|
Article Excerpt
Mobility in education can be caused by families moving from city to city or state to state as employment and housing changes for them; however, it can also be the result of families moving their children from one school to another within the same area, for other, more personal reasons. As the student mobility rate rises, concerns about its impact on the young learner increase (Wright, 1999).
This research investigated student mobility in a regional area in northern Queensland where the mobility rate increases each year. Through interviews with school personnel and some parents, a number of issues surrounding student mobility were examined. These included antecedents to mobility, perceived impact of mobility on students and strategies to address issues of mobility.
Keywords
educational mobility
transfer policy
academic achievement
transfer programs
attendance
social restrictions
Introduction
Mobility in schools has been described as 'patterns of family movement that involve students in relocating school, or periods of time when they do not attend school' and, further, a mobile student is described as 'a student who moves school more than twice in a three year period' (Commonwealth Department of Education, Science & Training & Department of Defence, [DEST & Def], 2000, p. 2). Student mobility can be caused by families moving from city to city or state to state as employment and housing situations change for them, but it can also be the result of families moving their children from one school to another within the same area for other, more personal reasons.
Australia has one of the most highly mobile populations in the western world (Settles, 1993, in Fields, 1997).The Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001, in DEST & Def, 2002) estimated that, within the overall Australian population, thirty per cent of residents from households with children moved at least once over a three year period, with an increasing proportion of this relocation being movement between one state or territory and another. The average Australian moves more than eleven times during his or her lifetime (Bell, 1995, in Fields, 1997). Regional areas such as the one examined in this research record a slightly higher mobility rate (forty-two per cent) than urban areas (forty per cent) (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2000).
While a number of positive impacts of mobility have been cited in research (Whalen & Fried, 1973; Wyer, Danaher, Kindt & Moriarty, 1997), mobility often causes inconsistency or interruption in the educational experience of the student (Ligon & Paredes, 1992, in Fisher, Matthews, Stafford, Nakagawa & Durante, 2002).
Literature review
Antecedents to mobility
Research in the area of mobility cites a number of factors that contribute to student mobility. According to Rumberger and Larson (1998) these factors are either family based or school based. Family-based reasons for mobility are mainly due to employment, lifestyle and housing changes, family changes (DEST & Def, 2002; Fields, 1997) and income (Martin, 2002; Wright, 1999).With the impact that global economic pressures have had on the labour market, employment moves have become more frequent, as one or both parents' work commitments or their seeking stable employment require relocation of the family to another geographical area (DEST & Def, 2002).
Lifestyle-related movement, where a family makes a conscious decision to relocate to a larger home or a better climate, accounts for many of these moves. Housing changes, due to instability in the housing market, eviction, a lack of adequate, low income housing and home ownership also account for a considerable number of family moves (DEST & Def, 2000; Fisher et al., 2002; Mantzicopoulos & Knutson, 2002; Martin, 2002; Skandera & Sousa, 2002).
Changes to the family that might serve as antecedents to mobility include financial or social difficulties, death, divorce, separation, disharmony or conflict (Astone & McLanahan, 1994; DEST & Def, 2002; Fisher et al., 2002; Rumberger & Larson, 1998). Family dysfunction can also lead to children becoming state wards or being placed in foster care. Some family moves may also be culturally related, due to cultural ceremonies, family business or recreational activities (DEST & Def, 2002).
Low family income is a determining factor for mobility (Audette, Algozzine & Warden, 1993; Family Housing Fund, 2002; Fisher et al., 2002; Skandera & Sousa, 2002). According to Skandera and Sousa, children from low income families or children who attend inner-city schools are more likely to have changed schools frequently than those from middle to high income families. Further, Alexander, Entwisle and Dauber (1996, in Wright, 1999, p. 347) state that 'higher income students frequently transferred into and out of the district, whereas lower income students more often transferred within the district'.
Ethnic minority groups are often cited as more mobile populations (DEST & Def, 2002; Family Housing Fund, 2002; Wright, 1999).
In Australia, there are a significant number of Indigenous students with high mobility rates, often with patterns of movement centred on a 'base' school, and intermittent travel to other locations in which enrolment in school may or may not occur. A summary of three Commonwealth projects on Indigenous student mobility found that within an Indigenous student population of 793 students from seventy-six schools, there were 1,039 movements in a nine-month period. These included transitions from primary to secondary school as well as movements in and out of school (DEST & Def, 2002).
School-based reasons for mobility feature less prominently in the literature. School issues such as social adaptability, engagement in curricula, academic difficulty, and safety may all lead to mobility in the student population. Additionally, time absent from school, misbehaviour and low educational expectations were found to correspond to students changing schools or dropping out of school before completing high school. Forty per cent of primary school students who changed schools did not change residences (Rumberger & Larson, 1998). With figures such as this, schools' roles in student mobility cannot be ignored. As Rumberger & Larson (1998, p. 1) note, 'Schools are at least partly responsible for high student turnover and, consequently, should help address the problem'.
Impact on students
Mobility affects all stakeholders, from students and their families to school personnel and system functioning. This paper looks at the affects of mobility on the learner. Benefits related to mobility include increased resilience and higher academic achievement in some students (DEST & Def, 2002; Whalen & Fried, 1973). Rahmani (1981, in Fields, 1995) found no significant negative impacts on measures of academic and social achievement for the children of Defence Force families, despite high levels of mobility. This could be due to the highly structured and supported relocations of Defence Force families (Duffy, 1987, in Fields, 1995).
In much of the literature, however, mobility is seen as problematic to...
|
