Social Ecology of School Success: Implications for Policy and Practice Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, May 13-15, 2010

1. School performance as indicator of
adolescent biological development
influence on the educational process
Constantin Caraion-Buzdea
Carmen Bărbat
Sorin Ursoniu
Brigitha Vlaicu

2. School performance as indicator of adolescent
biological development influence on the educational process
Educational
process
Developmental
stage
School
performance

3. Study questions
• To what extent does school performance
explaine the influence of biological development
on the educational process?
– Which are the best indicators to follow in the change
process of the high school structure?

4. • “The Ministry of Education approved to adapt the educational
content to the mental age of children without taking into account
their biological age (the homogeneity of biological age in classes
and the eligibility of special education only up to 18 years of age,
were some of the characteristics of our national education system).”
» PROCESSES OF CHANGE IN THE LIVES OF PERSONS WITH
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY FROM ROMANIA
ROMANIAN NATIONAL REPORT
Team Coordinator: Conf. Dr. Teodor Mircea Alexiu – West University –
Timisoara, in collaboration with: Laila Onu – Vice-president of Inclusion
Romania; Aurora Toea – Director of C.R.I.P.S. – Bucharest; Radu Sergiu
Ruba – Vice-president Romanian Association for the Blind Persons; Prof
Johans Sandvin, University of Bodö - Norway
Financed by Sida, Swedish International Development Agency

5. Old hypothesis
• “Early biological maturation may have
negative long-term consequences within
the education domain.”
» David Magnusson, Håkan Stattin and Vernon L. Allen.
Biological maturation and social development: A
longitudinal study of some adjustment processes from
mid-adolescence to adulthood.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
Volume 14, Number 4 / August, 1985, Pages 267-283

6. Standard predictors of education
• intelligence
• social status of the home

7. Milestones of development
• Stages of development may
overlap or be associated with
specific other aspects of
development.
• Transition into a stage may not
mean that the previous stage
is completely finished.
• Horizontal decalage (Piaget)
– “children could solve one type
of problem using mature
thinking skills, but could not
accomplish this for less
familiar problems.”
• Stages of personality (Erik
Erikson, 1968)
– “a lifetime is spent in
reworking issues that were
originally characteristic of a
childhood stage.”

8. A time of "storm and stress"
• Biological changes
associated with puberty:
– shifts in the shape of the
body,
– increases in hormones,
– changes in brain
architecture.
• Directly linked changes:
– changes in sexual
interest,
– cognitive capacities,
– physical capacities.
• Social changes
associated with:
– school-linked transitions,
– changes in the roles
adolescents are expected
to play by all those around
them.
• Psychological changes
linked to increasing social
and cognitive maturity.

9. Bio-psychosocial development
biological psychological social
changes in body
shape, appearance
and function
(puberty)
changes in the way of
thinking about
oneself (identity and
sexual identity) and
the ability to think
about the world
(thinking pattern)
changes in the way
young people relate
to their families, to
other young people,
and to the outside
world

10. Developmental
change
Environmental factors
and learning
Genetically-controlled
processes
(maturation)
Family
Personality
Personal
identity

11. “Biological age”
• Person-environment fit theory
» Jacquelynne Eccles et al.
– “negative motivational and behavioral changes [...] stem from many
junior and senior high schools not providing appropriate educational
environments for youth in early and middle adolescence”
• According to person-environment theory, individuals' behavior,
motivation, and mental health are influenced by the fit between the
characteristics individuals bring to their social environments and the
characteristics of these social environments.

12. Methods
• Source of data:
– A cross-sectional study conducted in Timiş County, Romania,
between May and June 2005.
• Selection procedure:
– From a total of 1,083 primary sampling units (classes),
• 149 were randomly selected and stratified proportionally according
to
– grades 9–12,
– high school profile (theoretical, industrial, vocational and confessional),
and
– urban / rural environment.

13. • Sample profile
– A total of 48 schools
participated in the study.
• Procedure
– students completed a self-
administered questionnaire
in their classrooms.
• class response rate - 97.9%
• student response rate - 76.2%,
• overall response rate - 74.6%
High school profile
762 26,2 26,2 26,2
1092 37,6 37,6 63,8
69 2,4 2,4 66,2
984 33,8 33,8 100,0
2908 100,0 100,0
Vocational
Industrial
Confessional
Theoretical
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent

14. “CORT study”
• “CORT 2004 Inventory”
– 126-item questionnaire
• “Freiburg Personality
Inventory” (FPI)
– 212-item self-rated
questionnaire

15. “CORT study”
• The CORT Inventory is covering
risk behaviors for health such as:
– aggressive behaviors,
– nutrition habits,
– relation with family members
and peers,
– substance use etc.
• The Freiburg Personality Inventory
(FPI) is comprising eleven primary
personality factors:
– Nervousness,
– Spontaneous Aggressiveness,
– Depressiveness,
– Irritability,
– Sociability,
– Calmness,
– Striving for Dominance,
– Inhibition,
– Sincerity,
– Extraversion,
– Emotional Lability

16. Procedure
• A pilot test was conducted to establish the validity and
reliability of the instrument.
– Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient was determined for the
main parts of the questionnaire investigating family environment,
consumption of alcohol, smoking, drug use, sexual behavior,
violence, physical activity and other health-related topics.
• Reliability coefficient values ranging from 0.55 to 0.79 were found,
indicating that participants responded consistently to questionnaire
items.
• Anonymity was assured.

17. Data analyses
• Binary logistic
regressions
• Univariate analyses
– Chi-Square Test
– Mann-Whitney Test
– Median Test

18. Demographic characteristics of the sample
Age years
Mean 16.85
SD 1.19
Range 14-25
Gender n (%)
Male 1418 (48.7)
Female 1482 (51.1)
High school profile
762 26,2 26,2 26,2
1092 37,6 37,6 63,8
69 2,4 2,4 66,2
984 33,8 33,8 100,0
2908 100,0 100,0
Vocational
Industrial
Confessional
Theoretical
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
301 240 221 0 762
39,5% 31,5% 29,0% ,0% 100,0%
262 305 273 252 1092
24,0% 27,9% 25,0% 23,1% 100,0%
19 15 24 12 70
27,1% 21,4% 34,3% 17,1% 100,0%
256 264 228 237 985
26,0% 26,8% 23,1% 24,1% 100,0%
838 824 746 501 2909
28,8% 28,3% 25,6% 17,2% 100,0%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Vocational
Industrial
Confessional
Theoretical
High
school
profile
Total
1 2 3 4
Grade
Total

19. “Biological age”?
• Related variables:
– Age
– Gender
– Height
– Wheight
– BMI (body mass index)
– Year of study (grade)

20. Which is the source of students’ frustration?
• Variables in the analysis:
– Age
– Gender
– Height
– Wheight
– BMI (body mass index)
– Year of study (grade)
– Nervousness,
– Spontaneous Aggressiveness,
– Depressiveness,
– Irritability,
– Sociability,
– Calmness,
– Striving for Dominance,
– Inhibition,
– Sincerity,
– Extraversion,
– Emotional Lability
• Social characteristics in the analysis:
– Student’s satisfaction regarding the
financial status of his/her family
– Level of satisfaction within the
relationship with parents
– Level of satisfaction within the
relationship with brothers/sisters
– Level of satisfaction within the
relationship with colleagues
– Level of satisfaction within the
relationship with friends
– Problems within the relationship with
parents
– Problems within the relationship with
friends
– Problems within the relationship with
teachers

21. Standard predictors of education
• Financial status of one’s family
• Cognitive inteligence
– Sincerity
• open-minded, recognize common/small weaknesses and flaws, self-critical, in
certain circumstances having a detached attitude;
• Social inteligence
– Sociability
• Desire and tendency to establish new contacts, active, communicative, talkative and
prompt replier
– Extraversion
• Need contacts, search and is able to establish contacts, easily connects friends, is
released, vivacious, impulsive, talkative, likes variation and entertainment

22. Students’ satisfaction regarding the financial status
of their families by the school profile
very
satisfied
contentneither
satisfied
nor
dissatisfied
not too
happy
dissatisfied
Student's satisfaction regarding the financial
status of his/her family
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
Percent
Theoretical
Confessional
Industrial
Vocational
High school profile

23. Students’ satisfaction regarding the financial
status of their families by the school profile
29 101 134 325 152 741
3,9% 13,6% 18,1% 43,9% 20,5% 100,0%
22 158 249 492 165 1086
2,0% 14,5% 22,9% 45,3% 15,2% 100,0%
2 7 16 40 5 70
2,9% 10,0% 22,9% 57,1% 7,1% 100,0%
43 131 226 451 130 981
4,4% 13,4% 23,0% 46,0% 13,3% 100,0%
96 397 625 1308 452 2878
3,3% 13,8% 21,7% 45,4% 15,7% 100,0%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Vocational
Industrial
Confessional
Theoretical
High
school
profile
Total
dissatisfied not too happy
neither
satisfied nor
dissatisfied content very satisfied
Student's satisfaction regarding the financial status of his/her family
Total

24. Bio-psychosocial stage correlations with
the school results
High school profile
Vocational Industrial Theoretical
Female
students
Social
•Relation with
colleagues
Psychological
•Striving for
dominance
Psychological
•Extraversion
Family type
Male
students
Social
•Problems with
parents
Psychological
•Nervousness
Grade
•Second grade vs
fourth grade
Psychological
•Spontaneous
Aggressiveness
Social
•Problems with
friends

25. Emancipation stage
• As adolescents become physically mature
they often seek more independence and
autonomy and may begin to question [...]
rules and roles, leading to conflicts.

26. Marks of female students from theoretical
classrooms in relation with their Extraversion level,
by grade
4321
Grade
10
8
6
4
2
0
Extraversion
good or very good
mark (8.00-10.00)
poor or average
mark (5.00-7.99)
Marks at the end of
the previous term

27. Marks of female students from theoretical
classrooms by age of study
21 151 172
12,2% 87,8% 100,0%
30 139 169
17,8% 82,2% 100,0%
25 124 149
16,8% 83,2% 100,0%
18 139 157
11,5% 88,5% 100,0%
94 553 647
14,5% 85,5% 100,0%
Count
% within Grade
Count
% within Grade
Count
% within Grade
Count
% within Grade
Count
% within Grade
1
2
3
4
Grade
Total
poor or
average mark
(5.00-7.99)
good or very
good mark
(8.00-10.00)
Marks at the end of the
previous term
Total

28. Marks of female students from theoretical
classrooms by their family type
Disorganised
(sole parent, divorce,
decease, others)
Reorganised
(remarried parent)
Organised
( mother and father)
Type of the family
100,0%
80,0%
60,0%
40,0%
20,0%
0,0%
Percent
13,98
%
5,9%
80,12
%
13,58
%
7,1%
79,32
%
20,46
%
10,5
%
69,04
%
34,12
%
0,0%
65,88
%
very good mark
(9.00-10.00).
good mark
(8-8.99)
average mark
(6-7.99)
poor mark
(5-5.99)
Marks at the end of
the previous term

29. Marks of female students from theoretical
classrooms by their family type
very good mark
(9.00-10.00).
good mark
(8-8.99)
average mark
(6-7.99)
poor mark
(5-5.99)
Marks at the end of the previous term
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
Percent
45,92%
41,47%
12,3%
0,31%
40,87%
38,78%
19,78%
0,57%
Organised
(mother and father)
Reorganised or
disorganised
Family type

30. Marks of male students from theoretical classrooms in
relation with their correspondent spontaneus
aggressiveness scores, by age of study
4321
Grade
10
8
6
4
2
0
SpontaneousAggressiveness
good or very good
mark (8.00-10.00)
poor or average
mark (5.00-7.99)
Marks at the end of
the previous term

31. Marks of male students from theoretical
classrooms by age of study
36 47 83
43,4% 56,6% 100,0%
40 54 94
42,6% 57,4% 100,0%
21 57 78
26,9% 73,1% 100,0%
29 50 79
36,7% 63,3% 100,0%
126 208 334
37,7% 62,3% 100,0%
Count
% within Grade
Count
% within Grade
Count
% within Grade
Count
% within Grade
Count
% within Grade
1
2
3
4
Grade
Total
poor or
average mark
(5.00-7.99)
good or very
good mark
(8.00-10.00)
Marks at the end of the
previous term
Total

32. Marks of male students from theoretical
classrooms in relation with age, by grade
4321
Grade
2220191817161514
Age
20,0%
15,0%
10,0%
5,0%
0,0%
Percent
20,0%
15,0%
10,0%
5,0%
0,0%
Percent
20,0%
15,0%
10,0%
5,0%
0,0%
Percent
20,0%
15,0%
10,0%
5,0%
0,0%
Percent
good or very good
mark (8.00-10.00)
poor or average
mark (5.00-7.99)
Marks at the end of
the previous term

33. Marks of male students from theoretical
classrooms in relation with age
2220191817161514
Age
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
Percent
good or very good
mark (8.00-10.00)
poor or average
mark (5.00-7.99)
Marks at the end of
the previous term

34. Logistic regression model regarding the influence of personality
structure on school performance, for both genders
Personality trait Wald Odds
Ratios
95% CI p value
Lower Upper
Sociability 63.78 1.282 1.206 1.363 0.000
Sincerity 56.05 1.264 1.189 1.344 0.000
Aggressiveness 28.65 0.851 0.802 0.903 0.000
Extraversion 17.35 0.885 0.835 0.937 0.000
Inhibition 11.43 1.113 1.046 1.185 0.001
Dominance 8.99 0.911 0.857 0.968 0.003
Emotionaly Labile 4.94 1.100 1.011 1.196 0.026
Nervousness 4.48 0.938 0.883 0.995 0.034
Recently published - Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (WCES)

35. Logistic regression model regarding the influence of selected
characteristics on school performance,
for female students within vocational classrooms
Characteristic Wald Odds
Ratios
95% CI p value
Lower Upper
Relation with colleagues 8.57 0.014
dissatisfied
/satisfied
7.71 0.089 0.016 0.490 0.005
neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
/satisfied
2.59 0.531 0.246 1.147 0.107
Problems with teachers (no/yes) 7.32 4.647 1.528 14.136 0.007
Problems with friends 5.48 0.318 0.122 0.830 0.019
Weight 4.99 1.203 1.023 1.414 0.025
Depression 3.67 0.811 0.655 1.005 0.055
Age 3.43 0.725 0.516 1.019 0.064

36. Logistic regression model regarding the influence of selected
characteristics on school performance,
for female students within industrial classrooms
Characteristic Wald Odds
Ratios
95% CI p value
Lower Upper
Striving for Dominance 10.15 0.803 0.701 0.919 0.001
Relation with brothers/sisters 17.22 0.001
without brother/sister
/satisfied
5.18 2.204 1.116 4.351 0.023
neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
/satisfied
8.22 0.430 0.242 0.766 0.004
Nervousness 6.96 0.806 0.686 0.946 0.008
Grade 12.70 0.005
2/4 6.92 0.426 0.225 0.804 0.009
Relation with parents 6.82 0.078
neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
/satisfied
5.52 0.538 0.321 0.902 0.019
Extraversion 4.15 1.144 1.005 1.303 0.041

37. Logistic regression model regarding the influence of selected
characteristics on school performance,
for female students within theoretical classrooms
Characteristic Wald Odds
Ratios
95% CI p value
Lower Upper
Extraversion 16.29 0.712 0.604 0.840 0.000
Sociability 9.38 1.280 1.093 1.498 0.002
Sincerity 7.11 1.250 1.061 1.472 0.008
Type of her family 9.03 0.011
Organized
(both mother and father)
6.98 2.343 1.246 4.407 0.008
Relation with colleagues 6.26 0.044
neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
/satisfied
5.00 0.548 0.323 0.928 0.025

38. Logistic regression model regarding the influence of selected
characteristics on school performance,
for male students within vocational classrooms
Characteristic Wald Odds
Ratios
95% CI p value
Lower Upper
Problems with parents 4.91 2.012 1.084 3.733 0.027
Sociability 4.03 1.200 1.004 1.434 0.045
Grade 5.11 0.077
2/3 4.02 0.526 0.281 0.985 0.045
Relation with brothers 3.73 0.292
neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
/satisfied
3.11 0.475 0.208 1.086 0.078

39. Logistic regression model regarding the influence of selected
characteristics on school performance,
for male students within industrial classrooms
Characteristic Wald Odds
Ratios
95% CI p value
Lower Upper
Sincerity 15.44 1.326 1.152 1.526 0.000
Grade 19.24 0.000
1/4 2.64 0.385 0.122 1.216 0.104
2/4 13.42 0.179 0.071 0.449 0.000
3/4 3.56 0.530 0.274 1.024 0.059
Nervousness 12.29 0.808 0.717 0.910 0.000
Spontaneous Aggressiveness 8.68 0.818 0.716 0.935 0.003
Age 5.41 0.671 0.479 0.939 0.020

40. Logistic regression model regarding the influence of selected
characteristics on school performance,
for male students within theoretical classrooms
Characteristic Wald Odds
Ratios
95% CI p value
Lower Upper
Spontaneous Aggressiveness 9.27 0.776 0.659 0.913 0.002
Problems with friends 4.66 0.541 0.309 0.945 0.031
Weight 3.93 1.151 1.002 1.324 0.047
Inhibition 3.92 1.204 1.002 1.446 0.048
Relation with brothers 8.46 0.037
without brother/sister
/satisfied
3.71 1.876 0.989 3.559 0.054
neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
/satisfied
2.10 0.555 0.250 1.299 0.147
Nervousness 3.30 0.843 0.702 1.014 0.069

41. • “Their are periods of crisis in child development
during which there is a qualitative transformation
in the child's mental functioning.”
» Lev Vygotsky, 1930
– "Every function in the child's cultural development appears
twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level;
first, between people (interpsychological) and then inside the
child (intrapsychological). This applies equally to voluntary
attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts.
All the higher functions originate as actual relationships
between individuals.”

42. Suggestion
• Unfair school competition system ?
– Progressive biological development of students needs
to meet specific responses from the part of the
society in accordance with their multifarious needs.
• Recommendation
– Change the structure of the school systems in
keeping with the “biological age” of students.

43. The complex relational model of
the main characteristics within the study
Stress
Frustration
Reactive
Aggressiveness
Competition
Peer/Social
Status
School Results
Health
&
Developmental
Stage

44. Finally
• We highlight the stakeholders’ moral
responsibility of undertaking systematic
and complex evaluation of high school
students and their school environment.

45. Thank you
E-mail : ccaraion@yahoo.com