Masters in Teaching and Learning

Phase 3 – Module 7

Teacher Enquiry – Part 1

Context Rationale (1000 words)

My enquiry focuses on the use of pupil progress data within my own school

and principally how this data can be used to motivate and encourage

students. One of my roles within my own school context is to lead on the use

of pupil progress data across the wider context of the school and ensure that

this data is used effectively to raise pupil progress. This has tended to focus

on the actions of the teacher and seeking to eradicate the under-performance

of students by using data to highlight where interventions may need to take

place. Upon reflection, and in the writings of previous modules in the MTL, I

sought to look at the use of data from the pupils’ perspective. I have often

been frustrated at the fact that within my own school, teachers work tirelessly

to try and improve the progress of students and that there must be a simpler

way to achieve this. In module 6, I likened these efforts to that of Sisyphus

and his condemnation of eternally rolling a rock to the top of a hill only to let it

fall to the bottom and begin again. Similarly, within my school, we seemingly

‘battle’ with students to make progress, almost ‘rolling’ them up that

Sisyphean hill. The key issue that I have identified is that there is often

apathy on the part of the student towards the progress that they make in their

learning, as a result it is necessary to investigate the intrinsic and extrinsic

factors that motivate pupils; in this case, the presentation of their progress

data. Therefore, motivation has played a key part of my enquiry and the way

in which progress data can be used to motivate students to improve progress

in their individual subjects. In addition, one must recognise that effort is

inextricably linked to the concept of progress and motivation and therefore

one may argue that there needs to be an assessment of the concept that

‘intelligence’ is not fixed but can develop over time. Naturally, my use of the

term ‘intelligence’ is problematic and is used within the context of a pupil

having the ability to make progress from a particular starting point. As a result

my enquiry focused upon the question: can the ranking of pupil progress data

be used to motivate students in such a way that their progress can be

improved or bettered? There are additional aspects that will naturally

influence this motivation, including competition with their peers. Throughout

this process, from module 6 onwards, I have hoped to learn that pupils can be

motivated through fully understanding their own progress and develop their

learning by taking responsibility, and crucially being interested in their own

learning.

Modern secondary schools are ‘data-rich’ institutions which analyse the

progress of students from a number of different angles, including the analysis

of variables in relation to progress such as: ethnicity, gender as well as how

each department is performing. The primary purpose of this scrupulous

analysis is often to change the behaviours of teachers and encourage them to

focus on the progress that students make from a particular starting point.

Many schools, including my own, also share certain aspects of this progress

data with students, however, this is often in a way that requires the student to

reflect and consequently know intuitively what they must do to improve; a

pupil is able to view how they have performed in a particular subject and it is

their responsibility to reflect upon this in conjunction with their parents.

However, there is a shortfall to this method as ‘intuition’ is not enough due the

fact that intrinsic motivation is an assumed parted of this ‘intuition’. That is,

that a student will see the progress they are making, or lack of, and work to

automatically correct this.

Within my own school context, it was the pupils’ understanding of data that I

wished to investigate along with how it motivated them to change their own

behaviour and attitude towards learning, and therefore, improve their

progress. Presently, pupils in my school receive their progress and predicted

grades for each of their subjects in the post. The progress grades are based

upon assessments carried out within each subject with end of year predictions

made based upon these assessments and teacher judgments about further

progress (or lack of) expected to be made. This information is sent to parents

with the assumption that a conversation will take place between the pupil and

their own parents – however, this unfortunately, does not always happen.

The expected outcome of this whole process is that the pupil will reflect upon

their own progress and seek to improve their in-class effort and ultimately

attain a higher grade then previously expected. In addition, teachers are also

expected to discuss a student’s progress with their students as well. This

process is one that not only exists within my own school but also within many

schools. The issue that I have had with this process is that it rests upon a

number of assumptions as well as the fact that pupil’s may end up reflecting

on individual subjects in isolation. Firstly, it assumes that parents will have a

robust conversation with their children about how they are performing at

school – something that is beyond the control of the school. Secondly, each

individual subject teacher is expected to have a dialogue with the pupil about

the progress in their subject – this essentially takes place without the teacher

having a broader understanding of the pupil’s learning and progress across all

of their subjects. Ultimately, in my enquiry I wanted to create a system that

motivated students to improve their effort and hopefully their progress.

Therefore, I investigated the effect of an intervention and subsequently I

introduced a Rank Order System that was devised to inspire pupils to take

greater ownership of their progress and motivate them to change their effort

and approach to learning. This process from its very genesis was designed

and intended to be collaborative between both pupils and teachers. The

practice of collating the pupil progress data has been completed over the

period of nine months, the premise of which was set forth in module 6.

However, this information and project needs to be evaluated and the full

methodology needs to be outlined, including the further aspects I am set to

study.

Literature Review (2000)

As already ascertained in module 6, one of the primary factors in developing a

Rank Order System was to increase pupil motivation. In addition, a part of the

ambition in introducing this system hinged on the research that intelligence is

not fixed rather it develops over time. This is a position that has been

extensively researched by Carol S. Dweck in both Self Theories (1999) and

Mindsets (2006). Dweck advocates the viewpoint of two ‘mindsets’ that is; a

‘fixed-mindset’ and a ‘growth-mindset’. The former rests on the concept that

intelligence is fixed and that one is born with their ‘intellect’. Dweck’s

research indicates that this particular ‘mindset’ is borne out of the idea that

young people are told that they are intelligent from an early age and as result

develop less resilience when they face a challenge. On the other hand, the

‘growth mindset’ is more likely to be found amongst people who are praised

for their effort and become more resilient when faced with challenges and as

a result do not capitulate when they face something they find challenging.

This view has been further propagated by Lucas and Claxton in New Kinds of

Smart (2010) who look at the variety of different ‘intelligences’. However, one

must also acknowledge that the concept of ‘intelligences’ is highly disputed,

not least for the fact that it is very difficult to find a consensual agreement for

the very definition of the word ‘intelligence’. For my own enquiry it is

important to hold the view that a young persons ability to make use of their

intelligence is composite and is something that can develop based on effort

and being motivated, either intrinsically or extrinsically.

As already highlighted, the Rank Order System rests on the concept that

students have to apply effort when presented with a set of data or information

about their learning – and that the corresponding actions mean that they can

develop their learning and progress within a particular subject or group of

subjects. However, this requires a certain element of motivation on the part of

the students and the teacher to understand the information or data that has

been presented to them. Therefore, a part of the motivation rests on that of

the teacher and the dialogue that helps the student to understand how they

can develop and improve. Linda Hargreaves outlines one potential barrier to

this:

“Communication between pupil and teachers has a notorious tendency to be

one sided. Teachers complying with national curricular objectives, decide the

subject, format, medium and content of the communication.”1

Hargreaves’ assertion is that teacher-pupil dialogue is notoriously one sided in

which the pupil tends to be a passive recipient of further instructions and

orders on how they can improve. One aspect of the Rank Order System is

that the pupils’ progress grades are displayed at various points around the

school and rely upon the students to view and engage with them. Secondly,

they must then attempt to have a dialogue with their teachers in order to

improve. However, as outlined by Hargreaves conversations between

teachers and pupils tend to travel in one direction: that is, the teacher tells the

pupils what they must do in order to improve. Whilst a teacher is equipped

with the necessary expertise and experience to be able to direct a student in

the right direction, Hargreaves is right that this conversation does have

‘tendency’ to be one sided. One may argue that if the student becomes the

beholder of the information (their progress grades) and directs questions at

the teacher then the shift of power becomes ever so slightly towards that of

the student. It could be that viewing progress grades in a rank order will

inspire a curiosity on the part of the student to question the teacher on their

progress. However, Hargreaves also refutes this position and seemingly

1 “It’s good to talk” – Hargreaves in “Motivating your Secondary Class” – Galton, Steward, Hargreaves, Page and Pell – Sage (2009) – p80

casts the aspersion that pupil motivation is not based on a lust or passion for

learning when she states:

“Their (pupils’) motivation, paradoxically, seems to remain fairly stable in spite

of the declining attitudes, but closer inspection shows that it is driven by

extrinsic rewards and instrumental goals, such as the need to pass

examinations, rather than intrinsic factors such as curiosity, challenge or

fascination.”2

The Rank Order System is undoubtedly a tool to aid the extrinsic reward of

motivating students to pass examinations or achieve higher grades in

assessments. Hargreaves almost seems to disparage the concept of these

extrinsic rewards in favour of the more intrinsic aspects of education such as

‘curiosity, challenge or fascination’. This is a highly contentious issue.

Hargreaves outlines the necessity of fostering intrinsic rewards in pupil’s

learning rather than relying upon external rewards such as examination

results or merits. However, it is reasonable to argue that we work in an

education system built upon extrinsic rewards, measured in league tables that

inevitably seem to squeeze aspects of intrinsic rewards out of the curriculum.

The supposed success and therefore viability of a secondary school is

measured by extrinsic variables and as a consequence means that for many

schools they become central. Whilst a Rank Order System may use extrinsic

rewards (that is, an improvement in their progress grades for their subjects)

one may also argue that it inspires an element of curiosity and challenge, as it

2 Ibid. p81

is meant to focus students on their effort and progress. In addition, it is hoped

that it will motivate students to become curious about their learning and set

themselves the challenge of trying to improve. It could also be argued that if

the pupil becomes the beholder of their pupil progress data then the dialogue

could potentially shift to them questioning the teacher about the way in which

they are taught. This however, is my theoretical hypothesis and will need to

be tested when the results of a particular group of students are analysed.

Furthermore, the issue of extrinsic motivation is a contentious one and thus

needs critiquing. Firstly, Dickinson notes that:

“Extrinsic consequences have been criticised on the grounds that they

decrease intrinsic motivation or internally initiate behaviour”3

This argument holds that although extrinsic rewards may increase the

frequency of a particular behaviour, they also decrease an individual’s

“intrinsic motivation” to perform that behaviour over a sustained period. In

relation to a Rank Order System, it may mean that the extrinsic factors of

seeing progress grades presented in such a way may inhibit the “curiosity,

challenge or fascination” that Hargreaves alluded to. This therefore calls into

question my previous assertion that a Rank Order System will potentially

foster ‘curiosity’ as it may in-fact be either short-lived or detrimental to the

longer term learning and progress of the pupil. That is, a student may view an

improvement in their progress grades as a means to an end in itself rather

3 “The Detrimental Effects of Extrinsic Reinforcement on “Intrinsic Motivation”” – Alyce M. Dickinson – in

The Behaviour Analyst - 1989

than an establishment of deeper long-term learning. Furthermore, Pintrich

and Schunk, in analysing the research of Lepper, Greene and Nisbett (1973),

note that “the conclusion of this research is that offering people rewards for

doing things they enjoy may undermine their intrinsic motivation and lead to

less interest in the task”4. As a result, a further criticism of the Rank Order

System could be that the ‘intrinsic’ interest in learning is lost to the ‘extrinsic’

receipt of a ‘better’ or higher grade within a particular subject. The

consequence of this would be that a student may make progress but may not

genuinely have an interest in what or why they are learning. As a result, this

could defeat the objective of having a Rank Order System in the first place.

Another facet of ‘extrinsic’ motivation is that of competition, this is a further

area whose merits are contested in academic research. Competition

permeates schools and begins naturally in primary schools and seemingly

continues throughout secondary school, Ames (1984) surmises this as

follows:

“Children are socialized into competitive thinking quite early in their school

careers when they see, for example, that only the best work gets posted, the

rows who are finished first get to line up first…students are grouped by

ability.”5

4 Motivation in Education: Theory, Research and Applications – Paul Pintich and Dale Schunk – Merrill

Prentice Hall – Second Edition, London, 2002 5 “Goal structures: Cognitive-Motivational Analysis” - Ames - in Motivation in Education: Volume 1 -

1984– Academic Press – p190

Although Ames’ view is disputed, particularly within primary school research, it

is undeniable that in my own school there exists competition in the everyday

parlance of both teachers and students. Students receive certificates and

vouchers for having the most merits or having the best attendance –

essentially extrinsic rewards based on competition, designed to motivate

others to achieve even more. The effect of this competition is often seen

most significantly amongst groups of friends and therefore it may be

appropriate to analyse the rank order progress data amongst a select group of

friends in order to see the extrinsic impact of this type of motivation. By

ranking students along side each others it is inevitable that when reflecting

upon ones own performance, a student is going to set that in relation to those

around them and potentially be motivated by a comparison to others. This in

turn will engender a certain degree of competitiveness amongst pupils and

hopefully will motivate students to engage in their own learning processes and

result in a student making ‘more’ progress. Brophy (2004) states that:

“…activities that encourage students to develop conflicting positions rather

than seek concurrences can have both motivation and learning benefits,

although it is important to make sure that the discourse remains constructive

and focused on the topic.”6

The sentiment of Brophy’s position is that the discourse and dialogue remains

focused on the student’s learning and their subsequent progress. If the focus

of the rank order moves away from promoting learning conversations and

6 Motivating Students to Learn – Brophy – 2004 – p171

motivating students to be reflective of their own learning than it falls into the

danger of being merely about competition and where the student ‘ranks’. This

has the potential to distract a student from the task of having genuine

dialogue with their teachers about their learning and focus solely on how their

friends are doing. One would suggest that if this were the case, then a Rank

Order System would be counter productive and could engender

underperformance or even conflict within the school setting.

It has been maintained that, “competition is debilitating because it places the

student in an ego-involved, threatening, self-focused state rather than a task-

involved, effort-or strategy-focused state.”7 This is a potential weakness of

creating a Rank Order System; that is, it has the potential to be ego-orientated

rather than leaning and progress centred. If a pupil only reflects on where

they are placed in the rank order, rather than why they are where they are,

then this will be a weakness. On the other hand, it could be argued that the

teacher plays a central role in diffusing the egotistical aspect of the system by

centring the dialogue on learning, effort and how to make improvements. The

anecdotal evidence in the planned student interviews (see methodology) on

the system will be interesting to see whether or not the student’s are

interested only in their positional ranking. They will also indicate whether or

not there are some negative consequences in terms of the way students

perceive one another. A further critique of the competitive nature of

comparing progress grades is summarised by De Fraja and Landeras:

7 Motivation in Education: Volume 1 - 1984– Academic Press – P8

“that increasing the power of the incentive scheme and the effectiveness of

competition may have the counterintuitive effect of lowering the students’

effort…[and]…increased competition lead to segregation of pupils by ability,

and may also determine lower attainment in some schools.”8

De Fraja and Landeras economic research paper draws the conclusion that

‘increased competition’ leads to segregation and would have a negative

impact on the attainment of pupils. A Rank Order System would undoubtedly

lead to heightened competition and would thus require me within my research

to ascertain the effect that this has on the progress of pupils towards the

bottom of the rank order. Furthermore, it will be necessary to see what impact

this has on aforementioned friendship groups and whether or not it changes a

students behaviour towards learning, particularly if they are towards the low in

the ranking.

Ames and Ames (1981) have argued that students working on their own tend

to:

“...evaluate their progress with reference to their prior performance, noting

and appreciating developments in knowledge and skill.”9

Whilst I agree that students are the best placed to take stock and note of their

developments, one must appreciate that in my school they need to evaluate

8 “Could do better: The effectiveness of incentives and competition in schools” – De Fraja and Landeras

– Journal of Public Economics 90 – pp189-213, 2004 9 Motivating Students to Learn – Brophy – 2004 – p171

their performance in ten subjects – every six to eight weeks. This is a

problematic task for students of this age to undertake and one in which I feel

an intervention is needed in order to help make sense of this vast amount of

information. Hence, an intervention that motivates the student from working in

isolation to being able to stock of their progress and be motivated to improve it

should surely be a positive?

In conclusion, the literature surrounding motivation and competition is

contentious. It would appear that promoting further competition in schools

that are often build on competitive structures has some serious pitfalls. In my

opinion, the premise of the Rank Order System is to tread somewhere in the

middle of this and whilst promote some competition, I hope at the same time it

will foster and engender the need for robust and rigorous dialogue between

pupil and teacher.

Methodology (2000 words) Rationale, method, sample ethics

It is crucial that when exploring such a rationale that one adopts the most

appropriate methodology. As such, I have opted to approach this enquiry

adopting a case study methodology. Lamnek (2005) defines a case study as

a “research approach, situated between concrete data taking techniques and

methodologic paradigms”10 whereas Yin (2008) sees a case study as “an

empirical enquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its

real-life context”11. I would argue that both of these definitions offer an

appropriate justification for a methodology outlined in my rationale. Exploring

10 “The Case Study” – Demetriou (2013) – in School Based Research - ed E.Wilson - 2013 – Sage Publications – p257 11 ibid. p257

the progress data has to happen within a ‘real-life’ context as it is a ‘real-life’

entity that affects the behaviours of a pupil. Furthermore, Demetriou (2013)

summarises a case study as being:

“…a versatile, qualitative approach to research which enables the researcher

to understand a complex issue or object and brings with it a familiarity to the

case that no other research approach is able to do.”12

Due to the fact that my research is going to centre on progress data and the

way in which this impacts on the motivation of students, it is clear that this is

an issue of some complexity. For example, there is a need to set the

evidence in the pupil progress data alongside the anecdotal evidence of

student questionnaires and evaluate the impact this has on student progress.

This case study proved a deeper understanding of such complex issue and

will indicate to me evidence of the impact of my intervention within my own

school context.

I also think that a case study is appropriate to the rationale I have set forth

due to the fact that it is not about collecting large samples of data or following

rigid protocols rather they are concerned with exploring a an “in depth,

longitudinal examination of a single instance or event”13 in order to provide me

with a clearer understanding of how pupil progress can be used to motivate

pupils. The scope of my research is naturally limited, by design, to a select

sample of students. As a result of this, a case study gives me the opportunity

12 ibid. p256 13 ibid.p257

for to ascertain the impact my intervention of a rank order system can have on

a small group of students within my school context. It is not designed to be a

wide-scale research for use across a group of schools or in any wider context:

it is bespoke to the needs of the students I work with in my own school

context. In addition, a case study on the how rank ordering pupil progress

data motivates student is a type of qualitative research due to the fact that I

will be researching only a few instances will be studied. However, it can also

incorporate quantitative research and in this instance it certainly will, as it will

require me to quantify the data I am using on pupil progress and come up with

general conclusions on the outcomes of this data.

Another part of my reason for adopting this approach is outlined by Bell who

states that:

“…or attempt to identify the various interactive processes at work, to show

how they affect the implementation of systems and influence the way an

organisation functions.”14

In implementing the rank order system to promote student motivation I have

essentially wanted to ascertain the impact that this will have on students and

therefore how our 'organisation functions’. In addition, one must see the rank

order system as an ‘interactive’ process, that is, teachers enter progress data

which is then analysed and made readily available for students to interpret

and understand. Their understanding is crucially developed through further

14 Bell, J. (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first time researchers in education, health

and social science. 5th edition. Maidenhead: Open University Press – P9

conversations with staff which will hopefully inspire a positive change for

students. It is the interaction with students that is the most critical: the system

was not designed so that students would merely look at the data themselves

and reflect independently, it was made to be collaborative in the sense that it

will promote robust teacher-pupil dialogue. As a result of this, I feel that a

case study would offer the opportunity to look at a number of facets within the

rank order system. Firstly, it would allow one to gather student opinion and

interpretations as to how the system is supposed to work as well as

understand the immediate and attitudinal impact it has on the relevant pupils.

Furthermore, it will be necessary to also gauge the attitudinal impact of

teaching staff to see whether there is a tangible improvement in both the

progress and learning of students. It will also be extremely exciting to

compare the view of the teachers with that of the students and compare

whether or not the view of motivation and competition is the same.

The case study methodology is not without its criticisms one of which being

that it can lead to subjective conclusions on the part of the researcher due to

“intense exposure to the findings of the case”15 biasing the findings.

However, one may counter claims of subjectivity based on the quantitative

aspect of this case study in particular and the reliance of using pupil progress

data measured over a period of time. If for example, one only used one

particular dataset then it would it would be entirely possible that subjectivity

could play a the part in the conclusions that would be drawn. Therefore, to

ensure my objectivity within the results drawn from the pupil progress data it is

15 “The Case Study” – Demetriou (2013) – in School Based Research - ed E.Wilson - 2013 – Sage Publications – p257

necessary to gauge this over a longer period of time. Giddens (1984)

criticises case study research as he:

“…considered case methodology ‘microscopic’ because it ‘lacked a sufficient

number’ of cases.”16

My case study will be limited to a small sample size thus making it

‘microscopic’ in the eyes of Giddens, however, both Hamel (1993) and Yin

(2008) disagree with the assessment made by Giddens. They have argued

that the sample size of a case study is to some degree irrelevant. Their view

is that the:

“goal of the study should establish the parameters, and then should be

applied to all research. In this way, even a single case could be considered

acceptable provided it meets the established objective.”17

Demetriou (2013) summarises the views of Hamel and Yin by stating that it is

not the units of analysis the are essential in a case study rather it is whether

or not the research has been theory driven. In terms my case study, it is not

about the volume of pupils involved in the research rather it is about

assessing the motivational factors the rank ordering of pupil progress can

have on a select amount of students over a period of time. In short, are the

students in my select group more motivated by their position in the rank

order? And, if so, why?

16 idid. p259 17 ibid. p259

Yin (2008) set out the example methods of case studies and the method of

which I have chosen to employ is an exploratory one. Demetriou summarises

this as follows:

“In exploratory case studies, fieldwork and data collection may be undertaken

before you define your research questions and hypotheses, although the

framework of the study must be created at the outset.”18

I have already begun collecting some of the data for my particular case study;

something which I wrote about in module 6 of the MTL. To fully assess the

impact that the rank order has on students it is necessary to complete this

task over a period of time. Reliance on using one dataset to assess the

motivational factors of the rank order would make it a rather limited study,

hence, the case study will factor in five separate data sets taken over the last

year. This makes my case study not only an exploratory one but also a

longitudinal one. Demetriou categorises a longitudinal study as “the

quantitative and/or qualitative study of one research entity at multiple time

points.”19 My case study will focus on collecting rank order data at five

separate points within one single year, however, I wont review this data until it

has all been collected. This data will be collected as part of the normal in-

school process of collecting pupil progress information. Teachers enter data

at (roughly) 6 to 8 week intervals that are based on assessments that

students have recently completed. These assessments show where the

18 ibid. p259 19 ibid. p260

student is currently at, not where they are predicted to be. A data manager

then uses the methodology that I presented in module 6 to work out the rank

ordering of pupils in each year group. It would be untenable to assess the

impact the rank order has on every single student in the school and is much

wider than this case study. Therefore, I will select a small sample of around 5

students from one particular year group. I will also endeavour to ensure that

the students I select are friends so that in module 8 I will also be able to build

on the literature that I reviewed about the use of competition and motivation.

It is natural for friends in a school context to compare and contrast their

relative performance in assessments and my hypothesis is that the rank order

will potentially heighten this competition and possibly alter their attidudes.

From this position, I will analyse the relative trends of the performance of

these set students over time and see whether or not the impact on the

progress of these students is positive. This is obvious very limited given the

brevity and depth of the study. Furthermore, I will discuss with each student

their feelings and sentiments towards being ranked alongside other

students/friends. It will be fascinating to see whether or not they view the

ranking as an extrinsic motivation in itself or if they are more influenced by the

behaviourist attitude of where there friends rank. I will then evaluate this data

and information in tandem and assess what conclusions I can draw from this

study.

All classroom research and study requires a consideration of the ethical

issues that will be encountered – particularly when a part of the subject matter

could be considered contentious. Ethics can be considered as discerning

between what is right and wrong and advocating a position of doing the right

thing. Stutchbury (2013) states that:

“As researchers, we have a duty to act ethically and to make sure that in

reporting our research, the reasoning behind ethical decisions is recoverable

by the reader.”20

As a result of this, when approaching the research into the rank order I will

ensure that the students I use are invited to take part and are not pressurised

into to doing so. In addition to this, I will seek the consent of the students via

the parents to talk to them about the study that I am undertaking.

Furthermore the names of the students in my sample will be anonymised. I

will not use their names, rather, I will categorise them as letters and keep this

lettering concurrent throughout the study. In addition, I will ensure that the

case study adheres fully to the BERA guidelines for carrying out research of

this nature.

The case study I will carry out will have a utilitarian aspect to it. That is, the

full outcome of the study will be to try and create a system that is for the good

of the majority of those involved. By creating a small sample group I will be

able to use them as the benchmark for certain aspects of the rank order, in

the hope that the system itself can be refined and improved. There are

potential ethical issues with using a group of students who are friends and

ascertaining the impact that a rank order would have on them. Therefore, it is

20 “Ethics in educational research –Stutchbury - in School Based Research - ed E.Wilson - 2013 – Sage Publications – p91

essential that any discussion and questioning with students is done sensibly

and the progress of other students is not referred to. As teachers we have a

deontological responsibility to ensure that the best is done for our students,

that is, to ensure that every process we engage with in schools is done for the

benefit of the students.

Bibliography

Motivation in Education – Russell E. Ames and Carole Ames – Academic Press, Orlando, 1984 Effective Learning in Classrooms – Chris Watkins, Eileen Carnell and Caroline Lodge – Sage Publications, London, 2010 “The Detrimental Effects of Extrinsic Reinforcement on “Intrinsic Motivation”” – Alyce M. Dickinson – The Behaviour Analyst - 1989 “Could do better: The effectiveness of incentives and competition in schools” – De Fraja and Landeras – Journal of Public Economics 90 – pp189-213, 2004 New Kind of Smart – Bill Lucas and Guy Claxton – Open University Press, Maidenhead, 2010 Motivation in Education: Theory, Research and Applications – Paul Pintich and Dale Schunk – Merrill Prentice Hall – Second Edition, London, 2002 Motivating your Secondary Class – Maurice Galton, Susan Steward, Linda Hargreaves, Charlotte Page and Anthony Pell – Sage Publications, London, 2010 Motivating your Students to Learn (Second Edition) – Jere Brophy – Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, 2004 School Based Research – Elaine Watson – Sage Publications, London, 2013