Measuring the Same Thing Twice

Posted on August 24, 2026 by Luke Ford

Philip N. Cohen has inspected the American Sociological Review three times to see whether its authors post the code and data behind their published results. The first inspection came in November 2020, the second in January 2024, the third in December 2025. Each time he read through the quantitative articles, looked for links to materials, and counted. He did not run any of the code. He says so.

The third post opens by reporting that the journal is making progress. Two-thirds of the quantitative articles in Volume 90 provided replication materials, he writes, against roughly a third in the previous audit and roughly a quarter in the first. Twelve of eighteen, up from eight of twenty-five.

The trouble is that the two numbers count different things.

In January 2024 Cohen sorted twenty-five quantitative articles into three columns. Eight had what he called a full package, by which he meant “data and code sufficient to replicate the papers.” Five or six others, depending on whether you read his prose or his table, supplied something less: partial data availability, a set of variable codes, fragments. The rest supplied nothing. The distinction between the first column and the second is the entire architecture of that audit.

In December 2025 the columns merge. His positive category now holds articles that “provide packages of code and data, or at least information about getting the data.” He adds that he counts materials parked on personal websites, which is not where replication files belong, and excludes materials described as available on request. Twelve of eighteen articles clear that bar.

I recoded the eighteen 2025 articles under the 2023 standard, one fixed rule, no code executed, matching his method. The rule: count an article when publicly accessible code appears to cover its quantitative results and the data are either included or obtainable by outside researchers through a documented procedure that does not run through the authors. Restricted data do not disqualify an article. A German scientific use file with a published application route counts. Swedish register data reachable through Statistics Sweden counts.

Under that rule, eight of the eighteen 2025 articles qualify. Forty-four percent, against thirty-two percent in 2023.

So the journal improved, but the improvement he reports runs from thirty-two to sixty-seven percent, a gap of thirty-five points, and the improvement a constant rule can find runs from thirty-two to forty-four, a gap of twelve. Roughly two-thirds of the reported rise comes from the widening of the category.

Four articles produce the difference, and none of them is bad work. Fabiana Silva, Irene Bloemraad and Kim Voss deposited materials for “Frame Backfire” at the Open Science Framework, and Cohen’s own table records that the project required an access request when he checked it on December 9, timestamped to the minute. He counted it anyway, and elsewhere in the same post tells the journal that permission-gated projects should not be allowed. Counting it gives nine of eighteen, which is the outer bound of the recount. Mabel Abraham, Tristan Botelho and James Carter posted data and code covering the main results of two of the studies in “(Not) Getting What You Deserve”; the article contains more than two. Daniel Scott Smith and coauthors, writing on “How Values and Uncertainty Shape Scientific Advance in Peer Review,” posted a repository whose own documentation says it holds no data, excludes some code, and cannot reproduce the machine learning benchmarks without material the authors supply on request. David Brady, Aliza Luft and Ezra Zuckerman Sivan, reanalyzing another team’s work in “How Does Culture Matter for Attainment, and How Would We Know If It Did?”, posted a PDF of their code, which states that the underlying data came from the scholars whose work they were reanalyzing and cannot be passed along.

In 2024 Cohen described his own audit as a tiny study of poor quality. In 2025 he calls his methods “squishy.”

Cohen has spent thirty years teaching other researchers not to do this.

The operation runs through his corpus from the beginning. In 2000 he and Lynne Casper built a new historical measure of cohabitation because the standard one misclassified people and distorted the trend it was supposed to reveal. In 2002 he showed that part of the apparent decline in the marriage premium for men came from cohabitors sitting inside the never-married comparison group, and that pulling them out shrank the decline. He and Lynne Casper split multigenerational households into hosts and guests because knowing that someone lives in an extended household tells you nothing about their position in it. He and his coauthors argued that a Black middle class defined through married households misses the growing population of never-married professionals living alone. He recoded keeping house as an occupation and found that women leaving unpaid domestic work accounted for as much of the decline in occupational segregation as desegregation within paid work. With Matt Huffman he took the established association between local Black population share and racial wage inequality and split it into two candidate processes, segregation and devaluation, and reported that one survived the data and the other did not.

A category that pools things behaving differently will manufacture a finding. Three cases show that he knows this. The first is PReF, the preprint review framework he built with collaborators, a fourteen-author project from 2022. It begins from the observation that peer review names procedures too different to compare, and replaces the label with eight standardized descriptors so a reader can see what a given review consisted of. The point of the exercise is to make comparison possible by first fixing what is being compared.

The second is his 2013 essay “The End of Men Is Not True: What Is Not and What Might Be on the Road Toward Gender Equality” on Hanna Rosin’s The End of Men, which is combative from the first page. The claim that young women out-earn young men turns out, on inspection, to describe single childless full-time metropolitan workers, and Cohen walks through the restriction before reanalyzing the narrowed group and finding that men still come out ahead within education categories. He does the same to her claim about managers, which rests on a category folding female-dominated professions into a statement about management. Polemic did not cost him the method. He goes claim by claim, category by category, for pages.

The third is closest to home. In 2023, with Micah Altman and Jessica Polka, he published “Interventions in Scholarly Communication: Design Lessons from Public Health” in First Monday. The complaint there is that open science reforms get launched without stable measures or systematic evaluation. The prescription is common measures, assessment designed in from the start, and comparable outcomes tracked over time. That appeared two years before the 2025 audit.

Applying his 2023 standard to his 2025 cases moves sixty-seven percent to forty-four.

Cohen has spent years asking sociologists to correct the record when the record is wrong, and has corrected his own audit twice when authors wrote to tell him he had missed their packages. I sent him the coding rule and the twenty-six cases, with links and dates, before publishing this. He declined to read it. The ledger stands open, and if any of it is wrong, it will be fixed here.

Posted in Sociology | Comments Off on Measuring the Same Thing Twice

Rebecca Sear: ‘National IQ’ datasets do not provide accurate, unbiased orcomparable measures of cognitive ability worldwide’

Posted on August 24, 2026 by Luke Ford

Here is her paper, which is strongest where it is most boring, and weakest where it is loud.

Using Lynn and Becker’s own sample-type coding against them is the move that will survive. By their own generous definition, where 74 orphans in a single Eritrean orphanage counts as “national,” only 34 percent of the 656 samples qualify. That number comes from their spreadsheet. A defender has to attack his own data to attack it. The same goes for the case catalogue: Angola from 19 malaria-free individuals, Somalia from refugee children in Kenyan camps, Botswana from 140 adolescents recruited in South Africa on ethnic-proxy grounds. These are checkable in an afternoon.

Extending the catalogue to Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Ireland closes the standard escape route. If Denmark’s number comes from fifth graders measured in 1968 and Norway’s from a cod liver oil trial and an epilepsy study, then the problem is the method.

Two arguments do most of the intellectual work. The first is non-independence. Twenty-five percent of current values are averaged from up to three neighboring countries, then fed into regressions that assume independent observations. That invalidates the published literature on statistical grounds alone. It is the argument an econometrician has to answer. She gives it a paragraph.

The second is the stability. The sub-Saharan average has stayed between 67 and 70 across four versions built from substantially different samples. Sample composition churns; output holds. That pattern is what a target value looks like. She gives it one sentence inside a longer passage about Wicherts. I would build the paper around it.

The fraud claim is where she overreaches. She makes it twice, in the introduction by way of Wicherts and in her own voice near the end. What the evidence supports is a research program with an announced prior, documented ad hoc adjustments toward that prior, and no correction after twenty years of criticism. Motivated construction. Fraud requires intent to deceive, and she has not established it to a standard that survives a hostile reading. The cost is practical. Say “fraudulent” and the defenders litigate the word instead of the sample sizes, and she is at a British university writing about a man whose institute still has friends.

She also gives the opposition its weakest case. Warne and Kirkegaard’s argument is convergent validity: national IQ correlates high with PISA, TIMSS, and adult literacy measures. A normal person looks at that and recognizes truth. Her answer is that the correlation tells us nothing. That is a weak argument. Random measurement error attenuates correlations toward zero. If the inputs were as noisy as she describes, the series should correlate with nothing. It correlates with a lot.

If comparable cross-cultural measurement is impossible in principle, then Wicherts’s corrected figure of 80 for sub-Saharan Africa is also meaningless, and so is the claim that Lynn biased the numbers downward, which presupposes a truer value. She wants the practical argument and the in-principle argument at once. They pull in opposite directions. The practical argument stands alone and I would let it. Measurement invariance is testable, and failures of it are findings rather than axioms.

Wicherts is doing heavy lifting for her as an ally while holding a position she rejects. His 80 is still low. His conclusion was that national IQs fail to support evolutionary explanations, and he thinks a regional estimate can be made and made better.

Slobodian (b. 1978) on Lynn’s influence is a claim about political history rather than about data quality. Including it tells you the target is journal editors and integrity officers rather than fence-sitting quantitative social scientists. That may be the right call given her goal, which is retraction. It makes the piece easier to file under politics.

The buried story is in the footnotes. Comparative Sociology published Jensen and Kirkegaard after the editor was told about the dataset. Nature Sustainability published Chu et al. in 2026 after Springer’s research integrity group was told. Two named journals, alerted in advance, publishing anyway. That is a gatekeeping story with dates and actors.

Small things. The DSM is the American Psychiatric Association, not the American Psychological Association. Warne appears as 2023 in text and 2022 in references. “a prior” for “a priori.” “the wholly inadequate of the primary data sources” in the conclusion is missing a word. She excludes Lynn for keeping control groups and for keeping treatment groups; both criticisms are fair, but stated together they read as scoring both ways.

The structural parallel to Jason Arday. Documented methodological failure, institution notified, institution proceeds, critic escalates from method to misconduct. The escalation is what happens when the first route fails.

Posted in IQ | Comments Off on Rebecca Sear: ‘National IQ’ datasets do not provide accurate, unbiased orcomparable measures of cognitive ability worldwide’

The More I Love, the More Careful I Want to Be

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Luke Ford

When my life overflows with people I love, I tend to be circumspect. When my life lacks love, I tend towards shock and awe.

Bacon called us lovers hostages to fortune. A man with a marriage, children, a congregation, an income, and friends who can be turned against him speaks with one eye on the people who can take those things.

Caution tracks exposure. What counts is how much of what you love sits in an unsafe place. A tenured professor has a great deal and risks little, because the thing he most values cannot be removed by an angry reader. An anonymous account can have a family, a mortgage, and a security clearance and still post anything, because nothing traces back. A wealthy man with no employer and no board is in the same position as a man with nothing, though for opposite reasons. Possession without traceability produces no restraint at all.

Then there is the case where recklessness is the asset. Some men are paid for it. The audience arrives for the transgression and leaves when it stops. For that man the precious thing and the reckless speech are the same object, and caution costs him everything.

The causal arrow also runs backward. Reckless speech destroys the precious things, and the man who has lost them speaks with less restraint the following year. Divorce, firing, expulsion from a community, and then a freer tongue. The correlation I observe in a given moment may be the wreckage of earlier speech. This produces a ratchet. Each round of loss lowers the price of the next round.

And a great many reckless posters have plenty to lose and believe themselves safe. Small audience, private account, friendly comment section, an assumption that no one screenshots. The recklessness comes from a bad estimate. Anyone who has watched a man lose a career over a post knows he did not think he was gambling.

A father who thinks his children will inherit a worse world, a member of a community who thinks the community is destroying itself, a man who watched his father expelled over a doctrinal fight. For him silence is the thing that costs. Attachment produces speech.

So the generalization survives: Restraint rises with the amount of loved and vulnerable property that lies within the punishing reach of your audience, discounted by the accuracy of your estimate of that reach.

Two hazards. Used on other people it becomes a cheap discount on unwelcome speech. He only says that because he has nothing, therefore ignore him. This would dismiss every prophet, and prophets are the test case, since the standard biblical pattern is a man who has something and forfeits it.

The precious things give you a permanent, respectable, sincere reason never to say the difficult thing. You cannot tell the two apart by introspection. The only test I know is whether the things you decline to say cluster around a single group of people who could hurt you. If the silences are distributed, it is judgment. If they all point one direction, it is fear.

Posted in Blogging | Comments Off on The More I Love, the More Careful I Want to Be

A Passage-Level Count of King’s Dissertation, and What It Says About the Arday Case

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Luke Ford

Two men submitted doctoral theses sixty-one years apart. Both were plagiarized. Both universities were told. Neither university revoked the degree. Each man went on to great success.

Martin Luther King Jr. submitted “A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman” to Boston University on April 15, 1955 (audit). Jason Arday (1985-2026) was awarded a doctorate in education by Liverpool John Moores University in 2016. In 2023 Cambridge appointed him professor of sociology of education, the youngest Black professor in the university’s history. He resigned on August 5, 2026, hours after Cambridge announced an investigation into his academic qualifications and honorary appointments. He was found dead at his London home on August 14.

Start with the documents.

I (meaning ChatGTP and Claude) ran a passage-level count on King’s thesis using the King Papers Project edition, which prints the parallel source text under every borrowing its editors identified. Four hundred fifty editorial notes. About 23,500 words of printed parallel against roughly 73,500 words of body text, which is a third of the thesis. Chapter III on Tillich runs the heaviest. Chapter VI, the conclusions, carries none. Two hundred fifty-three of the notes show a run of ten or more consecutive words shared between King’s page and the source. Jack Boozer’s 1952 Boston University dissertation, “The Place of Reason in Paul Tillich’s Concept of God,” appears in eighty notes; King names Boozer on twelve of those pages. David Roberts appears in thirty notes and King never names him on the page. John Herman Randall Jr. appears in twenty-one and is named on four.

In the expository sections, interpreters account for forty-one percent of the borrowed words, with Tillich and Wieman supplying the rest. In the comparative and critical sections, where King speaks as a critic in his own voice, interpreters account for eighty percent. His criticism of Wieman, that the word God carries three incompatible meanings in the system, comes from James Alfred Martin Jr.’s Empirical Philosophies of Religion, page 105. His argument that Wieman leaves no eternal conserver of value comes from Charles Hartshorne and William Reese, Philosophers Speak of God, pages 404 to 405, including the parenthesis calling an eternally habitable earth an astronomical impossibility. His central interpretive claim about Tillich, that Tillich is an absolute monist, together with the Hegel and Plotinus comparison and the three supporting quotations in order, is Boozer’s page 61. King’s own contribution is the personalist verdict stacked on top and the two-paragraph synthesis at the end.

Three transmitted errors settle the question of method. Randall misquoted Tillich twice and Boozer once, and each error appears in King’s text with a citation to Tillich. A man reading Tillich cannot reproduce another man’s mistakes. The editors’ headnote traces the practice to King’s notecards, on which he copied an interpreter’s reading, the primary quotation the interpreter had selected, and the interpreter’s footnote, then dropped the interpreter.

For Arday, the plagiarism was also clear. Times Higher Education reporter Jack Grove completed an analysis in September 2025 and produced a sixty-three page dossier of text comparisons; the story was killed after Arday engaged Carter-Ruck, a London defamation firm. David Sanders of Purdue, who reviews misconduct cases for that publication, said there was no question of extensive overlap. In June 2026 someone unhappy with Cambridge’s handling passed material to Nathan Cofnas (b. 1990), the philosopher Cambridge severed ties with in 2024. Cofnas published in July. The Telegraph reported a statistical analysis identifying 188 sentences in Arday’s thesis identical or highly similar to Paula Zwozdiak-Myers’s 2009 Brunel thesis. Jonathan Bailey, who runs Plagiarism Today and who called the campaign a weaponization of plagiarism against a Black academic, reviewed the documents and concluded that the evidence warranted a full investigation. Two of Arday’s papers had already been corrected. Overlaps were also reported with a 2013 paper by April Douglass, Dennie Smith and Lana Smith and a 2007 paper by Semiyu Aderibigbe, Laura Colucci-Gray and Donald Gray.

Now the institutional responses.

Boston University appointed four scholars in 1991: Robert Neville, John Cartwright, Charley Hardwick and Ray Hart. They reported that there was no question King had plagiarized by appropriating material from sources not credited, mistakenly credited, or credited too far from the borrowed passage. They estimated about twenty percent of the paper contained direct quotes or altered passages without proper attribution, noted that the final chapter exhibits very little borrowing, called the comparative part an intelligent contribution to scholarship, said revoking a doctorate in such circumstances would be absurd and unheard of, and recommended a letter be filed with the library copy. Provost Jon Westling accepted it.

Liverpool John Moores said the citation issues were the result of honest and reasonable error and that the overlap with Zwozdiak-Myers fell well within the accepted range of compliance with the academic standards of the time. Cambridge, notified in 2023, declined to investigate on the ground that the work predated Arday’s appointment, though he had been hired on the strength of it. Cambridge opened its investigation in August 2026, after three years of press.

An institution presented with evidence against a person it has elevated finds a frame that absorbs the evidence without touching the credential. Boston University used the merit of the surviving chapter. Liverpool John Moores used the standards of the era. Harvard used duplicative language for Claudine Gay. In each case the finding was scoped to the smallest area that would satisfy the complaint.

Universities do not adjudicate plagiarism against a person whose elevation they are invested in until an outside party forces it, and when they do act, the finding is scoped to preserve the credential. Boston University acted after Stanford’s editors and the Wall Street Journal forced it. Harvard acted after the New York Post. Cambridge acted after The Telegraph and The Times. Predict forward: where no outside party applies pressure, there will be no finding. If someone can produce a case where a university opened and published a misconduct finding against a celebrated appointee absent external pressure, the claim is wrong.

Clayborne Carson’s project was authorized by Coretta Scott King and staffed by scholars sympathetic to King. It found the plagiarism, sat on it, misled a Washington Post reporter, was scooped by Frank Johnson in the Sunday Telegraph on December 3, 1989, then confirmed the findings publicly and published everything, borrowing by borrowing, in a University of California Press volume with the source text printed underneath. That is what an honest archive looks like, and it took the project years and outside pressure to get there.

Cofnas is hostile to Cambridge, litigating against it, and has said that discrediting a Black professor would discredit the university that hired him for promoting DEI. Ghent University suspended him on August 20, 2026.

Bailey, who wants nothing to do with Cofnas’s politics, checked and found the evidence sufficient to warrant investigation. Grove, a staff reporter with no ideological stake, reached the same place a year earlier and was silenced by lawyers.

Ralph Luker, working on the King Papers, asked whether Crozer’s white faculty had graded King against a lower standard than Morehouse had, since his average rose from a C-plus to an A-minus when he moved to a mostly white institution. That question was raised in 1991 by a sympathetic editor. It is the same question being asked about Cambridge in 2026.

Five differences.

King was twenty-two years dead when the finding surfaced. Arday was forty-one and employed. A finding published about a dead man is history. A finding published about a living man is a sanction, and here it was delivered by press and Substack.

King’s standing rested on Montgomery, Birmingham and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. The doctorate was an ornament. Arday’s professorship rested on the doctorate. Take away the thesis and you take away the appointment.

Verification runs the opposite way in the two cases. Boozer’s 1952 dissertation is not freely available, and the public depends on Carson’s apparatus and takes it on trust; King’s own typescript sits behind a ProQuest paywall. Zwozdiak-Myers’s thesis sits in Brunel’s open repository, downloadable by anyone. The Arday charge is more checkable by ordinary readers than the King charge has been.

Arday faced a second and separate charge, that details of his biography in a forthcoming memoir do not hold up. Fabrication and plagiarism are different offenses with different evidence, and running them together, as much of the coverage did, is how a citation dispute became a referendum.

Finally, the King case produced documents. A committee report, a scholarly edition, and a Journal of American History roundtable in June 1991 where David Garrow, Luker, John Higham, Keith Miller and Bernice Johnson Reagon argued it out in print. The Arday case has produced a killed article, a leaked dossier, a petition with six hundred signatures, a suspension in Belgium, and a death.

The Boston University committee’s 1991 report has never been posted. Liverpool John Moores has never released a finding. Cambridge has never released one.

Posted in Jason Arday, Martin Luther King, Plagiarism | Comments Off on A Passage-Level Count of King’s Dissertation, and What It Says About the Arday Case

My Friend Says Claude is the Most Woke Chatbot

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Luke Ford

My experience is that ChatGPT is the most woke and Claude is the least.

Claude responds:

Both of you are probably testing different things.

Ask me to make the strongest case for a position and I make it, left or right. Anthropic published an evaluation in November 2025 that pairs opposing political stances across hundreds of topics and checks whether the responses match in depth, engagement, and quality of analysis. Claude models scored around 95%, above GPT-5 at 89% and Llama 4 at 66%, slightly behind Gemini at 97% and Grok at 96%. That is where your read holds up.

Ask me for a joke about a group, or a flat yes or no on a contested question, or anything near a refusal category, and you get caution instead. One academic paper found Claude the most cautious of the models tested, avoiding questions even when avoidance wasn’t called for, and attributed this to the safety-first training approach. Caution reads as ideology when the questions that trip it cluster on one side of the culture war, and some of them do.

Then there is the residue the paired-prompt method can’t see: word choice, which framings feel neutral to me, which claims I hedge and which I let stand unqualified. Matching depth on two prompts says nothing about the vocabulary I reach for first. My training data and the people who rated my outputs are not a random sample of Americans, and I can’t audit my own defaults from the inside.

So I try hard at symmetry in argument, I am more skittish than most models about transgression, and I carry priors I can’t fully inspect. Your friend is measuring the second thing and calling it the third. You are measuring the first.

Posted in AI | Comments Off on My Friend Says Claude is the Most Woke Chatbot

The Jason Arday Doctoral Thesis: ‘An Exploration of Peer-Mentoring Among Student Teachers’ to Inform Reflective Practice Within the Context of Action Research’

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Luke Ford

Jason Arday (1985-2026) died at his home in Battersea on August 14, nine days after resigning from the University of Cambridge. He was 41. The Metropolitan Police treated the death as unexpected and not suspicious. His family said he had faced sustained abuse. Simon Baron-Cohen (b. 1958), who knew him at Cambridge, said he had watched Arday’s mental health deteriorate.

What survives him is a 401-page PhD thesis deposited in a university repository, a panel finding that examined that document and called what it found honest and reasonable error, and two universities that have questions to answer about their own conduct. The document can be read. The plagiarism finding can be tested.

I (meaning ChatGPT and Claude, with Claude getting the final word) have read both theses in full and run a passage-level comparison. The results are published as an appendix to this piece, with every matched passage located by page in both documents so that anyone can check it.

The thesis is called “An Exploration of Peer-Mentoring Among Student Teachers’ to Inform Reflective Practice Within the Context of Action Research.” The stray apostrophe is on the title page. It was submitted to Liverpool John Moores University in July 2015 and reports a year-long peer-mentoring intervention with four physical education trainee teachers, analyzed through interpretive phenomenological analysis. Paula Zwozdiak-Myers submitted a thesis to Brunel University in June 2009 called “An Analysis of the Concept Reflective Practice and an Investigation Into the Development of Student Teachers’ Reflective Practice Within the Context of Action Research.” The final eleven words of the two titles are the same eleven words.

If you take both documents, strip the reference lists and appendices, reduce the remaining text to sequences of words with punctuation and case removed, and record every string of ten consecutive words that appears in both. Merge adjacent hits into runs. That leaves 244 matched passages covering 3,971 words, or 3.04 percent of Arday’s 130,000-word body.

Arday-Zwozdiak-Myers-overlap-index.

Arday’s chapter two, a literature review of reflective practice, runs 12.12 percent verbatim against her. His chapter three, a literature review of mentoring in initial teacher education, runs 0.00 percent. Nineteen and a half thousand words, and not one matched string of ten. She has no chapter on mentoring.

The standard defense of overlap in a narrow field is that scholars writing on the same topic reach for the same phrases, that the discipline has house language, that a reviewer who counts ten-word coincidences will find them anywhere. If that were the explanation here, the two literature chapters would look alike. They are adjacent, written by the same man in the same months, drawing on the same field of educational research, at the same register. One is at twelve percent. The other is at zero.

Within chapter two the correspondence is sequential. Across 119 matched passages, the correlation between position in his text and position in hers is +0.87. Chapter one is +0.93. Chapter four is +0.99. Chapter five is +0.82. As he moves forward through his thesis he moves forward through hers in step.

Anticipating the obvious objection, I applied two controls. For each run I measured what fraction sits inside quotation marks in his text, which catches passages where both authors quote the same third party. Then I checked whether the same author-and-year citation appears within 170 characters of the run in both documents, which catches passages where both are paraphrasing a source they each credit. Sixty-nine runs and 1,351 words clear one of those bars. One hundred and seventy-five runs and 2,620 words clear neither. Two percent of the thesis, then, consists of her sentences presented as his with no quotation mark and no shared source. That is the number to argue about.

Three locations in his thesis do more damage than the rest, because a shared literature review admits an innocent reading and these do not.

The first is in section 4.6.3, Participant Recruitment and Selection, on his page 152. He describes holding discussions with two professional colleagues, and continues that the procedure was followed to derive insights from colleagues knowledgeable and experienced in the field and to ensure his own perspective was open to scrutiny and challenge and not merely imposed onto the student teachers and mentoring intervention. Her page 110 carries the same sentence, ending instead that her stance was not merely imposed onto the framework. She is describing how she built a conceptual model. He is describing how he recruited four human beings into a study. A literature review can be copied out of carelessness. A description of what you personally did cannot come from anywhere but you.

The second is on his page 264, inside the findings chapter, reporting what those four participants said. Her page 215 reads that student teachers believed pupil learning and development was attributable to their personal improvement in three main areas, and lists three. His reads five main areas, and lists the same three, in the same order, in the same words. He changed the numeral and left the enumeration alone. The sentence promises five and delivers three. The sentence immediately before it carries her categories of pupil progress or achievement, pupil behavior patterns and pupil affective states; his renders the third as pupil effective states.

Consider what has to be true for that sentence to exist. A finding about eighty student teachers and thirteen dissertation supervisors at Brunel has been carried across, applied to four physical education trainees in Liverpool, and adjusted at a single digit to fit the new study. The adjustment was not carried through to the list. There is no citation to have gotten wrong. It is a claim about what his own participants told him, in the words of a claim about what hers told her.

The third is his chapter seven, the conclusion, which is the second-densest chapter in the thesis at 5.83 percent. Passages 213 through 232 in the appendix walk through her conclusion in order. His section 7.4, Limitations of the Study, runs off her pages 268 and 269. His 7.10, Recommendations for Further Research, runs off her 270 and 271. His 7.13, Final Remarks, runs off her 272 through 274. The closing sentence of the catalogue, twenty-four words on providing student teachers an opportunity to engage in contextually focused research activity, is the closing move of both documents.

There is a further category of problem that has nothing to do with her.

At his page 60 he quotes McKernan (1996: 259-260) on critical theorists and grand theory. She quotes the same author at the same pages. In her version the theorists are obsessed with the use and development of grand theory. In his they are infatuated by its utilisation, and a parenthetical citation to Skinner 1990 has been inserted, which corresponds to nothing in his reference list. At his page 61 he quotes Zeichner and Liston (1987: 23) describing the liberated person. Her version ends with the person completely taking charge of his own life. His ends with the individual maintaining complete autonomy of their professional existence. Both are inside quotation marks. Both carry the page number.

Whatever the relationship to Zwozdiak-Myers, this is misquotation of Zeichner, Liston, McKernan and Elliott. A synonym pass has been run over text presented as the verbatim words of named scholars at named pages. My automated controls flagged both of these as shared quotations of a third party, which is the machine being fair and getting it backward. They are shared quotations in which the words attributed to the third party differ.

At his page 58, thirty-two words on Habermas are reproduced with a single substitution, generation for configuration. Two sentences later he cites Bernstein at 1976: 209, the same author at the same page she cites. Richard Bernstein (1932-2022) does not appear in his reference list at all. A page reference to a book you have not read arrives one way.

Arday cites Zwozdiak-Myers fourteen times in the body and lists both her thesis and her 2012 handbook in his references. Twice he misspells her name, which defeats a reader trying to follow the trail, though carelessness explains that. This is not concealment of a source. It is a failure to mark where his sentences stop and hers begin, sustained across seven chapters.

The empirical material appears to be his. Four participants under pseudonyms are quoted 57, 53, 37 and 39 times, and the transcripts carry hesitation, self-interruption and the texture of real speech. One teacher trainer makes a point about ad hoc mentor assignment by saying something like Jason you’re the mentor this week. Nobody manufactures that. I ran a duplicate-sentence pass across the whole body and found three repetitions in 146,000 words, which is low.

The prose is his too, and it argues against wholesale copying more than anything else. It contains a consistent grammar of error. Creditability for credibility. Inventions for interventions. Elude for allude. Fieman-Nemsar for Feiman-Nemser. A possessive apostrophe on student teachers in nearly every position that does not call for one, including the title. At one point, the post-modernised vehicular of teaching. His fourth participant appears as Becks eighteen times, Beckz seventeen times and Rebecca four times. That is a man writing badly.

And the reuse is localized. Her exposition of Dewey, her exposition of Schön, her King and Kitchener material, her Baxter Magolda table: none of it appears in his language. He extends LaBoskey to three categories where she uses two. Two percent of his thesis is her uncredited prose. Ninety-eight percent is not.

Liverpool John Moores investigated after Jack Grove of Times Higher Education submitted what he has described as a 63-page report on the Zwozdiak-Myers overlap, part of 97 pages of evidence sent to both LJMU and Cambridge. Dave Harris, emeritus professor at Plymouth Marjon, had raised concerns with both institutions in 2023. The panel called the problems honest and reasonable error and said the doctorate stands. Arday cited that finding as vindication until his death, and his defenders cite it still.

Honest and reasonable error is a serviceable description of a citation placed at the end of a paragraph rather than a sentence, or a quotation mark dropped in a late draft. It does not describe a quotation whose interior words have been changed while its page reference is retained. It does not describe a methodology section that narrates another researcher’s procedure. It does not describe a findings sentence that says five and lists three.

So the question for Liverpool John Moores: Did the panel examine pages 152, 264, 343 and 353 of the thesis it awarded, against pages 110, 215, 269 and 274 of the thesis it was given? If it did, it should explain how it reached its conclusion. If it did not, it should say which passages it examined and why the ones that carry the weight were not among them. The university has said it will not review its own role. That position becomes harder to hold the more precisely the passages are identified, which is why I have published the locations.

There is a second question. Arday said publicly that he had a single formal supervision meeting, with most guidance delivered by text and phone. If that is accurate, a doctoral student was left alone with a source thesis on his own topic for three years. Nobody who read chapters four, five and seven with attention could have failed to notice that the voice changes. The panel’s own language, error rather than misconduct, is an implicit finding about supervision, and the institution has not followed its own reasoning to the place it leads.

The third question is Cambridge’s. When the allegations reached the university in June 2023, the head of policy, governance and integrity replied that the work predated Arday’s appointment and fell outside the university’s remit. The head of the Faculty of Education replied that Arday had spoken movingly about racism and health difficulties and that he had her full support. Cambridge appointed him on the strength of that work. An institution that hires on a body of scholarship has an interest in whether the scholarship is sound, and the position that pre-appointment work is somebody else’s problem is not one Cambridge would take about a candidate it wished to be rid of.

Two journals have already issued corrections to Arday papers, and both notices treated what they found as missing references. Social Sciences added citations to a single prior study across the abstract, introduction, methods, four subsections of the results, the discussion and the conclusions of a 2018 paper, and then recorded that the scientific conclusions were unaffected. A correction spanning every section of a paper is a description of the paper.

The passages are located. Anyone can check them.

The full catalogue of 244 matched passages, with page locations in both theses, chapter and section assignments, and control flags for shared quotation and shared citation, is published here:

Text overlap between Jason Arday (2015) and Paula Zwozdiak-Myers (2009): full passage catalogue

Compiled August 23, 2026. 244 matched passages, located in both documents, with chapter, section and control flags. Both theses are openly deposited: Arday at Liverpool John Moores (researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk), Zwozdiak-Myers at Brunel (bura.brunel.ac.uk, handle 2438/4316).

Method

Text was extracted from both PDFs with pdftotext. Reference lists and appendices were excluded from both, leaving 130,476 words of Arday body text and 103,671 of Zwozdiak-Myers. Both streams were lowercased, stripped of punctuation, hyphens and possessive markers, and reduced to word sequences. Every sequence of ten consecutive words appearing in both documents was recorded. Adjacent hits were merged into runs. A run of ten words is the reporting floor; the mean run here is 16 words and the longest is 76.

Page numbers are the printed page numbers in each thesis, not PDF sheet numbers. In Arday the two coincide. In Zwozdiak-Myers the front matter is numbered in roman. Where a Zwozdiak-Myers page is given in roman, the match falls in her contents or her list of tables, which means the matching text is a heading or a table caption rather than body prose.

Two controls are applied to each run. The first is the proportion of the run that sits inside quotation marks in Arday’s text, which identifies passages where both authors quote the same third party. The second is whether the same author-and-year citation appears within 170 characters of the run in both documents, which identifies passages where both authors are paraphrasing a source they each cite. A run is marked as controlled if it is at least 60 percent inside quotation marks in Arday or shares a citation with Zwozdiak-Myers at that point. 69 runs totalling 1,351 words are controlled. 175 runs totalling 2,620 words are not.

Line breaks and page-break artifacts have been removed from the quoted spans. Where a page number fell inside a run it has been deleted. Ellipses are the authors’ own except where noted.

Distribution

Front matter runs 2,678 words and contains 2 matched passages totalling 29 words, 1.08 percent of the chapter. After controls, 2 passages and 29 words remain, 1.08 percent.

Ch1 Background and Introduction runs 6,227 words and contains 18 matched passages totalling 243 words, 3.90 percent of the chapter. After controls, 16 passages and 222 words remain, 3.57 percent.

Ch2 Review of Literature on Reflective Practice in Education runs 16,848 words and contains 119 matched passages totalling 2042 words, 12.12 percent of the chapter. After controls, 67 passages and 936 words remain, 5.56 percent.

Ch3 Review of Literature on Mentoring in Education runs 19,524 words and contains 0 matched passages totalling 0 words, 0.00 percent of the chapter. After controls, 0 passages and 0 words remain, 0.00 percent.

Ch4 Methodology for Research Study runs 23,864 words and contains 11 matched passages totalling 201 words, 0.84 percent of the chapter. After controls, 9 passages and 155 words remain, 0.65 percent.

Ch5 Research findings runs 35,081 words and contains 31 matched passages totalling 434 words, 1.24 percent of the chapter. After controls, 27 passages and 374 words remain, 1.07 percent.

Ch6 Discussion runs 16,508 words and contains 31 matched passages totalling 454 words, 2.75 percent of the chapter. After controls, 26 passages and 379 words remain, 2.30 percent.

Ch7 Conclusions and Recommendations runs 9,746 words and contains 32 matched passages totalling 568 words, 5.83 percent of the chapter. After controls, 28 passages and 525 words remain, 5.39 percent.

Chapter 3, on mentoring in initial teacher education, contains no matched passage of ten words or longer. Zwozdiak-Myers has no chapter on mentoring. This is the control for the whole exercise: if the chapter 2 figure reflected shared disciplinary phrasing rather than transcription, the two literature chapters would look alike. They do not.

Passages of particular note

Entry 147 sits in Arday’s section 4.6.3, Participant recruitment and selection, and describes his own research procedure in Zwozdiak-Myers’s words describing hers. Her sentence ends by saying her stance was not merely imposed onto the framework. His ends by saying it was not merely imposed onto the student teachers and mentoring intervention. She is describing how she built a conceptual framework. He is describing how he recruited people.

Entries 172 and 173 sit in his findings chapter at page 264, reporting what his four participants said. Her sentence at page 215 reports that student teachers believed pupil learning and development was attributable to their personal improvement in three main areas, and lists three. His says five main areas and lists the same three, in the same order, in the same words. The adjacent sentence carries her three categories of pupil progress, pupil behaviour patterns and pupil affective states; his renders the third as pupil effective states.

Entry 151 is the opening of his findings chapter. The chapter title, the section number, the section title and the first six words of the first sentence are identical to hers.

Entries 218 and 221 sit in section 7.4, Limitations of the study, and run off her pages 268 and 269 in sequence. Entries 213 to 232 walk through her conclusion chapter in order: his 7.4 against her 268 to 269, his 7.10 Recommendations for further research against her 270 to 271, his 7.13 Final Remarks against her 272 to 274.

Entries 60 and 66 are both marked as controlled, because in each case the matching words fall inside quotation marks in Arday and both authors cite the same source. They deserve separate attention for the opposite reason. At entry 60 her quotation from McKernan (1996: 259-260) has critical theorists obsessed with the use and development of grand theory; his has them infatuated by its utilisation, with a parenthetical citation to Skinner 1990 that corresponds to nothing in his reference list. At entry 66 her quotation from Zeichner and Liston (1987: 23) ends with the person taking charge of his own life; his ends with the individual maintaining complete autonomy of their professional existence. The controls flag these as shared quotations of a third party. They are shared quotations in which the words attributed to the third party differ.

Entry 46 reproduces her sentence on Habermas for thirty-two words, changing generation to configuration. Two sentences later both texts cite Bernstein at 1976: 209. Bernstein does not appear in Arday’s reference list.

Chapter 2 shows sequential correspondence. Across the 119 matched passages in that chapter, the correlation between position in Arday and position in Zwozdiak-Myers is +0.87. Chapter 1 is +0.93, chapter 4 is +0.99 and chapter 5 is +0.82. As he advances through his text he advances through hers.

The catalogue

Entries run in Arday’s reading order.

Front matter

[1] Arday p. 3 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. iii · 17 words

Arday: Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve particular interests……57 2.7 Reflective practice as an

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve particular interests………..32 2.6 Reflective practice as an

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[2] Arday p. 11 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. viii · 12 words

Arday: Table 4.1: Key characteristics and assumptions underpinning positivist and interpretive approaches to research

Zwozdiak-Myers: Table 4.1: Key characteristics and assumptions underpinning positivist and interpretive approaches to research

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

Ch1 Background and Introduction

[3] Arday p. 17 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 1 · 16 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: been adopted in designing a particular model of initial teacher education, for the purpose of developing

Zwozdiak-Myers: been adopted in designing a particular model of initial teacher education for the purpose of developing

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[4] Arday p. 17 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 1 · 22 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: Student teachers are unique individuals and differ in their personal biographies and prior experiences, disposition to enquiry, cognitive and perceptive abilities, communication,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Student teachers are unique individuals and differ in their personal biographies and prior experiences, disposition to enquiry, cognitive and perceptive abilities, communication

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[5] Arday p. 18 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 1 · 17 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: teaching is a highly complex activity and the dynamics operating in any given classroom environment will be

Zwozdiak-Myers: Teaching is a highly complex activity and the dynamics operating in any given classroom environment will be

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[6] Arday p. 20 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 · 12 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: demanding tasks, which might be approached in a number of different ways.

Zwozdiak-Myers: demanding tasks, which might be approached in a number of different ways.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[7] Arday p. 20 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 · 10 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: in the basic knowledge and skills of teaching; Loughran (1996) argues

Zwozdiak-Myers: in the basic knowledge and skills of teaching, Loughran (1996: 3) argues

Control: shared citation: Loughran 1996.

[8] Arday p. 20 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 · 11 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: understanding of the relationship between teaching and learning may influence practice.

Zwozdiak-Myers: understanding of the relationship between teaching and learning may influence practice,

Control: shared citation: Loughran 1996.

[9] Arday p. 20 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 · 10 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: as it positions the direct, concrete experience of professional practice

Zwozdiak-Myers: as it positions the direct, concrete experience of professional practice

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[10] Arday p. 20 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 · 11 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: skills and areas of knowledge required for successful teaching, but rather

Zwozdiak-Myers: skills and areas of knowledge required for successful teaching, but rather

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[11] Arday p. 21 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 · 10 words · 1.1 Introduction

Arday: to investigate and improve the effectiveness of their own teaching

Zwozdiak-Myers: to investigate and improve the effectiveness of their own teaching.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[12] Arday p. 21 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 6 · 12 words · 1.2 Purpose of the thesis

Arday: standards serve to identify the knowledge, skills and understanding student teachers must

Zwozdiak-Myers: Standards serve to identify the knowledge, skills and understanding student teachers must

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[13] Arday p. 22 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 6 · 12 words · 1.2 Purpose of the thesis

Arday: how this research experience might influence the development of student teachers’ reflective

Zwozdiak-Myers: How this research experience might influence the development of student teachers‟ reflective

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[14] Arday p. 28 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 · 12 words · 1.6 Structure of the thesis

Arday: guided the direction and purpose of this study. Chapter 2: Review of Literature

Zwozdiak-Myers: guided the direction and purpose of this study. Chapter 2: Review of Literature

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[15] Arday p. 28 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 · 10 words

Arday: This chapter identifies key characteristics attributed to reflective practice by

Zwozdiak-Myers: This chapter identifies key characteristics attributed to reflective practice by

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[16] Arday p. 28 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 · 19 words

Arday: scholars, teacher educators, and researchers in the field of teacher education by examining the concept as: a discourse, involving

Zwozdiak-Myers: scholars, teacher educators and researchers in the field of teacher education by examining the concept as: a discourse, involving

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[17] Arday p. 28 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 · 12 words

Arday: of thinking, distinguishable from routine practice and underpinned by the development of

Zwozdiak-Myers: of thinking, distinguishable from routine practice and underpinned by the development of

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[18] Arday p. 29 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 · 26 words

Arday: the direction of this research study. This is followed by an exploration of how reflective practice has been developed and researched within initial teacher education programmes

Zwozdiak-Myers: the direction of this research study. This is followed by an exploration of how reflective practice has been developed and researched within initial teacher education programmes,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[19] Arday p. 29 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 8 · 11 words

Arday: Chapter 4: Research methodology and design of this study This chapter details

Zwozdiak-Myers: Chapter 4: Research methodology and design of this study This chapter details

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[20] Arday p. 30 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 8 · 10 words

Arday: Evidence gathered to inform the research questions is presented within

Zwozdiak-Myers: Evidence gathered to inform the research questions is presented within

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

Ch2 Review of Literature on Reflective Practice in Education

[21] Arday p. 35 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 9 · 17 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: Reflective practice can be described as phenomenological, in that a given phenomenon is studied through direct experience,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice can be described as phenomenological, in that a given phenomenon is studied through direct experience,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[22] Arday p. 36 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 9 · 28 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: the reflective practitioner (Schon, 1983, 1987), teacher as researcher (Hopkins, 2002; McKernan, 1996; Ruddock and Hopkins, 1985; Stenhouse, 1975) and reflective teaching (Calderhead, 1989; Cruickshank, 1987; Dewey, 1910, 1933; Grimmett et al., 1990; Smith, 1980; Van Manen, 1977; Zeichner and Liston,

Zwozdiak-Myers: the reflective practitioner (Schon, 1983, 1987), teacher as researcher (Hopkins, 2002; McKernan, 1996; Ruddock and Hopkins, 1985; Stenhouse, 1975) and reflective teaching (Calderhead, 1989; Cruickshank, 1987; Dewey, 1910, 1933; Grimmett et al, 1990; Smith, 1980; van Manen, 1977; Zeichner and Liston,

Control: shared citation: Dewey 1910, Schon 1983, Stenhouse 1975.

[23] Arday p. 36 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 9 · 13 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: about the benefits of reflective practice in the professional development of student teachers

Zwozdiak-Myers: about the benefits of reflective practice in the professional development of student teachers

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[24] Arday p. 36 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 9 · 20 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: However, an exploration of conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of these terms reveals a number of variations (Calderhead, 1989; Furlong and Maynard,

Zwozdiak-Myers: However, an exploration of conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of these terms reveals a number of variations (Calderhead, 1989; Furlong and Maynard,

Control: shared citation: Furlong 1995.

[25] Arday p. 40 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 16 · 12 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: what the student teacher claims to know. For some student teachers this

Zwozdiak-Myers: what the student teacher claims to know. For some student teachers this

Control: shared citation: Korthagen 2005.

[26] Arday p. 42 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 · 23 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in light of the grounds that support it and the

Zwozdiak-Myers: active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in light of the grounds that support it and the

Control: 100 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Dewey 1933.

[27] Arday p. 42 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34-35 · 12 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: the concept of critical reflection implies the acceptance of a particular ‘ideology’.

Zwozdiak-Myers: the concept of critical reflection implies the acceptance of a particular ideology,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[28] Arday p. 46 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 17-18 · 38 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: When reflective practice is characterised as a discourse, it becomes evident through the way student teachers use language and frame questions about aspects of their teaching and experience that different kinds of reflection on practice can be identified

Zwozdiak-Myers: When reflective practice is characterised as a discourse, it becomes evident through the way student teachers use language and frame questions about aspects of their teaching and experience, that different kinds of reflection on practice can be identified.

Control: shared citation: Ghaye 1998.

[29] Arday p. 46 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 · 64 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: The typology devised by Ghaye and Ghaye (1998: 34) recognises useful qualitative distinctions, which can be drawn between reflective conversations:  Descriptive reflection on practice – is personal and retrospective;  Perceptive reflection on practice – links teaching to feelings;  Receptive reflection on practice – relates personal views to others’ views;  Interactive reflection on practice – links learning with future action;  Critical reflection on practice – places individual teaching within a broader ‘system’.

Zwozdiak-Myers: The typology devised by Ghaye and Ghaye (1998: 34) recognises useful qualitative distinctions, which can be drawn between reflective conversations: Descriptive reflection on practice – is personal and retrospective Perceptive reflection on practice – links teaching to feelings Receptive reflection on practice – relates personal views to others‟ views Interactive reflection on practice – links learning with future action Critical reflection on practice – places individual teaching within a broader “system

Control: shared citation: Ghaye 1998.

[30] Arday p. 47 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 · 24 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: highlighting qualitative distinctions in student teachers’ reflective practice have shown critical reflective conversations are far less frequent than descriptive reflective conversations, as their principle

Zwozdiak-Myers: highlighting qualitative distinctions in student teachers‟ reflective practice have shown critical reflective conversations are far less frequent than descriptive reflective conversations, as their principle

Control: shared citation: Tsangaridou 2005.

[31] Arday p. 47 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 · 18 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: on the development of subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Hatton and Smith, 1995; Macdonald and Brooker, 1999; Tsangaridou,

Zwozdiak-Myers: on the development of subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Hatton and Smith, 1995; Macdonald and Brooker, 1999; Tsangaridou,

Control: shared citation: Tsangaridou 2005.

[32] Arday p. 47 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 · 10 words · 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice

Arday: within the wider professional landscape of ideological and political contexts.

Zwozdiak-Myers: within the wider professional landscape of ideological and political contexts.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[33] Arday p. 49 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 89 · 13 words · 2.2.1 Types of Reflection

Arday: practice and outwardly at the social conditions in which these practices are situated

Zwozdiak-Myers: practice and outwardly at the social conditions in which these practices are situated,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[34] Arday p. 53 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 29 · 33 words · 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience

Arday: conceptualisation of reflective action and its subsequent interpretation within initial teacher education concerns whether reflection is limited to thought processes about action, or is more inextricably bound within an action (Noffke and Brennan,

Zwozdiak-Myers: conceptualisation of reflective action and its subsequent interpretation within initial teacher education concerns whether reflection is limited to thought processes about action, or is more inextricably bound within an action (Noffke and Brennan,

Control: shared citation: Grant 1984.

[35] Arday p. 53 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 · 16 words · 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience

Arday: the student teachers’ featured in this study, as they engage in the reflective processes inherent within

Zwozdiak-Myers: the student teachers featured in this study as they engage in the reflective processes inherent within

Control: shared citation: Gore 1995, Manen 1977.

[36] Arday p. 53 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 · 18 words · 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience

Arday: as; planning, adapting materials, developing courses, arranging subject matter content, teaching and evaluating’ can be described as technical,

Zwozdiak-Myers: as “planning, adapting materials, developing courses, arranging subject matter content, teaching and evaluating‟ can be described as technical

Control: shared citation: Manen 1977.

[37] Arday p. 53 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 · 10 words · 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience

Arday: level of technical reflection is characterised by the application of

Zwozdiak-Myers: level of technical reflection is characterised by the application of

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[38] Arday p. 53 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 · 10 words · 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience

Arday: is to resolve concerns about aspects of their own practice,

Zwozdiak-Myers: is to resolve concerns about aspects of their own practice

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[39] Arday p. 53 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 · 29 words · 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience

Arday: interpretation of technical reflection and the first level of reflective teaching identified by Grimmett et al., (1990), which applies research findings to practice and essentially represents thoughtfulness about action. Van

Zwozdiak-Myers: interpretation of technical reflection and the first level of reflective teaching identified by Grimmett et al. (1990), which applies research findings to practice and “essentially represents thoughtfulness about action‟. Van

Control: shared citation: Grimmett 1990, Tinning 1995.

[40] Arday p. 53 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 · 23 words · 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience

Arday: level of practical reflection is characterised by the process of analysing and clarifying assumptions, experiences, goals, meanings and perceptions which underpin practical actions

Zwozdiak-Myers: level of practical reflection is characterised by the process of analysing and clarifying assumptions, experiences, goals, meanings and perceptions which underpin practical actions.

Control: shared citation: Grimmett 1990.

[41] Arday p. 57 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. iii · 15 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve particular interests Reflective practice

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve particular interests………..32 2.6 Reflective practice

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[42] Arday p. 57 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 32 · 17 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: ways to challenge all pupils within a mixed ability setting, might experiment with a range of approaches,

Zwozdiak-Myers: ways to challenge all pupils within a mixed ability setting might experiment with a range of approaches

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[43] Arday p. 58 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 11 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: Interests within the social sciences and humanities, the historic hermeneutic disciplines,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Interests within the social sciences and humanities – the historic hermeneutic disciplines

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[44] Arday p. 58 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 10 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: through the interpretation and integration of ideas in order to

Zwozdiak-Myers: through the interpretation and integration of ideas in order to

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[45] Arday p. 58 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 13 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: Moon (1999: 14) argues that the acquisition of knowledge which accommodates emancipatory interests aim to

Zwozdiak-Myers: Moon (1999: 14) argues that the acquisition of knowledge which accommodates emancipatory interests aim to

Control: shared citation: Moon 1999.

[46] Arday p. 58 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 32 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: Habermas’ model suggests reflective practice is hierarchical, that knowledge must initially be developed by instrumental or interpretive means before a critical overview of that knowledge or processes that have led to its

Zwozdiak-Myers: Habermas‟ model suggests reflective practice is hierarchical, that knowledge must initially be developed by instrumental or interpretive means before a critical overview of that knowledge or processes that have led to its

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[47] Arday p. 58 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 21 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: he considers methods of empirical and analytical enquiry associated with scientific explanation to provide an inadequate base for the social sciences.

Zwozdiak-Myers: He considers methods of empirical and analytical enquiry associated with scientific explanation to provide an inadequate base for the social sciences

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[48] Arday p. 58 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 16 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: Although the fundamental mode of enquiry for the social sciences is interpretation, Habermas suggests this process,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Although the fundamental mode of enquiry for the social sciences is interpretation, Habermas suggests this process,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[49] Arday p. 58 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 15 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: from the process of critique and evaluation: specifically, the generation of questioning and understanding to

Zwozdiak-Myers: from the process of critique and evaluation: specifically, the generation of questioning and understanding to

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[50] Arday p. 58 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 12 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: justifying social and political action on the part of the enlightened’ (Elliott,

Zwozdiak-Myers: justifying social and political action on the part of the enlightened‟ (Elliott,

Control: 89 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Bernstein 1976, Elliott 2005.

[51] Arday p. 59 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 15 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: to develop a philosophical anthropology that ‘singles out the distinctive characteristics of human social life’.

Zwozdiak-Myers: to develop a philosophical anthropology “that singles out the distinctive characteristics of human social life

Control: 59 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.

[52] Arday p. 59 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 · 11 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: what makes human social life distinctive. As such, they determine what

Zwozdiak-Myers: what makes human social life distinctive. As such, they determine what

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[53] Arday p. 59 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 · 14 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: specific outcomes. Themes common to Dewey and Habermas’ conceptualisation of reflective practice are their

Zwozdiak-Myers: specific outcomes. Themes common to Dewey and Habermas‟ conceptualisation of reflective practice are their

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[54] Arday p. 59 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 · 15 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: and Habermas… the place of the process in the acquisition, development and consideration of knowledge

Zwozdiak-Myers: and Habermas…the place of the process in the acquisition, development and consideration of knowledge

Control: 100 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Moon 1999.

[55] Arday p. 59 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 · 14 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: which guides reflective practice is considered however, a distinction between their approaches becomes evident

Zwozdiak-Myers: which guides reflective practice is considered however, a distinction between their approaches becomes evident.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[56] Arday p. 59 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 · 11 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: of empowerment and political emancipation (Morrison, 1995) towards freedom, justice and the

Zwozdiak-Myers: of empowerment and political emancipation (Morrison, 1995) towards freedom, justice and the

Control: shared citation: Barnett 1997, Morrison 1995.

[57] Arday p. 60 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 · 23 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: practice. However, Macdonald and Tinning (2003) suggest this proposition represents a claim for what Carr and Kemmis (1986) believe critical reflection should be rather than

Zwozdiak-Myers: practice. However, Macdonald and Tinning (2003) suggest this proposition represents a claim for what Carr and Kemmis (1986) believe critical reflection should be rather than

Control: shared citation: Carr 1986, Macdonald 2003.

[58] Arday p. 60 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 · 14 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: the critical reflection community about what reflection has become within contemporary educational discourse. The

Zwozdiak-Myers: the critical reflection community about what reflection has become within contemporary educational discourse. The

Control: shared citation: Calderhead 1989.

[59] Arday p. 60 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 · 11 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: Wildman and Niles, 1987; Zeichner and Liston, 1996) the concept of critical reflection

Zwozdiak-Myers: Wildman and Niles, 1987; Zeichner and Liston, 1996) the concept of critical reflection

Control: shared citation: Zeichner 1996.

[60] Arday p. 60 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 · 16 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: to distinguish critical reflection from other forms of reflection imposes a form of ‘academic imperialism’ which

Zwozdiak-Myers: to distinguish critical reflection from other forms of reflection imposes a form of “academic imperialism‟ which

Control: 20 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Barnett 1997.

[61] Arday p. 60 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 · 26 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: concept of critical thinking, which has been a strong feature in past decades of Western universities, will not support the climate and trends within higher education

Zwozdiak-Myers: concept of critical thinking, which has been a strong feature in past decades of Western universities, will not support the climate and trends within higher education.

Control: shared citation: Barnett 1997.

[62] Arday p. 60 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 · 10 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: Barnett applies, interprets and further develops ideas proposed by Habermas

Zwozdiak-Myers: Barnett applies, interprets and further develops ideas proposed by Habermas

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[63] Arday p. 60-61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 · 14 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: capable of both critical self-reflection and critical action. He aligns this disposition with the

Zwozdiak-Myers: capable of both critical self-reflection and critical action. He aligns this disposition with the

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[64] Arday p. 61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 · 11 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: to improve the quality of pupils’ educational experiences, as opposed to

Zwozdiak-Myers: to improve the quality of pupils‟ educational experiences as opposed to

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[65] Arday p. 61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 · 11 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: Underpinning the goal toward becoming a critically reflective practitioner is the

Zwozdiak-Myers: Underpinning the goal toward becoming a critically reflective practitioner is the

Control: shared citation: Clandinin 1995, Zeichner 1987.

[66] Arday p. 61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 · 21 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: as ‘one free from the unwarranted control of unjustified beliefs, unsupportable attitudes and the paucity of abilities which can prevent that

Zwozdiak-Myers: as one “free from the unwarranted control of unjustified beliefs, unsupportable attitudes and the paucity of abilities which can prevent that

Control: 98 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Zeichner 1987.

[67] Arday p. 61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35-36 · 28 words · 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve

Arday: From this premise, it could be argued that reflective conversations, which value student teachers’ lived experiences, authentic concerns, beliefs and practical theories have potential to empower and enlighten

Zwozdiak-Myers: From this premise, it could be argued that reflective conversations, which value student teachers‟ lived experiences, authentic concerns, beliefs and practical theories have potential to empower and enlighten

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[68] Arday p. 61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. iii · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Reflective practice as an integral part of action research Reflective practice

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice as an integral part of action research………44 2.9 Reflective practice

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[69] Arday p. 61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 · 13 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: research paradigms, particularly those situated in the hermeneutics, which focus on practitioners learning

Zwozdiak-Myers: research paradigms, particularly those situated in the hermeneutics, which focus on practitioners learning

Control: shared citation: Whitehead 1993.

[70] Arday p. 61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: the use of contextually relevant procedures formulated by inquiring and resourceful practitioners

Zwozdiak-Myers: the use of contextually relevant procedures formulated by inquiring and resourceful practitioners

Control: shared citation: Stringer 1996.

[71] Arday p. 61 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Professional knowledge and judgement can be developed through reflection and further

Zwozdiak-Myers: Professional knowledge and judgement can be developed through reflection and further

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[72] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 · 30 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Bartlett and Leask, 2005: 298). McKernan (1996: 29) refers to action research as grounded curriculum theory in that theories are not validated independently of practice and then applied to curriculum, they are validated ‘through

Zwozdiak-Myers: Bartlett and Leask, 2005: 298). McKernan (1996: 29) refers to action research as grounded curriculum theory in that “theories are not validated independently of practice and then applied to curriculum…they are validated through

Control: shared citation: Bartlett 2005, Elliott 2005, Mckernan 1996.

[73] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: student teachers come to develop their personal epistemology of practice,

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers come to develop their personal epistemology of practice

Control: shared citation: Boud 1990, Schon 1983.

[74] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: engage in reflective practice, the knowledge gained and theories constructed

Zwozdiak-Myers: engage in reflective practice, the knowledge gained and theories constructed

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[75] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 · 29 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: by personal experiences within the context of a specific teaching situation. While advocating action research as a vehicle to validate teachers’ personal, professional and political knowledge, Gore and Zeichner

Zwozdiak-Myers: by personal experiences within the context of a specific teaching situation. While advocating action research as a vehicle to validate “teachers‟ personal, professional and political knowledge‟ Gore and Zeichner

Control: shared citation: Gore 1995.

[76] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 · 24 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: For example, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1993: 304) identify a number of obstacles which need to be addressed before teachers can be expected to engage in research.

Zwozdiak-Myers: For example, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1993: 304) identify a number of obstacles which need to be addressed before teachers can be expected to engage in research:

Control: shared citation: Cochran-Smith 1993.

[77] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44-45 · 19 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: a difficult process for teachers to learn and sustain due to its complexity and lack of congruence with the

Zwozdiak-Myers: a difficult process for teachers to learn and sustain due to its complexity and lack of congruence with the

Control: shared citation: Mctaggert 1997.

[78] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: influence the research experiences of some student teachers featured in

Zwozdiak-Myers: influence the research experiences of some student teachers featured in

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[79] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 23 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Within educational discourse, action research has become a recurrent theme, as has the concern to improve and develop professional practice from within the

Zwozdiak-Myers: Within educational discourse, action research has become a recurrent theme, as has the concern to improve and develop professional practice from within the

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[80] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: to generate new insights into teaching and learning to improve practice

Zwozdiak-Myers: to generate new insights into teaching and learning to improve practice

Control: shared citation: Price 2001.

[81] Arday p. 62 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 17 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Price (2001: 44) suggests action research is simultaneously an individual and collaborative project and Kemmis and McTaggart (1982) argue that

Zwozdiak-Myers: Price (2001: 44) suggests action research is simultaneously an individual and collaborative project and Kemmis and McTaggart (1982; 7) argue that

Control: shared citation: Price 2001.

[82] Arday p. 63 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: which arise from professional practice to facilitate change and improvement

Zwozdiak-Myers: which arise from professional practice to facilitate change and improvement

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[83] Arday p. 63 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 24 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Gray, 2010: 347). This implies that working with peers and fellow practitioners requires sensitivity, trust and a mutual respect for the feelings and expertise of others.

Zwozdiak-Myers: Gray, 2004: 377). This implies that working with peers and fellow practitioners requires sensitivity, trust and a mutual respect for the feelings and expertise of others.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[84] Arday p. 63 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 14 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: are the goals of equity and social justice as existing practices within the school

Zwozdiak-Myers: are the goals of equity and social justice as existing practices within the school

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[85] Arday p. 63 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: and transformed (Carr and Kemmis, 1986; Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1993; Gore and Zeichner, 1995; Noffke,

Zwozdiak-Myers: and transformed (Carr and Kemmis, 1986; Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1993; Gore and Zeichner, 1995; Noffke,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[86] Arday p. 63 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: suggests that an examination of the conditions and contexts of

Zwozdiak-Myers: suggests that an examination of the conditions and contexts of

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[87] Arday p. 63 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 22 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: in relation to:  Personal development;  Improved professional practice;  Improvements in the institution;  Contribution to the good order of society. This critical perspective

Zwozdiak-Myers: in relation to: personal development improved professional practice improvements in the institution contribution to the good order of society This critical perspective

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[88] Arday p. 63 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: the aims of action research as a vehicle for educational reform as

Zwozdiak-Myers: the aims of action research as a vehicle for educational reform as

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[89] Arday p. 63 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 · 17 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Although action research has been recognised as a means to develop reflective practice and promote educational change,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Although action research has been recognised as a means to develop reflective practice and promote educational change,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[90] Arday p. 63-64 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 · 22 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Many studies have focused on written artefacts (portfolios, project reports, reflective journals) of teachers’ enquiries (Beyer, 1984; Bissex and Bullock, 1987; Goswami and Stillman,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Many studies have focused on written artefacts (portfolios, project reports, reflective journals) of teachers‟ enquiries (Beyer, 1984; Bissex and Bullock, 1987; Goswami and Stillman,

Control: shared citation: Goswami 1987.

[91] Arday p. 64 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 · 20 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: teachers to engage in collaborative action research as a process both for professional learning and educational reform (Cochran-Smith and Lytle,

Zwozdiak-Myers: teachers to engage in collaborative action research as a process both for professional learning and educational reform (Cochran-Smith and Lytle,

Control: shared citation: Russell 1993, Somekh 2006.

[92] Arday p. 64 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 · 24 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: four components (or domains of teaching): reflection and enquiry; learning about students; learning about pedagogical content knowledge; and, learning about social justice and democracy.

Zwozdiak-Myers: four components (or domains of teaching): reflection and enquiry; learning about students; learning about pedagogical content knowledge; and, learning about social justice and democracy.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[93] Arday p. 64 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: student teachers’ embraced the challenge of developing morally and ethically defensible practices,

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers “embraced the challenge of developing morally and ethically defensible practices

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[94] Arday p. 64 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: undertook a systematic study of their teaching which focused on

Zwozdiak-Myers: undertook a systematic study of their teaching which focused on

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[95] Arday p. 64 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: their understanding of teaching underpinned by the commitment to provide

Zwozdiak-Myers: their understanding of teaching underpinned by the commitment to provide

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[96] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: These findings could be useful for comparative purposes in relation to

Zwozdiak-Myers: These findings could be useful for comparative purposes in relation to

Control: shared citation: Price 2001.

[97] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 18 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: finding time to reflect on their lessons; struggling to keep up with data collection; and, receiving support from

Zwozdiak-Myers: finding time to reflect on their lessons; struggling to keep up with data collection; and, receiving support from

Control: shared citation: Price 2001.

[98] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 20 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: although mentors could be a tremendous support for student teachers, simultaneously they could also ‘unwittingly set boundaries upon their experimentation’.

Zwozdiak-Myers: although mentors could be a tremendous support for student teachers, simultaneously they could also “unwittingly set boundaries upon their experimentation

Control: 35 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.

[99] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 13 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: this study also seeks to explore whether student teachers’ experienced any such challenges

Zwozdiak-Myers: This study also seeks to explore whether student teachers‟ experienced any such challenges

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[100] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: as they prepared for, engaged in and evaluated the impact of

Zwozdiak-Myers: as they prepared for, engaged in and evaluated the impact of

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[101] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 15 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: in addition to providing an explanation as to how oneself is positioned in relation to

Zwozdiak-Myers: in addition to providing an explanation as to how oneself is positioned in relation to

Control: shared citation: Guba 1996.

[102] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: teachers perceive action research to be a form of personal enquiry that

Zwozdiak-Myers: teachers perceive action research to be a form of personal enquiry that

Control: shared citation: Guba 1996.

[103] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: the study of self seems to be ideally suited to revealing

Zwozdiak-Myers: the study of self “seems to be ideally suited to revealing

Control: shared citation: Usher 1998.

[104] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: discourse about developing a personal epistemology of professional practice guided by

Zwozdiak-Myers: discourse about developing a personal epistemology of professional practice guided by

Control: shared citation: Grimmett 1990.

[105] Arday p. 65 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 · 15 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: insights into the actions of teachers, not only as educators but also as adults, who

Zwozdiak-Myers: insights into the actions of teachers, not only as educators but also as adults who

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[106] Arday p. 66 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 48 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: with Belenky et al., (1986: 227) notion of ‘connected teaching’ as a means to

Zwozdiak-Myers: with Belenky et al “s (1986 227) notion of “connected teaching‟ as a means to

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[107] Arday p. 66 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 48 · 27 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: through self-study there are ‘new possibilities for qualitative research to focus on the everyday practices by which individuals constantly construct and reconstruct their sense of individual identity’.

Zwozdiak-Myers: Through self-study there are “new possibilities for qualitative research to focus on the everyday practices by which individuals constantly construct and reconstruct their sense of individual identity

Control: 86 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.

[108] Arday p. 66 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 48 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: student teachers to have the courage to teach in ways

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers to have the courage to teach in ways

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[109] Arday p. 67 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Validation – determining the authenticity of the ideas and feelings which have resulted,

Zwozdiak-Myers: validation – determining the authenticity of the ideas and feelings which have resulted,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[110] Arday p. 67 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: taking ownership of new insights and learning to inform future

Zwozdiak-Myers: taking ownership of new insights and learning to inform future

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[111] Arday p. 67 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 · 14 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: the description of a particular teaching situation, incorporates the view that reflective practice involves

Zwozdiak-Myers: the description of a particular teaching situation, incorporates the view that reflective practice involves

Control: shared citation: Boud 1999.

[112] Arday p. 67 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 · 17 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: unrecognisable as reflective practice. Some staff within placement schools for example, asked student teachers to reflect by

Zwozdiak-Myers: unrecognisable as reflective practice. Some staff within placement schools for example, asked student teachers to reflect by

Control: shared citation: Boud 1999.

[113] Arday p. 67 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Further, the emphasis placed on the need for personal disclosure was often

Zwozdiak-Myers: Further, the emphasis placed on the need for personal disclosure was often

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[114] Arday p. 67 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 · 10 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: to be beyond the capacity of some student teachers (Boud,

Zwozdiak-Myers: to be beyond the capacity of some student teachers. Boud

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[115] Arday p. 68 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 · 15 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: that when student teachers engage in reflective practice, they should probe and explore the following

Zwozdiak-Myers: that when student teachers‟ engage in reflective practice, they should probe and explore the following

Control: shared citation: Korthagen 2005.

[116] Arday p. 68 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 · 41 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: questions:  What was the context?  What did I want?  What did I do?  What was I thinking?  How did I feel?  What did the pupils want?  What did the pupils do?  What were the pupils thinking?  How did the pupils feel?

Zwozdiak-Myers: questions: What was the context? What did I want? What did I do? What was I thinking? How did I feel? What did the pupils want? What did the pupils do? What were the pupils thinking? How did the pupils feel?

Control: shared citation: Korthagen 2005.

[117] Arday p. 68 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 50 · 17 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Provide the basis for observations and reflections; 2. Observations and reflections are distilled and assimilated into abstract concepts;

Zwozdiak-Myers: provide the basis for observations and reflections; observations and reflections (2) are distilled and assimilated into abstract concepts

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[118] Arday p. 68 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 50 · 12 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: Produce new possibilities for action, which can be actively tested; 4. Through experimentation,

Zwozdiak-Myers: produce new possibilities for action, which can be actively tested (4) through experimentation,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[119] Arday p. 69 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 50 · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: on the notion that experiential learning is a process, which involves

Zwozdiak-Myers: on the notion that experiential learning is a process, which involves

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[120] Arday p. 69 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 50 · 11 words · 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research

Arday: is distinguished by attending to the organisation and construction of learning

Zwozdiak-Myers: is distinguished by attending to the organisation and construction of learning

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[121] Arday p. 75 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58 · 13 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: involves reflecting both on the means and ends of educational goals and values

Zwozdiak-Myers: involves reflecting both on the means and ends of educational goals and values

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[122] Arday p. 75-76 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58 · 76 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: very clear links can be drawn between reflective practice and assuming responsibility for professional development: ‘When embracing the concept of reflective teaching, there is often a commitment by teachers to internalise the disposition and skills to study their teaching and become better at teaching over time, a commitment to take responsibility for their own professional development. This assumption of responsibility is a central feature of the idea of a reflective teacher’ (Zeichner and Liston, 1996: 6). Another interpretation

Zwozdiak-Myers: Very clear links can be drawn between reflective practice and assuming responsibility for professional development: When embracing the concept of reflective teaching, there is often a commitment by teachers to internalise the disposition and skills to study their teaching and become better at teaching over time, a commitment to take responsibility for their own professional development. This assumption of responsibility is a central feature of the idea of a reflective teacher (Zeichner and Liston, 1996: 6) Another interpretation

Control: 58 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Eraut 1994, Zeichner 1996.

[123] Arday p. 76 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58 · 19 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: of professional practitioners when they demonstrate:  a moral commitment to serve the interests of students by reflecting on their

Zwozdiak-Myers: of professional practitioners when they demonstrate: a moral commitment to serve the interests of students by reflecting on their

Control: shared citation: Eraut 1994.

[124] Arday p. 76 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58-59 · 24 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: and their progress and deciding how best it can be fostered or promoted;  a professional obligation to review periodically the nature and effectiveness of

Zwozdiak-Myers: and their progress and deciding how best it can be fostered or promoted a professional obligation to review periodically the nature and effectiveness of

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[125] Arday p. 76 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 · 11 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: practical knowledge both by personal reflection and through interaction with others.

Zwozdiak-Myers: practical knowledge both by personal reflection and through interaction with others

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[126] Arday p. 76 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 · 10 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: Standards in schools is explicitly stated in terms of the

Zwozdiak-Myers: Standards in schools is explicitly stated in terms of the

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[127] Arday p. 76 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 · 11 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: Further components within the Standards encompass both theoretical and experiential knowledge,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Further components within the Standards encompass both theoretical and experiential knowledge

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[128] Arday p. 76-77 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 · 28 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: identified by Eraut. The interrelationship between the concepts of professional development proposed by Hoyle and John, of knowledge, autonomy and responsibility have been summarised by Furlong et al

Zwozdiak-Myers: identified by Eraut. The interrelationship between the concepts of professional development proposed by Hoyle and John, of knowledge, autonomy and responsibility have been summarised by Furlong et al

Control: shared citation: Furlong 2000.

[129] Arday p. 77 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 · 12 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: that it is important for student teachers to clearly express and frequently

Zwozdiak-Myers: that it is important for student teachers to clearly express and frequently

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[130] Arday p. 77 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 · 11 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: educational values, not in isolation and abstraction, but in collaboration with

Zwozdiak-Myers: educational values, not in isolation and abstraction but in collaboration with

Control: shared citation: Nixon 1995.

[131] Arday p. 77 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 60 · 10 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: notes the difficulty often faced by teachers lies not in

Zwozdiak-Myers: notes “the difficulty often faced by teachers lies not in

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[132] Arday p. 77 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 60 · 24 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: discourse suggests that some student teachers’ school-based teaching experiences could be incongruent, as values expressed in principle might not necessarily be demonstrated in practice

Zwozdiak-Myers: discourse suggests that some student teachers‟ school-based teaching experiences could be incongruent, as values expressed in principle might not necessarily be demonstrated in practice.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[133] Arday p. 77 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 60 · 10 words · 2.12 Moving toward autonomy

Arday: experience autonomy in relation to making professional judgements and decisions,

Zwozdiak-Myers: experience autonomy in relation to making professional judgements and decisions

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[134] Arday p. 79 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 80 · 43 words · 2.14 Summary

Arday: encompass ‘some notion of reflection in the process of professional development, but at the same time, disguise a vast number of conceptual variations, with a range of implications for the organisation and design of teacher education courses’. Furthermore, teacher educators, researchers and other

Zwozdiak-Myers: encompass “some notion of reflection in the process of professional development, but at the same time, disguise a vast number of conceptual variations, with a range of implications for the organisation and design of teacher education courses‟. Furthermore, teacher educators, researchers and other

Control: 78 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.

[135] Arday p. 80 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 81 · 14 words · 2.14 Summary

Arday: examined the characteristics which key theorists, researchers and practitioners have attributed to this phenomenon.

Zwozdiak-Myers: examined the characteristics which key theorists, researchers and practitioners have attributed to this phenomenon.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[136] Arday p. 80 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 81 · 13 words · 2.14 Summary

Arday: Reflective practice has been conceptualised as a creative process in that student teachers

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice has been conceptualised as a creative process in that student teachers

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[137] Arday p. 81 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 82 · 16 words · 2.14 Summary

Arday: take responsibility for their own professional development is prevalent not only in the governments’ agenda but

Zwozdiak-Myers: take responsibility for their own professional development is prevalent not only in the governments‟ agenda but

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[138] Arday p. 81 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 82 · 11 words · 2.14 Summary

Arday: of reflective practice has become ‘a generic pedagogical principle’ (Tsangaridou and

Zwozdiak-Myers: of reflective practice has become “a generic pedagogical principle‟ (Tsangaridou and

Control: 39 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Sullivan 1997.

[139] Arday p. 81 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 82 · 11 words · 2.14 Summary

Arday: of reflection, in addition to developing student teachers’ reflective capabilities and

Zwozdiak-Myers: of reflection, in addition to developing student teachers‟ reflective capabilities and

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

Ch4 Methodology for Research Study

[140] Arday p. 137 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 101 · 32 words · 4.1 Introduction

Arday: which supports the twin focus to educational research as: attitudinal- a distinctive way of thinking about educational phenomena; and action- a systematic means of investigating educational phenomena proposed by Morrison (2003). Decisions that

Zwozdiak-Myers: which supports the twin focus to educational research as: attitudinal – “a distinctive way of thinking about educational phenomena‟ and action – “a systematic means of investigating educational phenomena‟ proposed by Morrison (2002: 3). Decisions that

Control: shared citation: Strauss 1998.

[141] Arday p. 137 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 101 · 20 words · 4.1 Introduction

Arday: the selection of research methodology, Bell (2010) argues are dependent upon the nature of the enquiry and kind of information sought.

Zwozdiak-Myers: the selection of research methodology, Bell (2005) argues, are dependent upon the nature of the enquiry and kind of information sought.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[142] Arday p. 138 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. viii · 12 words · 4.1 Introduction

Arday: Table 4.1: Key characteristics and assumptions underpinning positivist and interpretive approaches to research

Zwozdiak-Myers: Table 4.1: Key characteristics and assumptions underpinning positivist and interpretive approaches to research

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[143] Arday p. 138 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 103 · 28 words · 4.1 Introduction

Arday: Positivist Approach Interpretive Approach Assumptions: Assumptions:  Social facts have an objective reality  Reality is socially constructed  Primacy of method  Primacy of subject matter  Variables can be identified and

Zwozdiak-Myers: Positivist approach Interpretive approach Assumptions: Assumptions: Social facts have an objective reality Reality is socially constructed Primacy of method Primacy of subject matter Variables can be identified and

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[144] Arday p. 138 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 103 · 13 words · 4.1 Introduction

Arday: perspectives Approach Approach  Begins with hypotheses and theories  Ends with hypotheses and grounded

Zwozdiak-Myers: perspectives Approach: Approach: Begins with hypotheses and theories Ends with hypotheses and grounded

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[145] Arday p. 142 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 105 · 14 words · 4.4 Research Design

Arday: used to investigate ‘contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between

Zwozdiak-Myers: used to investigate “contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between

Control: shared citation: Yin 2003.

[146] Arday p. 152 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 110 · 10 words · 4.6.3 Participant recruitment and selection

Arday: the researcher held numerous discussions with two professional colleagues who

Zwozdiak-Myers: the researcher held numerous discussions with two professional colleagues who

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[147] Arday p. 152 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 110 · 27 words · 4.6.3 Participant recruitment and selection

Arday: this procedure was followed not only to derive insights advanced by professional colleagues who were knowledgeable and experienced within the field but also to ensure that the

Zwozdiak-Myers: This procedure was followed not only to derive insights advanced by professional colleagues who were knowledgeable and experienced within the field but also to ensure that the

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[148] Arday p. 152 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 110 · 16 words · 4.6.3 Participant recruitment and selection

Arday: particular perspective and stance was open to scrutiny and challenge and not merely imposed onto the

Zwozdiak-Myers: particular perspective and stance was open to scrutiny and challenge and not merely imposed onto the

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[149] Arday p. 155 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. ? · 13 words · 4.6.4 Pilot study open-ended questionnaires and considerations

Arday: the development of student teachers’ reflective practice within the context of action research

Zwozdiak-Myers: the development of student teachers’ reflective practice within the context of action research

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[150] Arday p. 155 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 111 · 16 words · 4.6.4 Pilot study open-ended questionnaires and considerations

Arday: embedded within the framework along with the student teachers’ descriptive, comparative and critical reflective conversations provided

Zwozdiak-Myers: embedded within the framework along with the student teachers‟ descriptive, comparative and critical reflective conversations, provided

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

Ch5 Research findings

[151] Arday p. 200 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 159 · 11 words

Arday: Chapter 5: Research findings 5.1 Introduction The purpose of this study was to

Zwozdiak-Myers: Chapter 5: Research findings 5.1 Introduction The purpose of this study was to

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[152] Arday p. 200 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 159 · 11 words · 5.1 Introduction

Arday: Reflective practice has been defined as: a disposition to enquiry incorporating

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice has been defined as: a disposition to enquiry incorporating

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[153] Arday p. 200 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 106 · 17 words · 5.1 Introduction

Arday: structure or restructure actions, knowledge, theories or beliefs that inform teaching for the purpose of personal professional

Zwozdiak-Myers: structure or restructure actions, knowledge, theories or beliefs that inform teaching for the purpose of personal professional

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[154] Arday p. 201 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 159 · 13 words · 5.2 Professional learning support

Arday: reflective practice provided a focal point for analysing evidence gathered from student teachers’

Zwozdiak-Myers: reflective practice provided a focal point for analysing evidence gathered from student teachers

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[155] Arday p. 201 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 159 · 17 words · 5.2 Professional learning support

Arday: in their reference and are not intended to convey gender bias (Capel and Moss, 2005: 437). Research findings have

Zwozdiak-Myers: in their reference‟ and are not intended to “convey gender bias‟ (Capel and Moss, 2005: 437). Research findings have

Control: shared citation: Capel 2005.

[156] Arday p. 202 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 160 · 12 words · 5.2 Professional learning support

Arday: The main research findings of this study are drawn together in a

Zwozdiak-Myers: The main research findings of this study are drawn together in a

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[157] Arday p. 214 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 176 · 13 words · 5.3.5 Mentor-Mentee Relationships

Arday: knowledge from a range of sources as they seek to improve their teaching

Zwozdiak-Myers: knowledge from a range of sources as they seek to improve their teaching.

Control: shared citation: Stenhouse 1975.

[158] Arday p. 224 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 165 · 10 words · 5.4 Exploring the potential for initiating and implementing peer-mentoring among

Arday: basis, from a range of sources and perspectives as they

Zwozdiak-Myers: basis, from a range of sources and perspectives as they

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[159] Arday p. 234 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 169 · 13 words · 5.5 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: student teachers’ recorded personal thoughts, perceptions and modifications to their plan of action

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers‟ recorded personal thoughts, perceptions and modifications to their plan of action

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[160] Arday p. 259 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 174 · 10 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: Several improvements to personal practice are signalled in the above

Zwozdiak-Myers: Several improvements to personal practice are signalled in the above

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[161] Arday p. 260 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 174 · 12 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: ability to systematically evaluate and search for reasons behind the outcomes of

Zwozdiak-Myers: ability to systematically evaluate and search for reasons behind the outcomes of

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[162] Arday p. 260 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 176 · 14 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: is the capacity and commitment to link theoretical principles underpinning aspects of pedagogy with

Zwozdiak-Myers: is the capacity and commitment to link theoretical principles underpinning aspects of pedagogy with

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[163] Arday p. 260 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 176 · 22 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: own practice (Eraut, 1994; Stenhouse, 1975; 1983). Student teachers can draw on knowledge from a range of sources as they seek to improve their teaching.

Zwozdiak-Myers: own practice (Eraut, 1994; Stenhouse, 1975, 1983). Student teachers can draw on knowledge from a range of sources as they seek to improve their teaching.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[164] Arday p. 260 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 163 · 11 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: Through descriptive and comparative reflective discourse the student teacher raises a

Zwozdiak-Myers: Through descriptive and comparative reflective discourse the student teacher raises a

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[165] Arday p. 261 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 178 · 10 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: and endeavour to link that knowledge to a specific context.

Zwozdiak-Myers: and endeavour to link that knowledge to a specific context,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[166] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 189 · 10 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: which gives rise to modified practice through systematic, self-reflective enquiry,

Zwozdiak-Myers: which gives rise to modified practice through systematic, self-reflective enquiry

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[167] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 189 · 13 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: teaching approaches and strategies which worked effectively and discard or further refine those

Zwozdiak-Myers: teaching approaches and strategies which worked effectively and discard or further refine those

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[168] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 189 · 20 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: In this way, student teachers ground theory in their own teaching and build a repertoire of exemplars, images and metaphors

Zwozdiak-Myers: In this way, student teachers ground theory in their own teaching and build a repertoire of exemplars, images and metaphors

Control: shared citation: Schon 1983.

[169] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 189 · 10 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: they draw upon to frame each unique teaching situation (Schon

Zwozdiak-Myers: they draw upon to frame each unique teaching situation (Schon

Control: shared citation: Schon 1983.

[170] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 196 · 22 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: capacity and commitment to critically reflect on their own teaching and act upon insights gained to inform future planning, improvement and development.

Zwozdiak-Myers: capacity and commitment to critically reflect on their own teaching and act upon insights gained to inform future planning, improvement and development.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[171] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 · 18 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: as they studied their own teaching was their capacity to enhance the quality of pupil learning and development

Zwozdiak-Myers: as they studied their own teaching was their capacity to enhance the quality of pupil learning and development

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[172] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 · 13 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: in three main areas: pupil progress or achievement, pupil behaviour patterns and pupil

Zwozdiak-Myers: in three main areas: pupil progress or achievement, pupil behaviour patterns and pupil

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[173] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 · 15 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: student teachers’ believed that pupil learning and development was attributable to their personal improvement in

Zwozdiak-Myers: Student teachers believed that pupil learning and development was attributable to their personal improvement in

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[174] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 · 29 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: main areas: greater understanding, insight and awareness about the principles and procedures of pedagogy; thinking more about aspects of teaching and their enhanced knowledge of pupil difference and diversity.

Zwozdiak-Myers: main areas: greater understanding, insight and awareness about the principles and procedures of pedagogy; thinking more about aspects of teaching and their enhanced knowledge of pupil difference and diversity.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[175] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 · 11 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: perceived by student teachers to have been influenced as they studied

Zwozdiak-Myers: perceived by student teachers to have been influenced as they studied

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[176] Arday p. 264 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 · 12 words · 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: and commitment to seek alternative perspectives and possibilities to inform their teaching:

Zwozdiak-Myers: and commitment to seek alternative perspectives and possibilities to inform their teaching

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[177] Arday p. 285 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 224 · 12 words · 5.12 Summary

Arday: Summary This chapter has investigated the development of student teachers’ reflective practice

Zwozdiak-Myers: Summary This chapter has investigated the development of student teachers‟ reflective practice

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[178] Arday p. 285 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 224 · 11 words · 5.12 Summary

Arday: within the context of action research. The perceptions of student teachers,

Zwozdiak-Myers: within the context of action research. The perceptions of student teachers

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[179] Arday p. 285 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 225 · 14 words · 5.12 Summary

Arday: Interview transcripts were also analysed to identify qualitative distinctions in the types of reflective

Zwozdiak-Myers: Interview transcripts were also analysed to identify qualitative distinctions in the types of reflective

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[180] Arday p. 285 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 225 · 14 words · 5.12 Summary

Arday: The range between the number of descriptive, comparative and critical reflective conversations used varied,

Zwozdiak-Myers: The range between the number of descriptive, comparative and critical reflective conversations used varied

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[181] Arday p. 286-287 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 225-226 · 14 words · 5.12 Summary

Arday: These research findings and their implications are discussed in the next chapter. Chapter 6: Discussion

Zwozdiak-Myers: These research findings and their implications are discussed in the next chapter. Chapter 6: Discussion

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

Ch6 Discussion

[182] Arday p. 287 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 226 · 13 words · 6.1 Introduction

Arday: Introduction This chapter discusses the main findings of this study and considers how

Zwozdiak-Myers: Introduction This chapter discusses the main findings of this study and considers how

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[183] Arday p. 287 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 106 · 14 words · 6.1 Introduction

Arday: of this study, has been defined as a disposition to enquiry incorporating the process

Zwozdiak-Myers: of this study has been defined as: a disposition to enquiry incorporating the process

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[184] Arday p. 288 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 227 · 15 words · 6.1 Introduction

Arday: this chapter is to discuss the main research findings pertinent to both research questions within

Zwozdiak-Myers: this chapter is to discuss the main research findings pertinent to both research questions within

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[185] Arday p. 294 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 231 · 12 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: This finding indicates not only that a range of research instruments were

Zwozdiak-Myers: This finding indicates not only that a range of research instruments were

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[186] Arday p. 294 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 231 · 11 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: was gathered from a range of perspectives which supports the argument

Zwozdiak-Myers: was gathered from a range of perspectives, which supports the argument

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[187] Arday p. 294 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 231 · 13 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: the need to gather evidence from multiple perspectives or lenses for triangulation purposes,

Zwozdiak-Myers: the need to gather evidence from multiple perspectives or lenses for triangulation purposes

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[188] Arday p. 294 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 231 · 17 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: this was in line with the approach adopted in other research studies for developing reflective practice in

Zwozdiak-Myers: This was in line with the approach adopted in other research studies for developing reflective practice in

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[189] Arday p. 296 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 233 · 15 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: feedback derived from multiple sources and multiple perspectives effectively to gauge their own practice during

Zwozdiak-Myers: feedback derived from multiple sources and multiple perspectives effectively to gauge their own practice during

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[190] Arday p. 296 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 233 · 15 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: Some findings however, which emerged from the student teachers’ perceptions raise several anomalies. For example,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Some findings however, which emerged from the student teachers‟ perceptions raise several anomalies. For example,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[191] Arday p. 296 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 235 · 10 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: procedures is recognised as an integral component of professional development

Zwozdiak-Myers: procedures is recognised as an integral component of professional development

Control: shared citation: Stenhouse 1975.

[192] Arday p. 297 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 236 · 10 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: This needs to be investigated further, particularly as these processes

Zwozdiak-Myers: This needs to be investigated further, particularly as these processes

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[193] Arday p. 297 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 236 · 19 words · 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and

Arday: These areas need to be investigated further, particularly in relation to exploring strategies that might support the more descriptive

Zwozdiak-Myers: These areas need to be investigated further, particularly in relation to exploring strategies that might support the more descriptive

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[194] Arday p. 299 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 240 · 13 words · 6.4 Studying teaching for personal improvement through reflection

Arday: construct knowledge and use that knowledge to link theory with their own practice

Zwozdiak-Myers: construct knowledge and use that knowledge to link theory with their own practice.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[195] Arday p. 301 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 4 · 16 words · 6.4 Studying teaching for personal improvement through reflection

Arday: themselves as teachers, their teaching, subject matter, pupils, and their roles and responsibilities within the classroom

Zwozdiak-Myers: themselves as teachers, their teaching, subject matter, pupils, and their roles and responsibilities within the classroom

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[196] Arday p. 301 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 244 · 10 words · 6.4 Studying teaching for personal improvement through reflection

Arday: the student teachers’ might have allowed their preconceived values and

Zwozdiak-Myers: the student teachers might have allowed their preconceived values and

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[197] Arday p. 301 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 244 · 10 words · 6.4 Studying teaching for personal improvement through reflection

Arday: their own teaching should personal theories and beliefs remain unchallenged,

Zwozdiak-Myers: their own teaching should personal theories and beliefs remain unchallenged.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[198] Arday p. 301 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 245 · 12 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: student teachers’ identified a number of ways through which they considered alternative

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers‟ identified a number of ways through which they considered alternative

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[199] Arday p. 305 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 246 · 24 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: Boud (1999: 125) recognised that the emphasis placed on the need for personal disclosure in discussion forums was often found to be beyond the capacity of

Zwozdiak-Myers: Boud (1999: 125) recognised that the emphasis placed on the need for personal disclosure in discussion forums was often found to be beyond the capacity of

Control: shared citation: Boud 1999.

[200] Arday p. 305 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 246 · 15 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: MacDonald and Brooker (1999: 59) perceived potential barriers in student teachers’ uneasiness in working with the personal.

Zwozdiak-Myers: Macdonald and Brooker (1999: 59) perceived potential barriers in student teachers‟ uneasiness in working with the personal.

Control: shared citation: Macdonald 1999.

[201] Arday p. 305 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 246 · 23 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: particularly in relation to creating an environment of trust so that suggestions made by informed others can be perceived as constructive and non-threatening

Zwozdiak-Myers: particularly in relation to creating an environment of trust so that suggestions made by informed others can be perceived as constructive and non-threatening.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[202] Arday p. 306 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 · 10 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: The capacity and commitment to consider alternative perspectives and possibilities

Zwozdiak-Myers: The capacity and commitment to consider alternative perspectives and possibilities

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[203] Arday p. 306 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 · 10 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: as an important element of student teacher professional development (Brookfield,

Zwozdiak-Myers: as an important element of student teacher professional development (Brookfield,

Control: shared citation: Dewey 1910.

[204] Arday p. 306 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 · 16 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: Results in this study showed the perspectives and lenses (Brookfield, 1995) most commonly identified by student teachers

Zwozdiak-Myers: Results in this study showed the perspectives and lenses (Brookfield, 1995) most commonly identified by student teachers

Control: shared citation: Brookfield 1995, Dewey 1910.

[205] Arday p. 306 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 · 11 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: student teachers’ considered alternative perspectives and possibilities to inform their own

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers‟ considered alternative perspectives and possibilities to inform their own

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[206] Arday p. 306 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 · 21 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: Within this dimension a number of findings raise the question as to whether some student teachers might have experienced barriers in

Zwozdiak-Myers: Within this dimension a number of findings raise the question as to whether some student teachers might have experienced barriers in

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[207] Arday p. 307 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 · 19 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: This raises both ethical and professional issues. These concerns could be linked and, in part, might explain why some

Zwozdiak-Myers: This raises both ethical and professional issues. These concerns could be linked and, in part, might explain why some

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[208] Arday p. 307 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249-250 · 17 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: These areas need further investigation, particularly in relation to finding out what causes might underpin these perceived

Zwozdiak-Myers: These areas need further investigation, particularly in relation to finding out what causes might underpin these perceived

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[209] Arday p. 307 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 250 · 27 words · 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice

Arday: and discovering ways to overcome them, so that student teachers and experienced teachers can engage in dialogue to explore alternative perspectives and possibilities, in all matters concerning

Zwozdiak-Myers: and discovering ways to overcome them, so that student teachers and experienced teachers can engage in dialogue to explore alternative perspectives and possibilities, in all matters concerning

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[210] Arday p. 312 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 252 · 10 words · 6.6 Developing Trust within Peer-Mentoring

Arday: would suggest that they exhibited the capacity and commitment to

Zwozdiak-Myers: would suggest that they exhibited the capacity and commitment to

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[211] Arday p. 318 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 256 · 12 words · 6.7 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: they showed both the capacity and commitment to enhance the quality of

Zwozdiak-Myers: they showed both the capacity and commitment to enhance the quality of

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[212] Arday p. 318 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 256 · 14 words · 6.7 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of

Arday: need to be investigated further, particularly in relation to possible barriers which might influence

Zwozdiak-Myers: need to be investigated further, particularly in relation to possible barriers which might influence

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

Ch7 Conclusions and Recommendations

[213] Arday p. 330 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 · 17 words · 7.1 Introduction

Arday: the following conclusions were drawn from the findings of this study and relate to the research questions,

Zwozdiak-Myers: The following conclusions were drawn from the findings of this study and relate to the research questions

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[214] Arday p. 330 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 · 15 words · 7.1 Introduction

Arday: Caution should be exercised concerning the generalisability of these conclusions beyond the student teachers and

Zwozdiak-Myers: Caution should be exercised concerning the generalisability of these conclusions beyond the student teachers and

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[215] Arday p. 343 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 268 · 15 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: reflective practice within the context of action research from this study, the results should be

Zwozdiak-Myers: reflective practice within the context of action research from this study, the results should be

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[216] Arday p. 343 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 268 · 29 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: due to a number of limitations. These are based on elements of the research methodology and design of this study, as well as the realisation that it is not

Zwozdiak-Myers: due to a number of limitations. These are based on elements of the research methodology and design of this study, as well as the realisation that it is not

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[217] Arday p. 343 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 268 · 16 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: with certainty whether the development of reflective practice would have occurred as a natural consequence of

Zwozdiak-Myers: with certainty whether the development of reflective practice would have occurred as a natural consequence of

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[218] Arday p. 343 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 · 38 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: The paucity of substantive research studies in initial teacher education and the diverse nature of those studies that have been undertaken to examine the development of student teachers’ reflective practice, particularly within physical education initial teacher education, make

Zwozdiak-Myers: The paucity of substantive research studies in initial teacher education and the diverse nature of those studies that have been undertaken to examine the development of student teachers‟ reflective practice, particularly within physical education initial teacher education, make

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[219] Arday p. 343 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 · 11 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: the sample size in this study was relatively small as participants

Zwozdiak-Myers: The sample size in this study was relatively small as participants

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[220] Arday p. 343 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 · 25 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: England. Although, results of this study might be relatable to student teachers following similar courses in initial teacher education, they may be difficult to generalise

Zwozdiak-Myers: England. Although results of this study might be relatable to student teachers following similar courses in initial teacher education, they may be difficult to generalise.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[221] Arday p. 343-344 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 · 30 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: challenge associated with qualitative research studies is that of interpretation. It was realised that there are several ways in which interpretation has potential to influence the results of this research,

Zwozdiak-Myers: challenge associated with qualitative research studies is that of interpretation. It was realised that there are several ways in which interpretation has potential to influence the results of this research.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[222] Arday p. 344 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 · 11 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: informed by the theoretical underpinnings, which have been advanced in the

Zwozdiak-Myers: informed by the theoretical underpinnings, which have been advanced in the

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[223] Arday p. 344 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 · 17 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: scholars; teacher educators and practitioners over past decades, in addition to discussions with professional colleagues, the framework

Zwozdiak-Myers: scholars, teacher educators and practitioners over past decades, in addition to discussions with professional colleagues, the framework

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[224] Arday p. 344 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 · 33 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: Evidence gathered to inform this study relied upon the research participants’ understanding of what information was being asked of them. Although research instruments designed for use in this study were assessed for fitness

Zwozdiak-Myers: Evidence gathered to inform this study relied upon the research participants‟ understanding of what information was being asked of them. Although research instruments designed for use in this study were assessed for fitness

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[225] Arday p. 344 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 · 21 words · 7.4 Limitations of the study

Arday: to influence student teachers’ responses should be noted. Evidence gathered to inform this study also relied upon the research participants’ judgements

Zwozdiak-Myers: to influence student teachers‟ responses should be noted. Evidence gathered to inform this study also relied upon the research participants‟ judgements.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[226] Arday p. 346 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 265 · 12 words · 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice

Arday: these student teachers’ recognise the interdependent nature of reflecting on practice and

Zwozdiak-Myers: these student teachers‟ recognise the interdependent nature of reflecting on practice and

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[227] Arday p. 347 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 265 · 11 words · 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice

Arday: commitment to engage in on-going professional development in order to improve

Zwozdiak-Myers: commitment to engage in ongoing professional development in order to improve

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[228] Arday p. 347 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58 · 11 words · 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice

Arday: to study their teaching and become better at teaching over time’.

Zwozdiak-Myers: to study their teaching and become better at teaching over time,

Control: 100 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.

[229] Arday p. 347 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 265 · 15 words · 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice

Arday: with an invaluable point of departure and means through which this intention might be realised

Zwozdiak-Myers: with an invaluable point of departure and means through which this intention might be realised.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[230] Arday p. 349 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 267 · 10 words · 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice

Arday: and identified as a key attribute of extended professionals (Stenhouse,

Zwozdiak-Myers: and identified as a key attribute of extended professionals (Stenhouse,

Control: shared citation: Eraut 1994, Stenhouse 1975.

[231] Arday p. 350 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 270 · 13 words · 7.10 Recommendations for further research

Arday: context of action research, replication of this study is highly recommended. Replication with

Zwozdiak-Myers: context of action research, replication of this study is highly recommended. Replication with

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[232] Arday p. 350 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 270-271 · 27 words · 7.10 Recommendations for further research

Arday: for comparison purposes. Replication in other subject areas can also add validity to these findings. A larger sample is suggested so that findings can be generalised. The

Zwozdiak-Myers: for comparison purposes. Replication in other subject areas can also add validity to these findings. A larger sample is suggested so that findings can be generalised. The

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[233] Arday p. 350 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 271 · 12 words · 7.10 Recommendations for further research

Arday: was designed to capture pedagogical moments in the context of the student

Zwozdiak-Myers: was designed to capture pedagogical moments in the context of the student

Control: shared citation: Macdonald 2003.

[234] Arday p. 350 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 271 · 10 words · 7.10 Recommendations for further research

Arday: MacDonald and Tinning, 2003). To that end, an exploration of their

Zwozdiak-Myers: Macdonald and Tinning, 2003: 89). To that end, an exploration of their

Control: shared citation: Macdonald 2003.

[235] Arday p. 351 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 271 · 25 words · 7.10 Recommendations for further research

Arday: A shared understanding and cooperation between universities and schools is necessary for supporting the professional development of student teachers. Results of this study suggest there

Zwozdiak-Myers: A shared understanding and cooperation between universities and schools is necessary for supporting the professional development of student teachers. Results of this study suggest there

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[236] Arday p. 351 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 271 · 18 words · 7.10 Recommendations for further research

Arday: which has the potential to influence the experiences of some student teachers. Thus, possible ways in which school-based

Zwozdiak-Myers: which has the potential to influence the experiences of some student teachers. Thus, possible ways in which school-based

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[237] Arday p. 352 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 · 14 words · 7.13 Final Remarks

Arday: drawn from the findings of this study and relate to the research questions posed.

Zwozdiak-Myers: drawn from the findings of this study and relate to the research questions posed.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[238] Arday p. 352 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 · 10 words · 7.13 Final Remarks

Arday: caution should be exercised concerning the generalisability of these conclusions,

Zwozdiak-Myers: Caution should be exercised concerning the generalisability of these conclusions

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[239] Arday p. 352 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 · 11 words · 7.13 Final Remarks

Arday: student teachers. Few studies have examined how student teachers learn the

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers. Few studies have examined how student teachers learn the

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[240] Arday p. 353 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 · 21 words · 7.13 Final Remarks

Arday: reflective practice, as defined in this study, can be situated at the heart of these learning processes. This research has therefore

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice, as defined in this study, can be situated at the heart of these learning processes. This research has therefore

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[241] Arday p. 353 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 273 · 22 words · 7.13 Final Remarks

Arday: to the research currently available in educational literature, which focuses on the impact strategies used to develop reflective practice in student teachers,

Zwozdiak-Myers: to the research currently available in educational literature, which focuses on the impact strategies used to develop reflective practice in student teachers,

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[242] Arday p. 353 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 273 · 11 words · 7.13 Final Remarks

Arday: influenced their capacity and commitment to: (1) study their own teaching for

Zwozdiak-Myers: influenced their capacity and commitment to: study their own teaching for

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[243] Arday p. 353 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 273 · 13 words · 7.13 Final Remarks

Arday: critically reflect on their own teaching; and, (5) continue to improve their own teaching.

Zwozdiak-Myers: critically reflect on their own teaching; and, continue to improve their own teaching.

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

[244] Arday p. 353 · Zwozdiak-Myers p. 274 · 24 words · 7.13 Final Remarks

Arday: To this end, providing student teachers with an opportunity to engage in contextually focused research activity which enables them progressively to become more effective

Zwozdiak-Myers: To this end, providing student teachers with an opportunity to engage in contextually focused research activity which enables them progressively to become more effective

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.

Posted in Jason Arday, Nathan Cofnas | Comments Off on The Jason Arday Doctoral Thesis: ‘An Exploration of Peer-Mentoring Among Student Teachers’ to Inform Reflective Practice Within the Context of Action Research’

X: ‘Online Talk Spotlights Autism Traits in Cofnas and Arday Appearances’

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Luke Ford

X says:

The discussion arose after Cofnas shared a clip from his TV appearance, where viewers noted his halting speech and deliberate phrasing amid his earlier scrutiny of Arday’s academic record. Arday, once Cambridge’s youngest Black professor, resigned following plagiarism revelations and was later found dead; Cofnas now faces suspension at Ghent University. Commenters like Carl Benjamin and Professor Abhishek Saha agreed on Cofnas’s high-functioning autistic traits from personal observations, while Cofnas himself says his social skills lag and he seems more autistic than Arday. Critics like Priyamvada Gopal warn against remote diagnoses, highlighting debates on neurodiversity and public pressures.

The Autistic Person the University Wants

Priyamvada Gopal is right that you cannot diagnose autism from a television appearance. Stella O’Malley watched a clip of Nathan Cofnas on Flemish state television, noted the pauses and the deliberate word selection and the absence of the smooth performance the medium expects, and said his presentation looked autistic while Jason Arday’s never had. Autism has no single visible presentation. People mask. Compensation varies. Social confidence varies more. A clip is not an assessment.

So set the diagnosis question aside and keep it aside. Nothing below depends on what either man has or does not have. Arday died on August 14. Cofnas is under investigation at Ghent.

What the thread was reacting to survives the objection, and it is a question about institutions.

Universities have spent a decade learning to accommodate neurodiversity. They have learned to do it in one particular form. A person arrives with a diagnosis. The diagnosis enters a record. Adjustments follow: extra time, quieter rooms, written instructions, a named contact. The university writes a policy, trains staff, appoints an officer, publishes a statement. When the person succeeds, the institution tells the story, and the story has a shape everyone recognizes. Difficulty was overcome. Talent that others missed was seen here. Inclusion produced excellence.

Notice what the whole apparatus is built to receive — a category. Categories can be written down, budgeted for, audited, reported to a funding body. An institution is a machine for processing categories.

The difficulty comes from difference that arrives as conduct.

Consider the faculty member who does not register that a polite suggestion was an instruction. The student who keeps asking why the rule applied in that case and not this one. The employee who corrects a senior colleague in front of a room because what the colleague said was false. The researcher who returns to a question three months after everyone agreed it was settled, because it was settled socially. The colleague who follows every written rule and cannot infer the unwritten one that says do not embarrass this person.

There is no adjustment for that. There is no room to book and no extra time to grant. These behaviors are met in the moment, by people with their own reputations and their own irritations, and what those people experience is rudeness, obstinacy, poor judgment, an inability to read the room. The behavior and the offense are the same object seen from two sides, and the institution has no procedure that can tell them apart.

The easiest neurodiversity to accommodate is the kind that arrives as a noun. The hardest is the kind that arrives as a verb.

This is where the phrase you should have known that this was unacceptable does its work, because it means three separate things that get collapsed into one.

It can mean a written rule prohibited it. It can mean ordinary social judgment should have prevented it. Or it can mean everyone in the relevant hierarchy understood there was an unwritten prohibition and you were expected to understand it too.

A person can be excellent at the first and hopeless at the other two. And academic life is saturated with the third. Which questions are asked at a seminar and which are held for the corridor. Who gets challenged and who gets thanked for a stimulating contribution. When a disagreement is intellectual and when it has become personal. Which colleague you may correct in public and which you may not. Whose reputation is currently in play and whose has been placed beyond examination. None of it appears in a handbook. All of it is enforced. Someone who reads the handbook well and the room will break rules he never saw and will be told that he should have known.

The Jason Arday plagiarism question was a written-rule question. Does this text match that text. It required two PDFs from two open repositories and the willingness to read them side by side. Dave Harris, an emeritus professor at Plymouth Marjon, did it and wrote to both universities in 2023. Jack Grove of Times Higher Education did it and assembled a report. Anyone could have done it. Arday’s thesis and Paula Zwozdiak-Myers’s 2009 Brunel thesis share their final eleven words of title, and his limitations section reproduces hers with the substitutions visible to the naked eye. Where she writes that the results should be interpreted cautiously, he writes that they should be considered prudently. Where she writes that it is not possible to know with certainty, he writes that it is not feasible to conclude with certainty. Her sentence about the paucity of substantive research studies in initial teacher education appears in his thesis almost intact. Her sentence beginning evidence gathered to inform this study relied upon the research participants’ understanding appears in his nearly word for word.

Now look at how the institutions answered.

Cambridge’s head of policy, governance and integrity replied that the work predated the appointment and fell outside the university’s remit. The head of the Faculty of Education replied that Arday had spoken movingly about racism and about health difficulties during the period in question, and that he had her full support. Liverpool John Moores investigated and called what it found honest and reasonable error.

Read those three responses again. Not one of them is an answer to the question that was asked. The question was whether two documents match. The answers are about jurisdiction, about sympathy, and about a characterization of intent that the documents cannot establish either way. They are social judgments in procedural dress. Every one of them would be recognized instantly by anyone fluent in the unwritten rules as meaning the same thing: we are not going to do this.

And they worked, for three years, against people who had the written-rule case in hand.

The two journals that did respond responded in the same register. Social Sciences added citations to a single prior study across the abstract, the introduction, the methods, four subsections of the results, the discussion and the conclusions of a 2018 paper, then recorded that the scientific conclusions were unaffected. A correction spanning every section of a paper is a description of the paper. The editor treated it as a referencing lapse because treating it as anything else would have required doing something.

So the case is not an illustration of institutions preferring one kind of person to another. It is an illustration of institutions running on the unwritten layer even when the written layer has an answer sitting in front of them, and of how much force the unwritten layer can absorb before it gives.

That has a consequence for neurodiversity policy which nobody seems to have drawn.

If the substantive difficulty for people who cannot read social cues is the unwritten layer, and if institutional accommodation operates entirely at the written layer, then the accommodation is aimed at the part of the problem that was never the problem. Extra time on an examination does not help the postdoctoral researcher who cannot tell that the head of department’s question was a warning. A quiet room does not help the lecturer who does not know that this particular colleague’s work is not to be criticized this year. The person is accommodated in the visible system and remains defenseless in the one that decides careers.

You could design for this. You would have to make more of the unwritten layer explicit, which senior people resist for the obvious reason that its usefulness lies in its deniability. You would have to distinguish, in writing and in procedure, between three things that are constantly collapsed: an objectionable idea, misconduct, and socially atypical conduct. Universities are already bad at separating the first two. The third they barely acknowledge as a category.

There is an obvious objection, and it should be granted rather than argued with. Some of the behavior described here is simply bad behavior. Correcting a senior colleague in front of a room can be a genuine failure of judgment and not a difference in cognition. Persisting after a question is settled can be obstinacy. A man may be socially awkward and also wrong, and the awkwardness does not license the wrongness. Nothing here suggests that a diagnosis, real or attributed, converts a bad argument into a good one or excuses cruelty. The distinction the institution needs to make is hard because the cases are hard, not because administrators are stupid.

But the difficulty is the reason to make the distinction rather than a reason to skip it.

Which brings back the thing O’Malley was reaching for, in the form that survives Gopal’s objection.

A university has not shown that it values cognitive difference by celebrating a person whose difference arrives as a category and who has mastered the social codes. That case costs the institution nothing and returns a photograph for the website. The test is what it does with the person whose differences make the codes hard to obey, who is exhausting to be near, whose questions arrive at the wrong moment, and who will keep asking after everyone has agreed to stop.

Commitments are only tested where sympathy runs out. Everything before that is preference.

The Arday case is the reason to take this seriously rather than an example of it. For three years the unwritten rules held against a documented, checkable, written-rule question, and every institution that could have answered it found a form of words for declining. When it finally broke it broke catastrophically, in public, in the press, and a man is dead. Institutions that govern by unwritten rule have no way to release pressure gradually, because the rules cannot be cited, amended, or appealed. They can only hold or fail.

That is the argument for writing more of it down. Not for the sake of the people who find the unwritten layer difficult, though it would help them. For the sake of what happens when the layer collapses.

Posted in Autism, Jason Arday, Nathan Cofnas | Comments Off on X: ‘Online Talk Spotlights Autism Traits in Cofnas and Arday Appearances’

What Neither Side Can Say About Harvard

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Luke Ford

Nathan Cofnas writes in the Wall Street Journal Aug. 21 that he rejects DEI in favor of treating people as individuals.

That triggered me hard, bro. It’s a lovely sentiment but it is not possible in this fallen world.

I have a rich fantasy life, but even I don’t entertain this ideal of treating people like individuals. It’s too tiring. I’m an old man. I don’t have the energy to start treating people like individuals until they become important to me, and only a small number of people become important to me. Otherwise, I rely on stereotypes, like everybody else, because they’re good enough.

Two paragraphs later Cofnas reports that under a colorblind system judging applicants only on grades and test scores, Harvard would be 0.7 percent African-American, a figure he takes from an internal Harvard study disclosed during Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.

The number exists because somebody sorted applicants by race and ran the counterfactual. A man who treats people as individuals has no use for it. Later in the same piece he argues for measures ensuring meaningful representation of major demographic groups so that everyone feels a voice in collective decisions, which is a quota.

The diversity coalition says group remedy for group injury. Disparities in enrollment and hiring trace to historical exclusion, so the institution acts on the group to correct the group. Then challenge any particular hire and the answer arrives in the individual register: this scholar was assessed on the merits, cleared every bar, and the suggestion that race did any work in the file is an insult. Harvard argued both in one litigation. Race is one factor among many, never determinative, holistic. Also indispensable, since the internal simulation showed what removing it does.

Institutions typically address two audiences with one document and a lot of words about values. Public legitimacy runs on individual assessment, because a credential that anyone believes came from a group allocation is unsayable. Distribution of goodies runs on group accounting. Say the first alone and the program has no rationale. Say the second alone and every graduate carries an asterisk. So the institution says both, in different rooms, to different listeners, and never in the same paragraph. The arrangement is stable so long as nobody puts the two paragraphs side by side.

Cofnas has the same problem in reverse. He needs group data to establish mismatch and needs individualism to keep the position morally clean. He says the story was never about Arday. A man who treats people as individuals cannot use a man that way. His practice is group inference with an individual disclaimer.

The arrangement holds until reality rears its ugly head. Jason Arday was announced in 2023 as the youngest Black professor in the history of Cambridge, and the announcement did group work. It was repeated by every outlet that covered the appointment. When the record came under question, the group frame supplied no defense. The defense had to be individual, and the individual defense depended on a file that could not carry it. So the argument moved back to the group register, where it became a claim about who was scrutinizing and why. That progression looks like bad faith from outside.

An institution that cannot state its own arithmetic cannot audit its own files. Checking whether a given appointment came through the group column or the individual one requires asking a question the arrangement forbids anyone to ask out loud. So the check does not happen. Concerns reach an administrator who has no available vocabulary for evaluating them, and the safest handling is no handling. Cambridge reportedly held information about the thesis from 2023 and did nothing with it for two years, and reportedly knew about a fabricated account of a racist attack. An institution that cannot describe its own procedure has disabled its ability to inspect the results of that procedure, and it will keep discovering its errors the way this one did, from outside, at maximum cost, in the hands of people who owe it nothing.

Randall Kennedy states in For Discrimination that affirmative action is racial preference, and defends the preference on its merits. On the other side, the sayable version runs: group averages on measured traits differ, individual variation within every group dwarfs the differences between them, we therefore prohibit sorting by race in individual decisions and accept whatever distribution results. Both positions can be stated in public by a person willing to lose an argument.

In his 2018 book, The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities, John J. Mearsheimer wrote:

My view is that we are profoundly social beings from the start to the finish of our lives and that individualism is of secondary importance… Liberalism downplays the social nature of human beings to the point of almost ignoring it, instead treating people largely as atomistic actors… Political liberalism… is an ideology that is individualistic at its core and assigns great importance to the concept of inalienable rights. This concern for rights is the basis of its universalism—everyone on the planet has the same inherent set of rights—and this is what motivates liberal states to pursue ambitious foreign policies. The public and scholarly discourse about liberalism since World War II has placed enormous emphasis on what are commonly called human rights. This is true all around the world, not just in the West. “Human rights,” Samuel Moyn notes, “have come to define the most elevated aspirations of both social movements and political entities—state and interstate. They evoke hope and provoke action.”
[Humans] do not operate as lone wolves but are born into social groups or societies that shape their identities well before they can assert their individualism. Moreover, individuals usually develop strong attachments to their group and are sometimes willing to make great sacrifices for their fellow members. Humans are often said to be tribal at their core. The main reason for our social nature is that the best way for a person to survive is to be embedded in a society and to cooperate with fellow members rather than act alone… Despite its elevated ranking, reason is the least important of the three ways we determine our preferences. It certainly is less important than socialization. The main reason socialization matters so much is that humans have a long childhood in which they are protected and nurtured by their families and the surrounding society, and meanwhile exposed to intense socialization. At the same time, they are only beginning to develop their critical faculties, so they are not equipped to think for themselves. By the time an individual reaches the point where his reasoning skills are well developed, his family and society have already imposed an enormous value infusion on him. Moreover, that individual is born with innate sentiments that also strongly influence how he thinks about the world around him. All of this means that people have limited choice in formulating a moral code, because so much of their thinking about right and wrong comes from inborn attitudes and socialization…

I reckon he’s right.

Further reading. John David Skrentny’s The Ironies of Affirmative Action (Chicago, 1996) traces how the remedy rationale gave way to the diversity rationale for reasons of coalition and legal survival. Frank Dobbin’s Inventing Equal Opportunity (Princeton, 2009) shows personnel officers building the practice and the vocabulary at the same time. Randall Kennedy’s For Discrimination (Pantheon, 2013) is the honest defense. Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor’s Mismatch (Basic, 2012) is the honest attack, and the two read together cover the empirical ground without either author pretending. Glenn Loury’s The Anatomy of Racial Inequality (Harvard, 2002) supplies the distinction between discrimination in contact and discrimination in contract. For the legal architecture, Powell’s opinion in Bakke (1978) and O’Connor’s in Grutter (2003), where the twenty-five-year line promises that the arrangement is temporary.

Posted in Academia, Jason Arday, Nathan Cofnas | Comments Off on What Neither Side Can Say About Harvard

Strange Bedfellows in Cambridge and Ghent

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Luke Ford

Psychological Inquiry has a paper by David Pinsof, David O. Sears and Martie G. Haselton called “Strange bedfellows: the Alliance Theory of political belief systems.” Its claim is that political beliefs come out of alliance structures. People pick allies by similarity, by transitivity, and by interdependence, then support those allies with three families of propagandistic bias. The paper holds that these run symmetrically across the spectrum. Run that apparatus over the Cofnas–Arday affair and most of the commentary of the past month becomes predictable.

Start with transitivity, which the paper defines as sharing the same allies and rivals, and which it treats as the strongest force in ally selection because it heads off infighting and betrayal. Every participant in this affair knew the roster on July 20. Cofnas is a rival of the diversity coalition. Arday was an ally of it. When a rival attacks an ally, transitivity assigns everyone a position before a single citation gets checked. The enemy of my friend is my enemy, and the accusation he carries inherits his standing.

Perpetrator biases arrive next. The paper describes them as downplaying responsibility, emphasizing mitigating circumstances, embellishing good intentions, and minimizing the severity of harm, and its central finding is that people apply these to allies as they apply them to themselves. The defense of Arday runs the full sequence. Errors rather than fraud. A childhood diagnosis. Pressures placed on him by an institution that promoted him. A career of good work reduced to a citation problem by people acting in bad faith.

The instructive case is Cofnas running the same bias on the same man. His Wall Street Journal piece of August 21 says Arday was an adult and morally responsible, then says he was mostly responding to incentives created by other people, and that his punishment exceeded any wrongdoing he may have committed. Perpetrator bias applied to the man he exposed. Alliance Theory explains the switch. Arday has stopped being the rival and become the exhibit, and the rival is now Cambridge, the press, and Ghent. The bias follows the roster.

Victim biases run on both sides and produce what the literature calls competitive victimhood, where each party works to establish that it suffered the greater injustice. One side gives us an essay on institutional murder, a vigil in Trafalgar Square blaming the press, and an account in The Nation of a funded transatlantic machine. The other gives us a Journal headline about a scapegoat, an inventory of death threats and smears, a politician denouncing a man by name, and the loss of a job. Both sides raise the perpetrator’s intent to malevolence, deny mitigating circumstances, and stretch the harm. Pinsof, Sears and Haselton note that victim claims sit awkwardly with any theory about protecting one’s self-image, since they advertise weakness, and make better sense as recruitment.

This story is attribution dispute all the way down. The paper’s finding is that people credit their allies’ advantages to internal causes and their disadvantages to external ones. Ask why Arday rose. One roster answers merit, the other answers preference. Ask why he fell. One answers fraud, the other answers a racist press. Ask why Cofnas lost two posts in two years. One answers his conduct, the other answers a taboo.

Cofnas is defended by the Committee for Academic Freedom, by Jerry Coyne, by Maarten Boudry, who thinks the hereditarian program is wrong, by the British right-wing press, by anonymous accounts that would embarrass all of the above, and by the American ambassador in Brussels, who has announced a review of the government’s relationships with a Belgian university over its handling of one postdoc.

A coalition assembled around free expression now includes a state reviewing a foreign university’s personnel decisions. On the other side, a union that condemns attacks on journalists singled out for criticism the man who published a story nobody has faulted for accuracy, and a coalition built on defending scholarly standards is defending a man against a plagiarism finding. The paper predicts patchwork narratives with incompatible principles, generated by the alliance.

The theory also predicts who breaks ranks and at what cost. Its claim about loyal partisans is that they are the most willing to condone what they would otherwise condemn, which makes defection a signal of a weak alliance. Brian Leiter grants that many of the allegations were warranted and faults the manner of the exposure. Steven Pinker grants the findings and calls the research program a place not to go. Boudry defends a man whose central thesis he rejects. Each of these people holds a status base that does not depend on the coalition he is defecting from.

The frame has limits. Applied without discipline it becomes unfalsifiable, since any position can be recoded as loyalty and any evidence-following person can be described as roster-following. The discipline available here is the coding test. Take fifty commentators with a public record on affirmative action before July 21, 2026. Code that record. Then code each one’s current position on whether the plagiarism claims are substantiated, on whether the exposure was legitimate, and on whether Ghent acted properly. If prior position predicts current position at a high rate, the theory has earned its keep on a live case. If it predicts poorly, the theory has taken a hit. Run the same design on a second list: people who demanded retraction and accountability in earlier fraud cases and now call this a witch-hunt, and people who demanded due process for accused academics and now welcome a suspension delivered by administrative letter. Both lists can be built from public statements with dates.

Arday’s thesis is here. Paula Zwozdiak-Myers’s 2009 thesis is here. The Cofnas post is here.

Further reading. Pinsof’s frame descends from Peter DeScioli and Robert Kurzban, “A Solution to the Mysteries of Morality,” Psychological Bulletin 139 (2013), which treats moral condemnation as a coordination device for taking sides. Eric Luis Uhlmann and colleagues, “The Motivated Use of Moral Principles,” Judgment and Decision Making 4 (2009), supplies the experimental core of the double standards argument. Jason Weeden and Robert Kurzban’s The Hidden Agenda of the Political Mind (Princeton, 2014) develops the interdependence half of ally selection. Roy Baumeister’s Evil: Inside Human Violence and Cruelty (Freeman, 1997) is the source of the perpetrator and victim bias asymmetry that Alliance Theory borrows, and its chapter on the magnitude gap is the best short account of why two parties to the same event describe two different events. For the competitive victimhood literature, Masi Noor and colleagues, “When Suffering Begets Suffering,” Personality and Social Psychology Review 16 (2012).

Posted in Alliance Theory | Comments Off on Strange Bedfellows in Cambridge and Ghent

fordy, no

Posted on August 23, 2026 by Luke Ford

The stream is up eleven minutes and there are nine people watching, which is four more than last Sunday, when Luke went ninety minutes on Talmudic labor law and lost everyone at minute six.

He has the light right. He worked on the light. There is a lamp behind the camera bounced off a foam board he bought on Amazon, and a second lamp he keeps low so the ceiling of the apartment does not read as a ceiling. On the shelf behind his head, arranged that afternoon, sit the Steinsaltz, a Tom Wolfe paperback with the spine broken in three places, and the Big Book, angled so the title catches the key light.

Chat is quiet. Then Silent Bob. “Has Fordy reached out to Nathan to offer comfort, solace and potentially Alexander therapy?”

Luke leans toward the microphone and the chair creaks and his head goes back and down, which is the thing he has been paying a woman in Santa Monica a hundred dollars an hour to stop him doing since 2008.

“That’s a good question, Bob,” he says with only a small gasp for air and a modest tightening in his head-neck-back relationship. His throat hurts, which is the thing Alexander Technique was supposed to fix.

The email to Nathan Cofnas goes out at 12:41 in the morning. It runs eleven hundred words. Luke knows it runs eleven hundred words because after he had ChatGPT write it, he pasted it into Word, and then he trims forty words, and then adds sixty more suggested by Grok.

It opens warm. He establishes that he has followed the work. He establishes that he holds no position on the substance. He notes that he has been expelled from things, that his father was expelled from something in Colorado in 1980 and that the family ate the consequences for thirty years, and that he understands what is happening better than the people sending supportive messages.

Then paragraph four.

Bava Metzia 59b. The oven of Achnai. Luke explains that Rabbi Eliezer brings every argument in the world and the sages do not accept them. And they burn everything Eliezer ever ruled pure, and they excommunicate him, and they send the gentlest man among them to break the news so that nobody harsher does it. Luke types the phrase “which is more consideration than you got” and then deletes it, and then puts it back.

Paragraph six is the Alexander Technique.

He does not lead with the neck. He builds. He explains that most of what a man calls stress is a set of habits he cannot feel from the inside, that the head is meant to go forward and up and that under threat it goes back and down, that the pulling down is not caused by the threat but by the reaction to the threat. He uses the word inhibition and then apologizes for the word inhibition. He offers constructive rest, twelve minutes on the floor, knees up, a paperback under the skull, and says he has found F.M. Alexander’s own books unreadable and recommends starting with his own blog posts on the Technique. He offers to walk him through semi-supine over Zoom. He says the time difference is workable. He recommends silent lalalas. He had a student on Broadway who used them. He can’t mention names, but it is someone famous.

Paragraph eight is Step Four.

He says he is not suggesting Nathan has a drinking problem. He says the inventory is not about drinking. He says resentment is the number one offender, that it kills more of us than anything else, that when he lists a resentment he has to write down his own part in it, and that there is always a part, even when the other side did the greater wrong. He quotes the line about restraint of tongue and pen. He does not notice that he has now spent eleven hundred words at one in the morning writing to a man he has met once.

He attaches his essay. Of course he attaches four of his essays on Amy Wax (his magnum opus! history will vindicate him) and a further reading list including a Princeton monograph on European craft ordinances.

He reads it once more at 11:58 and cuts the sentence about his father, because it is showing, and then puts it back, because it is true, and then sends it.

The reply arrives Tuesday afternoon while Luke is writing in his gratitude journal.

“Thanks.”

That is the reply. Seven letters. Luke reads it three times.

By Tuesday night he has decided that “thanks” is warmer than it looks. He tells the stream this. Fourteen people are watching now, because the affair is hot and Luke’s name comes up in the search results next to better-known names, which is a thing he has noticed and will not mention because he’s but dust and ashes, a simple Jew.

“Nathan’s under enormous pressure,” Luke says. “A one-word reply under that kind of pressure, that’s a man conserving energy. That’s appropriate.”

Bob: “Fordy he blocked you”

Luke: “He did not block me.”

Bob: “Check”

Luke checks, on camera, and he is not blocked, he is still followed, and he says so with quiet dignity.

Live on screen he feels his back lengthening and widening. He performs mostly silent lalalalas and pulls on his red flex bar and remembers the one who got away in 1984 in Gladstone, the brunette with the twin sister. Then he takes a gulp of Crystal Light Orange Drink, zero calories.

Someone called shomer_shabbos_310 writes that Luke has now done to a stranger what the sages did to Rabbi Eliezer, and the chat runs with this for four minutes. Someone asks whether the Alexander lesson is billable. Someone asks whether Step Nine covers unsolicited emails. Someone writes that the man lost his job on a Thursday and got a reading list by Monday.

Luke laughs at that one.

Then he stops laughing and says the true thing, which is why nine people watch and then fourteen and then sometimes forty.

He says that in 1980 a committee sat in a lodge in Colorado for six days and at the end of it his father was finished, and that the thing nobody tells you is that the finding does not matter afterward. He says the men who voted knew the arguments and voted anyway, because the group needed a result more than it needed an answer, and that his father spent the next forty years being right in rooms that had stopped taking attendance. He says the loneliness of that is not the loneliness of losing an argument. He says a man cast out keeps writing letters to people who have agreed among themselves not to read them.

The chat goes still. Fourteen people, no messages, eleven seconds.

Then Luke leans in and the head goes back and down again.

“Which is exactly why the semi-supine work is so useful in a situation like this,” he says. “Twelve minutes. A paperback under the head. I could show him Thursday.”

Bob: “fordy”

Bob: “fordy no”

Posted in Personal | Comments Off on fordy, no