Page 144 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 144
ear ly school leaving: contempor ary european perspectives
Social competence and problem behaviour are also considered
non-cognitive factors of ESL (European Commission, 2014). Behavioural
problems lead to poor school performance or may be a consequence of frus-
trations due to keeping up with school work or maintaining an interest in
school work or an unsupportive environment more generally (ibid.). Based
on a review of studies, Rumberger and Lim (2008) concluded that any of the
deviant behaviours (e.g. misbehaving in school, delinquent behaviour out-
side of school, drug and alcohol use, and sexual activity and teen childbear-
ing) increased the risk for ESL. Literature reviews by Audas and Willms
(2001), Barclay and Doll (2001), Lyche (2010) and Hymel and Ford (2014)
support this. Ensminger and Slusarcick (1992) found that aggressive behav-
iour as early as first-grade increased the risk of ESL for boys, Brock (2011)
found a similar effect for hyperactive and inattentive behaviours of 12-year-
olds (also see Janosz et al., 1997; Jimerson et al., 2000; Vitaro, Brendgen, &
Tremblay, 1999). Carter (1998) demonstrated that ESLers have lower social
competence than those who persist in school.
Another set of non-cognitive factors was examined by Bradshaw,
O’Brennan, & McNeely (2008). In their literature review study, they high-
lighted the following protective factors against ESL: a positive sense of self,
self-control (e.g. impulse control, and delay of gratification locus of con-
trol), decision-making skills (e.g. responsible decisions about studying and
completing assignments, social and emotional problem solving, relation-
ship skills), empathy and perspective taking, and connectedness to par-
ents, teachers.
The findings of a comprehensive study by Wang, Haertel, & Walberg
(1993) which dealt more widely with factors supporting students’ school
learning (not specifically ESL factors) are in line with the examined stud-
ies. They identified the importance of psychological factors, including mo-
tivational, affective, social and behavioural (in addition to cognitive and
metacognitive) student characteristics.
Interplay of cognitive and non-cognitive factors
Based on the scientific evidence presented above, it seems that cognitive
factors have a strong and direct effect on the risk of ESL, and that this effect
remains after adding non-cognitive factors. However, non-cognitive skills
also explain part of the individual differences in ESL risk (Traag, 2012).
Traag (2012) found that non-cognitive factors play an important role in un-
derstanding why some students leave school even though their cognitive
144
Social competence and problem behaviour are also considered
non-cognitive factors of ESL (European Commission, 2014). Behavioural
problems lead to poor school performance or may be a consequence of frus-
trations due to keeping up with school work or maintaining an interest in
school work or an unsupportive environment more generally (ibid.). Based
on a review of studies, Rumberger and Lim (2008) concluded that any of the
deviant behaviours (e.g. misbehaving in school, delinquent behaviour out-
side of school, drug and alcohol use, and sexual activity and teen childbear-
ing) increased the risk for ESL. Literature reviews by Audas and Willms
(2001), Barclay and Doll (2001), Lyche (2010) and Hymel and Ford (2014)
support this. Ensminger and Slusarcick (1992) found that aggressive behav-
iour as early as first-grade increased the risk of ESL for boys, Brock (2011)
found a similar effect for hyperactive and inattentive behaviours of 12-year-
olds (also see Janosz et al., 1997; Jimerson et al., 2000; Vitaro, Brendgen, &
Tremblay, 1999). Carter (1998) demonstrated that ESLers have lower social
competence than those who persist in school.
Another set of non-cognitive factors was examined by Bradshaw,
O’Brennan, & McNeely (2008). In their literature review study, they high-
lighted the following protective factors against ESL: a positive sense of self,
self-control (e.g. impulse control, and delay of gratification locus of con-
trol), decision-making skills (e.g. responsible decisions about studying and
completing assignments, social and emotional problem solving, relation-
ship skills), empathy and perspective taking, and connectedness to par-
ents, teachers.
The findings of a comprehensive study by Wang, Haertel, & Walberg
(1993) which dealt more widely with factors supporting students’ school
learning (not specifically ESL factors) are in line with the examined stud-
ies. They identified the importance of psychological factors, including mo-
tivational, affective, social and behavioural (in addition to cognitive and
metacognitive) student characteristics.
Interplay of cognitive and non-cognitive factors
Based on the scientific evidence presented above, it seems that cognitive
factors have a strong and direct effect on the risk of ESL, and that this effect
remains after adding non-cognitive factors. However, non-cognitive skills
also explain part of the individual differences in ESL risk (Traag, 2012).
Traag (2012) found that non-cognitive factors play an important role in un-
derstanding why some students leave school even though their cognitive
144
