Sara Baker

Research suggests there are notable differences in approaches to doctoral admissions and the criteria employed to select doctoral candidates. Through interviews with 65 academic staff involved in doctoral admissions at the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, this paper examines how these different approaches to admissions play out in different disciplines, driving the disciplinary divergence in conceptualisations of the PhD and, in turn, admissions practices. Findings suggest that differences are shaped by varying underpinning assumptions within disciplinary clusters about the nature and process of knowledge production and the purpose of doctoral education, what we refer to as ‘ontological and epistemological assumptions’ about the doctorate. These tend towards two dichotomous positions: one that views the doctorate primarily as knowledge production, an approach mainly linked with humanities and social science, and one that views the doctorate as skills formation and a licence to research, an approach mainly linked with STEM and medical science. These conceptualisations are manifested in radically different approaches to doctoral admissions across the clusters, reflected in heterogeneity in the role of the research to be undertaken, the role of the potential supervisor, and judgements about existing skills and knowledge in selection decisions. We draw on neo-institutional theory as a heuristic device for understanding how assumptions about the nature and purpose of the doctorate can be viewed as disciplinary norms that get reproduced in the processes and practices of doctoral admissions. Understanding these disciplinary differences and their drivers is a critical first stage in understanding variations and potential inequalities in doctoral admissions and ensuring that these nuances and complexity are reflected in ongoing graduate access work.

1. Six playgrounds. They all look the same: large square jungle gyms for children to climb and crawl, some slides, and a couple of roofs over the top. All in bright primary colours, mainly made of ...

Background: Self‐regulation is crucial for children's learning and development. Several studies have explored children's inter‐individual differences in self‐regulation, but little is known about sources of intra‐individual variation. Aims: This study addressed the variability of children's self‐regulation across typical classroom situations and how this might be associated with children's executive functions (EFs). Sample: The study included 148 children (54.7% girls; M _age = 56.73 months). Methods: Self‐regulation was assessed with an observational measure in teacher‐led and child‐led activities within naturalistic classroom settings. Children's EFs were assessed with direct assessments at the start and end of the school year. Results: Linear mixed‐effect models showed that children demonstrated higher levels of self‐regulation in child‐led in comparison with teacher‐led activities. Children with higher levels of EFs at the start of the school year showed less variation across teacher‐led and child‐led activities in comparison with children with lower levels of EFs. Regarding other aspects of the classroom context, neither the group size in which the activity took place nor which school subject it was focused on were associated with children's self‐regulation. However, in teacher‐led activities the type of interaction involved in the activity and the type of task influenced children's self‐regulation. Conclusion: These results suggest that children who start school with higher levels of EFs are more able to adapt to different situations, highlighting the importance of fostering these skills in early childhood. In turn, children with lower levels of EFs may need additional support from teachers to remain self‐regulated across different contexts.

Direct assessments of executive functions (EFs) are increasingly used in research and clinical settings, with a central assumption that they assess “universal” underlying skills. Their use is spreading globally, raising questions about the cultural appropriateness of assessments devised in Western industrialized countries. We selectively reviewed multidisciplinary evidence and theory to identify sets of cultural preferences that may be at odds with the implicit assumptions of EF assessments. These preferences relate to motivation and compliance; cultural expectations for interpersonal engagement; contextualized vs. academic thinking; cultural notions of speed and time; the willingness to be silly, be incorrect, or do the opposite; and subject-matter familiarity. In each case, we discuss how the cultural preference may be incompatible with the assumptions of assessments, and how future research and practice can address the issue. Many of the cultural preferences discussed differ between interdependent and independent cultures and between schooled and unschooled populations. Adapting testing protocols to these cultural preferences in different contexts will be important for expanding our scientific understanding of EF from the narrow slice of the human population that has participated in the research to date.

Direct assessments of executive function (EF) are increasingly used in research and clinical settings, with a central assumption that they assess “universal” underlying skills. Their use is spreading globally, raising questions about the cultural appropriateness of assessments devised in Western, industrialized countries. We reviewed multidisciplinary evidence and theory to identify sets of cultural preferences that may be at odds with the implicit assumptions of EF assessments. These preferences relate to motivation and compliance; cultural expectations for interpersonal engagement; contextualized vs. academic thinking; cultural notions of speed and time; the willingness to be silly, be incorrect, or do the opposite; and subject-matter familiarity. In each case, we discuss how the cultural preference may be incompatible with the assumptions of assessments, and how future research and practice can address the issue. Many of the cultural preferences discussed differ between interdependent and independent cultures and between schooled and unschooled populations. Adapting testing protocols to these cultural preferences in different contexts will be important for expanding our scientific understanding of EF from the narrow slice of the human population that has participated in the research to date.

This study adopted a qualitative approach and analysed interviews from seven parents with children enrolled in nursery and kindergarten in Ghana. The interviews examined parents’ descriptions of play and learning and how they perceive the value of play in children’s learning. The findings revealed that the parents generally have doubts about the ability of play in bringing forth learning in the classroom. In general, they hold a narrow view of play as a break activity and a reward for learning, as well as viewing play and learning as mutually exclusive. The findings are discussed from a social and cultural perspective, drawing a picture of the ethno-theories about child development and the meanings of play and learning in Ghana.

The special issue comes at a time when children have lost extended periods of formal schooling due to the novel coronavirus pandemic that started in 2019. Children’s social and academic lives have ...

Playful learning has garnered supporters and research evidence, and also can be seen as nebulous and, therefore, reliant on practitioners’ intuitions in early education settings. In this paper, we offer an explicit theoretical account, grounded in developmental psychology of how play might support the acquisition of broad skills and dispositions for lifelong learning. We argue that play develops self-regulation and motivation, both of which support the child’s agency in their learning. We discuss a culturally inclusive view of agency that is distinct from autonomy, and which is visible in many existing early childhood pedagogies. We conclude by suggesting practical strategies that educators can adopt to enhance learning through play and children’s agency in their learning.