Effects of Mobility on Primary School Children - Essay Example

Effects of Mobility on Primary School Children Table of Contents Table of Contents Determinants of Bullying and Victimization: Rigby and Slee (1994) 14 Assessing School Climate: Bernhardt Elementary School Survey 14 References 16 Student Mobility There are many reasons that primary school students change schools outside of traditional grade promotion. Students may move based on family situation when one or both parents takes a job in a new location. Students may also change schools based on re-zoning, the construction of new schools within an area, or problems or concerns with the current school. Many other factors may also impact student movement between schools. Student mobility refers the movement of students between schools for any reason outside of traditional grade promotion (Anthony, 2004). The largest factor influencing student mobility, particularly prior to high school, is residential mobility. Residential mobility, which refers to the movement of family units between places of residences, accounts for the majority of student movement between schools. Many educators consider student movement between schools inevitable, often overlooking other causative factors such as school overcrowding, class size reduction, suspension and expulsion policies, general academic climate, social climate, and school choice (Rumberger 2000). Generally migrant student mobility, or student moving from foreign countries, is addressed by the school system, which may set up certain programs for these students based on the number of students and specific needs, such as cultural or language barriers. Urban migration, or migration within a region, is much more difficult to measure and assess (Ligon and Paredes, 1992). Urban student mobility and the reasons behind this movement of students are difficult to assess because of the many factors involved that vary drastically between different regions. A wide disparity exists between the techniques for measurement and recordkeeping of student motility within different districts and regions, further complicating analysis of student motility. Additionally, many contemporary mobility statistics are based on available numerical data, which fails to provide accurate correlation between the many factors influencing student motility and the numbers of student moving between schools (Ligon and Paredes, 1992). As such, this data has generally been of limited use in assessing the cause and results of student motility on primary school children. Examining student mobility from the perspective of the child, both the mobile child and the children experiencing the classroom effects of student mobility, is particularly useful in understanding the fundamental impact of student mobility on individual student growth and classroom effectiveness. Effects of Student Mobility It remains widely accepted that student mobility has a large impact on both the mobile students and the classrooms experiencing transition. Migrant student mobility involves cultural challenges, which may require specialized instructors and generally requires special provisions on the part of the school system. Urban student mobility is often addressed less formally, resulting in a poorer understanding of the effect of student mobility on these students and their classrooms (Ligon and Paredes, 1992). Student mobility, regardless of the source, impacts both mobile students and those left behind, generating an overall impact on the school’s core unit: the classroom. For students, mobility can have short-term effects of dissatisfaction, lower levels of social involvement, and behavioral problems. Additional studies have also shown that long-term effects on students include lower overall academic achievement levels and slower pacing in many core subjects, including an overall lower high school completion rate (Martin, 2002). Additionally, many students in urban areas experience residential instability generated by unfavorable economic situations, homelessness, immigration, and foster care, causing high rates of mobility between schools, which has been shown to drastically lower the percentage of students completing a high school education (Martin, 2002). Schools, and more importantly the classrooms—the core unit of primary schools—are also effected by student mobility. High levels of student mobility can place additional psychological and social strains on both teachers and students, slowing curriculum pace and stressing financial resources. Teachers are forced to spend more time reviewing and orienting students, resulting in less academic progress (Martin 2002). Studies have shown that by grade six, highly mobile students remain academically behind their peers by two-thirds of a year. A surprising fact may be that schools experiencing high levels of student mobility show that non-mobile students lag behind their peers from other schools with lower student mobility by half of a year (Martin 2002). The impact of student mobility on mobile students and non-mobile students is clear. Student mobility also sometimes has positive effects. Positive effects from movement between schools are generally seen when the movements are “strategic”, such as movements made for educational placement or special interest/course offering (Heilein and Shinn, 2000). Movements that are “reactive”, or based on moves made to get away from behavioral problem and dangerous settings often sometimes also have positive impacts of removing stressors placed on the children that may be contributing to behavioral issues (Heilein and Shinn, 2000). Transitions for Primary School Age Children Many parents and educators may overlook the impact of transitions on primary school age children. During these formative years, habits and social interactions may have long-term ramifications for the student’s future academic success and social adjustment. Twenty-three percent of primary school children in the age ranges from 5 to 9 have been shown to move between schools in a one year period, demonstrating that these student experience higher student mobility rates than either middle or high school children in the age ranges 10 to 14 or 15 to 19, with ages 15-19 experiencing the highest mobility rates (Ligon and Paredes, 1992). As such, parents and educators must understand the need to reduce transitions and how to help children cope when transitions become necessary. Transitions across multiple environments are stressful during early childhood for both children and families because these transitions impact the child across many social levels, both at school, at home, and in the community (Rous, 2007). In order for a child to make a smooth transition, the involvement of practitioners in assessment of the child, parents in providing guidance and supervision, and administrators in providing a sense of security in the new environment are necessary (Rous, 2007). Transitions in early childhood are well documented as having a strong impact on future achievement. Reaction of Primary Students to Transition Based Changes Mobility between schools results in the simultaneous onset of a number of social, environmental, academic, and other changes. Over fifty-eight percent of student movements between schools are accompanied by a movement in residential setting (Rumberger, 2010). Primary school age students are expected to adapt at the same time to a number of stimuli, including new social relationships in the home, neighborhood, and at school, while adapting to a new academic curriculum whose pace may not correspond with the student’s previous classes. Additionally these changes may cause the student to experience social isolation, particularly when the movement occurs during the school year when many peer-to-peer social connections have already been constructed. Students may react to the change by experiencing high levels of anxiety. While social isolation is generally thought to occur due to poorly developed social skills, more contemporary studies have also shown that students initially identifies by their peers as socially isolated are often assumed to have other negative qualities as well, preventing them from easily integrating into their peer group (Evans and Eder, 1993). Because of these assumptions, the changes involved with student mobility often result in high levels of stress and anxiety for the student, which sometimes develops into partial or complete social isolation from their peer group. The Impact of Relationships During Transitions During early childhood the most important relationship is with the child’s parents. As the child enters the primary school age, he or she has already established important relationships with parents, siblings, grandparents, and friends (Dunn, 1983). When considering student mobility, it each of these relationships plays a role the child’s adjustment to the transition. Transition situations maybe further complicated by stressors in these relationships, such as those created in cases of divorce, foster home placements, and death of parent or guardians. In cases of divorce, the child’s gender-role orientation and emotional adjustment may be impact, resulting in anti-social behavior in the new academic setting (Demo and Acock, 1988). Nearly 2 per 1000 students in the primary school age range, over five years of age, are in foster care, meaning that most urban schools have several of these students among their student population (Troutman et al., 1998). In cases of foster care, student may be building new personal relationships at home, which can interfere with their ability to cope with transitions at school, further isolating them from their peers. In special cases where relationships at home are disturbed prior to student movement between schools, administrators and educators should be able to identify and address transitional difficulty in primary school age students. The Importance of Friendship In all cases of student mobility, the day-to-day interaction with the child’s friends and peers will be changed, resulting in a need for the child to adapt to new social pressures and academic regimes. Friendships offer children emotional support and support both social and cognitive development (Parker and Seal, 1966). During childhood, interactions and associations with a child’s peer group provides the foundation for the development of empathy, more contemporarily referred to as “moral reasoning” (Kagan and Lamb, 1997). Moral reasoning provides a basis for right and wrong, and children that have developed strong connections with those outside of their family during childhood are markedly less likely to commit violent crimes as adults (Kagan and Lamb, 1997). Movement between schools may interfere with the formation of friendships, and increase feelings of anxiety and isolation, leading to behaviors problems and criminal incidents in adulthood. Additionally, a biological basis for friendships has shown that friendships are important in normal neural development. Students perceive this as a comfort level when sitting in class next to friend. When in a comfortable environment, surrounded by friends, a student’s brain levels of oxytocin and serotonin are higher than those in isolation. Brain Derived Neurogenic Factor (BDNF), a chemical associated with brain cell differentiation, is triggered by these high levels and suppressed by high levels of cortisol that occur with stress and anxiety (Govindan, 2010). This means that student surrounded by friends in their learning environment actually processes and retain data faster and more effectively than those experiencing high levels of anxiety due to isolation. Child Behavior, Peer Relations, Classroom Climate, and Class Dynamics Student mobility in primary schools affects child behavior, and may increase the chance of behavioral problems during this period and during adolescence. Child behavioral problems may be exacerbated by uncaring schools that segregate students, show bias, or economically exploit students (Calabrese 1989). When behavioral issues become common, not just the student experiencing the issue, but also other members of the classroom and the class dynamics are affected. Peer relations affect the classroom climate. As detailed previously, anxiety and stress can increase behavioral issues and reduce the effectiveness of student learning (Govindan, 2010). Teachers may also experience increasing levels of frustration and be more likely to exhibit preferential treatment of some student groups. Individual Differences Children have many different characteristics such as gender, culture, race, economic standing, family associations, and religion, among many others. As mobile student may be either urban, or moving into the school from within the same community or region, or migrant, moving into the school from another country or area of significant cultural distinction, it is important that teachers and administrators do not show bias or preferential treatment to any student group, as this encourages problems in peer relationships that may result in behavioral problems (Mercer and DeRosier, 2008). Individual differences and diversity should be considered a school advantage, allowing student to benefit from the interaction with various cultures and groups. Function of Primary Schooling Many primary schools offer mission statements that identify their goals. Most focus on preparing students for future academic achievement at this level and encouraging a range of cognitive and social growth. Primary schools increase exposure to a number of academic disciplines and establish foundation principles that will allow success in middle and high school, leading to high school graduation and future success. Some schools, normally private schools, may also include functions of student education and involvement in certain disciplines, such as certain religious affiliations or schools that place particular emphasis on mathematics, arts, or sciences (“School Mission Statements”, 2010). Despite the difference between schools, inclusion of mobile students is imperative to the success of the mission of a primary school. Cognitive Development of Primary School Age Students The development of cognitive function is a goal of primary schooling. Mobile students may lack social support from their peers, making cognitive development slower in some cases. Support from peers is critical to cognitive development and academic development, as it relieves loneliness and improves student’s performance, as studies indicate (Shin, 2007). This means that improvement in programs and policies that help relieve social isolation may also improve academic performance. Peer Relationships of Primary School Age Students Many positive relationship are cultivated in primary school age children that encourage social an cognitive growth. Peer relationships, such as friendships, provide the necessary social support for children to adjust to normal transitions that occur during grade promotion (Jin et al., 2009). Mobile students, without this backbone of positive peer relationships, may experience increasing anxiety when moving between grades or classes within a new school. Student mobility may also increase levels of negative peer relations, such as bullying and victimization of other students. Bullying may be a way in which some student manage peer and dominance relationships as they move into new social groups, and numerous studies have shown that bullying and other forms of aggression increase when students undergo large transitions such as the move into middle or high school or movement between schools not associated with traditional grade promotion (Pellegrini and Long, 2002). Peer Acceptance Peer acceptance is a measure of the degree to which a child is socially accepted by his or her peers, generally representing the ease with which the child both initiates and maintains the relationships that occur between the child and his or her peers (“Peer Acceptance”, 2010). Peer acceptance is influenced by a number of factors, including perceived popularity, teacher preference, social or financial standing, and social ties, including family and friends. For primary school age students, peer acceptance is a critical learning experience for both social and cognitive development where the student may learn group problem solving techniques, social skills, and how to manage both competition and conflict (“Peer Acceptance”, 2010). For mobile students, lacking pre-existing social ties to family, friends, and teachers may put these students as at a disadvantage, increasing feelings of isolation and anxiety. Peer Rejection Peer rejection can increase behavioral problems and aggression. Studies have shown that a lack of peer acceptance or preferential treatment by teachers can cause a chain reaction that leads to greater levels of peer rejection that correspond to increases in aggressive and disruptive behaviors (Mercer and DeRosier, 2008). Declines in teacher preference have been shown to increase peer rejection, further highlighting the role that teachers and administrators must play in ensuring that students moving into new schools are accepted by their peers, while ultimately prevents new behavioral problems from forming. Factoring Influencing School Climate School climate is influenced by a number of diverse factors, making quantification of school climate a topic of some debate among researchers. School climate is affected by the layout of school building, student-teacher interactions, student and teacher perception of the learning environment at the school, environmental factors such as classroom size and organization, academic performance, and feelings of security and safety within the school (Marshall, 2002). Often school climate is quantified by observing academic results or order and discipline among students (Marshall, 2002). A positive school climate generally has a high level of interaction between students, parents, teachers, and administrators and results in fewer emotional and behavioral problems (Kuperminc, 1997). Improving School Programs and Policies for Mobile Students Because student mobility in primary grades is common, and inevitable in many circumstances, school administration, teachers, and parents can play a part in improving the way in which the transition is handled in order to reduce stress on the child and cause minimal disruption in both the child’s cognitive growth and social development. Schools may be proactive in informing parents about the effects of student mobility, encouraging them to carefully consider how a moving between schools will affect the child. The school can also help parents to be informed about the best times to move with minimal impact on the child’s academic progress if a move is inevitable. The school may also improve the process by providing programs and educational materials that can help students adjust to the new academic environment, and provisions for inclusions in group activities, such as sports (Martin, 2002). Teachers can also take a proactive role by being careful not to demonstrate preferential treatment to any individual child or group of children, as preferential treatment increases levels of peer rejection among those students not receiving preferential treatment, which often results in both behavioral issues and classroom disruption (Mercer and DeRosier, 2008). Teachers can encourage positive programs for both new and existing students, such as peer-to-peer tutoring, that encourage group collaboration, problem-solving, and empathy (Jin et al., 2009). Interaction between the teacher, parent, administration, and student is necessary to ensure that the transition between schools occurs as smoothly as possible, with minimal impact on the student, the class the student leaves behind, and the class the student will join. Reactions to Disruptive Peers Mobile students are not only more likely to experience behavioral problems themselves, but schools or classrooms with high rates of student mobility are likely to experience increased behavioral problems as a reaction to disruptive behaviors. Mobile students experience feelings of anxiety and lack of control, which may be exhibited as bullying or other forms of peer victimization (Pellegrini and Long, J.D, 2002). This in turn may result in behavioral issues on the part of victimized students. Disruptions within the classroom may slow down learning processes, and result in greater time spent on review and slower overall academic progress (Martin 2002). Determinants of Bullying and Victimization: Rigby and Slee (1994) Children that have been victimized are at increased risk of both physical and psychological damage when they do not have adequate social support both at home and in schools, meaning that mobile students are much more likely to experience long-term negative impacts from bullying (Smith et al. 2004). Peer group attitudes to aggressive actions, such as peer bullying, as well as social perception of bullying, and perception that other peers are willing to help or intervene are critical to reducing aggression in primary school children, as demonstrated in the study conducted in 1994 by Rigby and Slee. This study also demonstrates that family influence plays a large role in aggressive behaviors of bullying students and the response of victimized students (Rigby, 1994). Assessing School Climate: Bernhardt Elementary School Survey The Bernhardt Elementary School survey is a student survey created by Victoria Bernhardt that gauges student perception of the school climate by asking students a number of questions about how they feel about their school, their teachers, their academics, and their peers (“Student Climate Survey”, 2010). This allows for standardized method of observing and recording changes in school climate that can be indicative of the need for new programs or changes in policy that benefit both mobile and non-mobile students. References Anthony, Rebora Ed. (September 2004). Student Mobility [Electronic version]. Education Week. Evans, Cathy and Eder, Donna. (July 1993). "No Exit" Processes of Social Isolation in the Middle School. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 22(2): 139-170. Calabrese, Raymond. (Oct.-Nov.1989) The Effects of Mobility on Adolescent Alienation. The High School Journal. 73(1): 44-46. Demo, David H and Acock, Alan C. (1988) The Impact of Divorce on Children. National Council on Family Relations. Journal of Marriage and Family. 50(3): 619-648. Dunn, Judy. (1983). Sibling Relationships in Early Childhood. University of Cambridge Reviews. Society for Research in Child Development. Govindan, R. (2010). Friendships Are Important to Academic Success. EZine Articles. Retrieved from http://ezinearticles.com/?Friendships-Are-Important-to-Academic-Success&id=4540883 Heilein, Lisa M., and Shinn, Marybeth. (2000). School Mobility and Student Achievement in an Urban Setting. Psychology in the Schools (37), 349-357. Jin Yu, J.; Hoffman, K.T.; and Russell, S.T. (2009). Peer Relationships and Friendship. National 4-H Council and the University of Arizona. Retrieved from http://cals-cf.calsnet.arizona.edu/fcs/bpy/content.cfm?content=peer_rel Kagan, Jerome and Lamb, Sharon. (1997) The Origins of Morality in Early Childhood Relationships. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kuperminc, G. P., Leadbeater, B. J., Emmons, C., & Blatt, S. J. (1997). Perceived school climate and difficulties in the social adjustment of middle school students. Applied Developmental Science. 1(2): 76-88. Ligon, Glynn, and Paredes, Vicente. (1992). Student Mobility Rate: A Moving Target. ERIC: Education Resources Information Center. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Francisco, CA, April 20-24, 1992). Marshall, Megan. (2002). Examining School Climate: Defining Factors and Educational Influences. Center for Research on School Safety, School Climate and Classroom Management. Georgia State University. Martin, Nancy. (March 2002). Addressing the Causes and Consequences of High Student Mobility: The Role of School Systems and Communities. American Youth Policy Forum. Mercer, S.H. and DeRosier, M.E. (2008). Teacher Preference, Peer Rejection, and Student Aggression: A Prospective Study of Transactional Influence and Independent Contributions to Emotional Adjustment and Grades. Journal of School Psychology. 46(06): 661-685. Parker, J.G. and Seal, J. (1966). Forming, Losing, Renewing, and Replacing Friendships: Applying Temporal Parameters to the Assessment of Childrens Friendship Experiences. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Child Development. 67:2249-2268. Rous, Beth. (October 2007). Strategies for Supporting Transitions of Young Children with Special Needs and Their Families. Journal of Early Intervention. 30(1): 1-18. “Peer Acceptance”. (2010). ENotes Encyclopedia of Childrens Health. Retrieved from http://www.enotes.com/childrens-health-encyclopedia/peer-acceptance Pellegrini, A.D. and Long, J.D. (June 2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 20(2): 259-280. Rumberger, Russell. (2000). The Causes and Consequences of Student Mobility. Journal of Education, 72(1). Rumberger, Russell. (2010). Student Mobility - The Extent of Student Mobility, The Impact of Mobility on Students, Causes of Mobility. State University.com Education Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2461/Student-Mobility.html “School Mission Statements”. (2010).Mission Statements: Ideas and Inspirations for defining your own mission statement. Retrieved from http://www.missionstatements.com/school_mission_statements.html Shin, Yoolim. (2007). Peer Relationships, Social Behaviors, Academic Performance and Loneliness in Korean Primary School Children. School Psychology International. 28(2): 220-236. Smith, P.K.; Pepler, D.J.; and Rigby, K. (2004). Bullying in Schools: How successful can interventions be? London: Cambridge University Press. “Student Climate Survey”. (2010). WINSS Successful School Guide. Retrieved from http://goal.learningpt.org/winss/scs/sampques.asp?survey=E Troutman, Beth; Ryan, Susan; and Cardi, Michelle. (1998). The Effects of Foster Care Placement on Young Childrens Mental Health. University of Iowa, Carver College of Medicine Archived Reports. Rigby, K. (1994) When is force reasonable? Directions in Education, 3(1): 4. Read More