collabore, construit cette tâche, puis la montre aux autres membres du groupe comme un modèle. Dans le modèle d’Engelström, « la L2 devient un objet d’apprentissage, et non plus un objet…/…activité et apprentissage y sont socialement distribués  », nous dit J.P. Narcy-Combes  (2005, p.61-62). Cela se traduit par une fusion entre l’humain et l’objet d’apprentissage, par exemple, ce qui a pour résultat que l’investissement humain donne du sens au non humain.

Une deuxième dimension doit être abordée, relevant de l’affectif, de l’émotionnel et de la multisensorialité.

La dimension affective

« L’affectivité est utile au groupe, elle est même considérée comme nécessaire au bien de la communauté  : sans elle, pas de motivation », selon H. Laborit (1996  : p.130).

« L’apprenant entre en classe avec un bagage émotionnel et cognitif qui influence l’apprentissage », affirme R.C. Gardner (1985).

99

Cette dimension affective et émotionnelle provient du cerveau limbique, particulièrement développé chez les apprenants jeunes. Celui-ci influence le néo-cortex par une myriade de circuits : « les centres de l’émotion ont un immense pouvoir sur le fonctionnement du reste du cerveau, y compris sur les centres de la pensée », précise D. Goleman (1997 : p. 28).

Il y aurait en fait une synergie entre affectif et cognitif, car si « le cognitif peut être, le cas échéant, géré ou contrôlé par l’affectif » (Buser,1998 : p. 298), nous ne devons pas oublier que « la perception des émotions serait un processus cognitif » (Damasio, 2008 : p.206).

La sensorialité englobe la kinésie, «  sensation de mouvement du corps, mais aussi d’émotions ressenties  ». La synergie des canaux sensoriels auditifs, visuels et kinésiques est capitale : «  une sensorialité en déclenche une autre, grâce au lien établi par l’affectivité » (Trocmé-Fabre, 1992 : p.78-79).

D’où l’importance de la motricité, de la gestuelle, du mime, du regard qui ont un lien avec l’affectivité. N’oublions pas que 90% des messages affectifs sont non verbaux et empathiques. La multisensorialité et la dimension affective ont un impact sur la motivation. Ne négligeons pas non plus l’aspect ludique que peut prendre une activité d’apprentissage et qui engendre des sentiments de plaisir et de satisfaction qui font souvent cruellement défaut dans notre système éducatif.

Nous allons tenter de préciser l’apport de ces données scientifiques sur le terrain institutionnel.

Vers une approche plus motivationnelle

A partir de ces réflexions théoriques, nous avons tenté d’aider les professeurs stagiaires à concevoir des dispositifs pédagogiques qui stimulent ou préservent la motivation de leurs élèves. Nous sommes ensuite revenu dans la classe de 4ème du Collège Beauséjour. Nous avons alors sondé à nouveau ces adolescents. Au vu des résultats, nous avons retenu un certain nombre de stratégies motivationnelles.

Nouvelle séquence de classe

Cette fois-ci, l’enseignant a demandé à ce public ce qu’il souhaitait faire. Ce dernier privilégie les jeux. L’enseignant prévoit de faire travailler ses élèves sur le jeu de l’oie (« snake and ladders »). Les objectifs linguistiques relèvent du parfait (present perfect), et de la modalité (Can.. ? You must…). La dimension culturelle est intégrée dans le jeu sous la forme de cases en rapport avec la géographie, le

100

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n mode de vie anglo-saxon. Ces cases impliquent les élèves eux-mêmes qui doivent par exemple décliner leur identité auprès du visiteur lorsqu’ils tombent sur la case « stranger ». Les activités langagières sont la lecture, l’interaction orale, la production en continu.

La séance démarre cette fois avec des rituels effectués par les apprenants eux-mêmes.

Le jeu est lancé  ; les apprenants sont amenés à décrire ce qu’ils voient, puis à poser des questions.

Un élève vient au tableau et démarre le jeu avec l’enseignant. Il s’agit d’abord de répertorier certaines questions et réponses correspondant à certaines cases. Sur certaines cases, ce dernier en profite pour introduire le lexique et les énoncés nouveaux. Une phase de manipulation est proposée avec un document approprié. Le mime est mis en place pour les éléments lexicaux, les actions. Des reproductions collectives sont orchestrées. La phonologie est travaillée : les sons sont bien articulés (/h/ par exemple) et accompagnés d’une gestuelle appropriée (souffler dans sa main pour le son /h/). Les schémas intonatifs sont pratiqués pour les questions et les réponses. Ils sont accompagnés d’un mouvement vers le haut ou vers le bas du corps.

Les fiches de jeu sont distribuées pour chaque binôme. Les dés sont également distribués.

Le jeu démarre. Sur les cases atteintes, l’élève concerné doit questionner son camarade. A chaque réponse positive, le joueur avance ; à chaque réponse négative, il reste dans sa case. A la case « stranger », il doit aller se présenter au visiteur ou au groupe classe et répondre aux questions pour pouvoir continuer. Il en résulte des échanges constructifs. Les gagnants (celui du binôme arrivé le premier) ont une médaille dorée.

A l’issue de cette séance, un nouveau sondage fut organisé auprès de ces adolescents.

Nouveau sondage

Nous avons posé les mêmes questions aux élèves que pour le premier sondage. Voici les réponses collectées. oui nonCette séance vous a t-elle apporté du plaisir ? 20 5 Les activités proposées vous ont-elles apporté de la satisfaction ? 19 6

Nous constatons que les réponses sont inversées. Ce dispositif ludique reposait sur un certain nombre de principes méthodologiques exprimés en termes de stratégies motivationnelles. Nous allons les répertorier.

101

Stratégies motivationnelles en rapport avec la dimension sociale

• Promouvoir l’importance d’un minimum d’autonomie pour les apprenants, à certains moments opportuns. Pour se faire, l’enseignant prévoira des activités de groupe ou de sous-groupes.

• Favoriser la coopération par le contexte en privilégiant plus souvent l’interaction orale pour le partage de données relatives à l’apprenant. Cette approche co-constructive permet le développement d’une certaine aisance salutaire.

• Préserver la cohésion du groupe ou de sous-groupes en mettant en place une certaine compétition dans la bonne humeur.

• Valoriser l’image sociale de ce public en leur faisant faire des tâches communicatives valorisantes leur permettant d’oublier leur situation d’adolescents hésitants.

Stratégies motivationnelles en rapport avec la dimension affective  

• Partir d’une évaluation diagnostique en début d’année pour mesurer les besoins des apprenants et prévoir de cerner ces besoins par un entretien individuel valorisant et positif pour la dimension relationnelle entre public et professeur.

• Intégrer les besoins du public dans la progression de l’enseignant.

• Impliquer le public par une responsabilisation liée à la pédagogie de contrat leur permettant d’agir sur leur apprentissage.

• Favoriser l’intérêt des apprenants en leur demandant une liste de thèmes qu’ils souhaiteraient aborder. Puis le professeur va établir une liste définitive qui prend en compte les demandes. Les élèves choisissent celles qui leur semblent les plus intéressantes par un vote.

• Responsabiliser les élèves en leur faisant faire certaines tâches incombant à l’enseignant (comme les rituels de début de séance, le relevé des bonnes prestations des uns et des autres, voire évaluer le travail de leurs pairs, etc…).

• Choisir des activités nécessitant un investissement corporel. Par exemple, la production orale peut être facilitée par un jeu de mime. La phonologie peut être travaillée par des activités physiques et ludiques. La grammaire peut être intériorisée grâce au mouvement.

102

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n • Repenser l’évaluation en termes plus positifs en situant le niveau de chacun et non plus en se focalisant sur le niveau non atteint. Ces différentes suggestions ont permis de répondre aux attentes des professeurs stagiaires ayant fait part d’un certain désarroi face à la problématique de la motivation.

Conclusion

Cette enquête a d’abord montré les limites d’une approche négligeant la motivation.

Le problème de la motivation concerne tout professionnel de l’éducation et se situe au centre du processus d’apprentissage d’une langue vivante étrangère. Il est regrettable que l’institution, qui ne l’ignore pas totalement, ne lui donne pas la place qui lui revient. Il est dommage que les méthodologies prescrites ne retiennent que peu de données relatives à la motivation, qui sont pourtant incontournables. Si la priorité est de se pencher sur le domaine cognitif, peut-on négliger, pour autant, la dimension motivationnelle intrinsèque ? Apprentissage et motivation prennent leurs racines, non seulement dans le champ social, mais aussi dans le champ affectif. Certes, le volet psycho-affectif est difficile à cerner, mais on ne peut l’écarter. Cela demande de la part des enseignants de bien doser leur pratique en faisant la part entre autonomie et coopération, entre individu et environnement, entre cognitif et affectif, entre raisonnement et émotions.

Nous ne pouvons que souscrire à cette remarque de A.R. Damasio (2008 : p. 257) qui, modifiant la phrase célèbre de Pascal (« le cœur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point »), précise que « l’organisme a certaines raisons que la raison doit absolument prendre en compte. »

103

Bibliographie

Bandura, A. (2003). Auto-efficacité : le sentiment d’efficacité personnelle. Bruxelles : De Boeck.

Brown, H.D. (2000). The Internet TESL Journal, vol XII, n°6 (2001).

Buser, P. (1998). Cerveau de Soi, Cerveau de l’Autre. Paris : Odile Jacob.

Crookes, G. & Schmidt, R. W. (1991). Motivation : reopening the research agenda. In Language Learning n°41, pp.469-512.

Damasio, A.R. (1997). L’erreur de Descartes, la raison des émotions. Paris : Odile Jacob.

Develay, M. (1993). Les trois coups sont frappés : la représentation peut commencer. In Les Cahiers Pédagogiques, 312, CRAP.

Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge : CUP.

Ehrman, M.E., & Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Interpersonal Dynamics in Second Language Education. The Visible and Invisible Classroom. London : Sage Publications.

Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation. in Engeström, Y. Miettenen, R., Punamake, R.L., Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge : CUP.

Gaonac’h, D. (1987). Théories d’apprentissage et acquisition d’une langue étrangère. Paris : Hatier.

Gaonac’h, D. (1995). Manuel de psychologie pour l’enseignement. Paris : Hachette.

Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning  : the Role of Attitudes and Motivation. London : Edward Arnold Publishers.

Goleman, D. (1997). L’Intelligence Émotionnelle. Paris : Laffont.

Goullier, F. (2005). Les Outils du Conseil de l’Europe en Classe de Langue  : CECR et Portfolios. Paris  : Didier.

Laborit, H.(1996). Une vie. Paris : Éditions du Félin.

Lantolf, J.P., & Genung, P.B. (2000). L’acquisition scolaire d’une langue étrangère vue dans la perspective de la théorie de l’activité. AILE (Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Étrangère) n°12. Lemarchand, F., Julié, K. & Lapaire , J.R. (2002). Spring, Paris : Hachette.

Narcy-Combes, M.F. (2005). Précis de Didactique. Paris : Ellipses.

104

jou

rna

lo

f

ed

uc

at

io

n Narcy-Combes, J.P. (2005). Didactique des Langues et TIC : vers une recherche-action responsable.  Paris : Ophrys.

Raby, F.(2007). A triangular approach to motivation in Computer-Assisted Autonomous Language Learning (CAALL). Recall, 19(2), 181-201.

Raby, F.(2008). Comprendre la motivation en LV2 : quelques repères venus d’ici et d’ailleurs. Les Langues Modernes, 3, 9-16.

Ryan, R.M. & Deci, L.D. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations  : classic Definitions and New Directions in Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 54-67. Academic Press.

Thill, E. (1997). Motivation, Émotion, Attention et Concentration. Paris : Vigot.

Trocmé-Fabre, H. (1992). J’apprends, donc je suis. Paris : Editions d’Organisation.

Van Lier, L. (2007). Action-based Teaching, Autonomy and Identity. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 46-64.

Viau, R. (1994). La Motivation en Contexte Scolaire. Bruxelles : De Boeck.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and Society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge MA : Harvard University Press.

Le Cadre Européen Commun de Référence pour les Langues (2005) Paris : Didier.