(Mis)Representing underachievement: A rejoinder to Gorard and Smith

Paul Connolly*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This article provides a brief rejoinder to Gorard and Smith's reply to an article I published in a previous issue of British Journal of Sociology of Education. In that original article I provided a critical review of their quantitative research on gender and education in the United Kingdom. In their reply to this article, Gorard and Smith seem to agree with many of the points I made. However, they appear to be particularly perplexed by why I had written this review given that they feel they have already addressed most of my points elsewhere. In this brief rejoinder I explain very clearly my motivations for writing my original article and refer readers to a more detailed and comprehensive paper where I have responded fully to each and every point raised by Gorard and Smith.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)715-717
Number of pages3
JournalBritish Journal of Sociology of Education
Volume29
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01 Nov 2008

Keywords

  • Achievement
  • Educational research
  • Gender
  • Quantitative methods
  • Statistics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Sociology and Political Science

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of '(Mis)Representing underachievement: A rejoinder to Gorard and Smith'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this