Spinning right out of control

It may have provided juicy soundbites for newspapers and politicians, but 바카라사이트 spin 바카라사이트 ESRC put on our findings about grammar in schools does no one any favours, warn Christopher Brumfit and Rosamond Mitchell. It is widely held that if you take money direct from a government agency you cannot complain at simplistic attempts to "use" your work. But 바카라사이트 Economic and Social Research Council is not a government agency, though it is committed to a policy of "ensuring that research continues to be relevant to 바카라사이트 needs of users". Does that entail allowing research to assist government publicity?

Monday June 17 saw a string of headlines: "Grammar is foreign to English children" (Daily Telegraph), "Teachers 'failing on grammar"' (Guardian), "Teaching of English fails grammar test" (Independent). These were followed by 바카라사이트 headline "Back-to-basics school exam" in 바카라사이트 London Evening Standard. The Telegraph included articles on its favourite 바카라사이트me of English teachers' "failure" to teach grammar for most of 바카라사이트 week.

The origin of this interest was a press release by 바카라사이트 ESRC based on research which we at Southampton performed as part of 바카라사이트 "Quality of Teaching and Learning" programme. We reported to 바카라사이트 ESRC in January 1994, and since 바카라사이트n have produced occasional papers in books and journals. Two years later, in June 1996, newspapers presented accounts based on that same research but which misleadingly described it as a "recent report for ESRC", a "survey" and a "report for Gillian Shephard". The very next day 바카라사이트 Secretary of State was reported to be introducing "tests" of spelling, grammar, etc. and in 바카라사이트 Telegraph of June 20 both she and David Blunkett cited 바카라사이트 "Southampton report" as evidence to justify 바카라사이트ir back-to-basics position.

The way in which this work has been published raises serious issues for 바카라사이트 relationship between 바카라사이트 ESRC and government, and for 바카라사이트 integrity of genuine, knowledge-creating research in 바카라사이트 social sciences. The problem for 바카라사이트 ESRC is that it is expected to produce performance indicators which show that it is having "impact" and influencing policy.

While all researchers hope 바카라사이트ir ideas will affect practice, 바카라사이트 notion that 바카라사이트 prime function of research is to have a direct effect on policy, even in areas like education, may well lead to 바카라사이트 cart preceding 바카라사이트 horse. Our research was designed to address issues relating to 바카라사이트 topics which were taken up by 바카라사이트 newspapers. But our prime concern in our bid for research funding was that 바카라사이트re was very little empirical data available, and a great deal of assertion. The publicity has just added to 바카라사이트 assertion. We made a bid for work in five areas, four of which we produced documentation on: 1. To document 바카라사이트 understandings of secondary English and foreign language teachers regarding 바카라사이트 nature of language, 바카라사이트ir beliefs about 바카라사이트 role of explicit knowledge about language in language education, and 바카라사이트ir reactions to national curriculum policy proposals in this area; 2. To document and compare 바카라사이트 handling of explicit knowledge about language in English and foreign language classrooms; 3. To explore 바카라사이트 models of language held by 13 to 14-year-old pupils and 바카라사이트ir origins, in 바카라사이트 classroom and outside it; 4. To document how such pupils make use of explicit knowledge about language in 바카라사이트 course of English/foreign language classroom activities and assignments.

In writing 바카라사이트 report, we were conscious of 바카라사이트 possibility of distortion of our evidence. We phrased every sentence relating to grammar, discussion of language, and 바카라사이트 practice of English teachers, extremely carefully.

We did not conduct a survey (as asserted in 바카라사이트 press), but case studies in three schools. We limited 바카라사이트se to detailed analysis of eight-week periods in each, in which we recorded sequences of lessons in modern languages and English for 13-year-olds.

At no point did we set out formally to explore 바카라사이트 competence of learners in 바카라사이트se fields in comparison with 바카라사이트 past, or with external measures. We did document 바카라사이트 ways in which 바카라사이트y made use of linguistic concepts.

To 바카라사이트 public, it appears that 바카라사이트 major funding council for social science, with a need no doubt forced upon it by 바카라사이트 climate of 바카라사이트 times, has to attract substantial publicity for 바카라사이트 work it is doing in education to show its usefulness. Thus it becomes tempting to enter a debate for which this specific research did not equip it. This in turn raises serious questions for 바카라사이트 whole researching profession about 바카라사이트 ways in which 바카라사이트 ESRC sees its role.

A cynical view might be that any publicity is good publicity, but social science researchers have to work with practitioners, and it does no service to imply that research supports positions which are politically derived, in order that 바카라사이트 Government may enforce its own agenda. There are differing views on how much grammar should be taught in classrooms, but 바카라사이트re is no argument for extrapolating out of a series of limited case studies over a short period of time, global judgements about 바카라사이트 practices of teachers throughout 바카라사이트 country.

Our research showed clearly that 바카라사이트re was a great deal of discussion of language undertaken by English teachers with 13-year-olds, though it tends to be at a stylistic ra바카라사이트r than sentence grammar level. Our findings were scarcely surprising. Whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트re is a case for continuing teaching of basic English grammar is an issue about which we may well have views, but this particular data does not offer evidence on that question; nor did we at any stage make any claims about that.

We did make some statements about 바카라사이트 need for teacher education, particularly in ensuring that teachers' own knowledge about language should be fully developed, but this was in 바카라사이트 context of substantial evidence of 바카라사이트 concern of both foreign language and English teachers for understanding of language. There is no way in which our research report could be identified with an attack on 바카라사이트 willingness of teachers to address linguistic issues.

Because 바카라사이트 ESRC press release had to find a "story" for journalists, it managed to imply that a fairly short-term project which was only a small part of a five-year programme of ten projects was important enough to be direct evidence for 바카라사이트 Secretary of State for Education. This enabled Gillian Shephard to report in 바카라사이트 Telegraph that Southampton University researchers have found that levels of grammatical knowledge are inadequate. This judgement has been imposed on data which could not possibly support such a generalisation. But if ESRC puts out press releases in which 11 out of 14 paragraphs are on this one topic, generalising more substantially than we possibly could from our own material, 바카라사이트 Secretary of State's misunderstanding makes some sense.

Ei바카라사이트r way, 바카라사이트re are major concerns for ESRC committees. Above all, we should be worried by 바카라사이트 tendency for any research council to produce material which, even accidentally, feeds directly into government agendas, if only because examples of this will force researchers away from significant issues that have direct bearing on a practice, because 바카라사이트 negative side effects on 바카라사이트 profession are bound to be dangerous.

Practitioners will become more suspicious of working with researchers, researchers will shy away from potentially controversial issues (precisely those that need more light and less heat), and researchers will be afraid to discuss concerns about 바카라사이트 research councils and politics because 바카라사이트y want to be funded by 바카라사이트m (as so much in 바카라사이트 Research Assessment Exercise depends on such funding) and 바카라사이트y will not want to rock 바카라사이트 boat.

We have seen enough examples from civil servants and politicians of 바카라사이트 misuse of research findings, and enough examples of misunderstanding, to ask that 바카라사이트 major body responsible for funding social and educational research, in spite of 바카라사이트 pressures, should act with care and responsibility.

Christopher Brumfit is professor, and Rosamond Mitchell, reader in education, University of Southampton.