Amy N. VanBuren and Amy K. Rottmann
The purpose of this quantitative research was to determine if there are differences in scores on the Connor- Davidson Resilience Scale among undergraduate students involved in…
Abstract
The purpose of this quantitative research was to determine if there are differences in scores on the Connor- Davidson Resilience Scale among undergraduate students involved in honors leadership programs at a four- year university. The study was an analysis of students’ reported resilience scores in relation to the number of leadership activities in which they participated to examine the potential impact of leadership practices on resilience levels of the students. Results of the dependent variables were the total resilience score, and the five factors of resilience: persistence and tenacity; emotional and cognitive control; adaptability and ability to bounce back; control; and spiritual influences. Independent variables were the number of leadership programs completed, age, gender, and class status. The level of significance used for the statistical test was .05. There was no significant difference in the total resilience scores among the three activity groups. However, a majority of students scored well above the national average score, and male students scored slightly higher than females. Additionally, females scored higher than the national average.
The purpose of this paper is to explore teachers’ noncompliance with secondary-level standardised literacy testing in Tasmania, Australia, particularly their motivations…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore teachers’ noncompliance with secondary-level standardised literacy testing in Tasmania, Australia, particularly their motivations, behaviours and justifications. This paper challenges pervasive views regarding test noncompliance, suggesting a reframing as “advocacy cheating”: noncompliance for purposes of advocating for and supporting students.
Design/methodology/approach
The research used a single case study design, with a simple thematic analysis of the qualitative data. The design enabled data to be collected during one iteration of the examined test regime, with depth of exploration into participants’ experiences and perspectives.
Findings
Findings indicate that small number of participants were engaged in test rule noncompliance at all stages of the testing regime: before, during and following the tests. This paper presents the concept of “advocacy cheating”, illustrated in these data through the motivations presented by participants for their noncompliant actions and the forms of noncompliance used.
Research limitations/implications
The small sample size and single site problematise drawing much broader comparisons. The age of the data means that current test processes and requirements have developed. Larger-scale studies might enable identification of ways in which this current regime has and might be improved.
Practical implications
This study’s findings and its focus on the classroom and teacher experience of testing provide insights into a widely debated and publicly important phenomenon.
Originality/value
The concept of “advocacy cheating” provides a newer way of considering and interpreting the range of ways in which teachers implement standardised tests.