The Influence of Pupil Perceptions on Subject Choice at 14+ in Geography and History

Abstract

This article draws on the ndings of a questionnaire inquiry into the factors in uencing pupils' uptake of history and geography at GCSE. It argues that although many pupils enjoyed their learning at Key Stage 3 and that each subject holds some intrinsic interest in its own right, many pupils believe that there is relatively little purpose in pursuing the subjects beyond this stage. Their understanding of the relative 'usefulness' of both history and geography in their future lives is limited to direct and naive reference to forms of employment. Their understanding of the wider contribution each can make to their future lives is disappointingly uninformed. This limited understanding has an impact upon option decisions: if pupils cannot perceive any short term and longer term appreciation of the value of each subject then they are unlikely to want to pursue it in further study.

Student teachers’ reflections on prior experiences of learning geography

“…In terms of liking, the findings from both questionnaires also suggest that participating cohorts in the RoI liked all three subjects more than their NI counterparts. Research suggests that students are more likely to opt for subjects they like when making choices at school (Adey and Biddulph, 2001;Bewick and Southern, 1997;Weeden, 2007). It is arguable that the differences found between the NI and RoI entry cohorts in relation to their liking of the subjects were already flagged to some extent by choices made at second level which resulted in the relatively high numbers of NI students who indicated that they had no post-primary experience of history and geography.…”

History education in comprehensive schools: using school-level data to interpret national patterns

“…It seems that history has been affected by two pressures; first, the pressures on schools to improve examination results have meant some school leaders have tried to manage students' subject choices to maximise examination grades (and therefore boost the position of schools in national league tables); and secondly, the perception of history as a challenging subject means some students look for alternative options. Interestingly the research suggests that students' understanding of what history will be like beyond KS3 is not always accurate (Biddulph & Adey, 2003), nor are students making 'informed' choices as their understanding of the subject, its nature and value, is limited (Adey & Biddulph, 2001;. Central to our discussion of this issue is an assumption that history matters--but is it really a matter of concern if schools steer students away from history or students choose not to study it further?…”

“…If students are also looking for an 'easy' subject then the perception of history as an 'academic' subject may be a barrier. Research commissioned by the Engineering and Technology Board (ETB) (2005) suggests that students from poor SES backgrounds were less willing to pursue subjects that were seen as academic, and, as Adey and Biddulph (2001) have shown, the majority of students believe history is a subject that requires extensive reading and writing at GCSE, and is therefore challenging. Although judging the relative complexity of GCSE subjects is difficult, using a Rasch model, Coe's (2008) analysis of results suggests that history is a relatively difficult subject in which to obtain high grades.…”

“…This leaves a sizable proportion of the pupil population who study neither, and, as the results of this study suggest, this is often associated with schools in poor socio-economic areas or high numbers of students with SEN. The perception of both history and geography is that they require high literacy levels (Adey & Biddulph, 2001), which are likely to be seen as a barrier to many students with special educational needs (partly accounting, as we have argued, for the correlation in the survey between schools with high numbers of students with SEN and low GCSE uptake). But assuming that schools do choose to follow the English Baccalaureate model, will they guide students towards one particular humanities subject to position themselves better in league tables--or will they provide students with a free choice of history or geography?…”

‘Purpose’ as a Way of Helping White Trainee History Teachers Engage with Diversity Issues

“…A way forward seems to be to work closely with the trainees and school based mentors to explore the basis of the problems the trainee is encountering, which in many cases is to do with fundamental issues such as what they are teaching and why; there is a need for teachers to engage with these fundamental questions about purpose in history [71,72]. Students often fail to see the point of what they are studying in history [73,74], and this can be associated with teachers' own lack of understanding or failure to communicate this to students [75]. This emphasizes the point that the source of many difficulties in education is the curriculum; for pupils the curriculum may appear irrelevant, inappropriate or inadequate [9,15,22], but it also raises difficulties for teachers if they do not understand its purpose either.…”