Page 208 - Šolsko polje, XXVIII, 2017, no. 5-6: Znanje, motivacija in pogoji učenja v luči mednarodnih primerjav TIMSS in PISA, ur. Barbara Japelj Pavešić in Klaudija Šterman Ivančič
P. 208
šolsko polje, letnik xxviii, številka 5–6
The second set of interpretations look for associations based on
characteristics of the environment (Hawkins, Smith and Catalano 2004;
Blum and Libbey, 2004). They list various characteristics of the environ-
ment, such as the norms of peers and adults, which encourage high expec-
tations and support for learning success; good interpersonal relationships
among students or between students and teachers, which encourage great-
er classroom and school loyalty; the promotion of collaborative learning;
ensuring a safe and well organised learning environment that promotes
positive behaviour. In our data, a positive school climate and a lower ex-
posure to bullying have been linked to higher achievement. As far as con-
nectedness is concerned, the findings are contradictory with having posi-
tive relationships with teachers leading to higher achievement in literacy
domains and having a positive relationship with significant adults in the
neighbourhood leading to lower achievement in literacy domains. The
best combinations are changes both at the level of individuals and at the
school level, which lead to immediate and long-term positive consequenc-
es (Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak and Hawkins, 2002).
The majority of our findings are in line with our expectations and
research literature, but not all, which raises additional research questions.
The study is not without limitations stemming from the sample selec-
tion (not being fully representative for a whole population of Slovenian
15-year-olds) as well as from the robust measure selection (only a few items
per construct). The study is a good starting point for additional more in-
depth analysis, for instance on the interplay between empathy, pro-so-
cial behaviour and achievement in literacy domains since our results show
contradictions in these areas. The complexity and intertwines of the two
concepts in question are well reflected in our study. We would like to con-
clude our debate with a reminder of the principle of equity of education
policies, which encompasses the promotion of the individuals’ overall de-
velopment and the development of education policies, and practices that
make it possible for each individual to achieve their optimum levels of
development (both cognitive and non-cognitive). Here we would like to
stress also our finding of relative independence of the wellbeing predictors
of achievement in literacy domains from the socio-economic and cultural
status. And, as we have seen from our results, there is a strong indication
on the intertwined nature of wellbeing and literacy achievement therefore
both need to be in focus when planning the educational policies.
References
Anderman, E. M. (2002). School effects on psychological outcomes during
adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 795–809.
206
The second set of interpretations look for associations based on
characteristics of the environment (Hawkins, Smith and Catalano 2004;
Blum and Libbey, 2004). They list various characteristics of the environ-
ment, such as the norms of peers and adults, which encourage high expec-
tations and support for learning success; good interpersonal relationships
among students or between students and teachers, which encourage great-
er classroom and school loyalty; the promotion of collaborative learning;
ensuring a safe and well organised learning environment that promotes
positive behaviour. In our data, a positive school climate and a lower ex-
posure to bullying have been linked to higher achievement. As far as con-
nectedness is concerned, the findings are contradictory with having posi-
tive relationships with teachers leading to higher achievement in literacy
domains and having a positive relationship with significant adults in the
neighbourhood leading to lower achievement in literacy domains. The
best combinations are changes both at the level of individuals and at the
school level, which lead to immediate and long-term positive consequenc-
es (Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak and Hawkins, 2002).
The majority of our findings are in line with our expectations and
research literature, but not all, which raises additional research questions.
The study is not without limitations stemming from the sample selec-
tion (not being fully representative for a whole population of Slovenian
15-year-olds) as well as from the robust measure selection (only a few items
per construct). The study is a good starting point for additional more in-
depth analysis, for instance on the interplay between empathy, pro-so-
cial behaviour and achievement in literacy domains since our results show
contradictions in these areas. The complexity and intertwines of the two
concepts in question are well reflected in our study. We would like to con-
clude our debate with a reminder of the principle of equity of education
policies, which encompasses the promotion of the individuals’ overall de-
velopment and the development of education policies, and practices that
make it possible for each individual to achieve their optimum levels of
development (both cognitive and non-cognitive). Here we would like to
stress also our finding of relative independence of the wellbeing predictors
of achievement in literacy domains from the socio-economic and cultural
status. And, as we have seen from our results, there is a strong indication
on the intertwined nature of wellbeing and literacy achievement therefore
both need to be in focus when planning the educational policies.
References
Anderman, E. M. (2002). School effects on psychological outcomes during
adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 795–809.
206
