THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS

Being able to choose subjects you want to study from a range of different subjects is a new experience encountered by students in the middle school. “This is my first high school year so it was quite new to me to be able to have options”(Y9B6). While this was an exciting development in their educational journey it was also perceived as a time when students saw themselves as being pressured from multiple directions and being asked to consider many important factors which may impact on their possibilities for the future. Not all students felt adequately prepared to meet these challenges. One student commented, “Everything happened like, all over the place and I didn’t really, couldn’t really keep up” (Y9B6). In an attempt to cope with the decision making process, students employed a variety of tactics, with the strategies of planning, researching and eliminating options the most frequently referred to in interviews (see Appendix C2.6).

Planning

Many students at all year levels referred to some form of planning to help them with their subject choices. Students wanted to choose subjects that were ‘correlated’ with their other

45

subjects or chosen career path, that would ‘benefit’ them in future goals or that would “set them up for the next year” (Y10G4). Strategic planning was evident with students speaking of “trying to expand myself as much as possible” (Y10G4) through choosing a broad range of subjects. The school Option Policy (2014) and Career Policy (2012) identify the importance of students’ planning in subject choice decision making, however neither document provides guidelines as to what form this planning may take.

Researching

The amount of research students reported doing before choosing subjects ranged from “zilch” to “heaps”. Some students had made efforts to research how the subjects would help them reach their goals and also explored possible future career directions. “You actually kinda searched it out … What am I going to need? What am I going to do? What they want from me” (Y10G6). However, others revealed a more haphazard approach to choosing subjects. While students acknowledged the need to “think about it” (Y9B6), they were not proactive in researching information, saying they would “wait” for the option evening information or “I shouldn’t but I’m kinda just leaving it” (Y10G1). Others “just assume that that’s what these subjects would be like” (Y9B6).

Interviewed students indicated that subject choice became more important as they progressed through the school; “they’ll get more and more important as your school life progresses, just because you’re getting closer to the decision that you really need to make in your life” (Y8B2). Another said subject choices are “ slightly [important] but not

extremely because … we’re still young and so we’re still learning what we’re good at and what we’re not best at” (Y8B1). For those still unsure of what choice to make, there was always the fall back of choosing the popular options. As one student commented, “its popularity … maybe ones that everyone’s talking about may influence you to join” (Y9B6). Eliminating options

The interviewed students reported a need to eliminate choices from a range of options, whether by trial and error, ranking against criteria or an elimination process guided by conscious or unconscious outside influences. What it was they were looking for in a trial and error process proved interesting. Some saw the middle years as a chance to try

46

liked it”, “were interested in it”, “were good at it” or alternatively “not good at it”. Others spoke of having a taster “to get an idea of what I wanted to do in the future” (Y8B1). While these first choices revolved around attitudes to subjects, when required to re-choose subjects due to timetable clashes or classes too full, students tended to focus on how the subject would help them achieve “what I might need for my future” (Y9G9).

Ranking a subject according to their self-perceived ability in it was also mentioned. Students in Year 10 suggested that they would be unlikely to take a subject for NCEA that they had not studied in previous years, as they would not know if they were good at it. Instead they would “play it safe” (Y10G6). Such an approach presents difficulties for schools wanting to encouraging students to take up the challenge of new learning areas.

Students were also aware that their mind-set might change over time, requiring them to rethink their future directions. While the subject choice process may only be undertaken once every year, “It’s not like just once a year you decide what you want to do [in the future]” (Y10 G5). Students warned that “your opinions can change between now and university” (Y8B2). Some students, especially those in the lower year levels, felt that “at this age [they] don’t really know what their main interests are … what they’re most good at” (Y9B2). While students felt that they would be able to change direction, with some planning for this by “keeping options open”, they expressed concern that they may be “stuck” with something they did not like. While the school policy allows for subject changes, there are time limits within which changes can be made. This allows for students to receive some guidance regarding the wider implications of a subject change; time for parent and teacher consultation and consideration of impacts from school structural factors such as class sizes and timetabling (Motuschool, 2012). However, such a late choice of subject and direction may result in fewer choices available due to classes already being full. These findings highlight the importance of students making informed decisions at the outset.

Students also reported self-system factors (that are dealt with more in the next section), particularly their attitude to a subject and their perceived ability in a subject, as affecting their ranking of options. Interests and enjoyment were common themes for directing subject choice voiced in all the interview groups, with students linking their choices to “passions” and “having a strong interest in” selected subjects (see Appendices C2.3, C2.4 and C2.5). Students suggested that “you’re going to move towards the one that you’re good

47

at” (Y10G10), another “chose what I thought I was good at” (Y9G9) or went away from a pathway because they found they were “not good at it” (Y9G9). However, some students were able to point out pitfalls in this approach. One student explained that choosing subjects using these criteria “has a huge impact on the way we’re going to think about our subjects, because if we know we are not good at something then half of us might go, oh well, then I’ll need to take this next year because I need to work on it. And some of us will go, oh well, I’m good at that so there’s no point in actually doing it, so they’ll do a different subject” (Y8G6). Another warned, “If you’re already good at a subject and you’re not

choosing things that you don’t like or are not good at, then you are not challenging yourself” (Y8B2). A further aspect that was revealed in the student interviews was students limiting their goals by their low self-efficacy. One student commented that “I’m not smart in general … I can get away with not getting excellence” (Y10 B7). There appears to be two stances being taken here. One is built on current strengths and abilities being the basis for

eliminating choices in study plans. The other relies on an awareness of possible futures and what skills, learning and attributes may be needed to be developed to achieve success. Regardless of which strategy students employ to make subject choice decisions, all will be influenced by a variety of different factors.