MA Assignment 1

P a g e | 1
1327405
MASTERS PROGRAMME
Student number: 1327405
Course: PGCE Secondary (School Direct)
Module: Reflective Practice IE9J1
Dissertation/Assignment title: The Impact of Seating Arrangements on
Behaviour for Low Attaining Students
Agreed Grade and
Mark
57 C
Overall comment
You have devised an interesting research project on a topic of relevance to your teaching and
your school. It will be challenging, however, in such a small scale project, to gain sufficient
relevant data on two issues to be able to draw valid conclusions, even if they are related: you are
looking at the effects of seating on both learning and behaviour. Be careful not to confuse the two.
You need to explain why the school has adopted a boy/girl seating policy: is it focused on
behaviour or learning, or both? Is it boy/girl pairs in rows or boy/girl table groups?
I look forward to reading the results of the intervention project. Well done.
Subject Knowledge
You have read relevant and recent research literature and have shown an understanding of the
main concepts and theories. However, the range of your reading, although adequate, is limited
and you rely principally on two or three texts. There is a lack of depth and breadth.
Analysis and Critique
The basic demands of the question have been recognised in this work. There is a competent level
of analysis. I would have liked a greater level of critique of your reading and a greater attempt to
apply your knowledge gained from your reading to your situation. There is very little in this
respect. There is sensible, if limited, comment on the evidence. Some points are unsubstantiated
Presentation
There is a generally satisfactory structure to the assignment. Written accuracy is also satisfactory
although in places your writing is ambiguous or lacks clarity of explanation. There are occasional
errors of syntax and punctuation. You should also be careful to follow the required referencing
system: there are some errors
Advice for future work
Aim to increase the breadth and depth of analysis and synthesis of material and, importantly,
critique and apply your knowledge to the data you derive.
Proof read your work to ensure that it reads with clarity and that grammar and punctuation are
correct.
Revisit the guidelines on referencing and ensure referencing accuracy in the text.
Signed (first marker) Kate Shilvock Date 24th January 2014
Second marker’s comments where applicable
I agree that the assessment of both behaviour and learning in your study will be challenging. You
show a good understanding of the topic and have undertaken relevant research. The context
section is strong, although would benefit from some editing. Generally, I feel that this piece of
work needs to be more tightly focused. At times it lacks clarity and would be improved by a clearer
structure, particularly in the literature review. By using signposting, you can help to guide the

P a g e | 2
1327405
reader through your argument. Ensure that all comments are substantiated and check the
referencing guidelines.
Signed (second marker) Alison Morgan
Date 30.1.14
The Impact of Seating Arrangements on Behaviour
for Low Attaining Students
ORIENTATION. Marx et al, recognise that while educational systems face intense scrutiny,
educational critics ignore the fundamentals of the classroom environment. They fail to
recognise the classroom as a physical entity and how that physical entity can influence the
behaviour of pupils who use the classroom (1999). In an Ofsted report dated May 2013; this
Academy was awarded outstanding for the behaviour of its pupils within the school. There
was no special mention for how pupils were seated within the classroom and how successful
it was. The Academy policy for seating arrangements is boy/girl wherever possible, also
taking into account any provision for those with special educational needs. While in a
standard classroom, this may be the correct approach; in a non-standard classroom this may
have detrimental effects on the behaviour of certain individuals. For example in a classroom,
where every pupil has a computer to work on, not only does the seating arrangement
contribute to how a pupil behaves, but there is an added barrier of a computer screen between
the teacher and pupil. In recent lesson observations, not only has the seating arrangements
been questioned, but also the physical environment the pupils are learning in. With some year
groups this is having a detrimental effect on their behaviour and ultimately their learning
experience. By following the school’s policy of boy/girl seating arrangements wholesale, it is
not allowing for differences in classroom setting, barriers to learning and the position of the
teacher within the classroom. Consequently, this mini-research project will examine not only

P a g e | 3
1327405
the standard boy/girl seating arrangements recognised by the school, but also two other
seating arrangements to see what effect if any seating arrangements in a non-standard
classroom can have on the behaviour and learning of pupils.
KEY WORDS: lesson observation, seating arrangements, question and answers, behaviour,
physical environment, engagement, learning experience, Means-End Chain (MEC)
CONTEXT. This Academy opened in January 2011 following the closure of its predecessor
school. It is an Academy sponsor-led mixed school for 11-18 year olds with specialist status
in mathematics. At present it has 958 pupils on roll, with 81 in an expanding sixth form
provision. This looks set to rise with increasing applications stating this Academy as their
first choice secondary provision. 2013-2014 is the first time this Academy has introduced an
admissions policy as in previous years it has been open to all in and out of area and this is in
part as a result of the Academy being awarded outstanding status for teaching and learning by
Ofsted in May 2013.
The Academy is a Catholic College and all pupils and teachers share in the Catholic vision of
the Academy and will take that vision and ethos into the community in which they live.
The curriculum is all encompassing and is tailored to meet all current and future statutory
requirements. Years 7 to 9 are divided into bands and pupils are placed within each band
based on their ability. Those with special educational needs are given extra support from
either a graduate coach or differentiation within the lesson. All pupils are given the
opportunity to achieve well and make good progress and will acquire knowledge and skills
relevant to adult life in the 21st
century. Above all they will leave the Academy competent in
both numeracy and literacy skills. l

P a g e | 4
1327405
The Academy believes that all children have the ability to succeed and ensure barriers to
learning are removed in order for those with Special Educational Needs (SEN) can achieve
the highest standards of academic achievement. They work in partnership with all
departments to deliver a broad and balanced curriculum which will prepare their young
people for lifelong learning. Student voice has been introduced in order for the teachers to
listen to what SEN pupils have to say about their learning experience. Individual Provision
Plans (IPP) are created as early as Year 6 in partnership with Primary Schools, in order to
ensure all new pupils joining the Academy are included in all aspects of the learning
provision.
For those pupils who permanently have problems with behaviour and disturb the learning of
others, various steps are taken to manage their behaviour and the goal of the Academy is to
keep them within the community. It is only once all avenues are exhausted that a pupil is
asked to leave the community and join an alternative learning provision.
This Academy is situated in Chelmsley Wood, within the Solihull Metropolitan Borough
area, and is one of three of the Borough’s most densely populated northern wards. From both
a regional and national perspective, Solihull is a broadly affluent Borough, with house prices
above the national average. In contrast to this, Chelmsley Wood is one of the most socially
deprived areas in the country. It has a high proportion of lone parent households and has a
larger than average population density per household than elsewhere in the Borough.
It is estimated that 37.1% of children in Chelmsley Wood live in poverty, more than double
the rate across Solihull as a whole (15.8%) and substantially higher than the England average
(23.3%) (Chelmsley Wood Ward Profile, 2013).

P a g e | 5
1327405
Of the 958 pupils on roll, the proportion of students from minority ethnic backgrounds is
within the national average and those who speak English as an additional language is well
below the national figure. In line with the socio-demographics of the area, those students
known to be eligible for free school meals are nearly twice the national average. A small
number of children who are looked after by the local authority attend the Academy. The
proportion of students who are disabled or with special educational needs supported by the
Academy through school action is below the national average. The proportion with a
statement of special educational needs or supported at school action plus is above average.
The Academy has a growing Rainbow Centre for those with social, behavioural and
emotional needs, along with those with recognised medical statements to support their
learning and emotional journey.
Although Solihull’s population is becoming more diverse with the population of Black or
Asian Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds increasing significantly, the profile within
Chelmsley Wood is different from the rest of the borough. Between 2001 and 2011, the
number of BAME residents increased by +42% and with this there was a fall of -3% (-368
individuals) in the White population of Chelmsley Wood. There is an above average crime
rate in Chelmsley Wood with 1,100 reported crimes in Chelmsley Wood in 2012, equating to
a rate of 88.3 per 1,000 population, considerably above the Solihull average (47.4 per 1,000)
and highest in the borough (Chelmsley Wood Ward Profile, 2013).
LITERATURE REVIEW. As earlier stated, education professionals fail to recognise the
importance of the classroom environment in the outcomes of learning for pupils. However, a
number of researchers have produced findings based on results from looking at where a pupil

P a g e | 6
1327405
sits in relation to the teacher, the importance of good planning when creating a classroom
environment and the overall outcomes of pupil learning depending on where they sit.
Looking first at the research carried out by Marx et al in 1999, which specifically looked at
the effects of seating arrangements and how this affected children’s question-asking, they
recognised immediately that the ‘physical characteristics of a classroom setting can influence
the behaviour of its users’ (p.249) but also needed to ‘consider where a teacher is positioned
in relation to the pupils within the classroom space’ (ibid). Whilst this is an important
consideration, in certain circumstances the teacher is restricted with what they can do within
the classroom depending on the size, layout and physical aspect of the furniture within the
setting. In an idealistic world, the teacher would be allowed to move pupils and furniture in
order to get the best out of their pupils, seating them appropriately and moving about the
classroom in order to get the best learning outcomes for the pupils. In a society where
budgets are being cut within the education system, the setting of the classroom does not take
priority and therefore this can have a detrimental effect on the education of our pupils. Using
Steinzor’s 1950 study, Marx et al, noted that pupils sitting adjacent to each other, as in a
standard row configuration, are less likely to interact with each other than those who sit
opposite or nearly opposite to them (p. 250). They then looked into this further by looking at
other variables, that of the distance between teacher and pupils and where the seat actually is
in relation to the teacher. Referring to Gump, 1987, Marx et al, looked at how larger
classroom groups had a greater likelihood of sustained and reciprocal verbal interaction
between the class and teacher (p. 250) and how pupils whose seats are ‘distributed through a
classroom can establish face-to-face contact more easily than those seated in rows and
columns’ (p. 251). One fundamental tool a teacher uses to control behaviour within a
classroom is the ability to make eye contact with their pupils and communicate using non-
verbal language. Gump and Marx et al, are looking at classroom settings where the furniture

P a g e | 7
1327405
and pupils within the classroom can be easily moved or indeed can move around. Without
the ability to move pupils and furniture, the teacher has to rely on seating arrangements only
and has to make a judgement on where best to seat pupils in order for them to gain the best
from the lesson and learning environment. Where a teacher positions themselves in class is
just as important as where the pupils sit. Many researchers support the idea that a teacher can
interact best by using the row-and-column pattern seen so often within the classroom,
allowing them to make eye contact and non-verbal gestures when controlling behaviour in the
classroom. Marx et al (quoting Weinstein, 1985), also see a connection between behaviour
and when a pupil selects where they sit, rather than being directed to sit in a certain seat,
following either school policy or teacher direction (p. 251).
Teachers who follow school policy and seat pupils’ boy/girl and use preferences for those
with SEN cannot account for personality differences and therefore the behavioural problems
connected to seating positions (p. 252).
It has been suggested that classroom communication varies according to where in the
classroom pupils are seated. For example those sitting at the front and middle location of the
classroom ‘communicate more…show different non-verbal behaviours…and [show] more
interest, enjoyment and motivation…compared to those seated at the back of a classroom’ (p.
251). It is therefore assumed that if communication levels and interaction changes due to
seating positions, then behaviour patterns of pupils will change depending on where they sit;
those at the back tending to not engage will the lesson and therefore become a disruptive
influence within the class. The ‘action-zone hypothesis’ (p. 251), relating to seating positions
and pupil-teacher interaction has been observed by a number of researchers. Marx et al, cite
Adams and Biddle, 1970 who observed 32 classes and reported that most of the verbal

P a g e | 8
1327405
interaction came from students seated in the front row and centre seats; a ‘T-shaped area of
disproportionate interactions the action zone’ (p. 251). Other researchers recognise a
triangular action zone giving a larger area of engagement. However, it is important to
recognise that pupil engagement depends on each individual’s interaction rate and in some
cases regardless of where they sit certain pupils will not engage or participate in lessons.
In contrast to being assigned seating positions, pupils who choose their own seating position
take control of a number of variables in response to personality, motivation and how they
participate in a class. In all Key Stages within the school environment, it is natural for pupils
to want to sit with their friends, those who are similar to them and they do so without taking
into consideration any consequences that particular seating arrangement has for them. For
example, a short-sighted or hard of hearing pupil who would be better sitting at the front of a
class, may choose to sit farther back within the classroom in order to sit with their friends.
They do not take into consideration any consequences that seating arrangement may have
from them and their learning focus. This can be attributed to immaturity and the need to not
be seen as over-enthusiastic within the classroom. However empirical research findings have
shown those who choose front-row or centre seats are ‘more creative, assertive, aggressive
and competitive…[and] have greater success in doing things…and are more attentive…than
those choosing seats further back or to the side of a classroom’ (pp. 251-252).
Moslemi Haglighi and Mohd Jusan, 2012 investigate further what happens when pupils
choose their own seating position and using ‘Means-End Chain’ (MEC) when looking at
pupils’ behaviour in the classroom. They looked at how the MEC varies according to the
cultural context the pupils belong to. The MEC model can be used to link pupils’ cultural
aspects to their behaviour in selecting the appropriate seating position. The original MEC
model (Fig. 1), sourced from Olsen and Reynold, 2012 in Moslemi Haglighi and Mohd Jusan,

P a g e | 9
1327405
2012, assumes that the attributes of the environment (in this case the seating arrangements)
can lead to various consequences of experience which in turn satisfies user value.
Moslemi Haglighi and Mohd Jusan, 2012, see seating arrangements from the perception of
the pupil in relation to the value they place on their educational outcomes. It can also be seen
from a school policy perspective where according to Atherton, 2005 (in Moslemi Haglighi
and Mohd Jusan, 2012, standard row arrangements …support a top-down (teacher-student)
approach to learning, which in turn can see pupils as passive learners (p. 289). Atherton goes
on to claim that circle or cluster seating arrangements create active learners (ibid).
Fig. 1. The original Means-End Chain model. Source: Olsen and Reynold, 2011 in Moslemi Haglighi and Mohd Jusan (2012)
Interestingly, this piece of research was carried out in Malaysia, where education value and
success carries a high premium. Pupils are expected to be high achievers and therefore they
take responsibility for their choices within an education setting. Therefore the cultural
context comes into play when it comes to seating position and choice. Moslemi Haglighi and
Mohd Jusan, 2012, ask two important questions regarding perceptions of seating
arrangement; what seating arrangement would a pupil choose if they were given the freedom
to state their preferences and which particular seat in the three favoured layouts would they
choose? Based on previous findings, in cultural contexts where success is vital, then these
Value
Consequence
Attributes

P a g e | 10
1327405
pupils, according to MEC theory, will ‘choose [their seat determined] by [their] values’
(Gutman, 1982, in Moslemi Haglighi and Mohd Jusan, 2012.
In areas of poverty, deprivation and low expectations, the value of the seating arrangement
alters significantly. Pupils, in practice, see the seating arrangement as a barrier to learning.
Seating arrangements forced upon them can be seen to have a negative effect on their
learning process. If they do not like where they have been assigned to sit, then this may stop
the learning process altogether and introduce difficult behaviour a teacher then has to control
for the good of the whole class. In contrast, a pupil who prefers the seat being assigned to
them may wholly engage with the lesson and in turn cause little or no disruption to the class.
This raises a question for a teacher expected to follow a school policy of boy/girl seating, if
actually certain pupils whether of the same gender or not, should be allowed to sit together in
order to get the best from the learning process. Is it better to lose the seating battle in order to
win the war over the learning process?
Another factor in behaviour patterns relating to seating arrangements does come down to the
maturity of the pupils. Again, this has a direct relationship with cultural contexts and the
socio-economic picture of the area the educational setting is based in. In earlier Key Stages,
where a pupil sits becomes an important factor in their school life. From Primary school age,
children are placed into sets depending on their ability to perform in literacy and numeracy.
This follows them throughout their school life, and in certain cultural contexts, can have a
positive and negative effect on the pupil. In a culture where educational success is everything,
sitting in the action-zone within a classroom becomes important. In a culture where they are
just told to do their best, then sitting in the action-zone becomes less important than them
being allowed to sit in a seat of their choice, next to their friends. Therefore as pupils

P a g e | 11
1327405
progress through the Key Stages, where they are assigned to sit sometimes can be an
indicator of whether they are expected to be high or low achievers. Moslemi Haglighi and
Mohd Jusan, 2012 cited the findings of Heindselman et al., 2007, in that grades within an
examination change due to seating arrangements based on capability. This was confirmed by
research carried out by Rennells and Chaudhari that pupils in the action-zone, regularly
performed better in texts (p. 289). Therefore not only do seating arrangements affect pupil
behaviour, but they also affect their attainment grades too.
As all pupils mature at different times, this can mean that even in Key Stage 4, a teacher can
still be experiencing behaviour problems because a pupil does not like their assigned seat
(Slavin, 2003, in Moslemi Haglighi and Mohd Jusan, 2012, p. 289).
Moslemi Haglighi and Mohd Jusan, 2012, conclude by indicating that although traditional
seating arrangements are meaningful to a classroom setting, more research needs to be carried
out on how a pupils’ cultural background influences their behaviour and performance. They
see the MEC theory as being useful for studying pupils’ behaviour relating to seating
arrangements and managing pupil expectation within the classroom environment (p. 292).
Fernandes et al., 2011 have also studied the impact of seating arrangements within the
classroom environment and have examined a number of factors which can affect the learning
process of a pupil. Their research looked at motivation, relationships, participation and
behaviour related to seating arrangements. They draw on research from other studies to show
how seating arrangements do indeed have an effect on pupil behaviour but also whether it is
‘the good student who selects the seat at the front of the class or if the seat at the front of the
class creates the good student’ (Burda & Brooks, 1996 in Fernandes et al., 2011, p. 66).

P a g e | 12
1327405
Looking at the research relating to ‘Student Control’ (pp. 70-71), Fernandes et al., 2011 cite
Hastings & Schwieso, 1995 and Wannarka & Ruhl, 2008 in showing that ‘a good seating
arrangement can help ‘control disruptive and easily distracted students’ (p. 70). It is easy to
see why education settings create a policy of boy/girl seating in order to keep same gender
groups apart, and to keep disruption and distractions to a minimum. Is this the best solution?
What if sitting a boy next to his friend has a positive outcome on their learning process. There
may be some low level disruption to contend with, but in the bigger picture, both boys may
be more engaged and more successful.
Seating plans are put into place in order to ‘control and manipulate behaviour... and [the]
physical structures [in a classroom, can] mould one’s behaviour’ (Foucault, 1972, in
Fernandes et al., 2011, p, 70). Teachers use seating plans and seating arrangements to control
behaviour without physical restraints (ibid). The physical layout of a classroom can also
control how a student moves within a class and in turn help to control behaviour and
minimising disruptive behaviour. As noted previously however, some teachers are restricted
by the physical layout of their classroom, and therefore are limited to how flexible they can
be with altering seating arrangements which could ultimately aid their control of pupil
behaviour. Fernandes et al., 2011 cite Weaver & Qi, 2005, ‘The size of the class and the room
teachers are presented with are directly related to how the classroom is to function’ (p. 70).
Teachers choose to allocate seats in order to control their pupils and ultimately their
classroom. Teachers try to keep all pupils in ‘visible line of sight…[to] allow…the teacher to
have additional input on that [pupil’s] activities and engagement level within the class’
(Fernandes et al., 2011, p, 71).

P a g e | 13
1327405
Ultimately, while seating arrangements can control communication, movement and behaviour
within a classroom, often it is the school policy or the teacher’s need to take ‘unspoken
control’ (ibid) over the classroom environment and their pupils. Therefore by placing these
unspoken seating restrictions upon a pupil, the teacher can actually be adding to behaviour
problems, whether minor or major, which in turn can have a negative impact on a pupil’s
learning process.
RESEARCH QUESTION. Using the information gathered from the literature review, this
research project will look at the impact of seating arrangements on behaviour for low
attaining students. It will also see whether seating arrangements within the classroom can
help pupils improve literacy skills using the technology they have to hand while working
independently. Using information and research gained from the literature review, this
research project will look at pupil development in terms of being able to work independently
and as a group without going off task and behaving inappropriately depending on where a
pupil is seated and where a pupil seats themselves.
One problem already identified using this class as a focus is that the school’s policy of
boy/girl seating is not particularly productive. Low attaining boys who struggle with the topic
have been observed distracting the girls in the group along with the boys who are the higher
achievers in the group and therefore this is having an impact on pupil development and
engagement in English. Research suggests that without the right classroom environment, the
behaviour of pupils’ impacts upon teaching behaviour and learning outcomes. The Academy
policy of sitting boy/girl next to each other has been observed as not wholly effective in some
circumstances and therefore alternatives need to be explored.

P a g e | 14
1327405
The focus of the research will be a Year 7, Set 4 Digital Studies class following a Gothic
Scheme of Work where they have been steadily writing their own Gothic horror eBook. The
class contains 16 pupils, 10 girls and 6 boys, which in itself creates problems when trying to
follow the school’s policy of seating boy/girl. One other barrier to learning is the classroom
environment. The classroom contains 30 computers set on static desks in a row formation.
The research will take place over six lessons, varying the seating arrangements over a two-
lesson period. The first two lessons will follow the original seating plan of boy/girl, sitting
the pupils in the seats they have been given since September. Then using the Minimum
Expected Levels of Progress (MELP) pupils will be seated with a high attaining pupil next to
a low attaining pupil. Finally during the last two lessons, pupils will be allowed to sit
wherever they choose.
During the research project, tasks given to pupils will be varied between independent
working and group working. Whether a pupil has been more or less engaged during question
and answer sessions will be recorded. Pupil’s work will be assessed to see whether seating
arrangements has impacted on their behaviour and if indeed this is reflected in the work they
have produced.
After each two-lesson period the pupils will be given a questionnaire asking them about their
learning experience during those two lessons. A focus group of six pupils – three boys and
three girls will also take place after each two-lesson cycle to ascertain more in-depth
feedback about the lessons. Questions will be semi-structured to allow for feedback from
pupils. Where possible the lessons will be observed by a non-participant to record off-task
behaviour using pre-defined checklist. Finally the pupil’s work will then be used to inform

P a g e | 15
1327405
discussion. The results will be then be used to ascertain whether seating arrangements do
indeed have an impact on the teaching and learning of pupils.
(4,014 words)
Bibliography
Fernandes, A, Jinyan, H, & Rinaldo, V 2011, 'Does Where A Student Sits Really Matter? -
The Impact of Seating Locations on Student Classroom Learning', International Journal Of
Applied Educational Studies, 10, 1, pp. 66-77, Education Research Complete, EBSCOhost,
[Accessed 9 December 2013].
Marx, A, Fuhrer, U, & Hartig, T 1999, 'Effects of Classroom Seating Arrangements on
Children's question-asking', Learning Environments Research, 2, 3, pp. 249-263, E-Journals,
EBSCOhost, [Accessed 9 December 2013].
McCorskey, J.C, & McVetta, R.W, Classroom Seating Arrangements: Instructional
Communication Theory versus Student Preferences, Communication Education, Volume 27,
1978, Pages 99-111, [Accessed 9 December 2013].
Mohammad Moslemi Haghighi, Mahmud Mohd Jusan, ‘Exploring Students Behavior on
Seating Arrangements in Learning Environment: A Review’, Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, Volume 36, 2012, Pages 287-294, [Accessed 9 December 2013].

P a g e | 16
1327405
Parker, T, Hoopes, O, & Eggett, D 2011, 'The Effect of Seat Location and Movement or Permanence
on Student-Initiated Participation', College Teaching, 59, 2, pp. 79-84, Education Research Complete,
EBSCOhost, [Accessed 9 December 2013].
Academy Curriculum Policy [Accessed 18 October 2013].
Academy SEN Policy (January 2012) [Accessed 18 October 2013].
Academy OFSTED Section 8 Report - 2012
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/provider/files/2010649/urn/136347.pdf
[Accessed 18 October 2013].
Academy OFSTED School Inspection Report - 2013
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/provider/files/2227553/urn/136347.pdf
For data on the school, see the DfE EduBase:
http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/establishment/summary.xhtml?urn=136347
Chelmsley Wood crime stats:
http://www.ukcrimestats.com/Neighbourhood/West_Midlands_Police/Chelmsley_Wood#Lea
gue [Accessed 18 October 2013].
2013 Ward Profile: Chelmsley Wood (Solihull Council):
http://www.solihull.gov.uk/Attachments/Chelmsley_Wood_WP.pdf

P a g e | 17
1327405
A4 MA Intervention Planning Annex
Name: Julie Robinson Subject: English Date: 8th
December 2013
Selected area of focus: In the table below, indicate in more detail the method(s) you will be using
in your intervention:
 Title or research question: The Impact of Seating Arrangements on Behaviour for Low
Attaining Students
Pre-intervention observations of the target group
Ability level of the
class
Organisation:
(ie seating
plan/group
work/practical etc)
Topic: (the
programme of study
for the duration of
the intervention)
Assessment: ( how
will progress be
assessed at the end of
the PoS)
Year 7 set 4. Low
level literacy and
understanding.
Three variations of
seating plan.
Individual work
creating eBook
The Gothic genre Quality and quantity
of work completed.
Teacher assessment
What method(s) of investigation will you use in your study? (Please tick)
Questionnaires Interviews Observations Learning outcomes
(i.e. tests)
What is your justification for using this/these method(s)?
For the pupils To ensure those who are uncomfortable with one method, are able to
participate in another to get a fuller study
For the school To show quantative data rather than just qualitative when presenting
results
For the study To show quantative data rather than just qualitative when presenting
results
What are the benefits of this method?
For the pupils Closed questions within the questionnaire will help reduce the
possibility of not understanding or even the inability to understand
what is being asked of them

P a g e | 18
1327405
For the study Questionnaires – by using questionnaires it is ‘easier to create
statistical results’ (Cohen et al 2007, p 321)
For the data By obtaining statistical results, the data becomes more reliable
What are the potential risks when using this method?
For the pupils For the questionnaires and interviews they give the answers they
think you want and do not act naturally when being observed.
For the data May become skewed if answers are not given openly and honestly
For reliability For the reasons stated above, if the pupils do not respond openly and
honestly, then the data will be unreliable
How have you addressed these risks?
The questionnaires will be confidential. No name or gender indication will be on the
questionnaire. This may assist the pupils in giving more honest and open feedback. Only
those who are comfortable with the interview process and who understand the need to be open
and honest will be invited to interview within the focus group. The neutral observer will only
indicate gender when filling in the observation criteria.
What, if any, are the ethical considerations with this intervention?
There are no ethical considerations with this intervention. The pupils will be given an honest
explanation of the intervention in order for them to understand what is happening. There are
no conflicts of interest between the researcher (myself) and the researched (pupils). Using a
neutral observer will ensure the researched are protected. All researched pupils will be made
aware that they can withdraw from the intervention at any point should they feel
uncomfortable.

MA Assignment 1

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to MA Assignment 1

More from julier3846

Recently uploaded

MA Assignment 1