EPSY 6850 Reading Responses

Week 1

Reaction Question: What are the key features of adolescents cognitive

development? What do educators need to understand to best support
adolescents in classrooms and schools?

Lerner & Jovanovic (2016)

p. 1 p. 13 p. 24 p. 32 p. 45
Intellectual Evolution from Adolescence to Adulthood Egocentrism in
Adolescence
Formal Reasoning Among Pre- and Late Adolescents
Formal Operations as Regulatory Context in Adolescence Development
of Physical and Social Reasoning in Adolescence

The key features of adolescents cognitive development are

egocentrism and the ability to use formal, logical thinking. Logical
thinking allows adolescents to test ideas through experimentation, to
find solutions through thoughtful trial and error (rather than random
trial and error) and to entertain hypothetical situations. The
egocentrism that develops during adolescence results in an obsession
with ones own thinking, behavior, and appearance, and the
anticipation that others are watching ones behavior and appearance
very critically. Egocentrism drives adolescents to react to an
imaginary audience believing that their peers are as obsessed with
them as they are of themselves. Adolescents also create personal
fables because they tend to have the feeling that their experiences,
thoughts, and emotions are unique and exceptional. They often write in
diaries or journals. Feelings of being exceptional can often lead
adolescents to feel that they are immune from harm.
Adolescents are able to reach the developmental stage of formal
operations. Formal operations is different from the developmental
stage of elementary students, concrete operations, in that adolescents
in formal operations are able to reflect on their mental operations, to
reinterpret facts and opinions when presented with new information,
and to use methodological reasoning. Children in the concrete
operations stage make judgments based on experience. When
presented with evidence contrary to what they believe, they find ways
to make the new information fit what they already believe rather than
change their beliefs.
Piaget initially found support for his theory of development and
formal operations in adolescents when he did a study with students. He
found that adolescents were able to use formal logic while younger
students could not. However, replications of the study have found
evidence that some people do not reach the formal operations stage.
Although researchers have agreed that if a person is to reach formal
operations, it will be around the age of adolescence, not before. Rather
than state that some people never reach formal operations, Piaget
theorized that all people (of normal development) reach formal
operations, but in domain specific ways that may not be apparent to
researchers that only test for logic-mathematical reasoning.
Researchers that attempted to account for this were unable to find
support for the theory.
In a study comparing preadolescent children and young college
students, researchers found that both groups are capable of improving
formal operations thinking skills, but that the college students were
able to improve much more than the children. The participants in the
study were selected because they showed no signs of formal
operational thinking when tested. Both groups of participants were
exposed to logic and reasoning problems repeatedly for months. Both
groups learned and improved in their operational thinking from their
experiences with the problems. The gains by the college students were
much greater than those of the preadolescent children. From this study
we can understand that formal operations are more readily accessible
to people who are post-adolescent.
Educators would do well to remember several things about
adolescents. Adolescents are transitioning from concrete operations to
formal operations, which means they may or may not be capable of
methodological reasoning. Adolescents are going through a period of
great egocentrism, which is a normal part of healthy development.
Because of this, students are likely to learn more when subject matter
is personable and meaningful to the student. Adolescents are
hypercritical and hypersensitive about how they are perceived by
others. Educators need to take special care in what they say and how
they say it.

Week 2

Reaction Question: Please identify one contemporary or applied issue

from popular press article that is relevant to the topic of this week and
discuss in relation to the articles of this week.

Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., et al. (1993). Development during
adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on young
adolescents experiences in schools and in families. American
Psychologist, 48, 90-101.

Feldlaufer, H., Midgley, C., & Eccles, J. S. (1988). Student, teacher, and
observer perceptions of the classroom environment before and after
the transition to junior high school. The Journal of Early Adolescence,
8(2), 133-156.
Juvonen, J., Le, V., Kaganoff, T., Augustine, C., & Constant, L. (2004).
Focus on the wonder years: Challenges facing the American middle
school. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation.

New York Times articles: Trying to find solutions in chaotic middle

schools (2007, Jan. 3) and The preteen: Betwixt and bedeviled (2007,
Jan. 7).

Popular Press Article

Meyer, P. (2011). The middle school mess. Education Next, retrieved
from http://educationnext.org/the-middle-school-mess/.

The theme of this weeks readings is the lack of evidence of

efficacy of middle schools. The history of how middle schools came to
be separate from elementary and high schools shows that middle
schools were more a matter of convenience than a necessity for
adolescence. Many of the readings point out that not only are middle
schools unnecessary for adolescent development, but they may be
harmful to learning and development. Peter Meyers article in
Education Next titled The Middle School Mess makes observations
about todays middle schools that fall in line with what is being
reported in the research articles.
Meyer begins his article with quotes about raging hormones.
Eccles et al. (1993), Fellaufer et al. (1988), and Juvonen et al. (2004) all
touch on the fact that adolescents are going through a major
developmental shift. However, all of the researchers question whether
the difficulties that middle school students face stem entirely from
physical, cognitive, and emotional development. Many adults are quick
to judge middle school students for being overly emotional and driven
by hormones, but the researchers suggest that these assumptions are
over exaggerated. Their studies (Eccles et al., 1993; Fellaufer et al.,
1988; Juvonen et al., 2004) have found evidence to support the idea
that classroom management and school organization negatively
contribute to difficulty in adolescence. Meyer also questions the
assumption that issues in middle school can be entirely attributed to
puberty.
Although there is question about the underlying causes,
numerous studies and standardized test scores do show a decline in
learning when students reach middle school (Eccles et al., 1993;
Fellaufer et al., 1988; Juvonen et al., 2004). The teachers quoted by
Meyer express frustration in the amount of bureaucracy, meetings, and
paperwork, which reduce the amount of time spent teaching in the
classroom. Researchers point to the increased number of students per
classroom and less class time as factors requiring teachers to spend
more time on discipline and classroom management than elementary
teachers (Eccles et al., 1993; Fellaufer et al., 1988; Juvonen et al.,
2004). Along with less time spent teaching due to classroom
management issues, researchers observed teachers in middle schools
assigning activities that required only the lowest level thinking skills,
giving students little to no control over their classrooms and
curriculum, and avoiding opportunities for student collaboration (Eccles
et al., 1993; Fellaufer et al., 1988; Juvonen et al., 2004).
Researchers found that not only do most middle schools provide
poorer learning opportunities than elementary schools, they also tend
to have stricter grading procedures (Eccles et al., 1993; Fellaufer et al.,
1988; Juvonen et al., 2004). Studies show a drop in grades for many
students when they reach middle school (Eccles et al., 1993; Fellaufer
et al., 1988; Juvonen et al., 2004). Adolescence is a particularly bad
time for students to feel ineffective at school as it contributes to self-
esteem issues. Researchers and Meyer agree that middle schools were
designed to alleviate congestion in crowded elementary schools, but
that this policy has been a disservice to adolescents (Eccles et al.,
1993; Fellaufer et al., 1988; Juvonen et al., 2004). Students are better
achievers, get into less trouble, and are more likely to succeed in high
school when they attend K-8 schools rather than middle schools (Eccles
et al., 1993; Fellaufer et al., 1988; Juvonen et al., 2004).

Week 3

Reaction Question: Based on the readings of last week and this

week, what do you think are the key critical issues adolescents (or
emerging adults) face in relation to the academic development in
current society?

Battistich , V. (2010). School Contexts that Promote Students Positive

Development. In J. Meece and J. Eccles (Eds.), Handbook of research on
schools, schooling, and human development (ch. 8). New York:
Routledge.

Benner, A., D., & Graham, S. (2009). The transition to high school as a
developmental process among multiethnic urban youth. Child
Development, 80, 356-376.

Arnett, J. A. (2000). A theory of development from the late teens

through the twenties. American Psychologist, 469-480.

Executive summary and excerpts from: Pathways to Prosperity (2011)

Harvard report.
Key critical issues that adolescents face in relation to academic
development are school contexts, school transitions, post-secondary
degree or credential options, and the developmental stage of emerging
adulthood. People from pre-teens through mid-twenties have a unique
set of developmental needs and issues. Not quite children and not
quite adults, adolescents are often misunderstood and inadequately
provided for in some cultures and some educational settings.

Adolescents issues in education begin with the transition from

elementary to middle school. Researchers have found that the larger
class sizes, departmentalization, and less positive teacher-student
relationships in middle schools impact adolescents negatively. The
transition from middle school to high school has similar issues. These
problems are enhanced for students that move from a small school to a
large school and/or students that move from a school in which they are
part of a majority group to a school in which they are part of a minority
group. Feelings of loneliness and not belonging are greater for these
students.

As high school students near graduation they must consider their post-
secondary options. A current issue for many adolescents today is the
pressure to attend a four-year university and earn a bachelors degree.
This pressure can lead to a number of undesirable results. High school
students without the desire to spend four more years in school may not
seek any sort of post-secondary education. Those who are not suited to
university work may incur expensive student loans just to drop out
without completing their program. In either case, unemployment or
low-paying jobs are likely ends for those students. The pressure to go a
four-year university to earn a bachelors degree can come from
teachers and parents. An emphasis on the necessity of going to college
has been a trend for a few decades. Researchers are now finding that it
is better to inform high school students of the varied range of options
after high school. In addition to a four-year university, post-secondary
options also include two-year associate degree programs and
certification programs. The programs often take less time and include
more hands-on training than more academic pursuits. High school
students need to understand that these programs not only exist, but
lead to well-paying careers.

Another issue for those in their late teens is the developmental stage
of emergent adulthood. Emergent adulthood is a time for
independence and exploration before reaching the typical milestones
of adulthood. Adulthood milestones include marriage, full-time
employment, and having children. In the stage of emergent adulthood,
young people find greater independence from parents and explore
career options, love interests, and other interests. Researchers have
found that the stage of emergent adulthood does not exist for all
people. It is most prevalent in western cultures, cultures that are highly
industrialized, and cultures that are postindustralization. Emergent
adulthood may not be present for all people in those cultures. People
with lower socioeconomic standing or those who are part of a certain
subculture (due to religion or other beliefs) may not experience
emergent adulthood because they have no choice but to take on
adulthood responsibilities in their late teens or early twenties or
because their family or religion expects them to begin adulthood at an
early age. Examples of these exceptions include high school dropouts
that begin full-time employment, women who become pregnant early
in life (with little outside support), and people that get married at a
young age. The benefits of having an emergent adulthood stage are
still being researched.

Week 4

Reaction Question: What are the most critical features of teacher

roles in the classroom for students cognitive and academic
development? How can we best evaluate effective teachers? What
kind of support can be provided (or is needed) for teachers in current
classrooms and schools?

Patrick, H., Mantzicopoulos, P. & Sears, D. (2010). Effective Classrooms.

In K. Harris, S. Graham and T. Urdan (Eds.) Educational Psychology
Handbook, Vol. 2 Washington DC: American Psychological Association
Publications.

Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2009). Conceptualization, measurement,

and improvement of classroom processes: Standardized observation
can leverage capacity. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 109-119.

Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. & Hamre, B. (2010). The role of psychological and

developmental science in efforts to improve teacher quality. Teacher
College Record, 112(12), 2988-3023

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2005). Can instructional and emotional

support in the first-grade classroom make a difference for children at
risk of school failure? Child Development, 76(5), 949-967.

Patrick, H., Turner, J. C., & Meyer, D. K. (2003). How teachers establish
psychological
environments during the first days of school: Associations with
avoidance in mathematics. Teachers College Record, 105(8), 1521-
1558.
Teachers have the most impact on a students learning. While parents,
peers, administrators, and legislators also influence the quality of a
students education, teachers are in position to have the biggest
impact. It is important to understand the various responsibilities that
teachers have in classroom teaching. To ensure the best teaching
occurs, we need to understand how to best assess classroom teaching
and how to best support classroom teachers. Schools run well and
students learn more when teachers and administrators are
collaborators who support each other.

There are many critical features of teacher roles in the classroom for
students cognitive and academic development. Teachers are
responsible for the development of activities, lessons, and tasks that
are appropriate and challenging to students according to the students
zones of proximal development. Teachers must also implement
classroom management techniques and procedures that promote a
mastery goal orientation rather than a performance goal orientation,
that create a positive and equitable environment in which students are
collaborators rather than competitors, and that provides safety and
support for students to participate fully without fear of failure. Teachers
must also build positive relationships. The most important of these
relationships is with students, but teachers also need positive
relationships with parents, administrators, and other teachers.

Administrators must evaluate classroom teachers in order to offer

valuable feedback that can improve teaching and to make better
decisions about what supports and what professional development
opportunities are needed at the school. Teachers are best evaluated
through direct observation rather than standardized testing of
students. Evaluating teachers only through standardized test scores of
their students has been shown to be ineffective and encourages
teachers to teach to the test. Direct observation of how teachers
manage classrooms and teach lessons give administrators a better
picture of how well a teacher is doing. Observations of teachers should
be standardized, should happen frequently and at different times of the
day, and include evidence of emotional support, classroom
organization, and instructional support. It is fair to the teachers if they
are all evaluated on the same criteria. The criteria should be items that
research has shown to improve student learning.

Teachers need supports in current classrooms and schools. Those

supports include positive relationships with coworkers, especially
mentor teachers and administrators, as well as support from the
parents of students. Teachers also need opportunities for professional
development to enhance teaching skills through psychologically sound
methodologies. Other supports include having fewer students per
class, having enough educational resources and supplies for all
students, and having the autonomy to make the best instructional
decisions to meet the needs of various learners. Teachers should be
viewed as professionals who are always developing and growing in
their field. From this perspective, administrators can evaluate teachers
and offer valuable feedback to teachers so that they can grow as
professionals. Administrators should use what they learn from
classroom observations to direct decisions about what other supports
are needed at the school and what kinds of professional development
will be most helpful to teachers.

Week 5

Reaction Question: How important are peers for students academic

development? Do students social relationships with peers have
significant impact on students academic adjustment? How
adolescents peer relationships are different with the ones of the
adults?

Rodkin, P. & Ryan, A.M. (2011). Child and adolescent peer relations in
an educational context. In K. Harris, S. Graham and T. Urdan (Eds.)
Educational Psychology Handbook (pp. 363-389). Washington DC:
American Psychological Association Publications.

LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2002). Childrens perceptions of

popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment.
Developmental Psychology, 38, 635-647.

Buhs, E. S., Ladd, G. W., & Herald, S. L. (2006). Peer exclusion and
victimization: Processes that mediate the relation between peer group
rejection and children's classroom engagement and achievement.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 1-13.

Academic achievement and social achievement are interrelated. The

social groups and social climates of students can resist or support
academic endeavors. The choices young people make about their
academic motivations are mediated by their peer relationships and
social identities. Researchers have found that there are patterns for
which students are perceived as popular and which are not. There are
both positive and negative qualities associated with popularity in
school. There are also differences in patterns according to race and
gender. Interestingly, researchers found that students generally dislike
aggressive peers, but consider them to be more popular. Being like by
peers, which is linked to pro-social behaviors, is also linked to better
academic achievement. Popularity, which can be a result of aggression,
is not strongly linked to academic achievement. Popularity can be a
risk factor for drinking, smoking, and disruptive and aggressive
behavior. Behaviors of disruption and lack of engagement in the
classroom may not be the result of a lack of motivation, but a
difference in motivation. These students goals are sometimes opposite
of what adults and educators want for students. Geared toward social
dominance and popularity, these students behaviors conflict with
academic goals.

Young children who are less well accepted by their peers are at greater
risk for peer rejection in future grades. Years of peer rejection
throughout schooling is a predictor of school disengagement. There is a
link between chronic peer maltreatment and decelerating classroom
participation, which is also linked to lower academic achievement. Peer
relationships have an effect on school engagement. Chronic peer
exclusion has a negative effect on academic achievement. Researchers
found evidence of peer dislike and exclusion as early as kindergarten.
Patterns of peer rejection can start early and continue through the
years, compounding the problems. Chronic exposure to peer rejection
and maltreatment exacerbates ones disengagement from classroom
activities, disengagement from classroom participation, and increasing
school avoidance. Peer exclusion has a greater impact on classroom
disengagement than peer abuse. This may be because peer exclusion
signals to all children that the excluded children are not important
members of the peer group, which restricts the students interactions
with peers. This may lead an excluded student to devalue his or her
relationships and withdraw from classroom activities in which
exclusions tend to occur. This has implications for an excluded
students patterns of avoidance and underachievement.

The social organizations of children and adolescents are similar to

those of adults in that there are problems of safety and security linked
to gender and race. It is the job of teachers, administrators, and
education decision-makers to find ways of promoting growth in
individual students, in classrooms, and in entire school cultures that
increase safety and security for all individuals. Educators must direct
the social networks of students toward the goals of learning, safety,
and school belonging.

Week 6

Reaction Question: What are the key differences of family (or

parents) involvement in students learning in different culture? What
are the pros and cons of each? What features of family relationship
and parenting styles are most important for students optimal
academic development?
Pomerantz, E. M., & Kim, E. M. & Cheung, C. S.. (2011). Parents
involvement in childrens learning. In K. Harris, S. Graham and T. Urdan
(Eds.) Educational Psychology Handbook (pp. 417-440). Washington
DC: American Psychological Association Publications.

Dearing, E., Kreider, H., Simpkins, S., & Weiss, H. B. (2006). Family
involvement in school and low-income childrens literacy performance:
Longitudinal associations between and within 3 families. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 98, 653-664.

Lerner & Jovanovic (2016)

p. 257 Parent Child Rearing and Academic Achievement in Boys
p. 276 The Relation of Parenting Style to Adolescent School
Performance

Many studies have found connections between family life and

academic achievement of children at every level of schooling. Higher
levels of parental involvement in school are associated with better
literacy achievement in kindergarten students. Students with literacy
achievement and high levels of parental involvement in kindergarten
continued to achieve across grade levels. Students whose parents
become more involved across grade levels showed increases in literacy
achievement. Schools may be able to help students who are at risk of
underachievement in literacy by creating more opportunities for
parents to become involved in school and helping low-income families
to overcome barriers to school involvement such as child-care and
transportation.

Differences exist between Chinese and American students

attachments to parents during adolescence. Researchers found that in
China it is more common for students to have a strong sense of
responsibility to do well academically to please their parents. In
contrast, researchers found that American students senses of
responsibility to parents decline during adolescence, which is linked to
a decrease in academic achievement. These findings have both
positive and negative associations. While better connectedness to the
family and better academic achievement is regarded as a positive trait,
students may not be intrinsically motivated to learn and succeed.
However, extrinsic motivations, such as parent approval, are still better
than no motivations at all.

Parental styles of disciplining have been associated with levels of

academic achievement in middle class adolescent boys. Researchers
found that the adolescent boys tended to do better academically when
discipline from their mothers and fathers was consistent and
understanding with an emphasis on self-restraint as a skill needed to
successfully reach ones goals. Researchers found that adolescent boys
tended to do less well academically when discipline was inconsistent
and harsh. Inconsistent and harsh discipline has been linked to low
cognitive self-worth and high levels of distress in adolescent boys,
which has a negative affect on academic achievement in middle
school.

Researchers looked for connections between specific parenting styles

on the grades of high school students. The parenting styles were based
on those defined by Baumrinds typology. The researchers also looked
for differences between genders and ethnic groups. An authoritarian
style is a strict style of parenting in which children are expected to not
question their parents. Purely authoritarian parenting was linked to
higher grades than permissive parenting in both sexes and ethnicities.
A permissive style of parenting is characterized by parents that care
little about grades and do not participate in the educations of their
children. Permissive parenting was linked to lower grades in both sexes
and all ethnicities. An authoritative style of parenting is more
democratic than the authoritarian style and allows for discussion and
questioning. Authoritative parenting has the highest correlation to high
grades for all ethnicities except Asian. Authoritative parenting is
common in white families, but less common for the other ethnicities.
Combinations of parenting styles were linked to lower grades than any
of the three parenting styles used consistently. Interestingly, patterns
across parenting styles and grades were relatively consistent across
both genders and all ethnicities studied.

Week 7

Reaction Question: Do we promote resilience in current schools?

What do theories of intelligence and mindsets tell us in relation to
the schooling and instruction?

Yeager, D. S. & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience:

When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed.
Educational Psychologist, 47, 1-13.

Blackwell, L., Trzesniewski, K., & Dweck, C.S. (2007). Implicit theories
of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A
longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246-
263.

Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Its ok not everyone can
be good at math: Instructors with an entity theory comfort (and
demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48,
731-737.
Dweck, C. (2012). Mindsets and human nature: Promoting change in
the Middle East, the schoolyard, the racial divide and willpower.
American Psychologist, 67, 614-622.

Resilience is related to ones mindsets. A mindset is an implicit theory

or belief about how peoples minds and personalities work. Some
people have a growth mindset (incremental theory) and believe that
people can change and learn and grow. Other people have fixed
mindsets (entity theory), which means that people are born a certain
way and with certain attributes and are unlikely to change or grow in
those areas. Resilience is responding positively to challenges. Resilient
students are likely to work hard to overcome obstacles and to look for
alternatives to violence and aggression in response to social issues.

One way to promote resilience in students is to help shape students

perceptions of adversity. When a student is prone to interpret an
experience as negative, teachers can intervene to point out the
positives rather than the negatives. The way that adults talk to a child
has an impact on the childs resilience. This is especially true for how
teachers and parents praise students. When students are praised for
being smart, they are more likely to develop an entity theory of
intelligence. Students that have an entity theory of intelligence
attribute success to inherent ability and failures to a lack of intelligence
or skill that cannot be gained. When parents and teachers praise
students for working hard, students are more likely to develop an
incremental theory of intelligence. Students with incremental
theories of intelligence attribute success to hard work and
perseverance and attribute failures to lack of effort. With this mindset,
students believe that success is achievable for anyone and that
setbacks are opportunities to learn. Parents and teachers can help
students to have an incremental theory of intelligence by telling
struggling students that they need better strategies in a particular area
rather than telling them that they may simply be weak in that area.
Similarly, teachers and parents can promote an incremental theory of
personality to better help students in social situations. When a student
has a negative social interaction, it is important to not label the
aggressor as a bully or a bad person. By doing so implies that people
are unable to change. Instead, teachers and parents can help the
student to understand the situation and the factors that may have
contributed to the incident, which can lead to strategies for avoiding a
similar incident in the future.

Researchers have found that students with incremental theories of

intelligence are more likely to improve their grades and have better
achievement when compared to students with an entity theory of
intelligence. Researchers also found that students could be taught
about incremental theory of intelligence. Teaching students about
growth mindset had positive effects on their grades over the next few
years of junior high. Students with fixed mindsets are more likely to
avoid challenges out of worry of not being good enough or smart
enough. In contrast, students with growth mindsets accept setbacks as
an important part of the learning process. Researchers also found that
people with fixed mindsets are more likely to quickly base their
judgments of others on stereotypes and reject evidence of the
contrary.