Teaching and cognitive outcomes in A-levels and Advanced GNVQ's: Case studies from Science and Business Studies Classrooms

The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate how a research diary methodology, designed to analyse A-level and GNVQ classrooms, can be a powerful tool for examining pedagogy and quality of learning at the level of case study. Two subject areas, science and business studies, are presented as cases. Twelve teachers and thirty-four students were studied over a four-week period in May 1997 and contrasts were drawn between lessons from three A-level physics teachers/three Advanced GNVQ science teachers and two A-level business/economics teachers/four Advanced GNVQ business teachers. Lessons were analysed within a cognitive framework which distinguishes between conceptual and procedural learning and emphasizes the importance of metacognition and epistemological beliefs. Two dimensions of lessons were identified: pedagogical activities (e.g. teacher-led explanation, teacher-led guidance on a task, question/answer sessions, group discussions, working with IT) and cognitive outcomes (e.g. structuring and memorizing facts, understanding concepts and arguments, critical thinking, problem-solving, learning core skills, identifying values). Immediately after each lesson, teachers and students (three per class) completed structured research diaries with respect to the above dimensions. Data from the diaries reveal general and unique features of the lessons. Time-ofyear effects were evident (examinations pending in May), particularly in A-level classrooms. Students in business studies classes reported a wider range of learning activities and greater variety in cognitive outcomes than did students in science classes. Science students self-rating of their ability to manage and direct their own learning was generally low. The phenomenological aspects of the classrooms were consistently linked to teachers' lesson plans and what their teaching objectives were for those particular students at that particular time of the year.

Computer usage and the validity of self-assessed computer competence among first-year business students

Abstract This study evaluates the reliability of self-assessment as a measure of computer competence. This evaluation is carried out in response to recent research which has employed self-reported ratings as the sole indicator of students’ computer competence. To evaluate the reliability of self-assessed computer competence, the scores achieved by students in self-assessed computer competence tests are compared with scores achieved in objective tests. The results reveal a statistically significantly over-estimation of computer competence among the students surveyed. Furthermore, reported pre-university computer experience in terms of home and school use and formal IT education does not affect this result. The findings call into question the validity of using self-assessment as a measure of computer competence. More generally, the study also provides an up-to-date picture of self-reported computer usage and IT experience among pre-university students from New Zealand and South-east Asia and contrasts these findings with those from previous research.