NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ763400
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2007-Apr
Pages: 2
Abstractor: ERIC
Reference Count: 8
ISSN: ISSN-0141-1926
A Brief Response to Gorard and Fitz
Noden, Philip; Goldstein, Harvey
British Educational Research Journal, v33 n2 p273-274 Apr 2007
This is a brief response to some of the issues raised by Gorard and Fitz in their paper, "What counts as evidence in the school choice debate?" published in the "British Educational Research Journal" v32, n6, 2006. Gorard and Fitz claim a "basic arithmetic error" (p. 807) in giving equal weighting to all LEAs (Noden, 2000). The authors would not describe this as an error. When using the Local Education Authority (LEA) as a proxy for a local secondary school market it is not self-evident that a larger LEA is a better proxy, and should therefore be given greater weight, than a smaller LEA. Interestingly, however, if Gorard and Fitz do regard this as an error then it is one that they have committed in output from the Cardiff study (Taylor and Gorard, 2002). They also criticise that same paper (Noden, 2000), for failing to cite their work reporting segregation in England (Gorard and Fitz, 2000a; 2000b). They have ignored, however, the time lag between having a paper accepted and it actually being published--all three papers were published in 2000. In their paper, Gorard and Fitz (2006) generally criticise others for failing to read or to understand their work. This is a criticism to which they are not immune.
Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site:
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Opinion Papers
Education Level: Higher Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Location: United Kingdom (England)