EÖTVÖS LORÁND UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND PSYCHOLOGY
DOCTORAL SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
HEAD OF DOCTORAL SCHOOL OF EDUCATION:PROF.GÁBOR HALÁSZ,DSC
Czető Krisztina
Research on adolescents’ attitudes and beliefs about schooling
DOCTORAL (PHD) DISSERTATION SUMMARY
Supervisor: Lénárd Sándor, associate professor, PhD. habil, ELTE PPK
Budapest, 2018
1 Introduction
The social, cultural and economic changes of the second half of the twentieth century have created uncertainty in the concept of childhood. The economic transformations of the post- industrial new capitalism, the demographic decline in the developed societies, and the cultural changes of the postmodern era eroded the stability of the social systems and institutions of modernity. New forms of childhood have appeared, and the crisis and the disappearance of childhood or the construction of the hurried child have become integrated part of childhood discourses (Hendrick, 1997, 2009; Buckingham, 2000; 2009; 2011; Lee, 2001; Prout, 2003, 2005; Kehily, 2009; Vajda, 2009; Woodhead, 2009; Somlai, 2013). In the 1980s, a new perspective in childhood studies appeared. The new social studies revealed that childhood is a social, cultural and historical construct, emphasized children’s active and interpretative participation in their social lives, and grounded interdisciplinary childhood studies hereby giving “voice” to children in childhood research (Jenks, 1996; James and Prout, 1997; James and James, 2004; Prout, 2005; Golnhofer and Szabolcs, 2005; Bluebond- Langer and Korbin, 2007; James, 2007; Levine, 2007; Jenks, 2009). The new sociology of childhood unfolded that schooling has a central role in the institutionalization of childhood by separating children from other social spaces and in the reproduction of social structures and power relations (see James, 2013; Corsaro, 2015), however children’s perspectives on schooling still gain less scientific attention. Present research assumes that the interpretations of children and young people on schooling must be made an integrated part of childhood studies by which new discourses can be created on the reconstruction of schooling. The social, cultural and economic changes of the postmodern era urge answers to the questions how schools can cope with the emergence of “new” childhoods, what new functions they have to shoulder and what the future of schooling is.
The aim of this research is to give voice to young people and focuses on the attitudes and beliefs of adolescents on childhoods and schooling. The research has three thematic dimensions. First, ‘Childhoods’ reveals the theoretical interpretations of the concept of childhood and focuses on the attitudes and beliefs of young people on childhood discourses.
Secondly, ‘Schooling’ researches the institutionalization of childhood and its interconnection with schools as social subsystems and aims to reveal school attitudes.
Thirdly, ‘Schools of the future’ studies social and global trends shaping the future of education and explore students’ views on future scenarios.
2 Theoretical background 2.1 Conceptions of childhood
The aim of the theoretical research phase, on the one hand, was to explore, describe and analyse the interpretations of childhood as social institutions and cultural representations.
Another aim, on the other hand, was to conceptually ground the empirical research by analysing the constructions of childhood in the 21st century. The research strongly agrees on Woodhead (2009) by stating that the exploration of children’s and young people’s interpretation cannot be separated from social and scientific discourses on childhood.
Discourse, as an element of constructing social reality, can contribute to the creation of social acts and institutions (see Fairclough, 2003; Carver, 2004) therefore, childhood discourses can impinge on the everyday experiences of children.
Concepts and theoretical assumption applied to the current research presented below:
• In my research, I accepted and agreed on that childhood and adulthood are opposing social codes that are conversely dependent (see James and James, 2004; Gittins, 2009; Woodhead, 2009a; Zinnecker, 2001).
• In my interpretation, interdisciplinarity must be a key feature of childhood studies (see Woodhead, 2009a), therefore childhood was examined from an interdisciplinary perspective.
• Childhood is interpreted as a structural and cultural component of societies formulated and constructed by historical and social contexts (Jenks, 1996; Prout and James, 1997; Hendrick, 1997; James and James, 2004; Prout, 2005; Golnhofer and Szabolcs, 2005; Gittins, 2009, Jenks, 2009, Szabolcs, 2011).
• My research assumed that the reflections of the different paradigms of childhood studies basically form and determine the mechanism of schools as social institutions, and
• discourses on childhood representations in the 21st century can only be interpreted as retrospective comparisons with the childhood constructions of modernity.
The theoretical research explored and analysed the two paradigms of childhood studies (i.e.
developmental and the new sociology of childhood (see Jenks, 1996; James and Prout, 1997, Qvortrup et al., 2009). This dichotomous interpretation of childhood studies rooted in Anglo- American and North European sociological discourses (Ryan, 2008; and see Jenks, 1996;
James and Prout, 1997; Prout, 2005; Golnhofer and Szabolcs, 2005; Bluebond-Langer and Korbin, 2007; James, 2007; LeVine, 2007; Jenks, 2009; Qvortrup, 2009; Woodhead, 2009b;
Steinberg, 2011; Szabolcs, 2011; Corsaro, 2015).
On the one hand, besides studying the paradigm shift in childhood studies, my research also intended to identify those approaches that offer complex and integrated interpretations of the conception of childhoods. These models analyse generational relations and social institutions (Zinnecker, 2001Qvortrup, 2009;) or synthetize the domains of childhoods based on the dominant and the new sociological paradigms of childhood (Ryan, 2008). On the other hand, the constructions of children’s needs, the concept of time and space in childhood were also analysed (James and Prout, 1997; Woodhead, 1997; Holloway and Valentine, 2000;
Thomas, 2005; van Krieken and Bühler-Niederberger, 2009; Hacket, Procter and Seymour, 2015).
Conceptualizing the empirical research, the exploratory analysis of contemporary childhood constructions had a peculiar significance. Social constructions of childhood, based on Hendrick’s (1997) definition, was interpreted as emerging from and created by discursive and interpretative parameters (see Qvortrup, 2009) shaping childhood concepts.
Contemporary childhood representations were seen as results of framing processes (see Buckingham, 2011), and usually interpreted and evaluated by being compared to the childhood of modernity, however, these interpretations reveal the erosion of boundaries between childhood and adulthood and the transformation of children’s everyday activities.
These representations are:
• the disappearance of childhood (Postman, 1982);
• the concept of hurried childhood (Elkind, 2001; Vajda, 2005);
• consumerism and media use in childhood (Buckingham, 2000; 2009a,2009b; 2011) and
• digital childhood (Hengst, 2009; Drotnet, 2009; Kehily, 2009; Steinberg, 2011).
2.2 The status of children in schools
The research of students’ attitudes on schooling was grounded by the analysis of the interconnection of childhood and schooling. In my interpretation, the most important social and cultural phenomena underlying the construction and re-construction of the “schooled child” were the below summarized:
• Along with the institutionalization of childhood in societies, social institutions connected to childhood came into existence (Gillis, 2009; Zeiher, 2009; Szabolcs, 2011).
• By compulsory education children were separated from other social spaces and normative prescriptions, formulated from an adult perspective, were created concerning useful and proper social activities for children (Hendrick, 1997; Zeiher, 2009; Szabolcs, 2011).
• New conception of time and space emerged and shaped the everyday activities of children in schools (Lawton and Gordon, 2002; Zeiher, 2009).
• The childhood concepts of modern and postmodern theories of education also reflect the dichotomies of the developmental and new sociological paradigm.
• Schools systems were integrated into the social structure (Mészáros, Németh and Pukánszky, 2003; Ballantine and Hammack, 2009; Ainsworth, 2013).
• The sociological analysis of schooling (i.e. functional, conflict and symbolic interactionist theories) revealed its functions maintaining social structure, power relations and reproduction of inequalities (Karabel and Halsey, 1976, Jackson, 1978;
Kozma, 1985; Mészáros, Németh and Pukánszky, 2003; Apple, 2004, 2012;
Dimitriadis et al., 2006).
• Participation in compulsory education became not only an obligation but a human right that shaped children’s right and participation in schooling (Freeman, 1998, 2000, 2009; Lansdown, 2003; Lundy, 2005; Monk, 2009; KjØrholt, 2008;
Quennerstedt, 2011; Tisdall and Punch, 2012).
• The social, cultural and economic changes of the late-modern/postmodern era erode the totalitarianism of the social institutions of modernity. The new forms of childhood require the re-construction of school functions while knowledge or information society reconceptualises learning places, forms and the nature of knowledge. Postmodern plurality of values challenges the normative nature of educational philosophies (Mihály, 1998, 2009; Bábosik, 2004; Gombocz and Trencsényi, 2007; Kanusz, 2014).
2.3 Theories on the future of childhood and schooling
The third thematic dimension of the research was the analysis of future scenarios. In childhood studies four dimensions can be identified shaping the study of the future of childhood:
• interpretations of the effects of childhood crisis representations (Prout, 2005;
Buckingham, 2000; 2009a, b; 2011; Kehily, 2009; Vajda, 2009),
• the future directions of childhood studies and their impact on social practices surrounding childhood (i.e. globalisation, control and visibility, politics of childhood, disciplinary reconceptualization) (Goddard, 2005; Woodhead, 2009);
• the development of genetic and medical sciences (Prout, 2005);
• the effects of changes in generational structures in aging societies (Zinnecker, 2001).
Similarly, the dimensions of research on the future of education are (OECD, 2001, 2006a, 2006b; 2008; Czető, 2013; Radó, 2017; OECD, 2018):
• the analysis of global trends and social processes shaping the future of education,
• the construction of 21st century skills and competences,
• results of cognitive sciences exploring the nature of human learning.
In scientific discourse on the future of education, OECD (2001) scenarios was determining.
OECD scenarios revealed complex analyses of social processes influencing schooling. The scenarios were not exclusively optimal models or normative assumptions but offered wilder perspectives concerning the possibilities of schooling. Six scenarios describing four ways of schooling were elaborated:
• bureaucratic system model depicts “status quo” and schools unaffected by external reforms or trends;
• re-schooling scenarios depict dynamic schools characterized by strong cultures of equity and consensus about their values, schools are social centres;
• de-schooling scenarios illustrate moves from formal institutions into more diverse, privatised, and informal arrangements and in this scenario, schools might disappear;
• system meltdown scenario depicts a crisis (exodus of teachers resulting in a breakdown of schooling systems).
3 Previous research
To place my research in scientific discourse, I explored and classified previous research studies along two dimensions. By conceptionally related research, I mean those new sociological childhood studies that focuses on children’s and young people’s activities, culture and on their interpretations about their own culture, activities and participation in society. These studies, in my research, were thematized on the basis of the main assumptions of the new sociology of childhood:
New sociology on childhood Research directions
Childhood is a social construction.
• historical studies of childhood (Szabolcs, 1995, 2009; Pukánszky, 2005a; Hendrick, 2009).
• cultural studies of childhood (LeVine (2007)
• studies of childhood policy and welfare (James et al., 2008)
• research on children’s right
Children’s cultures worth to study in their own right.
• study of childhood and work (McKechine & Hobbs, 2001; Mizen et al., 2001)
• children’s activities (Zinnecker, 2001)
• children’s interpretations about family relations and divorce (Jensen and McKee et al., 2003)
• adolescents activities (Csíkszentmihályi and Larsen, 2012)
Children are active in the construction of their social lives.
They interpret their own world.
• 9-year old children’s narratives about parenthood, childhood and their everyday activities (Mayall, 2000):
Childhood is a variable of social studies.
• large scale surveys (Corsaro, 2015)
Ethnography has an important place in childhood studies.
• study of children’s culture (conflicts, rules, fantasy) (Corsaro, 2003)
• school etnography (Mészáros, 2009)
By thematically related studies I mean those research that study children’s and adolescents’
attitudes on schooling and reveal their interpretations about childhood. The most relevant research directions and results are summarized below:
Research directions Research
Reserch on naïve beliefs
(Rapos, 2003; Golnhofer and Szabolcs, 2005, Balázs, 2009; Réthy, 2009)
• being a student (as a role) discolour other aspects of personality
• academic achievement is highly appreciated
• acceptance of adult dominance by children
• importance of per relations
• the myth of schooling
Research on the inner world of schools (Csíkszentmihályi et al., 2011; Mészáros et al., 1997)
• school activity is dominant part of students’ life
• social psychology of schools (labelling, group norms, peer group relations)
School attitude research
(Jenkins, 1997; Csapó, 2000; Libbey, 2009; Gottfredson, 2010; Szabó and Virányi, 2011; Stern, 2012; Szabó, Zsadányi and Szabó-Hangya, 2015)
• school attachment
• school bond
• disciplinary attitudes in schools
4 Research methods and objectives
The research was a descriptive-exploratory research that employed mixed-methods sequential explanatory design. In the empirical study, priority weight was given to the quantitative data, the qualitative phase aims to deepen and improve quantitative results (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011; Creswell, 2009, 2011).
Research participants were 10th grade (15-17-year old) secondary school students. Stratified random sampling was employed and 816 students (15 schools) participated in the study (433 boys, 383 girls).
In the quantitative phase of the research, data was collected by a four-dimension survey while in the qualitative phase focus group interviews were employed. The aim of the quantitative survey was to reveal the participants beliefs and attitudes on childhood discourses, schooling, interpretations about the social functions of schools and their beliefs about the future of schooling. The focus group interviews were etnomtehdological and thematic qualitative, semi structured interviews (N=27 students), participants were considered to be competent members of a social group. Qualitative in a sense that the aim of the interviews was to give voice to the participants (see Szokolszky, 2004).
The aim of the research was to explore and analyse
• the participant young people’s value structure and identify the most and less important values. To explore value orientations Schwartz (2003) Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ) was used.
Another aim of the study was:
• to describe participants’ attitudes on the sociological narratives of childhood,
• to explore adolescents’ attitudes on their well-being in schools, and their beliefs about the social functions of schooling.
• analyse students’ attitudes on scenarios about the school of the future.
5 Results and discussion
5.1 Social inequalities in schools
The research results revealed that parental educational levels strongly influence student achievement that justifies the determining nature of sociocultural background. The comparison of parental educational level and students’ academic achievement proved that interactions can be described between fathers’ educational levels and school achievement (p<0,001; χ2=133,281; df=6; γ=0,555), and mothers’ educational level and school achievement (p<0,001; χ2=148,797; df=6; N=788; γ =0,581).
Parental educational level was also highly influential concerning students’ objectives of further education. Research results draw differences between students’ learning plans based on parental educational level. Those students whose mothers have higher educational level reported higher educational levels as further learning objectives (Kruskal-Wallis H=144,925; df=2; p<0,01; η2=0,179), and this interaction can be proved in the case of fathers’ educational level, as well (Kruskal-Wallis H=182,547; df=2; p<0,01), η2=0,23).
These results call attention to the deeply rooted mechanism of reproduction of social inequalities within the Hungarian school systems (Ferge, 1972; Gazsó, 1982, Nahalka, 2003; Balázs, Kocsis and Vágó, 2011; Fejes, 2006; Ballantine and Hammack, 2009).
5.2 Value preferences among participant adolescents
Based on the results of Schwartz’s (2003) Portrait Values Questionnaire autonomy, hedonism, benevolence and universalism were reported as important values within the value structures of adolescents, while power, conformity and tradition were evaluated as less important ones. The importance of autonomy (i.e. making autonomous decisions and creation) revealed the relevance and importance of interpretative reproduction during socialization (see Corsaro, 2015). The value survey results verified previous value research results and explored that the ten basic values do not necessarily draw the same dynamic structure of values hypothesized by Schwartz (2003a, b, 2006, 2007, 2012).
The most important hypothesises and results are summarized below:
Hypothesis Results
In the value structures of the 10th graders autonomy considered to be a more important value (compared to the centred scores of values within the value structure.)
The hypothesis was confirmed by our research. The mean scores and centred scores of ‘autonomy’ was high among the participants.
However, the results also revealed that the value richness (i.e. the overall acceptance or rejection of the different values portrayed in the questionnaire) of the participants was also high that indicates the dynamic structure of values cannot be described by opposing values.
In the value preferences of the participant 10th graders there is a difference (based on school governance) in the perceived importance of tradition, namely tradition is reported as a value being more important among students of schools governed by church.
The research results revealed that there is a difference in the acceptance or rejection of
‘tradition’ based on school governance (p<0,05; Mann Whitney U=48500,5;
Z=3,007), although the effect size (r=0,1) indicates weak interaction. Our research did not confirm the hypothesis.
However, students of schools governed by church reported higher acceptance of
‘tradition’, on the basis of value centred scores, nevertheless tradition in the value structure was a less important element.
In the value preferences of the participant 10th graders there is a difference (based on school type) in the perceived importance of achievement, namely achievement is reported as being more important among six or eight grade grammar school students.
The hypothesis was partly confirmed. Six or eight grade grammar school students reported higher importance of achievement, although the centred scores of achievement was high among the participants.
5.3 Attitudes on childhood discourses
In the quantitative phase of the research, adolescents’ attitudes explored that the participant students accept the interpretation of childhood as a preparatory period for adult life.
Furthermore, the myth of adult initiation is an important element of childhood in the students’ interpretations which suggests that adolescents perceive and accept the superiority of adulthood. The innocent nature of childhood was also confirmed.
Students’ attitudes on the presence and acceptance of adult dominance in childhood are ambiguous. Concerning the assumptions of the new sociology of childhood research participants strongly agree on that childhood is a social and cultural construct. Analysing the contemporary representations of childhood, the evaluation of consumerism and media
access in childhood is ambiguous. Students favoured children’s agency in consumerism while refused children’s access to and participation in the media.
Concerning the correlation between childhood interpretations and values, only weak correlations can be described. Security, achievement and stimulation justified correlation with two items:
• those students who accept the innocent nature of childhood consider the value of security more important (p<0,05; Spearman’s r=0,077), and consider the value of stimulation less important (p<0,01; Spearman’s r s =-0,098);
• those who accept that childhood is a preparatory period for life, consider benevolence more important (p<0,01; Spearman’s r =0,1), and achievement less relevant (p
<0,05; Spearman’s r =-0,078).
• Those students who preferred the value of autonomy tend to do not agree with the assumption that adult and child everyday activities are similar (p<0,01; Spearman’s r=-0,125),
• and those who consider the value of tradition more important rejected the idea of children’s agency in consumerism (p<0,01; Spearman’s r=-0,148).
The focus group interviews proved that childhood is regarded as inferior to adulthood, and the described characteristics of childhood in the students’ narratives were: carelessness and dependency. Childhood was described dominantly as a period for education, and the importance of the acquisition of cultural capitals was emphasized that can be connected to Zinnecker’s (2001) cultural moratorium theory.
The quantitative and qualitative results verified the results of previous studies on childhood (see Mayall, 2000; Golnhofer and Szabolcs, 2005). The youngsters recognize and accept the superiority of the adult status; however, they stress their need for autonomous activities. The results of our research justified the process of interpretative reproduction based on Corsaro’s (2015) and James’s (2013) socialization theory.
The most important hypothesises and results are summarized below:
Hypothesises Results
Research participants report rejecting attitudes on those items that describe media childhood.
Our research does not verify the hypothesis.
The evaluation of items describing children’s media access and participation were ambiguous.
Research participants report supporting attitudes on those items that describe the superiority (concerning knowledge and experiences) of adulthood.
The hypothesis was confirmed. The research participants in their attitudes highly agreed on those items that described adult initiation as a determining element of childhood, and the interpretation of childhood as a preparatory period for adulthood.
5.4 Students’ attitudes and belief about schooling
By principal component analysis, our research developed different indexes to measure participant youngsters school attitudes along with three components.
School attitude components
Well-being in school
School attachment α=0,77
School alienation α=0,69
School functions
Learning dimension α=0,71
Social dimension α=0,67
Affective- interpretative
dimension α=0,64
Inner world of schools
Agency-identity-self enhancement
dimension α=0,83
Social-societal dimension
α=0,77
Participant students’ school attachment attitudes were highly positive, additionally my results described that there were differences in school attachment values based on academic achievement (p<0,05; χ2=77,194; df=6; N=795; γ =0,422). These results strongly confirm previous research findings and suggest that positive orientation towards schools can foster academic achievement (see Jessor et al., 2012; Libbey, 2004; Gottfredson, 2010; Stern, 2012).
To explore beliefs and interpretations about the functions of schools as social subsystems, my research developed a three-component model. The ‘Learning dimension’ of school functions implies items referring to lifelong learning, critical thinking and acquisition of widespread knowledge. The ‘Social dimension’ of functions includes items referring to the acquisition of social norms, social mobility and reproduction of inequalities. Finally, the third dimension refers to those functions that support individuals’ emotional stability, empathy and overall understanding of social processes. 10th grader students in their interpretations emphasized the importance of those functions that contribute to lifelong learning, preparation for future work and critical thinking, therefore the learning dimension of school functions was described as the most important function. Research results are summarized below:
Hypothesises Results
Research participant 10th graders report neutral (neither supporting, nor rejecting) attitudes on the school function supporting social equality.
The hypothesis was confirmed. In the three- component model, based on exploratory principal component analysis, the social dimension of school functions implied the item about social equality. The social dimension of school functions was evaluated as relatively important, while the average evaluation of the item describing the role of schools in supporting social equality was ambiguous.
Research participant 10th graders under evaluate the importance of personal well-being in schools.
The hypothesis was not confirmed. In the three-component model of school functions, the affective-interpretative dimension included the item about personal well-being. The average evaluation of the affective and interpretative functions of schooling revealed neutral attitudes but the analysis of the component items showed that students evaluated the importance of well- being relatively high.
Research participants report supporting attitudes on the learning dimension of school functions.
The hypothesis was confirmed. The learning dimension of school functions was described as the most important function in the students’
interpretation.
The third school attitude component was ‘the inner world of schools’ dimension. In this dimension adolescents’ attitudes were extremely diverse. These results suggest that individual perceptions are deeply rooted.
My research also studied the correlations between the different school attitude dimensions, and revealed that:
• there is a relationship between school attachment and the learning dimension of school functions (p<0,01; Spearman’s r =0,327), consequently research participants who report positive school attachment considered the learning dimension of school functions more important.
• Contrarily, there is a weak relationship (p<0,01; Spearman’s r =0,13) between school attachment and the social dimension of school functions, and school attachment and the affective interpretative functions of schooling (p<0,01;
Spearman’s r =0,139).
• There is a moderate relationship between school attachment and the ‘agency- identity-self enhancement’ dimension (p<0,01; Spearman’s r =0,338) and the
‘societal-social dimension’ (p<0,01; Spearman’s r =0,33). These results suggest that school attachment influences the perception of the inner world of schools.
In the focus group interviews, students emphasized the importance of peer group relationships in schools and revealed the harmful effects of teachers’ labelling on learning motivation.
The final thematic dimension of the research was the study of future scenarios about schooling. The quantitative research phase focused on the OECD scenarios and revealed that the participant students evaluate the learning network scenario as the most probable way for the future, while the interpretation of bureaucratic and re-schooling scenarios as future directions indicated uncertain attitudes. The probability of system meltdown scenario was rejected. Based on the participants interpretation, the most important characteristics of
education in the future will be: the dominant use of ICT technologies and the virtual spaces of learning
The most important results are summarized below.
Hypothesises Results
The research participant 10th graders reject the extended market model as a possible future scenario.
The hypothesis was partly confirmed by the research. The hidden structure of schooling scenarios was revealed by exploratory factor analysis. The items depicting the extended market model integrated into the learning network and bureaucratic model components.
Research participants considered the probability of online learning materials very high, at the same, rejected that only elementary education will be compulsory and free.
The research participant 10th graders reject the systems meltdown schooling scenario.
The hypothesis was confirmed by the research.
Based on the explored four-component factor model, students reject the items of the system meltdown scenario in their interpretations.
Concerning the relationship between schooling scenarios and school attitude dimensions my study explored that:
• there is a weak, negative correlation between school attachment and the bureaucratic model component (p<0,01; Spearman’s rho=-0,119). It suggests that students with positive school attachment more probably reject the bureaucratic model schooling scenario.
Social centre schooling scenario:
• weakly correlated with school attachment (p<0,01; Spearman’s rho=0,151);
• weakly correlated with the social dimension of school functions (p<0,01;
Spearman’s rho=0,113); and
• weakly correlated with the learning dimension of school functions (p<0,01;
Spearman’s rho=0,136). Consequently, those participants who reported positive school attachment or considered the social or learning dimensions of school functions more important also accepted the probability of social centre schooling scenario.
• There is a weak correlation between school alienation and system meltdown schooling scenario (p<0,01; Spearman’s rho=0,172), those students who reported
negative school attitude thought system meltdown as a possible scenario for the future.
6 Summary of new scientific results of the thesis
1. My research refined and deepened previous Hungarian childhood studies (Golnhofer and Szabolcs, 2005, 2008, Szabolcs, 2011) by expansively exploring the theoretical interpretations of the conception of childhood.
2. My research systematically revealed and analysed the Anglo-American and North- European sociological discourses on childhood and 21st century childhood representations.
3. My research by giving voice to children explored and analysed the values, attitudes, beliefs and interpretations of young people about scientific childhood discourses, schooling and future scenarios.
4. The study intended to establish a complex model for measuring school attitudes that can be improved and used.
References
Ainsworth, James (2013): Sociology of Education. A to Z Guide. SAGE Reference.
Apple, M. W. (2004): Ideology and Curriculum. Routledge Falmer. London.
Apple, M. W. (2012): Education and Power. Routledge. New York.
Bábosik István (2004): Neveléselmélet. Osiris Kiadó, Budapest.
Ballantine, Jeanne H. & Hammack, Floyd. M (2009): The Sociology of Education. Prentice Hall.
Bluebond-Langner, M. & Korbin, Jill E. (2007): Challenges and Opportunites in the Anthropology of Childhoods: An Introduction to „Children, Childhoods, and Childhood Studies”. American Anthropologist. 109(2), 241-246.
Brown, P. & Lauder, H. (2009): Economic globalisation, skill formation and the consequences for higher education. In: Apple, Michael W., Ball, Stephen J. Gandin, Lous, Armando (szerk.):
The Routledge International Handbook of the Sociology of Education. Routledge, London &
New York. 229-241.
Buckingham, D. (2000): After the Death of Childhood: Growing Up in the Age of Electronic Media.
Polity Press, Oxford.
Buckingham, D. (2009a): New media, new childhoods? Children’s changing cultural environment in the age of digital technology. In: Kehily, Mary J. (szerk.): An Introduction to Childhood Studies. Open University Press, New York. 124-141.
Buckingham, D. (2011): The Material Child. Growing up in consumer culture. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Buckingham, David (2009a): Children and television. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M.
S. (szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies. Palgrave Macmillan New York.
347-360.
Burbules, N. C. (2009): Postmodernism and Education. In: Siegel, H. (szerk.): The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Education. Oxford University Press.
Corsaro, W. A. (2015): The Sociology of Childhood. SAGE Publications. Indiana University, Bloomington.
Creswell, J. W. (2009): Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches.
Sage Publications, London & New Delhi.
Creswell, J. W. (2011): Educational Research. Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson, Univeristy of Nebraska.
Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011): Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research.
Sage Publications, London.
Czető Krisztina (2013): Iskolaundor vagy egész életen át tartó tanulás, avagy milyen lehetne a jövő iskolája?. In: Üzenet a palackban. Fiatal kutatók gondolatai az egész életen át tartó tanulásról.
Tempus Közalapítvány. Budapest.39-57.
Csíkszentmihályi Mihály & Larson, Reed (2012): Kamasznak lenni. Libri Kiadó, Budapest.
Csíkszentmihályi Mihály. (2011): Életre hangolva. A felnőtté válás útvesztői. Nyitott Könyvműhely, Budapest.
Denise C. Gottfredson, D. C., Marciniak, E. M., Birdseye, A. T., Gottfredson, G. D. (2010):
Increasing Teacher Expectations for Student Achievement. The Journal of Educational Research. 88(3) 155-163.
Drotnet, K. (2009): Children and Digital Media: Online, On site, Ont he Go. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S. (szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 377-394.
Elkind, David (2001): The Hurried Child. Growing up too fast, too soon. Da Capo Press, Cambridge.
Fairclough, Norman (2003): Analysing Discourse. Textual anaylsis for social research. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. London & New York.
Fejes József Balázs (2006): Miért nem fontosak a hátrányos helyzetű tanulók? In: Új Pedagógiai Szemle. 7-8.
Ferge Zsuzsa (1996/1972): A társadalmi struktúra és az iskolarendszer közötti néhány összefüggés.
In: Meleg Csilla (szerk.): Iskola és társadalom. JPTE Tanárképző Intézet, Pécs.
Freeman, M. (1998): The Sociology of Childhood and Children’s Rights. The International Journal of Children’s Rights 6(4): 433–444.
Freeman, M. (2000): The Future of Children’s Rights. Children and Society. 14. 277-293.
Freeman, M. (2009): Children’s Rights as Human Rights: Reading the UNCRC. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S. (szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies.
Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 377-394.
Gazsó Ferenc (1996/1982): Az esélyegyenlőtlenségek és az iskolarendszer. In: Meleg Csilla (szerk.):
Iskola és társadalom. JPTE Tanárképző Intézet, Pécs.
Gillis, J. (2009): Transitions to modernity. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S. (szerk.):
The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 114-127.
Gittins, D. (2009): The historical construction of childhood. In: Kehily, Mary J. (szerk.): An Introduction to Childhood Studies. Open University Press, New York. 35-50.
Golnhofer Erzsébet & Szabolcs Éva (2005): Gyermekkor: nézőpontok, narratívák. Eötvös József Könyvkiadó, Budapest.
Gombocz János & Trencsényi László (2007): Változatok a pedagógiára. A nevelés műkedvelőinek.
Okker, Budapest.
Gottfredson, D. C., Marciniak, E. M., Birdseye, A. T., Gottfredson, G. D. (2010): Increasing Teacher Expectations for Student Achievement. The Journal of Educational Research. 88(3) 155-163.
Hackett, A., Procter, L., & Seymour, J. (2015): Children’s Spatialities. Embodiment, Emotion and Agency. Palgrave Macmillan. UK.
Hendrick, H. (1997): Construction and reconstructions of British childhood: an interpretive survey, 1800 to the present. In: James, Allison & Prout, Alan (szerk.): Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood. Taylor & Francis Group, London. 33-61.
Hendrick, H. (2009): The evolution of childhood in Western Europe c. 1400-c.1750. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S. (szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies.
Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 99-114.
Hengst, H. (2009): Collective Identities. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S. (szerk.):
The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 202-215.
Honig, M. S. (2009): How is the child constituted in childhood studies?. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S. (szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 62-78.
Hunyady Györgyné & M. Nádasi Mária (2014): Az iskolakép változatai és változásai. ELTE Eötvös Kiadó. Budapest.
James, A. (2007): Giving Voice to Children’s Voices: Practices and Problems, Pitfalls and Potentials.
American Anthropologist. 109(2). 261-270.
James, A. (2013): Socialising Children. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
James, A. & Prout, A. (1997, szerk.): Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood. Taylor & Francis Group, London.
James, A., Jenks, C. & Prout, A. (1998): Theorizing Childhood. Polity Press.
Jarvis, P. (2007): Globalisation, Lifelong Learning and the Learning Society. Routledge, London &
New York.
Jenkins, P. H. (1997): School Delinquency and the School Social Bond. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 34. 334-367.
Jenks, C. (1996): Childhood. Routledge, New York.
Jenks, C. (2009): Constructing childhood sociologically. In: Kehily, Mary J. (szerk.): An Introduction to Childhood Studies. Open University Press, New York. 93-112.
Jensen, A. M. & McKee, L. (2003): Children and the Changing Family. Bewteen transformation and Negotiation. Routledge Falmer, London.
Jensen, A. M. & McKee, L. (2003): Theorising childhood and family change. In: Jensen, A. M. &
McKee, L. (szerk.): Children and the Changing Family. Routledge Falmer, London.
Jessor, R., Van Den Bos, J., Vanderryn, J., Costa, M. F., Turbin, S. M. (1995): Protective Factors in Adolescent Behavior: Moderator Effects and Developmental Change. Developmental Psychology. 31(6). 923-933.
Karabel, J. & Halsey, A. H. (1976): The New Sociology of Education. Theory and Society. 4(3).
529-552.
Karácsony András (1995): Bevezetés a tudásszociológiába. Osiris – Századvég, Budapest.
Kehily, M. J. (2009): The future of childhood. In: Kehily, Mary J. (szerk.): An Introduction to Childhood Studies. Open University Press, New York. 198-209.
Kjørholt, A. (2008): Children as New Citizens: In the Best Interests of the Child?. In: James, A. &
James, A. L. (Szerk.): European Childhoods. Cultures, Politics and Childhoods in Europe.
Plagrave Macmillan, New York.
Knausz Imre (2013): Mi a nevelés? In: Taní-tani Online. URL: http://www.tani- tani.info/mi_a_neveles Utolsó lekérdezése: 2018. július 18.
Kozma Tanás (1985): Tudásgyár. Közgazdasági és Jogi Könyvkiadó, Budapest.
Lange, A. & Meirendorff, J. (2009): Method and methodology in childhood research. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S. (szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies.
Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 78-97.
Lansdown, Gerison (2003): Children’s Rights. In: Mayall, Berry (szerk.): Children’s Childhoods:
Observed and Experienced. The Falmer Press, London. 33-45.
Lawton, D. & Gordon, P. (2002): A History of Western Educational Ideas. Woburn Press, London.
Lee, N. (2001): Childhood and Society. Growing up in the age of uncertainity. Open University Press, Maidenhead.
LeVine, R. A. (2007): Ethnographic Studies of Childhood: A Historical Overview. In: American Anthropologist. 2(109). 247-260.
Libbey, H. P. (2009): Measuring Student Relationships to School: Attachment, Bonding, Connectedness, and Engagement. Journal of School Health. 74(7). 274-283.
Lundy, L. (2005): Family Values in the Classroom? Reconciling Parental Wishes and Children’s Rights in State Schools. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family. 19(3), 346–372.
Mayall, B. (2000): The Sociology of Childhood in Relation to Children’s Rights. The International Journal of Children’s Rights. 8(3), 243–259.
Mészáros Aranka (1997): Az iskola szociálpszichológiai jelenségvilága. ELTE Eötvös Kiadó, Budapest.
Mészáros György (2009): Egy szalagavató pedagógiai etnográfiája. In: Szabolcs Éva (szerk.):
Ifjúkorok, gyermekvilágok I. Eötvös József Könyvkiadó, Budapest. 75-94.
Mészáros György (2014): Szubkultúrák és iskolai nevelés. Iskolakultúra, Veszprém.
Mészáros István, Németh András és Pukánszky Béla (2003): Neveléstörténet. Osiris Kiadó, Budapest.
Mihály Ildikó (2001): Milyen lesz a jövő iskolája? URL: http://www.ofi.hu/tudastar/oecd- tanulmanyok/milyen-lesz-jovo. Utolsó letöltés: 2018. július 18.
Mihály Ottó (1998): Bevezetés a nevelésfilozófiába. Budapest: Okker.
Mihály Ottó (2009): Értékpluralizmus és nevelés. URL:
http://www.ofi.hu/tudastar/ertekpluralizmus-neveles. Utolsó letöltés: 2018. július 18.
Monk, D. (2009): Childhood and the law. In: Kehily, Mary Jane (szerk.): An Introduction to Childhood Studies. Open University Press, England.
Nahalka István (2003): Az oktatás társadalmi meghatározottsága. In: Falus Iván (2003): Didaktika.
Elméleti alapok a tanítás tanulásához. Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest.
OECD (2001): Schooling for Tomorrow. What Schools for the Future? OECD Publishing.
OECD (2006a): Schooling for Tomorrow. Demand-sensitive schooling? Evidence and issues. OECD Publishing.
OECD (2006b): Schooling for Tomorrow. Think Scenarios, Rethink Education. OECD Publishing.
OECD (2008): Trends Shaping Education. Think Scenarios. Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. OECD Publishing.
OECD (2010b): The Nature of Learning. Using Research to inspired practice. OECD Publishing.
OECD (2018): The Future of Education and Skills. Education 2030. OECD Publishing.
Postmann, N. (1982): The Disappearance of Childhood. Delacorte Press, New York.
Prazsák, Gergő (2010): Prolegomena az európai internethasználók értékpreferencia változásának vizsgálatához. Információs Társadalom. 10. 2.
Prout, A. (2003): Participation, policy and the changing conditions of childhood. In: Prout, A. &
Hallett, C. (szerk.): Hearing the Voices of Children. New policy for a new century.: Routledge Falmer. Taylor &Francis Group, London & New York.
Prout, A. (2005): The Future of Childhood. Toward the interdisciplinary study of children. Routledge Falmer. Taylor & Francis Group. London & New York.
Pukánszky Béla (2005a): Tizenkilencedik századi magyar neveléstani kézikönyvek gyermekszemlélete. Iskolakultúra, Pécs.
Quennerstedt, A. (2009): Balancing the Rights of the Child and the Rights of Parents in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Journal of Human Rights. 8(2), 162–176.
Quennerstedt, A. (2011): The Construction of Children’s Rights in Education – a Research Synthesis. The International Journal of Children’s Rights. 19. 661–678.
Qvortrup, J. (2009): Childhood as a structural form. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S.
(szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 21- 34.
Radó Péter (2017): Az iskola jövője. Noran Libro, Budapest.
Rapos Nóra (2003): Az iskolai félelmek vizsgálata. Iskolakultúra. 5. 107-112.
Réthy Endréné (2009): Tanulói vélekedések az iskoláról. Az iskola mint örömforrás?. In: Szabolcs Éva (szerk.): Ifjúkorok, gyermekvilágok. Eötvös József Könyvkiadó, Budapest. 11-45.
Ryan, P. J. (2008): How is the „New” social Study of Childhood? The Myth of a Paradigm Shift.
Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 38(4), 553-576.
Schwartz, S. H. (2003a): Univerzáliák az értékek tartalmában és struktúrájában. Elméleti előrelépések és empirikus próbák húsz országban. In: Váriné Szilágyi I. (szerk.): Értékek az életben és a retorikában. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.105–154.
Schwartz, S. H. (2003b): A Proposal for Measuring Value Orientations across Nations.
Questionnaire Package of ESS. 259-290.
Somlai Péter (2013): Család. 2.0. Napvilág Kiadó.
Steinberg, R. Shirley (2011): Kinderculture: Mediating, Simulacralizing, and Pathologizing the New Childhood. In: Steinberg, R. Shirley (szerk.): Kinderculture. The Coporate Construction of Childhood. Westview Press, US. 1-55.
Stern, M. (2012): Evaluating and Promoting Positive School Attitude in Adolescents. SpringerBriefs in School Psychology.
Szabó Éva & Virányi Barbara (2015): Az iskolai kötődés jelentősége és vizsgálata. Magyar Pedagógia. 111(2), 111-125.
Szabó, É., Zsadányi, Zs. & Szabó Hangya, L. (2015): Ki szeret iskolába járni? Az iskolai kötődés, a motiváció, az énhatékonyság és a tanulmányifelelősség-vállalás vizsgálata. Iskolakultúra. 25 (10). 5-20.
Szabolcs Éva (2011): Gyermekből tanuló. Az iskolás gyermek, 1868-1906. Gondolat Kiadó, Budapest.
Szokolszky Ágnes (2004): Kutatómunka a pszichológiában. OSIRIS Kiadó, Budapest.
Thomas, Nigel (2005): Interpreting children’s needs: Contested assumptions in the provison of welfare. In Goddard, J.., McNamee, S., James, A. L. & James, A. (szerk.): The Politics of Childhood. International Perspectives, Contemporary Developments. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 13-27.
Tisdall, E. Kay. M & Punch, S. (2012): Not so ‘new’? Looking critically at childhood studies. In:
Children's Geographies, 3 (10), 249-264.
Vajda Zsuzsanna (2009): Siettetett gyerekek. Iskolakultúra. 19(9). 3-14.
Vajda Zsuzsanna & Kósa Éva (2005): Fejlődéslélektan. Osiris Kiadó, Budapest.
van Krieken, R. & Bühler-Niederberger, D. (2009): Rethinking the sociology of childhood: Conflict, Competition and Cooperatin in children’s life. In: Denis, A. & Kalekin-Fishman, D. (szerk.):
The ISA Handbook in Contemporary Sociology. 185-201.
Woodhead, M. (1997): Psychology and the cultural construction of children’s neeeds. In: James, A.
& Prout, A. (szerk.): Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood. Taylor & Francis Group, London. 61-74.
Woodhead, M. (2009a): Childhood studies. In: Kehily, Mary J. (szerk.): An Introduction to Childhood Studies. Open University Press, New York. 17-35.
Woodhead, M. (2009b): Child development and the development of childhood. In: Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W. A. & Honig, M. S. (szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies.
Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 46-62.
Zeiher, H. (2009): Institutialization as a Secular Trend. In: Qvortrup, Jens; Corsaro, William A. &
Honig, Michael-Sebastian (szerk.): The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 127-140.
Zinnecker, J. (2001): Children in Young and Aging Societies. The order of generations and models of childhood in comparative perspectives. In: Hofferth, S. & Owens, T. J. (eds): Children at the Millenium: Where we have come from, where are we going? Elsevier Sience Ltd., Netherlands.
