CHAPTER 5
Analysis
of Data
In
general our students are achieving in the social decision-making process
with the exception of the actual “decision” skill. This is
the action part of this process and, as cited in the literature review,
is the area where teachers are most unsure about teaching and assessing.
It is also the most abstract and complex of the skills and obviously not
consistently planned for in our classrooms and teaching units.
When the results are broken down to compare year 4 students with year
8 students there is an obvious difference between the achievements of
the younger students in the decision- making skill. This may be in part
due to the fact that the cognitive developmental characteristics of year
8 students can better understand the world through meta transformations
or abstract thinking. According to Smith (1998) the characteristics of
year 8 students involve combinational and prepositional thinking which
means that students in this age group can test propositions and consider
as many combinations as possible. In contrast, year 4 student’s
cognitive development implies that they will need more concrete tasks
to help them solve problems.
Variables
In looking at these results there are several variables that need to be
taken into consideration. In comparing the achievement of year 4 and year
8 pupils their chronological age and cognitive abilities need to be considered.
In line with the cognitive characteristics of year 4 students their attention
span is not as long as those of the year 8 students and the actual decision-making
aspect of the process was always at the end of the activity or task. This
was not the fault of the task itself; it is just part of the sequence
of the process of social decision-making. After considering the issue
or problem and developing suggestions in line with their values, students
will then set about reflecting on what the best decision will be (Mutch
1999).
The onset of adolescence at year 8 level must be considered as a variable
in terms of how to involve students in meaningful contexts.
Although they will have had experience in aspects of defining, suggesting
and deciding it is now important for them to take action in a meaningful
situation. Hypothetical situations will not elicit the degree of involvement
and depth of thought processes that is required. Students at this age
need to be challenged to participate in educational experiences where
they can see themselves in a real community context in which they have
a meaningful role to play.
The timing or sequence of the activities has to be taken into consideration. In the 1-1 activities of which there are 23 over a time period of approximately sixty minutes. The activity that was used for this research was the last one in a sequence of 1-1 tasks. It was noted that over a half of the children in the year 4 group were very restless by this time and this may have resulted in the low score for decision making in this age group. Although schools arrange for NEMP administrators to have adequate space and uninterrupted time frames for testing, there are often two administrators working on different tasks with different students at the same time. In some cases, this caused a noise distraction. This was especially evident amongst the year 4 students, and disrupted their concentration.
Associated
Skills
It was noticeable that co-operative skills had been specifically taught
in both the 1997 and 2001 year 4 groups. Students reminded each other
of the rules of co-operative learning with phrases like “Everyone
must take a turn.” “Who will be the leader?” “Listen
to everyone’s ideas.” Even though co-operative skills are
not what this research looked at specifically, they are essential to the
process of social decision- making and are inextricably linked to the
other two social studies processes. There was also a marked increase of
physical group positioning amongst the year 4 students that lends itself
to constructive group work. Many students were aware of the need to sit
in a circle and face each other when discussing issues at the year 4 level.
This did not happen as often in the year 8 groups possibly because of
the differences in physical size and general unwillingness to conform
to more ordered positioning.
Research
Questions
The skills that students use in Social Decision-making are identifying,
suggesting and deciding. Although the tasks prompted them in this sequence,
the components were recognised and understood by the majority of the students.
The results shown on in graphs 1 & 2. clearly answer the research
question about the development of process skills between year 4 and year
8 students. These results show a small increase in the achievement of
identifying the problem at year 8 level, but a much larger increase in
the decision making aspect than the year 4 students.
This can be attributed to the year 8 students’ level of cognitive
development and also their social and emotional characteristics. Students
at this level are increasingly able to make decisions, they can respond
to the use of strategies and they are willing to accept responsibility
in solving the problem that is identified. In viewing the tapes there
was a noticeable quality of reflective thinking evident as these students
justified their decision-making. They were more willing than the year
4 students to enter into meaningful and relevant conversation regarding
the issues that were posed in the tasks and this interaction seemed to
bring about decision making through their verbal evaluations.
The results over time in graphs 3 and 4 show that the year 4 achievement
has increased in these processes but year 8 students have not progressed
as steadily. Perhaps the introduction of the NZ social studies curriculum
in 1997 has given teachers a better frame of reference for teaching and
including social decision-making process in their classroom programmes.
This would mean that the year 4 students have had a more consistent exposure
and involvement in this process throughout their schooling than the year
8 students who were part of this research.
The lack of increased skill level among the year 8 students over time
is an indicator of the problem that I had identified in the introduction
and rationale of this research. Even though the year 8 students are achieving
at a higher level overall they are not consolidating and developing in
this process at the rate and depth necessary to cope with level 1 of New
Zealand Qualification Authority achievement standards. The NZQA level
1 equates to levels 5-6 of SSNZC.
Evidence of the need for more sophisticated thinking and teaching towards
this aim is obvious in both documents. The difference between the achievement
objectives in social decision- making in level 3-4 compared with level
5-6 is very marked.
Level 3 – 4
Students will demonstrate social decision making skills as they:
w Identify possible causes of issues and problems
w Use criteria to evaluate a range of solutions to relevant problems
w Make a choice about possible action and justify this choice.
This is the level
that our year 8 students should be achieving. In the context of my limited
research, I believe it was specific enough to show that this level isn’t
being achieved as well as it should be in order for the students to cope
with achievement objectives at the next level i.e. 5-6 which are as follows:
Level 5-6
Students will demonstrate social decision -making skills as they:
w Identify a range of problems associated with an issue and identify underlying problems.
w Generate a range of possible solutions.
w Plan possible actions in relation to the identified problems or issues and
identify the likely consequences of these actions
w Make a choice about preferred action and justify that choice.
The level of achievement in level one of the NZQA requires knowledge of political, cultural or economic contexts that include social problems. In order to achieve Merit or Excellence the students must provide at least three possible social actions. There is an expectation that students will have had the experience in social decision making skills to be able to:
w Classify consequences using social studies ideas and terms.
w Describe and explain relationships and interrelationships between consequences.
w Use different perspectives to examine consequences.
Social Studies 1.5 (p.2) New Zealand Qualifications Authority 2001.
There needs to be
a more in depth approach and exposure to the process of social decision-making
in the primary years of schooling in order to enable the consolidation
of skills to achieve at this level.
Discussion
These results indicate a modest increase in the process of social decision-
making over the range of age groupings. The focus on the three social
studies processes that are defined in the 1997 curriculum has provided
a context for the inclusion and teaching of these skills. The specific
skill that students fail to make steady progress with is the decision-
making aspect. This is the end result of the decision- making process
so ultimately this will determine overall achievement. This aspect is
the most sophisticated out of the three because it involves a degree
of collaboration and critical thinking.
The first two skills, identifying the problem and suggesting a solution
can be achieved on an individual basis, even when working in a group.
A lot of the children were familiar with brainstorming techniques and
this generated a flow of ideas in the first two stages of the process.
The decision-making aspect involves the higher thinking processes of
meta transformations and prepositional thinking. This type of thinking
process is usually indicated in the cognitive development of children
from 11 years and onwards.
Research by Armento (1986) and Rice (1996), mentioned in the Literature
review, espouses the idea that it is possible to teach these higher
order thinking skills to younger students provided that the skills are
taught directly.
One of the possible reasons for younger students not achieving in the
more sophisticated thinking processes required in decision making may
be due to inexplicit instructional procedures. This idea is not a new
development in the social studies field. Beyer (1985, 1988) had noted
that educators generally just placed students into learning situations
where they would have to “think” at whatever level they
could instead of actually being taught the skills that were required
to engage in the degree of thinking.
The delivery of social studies in our classrooms often assumes that
thinking skills will spontaneously develop simply by involving students
in tasks that will provide higher order challenges.
There is a school of thought that favours the direct instruction of
skills separately from content. Presseisen (1986), Chance (1986), Costa
(1985), deBono (1983) and Sternberg (1986) cited in Shaver (Ed 1991)
all favour the teaching of thinking as a set of skills rather than trying
to embed it in the curriculum. The direct instruction on thinking skills
approach is not without criticism. If teachers spend all their time
in teaching skills there is a concern that the events and ideas that
make up the content of the curriculum will be disadvantaged.
However, there is an obvious middle ground perspective that would be
advantageous to both teachers and pupils at any age, where there is
a goal directed skill and a deep content approach. Keown’s work
in the field of values and social action indicates that teachers need
to seek out opportunities for their students to practise the skills
involved in critical thinking and decision- making.
In the Publication Social Studies in the New Zealand Curriculum Getting
Started there are examples of classroom activities in throughout all
levels of the curriculum as to how students can practise the skills
of social decision- making. In relating these activities to the achievement
of pupils in my research there are several points I feel need clarification
if students are to be achieving at the indicator levels.
|
Getting Started (1998 p.86).
These
activities assume that students are capable of abstract thinking as
the examples lead students in dealing with the possible instead of the
actual eg : at Levels 1-2 “What if too many birds
were hunted?” This sort of scenario is expecting students whose
knowledge of the world is related to their own direct experience of
it to work out a solution without a concrete experience.
The issue of choosing the best solution, matching it to the problem
and justifying their choice indicates that they would have an in depth
knowledge of the content of the situation. Depth of content is a necessary
element in thoughtful learning, however it is time consuming and requires
sophisticated thinking processes in the realm of consequential thinking.
These expectations are are a matter of concern when there is no cognitive
expectation of skill attainment amongst younger children to enable them
to make these decisions.
In my experience
as a classroom teacher and as a result of what I have ascertained from
this research I now consider these tasks and expectations to be ill
matched to children’s actual abilities. This is in no way meant
to be a criticism of the text, there are many other publications present
the same type of activities and infer the same level of student achievement.
Development
of Skills Over Time
The increase of skill development over time is related to the acquisition
and refinement of knowledge, skills, understandings, ideas and attitudes
Flockton (1990). In measuring the degree of success of student learning
there is a focus on the extent of the gains made by the year 4 year
group and the year 8 year group. The year 4 students made genuine progress
over the 4-year period. They are displaying progress in the development,
understanding and retention of skills and ideas relating to the social
decision -making process.
The year 8 pupils show a slo
wer rate of achievement, and in the instance of decision- making a decline
in the rate of achievement. This may well be related to the fact that
the issues that involve action at this level are more complex. Developmental
theory implies that student ability to deal with complexity of issues
should be developing in line with cognitive development and the learning
situations that they are exposed to.
Smith (1998).
The lack of skill building in all aspects of this process at the year
8 level indicates that there is no consistent increase of exposure to
more complex issues throughout students’ primary schooling. The
cognitive development of students at year 8 level should enable them
to have progressed in the skills of identifying, suggesting and deciding.
There has been much written about the values aspect of social studies,
and there is a direct link between values and action. Again we come
up against the question of what is an appropriate action as far as the
age of the students and the nature of the problem are concerned.
Although students at year 8 level are more able to learn facts about
wider global issues there still must be a meaningful context for student
learning.
Gilbert (1996) points out that although students may explore a range
of values positions regarding certain issues, it may be years before
they become decision makers, taking action to express their values position.
This is a valid point especially in relation to time frames for the
teaching of such processes and accuracy of assessment and evaluation.
Conclusions
When the Position Paper on Social Studies in the New Zealand School
Curriculum was published in 1997 it included references to the report
on the Social Studies Subjects Survey (Department of Education
1987). Some of these references indicated that “Teachers gave
students little practice in higher order thinking skills….. Many
lessons were dominated by intake activities in which students learned
facts mainly through listening to the teacher” Position Paper
(1997 p53).
Although the achievement objectives of our present curriculum clearly
define the involvement of students in the social studies processes,
the results of this research show a lack of focus or real purpose in
the teaching of thinking skills in order to facilitate successful social
decision- making. From my own experience in discussions with teachers
and from what I have read in the process of this research it is apparent
that some teachers have difficulty defining exactly what thinking skills
are and therefore find it difficult to design tasks to teach and assess
them. This coupled with the fact that the emphasis in many school schemes
is for coverage and balance of the strands puts pressure on teachers
for coverage of the curriculum rather than in depth studies.
There are
many issues to consider here, not the least of, which is further research
into higher level thinking skills. Aside from this obvious implication
these points need to be considered:
| w | Are the accepted perceptions of children’s cognitive capacities accurate? |
| w | Are curriculum expectations in social decision- making in line with student cognitive abilities? |
| w | Can we build more concrete and relevant issues into younger students’ decision -making activities? |
| w | Should educators be delivering more specific higher order thinking skill instruction in all levels of the curriculum? |
| w | Is the process of decision-making too big for accurate assessment? |
| w | Should we break down the skills involved in decision making and teach more specifically to each aspect? |
| w | As educators, do we need to commit to providing students with real opportunities that might result in real action? |
The
implications of these results reach further than the social studies
curriculum. The development of thinking skills is intrinsic in The New
Zealand Curriculum Framework. We see the emphasis on problem solving,
flexibility, questioning and interaction in all of our curriculum subjects.
Literature is full of examples of theories about involving students
in real life issues, lateral thinking and higher order thinking enhancement.
We don’t lack inspiration but we do lack models that are aligned
to the teaching of specific skills in relation to the achievement levels
in our own curriculum.
Social studies is a broad curriculum with 5 strands for teachers to
try to cover in a cycle. The issue of depth over coverage is definitely
one that needs to be considered in relation to the teaching of social
studies. This curriculum has provided opportunity for higher order thinking
skills within the three processes. The social studies curriculum clearly
states that the processes do not stand alone, that they overlap and
complement each other. Facilitation of the 1997 curriculum involved
a focus on co-operative learning and the inquiry process. Achievement
in social decision making is necessary to support the values exploration
and inquiry learning processes.
The most recently released information from the National Education Monitoring
Project (NEMP) 2001 in social studies suggests that:
“More
emphasis needs to be placed on the Social Studies processes which promote
critical and analytical thinking about issues and situations.”
This is stated under the heading “Moving Forward” and is
indicative of the need for educationalists to be focusing on the development
of higher order thinking skills within the curriculum framework. This
needs even more emphasis within the context of the social studies curriculum.
The recent publication of the NEMP curriculum map by Dr Alison Gilmore
(2002) gives an indication to teachers as to how they can tie the NEMP
assessment tasks into the curriculum documents.
Out of the possible 44 Social studies tasks that were used to cover
all 5 strands there is opportunity to assess 13 examples of the Inquiry
process, 5 of Values Exploration and only 4 examples of Social decision
making. This doesn’t reflect the lack of importance of social
decision- making in the social studies curriculum, but rather the difficulty
in selecting tasks that involve students in this skill. The results
of this research uncover a lack of social decision -making skill development
appropriate to the cognitive development of the students.
The Implications for Practice and Professional Development
The results of this research indicate a need for social decision-making
to be planned for and delivered in a manner that will consolidate and
develop skill achievement in this process. There are four areas that teachers
and educational programme planners could focus on:
| w | To focus on social decision- making at all levels of the social studies curriculum. |
| w | To provide opportunities for students to work in real situations that have relevance to their environment and both their chronological and cognitive age. |
| w | To chunk the skills involved in social decision- making into a focus for micro teaching. |
| w | To be able to justify a more in depth coverage of topics in the curriculum as opposed to breadth of coverage. |
There is an obvious
need for more support for teachers in the form of professional development
programmes. These programmes should focus on the skill development needed
to support the social decision- making process.
Although the inclusion of the process achievement objectives in the 1997
curriculum indicates a focus on these skills, there has been little in
the way of professional development programmes to support the teaching
and assessing of social decision- making skills. Long term planning directives
by the Ministry are required to support the curriculum. A focus on resource
development that provides appropriate activities to guide the teaching
and assessment of decision- making would enable teachers to be more specific
in determining the teaching of specific skills within a context. These
resources should be developed after careful consideration of the actual
expectations of achievement of students in the process of social decision
- making. Specifically these resources should:
| w | Be developed to provide opportunity for children to learn and practise higher level thinking skills. |
| w | Develop thinking skills to enable students to participate in social decision-making to consolidate and extend skill level. |
How to Provide Opportunity for Decision-making in the School Programme
As mentioned already in this research, Keown’s work in values and
social action refers to the need for teachers to seek opportunities to
teach the skills of social action in the school programme. This does not
always mean that these opportunities will be within a social studies unit.
Opportunities for social decision-making present themselves in day to
day situations as well as within the more structured objectives of a specific
curriculum.
The “What If” type of thinking scenario as indicated
in the “Getting Started” excerpt on page 30 of this research
is a good way to involve students. However, at level 1-2 these thinking
activities should be based on knowledge that the students already have
not knowledge that they are processing. For example:
| w | What if no- one fed the fish in our aquarium? |
| w | How can we make sure that the fish will always be fed? |
| OR | |
| w | What if you discover that you have forgotten your lunch? |
| w | What will you do? |
| w | What could you do to make sure this doesn’t happen again? |
The importance of
making the decision- making aspect of social studies relevant to the child’s
experience and knowledge is, I believe, the key to training students in
this type of thinking. In the early years of schooling day to day opportunities
to share in the process of social decision-making in a real context will
present themselves. As well as sharing the talking aspect of the process
it would be helpful to display these problems, choices and decisions in
simple flow chart sequences for future reference. It is important to keep
exposing students to possibilities for this process in the hope that the
skill of problem solving will become more practised.
In the middle school, years 4-6 children need to continue to be exposed
to this type of thinking but it is possible to add some complexities to
the types of solutions. Instead of just identifying and suggesting, there
should be an element of consequence and choice involved. If the problem
is about a real life situation eg: Pens going missing from students desks,
children should be encouraged to come up with a variety of solutions and
then work through the consequences of each choice. For example;
| w | Have a desk check every morning |
| w | Have a class detective |
| w | Keep all pens in a box behind the teachers desk |
| w | Make sure all pens have a permanent mark on them for identification |
After these suggestions are made systematically go through each one in relation to the problem
| w | Desk checks are time consuming. |
| w | Invade students’ privacy. |
| w | Still allow people to hide pens elsewhere. |
| w | They would mean that people had to keep their desks tidy, |
| w | It would act as some sort of deterrent and might stop people taking pens. |
All suggestions need
to viewed in this way in order to compare the advantages or disadvantages
of the solution. In this way the justification for the decision whatever
that may be is already considered. This type of process would lead students
into achieving in social decision- making at a higher level in years 7&
8 because the pattern for the process has already been established and
can be more easily transferred into more global situations. However, the
need to use this skill in everyday situations is still very important,
even at the higher levels i.e. 4-5. I believe that a focus on this would
increase independence, self esteem and responsible thinking in school
cultures. Obviously the need to teach these skills would have to be adopted
school wide and integrated into other curriculums.
The lack of development of the thinking skills that is apparent in the
social decision making aspect of this process should also have implications
for teacher training. I have observed the use of Bloom’s Taxonomy
in encouraging student teachers to think about their questioning skills,
but there is a need to be more specific and rigorous in ensuring application
in the classrooms. As with students in classrooms, exposure to different
types teaching to encourage thinking skills isn’t enough. There
has to be a system in place to teach these skills and a system to check
that the skills have been taught and assessed. Learning these skills will
become more crucial in the future as there will be more student interaction
with information, and more requirements for them to reflect and make decisions
as to what is worthwhile.
The skills and attitudes needed by students in the 21st century have been
highlighted by educationalists in many forums over the last decade. What
is common to all, is the need for students to be able to contribute to
and influence society. The fabric of our society is reflected by the ability
of individuals and groups to make informed decisions. We see more and
more evidence of young people in our justice system who have been unable
to think in real life situations about the consequences of their decisions.
In the New Zealand Educational Institute Schools for Tomorrow report (1977)
Harvey McQueen lists critical thinking, problem solving and creative thinking
as important learning skills that students will need in the context of
successful learning in the 21st century. Social Decision- making is the
process in our curriculum that encompasses all of these skills. The importance
of ensuring that students are able to achieve in this process isn’t
just about social studies but about responsibility and the knowledge that
individuals can make a difference in working to reconstruct the society
they live in.