Can Instructional and Emotional support in the Key Stage 1 classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure?

This digest found in

Early years
Inclusion

How were pupils identified as being at risk of school failure?

The researchers identified pupils as being at risk of school failure if they showed one or both of two types of risk:

demographic risk; and/or
functional risk.

Demographic risk was defined prior to a child entering school and was based on family and other demographic factors thought to place pupils at a risk of school failure. The researchers identified low maternal education as one of the most robust indicators of this risk as pupils were less likely to have been exposed to frequent and rich language and literacy stimulation in the home. For the purpose of this study pupils were placed in the high demographic risk if their mother's level of education was less than a four year college degree (equivalent to A-levels in England).

Functional risk was recognised in pupils who demonstrated early difficulties with attention, behaviour, social skills and academic competence and was measured in the following ways:

sustained attention was measured by getting pupils to push a button every time a target stimulus, such as the letter X, appeared and recording the number of errors, measured when the pupils were 54 months of age;
behaviour was measured by asking teachers (of pupils aged four to six years) to rate a list of 100 problem behaviours relating to aggression, attention and classroom disruption, as not true, somewhat true or very true for each child;
academic competence was measured by asking teachers (of pupils aged four to six years) to judge specific learning behaviours such as overall academic performance and motivation against a five point scale; and
social skills were measured by teachers (of pupils aged four to six years) considering pupils’ cooperation, self assertion and self control.

Your path: Home > Welcome to The Research Informed Practice Site (TRIPS) > Themes > Inclusion > Can Instructional and Emotional support in the Key Stage 1 classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? > How were pupils identified as being at risk of school failure?
Research Home Themes \| Find digests \| About the digests resources glossary researchers contact TRIPS Introduction How were pupils identified as being at risk of school failure? What difference can instructional and emotional support make for pupils who are at risk of school failure? What took place in supportive classrooms? How was the study designed? Implications Where can I find out more? Send us your feedback Collated digests To view/remove/add notes and save your collated digests click here Get Word Reader Can Instructional and Emotional support in the Key Stage 1 classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? This digest found in Early years Inclusion Send to a friend Word doc 100KB Printer friendly Collate for later How were pupils identified as being at risk of school failure? The researchers identified pupils as being at risk of school failure if they showed one or both of two types of risk: demographic risk; and/or functional risk. Demographic risk was defined prior to a child entering school and was based on family and other demographic factors thought to place pupils at a risk of school failure. The researchers identified low maternal education as one of the most robust indicators of this risk as pupils were less likely to have been exposed to frequent and rich language and literacy stimulation in the home. For the purpose of this study pupils were placed in the high demographic risk if their mother's level of education was less than a four year college degree (equivalent to A-levels in England). Functional risk was recognised in pupils who demonstrated early difficulties with attention, behaviour, social skills and academic competence and was measured in the following ways: sustained attention was measured by getting pupils to push a button every time a target stimulus, such as the letter X, appeared and recording the number of errors, measured when the pupils were 54 months of age; behaviour was measured by asking teachers (of pupils aged four to six years) to rate a list of 100 problem behaviours relating to aggression, attention and classroom disruption, as not true, somewhat true or very true for each child; academic competence was measured by asking teachers (of pupils aged four to six years) to judge specific learning behaviours such as overall academic performance and motivation against a five point scale; and social skills were measured by teachers (of pupils aged four to six years) considering pupils’ cooperation, self assertion and self control.