Switched off? A study of disengagement among computing students at two universities

Research Papers in Education

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 191-201

  Hockings, Christine ^a   Cooke, Sandra ^b   Yamashita, Hiromi ^b   McGinty, Samantha ^a   Bowl, Marion ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Academic engagement; Classroom observation; Disengagement; Higher education; Learning and teaching; Widening participation

Indexed keywords

EID: 61849105926     PISSN: 02671522     EISSN: 14701146     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02671520802048729     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Adhami, M. 2001. Responsive questioning in a mixed ability group. Support for Learning 16, no. 1: 28-34.
2. Ashwin, P., and M. McLean. 2004. Towards an integration of the ‘approaches to learning’ and ‘critical pedagogy’ perspectives in higher education through a focus on academic engagement. Paper presented to the British Education Research Association, Special Interest Group in Higher Education, May 26, at the University of Oxford, UK.
3. Ball, S. 2003. The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy 18, no. 2: 215-28.
4. Belenky, M., B. Clinchy, N. Goldberger, and J. Tarule. 1997. Women’s ways of knowing. 2nd edn. New York: Basic Books.
5. Borasi, R. 1991. Learning mathematics through inquiry. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
6. Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of a theory ofpractice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
7. Bowl, M. 2003. Non traditional entrants to higher education: They talk about people like me. Stoke on Trent, UK: Trentham.
8. Burns, C., and D. Myhill. 2004. Interactive or inactive? A consideration of the nature of interaction in whole class teaching. Cambridge Journal of Education 34, no. 1: 35-49.
9. Burton, L. 1992. Who assesses whom and to what purpose? In Reshaping assessment practice: Assessment in mathematical sciences under challenge, ed. M. Stephens and J. Izard, 1-16. Hawthorn: Australian Council for Education Research.
10. Bryson, C., and L. Hand. 2007. The role of engagement in inspiring teaching and learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 44, no. 4: 349-62.
11. Clegg, S. 2001. Theorising the machine: Gender, education and computing. Gender and Education 13, no. 3: 307-24.
12. Clegg, S., D. Tayhurn, and A. Johnson. 2000. Not just for men: A case study of the teaching and learning of information technology in higher education. Higher Education 40: 23-145.
13. Forman, E. 1988. The role of peer interaction in the social construction of mathematical knowledge. International Journal of Education Research 13: 55-70.
14. Giroux, H. 1992. Border crossings. London: Routledge.
15. Habeshaw, S., G. Gibbs, and T. Habeshaw. 1992. 53 Problems with large classes: Making the best of a bad job. Bristol, UK: Technical and Educational Services Ltd.
16. Haggis, T. 2006. Pedagogies for diversity: Retaining critical challenge amidst fears of ‘dumbing down’. Studies in Higher Education 31, no. 5: 521-35.
17. Kutnick, P., P. Blatchford, and E. Baines. 2002. Pupil groupings in primary school classrooms: Sites for learning and social pedagogy? British Educational Research Journal 28, no. 2: 187-206.
18. Malcolm, J., and M. Zukas. 2007. Poor relations. Exploring discipline, research and pedagogy in academic identity. In The pedagogy of lifelong learning: Understanding effective teaching and learning in diverse contexts, ed. M. Osborne, M. Houston, and T. Toman, 15-25. Abingdon: Routledge.
19. Mann, S. 2001. Alternative perspectives on the student experience: Alienation and engagement. Studies in Higher Education 26, no. 1: 7-19.
20. Marton, F., and R. Saljo. 1976a. On qualitative differences in learning l - outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology 46: 4-11.
21. Marton, F., and R. Saljo. 1976b. On qualitative differences in learning l - outcome as a function of the conception of the learner’s task. British Journal of Educational Psychology 46: 115-27.
22. Mason, J., L. Burton, and S. Kaye. 1985. Thinking mathematically. Bath, UK: Addison-Wesley.
23. Nardi, E., and S. Steward. 2003. Is mathematics T.I.R.E.D? A profile of quiet disaffection in the second¬ary mathematics classroom. British Educational Research Journal 29, no. 3: 345-67.
24. Prosser, M., and K. Trigwell. 1999. Understanding learning and teaching: The experience of higher education. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press.
25. Read, B., L. Archer, and C. Leathwood. 2003. Challenging cultures? Student conceptions of ‘belonging’ and ‘isolation’ at a post-1992 university. Studies in Higher Education 28, no. 3: 261-77.
26. Reay, D. 1998. ‘Always knowing’ and ‘never being sure’: Familial and institutional habituses and higher education. Journal of Educational Policy 13, no. 4: 519-29.
27. Reay, D., M. David, and S. Ball. 2005. Degrees of choice: Social class, race and gender in higher education. Stoke-on-Trent, UK: Trentham Books.
28. Santhanam, E., and O. Hicks. 2004. Student perceptions of inclusion in unit/course evaluations. International Journal of Inclusive Education 8, no. 1: 91-102.
29. Siann, G. 1997. We can, we don’t want to: Factors influencing women’s participation in computing. In Women in computing, ed. R. Lander, and A. Adam, 113-21. Exeter: Intellect Books.
30. Turner, E. 2005. Why women don’t choose computing. Paper presented at the Social Diversity and Difference Seminar Series, Seminar 2, April 27, at the University of Birmingham.
31. Vithal, R., I. Christiansen, and O. Skovsmose. 1995. Project work in university mathematics education. A Danish experience: Aalborg University. Educational Studies in Mathematics 29: 199-223.
32. Watts, M., and H. Pedrosa. 2006. Enhancing university teaching through effective use of questioning. SEDA Special 19. London: SEDA.
33. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice. Learning meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.