Page 164 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 164
ear ly school leaving: contempor ary european perspectives
for the effects of other predictors (e.g. school composition variables, com-
munity crime, performance in standardised achievement testing; Cornell,
Gregory, Huang, & Fan, 2013; also see Houses of the Oireachtas. 2010). A
lack of emotional support services available to students is also important
for the ESL issue (Downes, 2011). Brock (2011) found that teachers’ expec-
tations concerning students’ ultimate education level and their report on
self-efficacy did not predict students’ ESL. Based on a review of 800 studies,
Hattie (2009) concluded the optimal classroom climate for learning is one
based on trust and in which errors are allowed.
Knesting (2008) conducted a qualitative study interviewing students
at risk for ESL, their teachers who were identified by the same students
as either supportive or unsupportive, and certain other school staff. She
also observed the teachers so identified in their classrooms. Those teach-
ers who tried to understand the students’ behaviour believed that all stu-
dents could succeed at school and communicated this (i.e. high expecta-
tions and respect), and accepted the students ‘as is’, were seen by students
as supportive and helping them to remain at school. Moreover, every stu-
dent in the classroom was important to these teachers and they interacted
similarly with all students. Teachers who, according to the students, sim-
ply do not care (e.g. they did not mind when students left the room, did not
ask about homework, did not seem excited about the material they were
teaching) were listed as a reason for not liking school. On the school level,
the students also mentioned an overemphasis on discipline, control, educa-
tional conformity and creating a caring and supportive environment with
high expectations for everyone’s success (also see Hattie, 2009). The sense
that some students were valued more than others (e.g. students with high-
er grades, successful sportsmen or cheerleaders) was also mentioned (also
see Downes, 2013a, b). To sum up, students at risk for ESL need their voic-
es to be heard and valued and require caring and respectful communica-
tion with teachers, administrators and other school staff. Interestingly, this
climate of respect and caring is often intended or assumed by the adults –
they assume they are providing it; yet students’ reports show that students
do not experience it in this way –the question thus arises of how adults ex-
press care or respect in order for students to experience it as such. On a sim-
ilar note, Downes (2013a) found splits in communication between students
and teachers (e.g. a fear of asking the teacher questions, grading approach-
es that may lack transparency, access to the toilet, perceived snobbery)
and advocated that students’ voices be listened to. Rogers (2016) found the
164
for the effects of other predictors (e.g. school composition variables, com-
munity crime, performance in standardised achievement testing; Cornell,
Gregory, Huang, & Fan, 2013; also see Houses of the Oireachtas. 2010). A
lack of emotional support services available to students is also important
for the ESL issue (Downes, 2011). Brock (2011) found that teachers’ expec-
tations concerning students’ ultimate education level and their report on
self-efficacy did not predict students’ ESL. Based on a review of 800 studies,
Hattie (2009) concluded the optimal classroom climate for learning is one
based on trust and in which errors are allowed.
Knesting (2008) conducted a qualitative study interviewing students
at risk for ESL, their teachers who were identified by the same students
as either supportive or unsupportive, and certain other school staff. She
also observed the teachers so identified in their classrooms. Those teach-
ers who tried to understand the students’ behaviour believed that all stu-
dents could succeed at school and communicated this (i.e. high expecta-
tions and respect), and accepted the students ‘as is’, were seen by students
as supportive and helping them to remain at school. Moreover, every stu-
dent in the classroom was important to these teachers and they interacted
similarly with all students. Teachers who, according to the students, sim-
ply do not care (e.g. they did not mind when students left the room, did not
ask about homework, did not seem excited about the material they were
teaching) were listed as a reason for not liking school. On the school level,
the students also mentioned an overemphasis on discipline, control, educa-
tional conformity and creating a caring and supportive environment with
high expectations for everyone’s success (also see Hattie, 2009). The sense
that some students were valued more than others (e.g. students with high-
er grades, successful sportsmen or cheerleaders) was also mentioned (also
see Downes, 2013a, b). To sum up, students at risk for ESL need their voic-
es to be heard and valued and require caring and respectful communica-
tion with teachers, administrators and other school staff. Interestingly, this
climate of respect and caring is often intended or assumed by the adults –
they assume they are providing it; yet students’ reports show that students
do not experience it in this way –the question thus arises of how adults ex-
press care or respect in order for students to experience it as such. On a sim-
ilar note, Downes (2013a) found splits in communication between students
and teachers (e.g. a fear of asking the teacher questions, grading approach-
es that may lack transparency, access to the toilet, perceived snobbery)
and advocated that students’ voices be listened to. Rogers (2016) found the
164
