Study Support and the Development of the Self-regulated Learner
Messages from the Ethnographic Research
Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, Leeds University, 15 September 2001
Caroline Sharp, National Foundation for Educational Research
Keith Pocklington and Dick Weindling, Create Consultants
Study Support and the Development of the Self-regulated Learner: Messages from the Ethnographic Research
Caroline Sharp, National Foundation for Educational Research
Keith Pocklington and Dick Weindling, Create Consultants
Abstract
This paper is based on a qualitative study of study support in 12 secondary schools which formed part of the Study Support National Evaluation and Development Programme. It presents evidence from interviews with students and staff about the six main factors attracting students to attend out-of-school activities and the benefits students derived. The paper ends by relating the conditions present in study support to the literature on self-regulated learning, and concludes that providing high quality study support requires commitment, investment and an understanding of its potential contribution to the work of the school.
Introduction
A team of researchers from the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) and Create Consultants was commissioned by the National Youth Agency to undertake case studies of study support at 12 secondary schools. The work was carried out during the 1999–2000 school year and was designed to provide a qualitative perspective to complement a large-scale quantitative evaluation of inner-city schools participating in the Study Support National Evaluation and Development Programme (see MacBeath et al., 2001).
Research methods
The project’s Steering Group selected 12 schools from the larger sample of 51. The schools represented a variety of LEAs and different approaches to study support, and were chosen to exemplify good practice. Members of the research team visited each school on a number of occasions between November 1999 and April 2000. The resulting information was written up as individual case studies, which were sent to each of the schools for verification. This paper provides an overview across the 12 schools. Details of particular activities and schools can be found in the set of individual case studies (Weindling et al., forthcoming).
During our school visits we observed students working in the study support centre and in two or three different activities suggested by the study support coordinators. We also attended a number of activities held during the school holidays (e.g. GCSE revision courses). At each school, interviews were conducted with the study support coordinator and with the headteacher or a representative of the SMT. The teachers who ran the observed activities were interviewed and we spoke informally to the students during the sessions. Interviews were also conducted with groups of Year 11 students (the age cohort followed in the quantitative research). Over 150 students and about 60 staff were interviewed in the 12 schools.
Basic information about the sample of schools is given in Table 1. The table shows that the twelve case study schools ranged in size from the smallest school with 585 students, to the largest, with 1,700 students. The schools also varied in type, with two girls’ schools, one boys’ school, and nine co-educational. Hampstead and Walker had Technology College status, and Shirelands was a Language College. Two others, Sarah Bonnell and Swanshurst, were Beacon Schools, with study support being one of their aspects of practice that they were prepared to share with other schools. GCSE results in 2000 varied considerably across the sample, from eight per cent of students achieving 5+ A*-C grades in one school, to 48 per cent in the highest achieving school. The results for the percentage of students achieving 5+ A*-G grades ranged from 59 per cent to 95 per cent.
Table 1: 12 Case Study Schools
School / LEA / Size / Type / NotesBroadgreen / Liverpool / 1280 / 11-18 Mixed
Byng Kenrick / Birmingham / 906 / 11-18 Mixed / UFA*
Campion / Liverpool / 680 / 11-16 Boys / Catholic
Hampstead / Camden / 1298 / 11-18 Mixed / Technology College
Oaklands / Tower Hamlets / 585 / 11-16 Mixed
The Royal Docks / Newham / 1230 / 11-16 Mixed / New site
Sarah Bonnell / Newham / 1200 / 11-16 Girls / Beacon School
Shirelands / Sandwell / 790 / 11-16 Mixed / Language College
Swanshurst / Birmingham / 1700 / 11-18 Girls / UFA, Beacon School
St Kentigern’s / West Lothian / 1000 / 12-18 Mixed
Walker / Newcastle / 1348 / 11-18 Mixed / Technology College
Yardleys / Birmingham / 885 / 11-16 Mixed / UFA
*The three schools in Birmingham were part of the University of the First Age (UFA) project. This was a major initiative developed by Birmingham LEA and designed to offer students out-of-hours opportunities for educational enrichment.
The development of study support in the case study schools
Most of the case study schools were situated in areas of high unemployment and social disadvantage. This is evident in the proportion of pupils eligible for free school meals, which ranged from 30 to 71 per cent, with half of the schools having over 40 per cent eligibility. The national average was 17 per cent, and Ofsted regards values above 32 per cent as indicative of severe disadvantage.
For several schools, study support began as a recognition of the difficulties that students experienced in finding a suitable place to complete their homework. Thus the earliest initiative often took the form of a homework club. Parallel with this was the development of additional subject-related sessions intended to help students to improve their GCSE results. A later development was the growing understanding that study support could form a coherent programme of activities, including the extra-curricular activities which most schools already provided. Some schools introduced study support as a strategy for improving both students’ and parents’ attitudes towards learning.
In addition to a study support centre where students could do their homework or coursework, many of the schools ran short courses as part of their study support programme. In a few cases the courses resulted from student requests, while others originated from teachers who wanted to offer something outside the normal curriculum. Some of the courses addressed the needs of specific groups such as underachieving boys or gifted and talented students.
The 12 schools varied in the length of time study support had been established. One of the earliest was Sarah Bonnell, which began its programme in 1991 with funding from the Princes’ Trust. At the other end of the time-frame was The Royal Docks School which had begun to develop study support in parallel with a move to new premises in 2000.
Students’ reasons for attending study support
In our interviews and during the observation of activities, we asked students why they came to study support. Most students made a number of points in answer to this question. An analysis of their answers provided the following list of six main reasons why students were willing to give up their free time to attend.
- I enjoy going to study support.
- I can get help with my learning.
- Disruptive students do not attend.
- There is a more relaxed atmosphere than in lessons.
- I can work with my friends.
- It is better than studying at home.
Each of these areas is discussed in more detail in the following sections.
1.Enjoyment
One of the main reasons students gave for attending study support was that they found the experience enjoyable and rewarding. When asked why they chose to go, some said simply: ‘because I enjoy it’.
This reaction was most common in relation to activities which could be termed ‘curriculum enrichment’ (i.e. clubs and courses focusing on areas outside the normal curriculum). In some instances it was the sheer novelty value of the activities which was the chief attraction. ‘You get to do things which you wouldn’t otherwise do’, was a typical remark. As one of the students at Byng Kendrick pointed out: ‘Where else could we get to learn about politics or philosophy?’
A few courses and activities had been initiated by students. For example, cricket coaching at Swanshurst girls’ school was arranged in response to students’ requests. Other schools had taken on board students’ ideas and suggestions for improvement to their existing programme. For example, at Sarah Bonnell school, students’ requests for greater access to computers and a quieter atmosphere in the study centre had been acted on by from staff. As one of the students said: ‘We have a system of form reps and a school council which works well. They listen to you at this school.’
Some of the students referred to the different teaching approaches they had encountered on their study support courses. For example, one student, describing a UFA summer school, remarked on the unusual approach to learning. A science project was presented in the form of a ‘murder mystery’ which had made it both absorbing and motivating. In addition, the outcome was not entirely predictable: ‘It wasn’t like a set lesson. Neither us nor the teacher knew what the outcome would be.’
Although students did not explicitly refer to all study support activities as enjoyable, they were clearly rewarding or else students would not have chosen to attend. Indeed, several students told us of occasions when they had tried activities once, but had decided not to return. The nature of the rewards inherent in successful study support activities is explained in the following sections.
2.Getting help with learning
Students made repeated references to the opportunities within study support to extend their learning, in ways that were not possible in ordinary lessons. They were also grateful for individualised help with their work.
Some activities gave students the opportunity to concentrate on a given topic or activity for longer and in greater depth, or to study a subject at a more advanced level. Several students explained that study support gave them the opportunity to consolidate their learning. As one student said: ‘It’s that extra learning, because sometimes in lessons it’s easy to get distracted. If I didn’t come here [revision sessions] I would be struggling in some subjects.’ A number of students alluded to the fast pace of regular lessons, admitting that they sometimes experienced difficulty in keeping up, and therefore felt they needed to put extra time into their studies.
Better understanding gained through study support led to feelings of reassurance, and increased confidence in their ability to handle schoolwork. ‘If you’ve got more knowledge you feel more confident’, one student said, while a second described how increased confidence enabled him to ‘handle the pressures on you to do well.’ All in all, the view was expressed repeatedly that time invested in study support was highlyproductive in relation to the quality of learning that took place. As one student said: ‘Twenty minutes after school is the equivalent to an hour in your lesson.’
Some of the Centres had a range of staff on hand – teachers, technicians, classroom assistants and peer tutors – to offer guidance and assistance. Because of the smaller number of students present and the favourable staff-student ratios, it was possible for students to receive more individualised support than in class lessons. As one student said: ‘You get one-to-one support, which makes you more confident… You get more in-depth discussions.’
Staff also recognised the importance of one-to-one help. As one teacher explained: ‘It’s the personalised attention that a teacher [in the regular classroom] can’t give.’ Another said: ‘There is much more one-to-one support, the sessions are more interactive and the pupils are relaxed.’
The presence of older students in a tutoring or mentoring capacity was popular with students. As one observed: ‘They don’t treat us like pupils and they don’t act like teachers.’ A sixth form mentor explained: ‘Pupils will sometimes tell you their problems. They don’t feel comfortable telling the teachers – kids want someone on their level… Kids will talk to you because they see you as a friend.’
3.The absence of disruptive students
Because study support is a voluntary activity, students who choose to attend do so because they have made a commitment to learn. One of the points made repeatedly by students attending study support was that they felt relieved by the absence of students who caused disruption in lessons. As one student explained: ‘People want to be there, so there’s no messing around.’ Another said: ‘It’s better because the silly people don’t go. The kids that mess around don’t turn up.’
Students commented that study support was subject to fewer interruptions than during regular lessons: ‘It just flows, it’s not just stopping and starting’. Given the relatively high adult-pupil ratios and the willing cooperation of the majority of students, any instances of poor behaviour were relatively easy for staff to deflect or contain.
4.A different atmosphere
A fundamental difference between study support and regular lessons lies in the much greater informality of study support activities. Students were well aware that there was a different staff/student relationship operating in study support. They felt that their commitment to learning outside school hours made a difference to the way teachers treated them. As one student put it: ‘Teachers think of you differently because you’ve opted to be there… They see that you’re more committed.’ This had positive effects on their relationships with teachers, as one student commented: ‘The teachers treat you better, they treat you as adults.’ One student felt there was a more equal relationship between staff and students during study support: ‘You don’t feel as far away from the teacher.’
Teachers said they felt more able to relate to individual students, rather than to view them as part of the class. The difference was apparent to students, as one said: ‘In class, teachers speak to you as a group’, whereas in study support, students felt ‘more valued as an individual and for your views.’ Teachers often spoke of their role in study support as that of a facilitator, and placed emphasis on promoting autonomy among the students. For example, one teacher explained: ‘The chemistry club is very student-led compared with class lessons, where there more rules. I try to let the students work as they want during the club – unless it involves something complex and experimental.’
Similarly, a sixth-form mentor at one of the schools commented on the ethos within the study centre. It’s like a culture-building thing… The control is within the kids – the adults and teachers are there to help.
Because of the lack of curriculum constraints, the higher staff-student ratio and the commitment of students, teachers involved in delivering study support were able to adopt a more informal and relaxed manner than in class. It was possible to be spontaneous in responding to students’ interests, wishes or needs. As a consequence, students found teachers more approachable: they felt able to ‘open up’ and talk to staff about their learning needs. Some students said that they felt able to say they did not understand something during study support, whereas in their regular lessons they were more likely to conceal their lack of understanding in an attempt to bluff their way through.
In several schools, staff were encouraged to offer study support in areas outside their subject specialism. This meant that students saw teachers in a different context. A science teacher who taught an English course talked about his experience of study support: ‘They get to see different teachers and teachers teaching different subjects. I am a science teacher and I don’t often get to teach an English class. [Study support] is in a different light – much more relaxed, much less driven by the curriculum and the syllabus.’
Students liked the more relaxed atmosphere. One student made the following comments about the school’s revision sessions: ‘We don’t have to wear school uniform and you can come in a bit later and they won’t say anything. There aren’t any strict rules.’ Most of the schools provided refreshments at some of their study support sessions – these were either free or at cost price. This was an important factor in adding to the informality and pleasantness of the setting.
5.Working with friends
One of the attractions of study support was related to the social dimension of learning. Students valued the opportunities to work with their fellow students. This often arose naturally – for instance, talking to their friends or being able to help each other while working on a learning activity. One student explained that he enjoyed learning alongside other students: ‘I want people to be here – I don’t want to work alone.’ Some teachers deliberately created situations to encourage interaction between students (for example, by setting up group projects). This was found to be enjoyable by the students concerned:‘You’re not on your own when you’re working in a team’, as one student put it. In some cases, there were opportunities to mix with students from several year groups. This enabled social interaction to be much wider than in regular lessons.