An Illuminative Process Evaluation of a Year 7 'Primary Ethos' Initiative for Vulnerable Pupils at Secondary Transfer

CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Birmingham Research Archive, E-theses Repository AN ILLUMINATIVE PROCESS EVALUATION OF A YEAR 7 ‘PRIMARY ETHOS’ INITIATIVE FOR VULNERABLE PUPILS by CLAIRE LOUISE LUNHAM A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham For the degree of DOCTORATE OF APPLIED EDUCATIONAL AND CHILD PSYCHOLOGY School of Education The University of Birmingham October 2009 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT This volume presents research into educational approaches for supporting young people at secondary transfer. The volume consists of a critical literature review and an empirical study, supplemented with an introductory chapter and concluding commentary. The review explores a 'continuity vs discontinuity' debate and examines previous research into the 'Primary Ethos' approach for maintaining continuity at secondary transfer. The review reveals a clear need for further Primary Ethos evaluations which look beyond impact, and which seek to elicit the views of the pupils and other key stakeholders. The empirical study reports on an illuminative process evaluation of a West Midland secondary school's Year 7 ‘Foundation Group’ initiative for low attaining pupils. With the evaluation’s primary purpose being to inform initiative development and organisational learning, the RADIO model (Knight and Timmins, 1995) was used. Following the identification of 5 collaboratively negotiated process questions, semi-structured interviews were conducted with pupils, staff and the Head teacher. Data analysis resulted in the identification of 'supportive factor' themes, areas for development, and issues pertinent to the school. The researcher concludes by suggesting that the application of an attachment theory perspective may be useful in providing a framework for future exploration of Primary Ethos initiatives. DEDICATION I would like to dedicate this thesis to my parents, Patrick and Julia Lunham whose unconditional love, unwavering support and absolute belief in me has kept me going and helped me to succeed in completing my thesis. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the following people: • Dr Jane Yeomans, my course tutor. Over the last 3 years Jane has not only extended and developed my thinking, but has shown such belief in my ability to complete the course that I have had no choice but to persevere! Thank you so much Jane! • Raj Pahil, Educational Psychologist and 3rd year supervisor. Having Raj as my supervisor for the final year of my doctoral training course has been a blessing. Thank you for nurturing my abilities, my self-belief and my passion for Educational Psychology. You have been an inspirational supervisor. • Sandi Cook, Principal Educational Psychologist and 2nd year supervisor. I would like to thank Sandi for helping me to get my research off the ground, for supporting my early communications with the school and for proof reading my extensive stakeholder briefings! • Sue Morris, course director. I would like to express my gratitude to Sue whose dedication and commitment to not only supporting myself and my fellow trainees colleagues, but to contributing to the development of the Educational Psychology profession, has been both motivating and inspirational. • Colleagues at Coventry Educational Psychology Service. I would like to thank the many colleagues who have contributed to the development of my professional practice over the course of the last 3 years. Finally I would like to thank all of my family and friends who have been so supportive and patient with me over the last three years! I promise I will 'get back to normal' now! CONTENTS 1. Introduction to the Research 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 The rationale for the choice of research 2 1.3 The context for the research 2 1.4 The remit of the evaluation 3 1.5 Influencing factors 4 1.5.1 Conducting ‘real world’ research 5 1.5.2 Working as a lone researcher 6 1.6 The nominated journals 7 1.7 Introduction to the remainder of the volume 8 References 10 2. Secondary Transfer, the 'Continuity Debate' and the 11 ‘Primary Ethos’ approach: A Review of the Literature 2.1 Abstract 11 2.2 Introduction 12 2.2.1 Pupils’ social-emotional response to the immediate transfer 13 period 2.2.2 Pupils’ subsequent adjustment to secondary school 14 2.2.3 The impact of secondary transfer on pupils’ academic 17 progress 2.2.4 Conclusions from the research on the impact of secondary 19 transfer 2.3 The ‘continuity debate’ 20 2.3.1 Theory and research underpinning the ‘pro- 23 discontinuity/progression’ view 2.3.2 Theory and research underpinning the ‘continuity’ view 27 2.3.3 A note about middle schools 29 2.3.4 Vulnerable young people and transition 30 2.4 Defining a ‘Primary Ethos’ initiative 31 2.4.1 Prevalence of Primary Ethos initiatives 33 2.4.2 Review of the findings from three early Primary Ethos studies 35 2.4.3 Critique of the three early Primary Ethos studies 42 2.5 The ENABLE evaluation 47 2.5.1 Main findings of the ENABLE evaluation 49 2.5.2 Critique of the ENABLE evaluation 52 2.6 Future directions for ‘Primary Ethos’ research 53 2.7 Conclusion 55 References 59 3. An Illuminative Process Evaluation of a Year 7 ‘Primary 66 Ethos' Initiative for Vulnerable Pupils 3.1 Abstract 66 3.2 Introduction: a review of the literature 67 3.2.1 Introduction to the present evaluation 74 3.3 Methodology 76 3.3.1 The evaluation questions 78 3.3.2 Rationale for decisions made 80 3.4 The qualitative interview study 82 3.4.1 Ethical considerations 84 3.4.2 Minimising threats to validity and reliability 85 3.4.3 Data analysis 89 3.4.3.1 The thematic analysis process for question 3 90 3.4.3.2 The data analysis process for questions 4-6 94 3.4.3.3 Processing information with stakeholders 94 3.5 Results 96 3.5.1 Question 3: What is it about the Foundation Group that has 98 contributed to its success? 3.5.1.1 Theme 1: The Foundation Group Staff 98 3.5.1.2 Theme 2: Support for Learning 100 3.5.1.3 Theme 3: Freedom and Flexibility 101 3.5.2 Question 4: How do pupils feel about moving out of the 103 initiative and what are the implications for post-initiative support? 3.5.3 Question 5: What do pupils understand about the reason for 105 their inclusion within the group and how do they and others (pupils and teachers) perceive the initiative? 3.5.4 Question 6: How can the Foundation Group be improved and 109 extended? 3.5.5 Issues arising 109 3.6 Discussion 112 3.6.1 Final comment 116 References 118 4. Concluding Commentary 124 4.1 Reflections on the evaluation approach 124 4.2 Contribution to knowledge and directions for future research 127 4.3 Final comment 129 References 131 APPENDICES Appendix 1: Instructions for authors for the nominated journals 133 Appendix 2: School stakeholder briefing of the literature review 136 Appendix 3: Description of the Foundation Group and the school 161 context (Results for evaluation Q2) Appendix 4: Profile of the 11 Year 7 Foundation Group pupil 167 interviewees (2007 – 2008 cohort) Appendix 5: Pupil interview schedule 168 Appendix 6: Staff interview schedule 170 Appendix 7: Head teacher interview schedule 171 Appendix 8: Prompts used by the researcher for the factual 172 interview Appendix 9: Adult consent form 173 Appendix 10: Parental consent letter 174 Appendix 11: Pre-prepared pupil consent form 175 Appendix 12: Coding frame 176 Appendix 13: Example of staff ‘supportive factor’ codes with excerpts 177 Appendix 14: The 3 sets of ‘supportive factor’ codes 178 Appendix 15: Transforming the ‘supportive factor’ codes into themes 179 Appendix 16: School stakeholder briefing of the evaluation 180 LIST OF TABLES 2. Secondary Transfer, the 'Continuity Debate' and the ‘Primary Ethos’ approach: A Review of the Literature Table 1: Salient features of Philip’s (1968) study 36 Table 2: Salient features of Dutch and McCall’s (1974) study 37 Table 3: Salient features of Galton et al’s (1975 – 1980) ORACLE 38 study 3. An Illuminative Process Evaluation of a Year 7 ‘Primary Ethos' Initiative Table 1: The application of the RADIO Model (Knight and 77-78 Timmins, 1995) to the research process. Table 2: The six evaluation questions 79 Table 3: The rationale behind the decision to undertake a 81 qualitative interview study Table 4: Minimising threats to validity within the interviews 86-87 Table 5: Braun and Clarke’s (2006) phases of thematic analysis 91 Table 6: The data analysis steps undertaken by the researcher for 92-93 Q3 Table 7: The data analysis steps undertaken by the researcher for 95 Qs 4 and 5 Table 8: The data analysis steps undertaken by the researcher for 95 Q6 Table 9: The themes and sub-themes identified by the researcher 97 for Q3 Table 10: The seven identified areas for development 110 Table 11: Issues about which stakeholders expressed conflicting or 111 contradictory views Chapter 1. Introduction to the Research 1.1 Introduction This volume presents two related papers, a critical literature review and an empirical study, written by the author/researcher (a Trainee Educational Psychologist) to reflect research undertaken for the purposes of a 3-year (2006-2009) Educational Psychology professional training programme (Applied Educational and Child Psychology Doctorate) with the University of Birmingham.

Load more