Wednesday, May 6, 2020

Children And Schooling

Question: Describe about the relationship between children and schooling? Answer: Introduction The report will be discussing the relationship between children and schooling. The children have different mindset for the school and the families sent the children to school for better growth and education that can help in their future development. The families or parent sent children to school for different reason such they did not get time to take care of their child or for their carrier purpose. Therefore, the current study will be dealing with the study of two research paper that relates with the children and their schooling. Moreover, the outcome of both research paper will be discussed along with methodology adopted. Similarities of the two research paper Both the research paper focused on the schooling of children. It can be found out that from the research paper that the development of children is connected with the factors of family more than factors of childcare. Moreover, both research work deals with transition of child to school so that they can gain knowledge and develop their primary education. On the other hand, it can also be marked that families want to send their children to school due to their loud behavior (Barban and White, 2011). Apart from that, one of the major similarities between the two is that both the study has carried in the urban and rural areas of New South Wales (NSW). Further, there is a great of families in sending children to school. On the other hand, the researches focused on the matters relating to starting school for child and interactions. Therefore, formal education is the main center for both the research so that formal approach of the children can be developed towards the learning (Bolt et al., 2 011). Apart from that, it can be studied that both researches focused on the nature and experience of children towards the schools at starting phase. Dissimilarities of the two research paper In the both researcher paper, the reason of families behind sending children to school is different. In first research paper, the focus is on the element of the child care experience of children whereas in second research paper, the focus is on the complex support needs. On the other hand, the first paper follows the child care history in relation to children in the study whereas second paper deals with the families experience in context to select right school for the transition to school of children (Bukowska and Siwińska-Gorzelak, 2010). Therefore, in the first case, the families want to send the child to school because of their behavior and they did not have time to provide home care. On the other side, in second case, families sent their child to school with complex support need so that they can gain high opportunity and well development (, 2015). Apart from that, in the first case, the families are well and financially equipped but in the second ca se the families are having problem such as unemployment, ill health, violence experience. Moreover, the methodology used in the each of the research paper is different. On the other hand, in second research paper, the focus is also on how the positive transitions to can be facilitated for the children with complex support needs (Gottfredson and Hussong, 2011). In first paper, families is engaged in arranging child care setting whereas in second paper, families in engaged in having positive relationships with schools. Outcome of the two researches First Research It can be noticed there is significant changes in the child care with the age. The average child n NSW is more likely to seek care as a part-time against the full-tie basis. It can also be seen that children prefer to be in single care setting than being in the multiple arrangements. On the other hand, it can be found that parents are more knowledgeable and observant to know the situation of their child in the child care settings and also the reactions of children towards it (GreatSchools, 2015). Therefore, it was seen that children has both positive and negative reaction to care setting. On the other side, it was also seen that children experienced six changes in the child care over 12 month. Apart from that it can be noticed that family day care homes and quality of centers was measured by ITERS, ECERS and FDCERS. Moreover, it was found from the study that preschools and centre-based care holds higher ranking in terms of quality in comparison to long day care centers and family day care homes (Grimes, 2011). Apart from that, a rating scale was used for measuring the child and teacher relationship such as degree of closeness and degree of conflict and as a result there was less variation. Therefore, it can be analyzed that child care is effective for the children before they can be sent to school for further studied or development. The child care is useful as early learning process so that the child can be equip with the environment (Hollins, 2011). Second Research In the second research, it was found that children were excited to move to the schools. The families of these children provided support and care for transition of their children to school. On the other hand, it can be found from the research families were able to identify whether their child is ready for the school or not. The transition program was effective in building relationship between educators, families, children and other professionals for an effective transition of children to school (Howe and Richards, 2011). Moreover, in order to decide the right school for their children, the families consider the safety and location of the school premises. Moreover, the decision of the families is influenced by the community and friends to select the school. On the other side, the teachers or professors of school were assessed by parents in order to know whether they are capable of handling and right education to the children or not (Hughes, 2011). Therefore, the parents visited the sch ool and ask question from teachers so that they can take decision. Thus, the transition program provided great opportunity to the families to build relationship with school and find schools so that special needs of the children can be met (Malseed, Nelson and Ware, 2014). It was also seen that, families had both negative and positive experiences in deciding the school. On the other hand, some families had financial pressure as they had to bear the cost of education materials and school uniforms. Construction of Children In order to provide early learning, the children are sent to preschool or Kindergarten. It helps the child in getting accustomed to the environment and coping up with the unknown faces and personalities. On the other hand, the children are able to interact with the teachers and groups of children for the first time. In the preschool, the child learns to follow instructions, share ideas that help as a foundation for learning (Masdonati, 2010). Therefore, preschool helps in preparing the kids for the kindergarten. Moreover, the social and emotional development can be promoted among the children through preschool. Apart from that, children are able to stay away from their parents and they can form trust relationship with other people outside the family. Therefore, the preschool prepares the child for elementary school and future development (Mclean, 2011). On the other hand, the family or parents provide great support from beginning to the child in their development stage. The parents help the child to identify between good and bad and provide early learning process (Meadows, 2009). Therefore, it helps child to behave as expected. Therefore, the parents and preschools help in preparing the child for better future growth and development and understand the environment around. Apart from that, playing game is effective for the growth of children. It helps the child in having communication and make bonding with other kids (Moore (eds)., 2011). Methodology First Research In order to conduct the study, families were accounted from the family day care schemes and long day care centers from rural and urban NSW. Permission was taken from Department of Community Services in NSW and directors, coordinators and carers of family and long day care service. Moreover, 3 NSW Department of Community Services areas were selected that are Nepean, South East Sydney and Inner West . The families with low income was 2, medium income 2 and high income 1. On the other hand, the children aging less than four years and that are within the radius of 20km of Sydney were taken for the study. From the rural area, the services of children related to Department of Community Services Central West and Far West regions of NSW were called for the research. Second Research In the second research, families too were selected that are linked with complex support needs. Participation was taken from the diverse geographical areas in New South Wales. Around 44 families were accounted for the study over the periods from one to twenty four months. Moreover, the qualitative methodology was taken in order to study the experience of the families. The conversational interviews were conducted relating to the concerns, issues and decisions faced by the families (Morodenko, 2011). On the other hand, the interview was done with the early family/intervention support staff. Teachers were invited through difficulties and strengths questionnaires. Therefore, an interview with the agency staff and teachers was conducted by the researcher. The data was collected from the series of discussions by employing emergent and existing themes. Apart from that, number of case studies was formed in order to account the families experience. The children were also taken from the partner organizations. Around 18 school teachers and six staff from partner organization took part. Thus, in order to sum up, there were 44 family member, 18 kindergarten teachers, six staff and 10 children starting school. Strengths and Weaknesses of two research projects First Research The first paper strengths were that it helps in understanding the importance of child care centers. The child care is effective in providing early knowledge and learning to the children and prepares them for the future. The child care prepares the kids for the kindergarten so that they can successfully transit from the child care to the school (Rice, Frederickson and Seymour, 2011). Apart from that, the weakness of the study was that, the researcher was bounded by the time constraint which affected the researcher in acquiring the useful information from the participants. On the other hand, the some participants did not provide the answer as expected by the researcher (Shannon, 2011). Second Research The research was effectively carried by the researcher to collect the right information from the participants from the families regarding school selection. The focus of transition to school of children was successfully achieved and complex support needs was understood (Skrobanek, Reissig and Mller, 2011). The purpose of the study was greatly achieved and it helped in knowing how the families react or conduct in selecting the schools for their children. The weakness of the study is that the researcher considered very less number of families to gather the study. If the researcher would have taken more number of families and teachers then the researcher can be able to present the study in more effective manner (Sullivan, 2011). Moreover, the researcher did a good job in conducting the research and fulfilling the purpose of the research. Conclusion It can be concluded from the study that both the research was effective in fulfilling their individual objective. The first research work highlighted on the day child care for making the children accustomed to the environment. The families also provided support to their children to adopt the child care center and promoted them and provide freedom o that they can develop their skill in their own way. In the second research work, the focus was on the transition of kids to the school with complex support needs. The families were involved in finding right school for their kids so that their child can have better future growth. On the other hand, the different sample size was selected for each research work. Further, the weakness and strengths of both the research has been presented. References Barban, N. and White, M. (2011). Immigrants Childrens Transition to Secondary School in Italy. International Migration Review, 45(3), pp.702-726. Bolt, S., Decker, D., Lloyd, M. and Morlock, L. (2011). Students' Perceptions of Accommodations in High School and College. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 34(3), pp.165-175. Bukowska, G. and Siwiska-Gorzelak, J. (2010). School competition and the quality of education: introducing market incentives into public services. Economics of Transition, 19(1), pp.151-177. Bukowska, G. and Siwiska-Gorzelak, J. (2010). School competition and the quality of education: introducing market incentives into public services. Economics of Transition, 19(1), pp.151-177., (2015). Supporting Your Child's Transition to School. [online] Available at: [Accessed 31 Jan. 2015]. Gottfredson, N. and Hussong, A. (2011). Parental involvement protects against self-medication behaviors during the high school transition. Addictive Behaviors, 36(12), pp.1246-1252. GreatSchools, (2015). 10 good reasons your child should attend preschool. [online] Available at: [Accessed 31 Jan. 2015]. Grimes, N. (2011). Planet Middle School. New York: Bloomsbury Childrens. Hollins, E. (2011). Learning to teach in urban schools. New York, NY: Routledge. Howe, A. and Richards, V. (2011). Bridging the transition from primary to secondary school. New York: Routledge. Hughes, C. (2011). Social understanding and social lives. Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press. Malseed, C., Nelson, A. and Ware, R. (2014). Evaluation of a School-Based Health Education Program for Urban Indigenous Young People in Australia. Health, 06(07), pp.587-597. Masdonati, J. (2010). the transition from school to vocational education and training: a theoretical model and transition support program. Journal of Employment Counseling, 47(1), pp.20-29. Mclean, C. (2011). Change and transition: Navigating the journey. Br J School Nurs, 6(3), pp.141-145. Meadows, D. (2009). Where Have All Our Students Gone? School to Postschool Transition in Australia. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 33(2), pp.87-108. Moore (eds)., K. (2011). Young lives in transition: From school to adulthood?. Eur J Dev Res, 23(5), pp.669-678. Morodenko, (2011). Comparative analysis of the characteristics of modern youths social adaptation in times of crisis transition school - higher school employment. Uchenye zapiski universiteta Lesgafta, (73). Rice, F., Frederickson, N. and Seymour, J. (2011). Assessing pupil concerns about transition to secondary school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(2), pp.244-263. Shannon, J. (2011). Autism and pervasive developmental disorders sourcebook. Detroit, MI: Omnigraphics. Skrobanek, J., Reissig, B. and Mller, M. (2011). Successful placement or displacement in the transition from school to vocational training: the case of lower secondary school pupils. Journal of Youth Studies, 14(7), pp.811-836. Sullivan, K. (2011). Lost in transition. Practical Pre-School, 1(127), pp.8-10. Thomas, L. and Tight, M. (2011). Institutional transformation to engage a diverse student body. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Walker, J. (2011). Learning to labour in post-Soviet Russia. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Young, R. (2011). Transition to adulthood. New York: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. Zichichi, A. (2013). Searching for the unexpected at LHC and the status of our knowledge. Singapore: World Scientific.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.