Louise Bunce

The student-as-consumer approach in higher education and its effects on academic performance

Students studying at universities in England have been defined as customers by the government since the introduction of student tuition fees. Although this approach has been rejected by educators, there is a lack of empirical evidence about the extent to which students express a consumer orientation and its effects on academic performance. These issues were examined in the current study by surveying 608 undergraduates at higher education institutions in England about their consumer attitudes and behaviours in relation to their higher education, learner identity, and academic performance. The analysis revealed that consumer orientation mediated traditional relationships between learner identity, grade goal and academic performance, and found that a higher consumer orientation was associated with lower academic performance. Furthermore, responsibility for paying tuition fees and studying a Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics subject were associated with a higher consumer orientation and subsequently lower academic performance. Implications for academic performance are discussed.

'I saw the real Father Christmas!' Children's everyday uses of the words real, really, and pretend

The words real, really and pretend are used in developmental research paradigms to reflect both the notions of ‘authenticity’ (in pretense-reality and appearance-reality research) and ‘existence’ (in fantasy-reality research). The current study explored whether children also expressed these notions in their everyday uses of real, really, and pretend. Mothers were interviewed and kept diary records, resulting in data for a younger group of children (2- to 3-year-olds, N ¼ 80) and an older group (4- to 7-yearolds, N ¼ 101). Utterances were analysed according to different uses of the target words and the topic of conversation in which they occurred. The words real, really, and pretend were used by both the younger and older age groups predominantly to consider the authenticity of things around them. Expression of the notion of existence was less common, particularly among the younger children. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to children’s performance in experimental studies, particularly those that intend to question children’s understanding of the fantasy-reality distinction. Learning about the reality or otherwise of objects, people, and events in the world is an important cognitive task (Woolley & Wellman, 1990). The current study focuses on two aspects of reality, both of which can be discussed using the words real, really, and pretend. The first refers to the notion of ‘authenticity’ and is the aspect of meaning considered in pretense-reality and appearance-reality distinctions. In a pretense episode used by Harris, Kavanaugh, and Meredith (1994, Experiment 3), for example, children were shown a scene in which cotton wool was used to represent milk. The critical question was whether children thought that the cotton wool was ‘real or pretend’ milk and what it ‘reallywas’.Similarly,Rosen, Schwebel, and Singer (1997)asked the children who were shown a televised episode of ‘Barney’: ‘Is everyone on Barney really cleaning up or are they just pretending to clean up?’ In appearance-reality studies, children are shown an object, e.g. a sponge, that looks like something else, a rock, and then they are asked whether the sponge is really a rock or really a sponge (Flavell, Green, & Flavell, 1986).Thus,in pretense-realityand appearance-reality contrasts, childrenhavetodecide whether an object or action is, in some way, an ‘authentic’ version or not.

He Hasn't Got the Real Toolkit! Young Children's Reasoning about Real/Not-Real Status.

During the preschool years, children develop an understanding of 2 types of real/not-real distinctions: ontological status and authenticity (Bunce & Harris, 2008). Two studies compared 3- to 5-year-old childrens real/not-real judgments and justifications for 3 types of contrast involving a real entity and either a fictional character, a child dressing-up, or a Lego toy. As expected, all children discriminated between the real entities and toys and dressing-up, and they justified their judgments on the basis of authenticity. In contrast, only older children consistently discriminated between the real entities and fictional characters on the basis of ontological status. In Study 2, the real and not-real entities were presented as pairs rather than individually to define the intended contrast. This manipulation increased childrens ability to discriminate between the real and not-real entities on the basis of authenticity. Together, these results support the hypothesis that understanding reality status on the basis of authenticity develops before ontological status. The development of reasoning about real/not-real status is discussed.

Appreciation of Authenticity Promotes Curiosity: Implications for Object-based Learning in Museums

ABSTRACT Museum professionals suppose that interacting with authentic objects promotes curiosity and engagement, but this has not been tested. In this research, children and adults visiting the Oxford University Museum of Natural History were shown a taxidermied rabbit or rabbit skeleton. They were asked “Is it real?”, “Why?” and were given the opportunity to ask a question about it to measure their curiosity and engagement. As predicted, visitors who perceived the rabbits as authentic were more likely to ask a question than those who judged them as inauthentic. Perceived authenticity also promoted more why questions. In general, these findings became more robust with increasing age. However, approximately 25% of visitors did not perceive the rabbits as authentic. This study thus supports the assumption that authentic objects are associated with increased curiosity and engagement but museum professionals need to ensure that visitors know when they are interacting with the real thing.

Postnatal depression, maternal–infant bonding and social support: a cross-cultural comparison of Nigerian and British mothers

Abstract Objectives: The high prevalence of Post-Natal Depression (PND) in low and lower-middle income countries of Africa raises questions about the functionality of the abundant informal support accessed in the enmeshed family structure. This study examined the interaction between social support, parity and culture in the development of PND and maternal–infant bonding (MIB) among Nigerian, British and Nigerian Immigrant mothers in the UK. Methods: Participants (N = 124) were recruited from the UK and Nigeria via local support groups for mothers, websites offering motherhood-related content and social media. Questionnaires including the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Postpartum Bonding Questionnaire and Norbecks Social Support Questionnaire were uploaded onto SurveyMonkey®. Results: Findings revealed significant cultural differences in PND and social support. Multiple regression analyses revealed that PND, social support and culture could predict MIB, with PND being the only significant independent predictor. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the importance that cultural factors play in the development of PND and the establishment of MIB in the context of culturally attuned healthcare services.

Corrigendum: “Appreciation of Authenticity Promotes Curiosity: Implications for Object-based Learning in Museums”

In the original article, some of the data were presented and interpreted incorrectly. This means that two of the conclusions, that explanation questions were asked more often following judgments of authenticity than inauthenticity, and that this pattern was evident in each age group, were not supported. The author would like to thank Dr. Anne Land-Zandstra and Dylan van Gerven of Leiden University, the Netherlands, for pointing this out. This corrigendum corrects the interpretation of the data and concludes that there is insufficient evidence regarding the types of questions that are more likely to be asked following a judgment of authenticity compared to a judgment of inauthenticity. As shown in Figure 3 in the original article, 89 participants asked a question about the taxidermy or skeleton rabbit. Of those questions, 62 (70%) sought facts and 27 (30%) sought explanations. In the original paper, the data are presented showing that 22 (81%) of the explanation questions were asked by participants who judged the rabbits as authentic compared to 5 (19%) by those who judged the rabbits as inauthentic. This was misleading. A better interpretation involves looking at the proportion of question types produced by participants following their judgment of authenticity or inauthenticity. This reveals that 29% (n = 22) of participants who judged the rabbits as authentic asked an explanation question (the remaining 71%, n = 54, asked a fact question) whereas 38% (n = 5) of participants who judged the rabbits as inauthentic asked an explanation question (the remaining 62%, n = 8, asked a fact question) (see Figure 3 revised). Thus the original conclusion, that explanation questions were more likely to be asked following a judgment of authenticity, is not supported by the data. Instead, the new analysis suggests that explanation questions were more likely to be asked following a judgment of inauthenticity (38%) than a judgment of authenticity (29%). However, given the small numbers of participants who asked a question following a judgment of inauthenticity (n = 13) it is difficult to draw firm conclusions from this reanalysis. Thus the new conclusion is that the effect of interpretation of authenticity on question types (facts versus explanations) is not clear from the data. Similarly, the data presented in the original paper under the heading “Effects of age on participants’ responses”, paragraph 2, sentence 2, suggested that more explanation questions followed judgments of authenticity compared to judgments of inauthenticity in each age group. However, looking at the data from this improved perspective again suggests that the numbers are too small to draw definite conclusions about developmental