Subjective wellbeing in primary school Does academic achievement
Subjective well-being in primary school: Does academic achievement matter? IAEA 2017 Irina Uglanova, Tatjana Kanonire Institute of Education, HSE Russia
Introduction Most of modern educational standards pay attention both to cognitive and non-cognitive (personal, social and emotional) development. The importance of children’s subjective well-being in school is emphasized. The aim of this study is to find out are level of academic achievement and subjective well-being are related in primary school.
Subjective well-being (SWB) SWB is subjective belief of individual that his/her life is good and pleasant. Subjective well-being General Life Satisfaction Positive Affect Negative Affect (Bradburn, 1969; Andrews, Withey, 1976; Diener, 1994) The research of subjective well-being in adults and adolescents indicates relations between SWB and various life outcomes (e. g. Diener, & Ryan, 2009; Luhmann, Lucas, Eid, & Diener, 2013; Kansky, Allen, & Diener, 2016)
Subjective well-being in school The research of SWB in school would allow to analyze SWB of children in more details and produce the basis for professional support implementation for children with low level of SWB in school satisfaction with different school life’s domains (academic achievement, school management, relationships with teachers and peers, teaching and academic learning); positive and negative affects towards the school (Tian, Wang, & Huebner, 2015); relationships with peers (cooperation and hostility as important indicators of school adjustment Huebner, 2016) (Ladd, Kochenderfer, Coleman, 1996; Tian, &
Subjective well-being in school and academic achievement Some studies showed that SWB in school differs according level of academic achievement (self-evaluation) and level of school involvement (Huebner & Gilman, 2006). Another studies showed a weak positive correlation between SWB and school marks and no correlation with scores of standardized tests (Lv, Zhou, Guo, et al. , 2016; Lyons & Huebner, 2016). There are still very little studies of SWB in school among primary school children.
Relationships with classmates Peer relationships predict students’ subjective well-being and reflect adjustment toward school (Ladd, Kochenderfer & Coleman, 1996; Tian, & Huebner, 2016) Children with low social position (who has a few friends and who is unaccepted by peers) are less successful in academic achievement. Relationships with peers are related with academic achievement through prosocial behavior (Wentzel & Asher, 1995; Wentzel & Caldwell, 1997). The current research focuses on collaboration and hostility in peer relationship.
Research question: Is there a difference in level of subjective well-being and relationships with classmates between students with different achievement levels?
Method Instruments Student Achievement Monitoring (SAM) for measuring achievement in mathematics. This instrument allows detecting different levels of academic mastery in Mathematics based on Vygotsky’s theory. (Nezhnov, Kardanova, Vasilyeva, Ludlow, 2015)
Structure of SAM 3. Functional level Orientation to functional field with it’s limits 2. Reflexive level Action with comprehension - orientation to substantial relationship of the problem situation 1. Formal level Action per sample – orientation to external characteristics of the problem situation Curriculum learnt The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
Estimation of examinees Mathematical competence scale Proficiency level 3 Student A 570 Items of the 3 rd level Proficiency level 2 Student B 500 Items of the 2 nd level Proficiency level 1 Student C 430 Items of the 1 st level Below level 1 Student D We expect student A to successfully complete at least 50% of level 3 items We expect student B to successfully complete at least 50% of level 2 items We expect student C to successfully complete at least 50% of level 1 items We expect student D to be unable to successfully complete even 50% of level 1 items
Instruments for subjective well-being Russian version of Brief Adolescents' Subjective Well-Being in School Scale (Tian, Wang, Huebner, 2015) The Satisfaction Scale The Affect Scale 8 items, 4 -point Likert scale 3 items, 5 -point Likert scale (strongly disagree – strongly agree) (never – always) Cronbach’s Alpha 0. 8 Cronbach’s Alpha 0. 67 Russian version of Collaboration and Hostility scales (from Classmates’ Friendship Relationships Questionnaire, Turilova-Miščenko & Raščevska, 2008) 7 items per scale, 5 -point Likert scale (never – always) Cronbach’s Alpha is 0. 71 and 0. 77 respectively.
Study 1 Participants 144 Russian students of the 4 th grade 49% boys 51% girls Mean age 10. 52 (SD = 0. 5) All students tested frontally at class settings
Results Table 1. A correlation analysis between academic achievement and subjective well-being components ** ** *p < 0. 05; ** p < 0. 01
Results Table 2. Descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA for children with different achievement levels (with Turkey post hoc test) SAM level The level lower The 1 st level than the 1 st (n = 53) (n = 16) The 2 nd level (n = 58) The 3 rd level (n = 16) F (3, 136) M (SD) 28. 27 (5. 11)B, C 31. 15 (3. 55)A 31. 30 (3. 57)A 30. 44 (3. 90) 2. 77* 11. 31 (1. 49) 11. 30 (2. 51) 10. 86 (1. 87) 10. 75 (2. 29) . 57 1. 75 (. 93)B, D 2. 36 (. 79)А 2. 28 (. 72) 2. 56 (. 81)A 3. 34* Collaboration 15. 69 (2. 82)B, C, D 18. 26 (2. 54)A 17. 72 (2. 04)A 18. 56 (2. 42)A 5. 50** Hostility 11. 72 (4. 04)A 12. 52 (3. 58)A 11. 50 (4. 18)A 4. 21** School Satisfaction Affective component The number of friends 15. 50 (4. 29)B, C, D *p < 0. 05; ** p < 0. 01 A – the level lower than the 1 st; B – the 1 st level; C – the 2 nd level; D – the 3 rd level
Results F(3, 136) = 2. 77* F(3, 136) = 1. 38, p = 0. 57 F(3, 136) = 5. 50** F(3, 136) = 4. 21** *p < 0. 05; ** p < 0. 01
Conclusion Students who did not achieve the formal level are less satisfied with school less frequently collaborate with classmates more frequently experience hostility than students at the formal level and higher achievement levels. There is no difference in the level of affect toward school between students with different levels of academic achievement. There is no correlation between academic achievement scores and SWB and relationships with peers.
The major limitation: the small sample (and sub-samples) size. The replication of the study was conducted…
Study 2 Participants 237 Russian students of the 4 th grade 50. 6% boys 45. 1% girls 4. 2% students who did not report their gender Mean age 10. 33 (SD = 0. 47) All students tested frontally at class settings
Results Table 3. A correlation analysis between academic achievement and subjective well-being components The number of friends Collaboration ** ** ** * * * Affective component School Satisfaction ** Hostility Academic Achievement The number of friends ** Collaboration ** School Satisfaction Affective component *p < 0. 05; ** p < 0. 01
Results Table 4. Descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA for children with different achievement levels (with Turkey post hoc test) SAM level The 1 st level (n = 67) The 2 nd level (n = 156) The 3 rd level (n = 14) F (2, 234) M (SD) 27. 03 (3. 2) 27. 5 (3. 5) 28. 14 (3. 1) 0, 79 Affective component 8. 6 (2. 2) 8. 97 (1. 96) 9. 43 (1. 4) 1. 38 The number of friends 2. 62 (0. 7) 2. 73 (0. 6) 2. 69 (0. 6) 0. 66 Collaboration 18. 09 (3. 95) 18. 98 (3. 2) 19. 29 (3. 98) 1. 7 Hostility 11. 19 (3. 2) 10. 29 (2. 64) 10. 14 (2. 84) 2. 54 School Satisfaction *p < 0. 05; ** p < 0. 01 B – the 1 st level; C – the 2 nd level; D – the 3 rd level
Results Satisfaction F(2, 234) = 0. 79, p = 0. 4 Collaboration F(2, 234) = 1. 7, p = 0. 2 Affect F(2, 234) = 1. 38, p = 0. 2 Hostility F(2, 234) = 2. 5, p = 0. 08
Conclusion The significant weak positive correlations between academic achievement scores and SWB and collaboration were found. There is no statistically significant difference in SWB and peer relationships between students at the formal, reflexive and functional levels. But we do not have data about children who did not achieve the formal level.
General discussion The aim of study was to examine the relationships between academic achievement and such a complex constructs as subjective well-being and peer relationships in primary school. Only the students with very low academic achievements showed low subjective well-being and difficulties in communication with classmates. It is enough for a student to be even at the formal level to ensure that he or she has successfully adapted in school.
Limitations, advantages and future directions of research This study allowed to compare SWB and peer relationships of students with different levels of academic achievement. The advantage is that the division by levels based on Vygotsky’s theory and the objective results obtained from the valid and reliable test. The major shortcoming was a small sample size and especially a small number of students who did not achieve the formal level. In the future research, it is important to consider the impact of the teacher-student relationships, the school type and additional demographic information.
Thanks for your attention! iluglanova@gmail. com tatjana. kanonire@gmail. com
Questions & Answers
- Slides: 26