Community and family influences
The Complexity of Community and Family Influences on Children’s Achievement in New Zealand is a synthesis of the best evidence about family and community influences on students' achievement (Ministry of Education, 2003). It shows that although various community and family factors are associated with low achievement for whole groups of children, this is not inevitable. Some children do achieve in spite of unfavourable conditions, and teachers and schools are able to improve outcomes for groups of children by developing effective partnerships with their families and communities. The extracts below relate to these points.
Extract 1
A significant proportion of New Zealand children live in homes that have scarce economic resources, or worse, and about a fifth are living in families in poverty. The incidence of poverty is more than two and a half times greater among Māori, and more than three and a half times greater among Pasifika families than it is among Pākehā families. As a group, the achievement of these low SES children is significantly below that of children from middle and higher SES homes in all curriculum areas.
(Page 80)
Extract 2
The association between low achievement and low SES (when children are considered as a group) is highly complex. It is not inevitable that living in a low SES family means low achievement for a child; the association does not hold for some individual low SES children who are high achievers.
(Page 81)
Extract 3
The research evidence suggests that effective centre / school–home partnerships can enhance children's learning in both home and centre / school settings. The positive impacts of such partnerships … on children’s achievement can be substantial, compared to institutionally based educational interventions alone. The benefits for children and young people can include better health and well-being, greater educational achievement, and increased economic well-being.
(Page 172)
Extract 4
There are various forms of partnership, but not all are effective. Those which are poorly designed, based on deficit views, and not responsive to the needs of families can be ineffective, and even counter-productive. Programmes which are effective respect parents and children, are socially responsible, and are responsive to families and the social conditions that shape their lives. Constructive partnerships empower those involved by (a) fostering autonomy and self-reliance within families, schools and communities, (b) building on the strong aspirations and motivation that most parents have for their children's development, and (c) adding to (rather than undermining) the values, experiences and competencies of parents and children. The evidence is that teachers can do much to initiate such constructive partnerships.
(Page 172)
