1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. ‘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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. “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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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.

22. 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