Research report - Institute of Education, University of London

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Although some of the „vulnerable‟ children also experienced positive peer influences, these students more often had friends and peers with negative attitudes to school and learning. In addition, it was often felt by them, as well as by parents and teachers, that their problematic or less effective behaviour and negative attitudes towards school and learning were reinforced by such friends. 11 Additional gateways to social and cultural capital The low SES children who „succeeded against the odds‟ and the „successful‟ high SES children made good use of resources that helped with school work (such as written materials and computers) but also of peers, siblings and other adults. Their positive attitude towards books and computers and frequent use of these tools for school or as hobbies facilitated learning throughout their life-course and will stand them in good stead in the future. Families with academically successful children perceived and valued extra-curricular activities as experiences that contributed to their children‟s development and school achievement. Low SES parents with children who did not „succeed against the odds‟ usually regarded these activities as fun and relaxing, but did not consider any educational aspects or benefits that might follow. As a result, „vulnerable‟ children were less likely to be encouraged to persevere with extra-curricular activities. Support networks of extended family, family friends and religious communities played an important role in supporting parents as they could offer additional social and cultural capital. A positive contribution from support networks was particularly felt when this support went beyond practical help and offered parents a chance to further develop their parenting knowledge and skills and reinforced their sense of self-efficacy with regard to the child‟s academic success. This particular type of support was mentioned more often by the low SES families with children „succeeding against the odds‟ and by high SES families in general. vi
Section 1: The Child and Family Case Studies 1.1 Background to the Child and Family Case Studies The Effective Pre-School, Primary and Secondary Education (EPPSE 3-16) research project is a large scale, longitudinal, mixed-methods research study (see Sammons et al., 2005; Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2006) that is following the progress of 3000 children since 1997 from the age of 3 to 16 years old (Sylva et al., 2010). A continuing question for EPPSE was whether pre-school, schools or children's home learning experiences could help reduce inequality. While the study found that parents' socio-economic status (SES) and levels of education were significantly related to child outcomes, it also found that the child‟s early years Home Learning Environment (HLE) was important and showed that school influences (pre-school and primary school quality and effectiveness) also shaped children‟s educational outcomes. The Effective Pre-school and Primary Education (EPPE 3-11) research project (1997-2008) found that it was what parents did with their children was also important in terms of the children's outcomes, rather than simply who they were (Melhuish et al., 2001; Melhuish et al., 2008; Sammons et al., 2002a). In 2008, an extension, funded by the Cabinet Office for the Equalities Review, provided a pilot study for the case studies presented in this report (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2007; Siraj- Blatchford, 2010). The pilot focused on the performance of disadvantaged children from White and minority ethnic groups. It found that disadvantaged families often had high aspirations for their children and provided significant educational support in a form similar to that described by Lareau (2003) as „concerted cultivation' (Siraj-Blatchford, 2010). In 2009, the Department of Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) funded a further extension of the mixed methodology EPPSE research to follow the students to the end of their compulsory schooling. One aspect of the study has been to analyse patterns of developmental trajectories for children „succeeding against the odds‟ of disadvantage. We have conducted 50 in-depth mixed-methods Child and Family Case Studies (CFCS) to deepen our understanding of child, family and school factors and experiences; how they interact and contribute to the achievement of children in school (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2011). The report is structured in the following way. Section 1 introduces the study and describes our theoretical framework. Section 2 provides technical details regarding our methods, the sampling procedure, instruments, data collection procedures and preparation and analyses of the data. Section 3 describes findings on the trajectory analysis. Section 4 reports on how „resilient‟ and „vulnerable‟ children, their parents and their teachers perceive their paths through the educational system and what they feel has influenced these paths. In Section 5, we relate the findings on „risk‟ and „resilience‟ from the interview data to international literature on these topics. Finally, Section 6 brings together the findings and answers the CFCS research questions. 1.2 Aim of the Child and Family Case Studies The aim of the Child and Family Case Studies (CFCS) is to extend our understanding of how child, family, pre-school and school factors and experiences interact and contribute to the achievement of children in school. Given the presence of particular „risk‟ factors associated both with the child and the family (such as low birth weight, the occurrence of early developmental problems, limited educational experience by parents or low family income), certain children from the EPPSE sample were identified as being „at-risk‟ of achieving particularly low attainment levels in English and Maths at the end of Key Stage 2 (age 11). Unfortunately, for the majority of children these predictions of low achievement proved to be correct, and as such many of the children identified as being „at risk‟ actually turned out to be „vulnerable‟ with respect to their attainment in English and Maths. However, as will become clear later in the report, some children who were identified as being „at risk‟ due to their 1
Page 1 and 2: Research Report DFE-RR128 Performin
Page 3 and 4: Principal Investigators THE EPPSE R
Page 5 and 6: Contents Page No. Executive summary
Page 7 and 8: Executive summary The Effective Pro
Page 9 and 10: child for school; they believed the
Page 11: experience longer-term benefits as
Page 15 and 16: specifically on the section of the
Page 17 and 18: Not only do parents provide a subst
Page 19 and 20: 2.1.1 Sampling procedure The studen
Page 21 and 22: Level 1: Questions common to all re
Page 23 and 24: Table 3 continued: Overview of the
Page 25 and 26: Second, we applied a „bottom up
Page 27 and 28: Figure 2 (above) also shows that th
Page 29 and 30: Table 4 Trajectory descriptions by
Page 31 and 32: Section 4: Views on academic succes
Page 33 and 34: 4.3 ‘Protective’ and ‘Risk’
Page 35 and 36: Reading, writing and computers in p
Page 37 and 38: Abdi was one of the boys who mentio
Page 39 and 40: I like practical classes „cos I l
Page 41 and 42: Many of the less academically succe
Page 43 and 44: There was another bit of image ther
Page 45 and 46: Section 5: Why do some ‘at-risk'
Page 47 and 48: The EPPSE project showed that early
Page 49 and 50: Well first I‟m gonna get, make su
Page 51 and 52: I used to read to him every night w
Page 53 and 54: Mother: I think she respects that I
Page 55 and 56: early years HLEs and for them parti
Page 57 and 58: As with the full EPPSE sample (see
Page 59 and 60: And I think she actually also start
Page 61 and 62: Through these kind of conversations
Page 63 and 64:
school for the child‟s future and
Page 65 and 66:
As children matured parents also gr
Page 67 and 68:
Although such role models existed f
Page 69 and 70:
Nearly all Child and Family Case St
Page 71 and 72:
5.3.3 The importance of pre-schools
Page 73 and 74:
To put it quite frankly, I think th
Page 75 and 76:
When asked about her Maths teacher
Page 77 and 78:
5.5 The community context As childr
Page 79 and 80:
5.5.2 Additional support networks S
Page 81 and 82:
Section 6: Conclusions Children who
Page 83 and 84:
In some of the households we visite
Page 85 and 86:
References Alexander Pan, B., Rowe,
Page 87 and 88:
Hall, J., Sylva, K., Melhuish, E.,
Page 89 and 90:
Pianta, R.C., La Paro, K.M., Payne,
Page 91 and 92:
Sharp, C., George, N., Sargent, C.,
Page 93 and 94:
Willis, P.E. (1977). Learning to la
Page 95 and 96:
PRIMARY SCHOOL 7. So then you went
Page 97 and 98:
FUTURE 33. What job you would like
Page 99 and 100:
PRIMARY SCHOOL 6. Was there anythin
Page 101 and 102:
Appendix 3: Example of personalised
Page 103:
Appendix 5: Individual trajectory p
Page 110 and 111:
Group 2: low SES, predicted attainm
Page 112 and 113:
Appendix 7: Child demographics duri
Page 114 and 115:
Appendix 8: Overview of early years
Page 116 and 117:
Appendix 9: CFCS questions for EPPS
Page 118:
Ref: DFE-RR128 ISBN: 978-1-84775-93
show all

Research report - Institute of Education, University of London

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?