A critical review of some recent developments in quantitative research on gender and achievement in the United Kingdom

Paul Connolly

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    13 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Over recent years the findings of a number of quantitative research studies have been published in the UK on gender and achievement. Much of this work has emanated from Stephen Gorard and his colleagues and has not only been highly critical of existing approaches to handling quantitative data but has also suggested a number of alternative and, what they claim to be, more valid ways of measuring differential patterns of achievement and underachievement between groups. This article shows how much of this work has been based upon rather under-developed measures of achievement and underachievement that tend, in turn, to generate a number of misleading findings that have questionable implications for practice. It will be argued that this body of work provides a useful case study in the problems of quantitative research that fails to engage adequately with the substantive theoretical and empirical literature and considers some of the implications of this for future research in this area.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)249-260
    Number of pages12
    JournalBritish Journal of Sociology of Education
    Volume29
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - May 2008

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Education
    • Sociology and Political Science

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A critical review of some recent developments in quantitative research on gender and achievement in the United Kingdom'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this