Tan, Chee Soon

This three-wave longitudinal study underscores the importance of identifying elements in school settings that can help academically at-risk students--those who are likely to follow a trajectory of low achievement or academic failure-- to develop academic resilience. The study utilised both quantitative (i.e., survey questionnaires and standardised achievement tests) and qualitative (i.e., open-ended questions and semi-structured interviews) approaches, and focused on two subject domains--English Language (EL) and Mathematics (Maths). The participants of the study were 1305 students from 22 schools in Singapore. These students were considered as potentially at-risk academically as their aggregate scores in the Primary School Leaving Examination were lower than the cohort’s mean score. From this pool of students, students facing different levels of academic risk (i.e., low, moderate and high) in EL or Maths were identified on the basis of their school grades and scores in standardised achievement tests at the end Secondary One (S1). Low language or numeracy proficiency on entry to secondary school, which is a critical transition phase in students’ life, was considered as a significant risk factor that can directly predispose students towards continued poor academic performance in later years.
The profiles of the students in the three risk groups were compared in relation to their background characteristics and the focal variables of this study: socio-emotional strengths (i.e., emotional awareness, empathy, goal setting, social competence, and emotional regulation), academic motivation (i.e., amotivation, extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation), perceived relatedness with teachers (i.e., student-to-teacher communication, teacher trust and teacher alienation), and perceived teacher autonomy and competence support. The results of the study suggest that, compared to students facing low academic risk, students facing high academic risk tended to report lower emotional awareness, goal setting and perceived teacher support; and higher amotivation, teacher alienation, and student-to-teacher communication. These variables can be considered as potential foci of interventions that can be implemented before or at the beginning of secondary school in order to preclude students from facing high levels of academic risk or to mitigate the effects of academic risk factors.
This study applied a dual approach in defining academic resilience. Using a trait-based approach, subjective academic resilience was defined as the students’ capacity to effectively handle challenges, adversities, pressures and setbacks in school setting; it was measured using students’ self-ratings on items acting as indicators of trait-based or dispositional form of academic resilience. Using a process- based approach, objective academic resilience was defined as the achievement of positive academic outcomes despite the presence of challenging situations or risk factors (i.e., low achievement on entry to S1). In this study, a positive academic outcome is assessed in Secondary Three (S3): It corresponds to at least a passing grade in EL (or Maths) and/or a score in standardized achievement tests in Reading (or Maths) above the 23rd percentile of the norming population.
Focusing on objective academic resilience, high-risk students who achieved positive academic outcomes in S3 were considered as resilient, and those who remained at a high-risk status were considered as less resilient. Compared to the less resilient students, the resilient students tended to report a greater improvement in goal setting, emotional awareness, and student-to-teacher communication and had a more stable perceived teacher trust over three years. The resilient students tended to have lower amotivation and teacher alienation than their less resilient peers. There were also indications that the resilient students were more competent in setting goals and in working towards their goals; they also tended to frame failure and deal with failure more positively, and to report receiving more competence and relatedness support than their less resilient peers. The key sources of support that helped students deal with academic challenges were mainly peers, followed by family members and teachers.
The results of the study also indicate that student-to-teacher communication and students’ goal-setting ability (particularly, a positive change), perceived teacher competence support, and students’ emotional regulation were the most consistent positive predictors of academic resilience in both objective and subjective forms. The aforementioned factors were found as significant predictors of academic resilience more consistently and strongly in relation to EL than Maths.

This paper draws from international literature and local studies in Singapore on low progress students to delineate the present state of local knowledge and practice, and suggest future directions for research and policy. The needs of low progress students vary and they may not perform as well as their peers due to a variety of reasons. According to local research, there is a range of learning orientations, motivations and talents, non-academic capabilities and psychological needs among these students, which should be considered in efforts to level them up. Besides individual factors, this paper also recognizes the importance of addressing both school- and education-system-related factors, as well as broader societal factors that could contribute to low progress. However, for the purpose of a more focused discussion, this paper looks more closely at the contributing school- and education-system-related factors to low progress. These factors can be categorized into areas of curriculum, instruction and pedagogy, assessment, teacher quality and attitudes, and school culture and structure. They are examined for constructive ideas, strategies and practices of which implications can inform and better the teaching and learning of local low progress students. We also seek to prepare students to face the new challenges in the 21st century as well as to fulfil the vision of achieving a student-centric education where each student matters and where education is positioned as a means by which meritocracy is implemented and social inequalities mediated. Therefore, this paper proposes that it is timely to revisit some long-held beliefs and practices, from preschool education to teacher education, from education policy to micro-classroom pedagogies and management, from curriculum to assessment, and from the school level to engagement of community and family as stakeholders.

This proposal seeks to investigate the beliefs and perceptions held by student teachers regarding student-centred learning (SCL). Specifically, we will seek the views of 15 student teachers enrolled in the PDGE (Primary) programme in 2016. They would have received an education that placed an emphasised on SCL as they were in secondary schools or junior colleges when the Teach Less Learn More initiative was introduced in 2005. These student teachers will in future be teachers who will hopefully make use of student-centred pedagogy and instruction in their classrooms. It is therefore important and useful to find out more about their beliefs and perceptions about student centred approaches. In addition, we are also interested to find out the impact of the Teaching Practicum experience on these beliefs and perceptions. Hence, we will gather information on student teacher perception and beliefs prior to and after their Teaching Practicum stint. In Phase 1 of the 2-phase research, participants will be identified and their consent to participate in the study will be obtained prior to the Teaching Practicum. The interview questions pertaining to their beliefs about SCL will be sent to be completed by participants and returned to the researchers. Individual participants will then meet a researcher for a more in-depth interview. Phase 2 will take place after the Teaching Practicum. As in Phase 1, participants will provide written responses to the interview questions based on their observations of SCL practices in the classrooms. Researchers will subsequently meet individual participants to further probe their responses. To analyse the data, an inductive approach will be used to identify general codes and themes. Results from this study will provide insight into how student teachers' prior experiences in the classroom has influenced their beliefs and perceptions. It will also look at how the training they have received in NIE as well as during their Teaching Practicum have further shaped their beliefs and perceptions.

Character strengths encompass a set of positive traits that can be manifested through thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. To measure the 24 character strengths, the Character Strengths-Semantic Differential Scale (CS-SDS) was used. The aim of the study was to (a) test the factor structure of CS-CDS and (b) test the convergent validity of CS-CDS with life satisfaction and positive affect, and the divergent validity of CS-SDS with negative affect. In total, 283 Singaporean students (96 males, 35.3%), with a median age of 24–26 years old (42.9%), participated in this study. Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) showed the multi-dimensional nature of CS-SDS. Specifically, EFA demonstrated a four-factor model, while CFA identified a five-factor model, showing the dimensions of interpersonal, emotional, restraint, theological, and intellectual. All factors were significantly related to life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect. It was concluded that CS-SDS is a psychometrically sound instrument for measuring character strengths in the Asian context. This tool can be used for designing strength-based interventions aimed at promoting well-being and character among students in higher education.