TRANSIENCE AND EDUCATION: ACADEMIC AND PSYCHOSOCIAL EFFECTS OF GEOGRAPH IC MOBILITY ON CElILDREN

Susan M. Smith Koschmider

A t hesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Master o f Arts

Depanment o f Human Developrnent and Applied Psychology Ontario Institute for Studies in Education o f the

University o f Toronto

@Copyright by Susan M. Smith Koschmider 1997

National Library 1*1 of Canada Bibliothbque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Seivices services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, nie Wellington Ottawa ON KIA ON4 OttawaON K1AON4 Canada Canada

The author has ganted a non- exclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or seiî copies of this thesis in microfonn, paper or electronic formats.

The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.

L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la forme de microfiche/fYm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.

TRANSIENCE AND EDUCATION:

ACADEMIC AND PSYCHOSOCIAL EFFECTS

OF GEOGRAPHIC MOBILITY ON CHILDREN

by

Susan M. Smith Koschmider

Degree of Master of Arts

1997

Departmeut of Human Development and Applied Psychology

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the

University of Toronto

ABSTRACT

This review attempts to examine the question: 1s rnobility a risk factor for high risk

school children? Mobility and risk terms are defined, and mobility research is

reviewed and analyzed. The research to date does not provide definitive answers to

the questions posed, mainly for a variety of methodological reasons. The review

concludes with some suggestions for future research directions.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge al1 those who helped and supported me in the completion

of my degree requirements:

Dr. Solveiga Miezitis, my Thesis Supervisor, who guided and redirected me throughout

this project, giving outstanding encouragement and support.

Dr. Otto Weininger, m y second Committee Member.

Cecily Jennings and Linda Booty who read the drafts and made helpful suggestions.

Family and friends, near and far, who inspire with their optimism.

My children, Kai and Melissa, who have cheered me on and helped with photocopying,

computer gli tches and household duties.

Horst, partner and friend, who steadfastly and loyally has supported and charnpioned

me throughout many years of education.

Thank-you very much

Home. Home was arbitrary, the place she had designared as home, the house on Tenrh Street, rather than the farm in Connecticut ... odd, how the heort will put down roofs in what was, at the time, only a ternporary shelter.

Madeleine L'Engle, A Severed Wasv

iii

This thesis is dedicated to Dorot h y Isabel Fraser Smith (1903-1983)

who taught me the importance of investing time in the lives of children.

TRANSIENCE A N D EDUCATION: ACADEMIC A N D PSYCHOSOCIAL EFFECTS O F GEOGRAPHIC MOBILITY ON CHILDREN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

CRITERIA FOR INCLUSION O F STUDIES

DEFINITIONS OF CRITERIA USED IN MOBILITY RESEARCH Mobility Criteria Risk and Protective Factors

OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW

CRITIQUE OF MOBILITY STUDIES Reason for Move Pre- and Post-Move Data Mobility and Risk

LIMITATIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

LISTS OF TABLES

TABLE 1: Mobility Studies Reviewed in Summary

TABLE 2: Major Characteristics of Studies Reviewed

TABLE 3: Reason for Move

TABLE 4: Research Controls

TRANSIENCE AND EDUCATION: ACADEMIC A N D PSYCHOSOCIAL EFFECTS

OF GEOGRAPHIC MOBILITY ON CHILDREN

BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION

A review of studies on the ef fects of transieace on the educational progress of

the child is vital at this time given the high mobility of school children in the greater

Toronto area, as well as in other parts of Canada and North America. The current

literatu re reveals contradictions regarding the e l fects of transience on children's

academic achievement, social-emotional adaptation and behaviour. Where some studies

show reduced academic achievement, less positive social experiences, and greater

adolescent alienation for mobile groups (Calabrese, 1989; Ingersoll, Scamman and

Eckerling, 1989; Vernberg, 19900, other studies find insignificant effects, positive

effects for bright students, and higher levels of child and social competence among the

mobile groups (Marchant and Medway, 1987; Stroh and Brett, 1990b; Whalen and Fried,

1973). Some of the discrepancy may be due to di fferences in definitions. Words such

as mobility, highly mobile, nonmobile, and transient are used to describe di f ferent

groups i n this literature, but without common criteria of selection. Other problems

noted in this body of literature are poor design, insufficient control, and loosely

defined dependent variables. Studies are performed with a variety of rubjects, often

wi thout controlling for such vital dif ferences as, for example, socioeconomic status

(SES) or reason for move. Other studies assess different aspects of adaptation and

adjustment or lack thereof. Thus arise the contradictions detailed above. Contradictions

lead to confusion on the subject and threaten the legitimacy of transience and mobility

as an important issue relative to other pressing issues in education today. In addition,

this leads to uncertainty about the necessity for interventions appropriate to the

accommodation of new students. It is the purpose of this review to contribute to an

awareness of the complexity of the interaction between transience and education, and

to suggest directions for future research on the subject. It is also the purpose of this

2

review to suggest criteria by which to assess potentia1 strengths and risks for

individual children who move.

Life transitions require adaptation. Moving from one school to another is a

challenging transition in which children must adapt. Circumstances surrounding a

move have a bearing on the child's ability to adapt or adjust. For example, a move due

to family breakdown or the death of a parent may be accompanied by symptoms of

stress from the trauma associated with multiple losses, A child in this situation could

exhibit academic difficulties or behavioural problems such as acting out or social

withdrawal (Ribordy, 1989). In al1 transitions, ability of an individual to adjust after

a move is thought to be related to a variety of factors including personality,

adaptability, level of motivation, socioeconomic status (SES), intelligence, age, social

skills, stress levels, amount of input into the decision to move, amount of difference

between the schools' curricula, level of emotional adjustment, and stability of and

support from the family andlor other relationships (AIlan and Bardsley, 1984; Jason,

Weine, Johnson, Warren-Sohlberg, Filippelli, Turner and Lardon, 1992). The current

review will evaluate studies based, in part, on the inclusion of such variables in the

design.

3

CRITERIA FOR INCLUSION OF STUDIES

The scope of this review is English-language articles dealing with any aspect of

mobility related to chiIdren. Searches were made using CD Rom software (ERIC and

PsvchLit), manual searches of recent journals, and the reference pages of books and

articles on the subject of mobility and children's education. In addition to peer-

reviewed articles, non-reviewed and unpublished articles have also been included

because there is some evidence suggesting that refereed journals may have a bias

towards publishing mainly statistically significant results, overlooking other research

with statistically insignificant, but possibly valid results (Light & Pillemer, 1984;

White, 1982).

Not included in this paper are studies of adult movers, with the foIlowing

exceptions: 1) where the study includes both adults and children as the subject group;

and 2) a study which retrospectively examined adaptation to university based upon

mobility in childhood.

DEFINITIONS O F CRITERIA USED IN MOBILITY RESEARCH

MOBILITY CRITERIA

Mobility or being mobile refers to geographic mobility, the change of residence,

school, andlor location. For the purpose of this study mobility refers to changes in

schools with o r without a change of residence, but not changes in residence without a

change in school. While there may be important consequences to changes in residence

without a change of school, these particular types of moves will not be considered at

this time as they tend to go unnoticed both in schools and for research purposes.

In the articles reviewed, specific de finitions of mobility used by researchers

tended to be arbitrary, varying from study to study. Difficulties arise in cornparing

studies because the definitions are sometimes unclear and because the different

definitions don? always concur well enough to compare one with another. Part of the

confusion is due to overlap of conditions. There is a good variety of combinations in

the studies due, for example, to numbers of moves, types of moves and subject groups.

This review will look at several definitions andlor types of definitions of mobility,

describe them, discuss the dif ferences, and highlight the strengths and weaknesses of

each.

a) NUMBER OF MOVES

Several theorists use the number of moves a child has made as a criterion for

definition of mobility. Typically researchers assign subjects to two o r more groups.

WhiIe the number of groups is arbitrary, the simplest would be two groups, one

consisting of students who have not moved, and the other of students who have moved

one or more times (Pinder, 1989; Stroh & Brett, 1990alb; Vernberg, 1990). A variation

of this category is number of schools attended (Morris, Pestaner & Nelson, 1967;

Whalen & Fried, 1973). For example, Harter, Whitesell & Kowalski (1992) defined

transitions for the purpose of their study as changes to a new school. In their study of

student mobili ty and achievement, lngersoll et ai., (1989) described five mobilit y

5

groups, based upon student enrolment patterns for the duration of their two year study.

These included three groups of continuing students and two groups of students new to

the system in the second year of the study, divided as follows: 1) no moves; 2) only one

move; 3) more than one move; 4) new entry to the school but no moves dur ing the

course of the study; 5) new entry and with one or more moves and/or exit from system.

This allowed the researchers to compare mobile with nonmobile students and then to

compare the effects of one move versus more than one move.

In some descriptive articles, writers merely note that the subject has moved, or

mention the average number of moves (Shaw, 1987).

b) DISTANCE OF MOVE

Some researchers have defined mobility on the basis of the distance of a move

or the cross from one area to another. Barrett & Noble (1973) studied movers who

relocated a distance of over 50 miles; Johnson & Lindblad (1991) compared intercity

moves, intracity moves and nonmobility; and Vernberg, Ewell, Beery & Abwender

(2994) described an intercommunity move.

Neither the number of moves nor the distance of move fully capture the whole

scope of the impact of a move. For example, a move within Canada can involve a

dif ferent climate, region, culture, and /o r language (Pinder, 1989).

c) MULTIPLE FACTORS

Kroger (1980), in a study of mobility and seIf-concept in adolescents, defined

mobility using a formula calcuiating the "distance" o f a move based upon the sum of

the number of moves multiplied by the weight of a move. The weighting was based

upon a scale developed by Oakay (1972) where the type of move is given numerical

weight (i.e., intracommunity = 1; intrastate = 2; intraregion [contiguous state] = 3;

intraregion [non-contiguous statel = 4; intranation [contiguous state] = 5; intranation

[non-contiguous state] = 6; and international = 7). For the subjects who had moved a t

6

least once Kroger used recency of last move and age span of the greatest number of

moves as variables. While it may be possible to improve and refine it, Kroger's formula

nevertheless provides an example of an attempt at the quantification of some of the

dif ferences and complexities inherent in mobility.

d) SCHEDULED VERSUS UNSCHEDULED MOVES

The definition of mobility includes the important distinction of whether a move

is schcduled (Le., a move from elementary to senior school) or unscheduled, such as a

school change due to job transfer, eviction, etc. A key factor involved in these two

types of moves is that with a scheduled move, groups of students usually move

together, w hereas an unscheduled move usually affects an individual student alone or

with siblings (Bogat, Liang, Caldwell, Davidson, Bristor, Phillips & Suu rme yer, 1993;

Jason et al., 1992). As Danner, Jason & Kurasaki (1993) note,

al1 children change schools during their educational careers. Many school transfers are considered routine, such as transferring from middle to high school. Other children experieace unscheduled school transfers, which are due to situations not considered part of the usual educational experience (p. 1).

Scheduled moves, being highly predictable, lend themselves well to research study and,

as will be discussed later, have provided valuable mobility information. The chief

drawback is that research of scheduled transitions does not necessarily generalize well

to the entire mobile population, since scheduled transitions lack the potential

unpredictability, isolation and some of the risk factors inherent in other types of

moves.

SUMMARY

WhiIe researchers have been fairly consistent about some criteria (i.e., change

of school), other criteria are inconsistent ranging from a simple haslhas not moved to

complicated formulae. To be useful for research a basic definition of mobility will

likely need to incIude the number of moves, the rate of moves (number of moves in

7

what time span), the distance moved, and whether the move is a normal scheduled

transition as opposed to an individual move outside of the usual school experience.

RlSK AND PROTECTIVE FACTORS

There is a growing interest in establishing the risk and protective factors for

children at different stages and in different circumstances. Some children appear to

bc at greater risk for school failure, underachievement, mental health problems and

psychosocial di f ficulties than others. Discussing risk and protective factors, Garmezy

(1991) States that,

protectiveness is not the obverse of vulnerability ... whereas risk mechanisms tend to lead directly to disordcr, protective processes operate indirectly, their effects partly a function of their interaction with and their modification of the risk variable (p. 428).

Risk and protective factors are important to consider in a study of transient

children because a move requires adaptation, and the circumstances surrounding a

move may have a bearing upon the child's ability to adapt. It is thus hypothesized that

mobility is likely to be a risk factor for certain children.

In order to identify areas that need to be considered when examining mobility

and children, some of the common risk and protective factors for school-age children

will be identified. Following this, the mobility studies will be evaluated in light of

the importance of these risk factors,

a) SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (SES)

Low socioeconomic status (SES) is cited by researchers as a significant risk

factor af fecting academic achievement, adaptive behaviour, mental health, and future

socioeconomic status. I t is difficuIt to know exactly what is meant by the term low

socioeconomic status, however, because various researchers use dif ferent variables to

describe it. For example, in a meta-analytic review of studies comparing sociometric

status (SES) with academic achievement, White (1982) found that SES measures varied

and also that the relationship between SES and school achievement varied depending

8

upon which factors were used to measure SES. White iists types of SES measured in the

studies he reviewed, including: income of family; education o f parents; occupation o f

head of house; home atmosphere (e.g., parents' a t t i tude toward education; parents'

aspirations for their children; cultural and intellectual activities of the family);

dwelling value; school resources; subjective judgement; and a miscellaneous category

(e.g., number of siblings, ethnicity, and mobility of family). He identi fied over seventy

di f ferent variables which were used eitber alone o r in some combination as indicators

of SES.

White (1982) found a positive, but weaker correlation between SES and

academic achievement than is normally assumed. Of the traditional SES indicators,

income was the highest single correlate of academic achievement. He found it

surprising, however, that measures of home atmosphere had a much higher correlation

with academic achievement than any single o r combined group of the traditional

indicators of SES. White recommended that when using SES as a research tool, specific

labels for the variables be used with a precise definition of how the variable was

measu red.

Family income, specifically poverty, was consistently found to be the strongest

predictor of academic failure, stress difficulties, developmental disabilities, emotional

disorder and other types of risk, of several variables studied (Caldas, 1993; Fergusson,

Horwoad, & Lynsky, 1994; Garmezy, 1991; Offord, 1989; Patterson, Vaden &

Kupersmidt, 1991; Reynolds, Weissberg, & Kasprow, 1992; Sameroff, 1975; Walker &

Boyle, unpublished; Wyman, Cowen, Work & Parker, 1991).

While there may be controversy regarding the actual relationship between SES

and factors such as child well-being and academic achievement, i t is an important

variable to include. l n some cases SES is implicit in the research question. For example,

in literature surrounding job transfers of mainly managerial, professional and

technical employees, concerns relate to cost-effectiveness of job transfers, employee

satisfaction, employee change and development, and parents' concerns regarding

9

children's happiness, adjustment, and academic achievement (Pinder, 1981; Pinder and

Walter, 1984; Stroh & Brett, 1990a/b). This is contrasted to mobitity studies involving

movers generally considered to be less advantaged when the research question concerns

student success or lack of success in academic subjects or programs (Manaster, Chan &

Safady, 2992).

The role of socioeconomic status i n chitdren's adaptation to transience will best

be evaluated by ideatifying specific variables and defining them precisely. Generally,

while poverty was consistently the strongest predictor of academic and other

difficulties, home atmosphere was also found to play an important role in predicting

academic success.

b) INTELLIGENCE

Intelligence is cited as a risk or protective factor i n a variety of studies

including those of Kandell, Mednick, Kirkegaard-Sorensen, Hutchings, Knop,

Rosenberg, & Schufsinger, (1988), Luthar, (1991) and Whalen & Fried, (1973).

IntelIectual assessment of children, however, is at best a challenging procedure, and is

complicated by factors associated with mobility. Gaps in schooling, inconsistencies in

education, and assessment procedures which discriminate against foreign-born and

other language children (Cummins, 1986), are some complicating factors. It is thus

difficult to establish causality by examining the relationship between intelligence and

risk factors. In addition, parent, teacher, and school expectations of students can be

powerful confounding variables (Weinstein, Soule, Collins, Cone, Mehlhorn and

Simon tacchi, 1991).

Alternatively, the perception that one is of Iower intelligence or has less ability

is fikely in itself to be debilitating, as lngraham (1985) found when he highlighted the

importance of accurate self-concept and logical information processing for self-esteem,

school motivation and achievernent.

I t is also possible that the differences Found in the literature may be related to

10

the method used to measure intelligence. Several authors refer to higher IO as a

protective factor (Garmezy, Masten & Tellegen, 1984; Kandel, et ai., 1988; Masten, Best

& Garmezy, 1990; Rutter, 1989; Werner, 1989) while others associate intelligence with

increased risk and vulnerability (Luthar, 1991; Yoshi kawa, f 994). 1 t appears, however,

that the conclusions rnay have been based upon different types of intelligence

measures. Luthar used a nonverbal measure of intelligence, and while not specifying

the type of measure, Yoshikawa points out that low verbal ability is a disadvantage i n

school. I t rnay be that verbal intelligence and language abilities are a protective factor

(Werner, 1989) while non verbal intelligence does not function as a protective factor,

and rnay even increase vulnerability in stressful situations (Luthar, 1991). In iiner-

grained examinations, interactions between a child's abilities and farnily variables rnay

moderate risk factors (Christenson, 1990). Further, stressfui situations, and especially

traumatic events, are known to affect concentration and distractibility, and rnay

confound the predictive value of measures of intelligence for school achievement.

Nevertheless, in spite of these limitations, it is important to consider whether

intelligence is a risk factor in general, and more specifically, in relation to mobility.

Whalen and Fried (1973), found that mobility magnifies existing differences between

children in that those mobile children considered more intelligent showed higher

academic achievement than their non-mobile counterparts, while less intelligent mobile

children showed lower academic achievement than their non-mobile peers. I t rnay be,

as Jason, Betts, Johnson, Weine, Warren-Sohlburg, Shinaver, Neuson, Filipelli and

Lardon, (1990) point out, that difficulty in mastering new skills rnay compound

challenges for weaker students who rnay then choose to give up rather than continue

to experience the humiliation of failure. It woutd appear that some children

transferring schools are a t a greater risk for experiencing school difficulties and that

these high risk kids tend to have fewer interna1 resources, including lower measured

intelligence.

C) LEARNING DISABILITIES AND LEARNING DIFFICULTIES

Scme researchers bave found that learning d i f ficulties and disabili ties seem

especially noticeable for children who move a great deal. Foreign children were over-

represen ted in special education classes in European countries (Organisation for

Economic Co-operation and Development, 1987). Children in shelters and hostels were

found to score lower on a standardized reading test and on a test of attention span

(Moore & Pepler, unpublished). Jason et al. (1990) found that academic vulnerabilities

add to other stressors, such as mobility, leaving a child more likely to experience

maladjustment and failure. Other researchers, however, have not found that mobile

children di f fer from their less mobile peers in terms of learning di f ficulties (Barrett

& Noble, 1973). One important di fference between these various bodies of work may

be SES. The latter subjects were drawn from families using a major interstate moving

Company, a luxury perhaps not used by some of the other subject groups. Thus, the

relationship between moving and learning difficulties may be mediated by SES or

family income factors,

Risk factors associated with learning difficulties, school failure and/or

underachievement may include high absences, difficulties with concentration and the

inability to solve interpersonal problems (Kellam, Werthamer-Larsson, Dolan, Brown,

Mayer, Rebok, Anthony, Laudolff, Edelsohn & WheeIer, 1991; Leonard & Elias, 1993;

Reyes & Hedeker, 1993).

d) PEER SUPPORT AND ADJUSTMENT

Support of peers &as been examined as a variable in research about emotional

adjustment, academic achievement, behaviour, stress, protection and resiliency. A

further question about the importance of peer support is raised when one asks if peer

support helps protect a mobile child against later persona1 risk and/or contributes to

later personal adjustment. In other words, is peer support a buffer factor in general,

and specifically in transience?

12

The support of peers is thought to be related to emotional adjustment. ChiIdren

with pour peer relationships, especially those with low acceptance coupled with

aggressiveness, are at risk for difficulties in adolescence and adulthood including

dropping out of schoul, criminal activity and externalizing di f ficulties (Hyrnel, Rubin,

Rowden & LeMare, 1990; Parker & Asher, 1987; Rubin & Mills, 1988). Further, social

skills and social resources have been found to protect against stress and to influence

well-being (Cohen & Wills, 1985; Luthar, 1991; Hirsch & DuBois, 1992). Some

researchers, however, have not found consistent relationships between peer support and

adjustment (Barone, Aguirre-Deandreis & Trickett, 1991; and Wolchik, Ruehlman,

Braver, and Sandler, 1989). Barone et ai. speculated that this may be due to the

measurement procedures or because the effect of peer support may differ according to

peer group characteristics. For example, support from delinquent peers may have

different consequences for an individual's adaptation than support from nondelinquent

peers, Walker and Greene (1987) found that gender was a factor in whether peer

support was helpful. Their research showed that peer support protected adolescent

males, but not adolescent females from the stress associated with negative l i fe events.

For females, regardless of the frequency or valence of life events, low peer support was

associated with high levels of symptoms.

Other researchers have found that peer support has mixed effects on personal

adjustment. Cauce, Hannan & Sargeant (1992) inferred potential stress-buffering

effects of social support from a study that showed that peer support was positively

related to peer competence and anxiety, but negatively related to school competence.

Asher, Hyrnel & Renshaw (1984) reported a positive correlation between low

peer support and the reporting of loneliness and social dissatisfaction, but also found

that satisfactory home relationships may be a mediating factor. Other researchers

found that those children who were actively rejected were more likely to remain

rejected when they moved into a new group or class, while children who were neglected

were more likely to improve their social status (Coie & Kupersmidt, 1983).

Academic achievement, often considered a protective factor, is related to social

skills and peer support. Leonard & Elias (1993) found that grade point average (GPA),

is related to the skills needed to solve interpersonal problems. Further, French (1990),

in a study of peer-rejected girls, found a relationship between low self-control, low

academic task orientation and high peer-rated aggression, social withdrawal, overall

behaviour problems, anxiety, hostile isolation, academic disability, and peer rejection.

Vernberg et al. (1994) found that social perspective coordination was helpful in

establishing and maintaining Friendships and, further, that establishment and

maintenance of close friendships is important in both short- and long-term adaptation.

Social perspective coordination refers to the ability to

di f ferentiate and integrate the self's perspective with the perspectives of others. This requires an understanding of the relationships among one's own thoughts, feelings and wishes and those of other people (Selman & Schultz, 1989, p. 6).

Asher (1983), Putallaz (1983) and Crick & Dodge (1994) found that socially competent

children are able to read and understand social situations more accurately and thus to

both initiate and respond positively and relevantly to others. Asher also fouad that

socially competent children reaIize that building relationships takes time and are able

to use indirect as well as direct approaches in goal-attainment. However, the self-

perception that one is socially competent was not necessarily accurate and could not be

viewed as a basis for social or behavioural cornpetence (Patterson, Kupersmidt &

Griesler, 1990).

Cultural or environmental factors, generally outside of the individual (and over

which he o r she may have less direct control) also affect behaviour and peer status.

These may include attractiveness and reputation (Dodge, 1983), cultural characteristics

(Schneider, 1993), high levels of stress, both long-term and acute (Patterson et ai., 1991),

the classroom achievement environment (Werthamer-Larsson, Kellam & Wheeler, 1991),

age (Barrett & Noble, 1973), and mobility (Byrnes, 1985).

Thus, as Sameroff (1975) suggests, mere causality may not be supportable. The

child and his or her environment must be examined in combination because complex

14

reciprocal interactions ameliorate or worsen behaviour problems, Requirements of good

peer relationships include intra-personal, inter-personal and cultural/environmental

factors. Although researchers have found that peer support is positively related to an

individual's adjustment, some inconsistency in the literature remains in relation to

peer group factors and to the area of adaptation being examined. Many factors may

contribute to modify the intensity of the relationship between social abiIities and later

persona1 adjustment, but there is generally strong support for this relationship and

thus, it is important to consider the role of peer support in a study of mobile children.

e) ADULT SUPPORT AND ADJUSTMENT

Researchers also need to account for the role of adult support of children in

mobility studies because relationships with aduIts are critical in a child's life. Thus the

interpersonal and intrapersonal factors which affect these relationships, including

availability and type of family support, are essential to an evaluation of risk and

protectiveness.

1) INTRA- AND INTERPERSONAL FACTORS

Among the intrapersonal factors likely to play a part in exacerbating or

ameliorating risk are a child's behaviour or adaptive functioning, which is related to

the child's ability to get along with adults.

Having a temperamental style or coping style that is a poor match for the

caretaking environment increases the challenges that a child must cope with and thus

increases risk of failure or maladjustment (Compas, 1987). For example, a very active

child living in a family that values peace and tranquillity rnay find it diff icult to

conform to the family's standards of quiet and inactivity, and may thus experience a

sense of failure.

Some intrapersonal traits and interpersonal factors are linked with g r m e r stress

and poor relationships with adults. Timko, Moos & Michelson (1993) found a

15

relationship between chronic stressors and such intrapersonal factors as an emotional

disposition and low self-worth, as well as environmental and interpersonal factors such

as negative l i fe events and limited social resources. Furthermore, longitudinal studies

show that aggressive behaviour, especially for males, is stable over time and that

aggressive behaviour in young children is highly predictive of serious adult antisocial

behaviour (Huesman, Eron, Lefkowitz & Walder, 1984; Lochman & Lampron, 1985).

Werner (1989) in a 1955 birth cohort s tudy on the island of Kauai, Hawaii

discovered that the relative impact of risk and protective factors changed at various

life phases. For example, Fenzel (1989) suggests that simply being a young adolescent

student brings role strain, while Rutter (1989), found that key patterns of interaction

between d i f ferent mediating factors (i.e., genetic, biological, environmental) exist and

that some of these persist across development whereas others are age specific.

Cauce et al. (1992) found that both family and school support moderated the

relationship between negative events and school com petence. Interactive e f fects were

also detected in that school support buffered a number of negative events best for

those indiv iduah with an interna1 locus of control for success,

Wertlieb, Weigel, & Feldstein (1987) note a distinction between stress associated

with major li fe events and that associated with normal dail y problems. Additionally,

they mention the possible modifying influence of social support. Undesirable life

events had the strongest association with behaviour problems. Ribord y (1989) concurs

that children's reactions to serious l i fe losses and stressors may show themselves as

behaviours a t school and that the form of the manifestation depends upon the type of

loss (i.e., death, separation/divorce).

Again i t appears that while there is a relationship, the influences that affect

resiliency may not be merely causal, but are likely interactional and may need to be

accounted for in mobility studies.

2) FAMILY SUPPORT AND FAMILY COHESION

The most important adults in a child's l i fe are the parents or caretakers who

make up the child's family. Family support has been found to be a buffer against

negative life situations, and is, in itself a protective factor, while a lack of family

cohesion has been found to be a risk factor.

Family support was consistently found to be helpful and stress-buffering in

several domains related to school adjustment including attitude toward school, anxiety,

and adapting to new school social tasks (Barone et al., 1991; Cauce et al., 1992). In

addition, there is a significan t positive relationship between parental involvement in

schools, especially the perceived quality of the parent involvement, and academic

achievement, social cornpetence and attendance (Haynes, Corner & Hamilton-Lee, 1989;

Reynolds et al., 1992). As well, a strong inverse relationship exists between a family's

social support and child symptomatology, including levels of substance (i.e., cigarette,

alcohol, marijuana) use (WertIieb et al., 1987; Wills, Vaccaro & McNamara, 1992).

Lack of family cohesion was found to be a possible stressor for adolescents

(Walker and Greene, 1987) and is related to adolescent suicidality (Kurtz &

Derevensky, 1993). When family stress increases there is a corresponding increase in

behaviour problems for children and adolescents (Fergusson et al., 1994; Shaw, Vondra,

Hommerding, Keenan & Dunn, 1994).

Some researchers, however, have been unable to find support for the hypothesis

that parental stress or even serious mental ilIness is a predictor of long-term pathology

or incompetence in children (Cohen, Burt & Bjork, 1987; Garmezy et al., 1984).

Nevertheless, research generally supports the notion that strong family support and

good cohesion are beneficial for children's adaptation, academic achievement and Iong-

term outlook. Not only were parental attitudes significantly linked to those of their

children (Stroh & Brett 1990), but in some cases it was found that parents could be

proactive in aiding their children. For example, in a study of mobile children, parents

used friendship facilitation strategies which were beneficial in helping adolescents

17

develop closer and more intimate friendships after moving (Vernberg, Beery, Ewell, &

Abwender, 1993).

A most extreme and distressing example of disruption of family and consequent

loss of support can occur with the death of a parent. Particularly i f the death was

sudden, unnatural or violent, i t can be considered a traumatic stressor. Ribordy (1989)

notes that children o f al1 ages will usually exhibit changes in behaviour as well as have

some interference in academic progress for at least the short term, and possibly for

several years after the traumatic event. Wolfelt (1996) suggests that children grieve i n

what he refers to as "doses" and that they can be expected to feel and/or express their

grief long after the death of a parent, especially at later developmental milestones such

as graduation, rnarriage, childbearing, etc. In addition, the death of a parent can be

accompanied by several other changes previously discussed as potential risk factors,

including change in family income, less availability of family support, and/or possible

move to another location. Thus, the death of a parent and the accompanying

disruptions create significant change in a child's life and can be considered a

significant stressor or risk for dif ficulties and/or maladjustrnent.

Poor parental support, whether due to poor family cohesion, mismatch of

parent-child temperament style, poor intrapersonal and interpersonal skills, or the

death of a parent can be considered a risk factor in a child's life. Without positive

adult support and strong intrapersonal skills a child is likely to be at greater risk if

subjected to f requent disruptions such as moves.

SUMMARY

Several factors can be considered risk factors for school-aged children. These

include, but are not limited to, socioeconomic status, intelligence, learning dif ficulties,

peer support, and adult support. These risk factors are complex and interactional and

need to be examined in studies of mobility.

18

OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW

Thirty-eight studies were chosen according to the criteria for inclusion

described earlier i n this paper. Ideally, to explore the effects of transience and

evaluate the risks invoIved, researchers need to clearly define the type mobility being

studied as well as describe the subject population fully in terms of the risk factors.

The mobility studies reviewed here have been presented in Table 1. A

description of the subjects, the independent and dependent variabIes, and a brief

summary of the findings is provided for each study, Furthermore, the studies have

been grouped according to four major categories: three based upon the major type of

dependent variable (both Academic and Psychosocial Ef fects; Academic Ef fects;

Psychosocial Effects) and a fourth comprises qualitative studies.

TABLE 1 - MOBILITY STUDIES REVIEWED IN SUMMARY STUDY SUBJECTS INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT FINDINGS

(age, etc) VARIABLE VARIABLE

Mobility and Both Academic & Psychosocial Effects

Filippelli 3-5 years; & Jason n=132 (1992) U.S.

Felner et al. (1982) US.

Pepler & Moore (unpub- lished 1991) Canada

Barone et ai. (1991) U.S.

Reyes & Hedeker

Grade 9; scheduled transition n=172

6-12 years; n=265

Grade 9; scheduled transit ion n=82

Grade 9: high risk

(1993) U.S. inner city n=154

Hatzi- 13-15 years; christou & n=784 Hop f(1992) Greece

Mobility + negative events

Prevention project

Homelessness

Mobility + means-end problem solving skills; l i fe stress; social support

Transition; preventative program

Remigration to Greece from Germany

Sel f-concept; achievement scores; academic grades

Sel f-concept; perceptions of school; grades

Academic achievement; attention; locus of control

Adjustment:

Transfer students with more negative life events had sig. lower w riting grades & self-concept scores, & lower achievement scores.

Project participants had sig. better grades, attendance & more stable sel f-concepts.

Homeless child ren sig. lower on reading & math, more behaviour probiems, and sig. more external in control orientation.

Transition resulted in grades; quality of sig. decrease in GPA life; attendance; & attendance; Females dif ficulty of posttransition tasks; state anxiety

Absence, academic achievement

Achievement, language com petence, adjustment (interpersonal, intrapersonal)

did not decrease GPA's as much as males.

Sig. decrease in GPA, increase in failure rate & drop in rankings for all; higher absenteeism Gr 8 linked to academic di f ficulties & higher absenteeism Gr 9.

Remigrants had di f ficulty in language/learning domains; newer remigrants sig. more dif ficulty in class adaptation & learning than local students; sig. lower achievement language, history & math.

20

TABLE 1 (continued)

STUDY SUBJECTS INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT FINDINGS (age, etc) VARIABLE VARIABLE

Mobility and Academic Ef fects

Johnson & Grade 6; Mobility Lindblad city; (in tracity, (1991) U.S. n=1686 ext racity,

nonmobile)

Warren- Grades 3-5; Reason for move Sohlberg & n=451 Jason (1992) U.S.

Marchant Grades 2,4,6; Mobility & Medway military; (1987) U S . n=170

Whalen & Grade I l ; Fried n=874 (1973) US.

Morris et Grade 5; al. (1967) n=410 us.

Mobility, IQ, & SES (3-way ANOVA)

MobilityISES; IQ con t rolled

Mancaster 14-20 years; Acculturation; et al. migrant urbanization; (1992) U.S. n=l51 SES

Levine et Grades K-6; Pupil turnover al. (1966) inner city U.S. n=574

fngersoll et Grades 1-12 Mobility al. (1989) n=41,735 (geographic U.S. instability)

Academic achievement

Adjustment to new school; (grades)

Adjust ment; achievement

Achievement scores

Reading/ arithmetic achievement

Intracity mobile groups had sig. lower academic achievement scores than others

Reason for move sig. di f ferentiated academic achievemcnt in reading, spelling and math; Grades dropped for al1 students regardless of reason for move

Sig. correlation betwcen total li fe moves & achievement (more moves = higher achievement)

High mobility1IQ group had sig. higher achievement scores than low mobilityl high IQ or high mobilityllow IQ groups

Mobility af fected reading but not arithmetic scores

Academic success AcculturaIization & urbanization finked with academic success

Academic # of moves sig. performance associated with poorer

academic achievement

Student Achievement levels of achievement stable groups & sig.

higher than mobile groups; Impact of mobility diminishes in higher grades.

TABLE 1 (continued)

STUDY SUBJECTS INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT FINDINGS (age, etc) VARIABLE VARIABLE

Mobility and Psychosocial Effects

Calabrese Grade 10- Mobility Alienation Early moves no sig. (1989) U.S. 12; urban; (Dean Alienation ef fect on alienation;

n=239 Scale) greater alienation for older adolescents; less alienation for adolescents who plan to go to college; sig. effects for race & alienation.

Goebel sophomores, Mobility SES; sex; Higher mobility (1981) U.S. juniors & patterns: age a t intelligence; 3 during preschool &

seniors; rnove; intra- vs way relationship lower rates during n=586 inter-community adolescence associated

Stroh & Brett (1990a) U .S.

Stroh & Brett (1990b) US.

Fenzel

moves.

6-18 years; Short term & Social, corporation cumulative behavioural & trans fers; ef fects of school n=309 mobility; before adjustment;

after data physical health; sel f-con fidence

6-18 years; Mobility Premove & corporation postmove transfers; attitudes and n=56 activities.

with higher SES, greater intelligence.

No short-term e f fects of moving or negative ef fects o f frequent moves; coping ability linked to previous coping ability.

3 months af ter move fewer best f riends, less time in sports, lessons and reading; no Sig. interactions for age, sexy p removd postmove activities except rank order constant; postmove attitude related to premove at t i tude and mother's well-being.

Grade 6; Scheduled school Role strain Development of Early (1989) U.S. n=120 transition ~ d o l e s c e n t Role

Strain Inventory (EASRI); concept of role strain has merit in studying adolescent stress.

22

TABLE 1 (continued)

STUDY SUBJECTS INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT FINDINGS (age, etc) VARIABLE VARIABLE

Mobility and Psychosocial Ef fects (continued)

Field 2-5 years; (1984) U.S. n=28

Vernberg Grade 7-8; (1990) U.S. n=73

Mann Under- (1972) U.S. graduates

n=69

Brett 1-18 years; (1982) U.S. n=373

School transfer Separation stress Increased agitated behaviour before the move for movers; post-move, agi tated behaviour diminished but increased in children who stayed.

Mobility Experiences with Fewer contacts with peers friends & less

intimacy with best f riends; Mobile boys had more rejection than peers.

Highllow Adaptation: OP1 High mobile group mobility & scores; anxiety had less anxiety than upward/no social ratings; low mobile group; mobility classroom social but not

pre ferences; residential mobility ANOVA af fected classroom

preferences; mobile males more intellectually oriented, value autonom y, independ. & more adaptive; no dif ferences for fernales.

Rate of mobility Well-being Mobile adolescents (moves/years in had more health work force; problems; mobile boys rnoves/age for less persistent on children) tasks; mobile girls

more frequent behaviour problems; # of moves related to quality of peer relations for children, not adolescents; missing friends & making new friends harder for adolescents than children.

TABLE 1 (continued)

STUDY SUBJECTS INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT FINDINGS (age, etc) VARIABLE VARIABLE

Mobility and Psychosocial Ef fects (continued)

Hirsch & Grade 6-8; Peer social Psy chological Sig. cross-sectional DuBois scheduled support symptomology correlates bet ween (1992) U.S. transition; peer support & mental

n=143 health.

Soussignan 5-6 years; Changing school Behavioural & Grade 1's more off - et al. n=17 environment ( K - cardiovascuIar task time than in (1988) U K Grade 1) changes Kindergarten; less

time with peers; no sig. di f f. in heart rate.

Gilchrist Grade 6; Move from Student's Entry to high school et al , middle & elementary to perception of potentially disturbing (1988) US. lower SES; junior high change; beliefs; in normal adolescents;

77% white; school readiness worried more about 23% non- social than academic white; n=606 matters.

Dowling 10-21 years; Trans fer & Adjustmeat (1986) U K scheduled predictor factors (behaviour;

transition; (verbal reason; attitude; n=503 sentence reading; attendance);

personality before & after inventory; da ta behaviour; attendance; gender

Best predictor of secondary adaptation is behaviour in primary; Attitude to school least predictable; Best predictor of secondary attendance was primary attendance .

Kroger 16-17 years; Distance, # & Sel f-concept No sig. correlations (1980) U.S. middle class; recency of between # of moves,

n=242 moves; greatest # recency of last move, of moves from 4 or age of greatest age spans moves & self-concept;

negative correlation between distance of moves & self-concept.

Jason et al. Grades 3-5; Parent-based High-risk (1993) U.S. n=147 intervention children

50% of high-intensity intervention group moved from poor to average/good coping compared with 30% of low-intensi ty group.

TABLE 1 (continued)

STUDY SUBJECTS INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT FINDINGS (age, etc) VARIABLE VARIABLE

Mobility and Psychosocial Ef fects (continued)

Walker & 4-16 years; Residential Boyle (un- n=3294 mobility: published) frequency of Chedoke- moves, recency McMaste r of move hospital; Child Health Study 1983 Canada

Gerner et High schoo1; International al. (1992) a=1076 mobility U.S.

Causey & Grade 7; Coping strategies Dubow scheduled & perceptions of (1993) U.S. move; n=162 school

environment

Barone et Grade 12; Mainstream o r al. (1993) scheduled special education U.S. move; n=234 status

Child psychiatric # of moves associated disorders with emotional

disorder; risk (29%) associated with low income; reccncy of move predictor of conduct disorder & hyperactivity (no temporal information) high rate of mobility associated with increase in child psychiatric disorders (not straight forward); single move not same resu l ts.

Interest in travel, Internationally mobile languages; adolescents more ratings of interest in crave1 & cultural learning languages; accep tance; more culturally orientation to accepting & oriented international toward international li festyle lifestyle in future.

Adaptation Approach coping strategies, favourable perceptions of school environment tied to higher levels of perceived coping ef fectiveness & general adaptation; avoidance strategies with lower levels; initial levels of coping strategies predictive of later perceived ef fectiveness.

Education & Spec. ed. group higher employment risk of disengagement; outcornes Respondents relying

on informa1 rather than forma1 resources; sig. changes in social networks 6 months ~ost- transi t ion.

TABLE 1 (continued)

STUDY SUBJECTS INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT FINDINGS (age, etc) VARIABLE VARIABLE

Mobility and Psychosocial Ef fects (continued)

Vernberg 12-14 years; Ratings of Intimacy & Social perspective et al. new sophistication companionship in coordination (1994) U.S. enrollees;

n=74 close f riendships

Barrett & 3-18 years; Long distance Emotional Noble mobile, non- moves adjustment (1973) U.S. military; (scores on

n=318 questionnaire & LBCL; mot hers' anxieties)

Har tere t Grades7-8; Mobility al. (1992) scheduled US. move; n=463

Academic self- concepts, motivation

important influence on f riendship formation.

No dif ference for Total Disability, Aggression, Inhibition or LD; somewhat more disturbed post-move but still below total population & dissipated quickly; more d i f ficulties making new friends af ter age Il.

Changes in perceived competence (50% felt either more or less competent) related to changes in motivation & to school-related affect & anxiety after transition.

TABLE 1 (continued)

STUDY SUBJECTS INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT FINDINGS (age, etc) VARIABLE VARIABLE

Qualitative

Brown & 11 years; Transition to Children's Armstrong S.W. London; secondary school worries & (1986) UK n=220 positive feelings

Murdoch 8-12 years; (1986) U K n=42

Transition to Individual and upper school; social meanings reading ages & of t r am fer m a t h scores; events social class; position in family; other schools attended

Wide individual variations & idiosyncratic nominations of worry; real, if transitory fears; general patterning & structure of both positive & negative expectations changes over time; no sig. di f f , bet ween girls' & boys' worries; evidence of degree of mismatch between teachers' assessments & children's reported feelings; 3 distinct types of transfer experience anxicty (transi tory, residual & debilitating).

Social class may have in fluenced expectations of transfer as may have previous school size and # of post-move schools group went to.

27

Table 2 shows an overview of the subjects in the studies. Of the thirty-eight

studies reviewed, ha1 f targeted adolescents and over ha1 f (t wenty-t wo) studied

subjects in middle school, junior high school or high school. Subjects in twenty-five

of the studies were divided fairly evenly between males and females, although

twelve of the studies failed to specify the gender mix.

TABLE 2 Major Characteristics of Studies Reviewed

n = 38

Study Characteristics # of studies

Age of Subjects c 5 years 6-11 years 12-19 years Mixed Unspeci f ied Total

Grade Range of Subjects Preschool Elementary school Middle school/junior high High school Post-secondary Mixed Unspeci fied Total

Gender % male % female < 40 > 60 40-60 40-60 > 60 c 40

Unspeci fied Total

CRITIQUE OF MOBILITY STUDIES

REASON FOR MOVE

Of the studies reviewed, most contained serious flaws. One major problem

with much of the mobility literature is failure to differentiate between types of

moves or reasons for moves. Generalization of results of a specific group of movers

(Le., children of military personnel) to the whole population, or failure to

differentiate between reasons and/or types of moves can invalidate results. Jason er

al. (1992) stress the importance of reason for a move as a factor influencing a child's

adjustment to a school transfer. Table 3 shows the studies which controlled for o r

faited to control for reason and type of move.

Of the thirty-eight studies, eighteen presented mixed or unspecified reasons

for moves. Of those, one study (Warren-Sohlberg & Jason, 1992) looked at the

correlation between the reason for a move and academic achievement, and found

that the reason for a move may have a dif ferential ef fect upon academic

achievement in readiog, spelling and math. In this study Warren-Sohlberg and Jason

found that children moving for "household considerations" or "transferring from

public school" experienced a drop in marks, while those chitdren who transferred

because their old school was closing scored consistently highest on al1 subtests. This

important finding indicates that the question is relevant and should be included as

background information in mobility studies.

TABLE 3 - Reason for Move

STUDY corporate military family scheduled migrant mixed breakupl transition otherjnot financial speci fied hardship

Johnson & X Lindblad (1991)

Calabrese (1989) X

Stroh & Brett X (1990a)

Stroh & Brett X (1990b)

Fenzel (1989)

Field (1984)

Warren-Sohlberg & Jason (1992)

Marchant & Medway (1987)

Filippelli & Jason (1992)

Whalen & Fried (1973)

Felner et al. (1982)

Vernberg (1990)

Mann (1972)

Brett (1982)

Morris et al. (1967)

Hirsch & DuBois (1992)

TABLE 3 (continued)

STUDY corporate military family scheduled migrant mixed breakupl transition otherfnot f inancial speci f ied hardship

Pepler & Moore (unpublished - 1991)

Levine et al. (1966)

Barone, et al. (1991)

Manaster et al. (1992)

Gerner et al. (1992)

Jason et al. (1993)

Causey & Dubow (1993)

Reyes & Hedeker (1993)

Barone et al. (1993)

Ingetsoll et al. (1989)

Vernberg et al. (1994)

Barrett & Noble (1973)

Hatzichristou & Hop f (1992)

Harter et al. (1992)

Soussignan et al. (1988)

TABLE 3 (continued)

STUDY corporate military famiiy scheduled migrant mixed breakupl transition o t h e r h o t financial speci fied hardship

Gilchrist et ai. (1988)

Brown & Armstrong (1986)

Murdoch (1986)

Dowling (1986)

K roger (1980)

Walker & Boyle (unpublished - 1983)

TOTAL (n=38)

Of the remaining seventeen studies, three adequately describe reasons for

moving and give arguments for the homogeneity of the population (Barrett & Noble,

1973; Field, 1984; Gerner, Perry, Moselle & Archbold, 1992) while the other fifteen

overlook the question. Why this important factor has been ignored can be speculated

upon. I t may be that researchers do not ask the question or that the school

administration does not gather such information at the time of a move. It may also

be that for some parents, revealing the true reason for a move is embarrassing,

especially if that reason inciudes financial hardship or a family break-up.

Nevertheless, to truly understand how moving exacerbates or ameliorates certain

known risk factors, the information must be more rigorously collected and

examined.

PRE- A N D POST-MOVE DATA

Another common omission in studies was failure to provide da ta both before

and af ter a move. AI1 studies reported data a f t e r the move but only seventeen of the

reviewed thirty-eight studies included full o r partial da ta from before the move as

Table 4 shows. Neglecting to include data from both before and af ter the move

compromises the validity of results. Without this important compatison, it is

diff icult to ascertain whether results found are effects of the move or are due to

factors present before and possibly unretated to the move. Granted, the mobile

population is diff icult to research well. The unpredictable nature of some moves

because of, for example, short notice for job transfers, and sudden fami1y crises

(marital separation or job loss) make it diff icult to anticipate subject pools and

track mobile groups. While i t is fairly simple to Iocate a sample of children who

have moved into an area, it can be difficult to obtain pre-move data for such a

group. The studies whose authors were successful in overcoming at least some of

these difficulties by including pre- and post-move data as part of their design are

described in the next section. Some of these studies included subjects whose moving

patterns were easier to track than others due to the reason for and nature of the

move, for example, subjects who moved at scheduled transition points.

TABLE 4 - Research Controls STUDY pre- & SES IQ learning peer adult

post- problems support support move

Johnson & Lindblad (1991)

Calabrese (1989)

Stroh & Brett X (1990a)

Stroh & Brett X (1990b)

Fenzel (1989) X

Field (1984) X

Warren-Sohlberg X & Jason (1992)

Marchant & Medway (1987)

FilippeIli & Jason (1992)

Whalen & Fried (1973)

Felner et al. (1982)

Vernberg (1990)

Mann (1972)

Brett (1982)

Morris et al. (1967)

Hirsch & DuBois X (1992)

TABLE 4 (continued)

STUDY pre- & SES IQ Iearning peer adult post- problems support support move

Pepler & Moore (unpublished - 1991)

Levine et al. (1966)

Barone, et al. (199 1)

Manaster et al. (1992)

Gerner et al. (1992)

Jason et al. (1993)

Causey & Dubow (1993)

Reyes & Hedeker (1993)

Barone et al, (1993)

Ingersoll et al. (1989)

Vernberg et al. (1994)

Barrett & Noble (1973)

Hatzichristou & Hop f (1992)

Harter et al. (1992)

Soussignan et al. (1988)

TABLE 4 (continued)

STUDY pre- & SES IQ learning peer adult post- problems support support move

Gilchrist et ut. (1988)

Brown & X Armstrong (1986)

Murdoch (1986) X

Dowling (1986) X

Kroger (1980)

Walker & Boyle (unpublished - 1983)

TOTAL (n=38)

a) PRE- AND POST- DATA FOR MOVES MADE AT SCHEDULED

TRANSITION POINTS

The groups of researchers most consistently successful in gathering both pre-

and post-move data were those studying subjects at normal transition times (i.e.,

preschool to elementary school; elementary to school; junior to senior high school).

Of the thirteen transition studies twelve include both pre- and post-move data,

providing valuable information about the effects of normal transitions. Studies of

scheduled traasitions allow easier and more standardized collection of pre-and post-

move data because the sampIe group generally moves a t one time from one or more

feeder schoo1s to the next level. The moves are predictable and easy to document

and thus have afforded useful information about students at normal transition

times.

Of these studies, three examined the ef fect of mobility on academic

achievement (Barone et al., 1991; Felner, Ginter & Primavera, 1982; Reyes &

Hedeker, 1993). Two of the studies found that when pre-move grade point averages

(GPA) were compared with those post-move, there was a significant decrease in

GPA's af ter the transition. The third study (Felner et al., 1982) examined the

e f ficacy of an intervention project, comparing control subjects wit h the project

subjects. The project subjects had signi ficantly better grades than the control

subjects post-move, even though the subjects were well-matched pre-move. While it

cannot be known from this data whether the third group also had lower post-move

grades, it is interesting to note that in this study extra intervention made a

difference in academic achievement af ter a move. Thus, looking at the general

trends in these three studies there may be some deleterious academic effects even in

normal transitions which may need to be addressed.

These three studies plus the remaining nine addressed issues chat migh t be

loosely grouped under the heading of psychosocial effects and included self-

concept, role strain, worries, peer support, mental health, coping strategies and

absenteeism. Al1 studies found some changes between pre- and post-move measures,

predominantly negative, such as greater distress or worries, higher absenteeism, or

lower perceived effectiveness. Five of the twelve found that while al1 subjects

experienced drops on the dependent variable, there was a link between pre- and

post-move abilities. For example, higher absenteeism pre-move predicted higher

absen teeism rates post-move.

It is indicated in these studies, albeit haphazardly, that even a normal time

of transition may be a stressor for children. For example, in one study Fenzel (1989)

developed an assessrnent tool (Early Adolescent School Role Strain Inventory) for

measuring role strain in young adolescents moving from elementary to middle

school, and analyzed its validity by administering known and normed measures at

one point in t h e before, and two points in time after, the school transition. He

found that the concept of role strain is likely to be useful in "investigating stress

37

related to the student role in early adolescencen (p.29). His conclusion is that simply

being a student undergoing a transition is likely in itself a stressor.

b) PRE- A N D POST- DATA IN UNSCHEDULED MOVES

Studies of students at scheduled transition periods provide valuable

information about students' reactions to scheduled moves, but can not necessarily be

generalized to unscheduled moves d u e to changes in family circumstances, job

transfer, and so on. It is thus useful to find some studies, albeit iimited in numbers,

which employ pre- and post-move data from studics of mobility at other than

normal scheduIed transition points (Field, 1984; Jason, Johnson, Danner, Taylor &

Kurasaki, 1993; Stroh & Brett, 1990a & 1990b; Warren-Sohlberg and Jason, 1992).

Stroh and Brett (1990a & 1990b) succeeded in gathering pre- and post-move

information by interviewing families of employees of estabtished Fortune 500

corporations at two time periods 18 months apart. The companies' records provided

the information necessary to track the families effectively. The sample of subjects

consisted of those families who were transferred between the two data collection

points. Families of those employees not transferred during this period served as the

control group. Stroh and Brett found that the effects of the move itself were not

significant fo r the children of corporate movers. Rather, they found that an

important predictor in children's adjustment to a move were their pre-move

activities. In addition, the mother's adjustment to the move was found to be

significantly related to children's attitudes to moving, although no causal

relationship was found. Stroh and Brett point out that the results of these corporate

move studies can only be generalized to other corporate moves. While insigni ficant

effects were found in this study, significant results may be found in studies of

other populations with fewer resources.

Warren-Sohlberg and Jason, (1992), obtained partial pre-and post-move data

by using school grades as one of the measures contributing to total adjustment.

Report card grades in math and reading were used from the quarter before the

move and from the quarter af ter the move. However, report card grades are not

standardized from teacher to teacher, o r from school to school and thus cannot be

considered reliable sources for comparing pre- and post-move adjustment.

Nevertheless, using the before and af ter grades, Warren-Sohlberg and Jason found

that no rnatter what the reason for moving, grades dropped for al1 the t r am fer

students w hen they changed schools.

Jason et al. (1993) compared the impact of high-intensity and low-intensity

parent-based interventions on groups of high-risk children after a move and found

that the high-intensity interventions helped 50% of the students move from poor to

average or good coping compared with 30% of the low-intensity group. Like the

study by Felner et al., (1982), this study suggests that not only are some students at

risk for academic difficulties, but that some interventions at the time of a move

may help lessen that risk, thus reinforcing the need for better, more complete

examinations of the nature of the interaction between mobility and risk.

In a study using multiple methods of data collection (naturalistic

observation, physiological measures, child interviews and parent and teacher

ratings) Field, (19841, followed two groups of preschoolers as some moved to new

schools, while others remained in the original school. The subjects were preschoolers

attending an all-day nursery school-kindergarten and the moves took place at the

close of a summer school session. Timing of the moves to coincide with the end of

term, and the short distance moved helped to facilitate tracking of the subjects in

this relatively small sample (N = 28). The children who moved were found to have

physioiogical and behavioural symptoms of agitation prior to the move, while the

children who remained in the original school experienced these physiological and

behavioural agitation symptoms after the other children had left. While these

findings cannot be generalized to include movers of al1 ages o r even al1 preschool

moves, they make a worthwhile contribution to the body of preschooler mobility

39

literature and point towards coping responses common to at least some preschoolers

in transition.

The studies employing pre- and post-move data provide important

information about the impact of normal transition points, but they represent a

minority among the mobility studies. Twenty-one of the thirty-eight studies

reviewed failed to provide data pre- and post-move. This may explain, in part, the

wide variety of results and some of the contradictions inherent in the body of

literature examining mobility. There is no doubt that serious problems exist in

attempting ta gather pre- and post-move information that is valid and worthwhile,

due to the nature of the subject group, the unpredictability of many moves, and the

difficulty in tracking subjects from one geographical or administrative area to

another. Still, the questions remain and perhaps in an era relying more and more on

computer access to information, there may be some hope that some of these

technical limitations may be overcome by obtaining more precise pre- and post-

move data which provides more exact information. Such information would

facilitate the planning of better, more accurately-targeted interventions.

MOBILITY AND RISK

Studies which examined the interaction between specific potential strengths

and risks for children moving were less evident, as Table 4 shows. Fewer than half

of the studies (eighteen) accounted or controlled for socioeconomic status. Two

unpublished Canadian studies are worth examining in relation to this question

(Pepler & Moore, unpublished 1991; Walker & Boyle, unpublished 1983). Pepler and

Moore compared homeless children residing in shelters with children living a t home

in both one- and two-parent families. The children living in shelters scored

significantly lower on achievement tests of reading and arithmetic, had higher

checklist scores fo r behaviour problems, and exhibited a more external locus of

control than did the children living in the family home. Walker and Boyles' study

40

found that for children, moving two or more times was linked with emotional

disorder and that part of the risk (29%) was linked with poverty. While i t woufd be

premature to draw conclusions about causality from either o f these studies, both

raise important questions which have not been adequately addressed by the mobility

literature to date. Both of these studies begin to examine the link between mobiIity

and some aspects of SES.

Even fewer studies cont rolled for intelligence (IQ - fivc), learning probIems

(four), peer support (four), or adult support (four). These omissions present serious

limitations in view of the profound impact that each of these factors has on the

lives of children. Since this type of data appears crucial to an examination of the

risk factors associated with mobility, its omission may account for the genera1 lack

of data useful for practitioners in much of the mobility Iiterature.

LIMITATIONS A N D DIRECTIONS FOR F U T U R E RESEARCH

Future studies investigating effects of geographic mobility on children

should provide more precise descriptions of al1 subjects, controls, variables and

measures in order to address some of the major flaws noted in the mobility

literature described above: failure to control for risk variables known to affect

school adjustment, (i.e., SES, IQ, peer relationships, family di f ficulties); failure to

differentiate between types of moves or reasons for moves; and failure to include

both pre- and post-move data. While much has been hypothesized and written about

the effects of geographic mobility on the academic and psychosocial developrnent of

children and adolescents, the findings to date tend to be contradictory. Researchers

have made valiant attempts to document the effects of mobility on children, but

subjects are mobile and therefore diff icult to track effectively. Consequently the

research does not yield the type of information practitioners are looking for.

Research to date is sketchy and has serious gaps. The studies reviewed lack

information which may be predictive of difficulties for children. None commented

upon the amount o f input a child had in the decision to move. Information is

lacking about differences between previous and receiving schools' curricula. Clear,

consistent definitions of socioeconomic status are rare. Information about the

differences due to maturity or developmental stages at the time of a move is also

lacking. The questions still remain: does i t make a dif ference why children move; is

the reason for a move important?

Nevertheless, researchers developing a more disciplined approach to research

in this field rnay more clearly delineate risks for mobile children. As suggested by

Vernberg and Field (1990), the delineation of major tasks or challenges posed by a

transition is a necessary step in understanding how children may be affected by a

move, a change of school and so forth. If we know what is involved in a move for

any particular individual child, we might then be better equipped to help that child

negotiate the move successfully.

BIBLIOCRAPHY

Allan, J.A.B. and Bardsley, P. (1984). Children who move. Toronto, ON: Faculty of Education, University of Toronto,

Asher, S.R. (1983). Social competence and peer status: Recent advances and future directions. Child Deveio~ment, 54, 1427-1434.

Asher, S.R., Hymel, S. and Renshaw, P.D. (1984). Loneliness in children. Child Develo~ment, 55, 1456-1464.

Barone, C., Aquirre-Deandreis, A.I. and Trickett, E.J. (1991). Means-end problem- solving skills, life stress and social support as mediators of adjustment in the normative transition to high school. American Journal of Comm u n i tv Psvcholoa~, 19(2), 207-225.

Barone, C., Trickett, E.J., Schmidt, K.D. and Leone, P.E. (1993). Transition tasks and resources: An ecological approach to life after high school. In L.A. Jason, K.E. Danner and K.S. Kurasaki (Eds). Prevention and school transitions. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

Barrett, C.L. and Noble, H. (1973). Mothers' anxieties versus the effects of long distance move on children. Journal of Marriane and the Familv. 35(2), 181-188.

Bogat, G.A., Liang, B., Caldwell, R.A., Davidson, W., Bristor, M., Phillips, M., and Suurmeyer, M. (1993). Alternative schools: A school transition for adolescent mothers. In L.A. Jason, K.E. Danner and K.S. Kurasaki (Eds). Prevention and school transitions. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

Byrnes, D.A. (1985). "Ciphern in the classroom: the invisible child. Childhood Education, 62(2), 91-97.

Calabrese, R.L. (1989). The ef fects of mobiIity on adolescent alienation. Hinh School Journal, 73(1), 41-46.

Caldas, S.J. (1993). Reexamination of input and process factor effects on public school achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 86(4), 206-214.

Cauce, A.M., Hannan, K. and Sargeant, M. (1992). Life stress, social support, and locus of control during early adolescence: Interactive effects. American Journal o f Commuai ty Psvcholony, 20(6), 787-798.

Causey, D.L. and Dubow, E.F. (1993). Negotiating the transition to junior high school: The contribution of the school environment. In L.A. Jason, K.E. Danner and K.S. Kurasaki (Eds). Prevention and school transitions. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

Christenson, S.L. (1990). Differences in students' home environments: The need to work with families. School Psvcholoav Review, 19(4), 505-517.

Cohen, L.H., Burt, C.E. and Bjork, J.P. (1987). Life stress and adjustment: Effects of li f e even ts experienced b y young adolescents and their parents. Deveio~men ta1 Psvcholoav 23(4), 583-592.

Cohen, S. and Wills, T.A. (1985). Stress, social support and the bu f fering hypothesis. Psvcholoaical Bulletin, 99(2), 310-357.

Coie, J.D. and Kupersmidt, J.B. (1983). A behavioral analysis of emerging social status in boys' groups. Child Deveio~ment, 54, 1400-1416.

Compas, B.E. (1987). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence. Psvcholonical Bulletin, 101(3), 393-403.

Crick, N.R. and Dodge, K.A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children's social adjustment. Psvcholonical Bulletin, 115(1), 74-101.

Cummins, J. (1986). Psychological assessment of minority students: Out of context, out of focus, out of control? Journal of Reading. Writinn. and Learnina Disabilities, 2(1), 9-19.

Danner, K.E., Jason, L.A. and Kurasaki, K.S. (1993). Introduction. In L.A. Jason, K.E. Danner and K.S. Kurasaki (Eds.) Prevention and school transitions. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

Dodge, K.A. (1983). Behavioral antecedents of peer social status. CbiId Deveio~ment , 54, 1386-1399.

Felner, R.D., Ginter, M. and Primavera, J. (1982). Primary prevention during school transitions: Social support and environmental structure. American Journal of Communi tv Psvcholonv, 10, 277-290.

Fenzel, L.M. (1989). Role strain in early adolescence: A mode1 for investigating school transition stress. Journal of Earlv Adolescence, 9(1-2), 13-33.

Fergusson, D.M., Horwood, L.J. and Lynsky, M. (1994). The childhoods of multiple problem adolescents: A 15-year longitudinal study. Journal of Child Psvcholonv and Psvchiatrv, 35(6), 1123-1 140,

Field, T. (1984). Separation stress of young children trans ferring to new schools. Deveiobmentaî Psvcholo Y. 20(5), 786-792.

French, D.C. (1990). Heterogeneity of peer-rejected girls. Child Develo~ment, 61, 2028-203 1.

Garmezy, N. (1991). Resiliency and vulnerability to adverse developmental outcomes associated with poverty. American Behavioral Scientist, 34(4) 416-430.

Garmezy, N., Masten, AS. and Tellegen, A. (1984). The study of stress and competence in children: A building block for developmental psychopathology. Child Develomnent, 55, 97-111.

Gerner, M., Perry, F., Moselle, M.A. and Archbold, M. (1992). Characteristics of internationally mobile adolescents. Journal of School Psvcholoqy, 30(2), 197-214.

Goebel, B.L. (1981). Mobile children: An American tragedy? PsvchoIoaical R e ~ o r t s 48, 15-18.

Harter, S., Whitesell, N.R. and Kowalski, P. (1992). Individual differences in the ef fects of educational transitions on young adolescents' perceptions of competence and motivational orientation. American Educational Research Journa1 29(4), 777- 807.

Haynes, N.M., Comer,J.P. and Hamilton-Lee, M. (1989). School climate enhancernent through parental invoIvement. Journal of School Psvcholonv, 27, 87-90.

Hirsch, B.J. and Du Bois, D.L. (1992). The relation of peer social support and psychological symptomatology during the transition to junior high school: A two- year longitudinal analysis. American Journal of Communitv Psvcholoae 20(3), 333- 347,

Huesman, L.W., Eron, L.D., Lefkowitz, M.M. and Walder, L.O. (1984). Stability of aggression over time and generations. Develo~menta l Psvcholo~v, 20(6), 1120- 1134.

Hymel, S., Rubin, K.H., Rowden, L. and LeMare, L. (1990). Children's peer relationships: Longitudinal prediction of internalizing and externalizing problems from middle to late childhood. ChiId Development, 61, 2004-2021.

Ingersoll, G.M., Scamman, J.P., and Eckerling, W.D. (1989). Geographic mobility and student achievement in an urban setting. Educational Evaluation and Policv Analvsis, 11(2), 143-149.

Ingraham, C.L. (1985). Cognitive-affective dynamics of crisis intervention for school entry, school transition and school failure. School Psvcho lo~v Review, 14(3), 266- 279.

Jason, L.A., Betts, D., Johnson, J.H., Weine, A.M., Warren-Sohlburg, M.L., Shinaver, C.S., Neuson, L., Filippelli, L. and Lardon, C. (1990). Promoting cornpetencies in high-risk transfer children. Special Services in the Schools, 6(1/2), 21-36.

Jason, L.A., Johnson, J.H., Danner, K.E., Taylor, S. and Kurasaki, K.S. (1993). A comprehensive, preventive, parent-based intervention for high-risk t r a m fer students. In L.A. Jason, K.E. Danner and K.S. Kurasaki (Eds). Prevention and school transitions. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

Jason, L.A., Weine, AM., Johnson, J.H., Warren-Sohlberg, L., Filippelli, L.A., Turner, E.Y. and Lardon, C. (1992). Helpinn transfer students: Stratenies for educational and social readiustment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Johnson, R.A. and Lindblad, A.H. (1991). Effect of mobility on academic performance of sixth grade students. P e r c e ~ t u a l and Motor Skills, 72, 547-552.

Kandell, E., Mednick, S.A., Kirkegaard-Sorenson, L., Hutchings, B., Knop, J., Rosenberg, R. and Schulsinger, F. (1988). IQ as a protective factor for subjects at high risk for antisocial behavior. Journal of Consultinn and Clinical Psvcholo~v, 56(2), 224-226.

Kroger, J.E. (1980). Residential mobility and self concept in adolescence. Adolescence, 15(60), 967-977.

Kurtz, L. and Derevensky, J.L. (1993). Stress and coping in adoIescents: the ef fects of family configuration and environment on suicidality. Canadian Journal of School Psvcholonv, 9(2) 204-216.

Leonard, C.P. and Elias, M.J. (1993). Entry into middle school: Student factors predicting adaptation to an ecoIogica1 transition. In L.A. Jason, K.E. Danner and K.S. Ku rasaki (Eds). Prevention and school transitions. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

Light, R.J. and Pillemer, D.B. (1984). Summina UD: The science of reviewinq research. Cambridge, MS:Harvard University Press.

Lochman, S.E. and Lampron, L.B. (1985). The usefulness of peer ratings of aggression and social acceptance in the identification of behavioral and subjective difficulties in aggressive boys. Journal of A ~ ~ l i e d Deveio~menta l Psvcholonv, 6, 187-198,

Luthar, S.S. (1991) Vulnerability and resilience: A study of high-risk adolescents. Child Develo~ment, 62, 600-616.

Manaster, G.J., Chan, J.C. and Safady, R. (1992). Mexican-American migrant students' academic success: Sociological and psychological acculturation. Adolescence, 27(105), 123-136.

Marchant, K.H. and Medway, F.J. (1987). Adjustment and achievement associated with mobility in military families. Psvcholonv in the Schools, 24, 289-294.

Masten, A.S., Best, K.M. and Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development: contributions from the study of children who overcame adversity. Deve lo~ment and Psvcho~atholonv, 2, 425-444.

Moore, T.E. and Pepler, D.J. (unpublished). Academic deficits in shelter and hostel children. A workshop presented by the York Family ProbIem-solving Project.

Morris, J.L., Pestaner, M. and Nelson, A. (1967). Mobility and achievement. The Journal of ExDerimental Education. 35(4), 74-80.

Offord, D. (1989). Ontario chiId health studv: Summarv of findinns. Toronto: Queen's Printer.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1987) Migrants' children at school. The OECD Observer, 146, 16-18 & 23.

Parker, J.G. and Asher, S.R. (1987). Peer relations and later persona1 adjustment: Are low-accepted children a t risk? Psvcholoai,cal Bulletin, 102(3), 357-389.

Patterson, C.J., Kupersmidt, J.B. and Griesler, P.C. (1990). Children's perceptions of self and of relationships with others as a function of sociometric status. Child Deveio~ment , 61, 1335-1349.

Patterson, C.J., Vaden, N.A. and Kupersrnidt, J.B. (1991). Family background, recent l i fe events, and peer rejection dur iag childhood. Journal of Social and Persona1 Relat ionshi~s, 8(3) 347-36 1.

Pepler, D.J. and Moore, T.E. (1991). Children of the homeless: Living in the shadows. Paper presented by the first author as a keynote address a t the Annual General Meeting of the Defence for Children International, Canada, September 25, 1991.

Pinder, CC. (1981). The role of transfers and mobiIity experiences in employee motivation and control. In W. Meltzer (Ed.). Makinn Oraanizations Humane and Productive: A Handbook for Practitioners. Toronto, ON: Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Pinder, C.C. (1989). The dark side of executive relocation. Ornanizational Dvnamics. 17(4) 48-58.

Pinder, C.C. and Walter, G.A. (1984). Personnel transfers and employee development. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 2, 187-218.

Putallaz, M. (1983). Predicting children's sociometric status from their behavior. Child Development, 54, 1417-1426.

Reyes, 0. and Hedeker, D. (1993). Identifying high-risk students during school transition. In L.A. Jason, K.E. Danner and K.S. Kurasaki (Eds.) Prevention and school transitions. New York: The Howarth Press, Inc.

Reynolds, A.J., Weissberg, R.P. and Kasprow, W.J. (1992). Prediction of early social and academic adjustment of children from the inner city. Arnerican Journal of Communitv Psvcholonv, 20(5), 599-624.

Ribordy, S. (1989). Children a t risk due to experienced trauma and loss. In J.M. Lakebrink (Ed.). Children a