Lab experiments in schools
- Created by: greggs25
- Created on: 21-02-15 13:38
View mindmap
- Laboratory experiments and teacher expectations
- Harvey and Slatin 1976
- Charkin et al (1975)
- He used a sample used a sample of 48 university students who each taught a lesson to a 12yr old boy.
- Charkin et al (1975)
- The artificiality of laboratory experiments may mean that they tell us little abut the real world of education.for example, charkin used university students rather than teachers, while Harvey and Slatin used photographs of pupils rather than real pupils .
- it is unlikely that university students behave the same wav as experienced teachers and that teachers expectations are based on just pupils appearance.
- Rosenthal and jacobson (1968)
- the researchers tested all the pupils, but then picked 20% of them purely at random and told the school, again falsely, that the Test had identified these as 'sputters'.
- the research is easy to repeat, however it is unlikely that other researchers will get exactly the same results due to school being a complex institution.
- Rosenthal and jacobson did look at the whole levelling process from teacher expectation s through to their effect on pupils, rather than just singe elements in isolation.
- the research is easy to repeat, however it is unlikely that other researchers will get exactly the same results due to school being a complex institution.
- the researchers tested all the pupils, but then picked 20% of them purely at random and told the school, again falsely, that the Test had identified these as 'sputters'.
- Rosenthal and jacobson (1968)
- it is unlikely that university students behave the same wav as experienced teachers and that teachers expectations are based on just pupils appearance.
- Harvey and Slatin 1976
- they examined if Teachers had a preconceived idea about children of different social classes.
- Harvey and Slatin 1976
- Charkin et al (1975)
- He used a sample used a sample of 48 university students who each taught a lesson to a 12yr old boy.
- Charkin et al (1975)
- Harvey and Slatin 1976
- they used a sample of 96 teachers. Each teacher was shown 18 photographs of children from different social classes. to control extraneous variables, the photographs were equally divided in terms of gender and ethnicity. the teachers were asked to rate the children on their performance.
- they examined if Teachers had a preconceived idea about children of different social classes.
- they examined if Teachers had a preconceived idea about children of different social classes.
- This study indicates that teachers label pupils from different social classes and use these labels to pre-judge pupils potential.
- (high expectancy) were told the boy was highly motivated and intelligent
- (the low expectancy) were told that the boy had a low IQ and was poorly motivated.
- the control group were given no information.
- (the low expectancy) were told that the boy had a low IQ and was poorly motivated.
- Used real pupils this raises ethical concerns.
- Charkin et al videoed the lessons and found that the high expectancy group made more eye contact and gave out more encouraging body language.
- Although Charkin et al identified the existence of positive and negative body language they did not examine how it would affect the pupil
- Charkin et al videoed the lessons and found that the high expectancy group made more eye contact and gave out more encouraging body language.
- It is hard to establish cause and effect in a school as a lot of other factors come into play. for example, the type of school, class sizes, and streaming.
- No real pupils were used, so less ethical issues.
- Field experiments
- it is unlikely that university students behave the same wav as experienced teachers and that teachers expectations are based on just pupils appearance.
- Rosenthal and jacobson (1968)
- the researchers tested all the pupils, but then picked 20% of them purely at random and told the school, again falsely, that the Test had identified these as 'sputters'.
- the research is easy to repeat, however it is unlikely that other researchers will get exactly the same results due to school being a complex institution.
- Rosenthal and jacobson did look at the whole levelling process from teacher expectation s through to their effect on pupils, rather than just singe elements in isolation.
- the research is easy to repeat, however it is unlikely that other researchers will get exactly the same results due to school being a complex institution.
- the researchers tested all the pupils, but then picked 20% of them purely at random and told the school, again falsely, that the Test had identified these as 'sputters'.
- Rosenthal and jacobson (1968)
- it is unlikely that university students behave the same wav as experienced teachers and that teachers expectations are based on just pupils appearance.
- they told the school that they had a new Test specially designed to identify those who would 'spurt' ahead. this was untrue because it was just a normal IQ test, however the teachers believed what they had been told.
Comments
No comments have yet been made