Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8


Assignment Title An Assignment Submitted by Name of Student Name of Establishment Class XXXX, Section XXXX, Fall 2012

THE INFLUENCE OF FAMILIES ON CHILDRENS SCHOOL The Influence of Families on Children's School Success The ecology of human development is a complex web of personal relationships, social settings, and institutions that influence developmental trajectories independently and interactively. In the early life course, families and schools represent arguably the two primary ecological contexts. Thus families and schools are two primary sources of social capital in the early life course. Indeed, the school as an educational institution that cultivates human capitalthe skills,

knowledge, and strategies that boost individual productivity (Hoover-Dempsey at al., 1995). Yet, the school does more than deliver curricula to students. It also organizes the social environment in which students spend the greater part of their week. As a primary site of social interaction, therefore, the school is also a source of social capital for young people. Hence, teaching is a very difficult job of great responsibility and most specific character. The teacher forms attitudes to his subject and attitudes to learning. While communicating with children a teacher studies them closely to discover their strengths and weaknesses, their needs and abilities, their interests. Thus a good teacher always regards capacities his pupils have. He tries to temper his teaching methods to the childrens abilities and aptitudes. He builds his work upon what he learns about children. An environment should be created to stimulate children to develop their abilities mad satisfy their interests. It is a purpose of education to liquidate ignorance. But it is also the function of education to link your school and family with your community. But, in fact, families are a primary source of social capital for young people, especially in relation to their education. As children move through the educational system, parents can provide instrumental assistance, impart information about education and future opportunities, establish


and reinforce norms of expected behavior and achievement, and offer support for the navigation of new arenas and the experience of both success and failure, all of which foster better academic functioning. The transmission of these valuable resources, however, is largely predicated on the emotional tone of parent-adolescent relationships, with close ties facilitating this transmission and distant ties blocking it (Leitch et al., 1998). This problem focuses on this affective component of the parent-adolescent relationship. Thus, it considers a family conduit of social capital rather than direct indicators of family-based social capital. Above all, the impact of parental induction is related to the child's level of cognitive development, and that "social learning theory is best suited to account for early forerunners of morality which consist of expression and inhibition of specific acts defined by socialization agents as good or bad and rewarded or punished accordingly" (Sigel, 1992). Children's understanding of reasons underlying rules as objective and rational (as opposed to awareness of the rule) is fostered by parental use of induction, and appears to be more closely tied to the child's cognitive processes. On the basis of data concerning helping and sharing behavior of kindergarten children, it is concluded that both induction and external control by parents may serve to teach children to behave in accordance with inductive statements. It is likely that both aspects of parental behavior are necessary because external control provides information concerning acceptable and unacceptable behavior, while children's understanding of the reasons for acceptability of behavior is affected by induction or other strategies that are aimed at logical cognitive processes of the child. Parents who evidence teaching styles consistent with social learning theory (verbal and non-verbal reinforcement, e.g.) are expected to have children who evidence high awareness of rules and conventions (Sigel, 1992). Parental styles that stimulate the child's own thinking concerning reasons and explanations are expected to be related to children's

THE INFLUENCE OF FAMILIES ON CHILDRENS SCHOOL objective and rational explanation for rules and conventions. It is recognized that the child also can affect the parent's behavior, as well as vice versa. Furthermore, two general questions should be put to parents, at least. A first and basic

question concerns the relation between beliefs and behavior. Do parents' beliefs about children's abilities affect the way that they behave toward children? Much of the recent interest in parental beliefs has stemmed from a conviction that there must be some relation between belief and behaviorthat what parents think about children must affect how they treat children. The second question concerns the relation between parents' beliefs and children's cognitive development. Do children develop best when their parents hold accurate conceptions of their abilities? Are some sorts of general belief systems about children and development more predictive of good cognitive development than are others? The general answer to both questions is yes (Miller, 1986). To illustrate the importance of understanding that the family/parents are the expert regarding their child, social scientists who have studied the family and those who have studied educational stratification have produced convincing evidence that parental divorce is negatively associated with educational success. Compared to children who live with both parents until adulthood, children from divorced families have lower educational expectations, poorer school attendance, and lower grades. Research has suggested that mothers' remarriage does not improve the chances of children's high school graduation and that children from stepparent families are only marginally better off than are those from single-parent families on many educational outcomes. To repeat, the "family instability "or "turbulence" perspective views the negative effects of divorce as the result of processes that surround this disruption. This argument suggests that

THE INFLUENCE OF FAMILIES ON CHILDRENS SCHOOL divorce itself may not cause poorer academic performance; rather, parental conflict and other

family processes that are associated with divorce may be the underlying cause of poor academic outcomes. Conflict is common prior to divorce and negatively affects children's well-being, regardless of whether the parents dissolve their marriage. That is, children who experience family instability perform poorly in school and consequently are placed in lower academic strata. Students in these lower strata are exposed to less-engaging material and experience reduced opportunities for postsecondary enrollment. However, after the eighth grade, it is difficult to change strata, meaning that a temporary reduction in academic ability that is due to family instability in late childhood may result in longterm negative effect so n educational outcomes. These effects may arise more because of the rigidity of the stratification system in high school than because of a long-term reduction in a child's academic ability. If this description is accurate, we would expect that controlling for grades or parents' educational expectations would eliminate the association between family experiences and educational attainment. If family disruption produces a long-term reduction in academic ability, we would expect the effects of family experiences to persist net of controls for earlier educational experiences. Controlling grades and educational expectations reduces to insignificance the association between maternal cohabitation and levels of attainment. The link between parental emotional health and child well-being is also a great problem. Children with an emotionally ill parent are expected to exhibit more problems than those with two healthy parents because of both the genetic transmission and the disruption of family life associated with such illnesses. The presence of an ill mother or father is related to disturbed emotional and social development in young children, including higher rates of internalizing (e.g., depression and anxiety) and externalizing (e.g., conduct disorder) behaviors, increased rates of

THE INFLUENCE OF FAMILIES ON CHILDRENS SCHOOL psychopathology as adolescents, especially major depressive disorder, and continued increased risk of psychopathology as an adult. On the whole, children of clinically depressed mothers are at higher risk of developing not only a depressive disorder during childhood but also a host of

other psychological and behavioral problems including anxiety and conduct disorders (Siegler et al., 1992). Moreover, parental structure is likewise important for achievement. Besides protecting their children confidentiality, parents should have a responsibility to show respect for the religion, political and social beliefs. To honor the beliefs, parents must be keenly aware of the comments they make and terms they use. They must not let their own political and religious attitudes become statements of public record in their homes. Respect for the ethical background, sexual orientation and social customs is also their responsibility. To foster a climate of acceptance without approving every lifestyle and attitude reflected or represented by the children they bring up, requires to walk a very fine line. It is their duty to do or to say nothing that would demean or insult any group nor allow an atmosphere that would tolerate slurs of any kind. Whether they are aware or not, parents actions, their behavior and their attitudes often are emulated by the young people. Parents do influence them, whether they mean to or not (HooverDempsey at al., 1995). Up to this point, families and schools have been considered as independent contexts, but the interaction between these contexts is a key part of developmental children's school success. When applied to the early life course, this concept of functional substitution suggests that young people may benefit more from being enrolled in schools high in social capital if they lack effective conduits of social capital at home. Indeed, related research on childhood and adolescence suggests that this might occur. Developmental research has demonstrated that


problems in the parent-child relationship can be countered by support from friends, relatives, and extra-familial adults, and educational research has demonstrated that positive schooling environments make more of a difference for students who come from socioeconomically disadvantaged families. As stated, families are the first context of interest. This paper replicates that the emotional tone of the parent-adolescent relationship is an important factor in adolescent academic achievement over time. The importance of this emotional dimension falls in between more tangible and more commonly studied aspects of families: parents' educational attainment and their aspirations for their adolescents' educational futures. The degree of emotional closeness between parents and their adolescents therefore appears to be a conduit of children's school success in that close ties facilitated the transmission of certain instrumental resourcessuch as parents' aspirationsthat cultivated the human. To conclude, family and educational research are two key areas of theoretical and empirical activity in psychology, sociology, and related disciplines. Studying the intricate web of the ecology of human development, however, requires not only exploring the independent role of families and schools but also recognizing that they come together, in positive and negative ways, to direct developmental trajectories. Consequently, a greater dialogue between these two prominent areas of research would be highly valuable.


Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1995). Parental involvement in children's education: Why does it make a difference? Teachers College Record, 95, 310-331. Leitch, M. L., & Tangri, S. S. (1998). Barriers to home-school collaboration. Educational Horizons, 66, 70-74. Miller, S. A. (1986). Parents' beliefs about their children's cognitive abilities. Developmental Psychology, 22, 276-284. Siegler, R. S., & Richards, D. D. (1992). The development of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press. Sigel, I. E. (1992). Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences for children. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.