Dear Dr.J-F

I want to give give you some literature about this topic.

1: Stephens NM, Hamedani MG, Destin M. Closing the social-class achievement gap:

a difference-education intervention improves first-generation students' academic

performance and all students' college transition. Psychol Sci. 2014

Apr;25(4):943-53. doi: 10.1177/0956797613518349. Epub 2014 Feb 19. PubMed PMID:

24553359.

2: Fan W, Wolters CA. School motivation and high school dropout: the mediating

role of educational expectation. Br J Educ Psychol. 2014 Mar;84(Pt 1):22-39. doi:

10.1111/bjep.12002. Epub 2012 Oct 24. PubMed PMID: 24547752.

3: Putwain D, Sander P, Larkin D. Academic self-efficacy in study-related skills

and behaviours: relations with learning-related emotions and academic success. Br

J Educ Psychol. 2013 Dec;83(Pt 4):633-50. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02084.x.

Epub 2012 Sep 27. PubMed PMID: 24175686.

4: Dompnier B, Darnon C, Butera F. When performance-approach goals predict

academic achievement and when they do not: a social value approach. Br J Soc

Psychol. 2013 Sep;52(3):587-96. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12025. Epub 2013 Jan 21. PubMed

PMID: 23336439.

5: Coe DP, Peterson T, Blair C, Schutten MC, Peddie H. Physical fitness, academic

achievement, and socioeconomic status in school-aged youth. J Sch Health. 2013

Jul;83(7):500-7. doi: 10.1111/josh.12058. PubMed PMID: 23782093.

6: Villavicencio FT, Bernardo AB. Positive academic emotions moderate the

relationship between self-regulation and academic achievement. Br J Educ Psychol.

2013 Jun;83(Pt 2):329-40. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02064.x. Epub 2012 Feb

24. PubMed PMID: 23692538.

7: Bjørnebekk G, Diseth A, Ulriksen R. Achievement motives, self-efficacy,

achievement goals, and academic achievement at multiple stages of education: a

longitudinal analysis. Psychol Rep. 2013 Jun;112(3):771-87. PubMed PMID:

24245072.

8: Smeding A, Darnon C, Souchal C, Toczek-Capelle MC, Butera F. Reducing the

socio-economic status achievement gap at University by promoting mastery-oriented

assessment. PLoS One. 2013 Aug 8;8(8):e71678. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071678.

eCollection 2013. PubMed PMID: 23951219; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3738531.

9: Park S, Holloway SD, Arendtsz A, Bempechat J, Li J. What makes students

engaged in learning? A time-use study of within- and between-individual

predictors of emotional engagement in low-performing high schools. J Youth

Adolesc. 2012 Mar;41(3):390-401. doi: 10.1007/s10964-011-9738-3. Epub 2011 Dec

23. PubMed PMID: 22193357.

10: Albertini JA, Kelly RR, Matchett MK. Personal factors that influence deaf

college students' academic success. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2012

Winter;17(1):85-101. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enr016. Epub 2011 May 9. PubMed PMID:

21558157.

In general we can see statistically significant predictors: the Self-Regulation Component (e.g., time management) and Will Component (e.g., self-discipline). For this group of underprepared students, results show that personal factors can play a significant role in academic success. This two predictors are closely connected to academic self-efficacy.

And self efficacy is related to expectations and self-perception beyond IQ or culture. Therefore fostering this persnal factors (expectation, hope, willingness and others) is animportant key.

Jurecska DE, Chang KB, Peterson MA, Lee-Zorn CE, Merrick J, Sequeira E. The

poverty puzzle: the surprising difference between wealthy and poor students for

self-efficacy and academic achievement. Int J Adolesc Med Health.

2012;24(4):355-62. doi: 10.1515/ijamh.2012.052. PubMed PMID: 23183738.

Greetings

Egon

Dear Professor EgonBachelor,

This is wonderful, I will begin to review the literature and work through them - this is excellent - thank you so much for taking time to put these together.

Are they works that particularly deal with primary and secondary school studetnts?

Regards

Dr J-F

Hello Dr. J-F

May these journals can help you about this topic

1. Chithambo, T. P., Huey Jr, S. J., & Cespedes-Knadle, Y. (2014). Perceived discrimination and Latino youth adjustment: Examining the role of relinquished control and sociocultural influences. Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 2(1), 54.

2. McNeal Jr, R. B. (2014). Parent involvement and student performance: the influence of school context. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 1-15.

3. Vaz, S., Parsons, R., Falkmer, T., Passmore, A. E., & Falkmer, M. (2014). The Impact of Personal Background and School Contextual Factors on Academic Competence and Mental Health Functioning across the Primary-Secondary School Transition. PloS one, 9(3), e89874.

4. Cueto, S., Guerrero, G., Leon, J., Zapata, M., & Freire, S. (2014). The relationship between socioeconomic status at age one, opportunities to learn and achievement in mathematics in fourth grade in Peru. Oxford Review of Education, 40(1), 50-72.

Regards,

Tiara

Dear Tiara,

Thank you for your reference - I looked up them now - but I am trying to explore a logarithm that can show variance and account for how and what variables are directly related to showing how teachers benefit and how we conceptualize it

Dr J F. In Australia, Low SES students are mainly characterised by poor protoacademic skills. That is, they have not received the family input that develops such things as preparation for reading, writing and numeracy in particular nd consequently are at a disadvantage from the start of school. From 2000 to 2005, I conducted an action research project at a large urban high school drawing a large proportion of low SES students. I had been teaching at that school for 10 years previously and devoped the thesis that these students had disengaged from school at an early age mainly because, having started school at a disadvantage, they were consequently labelled as 'poor achievers' and had accepted the label and given up. My research was to adapt curriculum, assessment, reporting and pedagogy so as to maximise focus on improvement rather than absolute achievement. Over the 5 years, there was reasonable evidence that reframing schooling to focus on each student's relative success increased engagement. Interestingly it did so for the higher achievers as well as the lower.

So the intervention was to reframe what happened in the classroom to explicitly rebuild students' self efficacy. and it worked! A detailed description of the project is in my publications.

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your response. We also followed Waldrip et al work with regard some of what you have suggested.

I guess my question in particular is - when you say that you have "adapt"/ed curriculum, assessment, reporting and pedagogy - what variance do these account for - and what changes in what factor led to what outcomes -

I agree with you that "reframing" research does provide positive improvement/s at many levels - but again to what extent this can be generalized and to what extent is this sustainable.

I have also worked in LOW SES schools in outer parts of QLD but the same argument holds - that teacher based interventions do show episodic improvements - but to what extent these are sustainable for the cohort or the students  again is not clear

Thanks again for taking time to address this -

Regards

J-F

Unfortunately Dr J-F, you are correct. Sustainability is the issue.

To respond to your first question - At the time of the action research, I thought that Outcomes based education was going to become the basis for the next many years and my action research was intended to test ways to get more from the new approach. I was not looking for data to test the approach so my 'experiment' was very poorly designed. What I can say is that what I did made a difference, particularly for those who had already decided that they were 'failures' at school. It appeared, and I stress 'appeared', that changing to measuring and reporting improvement rather than performance was the factor that allowed both teachers and students to think of success differently and, in a nutshell, realise that success could be defined as 'improvement through effort', which consequently changed their self efficacy beliefs.

Since that time however, politics has undone what could have been a valuable paradigm shift in schooling and so some of what I did has been lost. For the last 10 years, I have been experimenting with how the original ideas could be integrated with the extant paradigm, with limited success. My conclusion is that sustainability is of two types.

1. That which is built into the system. In other words a paradigm shift forced on teachers by the system itself. I still hope for that, and the latest work by Geoff Masters of ACER COULD lead to this in the future.

2. That which is built into the learners DESPITE the system. This is unfortunately ad-hoc and limited but better than nothing.

My experience of the transition from Outcomes Based education back to the 'traditional' showed that changes can't be maintained in the face of systemic pressures. Most teachers will fit their beliefs to the systemic paradigm. I have however seen some evidence of the second type of sustainability. Through my work (and others') I have seen students change their beliefs, and become more positive about success. In the face of the extant system, it is as I pointed out, inconsistent. Some change and some don't.

In essence for sustainable change, there must be systemic change. It doesn't need to be major but it must be profound. I think that one change suggested by ACER, to measure improvement rather than performance COULD provide the basis for the profound shift necessary for sustainable improvement.