The Complexity of Student-Led Research: From Terminology to Practice in a Case Study of Three Countries
Saved in:
| Title: | The Complexity of Student-Led Research: From Terminology to Practice in a Case Study of Three Countries |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Daria Khanolainen (ORCID |
| Source: | Oxford Review of Education. 2024 50(1):78-94. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 17 |
| Publication Date: | 2024 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Descriptive |
| Education Level: | Secondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Student Research, Secondary Education, Secondary School Students, Foreign Countries, Barriers, Facilitators (Individuals), Influences, Educational Policy, Ideology, Political Influences |
| Geographic Terms: | United Kingdom (England), Russia, Ireland |
| DOI: | 10.1080/03054985.2023.2203375 |
| ISSN: | 0305-4985 1465-3915 |
| Abstract: | Preparing young people to meet emerging contemporary challenges has become a global imperative. Over two decades, there has been a call for students' active participation in the life of school and society, and an important feature of this call is student-led research (SLR). However, this pedagogical and empowering call with many potential benefits is not unproblematic. There are far-reaching differences between various conceptions and use of student-led research in secondary schools both within and between different countries, reflecting a contrast between skill development and voice. This contrast, however, has not been previously scrutinised and discussed. We review student-led research in England, Ireland, and Russia showing that its development has been initiated and carried out in different countries with very different goals and focuses. Our study is in the form of a case study of the three countries covering a wide range of discussions related to SLR. By looking critically at how SLR is conceived and supported in various contexts, we evaluate facilitators and barriers, which ultimately offers a better understanding of how ideologies and political decisions influence students and teachers, and how educational policies and educational values are transferred into practice. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2024 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1408052 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEodvJo_XU4r8HSOc4lXktlAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDKf3InEfcEquCZ6VTAIBEICBm312b12VUdVzJdbNnvtPTc7deiuWQHCQrD2undenJrKULhyIbC_qsvDL1xcjMid6cMyLcis0Wn_2J8HLDWtHN_nCSaxmwLtyDKXCJmLV9InkEQC0Yu9W650qTlsvNLkvyj9LHoValIOAALDpVjlqXQbLt1t5CEozI0b6LkNlcbBGbqGIiAacmQVLtSVdIb22oK-egtCoI6DC061a Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0174879840;oxr01feb.24;2024Jan22.06:31;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0174879840-1">The complexity of student-led research: from terminology to practice in a case study of three countries </title> <p>Preparing young people to meet emerging contemporary challenges has become a global imperative. Over two decades, there has been a call for students' active participation in the life of school and society, and an important feature of this call is student-led research (SLR). However, this pedagogical and empowering call with many potential benefits is not unproblematic. There are far-reaching differences between various conceptions and use of student-led research in secondary schools both within and between different countries, reflecting a contrast between skill development and voice. This contrast, however, has not been previously scrutinised and discussed. We review student-led research in England, Ireland, and Russia showing that its development has been initiated and carried out in different countries with very different goals and focuses. Our study is in the form of a case study of the three countries covering a wide range of discussions related to SLR. By looking critically at how SLR is conceived and supported in various contexts, we evaluate facilitators and barriers, which ultimately offers a better understanding of how ideologies and political decisions influence students and teachers, and how educational policies and educational values are transferred into practice.</p> <p>Keywords: Child-led research; student-led research; inquiry-based learning; participatory research; children's rights</p> <hd id="AN0174879840-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Students' involvement in research can be differentiated along a continuum from 'manipulation', 'tokenism' and 'decoration' to 'child-initiated' and 'directed' (Hart, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref1">38</reflink>]; Mayne et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref2">57</reflink>]). Arguably, these approaches are reflected in various conceptions of childhood and the place of children and young people in society. A range of terms has referred to research in which children and young people have an important input and are not merely following adult directions. Different terminology extends further than a mere preference about words and reflects important differences in both conceptualisation and practice. These terms include student-directed research, student-led research, student inquiry, self-regulated learning, inquiry-based learning, and discovery-based learning. The terms are used in a variety of global contexts, while discussions about their theoretical distinctions are limited. Our working definition of student-led research (SLR) is a scientific inquiry conceived, planned, conducted and assessed by students with support from professional researchers and/or teachers (Bacon &amp; Matthews, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref3">6</reflink>]; Dobber et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref4">26</reflink>]).</p> <p>A rationale for SLR in secondary schools and colleges often is that students gain transferable skills. It has been recognised in international studies that students' involvement in research can facilitate the development of autonomy, critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Lundy et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref5">53</reflink>]), and can enhance well-being through empowerment and active citizenship (Graham et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref6">37</reflink>]). Studies also suggest that in relation to development and learning, SLR is an important way to nurture communication, collaboration, creativity and deep thinking (Barron &amp; Darling-Hammond, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref7">7</reflink>]). Importantly, research requires a capacity for critical, discursive and independent thinking, as well as analytical thinking about data in forming opinions and coming to conclusions (Kerawalla &amp; Messer, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref8">45</reflink>]). Additionally, research on some topics can help build citizenship, recognition of human rights and the involvement of students in decision-making (Fleming, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref9">32</reflink>]). Thus, there are well-documented benefits of student research for learning, critical reflection, and civic engagement. A future benefit may be the authentic production of student projects as an educational response to the recent developments in artificial intelligence, such as ChatbotGPT.</p> <p>Another rationale for SLR can be traced back to the 1989 United Nations <emph>Convention on the Rights of the Child</emph> (UNCRC) that provided an alternative motivation for childhood research practices by emphasising a participatory, rights-focused perspective (Mayne et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref10">57</reflink>]). This first legally binding treaty addressed children's rights as an issue of justice (Twum-Danso, [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref11">69</reflink>]), and spread the understanding that children are 'experts' of their own lives who have the right to participate in everything that has impact on their lives. Consequently, Articles 12 and 13 of the UNCRC (United Nations [UN], [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref12">70</reflink>]) brought about policy changes across countries that directed the focus of active engagement to the heart of education provision. In 2006, the UN stressed the importance for researchers to recognise children's rights more broadly and make research more participatory. The concluding observations from the UNCRC Committee encouraged State Parties and multilateral organisations to engage children in knowledge production. Importantly, it puts forward the concept of children and young people as competent social actors, as change agents and right-holders. This understanding has opened an opportunity for children's participation in research with the findings used for decision-making. Subsequently, over the past two decades, there has been an active promotion of children's and young people's positioning as co-researchers of their own lives (Cooper &amp; Kellett, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref13">19</reflink>]).</p> <p>There are two key framings of SLR that correspond to these rationales – inquiry-based learning and rights-focused research. The term 'inquiry-based learning' is often used in situations where the issues of support, scaffolding, and facilitation are forefronted (Hmelo-Silver et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref14">39</reflink>]; Marshall &amp; Horton, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref15">56</reflink>]; Pedaste et al., [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref16">60</reflink>]) and are part of the curriculum that is designed to achieve educational objectives such as advancing thinking and transferable skills. The relevant literature mostly focuses on exploring how research-based activities can improve students' educational outcomes through skill development (Chu, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref17">16</reflink>]). At the same time, there is a different tradition that reflects a rights-focused approach to research underpinned by discussions around such concepts as child empowerment, autonomy, participation, and voice (Franks, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref18">35</reflink>]; Graham et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref19">37</reflink>]; Kellett, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref20">41</reflink>]) that can be traced back to the UNCRC. This literature emphasises the value of children and young people leading their own projects without placing emphasis on their educational outcomes. We refer to this form of SLR as 'rights-focused research'.</p> <p>For our critical discussion of these topics, we conducted an exploratory cross-case analysis of national policies on and practices of SLR with a focus on both inquiry-based learning and rights-focused research in three countries: England, Ireland and Russia. The countries were chosen to provide a contrast between education systems that are significantly different but have a number of similarities in terms of their traditions. England provides an example of a country where there has been a history of students being able to carry out research projects as part of their post-16 education; also there has been an acceptance of the importance of student voice, and there has been an active promotion of rights-focused research. In Ireland, there has been in the last decade the promotion of inquiry-based learning and the acknowledgement that students should have a more prominent voice in the education system. In Russia, there has been a desire to use research projects to improve students' skills, but there are few opportunities for students to take initiative and to be in charge of their projects. Consequently, these three countries provide contrasts in the aims for and support of SLR; the review of their similarities and differences provides the basis for a wider ranging exploration of the influences on SLR in education and the basis for recommendations about its use. The cross-case analysis is based on authors' expert knowledge of the three contexts with a focus on secondary school students (11–16 age range). Although SLR has been and is undertaken by younger children, it is not usually a feature of their school curriculum (Lundy et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref21">53</reflink>]), and this limits the comparisons that can be made across different countries.</p> <p>The next three sections describe SLR in each country, with a consideration of what is the predominant form of SLR, the relation between policy and practice, and whether the UNCRC call for rights-focused research has resulted in it becoming part of the curriculum? This is followed by a discussion that considers the implications of our case studies and makes recommendations about the use of SLR.</p> <hd id="AN0174879840-3">SLR in England</hd> <p>The UK has a tradition of promoting SLR across primary, secondary and higher education. This is evidenced in a variety of initiatives, curriculum development and policies designed to provide greater opportunities for student engagement in research.</p> <p>Many UK educationalists support the idea of inquiry-based learning (IBL) and there has been interest in using technology to enhance this approach (Kerawalla, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref22">44</reflink>]). The emphasis on student identification of key interests, research themes and research questions is central to these views. Mellander and Svärdh ([<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref23">58</reflink>]) describe how IBL has its roots in constructivist learning theories, requiring active engagement. In this way knowledge is recognised as being constructed through problem-solving and discussion. Inquiry-based learning is thus closely related to the development of deep thinking (Watkins, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref24">72</reflink>]) underpinned by well-established theories of learning and pedagogy established through the works of Dewey, Piaget and Vygotsky. However, the English assessment system largely involves unseen examinations that focus on subject knowledge and this limits the extent of IBL.</p> <p>A different approach concerns research that involves rights-focused research that does not necessarily have an educational objective. The starting point was the 1989 UNCRC, which initiated policy changes involving consultation and participation. An important subsequent event occurred in 2004 with Professor Mary Kellett, establishing the Children's Research Centre (CRC) which was the first university-based centre in the world to train and support children and young people to undertake their own independent research. The CRC engages with diverse groups in schools and community settings to provide age-tailored research training and then support them to undertake original research of their choosing. Kellett's approach has been applied across several university centres in the UK.</p> <p>Kellett's pioneering work on agency focused on children's and young people's right to a research voice and how this can be meaningfully facilitated. Kellett challenged established conceptualisations of children and young people's competency and highlighted the societal impact of knowledge generated from their insider perspectives. Her work embraces contemporary shifts in the status of children in society as represented by the UNCRC, which addresses children's entitlement to be informed, consulted and involved in all decisions that affect them. It also has established that children can benefit from undertaking their own research, including increased confidence and motivation, as well as generating new knowledge for themselves and others (Cooper &amp; Kellett, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref25">19</reflink>]; Kerawalla &amp; Messer, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref26">45</reflink>]).</p> <p>In contrast to research 'about' or 'on' children, the CRC draws upon the principles of participation and acknowledges the limitations of applying adult, researcher logic to the experiences of others (Cooper &amp; Kellett, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref27">19</reflink>]). The research agendas children and young people prioritise, the research questions they pose, and the ways in which they collect data are fundamentally different from adults (young researchers often gravitate towards projects with practical implications choosing to focus on what affects them on a personal level and on a daily basis, for instance, health challenges in childhood [Kellett, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref28">42</reflink>]], or children's use of public transport [Carroll et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref29">14</reflink>]]). In this way, SLR research generates nuanced data which provide valuable insights into understanding childhood.</p> <p>Kellett and Ward ([<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref30">43</reflink>]) noted how there is an important link to political literacy and the notion of advocates and protagonists in students' rights-focused research. This emerges from two conceptual arenas of power and emancipation. Power relates to whose interests the research serves, who owns the research and for whom the research is conducted. Emancipation challenges the legitimacy of research which does not involve groups (in this case, children) who are marginalised. Hence, as Fielding ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref31">31</reflink>]) argues, the interests of children are well served when they set their own agendas. Consequently, discussions about this approach are underpinned with many claims, from opportunities for personal and social growth, learning and development, to enhancing basic human rights and democracy.</p> <p>Despite a host of developments which now value children's contributions, SLR often falls short of making a difference to power relations (Bucknall, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref32">12</reflink>]; Cooper, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref33">18</reflink>]). Children are regularly consulted and have opportunities to engage in SLR, but many report frustration when research fails to make any difference or improve lives (Bucknall, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref34">12</reflink>]). Adults often intervene on final decisions and the representation of children's views in research papers continues to be translated and often censored (Cooper, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref35">18</reflink>]). One cannot therefore assume that SLR results in voice and empowerment.</p> <p>Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref36">63</reflink>]) acknowledge that on occasions SLR has moved in this direction yet needs to extend beyond simply listening to what children say, and begin to position them as independent researchers who directly influence the methodology, analysis and outcomes of research. Furthermore, they argue that this is essentially a question of children's political agency as much as a question of voice, as exemplified by children becoming politically active through a number of social movements.</p> <p>A body of research also demonstrates how many participatory, voice-based and SLR school initiatives can be potentially disempowering to some groups, especially where schools have implicit contracts that pupils speak 'responsibly, intelligently and usefully' (Bragg, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref37">11</reflink>], p. 73). Potentially this closes doors to pupils without the language or presentation skills prized by the school and can reinforce divisive practices. Cooper and Kellett ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref38">19</reflink>]) state how the risk here is that SLR, voice and participatory work becomes inextricably linked with privilege. Participatory initiatives in schools can also be oppressively censorial if areas such as teaching and learning become forbidden areas of enquiry (Fielding, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref39">30</reflink>]) and only comfortable, 'safe' issues are encouraged (Lodge, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref40">51</reflink>]) where teachers' roles are never questioned (Devine, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref41">25</reflink>]). This raises questions for practitioners and policymakers, for example, whether or not the ways to promote SLR are appropriate for all children and take account of children's diversity.</p> <p>Thus, the evolution of rights-focused research within the UK has been strongly influenced by a growing body of academic debate spanning the new sociology of childhood (Prout, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref42">62</reflink>]), children's rights (Alderson, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref43">1</reflink>]) and childhood studies (Woodhead &amp; Montgomery, [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref44">73</reflink>]). Additionally, it is firmly linked to a number of child-centred research methodologies, including the mosaic approach (Clark &amp; Moss, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref45">17</reflink>]). However, this form of research has not been incorporated into the curriculum.</p> <p>In contrast, inquiry-based research continues to be a feature of curriculum assessment in English secondary schools, and many students carry-out their own independent research. Subjects, including, biology, physics, psychology and geography, require students to design, carry-out and evaluate their own research projects. This usually involves an <emph>extended project</emph> qualification for post-16 education; students carry-out an independent piece of research on a subject-related topic of interest to them. The extended project is recognised as contributing key support for enhanced learning and critical analysis (Stoten, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref46">67</reflink>]) and is now a significant benchmark for university entry. For many practitioners, however, there are challenges, as research training and support is not a mandatory requirement for secondary teacher education (Walkington &amp; Rushton, [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref47">71</reflink>]). There also have been concerns about unauthorised parental support.</p> <p>Summary. Rights-focused research does not feature in the English curriculum, but there are several university rights-focused centres which promote this form of SLR. In the curriculum, a subject-based extended research project involving inquiry-based learning is the main form of SLR.</p> <hd id="AN0174879840-4">SLR in Ireland</hd> <p>In Ireland, SLR has been conceptualised and studied from a number of academic perspectives: childhood studies (e.g. Forde et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref48">33</reflink>]; Zeiher &amp; Devine, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref49">74</reflink>]) with attention given to power inequalities and representation of children's voice; social policy research (e.g. Byrne et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref50">13</reflink>]) with a focus on democratisation of knowledge-making and social exclusion/inclusion; and educational research (Bacon &amp; Matthews, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref51">6</reflink>]) that looks in particular at pedagogical practice and curriculum change. Arguably, though these perspectives have different foci, there is at least one aspect that connects them – students' agency.</p> <p>From the educational perspective, the concept of SLR can be understood in terms of inquiry-based learning practices defined as the ways in which learners actively engage with the social and physical environment (Bacon &amp; Matthews, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref52">6</reflink>], p. 352). Such an understanding represents the process in which both students and teachers traverse the process of inquiry and reflective analysis and assessment.</p> <p>There is increasing interest in this approach in Irish educational policy and practice. The secondary school curriculum has seen significant changes in relation to pedagogical approaches, with guidelines referring to inquiry-based methods and self-directed learning. Drawing on the policy intention to build a 'knowledge-intensive society and economy' (Department of Education and Skills, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref53">24</reflink>], p. 75), the national education policy clearly aims to increase the importance of inquiry-based learning, as linked to the '21st century skills' paradigm, and to an extent these are realised in practice.</p> <p>Post-primary level includes Junior Cycle (three-year programme for ages 12 to 15), Transition Year (optional or mandatory for students depending on the school's policy) and Senior Cycle (two-year programme, ages 15 to 18) – each has seen dramatic changes and should be considered as separate but connected.</p> <p>The new Junior Cycle subject specification takes an inquiry-based approach. This aims to 'provide students with learning opportunities that strike a balance between subject-specific knowledge and a wider range of skills and thinking abilities' (Department of Education and Skills, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref54">24</reflink>], p. 51). The Transition Year is an interesting example of how SLR has been enhanced. The main values are in providing opportunities for students to be creative and innovate to develop skills through a curriculum centred around experiential and project-based learning. This involves reflective journals, courses on how to conduct research, also in partnership with third-level institutions. Project-based learning should have research elements and can be of three types: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref55">1</reflink>) research projects involving research and presentation skills; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref56">2</reflink>) design brief projects involving creating or responding to a specific design brief; and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref57">3</reflink>) action projects involving some initial research and a response/action. Arguably, these opportunities to pursue the students' own interests in project work can be empowering, giving more autonomy, and equipping students with the knowledge and skills to conduct research without placing emphasis on high-stakes examinations. In the Senior Cycle, a curriculum framework of key skills has been developed (National Council for Curriculum and Assessment [NCCA], [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref58">59</reflink>]). This was influenced by the Lisbon Strategy and the OECD DeSeCo (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Defining and Selecting Key Competencies) where initiative, problem-solving, accessing information, selecting information, and information processing, are seen as key, and should be developed through self-regulated active learning.</p> <p>Thus, project-based learning is widely adopted in which learning is organised around projects on specific themes or questions. This usually takes a single subject orientation (environmental, literacy, science, culture of a studied language, etc.), or can be interdisciplinary. Additionally, the inquiry-based learning approach engages a student in asking a question or identifying a researchable problem; investigating possible solutions; gathering evidence, analysing, summarising findings, presenting findings; and reflecting on the process (Bacon &amp; Matthews, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref59">6</reflink>]).</p> <p>SLR is regarded as important, is promoted in a number of ways and is assessed. For instance, the State Examination taken at the end of school education (leading to the Leaving Certificate) encompasses Project, Reflection and Practice Coursework in a number of subjects. Furthermore, a revised policy for assessment has given an increased emphasis on formative assessment and summative assessment for certification purposes.</p> <p>However, importantly, the senior level remains highly performance-oriented and a 'product-driven' educational system steered by knowledge outcomes and academic performance. Despite the current initiatives, this has the potential to 'further subvert any pedagogical and wider rights-focused and democratic-citizenship motivations' (Fleming, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref60">32</reflink>], p. 237) and leaves little time for meaningful independent SLR.</p> <p>A common issue with SLR is that it strongly diverges from classroom culture, and is often outside the teachers' experiences (Donnelly et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref61">27</reflink>]). Organising SLR is a complex process. Teachers require experience to develop facilitation skills and fit research practices into a thematic teaching unit. There is the need for the teacher to create the environment for the inquiry, to model critical thinking, to focus the discussions, and to encourage deep consideration of the research topic (Dunlop et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref62">28</reflink>]). Consequently, this approach makes many demands on teachers and students.</p> <p>Furthermore, looking at SLR through the lenses of childhood studies and social policy research allows us to understand that a significant obstacle to SLR is the complex power dynamics of the classroom embedded in traditional expectations, beliefs, and values (Donnelly et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref63">27</reflink>]). The hierarchical structures, contexts and relationships in settings can become 'thinners' of students' agency. Teachers' attitudes may also be affected by the hierarchical nature of many schools, the perceived pressure of curriculum delivery, the assessment of students, and school evaluation driven by performance-oriented scripts. Further, teachers may have little awareness of issues concerning power or agency (Forde et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref64">33</reflink>]).</p> <p>Nevertheless, the agenda to enhance students' agency is strongly present in the Irish policy documents. The National Strategy on Children and Young People's Participation in Decision-making, 2015–2020 (Department of Children and Youth Affairs, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref65">23</reflink>]) was informed by national research (Horgan et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref66">40</reflink>]), and guided by Article 12 of the UNCRC and by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Students are increasingly seen as active citizens and human '"beings" rather than "becomings"' (Horgan et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref67">40</reflink>], p. 13). The policy document supports children's voice in decision-making, mainly through student councils.</p> <p>The policy objectives to develop active citizens with an entitlement and a right to a voice, and readiness for evidence-based decision-making are also to be implemented through subjects and short courses, such as Civic, Social and Political Education (CSPE) at junior level and Politics and Society at senior level, and through local school initiatives, e.g. European Studies. The subject specifications envision a wide range of participatory and inquiry-focused teaching, learning and assessment. These ask for active engagement of learners, in particular in discussion and debate, collecting and analysing data and participating in a small research project. As a result, students' feedback and hearing students' voices are becoming a more widespread classroom practice.</p> <p>Summary. The Irish context is constantly evolving in relation to SLR. National policies support and promote SLR of both framings. However, because of the many demands on teachers and learners, it might be a long journey to achieve successful large-scale SLR practice.</p> <hd id="AN0174879840-5">SLR in Russia</hd> <p>The Russian understanding of SLR has been strongly influenced by the ideas of Vygotsky, Leontiev, and Davydov. SLR was initially conceptualised and developed as educational activities which help young people acquire everyday knowledge (Leontovich &amp; Savvichev, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref68">50</reflink>]). The most widely accepted and cited definition in Russian literature was formulated by Andreev ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref69">3</reflink>]), as an activity within which children seek to understand the world and develop research skills through posing questions and collecting and analysing data.</p> <p>In addition, Russian authors recognise two distinct types of SLR. Most notably, Leontovich ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref70">48</reflink>]) distinguishes between learning-oriented research (uchebnoe issledovanie) and scientific research (nauchnoe issledovanie). He and others state that the main purpose of learning-oriented research is to learn subjectively new things and develop basic research skills; this is linked to Vygotsky's constructivism and corresponds to the English-language term 'inquiry-based learning'. In contrast, 'scientific research of students' is to generate objectively new knowledge and this has a relation to 'SLR' with its emphasis on student agency, but this type of activity cannot be regarded as rights-focused research because the 'rights' component is lacking in Russian theory and practice. Further, the distinction between different types of SLR is rarely made by practitioners (Belova &amp; Belov, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref71">9</reflink>]). Often all research activities, regardless of their format, are referred to as 'issledovatelskaya deyatelnost shkolnikov' (research activities of school children).</p> <p>Many authors suggest that students usually can engage in learning-oriented research and that while producing objectively new knowledge is possible and even desirable, it cannot be the main goal as it is too demanding (Belova &amp; Belov, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref72">9</reflink>]; Cherepanov &amp; Fedotova, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref73">15</reflink>]; Leontovich, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref74">48</reflink>]). This is related to the traditional Russian view that only a select group of students is able to conduct research with up to 95% of high-schoolers being 'either incapable or unmotivated to participate in this type of activity' (Cherepanov &amp; Fedotova, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref75">15</reflink>], p. 40). Contrary to this widespread belief, in a large-scale study involving 1,500 schools, Pinskaya et al. ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref76">61</reflink>]) found that setting high expectations and promoting SLR is one of the main features of effective schools that serve underprivileged areas and help students develop resilience. Importantly, the researchers highlighted that these effective schools often encouraged students to pick research topics that were important and of relevance to themselves, their families and communities. Even though this shows that SLR can be promoted in students with low academic success and low socio-economic status, the number of such schools remains very small.</p> <p>The new Russian General Education Standards (Federal State Educational Standards [FSES], [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref77">29</reflink>]) aim to encourage a wider spread of SLR as they require all students to leave school with basic research skills (Berseneva, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref78">10</reflink>]; Tsalikova &amp; Pakhotina, [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref79">68</reflink>]). Before these reforms teachers selected the academically successful and 'gifted' students for research activities because SLR was often viewed as a serious challenge. The recent policy shift, however, has important consequences; the practitioner's conception of SLR is being reformulated as inquiry-based learning, as the policy documents explicitly place the emphasis on mandatory skill development rather than on students' independent discoveries.</p> <p>It can be argued that there are benefits in the inclusion of all students in research activities, but their compulsory nature largely precludes any opportunities for student empowerment (Graham et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref80">37</reflink>]). Further, the concept of empowerment is entirely missing from current Russian discussions, and the policy shift has been simply introduced top-down without appreciable discussion or any specific provisions for the extension of research activities to all students. This lack of concern with student autonomy and empowerment is evident at all system levels. For example, Lyubzhin ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref81">54</reflink>]) actually goes as far as to argue that teachers should decide research topics by evaluating what is going to provide the greatest intellectual challenge for a student and students' interests should not be regarded as important. In view of this, it is not surprising that 'Step into the Future' (the main competition of SLR projects in Russia) only displays awards about STEM projects since they are valued as the most intellectually challenging (Step into the Future, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref82">66</reflink>]).</p> <p>While discussions over student empowerment are absent, what is currently viewed as the main obstacle to expanding SLR is that teachers have been officially entrusted with the responsibility of organising research without being fully equipped to do so or having had appropriate training. Indeed, it is a challenge for teachers who do not conduct their own research to effectively support student research (Lyubzhin, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref83">54</reflink>]). Margolis ([<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref84">55</reflink>]) highlights research preparation as one of the biggest challenges in Russian teacher training, which contributes to a widespread lack of understanding among student teachers of how research components of their training are related to teaching practice (Margolis, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref85">55</reflink>]). Moreover, Aydarova ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref86">5</reflink>]) argues that the new teacher standards actually diminish opportunities for teacher inquiry and critical thought, ultimately promoting the development of 'the teacher as a consumer of information rather than a knowledge producer' (p. 70).</p> <p>Moreover, Russian teachers are not only expected to organise student research but also to assess it, which sometimes acts as a barrier to the meaningful engagement of both students and teachers. Currently, conferences and other types of events organised on a competitive basis are the main form of assessment of student research projects. At the same time, assessment criteria are often unclear (Leontovich, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref87">49</reflink>]). In addition, there is an issue of the type of extrinsic incentives driving teachers to highjack student projects to ensure that their students can be successful. Cherepanov and Fedotova ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref88">15</reflink>]), Galanov ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref89">36</reflink>]), and Lukyanova ([<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref90">52</reflink>]) outline teachers' preoccupation with 'winning conference prizes', 'establishing good reputation' and 'improving career prospects'. Indeed, it has been widely discussed that incentive-based systems result in teachers having weak and outcome-oriented motivations leading to performativity (Davis &amp; Winch, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref91">22</reflink>]). Under the current regulations, this is exactly what is happening – children and teachers are seeking shortcuts and resorting to cheating (Rumbeshta &amp; Pishchulova, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref92">64</reflink>]; Tsalikova &amp; Pakhotina, [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref93">68</reflink>]).</p> <p>Summary. Russian educational policies contain the rhetoric of developing the research skills of all students; however, there is no real framework for creating the conditions necessary for widespread SLR, and teachers have voiced their concerns about achieving the objectives set up for them by the government (Khanolainen, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref94">46</reflink>]). The important component of student ownership as a motivating force for learning has been ignored and teachers are not provided with appropriate research knowledge or skills to support less able students. As a result, teachers continue to structure activities around student selection and outcome-oriented goals. Consequently, the objectives of raising critical thinking and research skills of all secondary students are unlikely to be achieved.</p> <hd id="AN0174879840-6">Discussion</hd> <p>Our cross-case analysis indicates that SLR is a nuanced concept with blurred boundaries, with many different layers of possible interpretations and practical implications. By analysing the nature and main goals of SLR we can distinguish between inquiry-based learning and rights-focused research. The former implies that students participate in research to develop transferable skills by following the leadership of an educator. The latter entails an emphasis on student autonomy and empowerment that emerges when students set their own research agenda. Both forms can be vehicles for developing higher-level thinking skills relevant to meeting global challenges.</p> <p>Our study shows that organising SLR represents a significant challenge for all three countries. England has strong and active advocates of rights-focused research, the form of SLR that is closest to what the UNCRC envisioned. However, rights-focused research remains outside the English curriculum and does not reach many students because of the limited number of non-school and college organisations that provide support for this type of research. Ireland, on the other hand, is striving towards wider research participation by encouraging inquiry-based pedagogy both in policy and in practice, while rights-focused research appears a secondary priority. Similarly, Russia has adopted a policy to encourage widespread student research aimed at skill development, but it is unclear whether the policy will be translated into practice. In addition, unlike Ireland and England, in Russian policy there is an absence of interest related to students' empowerment through rights-focused activities.</p> <p>The idea of listening to and providing opportunities for children and young people to share their views and have a voice challenges a longstanding trajectory of research and policy where their views and experiences usually have been absent (Cooper et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref95">20</reflink>]). The repositioning of the status of those under 18 years, enshrined in the UNCRC (UN, [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref96">70</reflink>]), particularly articles 12 and 13 of the convention, mandated policymakers to engage with children and young people through enhanced listening and more effective consultation (Cooper, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref97">18</reflink>]). By engaging with the often-neglected voices of children and young people through research and/or consultation generates insights and deeper understandings of childhood (Spyrou, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref98">65</reflink>]) and practices related to children and young people (Cooper, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref99">18</reflink>]). This research thus builds upon a longstanding trajectory surrounding debates and discussions linked to the rights of the child, voice and agency.</p> <p>What was envisioned in the UNCRC, however, is not easily achievable, which explains why it is so rare. Importantly, there is a tension between supporting students to develop the skills to carry out research and allowing them full independence in decision-making. Complete autonomy may not be possible as most forms of research need to fit with the conventions of the discipline, but support can diminish self-directedness. However, encouraging more meaningful student participation is possible, though it requires a difficult balance between allowing autonomy while providing the necessary scaffolding. In this section, we reflect on what stands in the way of rights-focused research and offer a number of recommendations to overcome barriers.</p> <p>It is apparent that none of the three educational systems we have considered provides a place for rights-focused research within the curriculum; furthermore, when student project research is positioned in the curriculum students have limited autonomy to choose their research questions. Our analysis indicates that the absence of rights-focused research reflects a number of common factors. These include the need for the training of practitioners to support this type of research, as well as allowing students the space, time and autonomy to develop their own agenda: a combination that is difficult to achieve, especially when there can be considerable challenges to practitioners in supporting student research alongside core curriculum teaching. As we have emphasised in each of the three countries, there is minimal training about research methods for teachers, and there is no training about the skills needed to support rights-focused research by supporting the wishes of students to investigate topics of their choice. It is also the case that much of the rights-focused research that occurs outside of the curriculum is limited to the social sciences, which may present a further barrier to its broader cross-curricular appeal and acceptance.</p> <p>Rights-focused research gives students the possibility of having their views expressed and listened to, based on evidence they have collected in relation to a topic that is important to them. It also provides a vehicle for 'consultation' so that adults better understand the views and interests of young people. In addition, rights-focused research appears to provide similar experiences to other forms of SLR: it is motivating and sometimes transforming for students; it helps develop independent learning; and provides a context to develop an in-depth understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the research process. In view of this, we recommend that greater attention is paid by policymakers and educationalists to include rights-focused research in the curriculum, for example as part of topics such as general studies or citizenship.</p> <p>Inquiry-based learning is often viewed and discussed as a key component of an effective education system that prepares students for a knowledge economy. Students are encouraged to engage in inquiry activities as this helps them develop critical thinking and research skills necessary for continuing education and succeeding at a university level. Moreover, research and policy related to inquiry-based learning are often centred around measurable outcomes. For example, multiple meta-analyses found that explicit guidance makes inquiry-based learning significantly more effective compared to minimal or no guidance and these effects are equal for both younger and older students (Alfieri et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref100">2</reflink>]; D'Angelo et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref101">21</reflink>]; Lazonder &amp; Harmsen, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref102">47</reflink>]). However, preoccupation with measurable educational results precludes truly participatory activities and empowerment as is possible in rights-focused research. As we see across the three contexts presented in the article, high-stakes outcome-oriented assessments seem to be a prerequisite of SLR being included in the curriculum, but this limits student's agency: the more pressure there is to demonstrate a certain outcome, the less opportunity there is to invest time into what cannot be measured. The Russian context provided a particularly noteworthy example of how external incentives can limit the wider benefits of SLR as both students and teachers jump to the outcome without learning from the process (Cherepanov &amp; Fedotova, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref103">15</reflink>]; Galanov, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref104">36</reflink>]; Lukyanova, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref105">52</reflink>]). At the same time, the Russian context also shows that the encouragement of students to pursue research topics that speak to them, their families and communities is one of the distinctive features of high-performing schools with underprivileged students (Pinskaya et al., [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref106">61</reflink>]). Thus, our next recommendation is to find ways to foster students' and teachers' internal motivation by giving them an opportunity to explore what is of interest to them personally rather than be directed by external assessments.</p> <p>Seeing that underprivileged students stand to benefit the most from enhanced autonomy, it is worth noting the synergies between SLR and youth participatory action research (YPAR). At its core, YPAR advocates a democratic research process, which can action change by involving those the research seeks to understand, often including marginalised communities (Asakura et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref107">4</reflink>]; Foster-Fishman et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref108">34</reflink>]). As Baum et al. ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref109">8</reflink>]) suggest, participatory action research aims to understand and improve conditions by employing collaborative, reflective inquiry whereby the researcher and research participants work together to better understand and improve the situations, circumstances and conditions which they are part of. Within the context of young person-focused research, this approach acknowledges the limitations of applying adult, researcher logic to the experiences of young people and utilises a wealth of research tools including multi-modal methods such as picture making, visual methods and storytelling (Cooper, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref110">18</reflink>]), which not only play to the strengths of young people but afford opportunities for young people to lead within the research process. In view of this link between SLR and YPAR, it is important to acknowledge the relevance of best practices of YPAR for SLR. Therefore, our final recommendation is to encourage children and young people engaged in SLR to reflect on their specific social situation and explore a variety of methods (including multi-model methods) to be able to find those that work best for their unique project and context without simply striving to imitate adult research. Further, it is important that consideration is given not just to the process of research, but also the process of disseminating this research so that it can have impact on the wider community.</p> <hd id="AN0174879840-7">Conclusion</hd> <p>Rights-focused research enables students to address issues that concern them and provides an evidence base for change, thereby aligning with the recommendations of the UNCRC. However, this form of SLR is not part of the curriculum in any of the three educational systems we examined, even in subject areas such as citizenship, there being several possible reasons for this (e.g. lack of teacher training, a focus on assessment, etc.). In contrast, in all three education systems there is support for inquiry-based learning as it is believed to develop the higher-level abilities needed for the future (creativity, planning, critical thinking, etc.). These abilities and their valid assessment are likely to become even more important with artificial intelligence being able to write coherent text summaries about a subject (e.g. ChatbotGPT). Thus, we believe that there are important arguments to give SLR a more prominent place in the curriculum, provide better support for teachers in relation to SLR, and to find a place for rights-focused research within school and college settings.</p> <hd id="AN0174879840-8">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <ref id="AN0174879840-9"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref43" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Alderson, P. (2016). International human rights, citizenship education, and critical realism. London Review of Education, 14 (3), 1 – 12. https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.14.3.01</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref56" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., &amp; Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103 (1), 1 – 18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref57" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Andreev, V. I. (1981). Evristicheskoe programmirovanie uchebno-issledovatelskoy deyatelnosti [Heuristic programming of learning-oriented research]. Vysshaya skola.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref107" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Asakura, K., Lundy, J., Black, D., &amp; Tierney, C. (2020). Art as a transformative practice: A participatory action research project with trans* youth. Qualitative Social Work, 19 (5–6), 1061 – 1077. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325019881226</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref86" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Aydarova, O. (2014). Universal principles transform national priorities: Bologna process and Russian teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 37, 64 – 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.10.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref3" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bacon, K., &amp; Matthews, P. (2014). Inquiry-based learning with young learners: A Pierce-based model employed to critique a unit of inquiry on maps and mapping. Irish Educational Studies, 33 (4), 351 – 365. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2014.983303</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Barron, B., &amp; Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Prospects and challenges for inquiry-based approaches to learning. The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice, 199 – 225. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264086487-11-en</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref109" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Baum, F., MacDougall, C., &amp; Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60 (10), 854. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.028662</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref71" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Belova, T. G., &amp; Belov, I. P. (2016). Issledovatelskaya deyatelnost obuchayushchihsya kak sovremennaya pedagogicheskaya problema [Student research as a modern pedagogical problem]. Sovremennye issledovaniya socialnyh problem, 3-2 (59), 41 – 47. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/issledovatelskaya-deyatelnost-obuchayuschihsya-kak-sovremennaya-pedagogicheskaya-problema</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Berseneva, O. V. (2016). Model formirovaniya issledovatelskih kompetenciy studentov-budushchih uchiteley matematiki [Model of developing research competency among student mathematics teachers]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 4 (169), 65 – 69. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/model-formirovaniya-issledovatelskih-kompetentsiy-studentov-buduschih-uchiteley-matematiki</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bragg, S. (2001). Taking a joke: Learning form the voices we don't want to hear. The Forum, 43 (2), 70 – 73. https://doi.org/10.2304/forum.2001.43.2.9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bucknall, S. (2014). Doing qualitative research with children and young people. In A. Clark, R. Flewitt, M. Hammersley, &amp; M. Robb (Eds.), Understanding research with children and young people (pp. 69–85). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Byrne, A., Canavan, J., &amp; Millar, M. (2009). Participatory research and the voice-centred relational method of data analysis: Is it worth it? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12 (1), 67 – 77. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701606044</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carroll, P., Witten, K., Asiasiga, L., &amp; Lin, E. Y. (2019). Children's engagement as urban researchers and consultants in Aotearoa/New Zealand: Can it increase children's effective participation in urban planning? Children &amp; Society, 33 (5), 414 – 428. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12315</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cherepanov, M. S., &amp; Fedotova, S. A. (2013) 'Uchim ne predmety, a uchim cheloveka' (k voprosu ocenivaniya metapredmetnyh I lichnostnyh rezultatov issledovatelskoy deyatelnosti uchashchihsya) ['We are not teaching subjects but we are teaching children' (assessing meta-subject and personal outcomes of school children's research)]. Permskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal, (4), 40 – 45. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/uchim-ne-predmetu-a-uchim-cheloveka-k-voprosu-ob-otsenivanii-metapredmetnyh-i-lichnostnyh-rezultatov-issledovatelskoy-deyatelnosti</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chu, S. (2017). 21st century skills development through inquiry-based learning: From theory to practice. Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark, A, &amp; Moss, P. (2001). Listening to young children: The Mosaic approach. National Children's Bureau for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cooper, V. L. (2017). Lost in translation: Exploring childhood identity using photo-elicitation. Children's Geographies, 15 (6), 625 – 637. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2017.1284306</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cooper, V. L., &amp; Kellett, M. (2016). Listening to children. In J. Payler, J. Moyles, &amp; J. Georgeson (Eds.), Beginning teaching, beginning learning in early years and primary education (pp. 229–240). Open University Press/McGraw Hill.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cooper, V., Payler, J., &amp; Bennett, S. (2019). Beyond talk: Learning from children and young people experiencing a family health crisis. In M. Robb, H. Motgomery, &amp; R. Thompson (Eds.), Critical practice with children and young people (2nd ed., pp. 143 – 160). Policy Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> D'Angelo, C., Rutstein, D., Harris, C., Bernard, R., Borokhovski, E., &amp; Haertel, G. (2014). Simulations for STEM learning: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Menlo Park: SRI International, (23), 1 – 5. https://<ulink href="http://www.sri.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/simulations-for-stem-learning-brief.pdf">www.sri.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/simulations-for-stem-learning-brief.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis, A., &amp; Winch, C. (2015). Educational assessment on trial. Bloomsbury Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Department of Children and Youth Affairs. (2015). National strategy on children and young people's participation in decision-making, 2015–2020. Government Publications. <ulink href="http://www.dcya.ie">www.dcya.ie</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Department of Education and Skills. (2016). National skills strategy 2025 – Ireland's future. https://<ulink href="http://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Services/National-Skills-Strategy/">www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Services/National-Skills-Strategy/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Devine, D. (2002). Children's citizenship and the structuring of adult-child relations in the primary school. Childhood, 9 (3), 303 – 320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568202009003044</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dobber, M., Zwart, R., Tanis, M., &amp; van Oers, B. (2017). Literature review: The role of the teacher in inquiry-based education. Educational Research Review, 22, 194 – 214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Donnelly, D. M., McGarr, O., &amp; O'Reilly, J. (2014). Just be quiet and listen to exactly what he's saying': Conceptualising power relations in inquiry-oriented classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 36 (12), 2029 – 2054. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.889867</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dunlop, L., Compton, K., Clarke, L., &amp; McKelvey-Martin, V. (2015). Child-led enquiry in primary science. Education 3-13, 43 (5), 462 – 481. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2013.822013</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Federal State Educational Standards. (2010). https://fgos.ru/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fielding, M. (2001). Students as radical agents of change. Journal of Educational Change, 2 (2), 123 – 141. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017949213447</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fielding, M. (2004). Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, 30 (2), 295 – 311. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192042000195236</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fleming, D. (2015). Student voice: An emerging discourse in Irish education policy. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8 (2), 223 – 242. https://iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/110</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Forde, C., Horgan, D., Martin, S., &amp; Parkes, A. (2018). Learning from children's voice in schools: Experiences from Ireland. Journal of Educational Change, 19 (4), 489 – 509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-018-9331-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Foster-Fishman, P. G., Law, K. M., Lichty, L. F., &amp; Aoun, C. (2010). Youth ReACT for social change: A method for youth participatory action research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46 (1), 67 – 83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9316-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Franks, M. (2011). Pockets of participation: Revisiting child‐centred participation research. Children &amp; Society, 25 (1), 15 – 25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-0860.2009.00258.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Galanov, A. B. (2013). Issledovatelskaya deyatelnost shkolnikov kak uslovie samorealizacii odarennyh detey [School children's research activities as a condition for self-realisation of gifted children]. Municipalnoe obrazovanie: innovacii I eksperiment, 4, 20 – 23. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/issledovatelskaya-deyatelnost-shkolnikov-kak-uslovie-samorealizatsii-odarennyh-detey</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Graham, A., Simmons, C., &amp; Truscott, J. (2017). 'I'm more confident now, I was really quiet': Exploring the potential benefits of child-led research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30 (2), 190 – 205. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1242803</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hart, R. A. (1992). Children's participation: From tokenism to citizenship (Innocenti essays 4). UNICEF International Child Development Centre.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., &amp; Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and. Educational Psychologist, 42 (2), 99 – 107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Horgan, D., Forde, C., Parkes, A. M. S., Mages, L., &amp; O'Connell, A. (2015). Children and young people's experiences of participation in decision-making at home, in schools and in their communities. Department of Children and Youth Affairs.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kellett, M. (2011). Empowering children and young people as researchers: Overcoming barriers and building capacity. Child Indicators Research, 4 (2), 205 – 219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-010-9103-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kellett, M. (2014). Images of childhood and their influence on research. Understanding Research with Children and Young People, 1, 15 – 33.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kellett, M., &amp; Ward, B. (2008). Children as active researchers: Participation and power sharing. In A. Moore &amp; R. Mitchell (Eds.), Power, pedagogy and praxis: Social justice in the globalized classroom (pp. 91–105). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087904920</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kerawalla, L. (2015). Talk factory generic: Empowering secondary school pupils to construct and explore dialogic space during pupil-led whole-class discussions. International Journal of Educational Research, 70, 57 – 67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.12.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kerawalla, L., &amp; Messer, D. (2019). Is being a young researcher always a positive learning experience? Interdisciplinary Education and Psychology, 2 (2), 5. https://doi.org/10.31532/InterdiscipEducPsychol.2.2.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Khanolainen, D. (2019). Attitude of Russian teachers towards the new standards. Quality Assurance in Education, 27 (3), 254 – 268. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-03-2018-0027</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lazonder, A. W., &amp; Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86 (3), 681 – 718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leontovich, A. V. (2003). Ob osnovnyh ponyatiyah koncepcii razvitiya issledovatelskoy I proektnoy deyatelnosti uchashchihsya [Speaking of the main ideas within the concept of developing project-based and research work of students]. Issledovatelskaya rabota shkolnikov, (4), 12 – 17.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leontovich, A. V. (2006). Shkolniki kak issledovateli [School children as researchers]. Shkolnye tehnologii, (5), 63 – 71.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leontovich, A. V., &amp; Savvichev, A. S. (2007). Uchashchiesya kak issledovateli (kak effectivno rukovodit samostoyatelnoy issledovatelskoy rabotoy shkolnikov) [Students as researchers (how to effectively manage independent research work of school children)]. Metodicheskoe posobie dlya prepodavateley (trenerov) sistemy RKC-MMC proekta ISO. M.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lodge, C. (2005). From hearing voices to engaging in dialogue: Problematising student participation in school improvement. Journal of Educational Change, 6 (2), 125 – 146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-005-1299-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lukyanova, L. A. (2016). Gotovnost uchiteley k organizacii issledovatelskoy deyatelnosti shkolnikov [Teacher preparedness to organise research activities with school children]. Vestnik Chuvashskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta imeni Yakovleva, 1 (89), 122 – 131. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/gotovnost-uchiteley-k-organizatsii-issledovatelskoy-deyatelnosti-shkolnikov.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lundy, L., McEvoy, L., &amp; Byrne, B. (2011). Working with young children as co-researchers: An approach informed by the United Nations convention on the rights of the child. Early Education &amp; Development, 22 (5), 714 – 736. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2011.596463</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lyubzhin, A. I. (2011). Byurokratiya I nauka: chto mozhet dat sredney shkole ih simbioz? [Bureaucracy and science: What can their symbiosis give to secondary school?]. Voprosy obrazovaniya, (3), 237 – 244. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/byurokratiya-i-nauka-chto-mozhet-dat-sredney-shkole-ih-simbioz.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Margolis, A. A. (2014). Problems and prospects of the development of pedagogical education in the Russian Federation. Psikhologicheskaya Nauka I Obrazovanie – Psychological Science and Education, 19 (3), 41 – 57. https://psyjournals.ru/journals/pse/archive/2014_n3/71565</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marshall, J. C., &amp; Horton, R. M. (2011). The relationship of teacher‐facilitated, inquiry‐based instruction to student higher‐order thinking. School Science and Mathematics, 111 (3), 93 – 101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00066.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mayne, F., Howitt, C., &amp; Rennie, L. (2018). Rights, power and agency in early childhood research design: Developing a rights-based research ethics and participation planning framework. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 43 (3), 4 – 14. https://doi.org/10.23965/AJEC.43.3.01</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mellander, E., &amp; Svärdh, J. (2018). Context and implications document for: Inquiry‐based learning put to the test: Medium‐term effects of a science and technology for children programme. Review of Education, 6 (2), 142 – 145. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3111</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. (2009). Senior cycle key skills framework. https://ncca.ie/media/3380/ks_framework.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Leijen, Ä., &amp; Sarapuu, T. (2012). Improving students' inquiry skills through reflection and self-regulation scaffolds. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 9 (1–2), 81 – 95.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pinskaya, M. A., Kosaretskiy, S. G., &amp; Frumin, I. D. (2011). Shkoly, effektivno rabotayushie v slozhnyh socialnykh kontekstakh [Schools that effectively serve troubled social contexts]. Voprosy obrazovaniya, (4), 148 – 177. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/shkoly-effektivno-rabotayuschie-v-slozhnyh-sotsialnyh-kontekstah.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Prout, A. (2019). In defence of interdisciplinary childhood studies. Children &amp; Society, 33 (4), 309 – 315. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12298</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rousell, D., &amp; Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, A. (2019). A systematic review of climate change education: Giving children and young people a 'voice' and a 'hand' in redressing climate change. Children's Geographies, 18 (2), 1 – 18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2019.1614532</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rumbeshta, E. A., &amp; Pishchulova, A. S. (2009). F ormirovanie informacionnoy, kommunikativnoy issledovatelskoy kompetencii v processe obucheniya shkolnikov issledovatelskoy deyatelnosti [Developing informational communicative research competency among schoolchildren engaging in research activities]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, (7), 15 – 19. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/formirovanie-informatsionnoy-komunikativnoy-issledovatelskoy-kompetentsiy-v-protsesse-obucheniya-shkolnikov-issledovatelskoy.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spyrou, S. (2011). The limits of children's voices: From authenticity to critical, reflexive representation. Childhood, 18 (2), 151 – 165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568210387834</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Step into the future. (n.d.). Academic Olympics for schoolchildren. https://olymp.bmstu.ru/en</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stoten, D. W. (2014). The extended project qualification. International Journal for Lesson &amp; Learning Studies, 3 (1), 66 – 77. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-06-2013-0035</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tsalikova, I. K., &amp; Pakhotina, S. V. (2017). Organizaciya issledovatelsky deyatelnosti shkolnikov po discipline 'inostranniy yazyk ' [Organising children's research within the subject 'Foreign language']. Sibirskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal, (2), 31 – 36. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/organizatsiya-issledovatelskoy-deyatelnosti-shkolnikov-po-distsipline-inostrannyy-yazyk.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Twum-Danso, A. (2009). International children's rights. In H. Montgomery &amp; M. Kellett (Eds.), Children's Worlds. Developing frameworks for integrated practice (pp. 109 – 126). Policy Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> United Nations. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child (UNCRC). HMSO.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walkington, H., &amp; Rushton, E. A. (2019). Ten Salient practices for mentoring student research in schools: New opportunities for teacher professional development. Higher Education Studies, 9 (4), 133. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v9n4p133</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watkins, C. (2012). Learners in the driving seat. Leading Learning Pedagogy, 1 (2), 28 – 31.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Woodhead, M., &amp; Montgomery, H. (2002). Understanding childhood: An interdisciplinary approach. Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zeiher, H., &amp; Devine, D. (2007). Flexible childhood?: Exploring children's welfare in time and space. University Press of Southern Denmark.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Daria Khanolainen; Victoria Cooper; David Messer and Elena Revyakina</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Daria Khanolainen has always been involved in the field of education through both practitioner and researcher roles. After completing her master's degree in education management at King's College London, she took a position of a research associate at Kazan Federal University and contributed to multiple research projects related to teacher development. She is currently a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action fellow and is in her final year of studying for a doctoral degree at the department of teacher education at the University of Jyväskylä. Her research interests lie primarily in the field of developmental psychology and learning difficulties.</p> <p>Victoria Cooper is Senior Lecturer at The Open University (OU) who specialises in research focused on marginalised children and young people's experiences and has written widely on issues related to voice. She is co-author of Parenting the First Twelve Years: What the Evidence Tells Us (2018 Penguin) and co-editor of Exploring Childhood and Youth (2021) and An Introduction to Childhood and Youth Studies and Psychology (2023) both published by Routledge. She is currently chair of Childhood and Youth and Psychology at the OU and PI for a national study exploring children's experiences of parental imprisonment.</p> <p>David Messer is a developmental psychologist and emeritus professor of education at the Open University, and a member of the Children's Research Centre; he also is a visiting professor at the Division of Language and Communication Science, City, University of London. He has a long-standing interest in language and communication, the use of educational technology, and disability. He was an advisor to the BBC series Child of Our Time. He has been involved in the publication of over 10 books, 35 book chapters and 90 journal publications. Although retired he continues to be involved in several research projects.</p> <p>Elena Revyakina is a researcher at the University College of Teacher Education Vienna (Austria). She has completed her MA in Education and PhD research at University College Dublin, Ireland within the National University of Ireland, with a focus on professional learning and policy change in and via communities of practice, and networks.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref108"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1408052 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: The Complexity of Student-Led Research: From Terminology to Practice in a Case Study of Three Countries – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Daria+Khanolainen%22">Daria Khanolainen</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1571-2938">0000-0002-1571-2938</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Victoria+Cooper%22">Victoria Cooper</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0620-9062">0000-0002-0620-9062</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22David+Messer%22">David Messer</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9332-1265">0000-0001-9332-1265</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Elena+Revyakina%22">Elena Revyakina</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3249-379X">0000-0002-3249-379X</externalLink>) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Oxford+Review+of+Education%22"><i>Oxford Review of Education</i></searchLink>. 2024 50(1):78-94. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 17 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Research%22">Student Research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Students%22">Secondary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Barriers%22">Barriers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Facilitators+%28Individuals%29%22">Facilitators (Individuals)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Influences%22">Influences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Policy%22">Educational Policy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ideology%22">Ideology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Political+Influences%22">Political Influences</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22United+Kingdom+%28England%29%22">United Kingdom (England)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Russia%22">Russia</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ireland%22">Ireland</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1080/03054985.2023.2203375 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0305-4985<br />1465-3915 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Preparing young people to meet emerging contemporary challenges has become a global imperative. Over two decades, there has been a call for students' active participation in the life of school and society, and an important feature of this call is student-led research (SLR). However, this pedagogical and empowering call with many potential benefits is not unproblematic. There are far-reaching differences between various conceptions and use of student-led research in secondary schools both within and between different countries, reflecting a contrast between skill development and voice. This contrast, however, has not been previously scrutinised and discussed. We review student-led research in England, Ireland, and Russia showing that its development has been initiated and carried out in different countries with very different goals and focuses. Our study is in the form of a case study of the three countries covering a wide range of discussions related to SLR. By looking critically at how SLR is conceived and supported in various contexts, we evaluate facilitators and barriers, which ultimately offers a better understanding of how ideologies and political decisions influence students and teachers, and how educational policies and educational values are transferred into practice. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1408052 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1408052 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/03054985.2023.2203375 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 17 StartPage: 78 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Student Research Type: general – SubjectFull: Secondary Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Secondary School Students Type: general – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries Type: general – SubjectFull: Barriers Type: general – SubjectFull: Facilitators (Individuals) Type: general – SubjectFull: Influences Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Policy Type: general – SubjectFull: Ideology Type: general – SubjectFull: Political Influences Type: general – SubjectFull: United Kingdom (England) Type: general – SubjectFull: Russia Type: general – SubjectFull: Ireland Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: The Complexity of Student-Led Research: From Terminology to Practice in a Case Study of Three Countries Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Daria Khanolainen – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Victoria Cooper – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: David Messer – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Elena Revyakina IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2024 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0305-4985 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1465-3915 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 50 – Type: issue Value: 1 Titles: – TitleFull: Oxford Review of Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
