ABSTRACT
Phenomenological study of effects of student mobility on middle and high socio-
economic high school students
by
Marie M. Alcock
M.A., Marygrove University, 2002
B.S., Castleton College, 1995
Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Walden University
Walden University
ABSTRACT
Mobility, changing schools and residences, affects both academic and non-academic
experiences of students. In schools with high student mobility rates, the effects of
mobility on individual students may compound to affect the school itself, or even the
school district. However, the impact of mobility has not been sufficiently researched
from the point of view of the mobile students themselves. Therefore, using student
mobility as the conceptual framework, this phenomenological study explored the
academic and non academic experiences of current middle and upper socio-economic
class high school students who have changed both school and residence to, from, or
within New Jersey, in a three year period. Data was collected through five in-depth
interviews and analyzed using Hatch‟s nine-step inductive analysis model. Primary
findings include description of mobility as a magnifier of existing student characteristics,
a need for educators to consider non-academic factors during placement, a need for
educators to consider additional closure and welcoming policies for mobile students, and
a need to increase awareness of both teachers and students concerning the needs of
mobile students. Understanding the affects of mobility on the academic and non-
academic experiences of students may have implications for positive social change by
informing districts, schools, parents, and students themselves of potential impacts of
mobility and by providing a basis for planning and programming to minimize negative
and maximize positive effects of mobility.
Phenomenological study of effects of student mobility on middle and high socio-
economic high school students
by
Marie M. Alcock
M.A., Marygrove University, 2002
B.S., Castleton College, 1995
Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Education General Program
Walden University
DEDICATION
I dedicate this work to my family. I could not have done this without the
continuous love and support from my husband, son, mother, father, and beloved family.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I want to thank my mentor, Dr. Linda Crawford for her support and guidance
throughout this process. I thank my dedicated committee Dr. Laura Lynn and Dr. Sharon
Johnson for their hard work, patience, and guidance.
I have deep appreciation for my professional mentors and inspirations Dr. Heidi
Hayes Jacobs and Dr. Bena Kallick. Who have encouraged, supported, and guided me
directly and indirectly in my professional work.
I could not have completed the data collection without the support of Dr. David
Donovan, Ms. Margaret Patrick, Mrs. Mercedes Appaluccio, Nancy Bower, Pamela
Cordts, and Mrs. Jean Hubley.
Finally I acknowledge that without God and my family this dissertation would
never have been a reality. My husband, Jim, and son, Garret, showed unwavering
support, endless motivation, and love as I worked. My mother, Laureen Alcock, and
father, Thomas Alcock, made immeasurable contributions of their own time and
resources. Finally, Kea Alcock, Gary Alcock, Michael Alcock, Kathy Nakayama, and
Mary Hubley have supported me through some of the ups and downs of working full time
and continuing my education.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION .....................................................................................................................v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi
CHAPTER 1 Introduction..............................................................................................1 Background of the Study ...............................................................................................2 Problem Statement .........................................................................................................7 Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................7
Research Questions ........................................................................................................8
Nature of the Study ........................................................................................................9 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................12 Definition of Terms......................................................................................................14
Assumptions, Delimitations, and Limitations ..............................................................15 Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 15
Delimitations ......................................................................................................... 15
Limitations ............................................................................................................ 17
Significance of the Study .............................................................................................18 Summary ......................................................................................................................19
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................22 Introduction ..................................................................................................................22 Conceptual Basis: Student Mobility ............................................................................24
Student Achievement (academic aspects) ....................................................................29 A Focus on School Assessment ............................................................................ 32
A Focus on Secondary School .............................................................................. 36 Social and Emotional Concerns (non academic aspects) .............................................38
A Focus on Military Mobility ............................................................................... 44 A Focus on Disaster Mobility ............................................................................... 46
Compounding Issues ....................................................................................................48 Summary ......................................................................................................................49
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHOD ..............................................................................51 Introduction ..................................................................................................................51 Research Design...........................................................................................................54
Advantages over other methods ............................................................................ 55 Sampling Strategy and Participant Selection ...............................................................55
Data Collection Procedures ..........................................................................................57 Role of the Researcher .......................................................................................... 59
Data Analysis and Interpretation Plan .........................................................................60
iv
Evidence of Quality .....................................................................................................66 Informed Consent and Ethical Considerations ............................................................69 Summary ......................................................................................................................70
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS ....................................................................................................74 Introduction ..................................................................................................................74 Population ....................................................................................................................76 Data Collection ............................................................................................................79 In-depth Interview Data ...............................................................................................80
Analysis of Interview Data ..........................................................................................80
Results for Research Question Number 1 ....................................................................89
Results for Research Question Number 2 ..................................................................104 Discrepant and Non-Confirming Data .......................................................................112 Summary ....................................................................................................................114
CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............116
Summary ....................................................................................................................116 Conclusions ................................................................................................................118
Changing Environment ....................................................................................... 118 Changing Schools ............................................................................................... 125
Role of Academic Placement .............................................................................. 132 Student Achievement .......................................................................................... 135
Graduation........................................................................................................... 137 Making Friends ................................................................................................... 138 Making Connections to School Environment ..................................................... 140
Making Connections to Greater Community ...................................................... 144 Changing of Individual ....................................................................................... 147
Recommendations for Education ...............................................................................155 Recommendations for Further Study .........................................................................163 Implications for Social Change ..................................................................................166
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................171
APPENDIX A: .................................................................................................................178
APPENDIX B: .................................................................................................................180
APPENDIX C: .................................................................................................................197
CURRICULUM VITAE: .................................................................................................200
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Participants Demographic Information 77 Table 2 Differences Between Schools 78 Table 3 Frames of Analysis for Student Mobility 82 Table 4 Themes for regarding the participant‟s social and emotional adaptation 87 Table 5 Themes for regarding the participant‟s student achievement and adaptation 88
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Diagram of steps in Hatcher‟s inductive analysis model …………………..58
Figure 2 Domain example...………………………………..…………………………60
Figure 3 Sample of added domain....…………………………….…………………...82
Figure 4 Restructured domain...…………………………….…………………...……82
Figure 5 Expanded domain….………………………………..………………….……83
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
The phenomenon of student mobility has been recognized in the world of
education as a contributing factor to the achievement gaps historically attributed to race,
ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic class (Fowler-Finn, 2001). High school students
who change schools showed a 50% chance of dropping out (Rumberger, Larson, Ream &
Palardy, 1999; South, Haynie, & Bose, 2007). Highly mobile students were more likely
to be retained a grade across all income classes (Fowler-Finn, 2001). Where high levels
of mobility were apparent, the mobility itself had a negative impact on learning (Ewell,
Schild & Paulson, 2003). The higher the mobility the less likely that learning at age
appropriate levels was expected to occur (Hartman, 2006; Rumberger, 2003). Student
mobility tended to compound issues, both positive and negative, that impact student
achievement. The evidence suggested that in order to enforce the aims of the No Child
Left Behind Act (NCLB), states and districts should recognize student mobility, making
this a timely issue. Educators should understand how mobility impacts student
achievement and its implications for students, schools, and districts. The goals of NCLB
may be difficult to achieve without understanding what happens to the specific student
who experiences student mobility (Rhodes, 2007). The point at which mobility may have
an adverse impact on student achievement was not clear and some research suggested
that mobility may be a benefit to some individuals (Blakeman, 1993). This study focused
on student mobility and to do so isolated as many of the compounding issues as possible.
To isolate poverty only the middle socioeconomic class and the upper socioeconomic
2
class were included in the population. Similarly, only high school students who have also
changed residence were included to limit complications associated with expulsion,
dissatisfaction with the current school, or homelessness. Thus, this study explored the
academic and non academic experiences of high school students who have changed both
school and residence in the past three years in an effort to understand student mobility
and any possible impact it had on their student achievement.
Background of the Study
In this time of high accountability for schools, there is a growing societal focus on
academic programs and how our children are performing both individually and as a
group. It has become increasingly important to improve how educators evaluate school
achievement and student achievement. A review of the literature illuminated issues that
were attributed to decreasing student achievement, one of which was student mobility.
There was a very limited understanding of the exact impact student mobility had on
student achievement. In addition, it was unclear what student mobility was when isolated
from the characteristics (e.g. poverty, military, disasters, etc.) found connected to all of
the current research on the topic. As the national education establishment examined
providing waivers for schools with high student mobility or proposes intervention
programs to meet the needs of highly mobile individuals (Cook, 2006; Titus, 2007), it
was prudent to examine the phenomenon of student mobility to develop clarity so that the
efficacy of such programs may be maximized. A review of the relevant literature
provided the current knowledge base related to mobility and examined the conflicting
3
theories of its impact on student achievement. The need was for increased clarity
concerning the exact nature of student mobility and the impact that the experience had on
student achievement. Current research had not clearly isolated whether student mobility
was a symptom of lower student achievement, a cause, or unrelated. In some cases,
mobility had shown to be related to an increase in student achievement. Based on the
research available, it was impossible to isolate mobility as a variable for quantitative
research until there was additional exploration of the phenomenon through qualitative
observation, thus the selection of the phenomenological paradigm for this study.
There was a great deal of literature dedicated to exploring the causes and
consequences of student mobility (Offenberg, 2004). The literature review explored
these studies in detail and explained why student mobility as experienced by middle
socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class families was the focus of this
research. In summary, there were a variety of relationships between student mobility and
secondary student achievement (Strand & Demie, 2007); however, the point at which
mobility impacted student achievement was not clear. The lenses currently used to
research student mobility focused on the poor (Hartman, 2006), migrant workers (Lennon
& Markatos, 2002), military families (Smrekar, Gunthrie, Owens, & Sims, 2001), and
survivors of natural disasters (Cook, 2006). There was no current research on middle
socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class children and their experiences with
student mobility.
The research showed that student mobility was a persistent issue both in the
United States and globally (Long, 1992). Students changed schools frequently. One
4
study suggested that 50% of all students in the U.S. moved at least twice before senior
year and 10% moved at least six times (Wood, Halfon, Scarla, Newacheck & Nessim,
1993). “ [M]ore than 40% of all third graders [have] changed schools at least once since
first grade and 17% had changed schools two or more times” (U.S. General Accounting
Office, 1994). The same report indicated that by the end of third grade, one of six U.S.
children had attended three or more schools. The 2003 National Assessment of
Educational Progress (NAEP) reported that 34% of all fourth-graders, 21% of eighth-
graders, and 10% of twelfth-graders changed schools at least once in the previous two
years (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2003). Finally, the 2004 Annual
Social and Economic Supplement to the U.S. Census found that 15 to 20% of school-
aged children moved in the previous year. These figures represented the most current
information available concerning student mobility specifically at the time of this study.
The age of these sources illustrated a gap in the current information and a need for
updated statistical data.
Multiple studies suggested that student mobility was higher among Latino,
African American (Offenberg, 2004), Native American (Zehr, 2007), and poor
individuals than among Caucasian, Asian, and middle socio-economic class and upper
socio-economic class individuals (New York State Education Department, 1992;
Rumberger, 2003). The NAEP (2003) illustrated this point: 25% of third graders
attending urban schools are highly mobile students, only 14% in suburban and rural
schools combined; 45% of African-American and 41% of Latino fourth grade students
5
were mobile, compared to 27% of Caucasian fourth-grade students; 43% of lower class
fourth grade students were mobile, compared to 26% above the poverty limits.
The causes of student mobility were wide and varied. In some instances, mobility
resulted directly from parental occupation/lifestyle: (a) military assignment, (b) poverty
and homelessness, (c) migrant worker (e.g. agricultural, carnival, urban construction), (d)
Gypsy or Traveler, (e) promotion/relocation, (f) foster or division of youth and family
Services (DYFS) care. In other instances mobility was associated with more specific
events: (a) family restructuring (e.g. marriage, divorce, separation, imprisonment, death
of a parent(s), (b) evacuee from natural disaster, (c) expulsion from school or
dissatisfaction with element of school. Finally, instances of mobility were connected to
well established patterns of mobility: (a) immigration and emigration, (b) tiebout
(searching for better schools), (c) political, religious, or economic refugee/asylum seeker.
Regardless of the cause, there was a widespread assumption that student mobility was
disruptive to education, either directly by disrupting curriculum continuity and
progression, or indirectly through domestic stress or poor social adjustment. It was the
variety of causes that made it difficult to make generalizations concerning mobility.
The available research suggested that student mobility was seen in some
populations more than others including: (a) families with children under six (Walls,
2003), (b) foster children (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2003), (c)
families in poor housing areas move more frequently than those in average and good
housing situations (Hartman, 2006), (d) individuals living with one or fewer biological
parents move from school to school more frequently than those with two (Tucker, Marx
6
& Long, 1998), (e) families from a lower socioeconomic status moved more often than
any other economic status. Schuler (1990) found that 58% of welfare families in an
urban area moved at least once a year. There was no research available to connect
student mobility with middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class
families, families that experience positive changes such as upward economic movement
or social advancement. The generalization that when families, any families, change
places of residence, the children face problems of disruptions in school curricula,
teachers, and social support systems (Rumberger, 2003) remained to be shown when
specifically discussing middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class
families.
Thus, the review of the literature suggested that the positive causes of mobility,
namely upward economic movement, upward social movement, better housing and better
schooling environments were the least studied of the causes of student mobility. There
was a need to explore what individuals experience without the added complications of the
negative causes. One example of this logic was: there was an established connection
between poverty and lower student achievement and there was an established connection
between poverty and student mobility, however there was no clear connection between
student mobility and student achievement. The complications to the understanding of
what student mobility is and its impact on student achievement can be limited by
focusing on the middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high school
children and their academic (student achievement) and non academic experiences with
student mobility.
7
Problem Statement
Student mobility was a complex issue with multiple causes and effects and
interconnected relationships, which were always easy to determine. Most students made
at least one non-promotional school change (Rumberger et al., 1999). Currently, it was
difficult to identify the point at which student mobility may have an impact on student
achievement. The problem was that student mobility affected both the students‟
academic achievement as well as the schools where the mobility rates were high (Slater,
2005). There were many possible factors contributing to this problem, among which
were socio-economic level, family restructuring, curriculum gaps, incomplete records,
and parental employment. This study contributed to the body of knowledge needed to
address this phenomenon of student mobility by exploring the academic and non
academic themes identified by middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic
class high school children who have experienced mobility in New Jersey and its impact
on their own student achievement.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to find meaning from the
academic (student achievement) and non academic experiences of middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children in New Jersey who
had experienced student mobility and their description of the impact it had on their own
student achievment. Mobility tended to compound issues, both positive and negative,
8
that impacted student achievement. This research was directly related to student
achievement and the impact that student mobility had on multiple aspects of student
achievement including student test scores, grades, retention, graduation, and attendance.
The evidence suggested that in order to enforce the aims of the NCLB, states and districts
should recognize student mobility, potentially making this a timely issue (Rhodes, 2007).
When educators understand how student mobility impacts students both academically
(student achievement) and non academically there could be a basis for better meeting the
needs of all students who experience student mobility. In an effort to limit the
compounding complications of poverty, only middle socio-economic class and upper
socio-economic class high school students were used in this study. The implications for
positive social change included a better understanding of student mobility, its impact on
student achievement, and the potential to minimize its negative influences and maximize
its potential positives.
Research Questions
The following research questions were used in this phenomenological study:
1. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience student mobility in regard to non-academic elements?
2. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience the academic (student achievement) elements associated with
student mobility?
9
Nature of the Study
The phenomenological method of inquiry places the researcher and the participant
in a position to coconstruct the multiple realities of the phenomenon. Through Hatch‟s
(2002) inductive analysis model the researcher examined the details and nuances of the
academic (student achievement) and non academic experiences of middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class high school students who have moved
school and residence in the past three years. The phenomenological paradigm allows for
emergent design to enable the researcher to respond to the multiple realities potentially
involved and impossible to prepare for ahead of time. Thus, the phenomenological
method was consistent with the needs of this research. The current lenses provided a
view from specific points of view that are not sufficient to answer the specific problems
facing all mobile students in today‟s world. In addition, at this time there was no close-
up view available to analyze.
Quantitative methods seek to test theoretical generalizations through
experimentation. Such logical positivism relies heavily on variables and clearly defined
samples from populations. These methods do not support any attempt to clarify
individual experiences nor present unique perspectives; quantitative research tests rather
than explores, and this was an exploratory study. The phenomenological paradigm was
better suited for the exploration of what it means to be a mobile high school student.
The conceptual framework for this study was student mobility. This study
confined itself to researching individuals who experience student mobility when it
10
included residential mobility. A review of the literature identified a large population of
individuals impacted by student mobility without residential mobility. Some of the
participants were selected from students attending a coalition of private schools in New
Jersey. The use of these kinds of schools to aid in participant selection served as a fair
indicator of their economic class as middle socio-economic class and upper socio-
economic class due to the tuition in all of the schools ranging from $15,000.00 to
$25,000.00 per academic year. The parents of potential participants were sent the
researcher‟s invitation to participate by the Dean of Admissions of the School. The letter
asked for permission from the parents for the schools to share the family‟s contact
information with the researcher for an interview with their child. No initial contact
information was given to the researcher prior to the participant‟s agreement to participate
in the research. The dean of admissions for the School was responsible for actually
sending the invitation letters. Participants were then contacted via written and electronic
mail when possible, as well as a follow up telephone contact for further discussion
concerning an interview date, the research questions, methods, and procedures. In
addition, a snowball technique was used to reach out to parents of possible participants.
In these cases parents were contacted by the researcher through an introduction from a
friend or colleague. The initial contact was through phone or e-mail and included a
description of the study, confidentiality, the research questions and an invitation to ask
the student if they would like to participate. The parents were then sent the invitation
letter and the consent form, which when returned was followed with the setting of a date
for the interview. The population was ten participants currently in the grades 9, 10, 11, or
11
12; unless saturation of the data was achieved before ten. It was possible that one grade
might be represented more than the other grades or even that one grade level might not be
represented at all. Mobility, in this study, meant the individual changed schools within a
three year period and that the change occurred during grades 7 through 12. This also
meant that the individual, at the time of the interview, may no longer have been in high
school; however, they experienced the phenomenon of student mobility while they were
enrolled in middle or high school.
Unstructured in-depth phenomenological interviews of ten high school students
were conducted in person when possible and, in the event that an in person interview was
impossible, they were conducted via telephone. Both in-person and telephone interviews
were recorded onto audio tape with the informed consent of the participants and their
parents. In the course of each interview, although was an interview guide (located in
appendix A) the questions were developed through the evolution of the conversation with
the participant. The format of these questions included detail-oriented probes,
elaboration probes, and clarification probes to enhance the understanding and clarity of
statements as appropriate. Sample probes included: It sounds like you are saying, “…” Is
that a fair summary? Tell me more about that, Why was that important to you? Why does
that stand out in your memory? and What motivated this change? The questions and
subsequent probes were directed to the actual academic and non academic experiences
(Welman & Kruger, 1999, p. 196). Thus, the duration of the interviews and the exact
number of questions varied from one participant to another.
12
Phenomenology is dependent on the creation of what Patton (1990) calls "solid
descriptive data," or "thick description" to improve an analysis' transferability and raw
data reuse. Thus, to improve the odds of relevance of this work to future works, a thick
description of the experiences of the participants was generated. The analysis, using
Hatch‟s inductive analysis model (2002), of the experiences collected in this study
produced multiple information-rich summaries based on major themes in the data
regarding middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high school
students experiences of mobility in conjunction with primary relocation.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework for this study was student mobility. The exact impact
student mobility had on student achievement was unclear. In addition, it was not
understood what student mobility was outside of its association with multiple other
characteristics (e.g. poverty, military, disaster refugees, etc.) that result in compounded
complications; thus, the focus of this study was on middle socio-economic class and
upper socio-economic class high school students only. As our country considered
waivers (as seen after hurricane Katrina) for schools with high mobility (Cook, 2006) or
interventions to meet the needs of highly mobile individuals (Heiderson & Stiles, 1994) it
was prudent to examine student mobility a bit closer to contribute to the efficacy of such
efforts.
This research was directly related to student achievement and the impact that
student mobility had on multiple aspects of student achievement including student test
13
scores, grades, retention, graduation, and attendance. Russell W. Rumberger, the director
of the Linguistic Minority Research Institute at the University of California, and David
Kerbow, a senior research associate at the center for Urban School Improvement at the
University of Chicago were two of the lead contributors to the current understanding of
student mobility. Through their work, Rumberger (2003) and Kerbow (1996) both
explored the complex relationships surrounding student mobility as these relationships
limit what most studies can report definitively. For example, background and family
characteristics contributed to student achievement for most individuals. Thus, a need was
identified for more studies that take into account these relationships in order to determine
whether student mobility itself is the cause of subsequent achievement gaps (Rumberger,
2003).
At first the negative association between student mobility and student
achievement appeared clear cut, both in international and US research (Bernard Van Leer
Foundation, The Hague (Netherlands), 1994; United States General Accounting Office,
1994; Hartman, 2006; Liang & Chen, 2007; Rumberger, 2002). Two national studies
based on health study data suggested the impact of student mobility on student
achievement across grade levels was related to the actual number of times a individual
moved (Black, 2006; Swanson & Schneider, 1999). However, Strand & Demie (2006;
2007) explored the evidence connecting student mobility to student achievement and
conclude that much of it failed to control for background factors or family characteristics
that are also connected to student achievement. When issues such as socioeconomic
status, language proficency, prior performance or social disadvantages were controlled
14
for, two well-designed studies showed evidence that student mobility had no significant
effect on student achievement at the elementary level (Alexander, Entwisle& Dauber,
1996; Strand & Demie, 2006). At the secondary level, when some of the same reseachers
controlled for the same factors at age 16, the results indicated that student mobility had a
significant negative impact on student achievement (Strand & Demie, 2007). It remained
to explore exactly what kinds of factors can explain the inconsistency in the research.
Definition of Terms
Student mobility: When a child moves from one school to another for reasons
other than promotion to a higher grade.
Student stability: When a child stays in a school.
Highly mobile: When a child moves six or more times during K-12 – often
children from migrant, military, homeless, or low-income families.
Tiebout mobility: When a child moves from one school to another specifically to
attend a “better” school environment or learning opportunity.
Student achievement: The academic performance of an individual student
including student test scores, grades, retention, graduation, and attendance.
Life Experiences: The non academic experience of the participants that may
include but are not limited to: social relationships, personal feelings or observations,
emotional growth, cultural adjustments, and language changes.
Middle socio-economic class and Upper socio-economic class: As defined by the
United States census bureau (2006) it was the sub population that represented any
member of the American population living consistently above the median household
15
income benchmark. The median household income was $46,326 and 18% of households
reported an income over $100,000 in 2005.
Assumptions, Delimitations, and Limitations
Assumptions
For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the high school students
responded honestly during the interview. No documents were collected to verify
statements made by the individual during the interview. For the purposes of the
phenomenological study the perceptions as they are presented by the participant were
considered valid as their understanding of the truth at the time. There was no way for the
participant to suffer repercussions for comments made during the interview and there was
no possible way for the interviewer to intervene or impact the participant‟s life situation.
It was also assumed that the participating student also experienced residential relocation
in the past three years. Finally, it was assumed that the participants found through the
snowball technique, were honest when describing their class as middle to upper socio-
economic class when directly asked. No documentation was collected for verification.
Delimitations
This study confined itself to interviewing middle socio-economic class and upper
socio-economic class high school students who had experienced student mobility within
the last three years. This study also confined itself to researching a population of
individuals who experienced student mobility when it included residential mobility to,
from, or within the state of New Jersey. Mobility, in this study, meant the individual
16
changed schools within a three year period and that the change occurred during grades 7
through 12. This also meant that the individual, at the time of the interview, may no
longer have been in high school; however, they experienced the phenomenon of student
mobility while they were enrolled in middle or high school.
This study confined itself to researching individuals who experienced student
mobility when it included residential mobility to, from, or within the state of New Jersey.
A review of the literature identified a large population of individuals impacted by student
mobility without residential mobility. Participants in this study had to have changed
residence and school in order to qualify. The requirement of a change of residence was an
attempt to limit some of the negative compounding issues including homelessness,
expulsion, and mobility due to dissatisfaction with a specific aspect of a school.
The use of the state of New Jersey was convenience of location and the
cooperation of the coalition of schools primarily Delbarton School. The purpose of using
the private schools was to screen participants for economic class. Therefore this study
confined itself to research high school students that were not awarded full scholarship to
the private school. The researcher provided an invitation to participate in the research to
the Dean of Admissions of Delbarton School and through the high school it was
systematically sent to all possible students that matched the specific qualifications,
primarily that they had both changed high schools and residence in the last three years.
This continued until there were no further willing participants available, ten participants
were interviewed, or saturation of data was achieved. The delimitation to work with only
middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high school students was an
17
attempt to isolate these results from existing studies dealing with poverty and
homelessness. The snowball technique was also used in this study and participants were
asked directly concerning their socio-economic class. They were informed as to the
purpose for the question and given the opportunity to withdraw from the study if they felt
they did not satisfy the requirements for participation.
Limitations
Limitations identify potential weaknesses of the research conducted. This
phenomenological study explored the lived experiences of high school students in regard
to mobility; however, the results cannot be generalized or applied to the possible
experiences of a larger population. The results of this research can only be used to
describe student mobility as it applies to these participants. Although a meaningful and
important part of the puzzle, it is only one piece. Specific limitations include the
population only represented students relocating into or from the state of New Jersey. In
addition, the population only related to students living in the middle or upper socio-
economic class. The ramifications of these limitations were not explored in this study
however it does reduce the generalizibility of the results.
A limitation of this study developed during the data collection. Only five willing
participants were identified during the nine months of data collection. This limitation is
described in detail in later chapters.
18
Significance of the Study
The evidence suggested that in order to enforce the aims of NCLB, states and
districts should recognize student mobility, potentially making this a timely issue. When
educators understand how student mobility impacts individuals both academically
(student achievement) and non academically there may be a basis for better meeting the
needs of all individuals who experience student mobility.
Student mobility tended to compound issues, both positive and negative, that
impact student achievement. Educators should understand how mobility impacts student
achievement and its implications for students, schools, and districts. The goals of NCLB
may be difficult to achieve without understanding what happens to the specific student
who experiences student mobility (Rhodes, 2007). This is critical when considering that
schools with high mobility rates show decreases in student achievement for students that
are not mobile. Student mobility ultimately affects all students. The point at which
mobility may have an adverse impact on student achievement was not clear and some
research suggested that mobility may be a benefit to some individuals (Blakeman, 1993).
A review of the relevant literature suggested this was the first study to examine
middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children and
their experiences with student mobility. The implications for positive social change
included a better understanding of student mobility, its impact on student achievement,
and the potential to minimize any negative influences and maximize any potential
positives.
19
Summary
Student mobility was identified as a complex issue with multiple causes and
effects and interconnected relationships, which were not always easy to determine.
Research suggested most individuals made at least one non-promotional school change
(Rumberger et al., 1999). At the time of this study, it was difficult to identify the point at
which student mobility may have an impact on student achievement. The problem was
that student mobility affected both the students‟ academic achievement as well as the
schools where the mobility rates were high (Slater, 2005). There were many possible
factors contributing to this problem, among which are socio-economic level, family
restructuring, curriculum gaps, incomplete records, and parental employment. This study
contributed to the body of knowledge needed to describe this phenomenon of student
mobility by exploring the academic and non academic themes identified by middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children who had
experienced student mobility and its impact on their own student achievement.
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to find meaning from the
academic (student achievement) and non academic experiences of middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children who had
experienced student mobility and their description of the impact it had on their own
student achievment. Student mobility tended to compound issues, both positive and
negative, that impacted student achievement. This research was directly related to
student achievement and the impact that mobility had on multiple aspects of student
achievement including test scores, grades, retention, graduation, and attendance. The
20
evidence suggested that in order to enforce the aims of the NCLB, states and districts
should recognize student mobility, potentially making this a timely issue (Rhodes, 2007).
When educators understand how student mobility impacted individuals both
academically (student achievement) and non academically there iss basis for better
meeting the needs of all individuals who experience student mobility.
This study focused on student mobility and to do so isolated as many of the
compounding issues as possible. To isolate poverty only the middle socioeconomic class
and the upper socioeconomic class were included in the population. Similarly, only high
school children who had also changed residence were included to limit complications
associated with expulsion, dissatisfaction with the current school, or homelessness. Thus,
this study explored the academic and non academic experiences of high school children
who had changed both school and residence in the past three years in an effort to
understand student mobility and any possible impact it may have had on student
achievement.
This study attempted to broaden the knowledge base and understanding we have
as humans concerning mobility from this unique point of view. The phenomenological
paradigm is presented in chapter three. Based on the review of the relevant literature this
was the first study to examine middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic
class high school children and their academic and non academic experiences with student
mobility and any possible impact it had on student achievement. The analysis, using
Hatch‟s inductive analysis model (2002), of the experiences collected in this study
produced multiple information-rich summaries based on major themes in the data, and
21
was designed to focus on student mobility in an attempt to learn more about the
phenomenon so that researchers in the future might return to the topic with new insights.
The implications for positive social change included a better understanding of student
mobility, its impact on student achievement, and the potential to minimize its negative
influences and maximize its potential positives.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The phenomenon of student mobility was gaining recognition in the world of
education as a contributing factor to the achievement gaps historically attributed to race,
ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic status (Fowler-Finn, 2001). High school children
who changed schools showed a 50% chance of dropping out (Rumberger R. W., Larson,
Ream& Palardy, 1999; South, Haynie, & Bose, 2007). Highly mobile students were
more likely to be retained a grade, this statistic was true across all socioeconomic classes
(2001). In addition, where high levels of mobility were apparent, the mobility itself had a
negative impact on student achievement (Ewell, Schild, Paulson, 2003). Finally, the
higher the mobility the less likely that student achievement at age appropriate levels was
expected to occur (Hartman, 2006; Rumberger, 2003). Mobility tended to compound
issues, both positive and negative, that impacted student achievement. The evidence
suggested that in order to enforce the aims of the NCLB (No Child Left Behind Act)
states and districts should recognize student mobility making this a timely issue (Rhodes,
2007). They should understand how it impacted student achievement and its implications
for students, schools, and districts. When educators understand how student mobility
impacted individuals both academically (student achievement) and non academically
there is a basis for better meeting the needs of all individuals who experience student
mobility. The point at which mobility had an adverse impact on student achievement,
23
however, was not clear. In fact, some research suggested that mobility was a benefit to
some individuals (Blakeman, 1993).
A review of the relevant literature provided the current knowledge base related to
mobility and compared the conflicting theories of its impact on student achievement. The
need was for increased clarity concerning the exact nature of mobility and the impact that
the experience had on the student achievement of the individual. Current research had
not clearly isolated whether student mobility was a symptom of lower student
achievement, or a cause. In some cases it had shown to be related to an increase in
student achievement. It became the view of this researcher that it was impossible to
isolate mobility as a variable for quantitative research until there was additional
exploration of the phenomenon through qualitative observation, thus, the selection of the
phenomenological paradigm for this study (Moustakas, 1994).
The conceptual framework was student mobility and to focus on student mobility
this study was designed to isolate as many of the compounding issues and causes as
possible. To isolate poverty only the middle socioeconomic class and the upper
socioeconomic class was included in the population. Similarly, only high school students
who had also changed residence were included to limit complications associated with
expulsion, dissatisfaction with the current school, or homelessness. Thus, this study
explored the academic and non academic experiences of high school children who had
changed both school and residence in the past three years in an effort to understand
student mobility and any possible impact it had on student achievement.
24
There was a great deal of literature dedicated to exploring the causes and
consequences of student mobility. The literature review explored these in detail and
explained why student mobility as experienced by middle socio-economic class and
upper socio-economic class high school children was the focus of this research. In
summary, there were a variety of relationships between student mobility and student
achievement; however, the point at which mobility impacted student achievement was
not clear. What accounted for the generally negative impact of mobility on student
achievement? Why, in some cases, did mobility not adversely impact student
achievement, or even improved it? It was these questions that led to the main themes
explored in this study. The answers depended, in part, on the causes of the student
mobility.
Conceptual Basis: Student Mobility
The conceptual framework was student mobility and this section develops that
concept. Students changed schools frequently. “…[M]ore than 40% of all third graders
[have] changed schools at least once since first grade and 17% had changed schools two
or more times” (U.S. General Accounting Office, 1994). The same report indicated that
by the end of third grade, one of six U.S. children had attended three or more schools.
The 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reported that 34% of all
fourth-graders, 21% of eighth-graders, and 10% of twelfth-graders changed schools at
least once in the previous two years. Another study suggested that 50% of all students in
the U.S. moved at least twice before senior year and 10 % moved at least six times
25
(Wood, Halfon, Scarla, Newacheck& Nessim, 1993). Finally, the 2004 Annual Social
and Economic Supplement to the U.S. Census found that 15 to 20 % of school-aged
children moved in the previous year. The research showed these statistics increasing;
Student mobility was growing in the United States and globally (Long, 1992).
Research revealed that the causes of student mobility were more complicated than
many people assume. Multiple studies suggested that student mobility was higher among
Latino, African American (Offenberg, 2004), Native American (Zehr, 2007), and poor
individuals than among Caucasian, Asian, and middle socio-economic class and upper
socio-economic class high school children (New York State Education Department,
1992; Rumberger, 2003). The NAEP (2003) illustrated this point: 25% of third graders
attending urban schools were highly mobile students, only 14% in suburban and rural
schools combined; 45% of African-American and 41% of Latino fourth grade students
were mobile, compared to 27% of Caucasian fourth-grade students; 43% of lower class
fourth grade students were mobile, compared to 26% above the poverty limits. These
kinds of patterns suggested interconnected causes and relationships that complicate the
discussion of student mobility and the impact it has on student achievement.
There was an assumption that student mobility was the result of individuals
moving or changing residence. This was substantiated by the data; one national study
found that 70% of all school changes between grades 8-12 were due to a change of
residence (Rumberger & Larson, 1998). However, this changed somewhat when certain
characteristics received focus. For example, Kerbow (1996) found, in an urban district of
Chicago, that less than 60% of school changes in grade 6 were accompanied by changes
26
in residence (p. 154). This same study suggested that 62% of all student mobility
involved individuals leaving and then reenrolling in Chicago public schools. How many
of these included a change of residence, however, was not identified.
This connection to urban mobility was echoed in a current study conducted in
China which focused on the causes and consequences of student mobility (Liang & Chen,
2007). They separated the migrant work population into temporary and permanent
migrant families. They found that temporary migrant children were less likely to be
enrolled in school and suffered academically the most during their first year of relocation.
Similarly, Liang and Chen (2007) focused on the impact this kind of mobility had on the
urban population and expressed concern for the urban society as a whole. Interestingly
though, they also found that the permanent migrant families had a higher enrollment than
even the local families. They attributed these results to the highly selective nature of the
parents and the adaptation to the lifestyle. The logical extension of this suggested that
some mobile families do not suffer the consequences of student mobility to the same
degree because of preparation, adaptation to the lifestyle, or parental commitment to
education (Liang & Chen, 2007).
The causes of student mobility were identified as wide and varied. In some
instances mobility resulted directly from parental occupation/lifestyle: (a) military
assignment, (b) poverty and homelessness, (c) migrant worker (e.g. agricultural, carnival,
urban construction), (d) Gypsy or Traveler. In other instances mobility may be
associated with more specific events: (a) parental job promotion/relocation, (b) family
restructuring (e.g. marriage, divorce, separation, imprisonment, death of a parent(s),
27
foster or DYFS care), (c) Evacuee from natural disaster, (d) expulsion from school or
dissatisfaction with element of school. Finally, instances of mobility was connected to
well established patterns of mobility: (a) immigration and emigration, (b) tiebout
(searching for better schools), (c) political, religious, or economic refugee/asylum seeker.
Regardless of the cause, there was a widespread assumption that student mobility was
disruptive to education, either directly by disrupting curriculum continuity and
progression, or indirectly through domestic stress or poor social adjustment. It was the
variety of causes that made it so difficult to make generalizations concerning mobility.
Residences changed for a variety of reasons. There were some populations that
were more affected than others including: (a) families with children under six (Walls,
2003), (b) foster children (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2003), (c)
families in poor housing areas move more frequently than those in average and good
housing situations (Hartman, 2006), (d) individuals living with one or fewer biological
parents move from school to school more frequently than those living with two (Tucker,
Marx& Long, 1998), (e) families from a lower socioeconomic status move more often
than any other economic status. Schuler (1990) found that 58% of welfare families in an
urban area moved at least once a year. When families, any families, changed places of
residence, the children faced problems of disruptions in school curricula, teachers, and
social support systems. This connection to socioeconomic status meshed with the
research that connected mobility and poverty to low student achievement which is
presented in detail later.
28
Not all student mobility was detrimental or involuntary; some families moved to
secure better jobs or find a more appropriate school. Family mobility was also associated
with optional moves in the interest of improving the living conditions and opportunities
for the family. Tiebout mobility, as described by economists, was defined as the
instances where parents changed districts in search of higher quality schools. One study
in Texas showed an average increase in school quality for district switchers (Hanushek,
Kain& Rivkin, 2001). Similarly, corporate relocation or reassignment can improve the
economic status of the family and increase the standard of living and educational
opportunities. Research suggested that the impact of family attitude and support for the
move had a significant impact on the ultimate adjustment and future student achievement
scores of the children involved (Engec, 2006; Liang & Chen, 2007).
Change, whether positive or negative, causes stress and anxiety. The positive
causes of mobility were simply events that were categorized in a positive light; however
one cannot make assumptions about the impact such an event might have had on a child
in the family (Norford & Medway, 2002). For example, marriage or remarriage,
although often positive, represented change, and carried social and emotional baggage or
a sense of displacement which could have had a negative impact on student achievement
with or without mobility (Brodkin, 2006). A review of the literature suggested that the
positive causes of mobility, namely upward economic movement, upward social
movement, better housing, and better schooling environments were the least studied of
the causes. There was a need to explore these reasons for student mobility because they
represented experiences without the added complications of the negative causes as
29
described above. This connection to socioeconomic status meshed with the research that
connected mobility and poverty to low student achievement.
Student Achievement (academic aspects)
It is commonly believed that changing schools affects children both academically
and psychologically. Highly mobile students are thought to be more
educationally at-risk than their more stable counterparts. Similarly, schools with
high percentages of transient students are found to be disadvantaged when
aggregate test scores are used as indicators of school performance. (New York
State Education Department, 1992)
This research was directly related to student achievement and the impact that
mobility had on multiple aspects of student achievement including test scores, grades,
retention, graduation, and attendance. Russell W. Rumberger, the director of the
Linguistic Minority Research Institute at the University of California, and David Kerbow,
a senior research associate at the center for Urban School Improvement at the University
of Chicago are two of the lead contributors in this area. Through their work, Rumberger
and Kerbow both explored the complex relationships surrounding student mobility
because they limit what most studies can report definitively. For example, background
and family characteristics contributed to student achievement for most individuals. A
need was identified for more studies that take into account these kinds of relationships in
order to determine whether student mobility itself was the cause of subsequent low
student achievement.
30
In this time of high accountability for schools there was a growing societal focus
on academic programs and how children perform both individually and as a group, it
became increasingly important to review how schools were evaluated in terms of student
achievement (Titus, 2007). The exact impact mobility had on student achievement was
unclear. In addition, it was not understood what student mobility was outside of its
association with multiple other characteristics (e.g. poverty, military, disaster refugees,
etc.). As our country considered waivers for schools (as seen after hurricane Katrina)
with high student mobility or intervention programs to meet the needs of highly mobile
students it became prudent to examine the phenomenon a bit closer to contribute to the
efficacy of such efforts.
At first the negative association between student mobility and student
achievement appeared clear cut, both in international and U.S. research (Bernard Van
Leer Foundation, The Hague (Netherlands), 1994; United States General Accounting
Office, 1994; Hartman, 2006; Liang & Chen, 2007; Long, 1992; Rumberger, 2002).
Two national studies based on health study data suggested the impact of student mobility
on student achievement across grade levels was related to the actual number of times an
individual moved (Black, 2006; Swanson & Schneider, 1999). This generated the two
terms “student mobility” and “highly mobile students” (three or more moves) which
predicted student grade retention (Simpson & Fowler, 1994; Wood, et al., 1993). In
addition, the Schuler (1990) study which focused on 253 elementary children in an urban
district in California, established a connection between highly mobile students (moved
31
more than once a year) and lower standardized achievement test scores in every single
category.
However, Strand and Demie (2006; 2007) explored the evidence connecting
student mobility to student achievement and concluded that much of it failed to control
for background factors or family characteristics that are also connected to student
achievement. When issues such as socioeconomic status, language proficency, prior
performance or social disadvantages were controlled for, two well-designed studies show
evidence that student mobility had no significant effect on student achievement at the
elementary level (Alexander, Entwisle & Dauber, 1996; Strand & Demie, 2006). At the
secondary level, when some of the same reseachers controlled for the same factors at age
16, the results indicated that student mobility had a significant negative impact on student
achievement (Strand & Demie, 2007). Finally, an exahustive report by the Worcester
Regional Research Bureau in Massachusetts suggested that controling for socioeconomic
class was not always appropriate when discussing student mobility (2002). Using the
standardized achievement tests to establish a comparison they found that schools with
mobility rates above 50% and in some cases as high as 70% had a school achievement
performance rating below the district average and schools with mobility rates as low as
15% to 20% had a school achievement performance rating above the district average.
This pattern followed what the majority of the research reviewed here showed; the
difference was found in one part of the report that suggested the following comment.
It appears, however, that the effect of socioeconomic status can be mitigated in
various ways, as seen at the University Park Campus School which has 76% of its
32
individuals eligible for free and reduced-priced lunch and has low mobility rates
and high MCAS scores in the eighth grade. (Beaman & Schaefer, 2002, p. 6).
It remained to establish and explore exactly what kinds of factors can explain the
inconsistency in the research.
Some complicating factors included the time and resources needed to process and
support individuals during transition (Titus, 2007). A review of the literature showed
multiple facets of the problem: (a) tranfer of records (e.g. satisfied graduation
requirements, transcripts, medical paperwork including innoculations), (b) support
information for special needs (e.g. IEP records, evaulation results), (c) social or counselor
support needs for the individual (Bartolomeo, 2006; Beaman & Schaefer, 2002; Black,
2006; Brodkin, 2006; Cook, 2006; Lennon & Markatos, 2002; Picou & Marshall, 2007;
Titus, 2007). The results of these studies showed repeatedly that individuals frustrated by
being told they do not have enough credits to graduate with their age group dropout.
Studies showed that individuals who struggle with improper placement or are arrested in
their progress by the removal of support services cannot perform academically (Norford
& Medway, 2002; Titus, 2007; Walls, 2003). In addition, schools that were burdened by
incomplete records and highly fluctuating populations, some in excess of 69.6% (NAEP,
2003; Offenberg, 2004) cannot assess their own performance as an organization. This is
examined closer in the next two subsections.
A Focus on School Assessment
[S]ince I‟ve been here it‟s well over 800 students from July through December
who have left. They have been replaced by 800 more coming in. We‟re about
33
3800 as far as active students right now…so you‟re constantly dealing with 1000
students leaving, 1000 students coming in. (Rumberger, 1999, p. 29)
One of the most common measures of school effectiveness was the student
achievement of their children on test scores. These test scores were accepted as one of
the critical outcomes of schooling (Offenberg, 2004). However, a focus on test scores as
a sole measure of school outcomes lost sight of other important outcomes such as dropout
rates and mobility rates (Slater, 2005). The Fowler-Finn (2001) report found that the
public schools in Fort Wayne (Indiana) actually calculated their mobility rates to aid in
balancing the school outcomes for accountability purposes. However, most educational
reform formats, including NCLB, continue to assume that the quality of the educational
program can be measured using the achievements on test scores of the children in
attendance (Rhodes, 2007).
…[W]e get tested at the end of the year, and you know, it‟s assumed that the
people we test at 9th
grade are the ones we tested at 10th
grade and if the scores go
up or down, we‟re going to say it was related to instruction but it may not have
been. It may be an issue of how our mobility impacted us one way or another.
We‟re not doing longitudinal studies with the same kids in a school. I mean,
we‟ve got 30-40% of the kids who, in any one year, are checking out. So I don‟t
know how we hold schools accountable. (Rumberger R. W., Larson, Ream &
Palardy, 1999, pp. 58-59)
In his study of Chicago schools, Kerbow (1996) expressed this concern when he
discussed how mobility created educational program disjuncture that actually reduced the
34
effectiveness of local school reform efforts in Chicago at that time. He found that the
core population of first grade classrooms routinely disappeared over time. In addition, he
found that the highest mobility rates were at the schools with the highest at-risk
populations. This was echoed in the Offenberg (2004) study of adequate yearly progress
(AYP) schools in Philadelphia. In this three year study of first graders, Offenberg (2004)
suggested that schools in the most need of reform efforts and resources were also most
likely to have compromised results of their efforts in the AYP assessments due to high
student mobility.
A report from the U.S. General Accounting Office in 1994 suggested that during a
four year period, the proportion of students who remained in school for the full year fell
below 50% in many schools. These older statistics were the most current available at this
time and represent a gap in the literature. Yet, in these cases, when the classroom door
resembled a revolving door, the literature suggested it became increasingly difficult for
the school organization to measure or observe the results of program reforms such as
smaller classes, better trained teachers, and curricular alignment (Rhodes, 2007). The
literature explored the conflict with the current practice of using students‟ test score data
to evaluate the effectiveness of a school‟s program if the mobility of individuals impacted
these scores beyond the control of the school organization or the actual quality of their
program (Offenberg, 2004). Some schools, however were affected more than others: (a)
those around military or naval bases, (b) those around prisons, (c) areas with migratory
workers, (d) those with poor socioeconomic conditions, (e) urban areas, (f) those with
35
limited affordable housing, and (g) those surrounding disaster areas (Blakeman, 1993;
Brodkin, 2006; Pittman & Bowen, 1994; ; Slater, 2005; Walls, 2003).
As presented above, student achievement was affected by many background
factors and circumstances; however, it was also affected by the characteristics of the
school attended (Rumberger & Larson, 1998; Rumberger & Thomas, 2000). Two
studies suggested that student mobility was, in part, directly related to what goes on in
schools. A national study of high school and elementary children both suggested 40% of
the causes identified for transferring schools were not connected to family relocation
(Kerbow, 1996; Lee & Burkam, 1992; Rumberger, 1995; Rumberger & Larson, 1998).
The literature also showed ample evidence that schools that had a high population of
mobile students showed a decrease in student achievement overall (Black, 2006;
Rumberger & Thomas, 2000; Slater, 2005; The New York Board of Education, 1992).
One reason educators and policy makers should be more concerned about student
mobility is “…that research suggests that student mobility is generally detrimental both to
individuals and to the schools they attend” (Rumberger & Larson, 1998, p. 3).
As mentioned earlier the Wood et al. (1993) study controlled for background
factors and looked independently at student achievement across grade levels. This study
found that only highly mobile families (three or more moves) predicted grade retention
and fewer moves did not. Yet, another study based on the exact same population and
database suggested that so much as one change of residence had a negative impact on a
composite measure of both student achievement and social and behavioral aspects of
school performance (Tucker, Marx & Long, 1998). This report found that individuals
36
who lived with two biological parents may have had more “social capital” as defined by
sociologist James Coleman (1988) to characterize the mitigating effect positive
supportive family relationships and stable structures can have on student mobility.
A Focus on Secondary School
What is known about the impact of mobility on student achievement in high
school? The existing literature on mobile high school children suggested a negative
impact on student achievement (Engec, 2006; Rumberger & Larson, 1998; Rumberger &
Thomas, 2000). However, there was a lack of controls for the compoundable issues
mentioned above and therefore the methodology of these studies was potentially flawed.
Studies that did attempt to control for compoundable issues, such as the Simpson
and Fowler‟s (1994) health data study, produced conflicted results. Rumberger, Larson,
Ream, and Palardy (1999) also suggested that high school children who change schools
are less likely to graduate by about 50%. This study was supported later by South, Scott,
and Bose (2007). Similarly, Swanson and Schneider (1999) concluded that mobility in
grades 10-12 did have a negative impact on student achievement in grade 12. Contrarily,
Swanson and Schneider (1999) also stated that mobility during grade 8-10 did not have a
negative impact on student achievement in grade 10. What was more, they reported that
mobility during grade 8-10 had a positive impact on student achievement. It should be
noted that this study focused on student mobility without relocation of the residence
which many studies distinguished as having a different type of impact (Brodkin, 2006).
Thus, this study focused on a population that had changed school and residence in the
past three years.
37
Swanson and Schneider (1999) suggested that their results showed a connection
to parents moving their children to better quality schools (tiebout relocation). Similarly,
another study explored the phenomenon of parents moving their children in search of
schools that met the needs of their child specifically; their findings suggested that the
disruption was minimal when the parents were supportive and highly involved in the
transitioning process (Hanushek, Kain & Rivkin, 2001).
The literature showed the strongest impact of mobility was on graduation rates.
“There is overwhelming evidence that mobility during high school diminishes the
prospects for graduation” (Rumberger, 2003, p. 3). However, the research focused on
several different relationships for example, Swanson and Schneider (1999) and
Rumberger (1995), used longitudinal data on eighth graders concluded that there was a
different effect on dropout rates when the mobility occurred between grades 1-8 verses
grades 8-10. Although both increased the chances of dropping out by grade 10 the
chances were higher when the mobility occurred in grades 8-10. In extension to these
studies one more looked at the same data in relation to grade 12. Rumberger and Larson
(1998) found that mobility between grades 8 through 12 increased the odds of dropping
out of school by grade 12. “…with even one school change during high school
decreasing the odds of graduating from high school by more than 50%” (p. 4). Further
studies isolated the range of mobility changes to grades 8-10 as the most critical for
staying in one location to prevent dropout. Individuals who then relocated after grade 10
actually decreased the odds of dropout which supported the theory that mobility has a
negative impact on some students and a positive impact on others (Rumberger, 2003).
38
Strand and Demie (2007) used the multivariate regression analysis model and
controlled for multiple individual background factors, such as sex, fluency in English,
ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, concluded that student mobility was strongly
associated with attainment in age 16 examinations. The size of the impact was reduced
only slightly (around 20%) when the background factors were taken into account. In
addition, the impact remained significant when factors such as prior attainment were
examined. It was concluded that student mobility at age 16 both reduced student
achievement and academic progress when compared to their stable peers (p. 19). While
the evidence suggested the impact of student mobility on student achievement at the
elementary school was minimal, the evidence in relation to secondary school was more
equivocal. The question still remained, what can explain the difference between
elementary and secondary mobility and the impact on student achievement? Thus, this
study focused on high school children for the population to be examined in relation to
student mobility.
Social and Emotional Concerns (non academic aspects)
A review of the literature showed that individuals can suffer socially and
psychologically from mobility. Reactions to student mobility vary from person to person,
and adjustment occurred along a broad continuum. Some individuals made the transition
smoothly, while others found it a traumatic event. Mobile students face the
psychological challenge of coping with a new school environment and social community
(Rumberger, 2003). Having to leave friends behind and in some cases family members
39
or connections was described as the single hardest part of relocating according to
Blakeman (1993). One report focusing on adolescents suggested that, because student
mobility was a crisis event and the social aspect of it was critical, an exit policy from the
former school to aid both the mobile individual and the community left behind to give
closure would aid in the transition (1993). The difficulty associated with leaving friends
cannot be underestimated especially when considered in the context of its impact on a
student‟s ability to focus on learning (Holland, Kaplan & Davis, 1974). In addition,
Blakeman (1993) reported that all schools needed to develop procedure for integrating
mobile individuals. The role of the school community in aiding a mobile individual
through the challenges of relocation was critical for academic (student achievement)
success (Titus, 2007).
For a successful transition to occur from one school to the next, students should
achieve three goals: (a) students need to find a place among their peers that is acceptable;
(b) students should become successful in the academic areas and behavioral standards
they have been placed in, and (c) students should experience a sense of acceptance by the
faculty as an appropriate and successful member of the class (Blakeman, 1993; Titus,
2007). New friendships may be difficult to form. Younger school children who are
starting to develop socialization skills and friendships may not be adept at forming new
ones. Adolescents may find it hard to break into established cliques or to navigate new
academic or behavior expectations. Psychologists theorized that children who move
should deal with grieving for lost connections, fears of the unknown, and lessened
parental attention, all of which may lead to emotional and behavioral problems
40
(Blakeman, 1993; Dobson & Henthorne, 1999; Heiderson & Stiles, 1994). Furthermore,
children do not choose to move; they are helpless members of the family subjected to the
events around them, although parents may take into account their children and the ages of
their children when choosing to move (Norford & Medway, 2002). Parents, preoccupied
or exhausted with the physical and social demands of moving such as locating medical or
child care in a new community and getting established in new employment situations,
may be less attuned to their child's fears or needs. Children who moved three or more
times were at increased risk for emotional/behavioral and school problems (Blakeman,
1993; Simpson & Fowler, 1994). Thus, it was recommended that pediatricians, other
health professionals, and educators be alert to the potential educational and psychological
problems among children from highly mobile families (1994). Simpson and Fowler
(1994) suggested that children going through key developmental stages may be
particularly vulnerable to the stress of moving, or that moving could compound problems
which already existed either in the child or in the family. Alternatively, an increased
number of moves may be a marker for highly chaotic, stressed families, who are also
characterized by the emotional and school problems noted. Similarly, Blakeman (1993)
suggested that adolescents grieved particularly hard for lost peer connections, and often
suffered a period of stress and disorganization directly after relocation. “Moving is a
stressful event which can cause problems, depending on how it is handled” (p.9). This
was true even if the long term effects of the move were ultimately positive; students
needed guidance to ease the immediate impact.
41
There were social and emotional (non academic) concerns inherent in some of the
negative causes of student mobility, such as family trauma, parent on active military duty,
poverty, grieving over economic damages to homes in the paths of natural disasters, exile
from countries or states, imprisonment of parents, and other elements discussed earlier.
Student achievement became compromised when very real or perceived social and
emotional issues confronted a child during mobility events (Bartolomeo, 2006;
Blakeman, 1993; Brodkin, 2006).
One report by Fowler-Finn (2001) in Fort Wayne (Indiana) public schools showed
an association between student mobility and lower student achievement. The school
administration began calculating mobility and stability rates for accountability purposes
(2001). Low student achievement compounded by poor attendance and gaps in learning
may be decreased still further when students seek to dropout of school as a result of
social or emotional concerns. In addition, the stress and anxiety derived from
inappropriate placement or the removal of prior levels of support (i.e. student with special
needs), has the potential to exacerbate social and emotional concerns.
The literature also showed that student mobility was connected to behavioral
problems which can be connected to missed classes and academic (student achievement)
difficulties (Wood, et al., 1993). The same study demonstrated that mobility was related
to incidence of violence and behavior incidences in school (1993). However, a national
study of over 10,000 high school children suggested that, after controlling for background
and family characteristics, mobility during grades 9-10 had no significant effect on
behavior problems, but changing schools during grades 11-12 increased behavior
42
problems (Swanson & Schneider, 1999). Studies have also suggested that mobile
secondary students are less likely to participate in extracurricular activities (Rumberger
R. W., Larson, Ream & Palardy, 1999).
A negative relationship exists between mobility and student test performance and
behaviors. I recommend that educators give particular attention to students who
have experienced single or multiple transfers within a school [district] because
these students are more likely than other students to incur discipline and
performance problems. (Engec, 2006, p. 177)
However, Engec (2006) recognized the limit of these findings for there was no
control for socioeconomic status or prior performance.
Studies that take background differences into account found that mobility may be
more of a symptom than a cause of poor student performance and behavior (Rumberger
& Thomas, 2000). For example, Alexander, Entwisle, and Dauber (1996) presented a
well-designed study of Baltimore elementary schools. They suggested that although
mobility had a negative impact on test scores and grades, rate of retention, and special
education identification in grade five, the results became insignificant once controls for
family background and prior student achievement in grade one were instituted. In
summary, it was the poorer individuals who tended to be highly mobile and have low
student achievement before and after they moved. Yet, this conclusion should be joined
with another observation from the same report, which suggested that middle-class white
individuals with high student achievement in first grade were more likely to leave the
school district (1996). This suggested that there was a complex matrix of migration
43
distinguished clearly by their destination. The middle-class families leave the urban
system and the poor families shift about within it (1996).
The idea that student mobility affected different individuals in different ways led
to the logical conclusion that student mobility had a compounding effect on negative
issues associated with student achievement. The extension of that logic held that student
mobility had a compounding effect on positive issues associated with student
achievement; for example, an individual who had natural abilities to make friends easily
would develop and practice the skill honing it to a powerful level when highly mobile.
Indeed some individuals thrived and grew in their skill development through student
mobility. For example, in some cases children took the opportunity of relocation to
rediscover themselves in a new environment (Blakeman, 1993). Many individuals
developed coping skills and adaptation strategies during relocation that might never have
been developed, and thus strengthened their potential ability to transition well throughout
the rest of their education. Norford and Medway (2002) reported that highly mobile
students were no more likely to suffer depression, have poor social networks, or to
participate in extracurricular activities in grades 10 through 12 than non-movers.
The literature review provided further evidence to substantiate this position,
Simpson and Fowler (1994) established that any negative correlation between student
mobility and student achievement was only in relation to high mobility (moving three or
more times). Additional individuals added the connection to complex family and
personal background factors (Fields, 1995; Schuler, 1990; Wood, et al., 1993). There
was a level of interdependence between student mobility and these social and emotional
44
concerns that should be recognized by both parents and teachers. In light of the
conflicting results in the literature, there was a need for further research that can control
for additional factors that complicate the discussion of student mobility.
A Focus on Military Mobility
There were over 2 million children in armed services families (Schagen, 2007),
many of whom changed schools over 6 times during their K through 12 education. This
placed military families in the highly mobile category as defined by Simpson and Fowler
(1994). Military families routinely struggled with leaving their familiar network and
extended family contacts to be close to a parent‟s assignment on a routine basis often
living as a single parent household for long periods of time (Brodkin, 2006; Schagen,
2007; Walls, 2003). Approximately 50% of these individuals qualify for reduced priced
meals at school; and 94% of these families had parents whose highest education was a
high school diploma (Smrekar, Gunthrie, Owens & Sims, 2001; Walls, 2003). Finally,
the demographics in the schools for these individuals was similar to those of the public
schools in New York State which had, on average, about 40% minority enrollment.
Historically these statistics were connected to achievement gaps however, these highly
mobile students, according to (Smrekar, Gunthrie, Owens & Sims, 2001), consistently
performed at academic levels equal to or above the national average. It should be noted
that these high levels of student achievement included all minority individuals (Walls,
2003).
These studies suggested that the Department of Defense (DoD) could teach a few
lessons to the greater population about student mobility. The military had education
45
specialists working on maximizing the adjustments and transitions for military families.
Their suggestions included: (a) a peer buddy for the first few weeks to ease the social
transition; (b) flexibility about both instructional and extracurriculuar activities (e.g.
admission to honor societies, club enrollment limits, and varsity sport participation
prerequisites); and (c) sensitivity from school personnel to signs that a child might be
suffering from a parent‟s deployment (the DoD provided counseling support services);
(d) a program to transfer graduation credits across academic programs; (e) a stay of
orders when a family has a child in their senior year (Brodkin, 2006; Schagen, 2007).
These suggestions were similar to ones put forth by Rumberger and his teams in
California to aid all children experiencing mobility (Rumberger, 2002). One report,
financed in part by the Norweigian military, looked into using technology to connect
different learning arenas for highly mobile students. They focused on teacher education,
internet bulletin boards, and other kinds of common spaces to help individuals transfer
their student achievements from one school organization to another. However, this
program was technology intensive and costly. It was not presented as a realistic option
for most schools at this time (Morken, Divitini & Haugalokken, 2007).
In addition, the Department of Defense has an office dedicated to the expedition
of student records for transfers in a timely fasion (Smrekar, Gunthrie, Owens & Sims,
2001). Schagen (2007) suggested that military mobility reflected all of the same
characteristics of civilian mobility and the tools used by one should easily fit the needs of
the other. The results suggested there was room to research a national database for the
easy transfer of records (Borden, 2004). This idea was on the table for both college level
46
data, as seen in the report from the National Center for Higher Education Management
Systems (Ewell, Schild & Paulson, 2003), and high school children in the United States.
Similarly, there was a national database of educational information for the highly mobile
population of individuals suffering from the impact of Katrina.
A Focus on Disaster Mobility
In an effort to help support long term recovery in the communites devastated by
Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in the United States; several reports were funded to
identify what should be done concerning the hundreds of thousands of children displaced
into new school systems (Cook, 2006; Hartman, 2006; Picou & Marshall, 2007). This
massive migration impacted the children and their families as well as the schools and
districts that they migrated to. Their experiences marked a complete contrast to those of
the mobile military families.
Hurricane Katrina displaced over 372,000 children and these involuntarily mobile
students were confronted with profoundly complicated and disruptive factors in their
lives in addition to the sudden switch to new schools (Cook, 2006). One report focused
on two individuals and one teacher as it explored their experiences in comparison to the
national figures (2006). At the time of this report, it was still difficult to get an accurate
enrollment count at high schools such as Pearce, Yates and in many Houston School
districts (p. 4). The report also accounted for the difficult social transition experienced by
the children including violence at new schools and trauma counseling efforts. One of the
students from Yates described how they organized a welcoming dance and a social
47
breakfast to help socialize the new individuals: this kind of intervention was suggested by
Rumberger to help all mobile students (Cook, 2006; Rumberger, 2003).
The most challenging issue though, as explained by Houston Superintendent
Abelardo Saavedra, was academics, for many of the displaced students were at times
multiple grade levels behind. The state was given a one year stay on accountability
measures by the U.S. Department of Education (2002, p. 5). “We frankly have not paid a
lot of attention or put a lot of focus on waivers. We are focusing on the academic growth
of all kids…it‟s not something we‟re going to dwell on” (p. 5). The schools were
struggling under the adjustment the curriculum and academic program had to make to
meet the needs of incoming students. At the time time of this publication more than
180,000 individuals were still displaced from their home school districts according to the
U.S. Department of Education and state education departments (Cook, 2006).
Student mobility was a pervasive annual issue but it impacted the nation rapidly
and in large numbers during these disasters. Picou and Marshall (2007) actually focused
on the Mobile County (Alabama) schools and documented preliminary observations on
the impact of the disaster mobility. The report suggested that the schools witnessed and
struggled with all of the issues of student mobility, concentrated at one time and in one
area. Children and their families were dealing with: (a) financial strain that simulated
the effects of poverty and issues seen with migratory or homeless children; (b) one parent
being separated to travel back to their home to supervise repairs; (c) living in over
crowded situations; and (d) living in a new cultural or financial environemnt; (e) family
stress due to negotiations with insurance, state, and federal angencies. The schools had to
48
deal with: (a) disruption of the science and math curriculum, (b) reaction and support for
trauma among displaced students with limited couseling available, if at all; (c) limited
transportation, resulting in attendance and dropout problems; (d) limited records, both
academic and medical, leading to significant problems for seniors; (e) Serial relocation
for families struggling to acquire affordable housing; and (f) unsuitable housing resulting
in limitations on individuals being able to complete assignments and participate in
extracurricular activities (Picou & Marshall, 2007). These results reflected the larger
discussion concerning student mobility. In addition, the mental health impacts included:
depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, hopelessness, and classroom discipline and
attendance problems for displaced children (p. 777). The results from these preliminary
studies suggests that there are compounded issues facing mobile populations.
Compounding Issues
When a student experiences difficulties, changing schools can compound the
issues faced by the individual and exacerbate problems where they already existed
(Hartman, 2006). “…[S]tudent learning has an inverse relationship with mobility, with
the higher the mobility the less likely that learning at age appropriate levels is expected to
occur” (p. 2). A review of the literature on family mobility suggested the risk of
impairment to children‟s psychosocial adjustment was increased by: negative parental
attitudes to the move; moving due to family disruption (e.g. divorce or bereavement);
poor premove adjustment; number of moves and distance of moves (Humke & Schafer,
49
1995). The idea was that mobility alone does not necessarily result in lower student
achievement, the cause of the move was ultimately an important compounding issue.
Compounded issues were magnified when the family mobility was the result of:
tragedy or violence, poverty, flight from natural disasters, becoming refugees or asylum
seekers, living as routine labor migrants, the loss of a parent to prison, parent in active
military service, or a change in marital status, and they are then compounded by any
significant change in demographics including primary language, climate, or culture; the
impact on student achievement was more pronounced. These effects then compounded
any already existing learning difficulties, challenges with mastery of primary language,
or behavioral challenges. Similarly, when a child had a strong ability to adapt and adjust
to an environment, mobility provided the experience to hone these skills and develop
them. The extension of this theory would apply to social skills, organizational skills,
interpersonal and intrapersonal skill sets.
Summary
The attitude and support of the family members, community and school
environment all impacted the ability of the mobile child to adjust to their new
surroundings and ultimately student achievement (Tucker, Marx & Long, 1998). Where
appropriate, preparations and interventions should be included in the transitioning
process (Blakeman, 1993; Walls, 2003; Rumberger, 2003; Engec, 2006; Hannusheck,
Kain & Rivin, 2001). However, at the time of this publication, no consistent national
response to mobility had been embraced, nor was there a clear connection between
50
specific interventions and the vastly different issues facing the population of highly
mobile individuals. It was the variety of causes that continued to make it so difficult to
generalize concerning student mobility.
The statistics available concerning student mobility were aged and limited. There
was a gap in the available information concerning American student mobility and how it
impacted student achievement. The existing research failed to satisfactorily isolate
student mobility as a variable in any of the studies. In addition, there was little evidence
to demonstrate a negative impact of student mobility for children of professional and
managerial workers and other high income groups (Dobson & Henthorne, 1999; Strand &
Demie, 2007). It was because of these gaps in the literature and methodology that this
study had focused primarily on the middle socio-economic class and upper socio-
economic class high school children to explore how student mobility was experienced
both academically and non academically and the possible impact the participants believe
student mobility had on their own student achievement. To learn about this unique point
of view a phenomenological paradigm was selected.
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHOD
Introduction
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to find meaning from the
academic (student achievement) and non academic experiences of middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children who had
experienced student mobility, and their description of the impact it had on their own
student achievment. The phenomenological paradigm was uniquely designed to capture
this point of view and provide information rich summaries and a description of the
phenomenon of student mobility. The implications for positive social change included a
better understanding of student mobility, its impact on student achievement, and the
potential to minimize its negative influences and maximize its potential positives.
An examination of the current literature showed a preponderance of studies
relying on grouping student mobility with compounded issues to describe extremely
different experiences and realities. Mobility tended to compound issues, both positive
and negative, that impact student achievement. This study built upon the quantitative
study by Strand and Demi (2007) which found a significant relationship between student
mobility and student achievement at age 16. However, this quantitative study failed to
examine the true nature of student mobility.
This study embraced the phenomenological paradigm, which employs empirical
methods to develop an understanding of human experience from a unique point of view.
“Evidence from phenomenological research is derived from first-person reports of life
52
experiences” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 84). The phenomenological paradigm is a tool that
makes possible an understanding of the meanings and essences of the student mobility
experience (1994). “In accordance with phenomenological principles, scientific
investigation is valid when the knowledge sought is arrived at through descriptions…” (p.
84). This reasearch attempted to explore what happens to the specific high school
individual who experiences student mobility. It was also necessary to isolate the
compounding issues of poverty thus, the population selected for this research was the
middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high school student.
By carefully following systematic strategies, phenomenologists contend that
researchers can scientifically comprehend “the essence of lived experience” (Kvale,
1996) through the implementation of what Moustakas (1994) described as a combination
of epoche, phenomenological reduction, imaginative variation, and synthesis. This
phenomonological study utilized all of these elements throughout data collection and the
use of Hatch‟s (2002) inductive analysis process which is closely aligned to the last three
aspects. Epoche, however, is more a clearing of the conscious mind of preconceived
notions to try and see something for what it really is (Moustakas, 1994). This was seen in
the “bracketing” the researcher practiced constantly as the data was gathered and
analyzed.
This was a phenomonological study that utilized in-depth interviews of high
school students who have changed both school and residence to, from, or within New
Jersey, in a three year period. This work represented an exploration of the perceptions
and experiences of the individuals who lived it and resulted in a description of student
53
mobility. The method of data collection used was the informal and interactive long
interview, which involved a series of open-ended questions (available in full in Appendix
A) designed to evoke a comprehensive exploration of student mobility and any
connection to student achievement (Creswell, 1994). In addition, some questions to
describe specific characteristics of the schools, academic program, relocation process,
and family, were used. The following research questions were used in this
phenomenological study:
1. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience student mobility in regard to non-academic elements?
2. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience the academic (student achievement) elements associated with
student mobility?
The population was defined as current middle and upper socio-economic class
high school students who have changed both school and residence to, from, or within
New Jersey, in a three year period. Both a snow ball technique for finding participants
and the cooperation of a private school in New Jersey were used to identify participants.
The Dean of Admissions for Delbarton School was solely responsible for contacting
students or former students and asking permission to share contact information with the
researcher if the student is willing to participate in the study. The focus for this study
was high school students in grades 9-12 who had relocated to, from, or within the state of
New Jersey in a three year period. There were five participants.
54
Hatch‟s (2002) nine-step inductive analysis model was used to conduct the
analysis of the data. Data collected included descriptions of what it was like to relocate
from one school to another, characteristics of the schools and the family, and descriptions
of the preparation, resources, and support utilized during relocation. In addition,
descriptions of the academic aspects (student achievement) and non academic aspects of
the student mobility experienced by the participant was collected during the interview
process.
Research Design
The phenomenological method of inquiry places the researcher and the participant
in a position to coconstruct the multiple realities of the phenomenon. “The aim is to
determine what an experience means for the persons who had the experience and are able
to provide a comprehensive description of it” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 13). Through Hatch‟s
(2002) inductive analysis model the researcher examined the details and nuances of the
academic and non academic experiences of middle socio-economic class and upper
socio-economic class high school students who had changed school and residence in the
past three years (p.162). The phenomenological paradigm allowed for emergent design
to allow the researcher to respond to the multiple realities potentially involved and
impossible to prepare for ahead of time. Thus, the phenomenological paradigm was
consistent with the needs of this work specifically empirical research as described by
Moustakas (1994) and strived to develop a comprehensive description that provided the
basis for a reflective structural analysis, using Hatch‟s (2002) model, that ultimately
55
portrayed the essences of the experience of mobile high school students. The current
lenses available provided a view from limited points of view that are not sufficient to
answer the specific problems facing all mobile individuals in today‟s modern world. In
addition there was no close-up view available nor current statistical data to analyze.
Advantages over other methods
Quantitative methods seek to test theoretical generalizations through
experimentation. Such logical positivism relies heavily on variables and clearly defined
samples from populations. These methods do not support any attempt to clarify
individual experiences nor present unique perspectives; quantitative research tests rather
than explores, and this was an exploratory study. The phenomenological paradigm was
better suited for the exploration of what it meant to be a mobile high school student.
A case study, focused on either one variable or one individual, would be limited
because the variables involved were so varied and the experiences of one individual so
compounded that such a focus was premature at this time. Similarly, an ethnography or
hermeneutic study seemed too focused on a subgroup or source which was not
immediately helpful to answer the questions involved in this study.
Sampling Strategy and Participant Selection
Creswell (1994) recommended “long interviews with up to ten people” for a
phenomenological study. Thus, a sample size of ten high school students were selected
predicting interviews to last on average one to one and a half hours. This represented
about fifteen hours of taped dialogue. The intent was for interviews to continue until the
56
topic was exhausted or saturation of data was achieved. Although the intention was to
obtain interviews from ten participants, the fact that only five willing participants were
found, despite efforts on the part of the researcher, limited the participants to five.
Therefore, every possible participant was used for this study for in nine months only five
willing participants were found.
This study confined itself to researching individuals who experienced student
mobility when it included residential mobility to, from, or within the state of New Jersey.
A review of the literature identified a large population of children impacted by student
mobility without residential mobility. Participants in this study were high school students
who had changed both school and residence to, from, or within New Jersey, in a three
year period. Potential participants were from the pool of students attending any one of a
coalition of private schools in Northern New Jersey, five in total. Thus, participants were
primarily located in any number of cities or towns in the greater New Jersey area. The
use of these kinds of schools to aid in participant selection served as a fair indicator of
their economic class as middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class due
to the cost of tuition exceeding $15,000.00 per academic school year. The parents of
potential participants or in some cases the actual students were sent the researcher‟s
invitation to participate by the Dean of Admissions. The letter asked for permission from
the parents for the school to share the family‟s contact information with the researcher for
an interview with their child. No initial contact information was given to the researcher
prior to the participant‟s agreement to participate in the research. The school was
responsible for actually sending the 50 initial invitation letters to the most recent high
57
school students that experienced student mobility and residential mobility. When the
family expressed interest in this study, the researcher was notified by the school and the
contact information was exchanged. The intent was for families to be contacted in the
order of response until the goal of ten had been reached. Only one participant was found
in this manner. The researcher began cold calling schools and was still unable to produce
willing participants. A snow ball technique of finding families and contacting them
individually was used to identify the four other participants. Participants were contacted
via written and electronic mail when possible, as well as a follow up telephone contact
for further discussion concerning the interview date, the research questions, methods, and
procedures.
Any remaining “willing families” were to be sent a thank you for being willing to
participate. In the event there had not been enough willing participants in the original 50
mailings, the school was to be asked to complete another mailing to the next
chronological set of 50 students that satisfied the requirements to participate in the study.
The Dean of Admissions was aware of all students that qualified and invited them to
participate.
Data Collection Procedures
Phenomenological inquiry utilizes inductive theory development, having it
emerge from the process and analysis rather than the inverse (Patton, 1990). That is, to
let the data emerge through the capture of rich descriptions of phenomena, and let it lead
the researcher to learn more. Because there was a reliance on empirical methods of
58
inquiry, it was crucial to allow the research design to react and be refined throughout the
process of data collection.
Unstructured in-depth phenomenological interviews of the high school students
were conducted in person when possible and, in the event that an in person interview was
impossible, they were conducted via telephone. Both in-person and telephone interviews
were recorded onto audio tape with the informed consent of the participants and their
parents. In the course of each interview, although there was an interview guide (located
in Appendix A) the questions developed through the evolution of the conversation with
the participant. The format of these questions included detail-oriented probes,
elaboration probes, and clarification probes to enhance the understanding and clarity of
statements as appropriate. Sample probes include: It sounds like you are saying, “…” Is
that a fair summary? Tell me more about that, Why was that important to you? Why does
that stand out in your memory? and What motivated this change? The questions and
subsequent probes were directed to the actual academic and non academic experiences
(Welman & Kruger, 1999, p. 196). The duration of the interviews and the exact number
of questions varied from one participant to another.
Open-ended questions allowed the participants the opportunity to focus on the
areas of their own choosing. Thus, showing what information they felt was most
pertinent to their student mobility and relocation experiences through the words they
chose, the order, and non-verbal clues at the time of the interview. These signals might
include rising of their voice, physical signs of their emotions, or hand gesticulations to
59
connote significance. This information was documented on the audio tapes when
possible and the field notes maintained during the interview by the researcher.
Transcriptions were produced by a software transcription process, and an outside
professional transcriber. They were then verified by the researcher through comparison
with the audio version. Participants received copies of their own transcriptions either by
mail or, when possible, e-mail for further verification and revision suggestions.
Role of the Researcher
“We are not so engrossed in our conscious experience that we lose touch with
what is actually before us, with the thing itself (Moustakas, 1994, p. 91). There is one
form of “bracketing” where researchers must isolate their own preconceived notions and
beliefs so that they can understand the world from the participants‟ point of view, to
glean meaning from their experiences as an interpreter. This is the heart of
phenomenological research, and it was during the long interviews that this was done.
The goal was to isolate the researcher‟s own preconceived notions concerning student
mobility; this was done through a series of personal journaling notes that recorded the
researcher‟s thoughts in isolation from the words spoken by the participant during the
interview.
In the course of each interview, the researcher focused on the participant and
maintained field notes during the experience. In addition, although there was an
interview guide (located in Appendix A), the researcher delved deeper into the participant
experiences using questions which developed through the evolution of the conversation
with the participant.
60
Data Analysis and Interpretation Plan
The analysis of interview data was conducted by using Amos Hatch‟s nine-step
analysis process, which is an appropriate tool for phenomenological analysis (2002).
This process has nine steps: (a) read the data and identify frames of analysis; (b) create
domains based on semantic relationships discovered within frames of analysis; (c)
identify salient domains, assign them a code, and put others aside; (d) reread data,
refining salient domains and keeping a record of where relationships are found in the
data; (e) decide if domains are supported by the data and search data for examples that do
not fit with or run counter to the relationships in domains; (f) complete an analysis within
domains; (g) search for themes across domains; (h) create a master outline expressing
relationships within and among domains; (i) select data excerpts to support the elements
of master outline (p. 162).
Figure 1 Diagram of Steps in Hatcher’s inductive analysis model
61
The first step, read the data and identify frames of analysis, was where the
researcher reviewed the data several times building a holistic understanding of the
participant‟s words and experiences. It was here the researcher focused on the meaning
of the participant‟s world, void of any position for or against. It was this holistic vision
that set the parameters of the remaining analysis. This step began before all of the data
was collected; however, all of the data was reread when new data was added and analysis
continued. The key question during this step was: What will be my frames of analysis?
This was the focusing of the analysis and the development of the lenses which were used
to conduct the analysis. In practice these should each be one idea, episode, or piece of
information (Tesch, cited in Hatch 2002). Some examples might be, “comments related
to report cards” or “comments related to friends”. “Some unobtrusive data will be
objects that can be analyzed as free-standing pieces, but many will be more complex or
text-based and will require careful framing to be sure all important dimensions are
explored” (p. 163). Thus, frames of analysis are conceptual categories that guide
researchers as they read the data so that they can generate the next level of categorization,
domains.
The second step, create domains based on semantic relationships discovered
within frames of analysis, was a critical part of explicating the data, or coding. This was
the most inductive step of the analysis and focuses on the relationships represented in the
data. Domains are categories that contain internal categories. The critical element was
that all internal categories share one central commonality, one feature of meaning.”All of
62
the knowledge that individuals use to make sense of their world can be organized into
domains” (Hatch, 2002, p. 165).
Domains can be expressed semantically and Hatch (2002) identified nine major
relationships critical for domain analysis: (a) strict inclusion (most common) which is X
is a kind of Y, (b) spatial which is X is a place in Y, (c) cause-effect which is X is a
result of Y, (d) rational which is X is a reason for doing Y, (e) location for action which
is X is a place for doing Y, (f) function which is X is used for Y, (g) means-end which is
X is a way to do Y, (h) sequence which is X is a step in Y, (i) attribution which is X is a
characteristic of Y (p. 165). Domains can be expressed through included terms and cover
terms that are connected by a semantic relationship. The cover terms name the category
and the included terms are all members of that category (Hatch, 2002). An example
might look like figure 2.
Figure 2 Domain Example
The product of this step was a stack of domain sheets similar to the example and it
represented the first stage of the analysis process. It was from a thorough domain
analysis, which represented the breadth of the data, that the next steps were possible.
The third step, identify salient domains, assign them a code, and put others aside,
represents the preliminary judgments of the researcher concerning which domains were
Included Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
Secretary
Custodian
Assistant coach is a kind of noncertified
Substitute teacher school worker
Subcontractor
63
important for this study and which were not (Hatch, 2002). The list of domains extracted
from the data were carefully scrutinized for pertinence and unrelated ones removed
(Moustakas, 1994). To do this the researcher considered the literal content, the number
of times a meaning was mentioned and any emphasis (verbal or nonverbal) at the time of
the interview. At this point it was critical to return to the research questions and remove
any domains that did not directly connect back to the main thrust of this research. The
remaining domains were then coded using an alphanumeric system. For example the
domain 1.Ways to hold student accountable, had 1a time out, 1b in-school suspension,
and so on.
The fourth step, reread data, refining salient domains and keeping a record of
where relationships are found in the data, was focused on increasing the depth of the
salient domains. One or two of the salient domains were selected at a time and a
thorough rereading of all the data was conducted to be sure that all relationships had been
identified through domains and that critical terms had been included. In addition, the
data was coded showing where domains were represented. It was through this
comprehensive reading of the data that the researcher confronted the importance or
richness of the domains selected. Many new domains were found during this process or
existing ones modified based on the close examination of the supporting data.
The fifth step, decide if domains are supported by the data and search data for
examples that do not fit with or run counter to the relationships in domains, was the first
point where deductive reasoning was used to decide if the domains selected actually held
up through an examination of the data. The questions focused on during this step
64
included: Is there enough data to support the existence of this domain in the setting being
studied? Are the data strong enough to make the case for including this domain? Are
there other data that do not fit with or run counter to the relationships expressed in the
current domains? A model Hatch refers to as “analytic induction” was used which was
basically generating hypothetical domains inductively and then modifying or discarding
initial domains as negative examples were examined (2002, p. 171). The researcher was
still responsible not to cluster common terms if exceptions existed. The outlier is an
important counterpoint to illuminate in phenomenological research. The product at this
point in the analysis was a collection of domains that were appropriate for reporting a
description of the phenomenon, student mobility as experienced by middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class individuals. The next steps focus on
increasing the depth and richness of the analysis and interpretation.
The sixth step, complete an analysis within domains, looked inward at the data
and attempted to discover new links, new relationships, new domains. Hatch (2002)
suggested three strategies in which to approach the data in this step. The first was to
simply increase the depth of the domain outline, to include another level of detail to
search for more connections. The second was to look within domains and find any
relationships between or among included terms which might lead to restructuring the
domain for increased clarity. The third was to study expanded domains to find any
categories that might lead to new domains, perspectives, or areas that have not been
represented. The fine-grained examination of each domain leads to an enriched analysis
65
and led to a more complex understanding of what was going on concerning student
mobility (p. 173).
The seventh step, search for themes across domains; looked across the domains
and original data for larger social themes or relationships (Hatch, 2002, p. 176).
Continuing to bracket any presuppositions, a process of searching the coded data for
some themes began here. The researcher reread the original coded data with a new set of
questions to focus the task: What does all this mean? How does all this fit together? How
are the pieces related to the whole? What are the similarities and differences between
domains? It was here that any pervasive themes surfaced and became recognized as
universal or overarching. It was also possible to begin constructing a meaningful whole
that fairly represented all of the parts of the analysis and generated either a graphic or
summary overview of the findings. This evolved into the common themes outlined in
detail in chapter four.
The eighth step, create a master outline expressing relationships within and
among domains; was the summary, validation, and when needed modification of the
themes so that they accurately represented student mobility. This process brought a level
of closure to the analysis process and completed the refining of the salient domains. It
was here that any domains which seemed thin or off topic were reviewed. If existing
themes did not account for all of the data, this was the step were they were reconsidered
and the researcher reflected on what held the analysis together. Most importantly, it was
during the creation of a master outline that any elements that did not fit stood out clearly
and were addressed. “…the relationships evident in the outline will have a major
66
influence on how findings are reported” (Hatch, 2002, p. 178). This resulted in exploring
and documenting any non-confirming data.
The ninth step, select data excerpts to support the elements of master outline, general and
unique themes and a composite summary was the summative evidence of the
phenomenological process. It was during this step that a final reading of the data was
completed to locate appropriate quotes to support the elements that made up the master
outline. The researcher pieced together three products from the interviews: (a) a event
history of the participant, as it pertained to their experience of student mobility; (b) a
chronological summary regarding the participant's process of social and emotional
adaptation; (c) a summary regarding the participant's student achievement and adaptation.
It was here that the researcher conducted a validity check through the practice of member
checking described in detail in the evidence of quality section. The inductive analysis of
the experiences collected in this study produced information-rich academic and non-
academic themes regarding middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class
high school children experiencing student mobility in conjunction with primary
relocation. These themes were then combined into a single information rich description
of student mobility presented in detail in chapter five.
Evidence of Quality
One fundamental question in phenomenological research is, “How can a
researcher illustrate to the audience that the findings are valuable?” In other words,
generate a product upon which other qualified researchers might build In response to this
question a qualitative researcher turns to four tools: (a) credibility, (b) transferability, (c)
67
dependability, and (d) confirmability (Creswell, 1994). The goal was for the results to be
accepted by all research communities as credible, thus encouraging quantitative studies
and further qualitative studies in this field. Variations of two of these strategies, member
checking and peer debriefing, were used in this design.
Member checking is a process through which respondents verify data and the
resulting interpretations. Specifically, data, analytic categories, interpretations, and
conclusions are tested by having the original interviewees read and confirm the
transcripts as well as any themes or interpretations put forth by the researcher for
alignment with the participants true experience. To this end, each participant received,
by mail or when possible e-mail, a copy of their interview transcripts for confirmation
and feedback on themes. All data was verified through this process.
Colleague Review is "a process of exposing oneself to a disinterested peer in a
manner paralleling an analytic session and for the purpose of exploring aspects of the
inquiry that might otherwise remain only implicit within the inquirer's mind (Creswell,
1994, p. 308).” The purpose for using a knowledgeable colleague is twofold. 1) To have
the benefit of an outside professional help validate the alignment of the transcripts to the
themes generated. 2) To have an experienced researcher play “devil‟s advocate” and
challenge any working theories emerging from the researcher‟s current thinking. This
colleague reviewed the transcripts of the interviews and gave feedback on the analysis
conducted by the researcher. All five transcripts were given to a scholarly colleague to
be reviewed for validity. If disturbing discrepancies were found then more would have
been needed to be done or some reason for the discrepancies would have been needed to
68
be determined. A scholarly colleague within the field of education was selected and
asked to complete this role for this study.
Transferability An ancillary goal was to generate a study that enabled and
stimulated future research. To build upon what was learned about the phenomenon of
student mobility by isolating it from previously identified compounding elements (e.g.
poverty) was a primary aim of the design. Phenomenology is dependent on the creation
of what Patton (1990) calls "solid descriptive data," or "thick description" to improve an
analysis' transferability and raw data reuse. Thus, to improve the odds of transference of
this work into future works, a thick description of the experiences of the participants was
provided in chapter five. The analysis of the experiences collected in this study produced
multiple information-rich themes regarding middle socio-economic class and upper
socio-economic class high school children experiencing student mobility in conjunction
with primary relocation in the state of New Jersey outlined in chapter four.
As the researcher, it was critical to identify existing biases and any possible threat
that they may present to the validity of the study. The future value of a study is
compromised when a researcher‟s expectations enter either the data collection or analysis
phase of a study. In phenomenological research it was accepted that the researcher
cannot detach from her own experiences or presuppositions and it was important that she
not pretend otherwise and so should bracket beliefs (Hammersley, 2000). There was
concern for a bias of what student mobility might mean for a high school child in the
middle class by the researcher in this case as she was relocated from New York to New
Jersey in January of her freshman year of high school. Thus, she had entered into the
69
investigation with an aged and matured preconceived notion of what the experiences of
other high school children in the middle class might be. The understanding that failure to
bracket these preconceived notions would invalidate the results necessitated that the
researcher bracket personal experiences through the documentation of impressions or
preconceived notions during the interview process and any assumptions from the analysis
process through journal notes and memos.
Informed Consent and Ethical Considerations
Each and every participant, and his/her parent or guardian, in the data collection
process received and was asked to sign an informed consent notice. The notice was
explained to subjects at the beginning of each interview and it followed the Institutional
Review Board (IRB) standards. The notice also explained to the interviewee that
participation in this research was entirely voluntary and they had the right to cease
participation at any time, even after the interview was completed.
During the introduction to the interview each participant was reminded that they
were taking part in research and given the purpose, procedures, and an offer to remain
anonymous. The participants were reminded that an executive summary of this research
would be provided to satisfy a portion of my doctorate in Philosophy degree from
Walden University.
There were no anticipated risks or discomforts from participation in this research.
The goal of this research was to gather lived experiences from high school children
concerning student mobility.
70
Summary
Student mobility is a complex issue with multiple causes and effects and
interconnected relationships, which are not always easy to determine. Most students
make at least one non-promotional school change (Rumberger et al., 1999). At the time
of this study, it was difficult to identify the point at which student mobility had an impact
on student achievement. The problem was that student mobility affected both the
students‟ academic achievement as well as the schools where the mobility rates are high.
There were many possible factors contributing to this problem, among which are socio-
economic class, family restructuring, curriculum gaps, incomplete records, and parental
employment. This study contributed to the body of knowledge needed to address this
phenomenon of student mobility by exploring the academic and non academic themes
identified by middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high school
children who had experienced student mobility and its impact on their own student
achievement.
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to find meaning from the
academic (student achievement) and non academic experiences of middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children who had
experienced student mobility and their description of the impact it had on their own
student achievment. Mobility tends to compound issues, both positive and negative, that
impact student achievement. This research was directly related to student achievement
and the impact that student mobility had on multiple aspects of student achievement
71
including individual test scores, grades, retention, graduation, and attendance. The
evidence suggested that in order to enforce the aims of the NCLB, states and districts
should recognize student mobility, potentially making this a timely issue. Educators
should understand how student mobility impacts individuals both academically (student
achievement) and non academically. The initial goal was to understand what happened to
the specific individual who experienced student mobility.
This study focused on student mobility and to do so isolated as many of the
compounding issues as possible. To isolate poverty only the middle socioeconomic class
and the upper socioeconomic class was included in the population. Similarly, only high
school children who have also changed residence within the last three years were
included to limit complications associated with expulsion, dissatisfaction with the current
school, or homelessness. Thus, this study explored the academic and non academic
experiences of high school children who had changed both school and residence in an
effort to understand student mobility and any possible impact it may have had on student
achievement.
This study embraced the phenomenological paradigm, which employed empirical
methods to develop an understanding of human experience from a unique point of view
(Moustakas, 1994). The phenomenological paradigm is uniquely designed to capture this
point of view and provided information rich themes and a description of the phenomenon
student mobility.
The method that was used was the informal and interactive long interview,
involving a series of open-ended questions (available in full in Appendix A) designed to
72
evoke a comprehensive exploration of student mobility and any connection to student
achievement. In addition, some specific questions to describe specific characteristics of
the schools, academic program, relocation process, and family, were used. The inductive
analysis model as described by Hatch (2002) was used in the data analysis. The
following research questions were used in this phenomenological study:
1. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience student mobility in regard to non-academic elements?
2. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience the academic (student achievement) elements associated with
student mobility?
The population was defined as current middle and upper socio-economic class
high school students who have changed both school and residence to, from, or within
New Jersey, in a three year period. Both a snow ball technique and a cooperative effort
with local private schools were used to identify potential participants. The goal number
of participants was originally ten unless saturation of the data was achieved earlier;
however, only five participants were actually interviewed for this study.
Hatch‟s (2002) nine-step inductive analysis model was used to conduct the
analysis of the data. Data collected included descriptions of what it was like to relocate
from one school to another, characteristics of the schools and the family, and descriptions
of the preparation, resources, and support utilized during relocation. In addition,
descriptions of the academic aspects (student achievement) and non academic aspects of
73
the student mobility experience of the participant was collected during the interview
process.
Based on the review of the relevant literature this was the first study to examine
middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children and
their academic and non academic experiences with student mobility and any possible
impact it may have had on student achievement. The analysis, using Amos Hatch‟s
(2002) analysis process, of the experiences collected in this study produced multiple
academic and non-academic themes, an information rich description of student mobility,
and was designed to focus on student mobility in an attempt to learn more about the
phenomenon so that researchers in the future might return to the topic with new insights.
The implications for positive social change included a better understanding of mobility,
its impact on student achievement, and the potential to minimize its negative influences
and maximize its potential positives.
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
Introduction
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to find meaning from the
academic (student achievement) and non academic experiences of middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children who have
experienced student mobility, and their description of the impact it had on their own
student achievment. The phenomenological paradigm is uniquely designed to capture
this point of view and provide information rich summaries and a description of the
phenomenon student mobility. The implications for positive social change include a
better understanding of student mobility, its impact on student achievement, and the
potential to minimize its
This chapter presents the findings of the interviews of high school students in
grades 9-12 who had relocated to, from, or within the state of New Jersey in a three year
period. This work represents an exploration of the perceptions and experiences of the
individuals who lived it and result in an information rich description of student mobility
in chapter five.
The method of data collection used was the informal and interactive long
interview, involving a series of open-ended questions (available in full in Appendix A)
designed to evoke a comprehensive exploration of student mobility and any connection to
student achievement (Creswell, 1994). The data collected and the resulting frames of
75
analysis covered during the in-depth interviews provided the basis for the data analyzed
in this chapter and the academic and non-academic themes.
The following research questions formed the foundational background for the
questions asked during the in-depth interviews conducted during this phenomenological
study:
1. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience student mobility in regard to non-academic elements?
2. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience the academic (student achievement) elements associated with
student mobility?
Prior to the beginning of the in-depth interview, the researcher thanked the
participants for the their time and gave them a brief introduction to the issues that would
be explored during the interview. The researcher reminded the participants that the
interview was recorded, that they would get a copy of the transcription for review, and
finally that they could stop at anytime for any reason.
The in-depth interviews involved taped phone conversations that were later
transcribed using a professional service. The transcriptions were sent to the original
participant for review and editing. One participant returned the transcription with minor
edits that were applied. During the interviews the researcher would repeat back
comments to clarify meaning as appropriate. Participants were allowed to freely discuss
issues raised during the interview with appropriate examples.
76
An interview guide was used for the in-depth interviews to ensure consistency in
the interview flow and protocols. Probing and delving questions, described in chapter
three, were used to explore topics further and to attempt documentation of appropriate
examples. The longest interview lasted for 155 minues while the shortest interview
lasted for 67 minutes. The average time for the in-depth interview was 110 minutes.
Population
The population was defined as current middle and upper socio-economic class
high school students who have changed both school and residence to, from, or within
New Jersey, in a three year period.
The recruitment of the participants in this study took approximately eleven
months. The five participants who agreed to be interviewed, and their parents, were sent
letters of consent having certified they met the requirements for participation. The Dean
of Admissions for Delbarton School contacted students or former students and asked
permission to share contact information with the researcher. One participant was found
using this recruitment method. The Dean of Admissions went further to reach out to five
other schools in the coalition to attempt finding participants. No other schools were able
to produce willing participants. The researcher began cold calling schools and was still
unable to produce willing participants. Using the snowball technique four more
participants connected to New Jersey were successfully contacted and interviewed for
this study. Because of the difficulty in finding willing participants some of the
population limiters had to be adjusted. For example, one of the participants moved in
77
seventh grade and not while in 9-12 grade. This participant is included because he or she
does represent a highly mobile teen, he or she has changed schools a total of nine times,
and he or she was currently in high school at the time of the interview. Another
participant does not currently reside in New Jersey, rather she moved from New Jersey to
a high school in Texas. However, she produced data connected to the frames of analysis
and themes generated by the teens who do currently reside in New Jersey. Finally, two of
the participants moved during the summer and not specifically during the academic year.
These changes are discussed further in the limitation of this study and suggest areas for
future research to continue.
Table 1
Participants Demographic Information
Current Grade # of Moves When Type of Move Reason
P1 12 3 December of 10th
grade International Dad‟s job
P2 12 3 November of 10th
grade Interstate Dad‟s job
P3 12 3 November of 10th
grade Interstate Dad‟s job
P4 10 1 July of 9th
grade Interstate To leave N.J.
P5 9 9 June of 7th
grade Interstate Custody change
(Self selected)
P1: “Well, I had moved three times. The first time was when I was nine years
old and I moved from Mexico to Brussels in Belgium. The second time I moved
from Belgium to England, to London. And then the third time I moved here to
the U.S. to New Jersey.”
78
P1: “Well, I've been moving because my family has been moving around
primarily because of my dad's job. He's been working in the same company but
has been moved around so we have been going wherever he goes.”
Table 2
Differences Between Schools
Participant Prior School Current School Prior Size Current Size Affluent Area
P1 Boarding Private all boy xx 500 students Tuition
P2 Public Public xx 4100 students Sparta
P3 Public Public xx 4100 students Sparta
P4 Small Public Large Public 600 Students xx Comment
P5 Small Public Public 100 Students 1400 students Comment
P5: “...where I'm at, not to sound like a little braggish, but this is like a middle
upper class area. Cause this is rural New Jersey, but my neighbors to the left of
me work in New York, the ones across the street's a Wall Street broker and the
one to the left, I forget what they do, but it's like a very nice area.”
P4: “I think that was really hard, like coming into it and being like, wow, this is a
two-story, really big house as compared to, you know, our, our ranch on a 2 and a
half acre, acre land. I mean just, just the whole transition of, you know, little
house/big house, friends/no friends was probably, well it was hard.”
The focus for this study was high school students in grades 9-12 who had
relocated to, from, or within the state of New Jersey in a three year period. There were a
79
total of five participants. The interview instrument met the objectives of this study.
Therefore there was no change necessary to the original interview questions.
Data Collection
The data collection process started with identifying potential participants through
personal contacts or through the private school coalition as described in chapter three.
The potential contact that was found using the coalition was sent an invitation letter
asking for permission to share personal contact information with the researcher along
with a consent form for both the participant and their parents. The potential contacts
found using personal contacts were e-mailed or phoned and personally invited to
participate in the in-depth interview. They were then sent the consent form through the
internet or in one case, traditional mail system. When the signed consent forms were
returned to the researcher the participant was called or e-mailed and given the
prearranged call in number and participant pass code for the conference call with the
researcher. This method allowed the call to be recorded and professionally transcribed in
a timely manner. The participants were asked for convenient dates and times for the
interview to be scheduled. They were then contacted right before the interview to
confirm the call in number and pass code. At the end of the interviews, the taped
conversation was transcribed and sent to the participants for validation before analyzing
the data.
80
In-depth Interview Data
Open-ended questions allowed the participants the opportunity to focus on the
areas of their own choosing. Thus, participants will identify information they believe is
pertinent to their student mobility and relocation experiences through the words they
choose, the order, and the non-verbal signals at the time of the interview. These signals
included rising or dropping of their voice and signs of their emotions including crying or
laughing. This information was documented on the audio tapes and the field notes
maintained during the interview by the researcher.
Analysis of Interview Data
Hatch‟s (2002) nine-step inductive analysis model was used to conduct the
analysis of the data. Data collected included descriptions of what it was like to relocate
from one school to another, characteristics of the schools and the family, and descriptions
of the preparation, resources, and support utilized during relocation. In addition,
descriptions of the academic aspects (student achievement) and non academic aspects of
the student mobility experience of the participant were collected during the interview
process.
The analysis of interview data was conducted by using Amos Hatch‟s nine-step
analysis process, which is an appropriate tool for phenomenological analysis (2002). This
process has nine steps: (a) read the data and identify frames of analysis; (b) create
domains based on semantic relationships discovered within frames of analysis; (c)
identify salient domains, assign them a code, and put others aside; (d) reread data,
81
refining salient domains and keeping a record of where relationships are found in the
data; (e) decide if domains are supported by the data and search data for examples that do
not fit with or run counter to the relationships in domains; (f) complete an analysis within
domains; (g) search for themes across domains; (h) create a master outline expressing
relationships within and among domains; (i) select data excerpts to support the elements
of master outline (p. 162).
The first step, read the data and identify frames of analysis, was conducted during
data collection. With the first interview the data was read and reread to try and frame a
holistic understanding of the participant‟s words and experiences. After each interview
all of the data was reread with the intent of creating this holistic understanding. It was
this holistic vision that set the parameters of the remaining analysis. They key question
during this step was: What are the frames of analysis? This was the focusing of the
analysis and the development of the lenses which were used to conduct further analysis.
“Some unobtrusive data will be objects that can be analyzed as free-standing pieces, but
many will be more complex or text-based and will require careful framing to be sure all
important dimensions are explored” (p. 163). The frames of analysis for this study are
detailed in Table 3.
82
Table 3
Frames of Analysis for Student Mobility
“Comments relating to”
1. Changing Environment
2. Changing Schools
3. Changing Friends
4. Changing as an Individual
In relation to the research questions there were academic and non-academic elements
found connected to each frame of analysis.
The frames of analysis are conceptual categories that were then broken down into the
next level of categorization, domains.
The second step, the data was coded into domains based on semantic relationships
discovered within frames of analysis. The domains are expressed through included terms
and cover terms that are connected by a semantic relationship. The cover terms name the
category and the included terms are all members of that category (Hatch, 2002). The
product of this step was a stack of domain sheets. These domains, which represent the
breadth of the data were then read again and sorted and condensed into salient domains,
the third step in the data analysis process. These were then assigned a code and all others
were put aside.
To do this, the literal content, the number of times a meaning was mentioned and
any emphasis (verbal or nonverbal) at the time of the interview were considered. At this
point the research questions were used to remove any domains that did not directly
83
connect back to the main thrust of this research. The remaining domains were then coded
using an alphanumeric system (available in full in Appendix B).
The fourth step, reread data, refining salient domains and keeping a record of
where relationships are found in the data, was focused on increasing the depth of the
salient domains. Two of the salient domains were selected at a time and a thorough
rereading of all the data was conducted to be sure that all relationships had been
identified through domains and that critical terms had been included. In addition, the
data was coded showing where domains are represented. Some new domains were found
during this process and existing ones were modified based on the close examination of
the supporting data.
The fifth step involved a check to see if the data actually supported the domains
and a search of the data for examples that do not fit with or run counter to the
relationships in domains. This was the first point where deductive reasoning was used to
decide if the domains selected actually held up through an examination of the data. The
questions focused on during this step included: Is there enough data to support the
existence of this domain in the setting being studied? Are the data strong enough to make
the case for including this domain? Are there other data that do not fit with or run
counter to the relationships expressed in the current domains? The product at this point
in the analysis was a collection of domains that are appropriate for reporting a description
of student mobility as experienced by middle socio-economic class and upper socio-
economic class individuals. This description is discussed in chapter five. The next steps
focused on increasing the depth and richness of the analysis and interpretation.
84
The sixth step, completed an analysis within domains, looked inward at the data
and discovered new links, new relationships, and new domains. This involved rereading
all of the data three times to complete the steps described by Hatch (2002). The first step
was simply to increase the depth of the domain outline, to include another level of detail
to search for more connections.
Figure 3 Sample of added domain
The second step was to look within domains and identify relationships between or
among included terms which often lead to restructuring the domain for increased clarity.
55/41 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Nervous – P1, P2, P3
Is a kind of
Emotion thinking about
potential new environment
non-academic at a new
school
B Excited – P1, P5
C Stressful / Anxiety– P1,
P2, P3, P5
D Disappointment – P2, P3
E Confident – P5
F Relief – P4, P5 Inclusion
Figure 4 Restructured domain where terms from several domains were refined for clarity
Note coding numbers had to be combined to align with already coded text in interviews.
The third step was to study expanded domains to find any categories that often lead to
new domains, perspectives, or areas that had not been represented.
503 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Start packing
Is used for
Showing a change in
attitude and maturation B Clean room
C Think about positives
D Keeping journal
Function
85
Figure 5 Expanded domain where the categories led to a new perspective separating the emotions
before the move from the emotions about the exact same things after the move. Note coding numbers
had to be split in two to align with already coded text in interviews.
The fine-grained examination of each domain led to an enriched analysis and led to a
more complex understanding of what was going on concerning student mobility (Hatch,
2002, p. 173).
The seventh step searched for themes across domains; looked across the domains
and original data for larger social themes or relationships (Hatch, 2002, p. 176). The
coded data was reread and a process of searching the coded data for some themes began
here. The focus was on a new set of questions: What does all this mean? How does all
this fit together? How are the pieces related to the whole? What are the similarities and
differences between domains? It was here that pervasive themes surfaced. It was also
possible to begin the construction of a meaningful whole that fairly represented all of the
parts of the analysis and generated a summary overview of the findings.
5.5 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Pain (friends, significant
others, teachers, home,
family members) p.9
Is a kind of
Emotion about having to
leave friends, home,
teachers behind after the
move B. Missing and loneliness
C. Regret and wish to return
D Sense of loss and
mourning, weather,
backyard, home “father
built”, culture, graduating
class
p. 16
E. Relief leaving behind
bullies and negative
influences
Inclusion
86
The eighth step, was the creation of a master outline (available in full in Appendix
C) which expressed relationships within and among domains; the summary which
accurately represented student mobility. This process brought a level of closure to the
analysis process and completed the refining of the salient domains. It was here that any
domains which seemed thin or off topic were reviewed. If existing themes did not
account for all of the data, they were reconsidered. Most importantly, it was during the
creation of the master outline that any elements that did not fit stood out clearly and were
addressed. The master outline for student mobility is available in full in Appendix C. It
was here that the researcher conducted a validity check through the practice of member
checking described in detail in the evidence of quality section of chapter three.
The ninth step selected data excerpts to support the elements of the master outline.
The general and unique themes and a composite summary was the summative evidence
of the phenomenological process. It was during this step that a final reading of the data
to locate appropriate quotes to support the elements that made up the master outline was
completed. The expectation was to piece together three products from the interviews: (a)
an event history of the participant, as it pertained to their experience of student mobility;
(b) a chronological summary regarding the participant's process of social and emotional
adaptation; (c) a summary regarding the participant's student achievement and adaptation.
The event history of the participant is recorded in the transcriptions that were sent to the
participant immediately after the interview. Research question number one is addressed
through the chronological summary regarding the participant‟s process of social and
emotional adaptation. This summary is organized into eight non-academic themes that
87
emerged from a combination of the master outline and the pervasive statements in the
interviews. Pervasive here refers to comments mentioned by at least four out of the five
participants.
Table 4
Themes for regarding the participant’s social and emotional adaptation
“Comments relating to” Participants
1. Experience a variety of emotions including excitement, worry, 5 out of 5
anxiety, helplessness, confusion, being upset, nervous, and displaced
in connection with changing their environment
2. Experience a change of personal attitude from negative to positive or 5 out of 5
more mature as they adapt to the move
3. Experience stress and anxiety in connection to changing their social groups 5 out of 5
4. Experience growing closer to their families despite negative emotions 5 out of 5
attached to the decision to move
5. Experience non-academic differences in connection to changing their schools 5 out of 5
6. Believe their personal attitude was important to make new friends and adapt 5 out of 5
7. Experience the social reception in New Jersey to be initially harder to connect to, 5 out of 5
and/or less diverse.
8. Find moving in high school to be different from moving in any other grade level 4 out of 4
Note for number 8 only four of the participants had prior moves to compare to.
The same process was used for research question number two which is addressed
through the summary regarding the participant‟s student achievement and adaptation.
88
The summary for research questions number two is organized into seven academic
themes that emerged from the same process described above.
Table 5
Themes for regarding the participant’s student achievement and adaptation
“Comments relating to” Participants
1. Experience a variety of emotions including confidence, nervousness, fear, 4 out of 5
and appreciation in connection to changing their classes
2. Experience lower grades 4 out of 5
3. Experience different learning environments 5 out of 5
4. Experience gaps and redundancies in their program of study 4 out of 5
5. Experience a recovery in their grades after time ranging from three weeks 4 out of 5
to two years
6. Believe that non-academic factors impacted their grades in a negative way 4 out of 5
7. Believe that academic placement was worse after changing schools and 3 out of 5
negatively impacted their grades and their ability to make appropriate friends
Note number 7 is included although it only represents three of the participants one of the
participants only satisfied the requirement of negative impact on grades the participant
did not make a connection to impact on ability to make friends. See discussion below.
The inductive analysis of the experiences collected in this study produced
information-rich academic and non-academic themes regarding middle socio-economic
class and upper socio-economic class high school children experiencing student mobility
in conjunction with primary relocation. The display of the data as it aligns to the
academic and non-academic themes is organized here by research questions. The
89
discussion of the results is presented in an information rich description of student
mobility located in chapter five.
Results for Research Question Number 1
The following list was created from an analysis of the master outline, salient
domains, process notes, and original transcriptions and audio tapes of the interview
sessions to answer the first research question: How do middle socio-economic class and
upper socio-economic class high school students experience student mobility in regard to
non-academic elements?
1. Experience a variety of emotions including excitement, worry, anxiety,
helplessness, confusion, being upset, nervous, and displaced in connection with changing
their environment. The following specific statements from the process notes and
interviews seem to support this notion:
P1: Well, when I moved … from England to New Jersey, my family was already
here in the U.S. I still had to finish…my year at boarding school….I didn't want
to leave what I had at that moment. But then I realized it would be exciting. It
would be an opportunity to meet new people, to discover new places. And, yeah,
I was excited to come to the U.S. and a new school….I just thought it‟d be an
exciting place, especially because the image of America is so, it's unique in a way
that you think of prosperity or so many different things which are not available in
other countries.
P1: I was very happy where I was. I didn't want to make such a drastic change
not only in schools, but in like location and also like the culture of the people who
you interact with are different…. like what the school was gonna be like, what the
people were gonna be like, what everyday life was gonna be like...things like
going to the movies….basically…the whole environment, …the whole setting…I
had only visited my house and my school. So it was more the unknown that I was
worried about.
90
P1: Also, things like, you think about outside of school the new house, the new
location where you are, the things around where you live, the people you're
interacting outside of schools or around your house. I mean like neighbors….And
then just more general, like your place in that new environment like how are you
fitting in or how are you adapting to it.
P2: “It was probably like the worst day of my life, moving….It was like horrible….I hate
moving. It's like the worst thing ever.”
P2: “I guess like anxious too to like start school and see what everything's like.”
P3: “I hated it….like I didn't even know what to do…. we were like we didn't really know
what else we could do because we know that once they've decided it, we have no choice.”
P4: “…I never really wanted to think that we would leave. So when they first told me I
was really rather like confused and upset about it…. [Leaving] the house I've grown up
in. Like I loved, you know?”
P4: …during that like transition I wasn't looking at it as a new experience. I was
looking at it as you're ripping me away from my house … leaving everything
behind…and then just getting, like the [new] house that we were in…it wasn't a
home. It had nothing. It was just blank, white, washed out walls…and the yard
was unkept and not bright and vibrant like our yard in New Jersey because my
mom likes to plant a lot….It was barren….I think that was really hard…just the
whole transition of, you know, little house/big house, friends/no friends was
probably, well it was hard.
P5: I was second guessing myself a lot. I figured…I put my parents through this
much stress to get me out here…I might as well go through with it and see what
happens because…at first it's a temporary custody, which means I was out here
for a year and then I would make my decision, so I could sample each and say
maybe I wanted to move back or maybe I wanted to stay here.
2. Experience a change of personal attitude from negative to positive or “more
mature” as they adapt to the move. The following specific statements from the process
notes and interviews seem to support this notion:
91
P1: I think it was more of a transition. I think it was that at the beginning…such a
big change sort of like imposed on me and, I sort of like backed away from it as
an immediate reaction….But then, I guess, as time [went] by…the time to move
came closer, I began to realize that I wouldn't do myself any good…taking it
negatively and…I decided to see…the good side of the situation and
realizing…the opportunity and the excitement.
P1: Well now I can say that I'm as much a part of my school as I have been
anywhere else. It's great. I have the same friends that I would have had anywhere
else and I have had anywhere else, so right now this is home for me and my
school, it's just, I have adapted as most as I could and it has become as welcoming
and as comfortable a place for me as any other place has been.
P1: Now I sort of realize, I look at all the good things that have come from my
being here and from my new schools, from my new environment, all the
opportunities that I've had, so all the positive things that I can think of in my
situation right now and just realize that they would not have been possible had my
life gone another way, had I stayed or had I gone to another school that was
not…in New Jersey. So that just, for me that's a positive way to book on an event
that is passed and you can't do anything about now.
P2: “Well, at one point I was like, oh, okay, that's cool. Like maybe I'll meet a lot of
knew friends…”
P3: I'm kind of like, I'm over it but I'm not over it „cause it still gets me upset.
But I just kind of deal with it „cause I still see my friends. I still go visit. But I
have like I guess, well this year I made a lot of friends like compared to my
sophomore year. And like I'm making new friends from this year compared to
last year „cause they all graduated. So I think that I did really good this year like
with all that kind of stuff.
P4: Over Spring Break I was like, you know, I have nothing better to do, I guess
I'll just like get ahead and be like strong and show them [parents] that I'm, I'm
kind of okay with it so that I won't get, you know, yelled at again because they get
upset when I always said, „oh I don't wanna move, this is such a bad idea, I don't
like this‟. So I just put on a bright face and cleaned my room out … and it was
really,…hard, but it was kind of a good thing because my room was a mess but
I… tried to like show them that I was going to be okay.
P4: I was tired of always being, you know, a brat about it and being like, „no I
hate this. Why are you ruining my life?‟…I wanted to show them that I could
be…a mature person and I could grow and to show them, hey you know, I'm not
gonna like this but maybe it‟ll be a new experience and, you know, just to let
92
them know that I'm not gonna…give up and…be…one of those emotional kids
that just …shut themselves up in their room and like refuse to leave and make it
harder and more stressful on them, because I know…we are having to clean out
this house that they've lived in even longer than me….my dad built that house….I
guess it was just like a growth for me in my life when I…became mature.
P4: I mean there are plenty of things that I miss, but I mean I made a new best
friend here….I have a boy friend here that is pretty good and like the experiences
are really good. Like all I need really to make this whole like thing awesome
would be if [my friends from before] came and moved in with me and it snowed
like once a year. If that happened…I would truly love it here…. I'm almost really
…happy that we did move so that I got to know all these people and I got to…get
all this new culture and stuff and diversity into like my experience and I also love
my room because it‟s pretty colors. I mean I do, I like it a lot here now that I've
gotten those close ties again, you know. I'm just missing the other ones that are
still left. You know, I just need them to make it perfect.
P5: [most difficult]…Leaving my family and the sports. Like leaving everything
behind. Because I came from a very tight-knit area. They‟re like those little
everybody-knows-everybody areas and it was just kind of hard to adapt…. [and
now]…Kind of like I needed it. Like God presents me with these opportunities for
a reason and I take it and now I just gotta see what happens.
3. Experience stress and anxiety in connection to changing their social group.
The following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem to support
this notion:
P1: Well the first thing is obviously make friendships and connections….when
everybody seems to know each other it's harder to come in and become part of the
group. That is something that just takes a lot of time and effort and, and just
understanding of what your situation is and what you're coming into.
P1: Well looking back now, on it now, the hardest part was just leaving the
friendships behind, leaving the culture behind. It's just something you're used to,
something you're a part of, and just cutting it all off, leaving it all behind, it's
pretty difficult in the beginning regardless of where you're going.
P2: I was like devastated because I didn't want to leave all my…best friends and
everything that…I've done and worked for. And then I had to pick up and move
everything to somewhere else and start all over again…. in a new place with new
people or new faces.
93
P3: I'm not looking…forward to it…just because I don't wanna graduate with
these people... „cause I would rather graduate with the ones I started with…. I
mean I guess I like my friends that I have now but I would still… rather be with
my other friends.
P4: … I have to leave all the friends that I've already made, all the people I've
grown up with…. I was upset that I was leaving my friends who were a walk
away because they were in my neighborhood….I didn't want to shut myself out
from it because then I wouldn't get any memories from it. So I…just went by and
hoped that the year wouldn't go by as fast as it did and just got close to them [my
friends] and made sure that I had…everyone's numbers and I was like…I'm not
gonna forget about you…Sign my year book. Don't let me forget….I made every
memory, every experience…I just went that much further to…make those ties
memories so that I could have them when I left.
P5: It was a little hard to leave though because I had all these little issues. I had a
boyfriend. I had friends….I was supposed to go to the festival that fall…and I
was…the chief art director for that….I was supposed to be there and then I…left
all that stuff behind. And I left being a starter freshman year on our championship
team.
P5: I had notebook after notebook of reasons, pros, cons, what I was leaving
behind, what I was possibly gaining…the things people could say. Like what if I
came back, what would they do? Like I had every situation figured out. I had, I
had notepads of like every possible situation that could happen, could go wrong.
4. Experience growing closer to their families despite negative emotions
attached to the decision to move. The following specific statements from the process
notes and interviews seem to support this notion:
P1: …Primarily with my family, my parents, „cause it was very hard to go
through that transition. I mean even my, even my friends were urging me
to…talk to my parents in some way or avoid the move in some way, but I just
decided that this was what was next for my family and…they really made me see
that this was our next step…as a whole....So I realized I was part of them and I
decided that I had to, you know, I was happy to follow them.
P1: The thing that helped us a lot was our family…we moved during Christmas so
my parents decided that we were going to spend Christmas at our new
house....Relatives came over from Mexico to spend that Christmas…at our new
house. And I just think that really helped the transition to move, to know that you
weren't doing it alone, to know that it wasn't completely different, you weren‟t
94
isolated from what you knew. So it was an easier transition. I was with my
family and we all remained the same. We hadn't changed and basically that…was
like a constant factor that remained the same in the move because when I was at
home I didn't think about where, if I was living here or in Europe. It was just the
same environment.
P2: “…A lot of fear and anger like towards my parents „cause they chose to move.…
And then, like my parents tried to do everything that they could to make it not so bad.”
P2: Well it brought me closer to like my grandparents and everything so I could
like see them….Most of my family lives, well all my family lives in New Jersey
so it made it easier to actually come back here and be closer to them.
P2: My mom helped me a lot like with school „cause she would go in all the time and see
the guidance counselor and make sure like our classes were right and everything.
P2: Well I know it definitely brought me closer to my twin sister because she was
in every class with me and I pretty much looked for her every single day because I
had no one else to hang out with so I would rely on her a lot.
P3: Yes and no. Like we got closer but then we got really…annoyed with each
other after a while „cause we were with each other all day and after school „cause
there was volleyball and softball.
P5: I think they were very divided, „cause some would support me and some
wouldn‟t…. Because the ones that I usually [had] gone to for support I think I
listened to them more, but overall it was my own decision so I kind of weighed
my own opinion more than theirs…. They started enrolling me in church, like
doing church stuff, trying to help me like ease into it. That's why like most of my
friends don't go to my school, they go to other schools. And like because they
supported me. And… [said], you know what? You can do it, just try.
5. Experience non-academic differences in connection to changing their schools.
The following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem to support
this notion:
P1: Well at first I had trouble adapting to the different systems. Even the grades
were done differently and on different scales…. The activities were different…
the way you joined activities….overall the environment…that is very particular to
95
an institution where a school or a university or whatever, it has sort of like an
identity.
P1: Well „cause I was coming from a boarding schooling, the schedule was
completely different…I only used to have four or five classes a day, each lasting
about an hour. Here, the schedule is more like eight or nine classes a day, being
each either half an hour or 45 minutes. So that means…a lot more subjects and
that took a while to get used to because that means a lot more homework and
different classes to keep track of.
P1: Well discipline, at my school, at my old school, the discipline was more, you
could say the norm. I see this in other schools with the detention or clear rules for
what you could do and what you couldn't do. While the new school here…it was
more of a community that was based upon values rather than rules, so there wasn't
that same type of punishment or anything like detention. It was more through
talking and principles…and a lot of student…discipline where…older peers
would help you…when you were basically in trouble with other students or with a
teacher….just a different approach to discipline.
P1: Well for the moves I had, language had been a big part of them, but not
specifically in the move I made from England here to New Jersey because, simply
because I was used to, I was at the boarding school speaking English all the time
even though it isn't my native tongue. So language wasn't that much of a
difference. Maybe other things associated with languages were simple things like
the accent, coming over here with a British accent or things like that, but that
disappeared after a couple of months.
P1: The biggest difference for me would be first of all the people, the people, I
mean the friendships, the way you relate to other people, things like, the things
other people find funny, the humor, their conversations, their interests.
P3: “So when I moved here I like joined in a lot of clubs. But they had... so many more
like own there [Virginia].”
P3: I thought it was fun…everything like was different in as lenient. Like you
were allowed to use your iPod, people had their hats on in the school….at my old
school people were more…strict on things, but like they weren't mean about it.
Like everyone just knew--you don't wear your hat in the school, you can't bring
your iPod around.
P3: “I think it's different like because the grades here, we have like C-minuses, and at my
old school we didn't have any minuses...”
96
P3: …The overall school,…my old school was…huge.…the other day like ten of
our guys that played football there got signed to division 1 colleges like for
scholarships for football and…it was more populated down there…here it's kind
of smaller.
P4: “…I [had to]…leave my sport [not available at new school]. So…I was like, „oh,
another thing that I won't be able to…do to maybe get to know people‟…”
P4: “…We had 93 kids graduate from our 8th grade year class and that's big.…and I'm
going into like this humongous like miniature college high school…in comparison to
anything in New Jersey.”
P4: …Our first period starts at 8:50 rather than 7:30, so I got to sleep in a little
bit…. and we have eight 50-minute classes…. The time between classes is a lot
longer because it's a much bigger campus.… As long as [a student has] a license
they can drive, rather in New Jersey it was only seniors who could drive to
school. Also…seniors are allowed to leave campus for lunch because we have 50
minutes and there's close fast food joints everywhere.
P4: … Like in New Jersey we have marking periods, so they're like set into
quarters through the year and that's when you take your final test. And then, you
know, mid-terms…and then finals. We have what's called six weeks…so you
have three six weeks during a semester and you take a test at the end of every six
weeks…[then a final]…not to mention the state-wide test…it‟s a lot of testing and
a lot of…work and studying. It's a lot harder to keep up with things.
P4: “…they also do not have a D grade like New Jersey does. It‟s either A, B, C or
failing if you‟re in an academic class.”
P4: The school sends out progress reports. They just set up a Web site where
your parents can actually apply to it and get a user name and password and check
on your grades in every class and check on your attendance records, so you're
parents can also get you in check so you can't skip classes and you know if you're
failing…be like, hey, I need to like do some extra credit. And also the counselors
are … pushing us to …check off that you got all this credit last year and now
check off what you need to get this year. And course fairs and advisories…every
Thursday….where they like tell us how to…apply to colleges and get us ready for
the SATs and the PSATs and …they just nail it into your brain that you will, and
that you can, and it's tangible for you to get there.
97
P5: I was an average student, but I played a lot of sports. And it was a small
school. I mean the high school had a hundred students and the middle school had
50 or so, and like so it was easier to stand out there because if you played a sport,
people knew…. It was a big sports town. And then I moved out here and I
remember before I started school [my step-mom] told me…you're like the little
fish in a big pond now… you have to focus more on school and then sports…. I
was kind of like, you know, I can handle this and then when I moved out here, I
was in over my head beyond belief.
6. Believe their personal attitude was important to make new friends and adapt.
The following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem to support
this notion:
P1: So I didn't really care that much about what it was I was doing, it was just
participating in something, in some group, and I just started to meet people in…
like the soccer club, or maybe the debate team, or even like a history club….I
maybe wasn't there because it was my biggest interest, but my interest was to
meet other people and to have fun.
P1: Well, the process of adapting to a new place for me was, I tried to keep it
balanced. Balanced in the sense that…I realized I didn't need to change to be a
part of this new community. It was more just getting used to the simple everyday
things… the way… people relate to each other, getting used to the new people
themselves, like new faces. Those things, it's just more getting used to in the sense
of adapting to making it…a part of your life…rather than actually changing too
much yourself.
P1: I think that the most important thing is your attitude because…there is nothing
that can prepare you really for the new things you'll be encountering…It's more
your own personal attitude. … how you go into the situation. And I‟d say the
more positive you are about everything, the more … it makes everything a lot
easier, a lot more fun and you start making friends quicker.
P2: I think at first if I was like open-minded about moving and I was like, oh yeah
that‟d be cool, like I think I wouldn't have a problem with moving. But I think
„cause I was so like „I'm moving, I don‟t wanna move to New Jersey‟, like I made
everything ten times worse.
P2: Well now I realize that she has way more friends than me and everything,
because like she doesn't really care who she talks to „cause everyone talks to her.
So it probably would've helped if I was like that…. It's not that I don't care who I
98
talk to, but like I wouldn‟t be the first one to go up to you and like talk to you. I
need people to like come to me first.
P3: Probably fitting in with teammates. Like making a team and fitting in with
the teammates. Because sports is always like, was like my first priority. Like
when I first moved here I was just getting ready for softball season cause that's
what I was looking forward to, making knew friend on a team, which is easiest for
me because I've been on several teams and every team I always like make such
good friends with my teammates.
P3: I think a positive attitude. Like I…didn't want to make new friends and that's
what was like making it harder for me. Like I had such a bad attitude on it that
it…was so…difficult….Because I didn't want to make new friends and thought
that if we like gave my parents such a hard time that we would…move back, but I
guess not.
P3: I guess „cause I was able to go through all the things that I've gone through
and like I'm afraid of it, but I do it….I take chances by doing things… last year
with all my friends leaving I could have had nothing this year, but I was still able
to make friends.
P4: “…to be optimistic and keep those strongest ties, being family and those friends that
will last.”
P5: …be yourself. …try to adapt …well, you know, just stick it out. There's a
reason you're [here]…. think with an open mind. Think as if you've always lived
here. …like go into it with an open mind, open heart, open eyes.
P5: List out the pros and cons. Try to think positive. Like, wow, I‟m starting to
sound like my grandma now. Think positively about what‟s going to happen. Try
not to think about the negative. And try to think about what opportunities you‟re
gonna have moving where you are…. Because you‟re focusing on the good things
about it instead of the bad and the bad usually makes you think about, oh, … it
makes you all depressed about the situation instead of being excited about these
new things that are gonna happen.
7. Experience the social reception in New Jersey to be initially harder to connect
to, and/or less diverse. The following specific statements from the process notes and
interviews seem to support this notion:
99
P1: Well, I have to say that at my age the greatest challenge is arriving at a
community where most people know each other or have grown up with each other
in some way. It's always hard to arrive at a place and be so starkly different. I
mean in where you have come from and your background. Just, you know, the
fact that in this, at least in this area of the U.S. most people grow up, spend their
whole childhood in the same place, more or less, so there isn't that much
movement. So definitely, yeah, adapting to the new environment and the
challenges that come with being a new person in a closely knit community…. it's
something that takes time for them to embrace, for them to… like reconcile with.
It's just something new for them, something different. They don't have…other
friends who are from Mexico. All of their friends are from New Jersey…that
they've grown up with. So just the biggest difference was simply the fact that,
that I wasn't from there. I…was a new thing in their… environment…. I guess
there‟s not much diversity I would say.
P1: Well I'd have to say that in England, relationships or friendships are much
closer, much more personal. It's just overall like a warmer kind of attitude in the
way people relate to each other, more of, a little bit friendlier maybe at the start.
While here, people at the beginning are a little bit closed off.
P1: Well at first I found it very hard to, to just sort of get the, get the feel for what,
what the people were like. It's difficult to explain, but people really are different
in just the way they, in the way they talk.… like the things they think about, the
things they do, the things, like what friends do to get together, the way they relate
to each other. So at the beginning it was, it was hard because coming from a,
from such a different culture and type of friendship… it took me a while to sort of
adapt and to see how these people, how these guys here, were friends with each
other. But after a while I actually just felt that by getting involved in everything,
by…being around and, at school doing things, doing as many activities as I could,
I just started to meet people and in the end I discovered that I could still be friends
even if I was different from them.
P1: …normally there were two types of students: ones who didn't know how to
react to me sometimes, as surprising as that sounds. They sort of didn't …want to
ask, felt, I don‟t know, scared, or didn't know how to go about it. But then there
were others that…were really interested in where I had been and my experiences
and my background.
P3: I don't know. Like people have their cliques cause a lot of people have lived
here since they were born. So like people have like all their friends and then it's
just like the random person coming in. So it‟s harder.
Q: “But you didn't have those kinds of cliques in Virginia?”
100
P3: No, because like everyone would move, like everyone just, no one lived there
their whole life cause we were so close to like D.C. so like people were moving
around all the time and like people like just, like a lot of kids in high school like
all my closest friends all moved to there like the same time I did.
Q: “During the move, how did the transition go at school?”
P2: “It was so bad. It's still hard, like „til today.”
Q: “Can you give me an example of what makes it bad?”
P2: Just like the people here, they're not so like friendly, I guess, cause they all
know, they've all been friends since like middle school, I guess, and they're not
really like open about letting like new people in their little like clique of groups
and everything.
P2: We like met with our guidance counselors before we went to, we started at
school and she had two girls walk us around school for two days and just show us
like where everything was and get us from our classes and everything. And they
tried, they like, she tried helping us like meet new people, but like usually with
the first day of school everyone's like, „Oh, you're new. Where are you from?‟
And then the rest of the day they don't really care about you.
P3: It was like, the first like week or two like everyone was like, oh hi, like who
are you guys? Like where are you from? And then…after that…only certain
people would talk to us. Like my sophomore year was, I had... a few friends. I
barely knew…anyone.…And then my junior…I actually…had a lot of friends
and…I had so much fun and then all my friends graduated, and now I have…my
junior friends and I'm still in…with them. But…when we first moved
here…people would…try and be nice to us and then…after…two weeks
they…gave up.
P4: That everybody was way too nice [in Texas]. In comparison to New Jersey,
you know, when you meet a new student, unless, you know, they're gonna be
automatically popular because they're pretty or they have money or, you know,
it's a really cool looking guy, or something like that, you're gonna be left alone for
a really long time. You know, be like the nerd outcast and just like working on
science homework alone in the cafeteria…. Like that's what I thought my first
day was gonna be like, that I would sit alone and not talk to anybody and no one
was gonna talk to me, but like second period, first period, I already started talking
to people, you know. Like they were all like really nice and everyone was just
like yapping because it, it's so, I thought, like I felt like I was gonna be the only
person new and everybody was gonna know everybody else. I was very, very
surprised and wrong at that thought because everyone was coming from like four
101
different middle schools and there were transfers from other schools, from other
middle schools as well, coming into Bowie. There's like 3,500 students there. So,
I mean they're coming from all different experiences, all different backgrounds as
well, like, just like me. So it was really, it was really shocking to have people be
that polite to me and be like, hey how are you? .... Like, how are you liking
school? Yeah, I know it‟s boring, you know, just getting a conversation out into
the air. Like, I never thought about doing that. Like I always try to be nice to
new students but we didn't really have that many new students to be nice to, so I
don't think anybody in New Jersey had like the experience and notion to be that
polite to somebody, so we just weren't.
P4: One girl who I met during second period class had, had moved from San
Antonio to Austin and she didn't know anybody either, so we kind of like hung
out together. Other people just like didn't know each other from, because they
were in different schools. You know, some went to the middle school right down
the road, some went to the middle school, you know, down the road and around
the corner. So it was, it was a bunch of different places, not to mention transfers
from people who like live really far away from Bowie but their parents want them
to get the good academic plan so they send them there any way. So it's just
everybody coming from every which way possible into [this school].
Q: “So they didn't have the close ties that perhaps someone trying to break into a New
Jersey school might have had.”
P4: “Yeah.”
Q: “They were already mixed up.”
P4: Yeah. That's, yeah, it was very, very diverse. Like, of course, people like
saw people, you know. They're like, hey, you went to school, did you go to Miss
Ayers class? Were you in her class in 6th grade? You know, it's that kind of
thing. Like maybe sometimes you'd be placed with your best friend but, you
know, it was really, really mixed up in the classroom.
P5: I was the epitome of a tomboy as my friends now put it. It was just, I didn't fit
into the cliques, so I kind of broke them a little bit „cause I was kind of friends
with everybody. Because I was friends with the jocks because I played sports. The
kids that are in my development I'm friends with, I clicked with because I live
here and I see them every day…there are some kids in our school that don't have
much and I can click with them too because that‟s where I came from. So that's
like basically the 3 main cliques in our school, are the kids that don't have much,
the kids that have a lot, and the jocks.
102
P5: Like the school seems to present more challenges to me. Not just like
academically but trying to fit in with everybody…But I was like, there's certain
people in the school that I can't stand and they know I can't stand them and they
can't stand me. It's kind of like, that's the only people I repel is the people I can't
stand….They‟re very materialistic. Sometimes I just want to slap them and say,
“wake up, you‟re in high school.
8. Find moving in high school to be different from moving in any other grade
level. The following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem to
support this notion:
P1: I think, I think the first move was very important for me to be able to then
succeed in the second move simply because you, you're attitude changes about the
new things you will encounter. The first move is much harder because, simply
because it's the first time and the things you're not sure about or that are new and
unknown to you simply shock you that much more because it's the first time. But
the second time you move you sort of come to terms with the new things that you
will be facing and realize that the best thing you can do is just to take it in stride
to be positive and to embrace the new challenges.
P2: …it was so much easier moving in middle school than in high school the first
time… Cause like the teachers are more, like they're more like friendlier kind of,
like they know like who you are and like your name and everything.
P3:I think we were just mainly upset „cause we were like leaving during high
school…. Because like, oh my God, I'm gonna get so upset now…sorry… Okay.
I think it was because…we were with them…starting in high school. We wanted
to graduate with most of our friends from high school. I think that's why.
Q: “Is there any difference between moving when you're in elementary school to when
you're moving in high school?”
P3: I think moving …from 7th to 8th grade, it like effected [me] but not a lot
because I didn't really know I was moving while I was in school. So the only
people that knew were like my close friends and I was young so I
was…okay…whatever I have to do I guess I'll do it. … I didn't have that
many…friends like, you know, when you're in…middle school, elementary
school…you're only with…a certain…few friends. Not everyone has…their
cliques and groups and stuff.
103
P5: I think high school would be … the most difficult out of the three of them
because you, this is your last couple years of high school and I think now you rely
more on your friends than you have before because you're going through so much
stress. Like I'm just in my second semester of freshman year, but I've seen so
much stress compared to when I was in orientation… And like middle school it
was, everybody else, all the 8th graders were new…like an even playing field.
And in elementary you're a little kid so you really don‟t realize things.
P5: Certain schools, like preschool, kindergarten, first grade and part of second
grade I went to Catholic school, and some of the school things overlapped. Like
they linked me doing bad in second grade to the fact that it was reteaching me so I
would get bored. So it was kind of like reteaching me. And then I had a friend that
transferred from a different school into that school and he was a grade lower than
me but he was struggling because he didn't understand „cause they were
reviewing stuff that he hadn't learned at all, but for me they were reviewing
things, they were teaching new things that I had reviewed multiple times.
Q: So in elementary school the family would be the big support, in middle school
everyone's on even ground and it's family and friends. But in high school, you're really
relying on your friends more often and it's incredibly stressful.
P5: “Yeah, because you're friends are going through the same things you are. Like I have
two friends that are having major, major issues like I haven't gone through but I kind of
have an idea of what they're going through.”
Q: “Anything else that would make a difference between when you moved …in
elementary, middle school or high school…, because you've moved… in all three.”
P5: “I have moved in all three.”
Q: “So …any other things stand out to you?”
P5: Probably, I don‟t wanna to say sports again, but that's what it, because here if
you look at all the banners the kids that succeeded in freshman year stayed here
all 4 years and they succeeded all 4 years. And like I was supposed to stay at the
school. I was supposed to start, they said I was guaranteed a spot on varsity if I
stayed there through freshman year at the old school and like, I don't know it's just
kind of leaving your mark on the school. Like, I don't know, if you move I guess
you feel like you didn't leave your mark and that you could've done more if you
104
stayed there so it's kind of like the what if factor, kind of it sits in the back of your
brain like forever, cause you're thinking, you know, what if I stayed? What if I did
this? What if I did that?
P5: The first grade…That was the biggest move because I was moving from the
town I grew, like I was born in to the capitol of the state which was Springfield.
But I had moved previously, but only house to house, not switching
schools….Like I remember I was talking to my grandma like a couple hours
before this and she said that my little sister talked to her and she said, „I'm getting
pretty good at this moving thing‟, because …we transferred… schools a lot.
Results for Research Question Number 2
The following list was created from an analysis of the master outline, salient
domains, process notes, and original transcriptions and audio tapes of the interview
sessions to answer the first research question: How do middle socio-economic class and
upper socio-economic class high school students experience the academic (student
achievement) elements associated with student mobility?
1. Experience a variety of emotions including confidence, nervousness, fear, and
appreciation in connection to changing their classes. The following specific statements
from the process notes and interviews seem to support this notion:
P1: And then academically it was such a big gap at my old school between what I
was used to and what I had at my old school that it was very difficult for me to
adapt academically. But then coming to this school…I was more prepared. I was
more prepared in the sense that I was expecting anything, I was expecting
whatever change came in the system or in the procedures, so it was just overall
easier for me to adapt.
P1: Well I can't say I wasn't that nervous academically, because my school in
England…was a very good school academically, very demanding. And so that
sort of didn't, wasn't high on my mind.…I mean, the big thing is…I tried to stay,
…focused at the school I was leaving, because when you know you're gonna be
leaving a school, it‟s easy to sort of forget about the work and sort of get a bit lazy
and that certainly doesn‟t help when you're going to a different place. So I just
tried to keep on top of what I was doing at my school, even if I was gonna leave.
105
And then just…be ready for the…different type of changes and teaching changes
that might occur.
P2: “Well at first I was scared because in Virginia we had like different classes and
different like requirements to graduate and then here there are different graduation
requirements, too. And I was afraid I wasn't gonna make them from moving.”
P3: “I was really nervous, but having…[my sister]… in all my classes with me made it
easier.”
P5: …I had the whole switching classes thing down, but like I was just really
nervous about the whole, cause this is like, I was moving from the middle of
nowhere to New Jersey. And I was…extremely nervous. I remember I didn't sleep
at all the night before cause I was like you know, is [my step-mom] right? Am I
gonna be…in over my head? …what am I gonna do… I was nervous.
P5: “The classes changed, but that was good that changed.”
2. Experience lower grades after changing schools. The following specific
statements from the process notes and interviews seem to support this notion:
P1: “The first three weeks I remember my grades were not very consistent. The first
three weeks you don't really, I remember not really sitting down and studying or working
too hard on the homework.”
P2: “I did really bad. I went from, my GPA went down to a 1.9.”
P3: In my first like marking period I didn't have good grades. „Cause I had, like
so many teachers made me makeup stuff…that I never even…learned before and
…take…quizzes that I missed. So…I didn't do good…. Yeah, but like they just
said that they figured if I had taken the class by now I should have like known
most of the stuff. But like I was just like, okay, so I would just try it because I
didn't wanna…argue with my teachers on…the first day of school or first week of
school.
P5: “My grades dropped…dramatically. Like I was put on the athletic ineligibility list for
academics, and I…couldn't believe it. I'd never been on that list before.”
106
3. Experience different learning environments after changing schools. The
following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem to support this
notion:
P1: “What was very new to me was actually getting a grade for effort as well as just
normal achievement.”
P1: “It was difficult just the way classes are taught, what…different teachers…used to
teach, like either using the new systems, like Smart boards …or using the computer.”
P1: At my old school homework was more used as a learning aid, in the sense that
it wasn't that much focused on…grades. So the homework was assigned more to
help you understand the class material rather than to test you on [if] you
understand it or not. Here in New Jersey…it's more focused on as a test…on
grades. So definitely a little bit of pressure comes with that, the pressure of more
grades…than before. And that's a big difference because it changes the way you
go about doing your homework.
P2: I think I did my homework more when I was in Virginia just „cause I was…a
freshman and it was…the thing to do…and they would get mad at you if
you…didn't do your homework and they wouldn't pass you…. [now] I don't even
get homework. I think because I'm in all the basic classes that they just don't even
give…homework.
P2: My teacher was like, you're in high school, we shouldn't have to…baby you
and make sure that you have a notebook and you bring a pencil to class and
everything. So I'd rather, like I think that's their job. They should try and like
wanna help us with everything.
P3: I liked it better down there „cause…it was like easier and I understand more.
The teachers were a lot more, like better at teaching…. I feel that way because I
…understood things a lot better when I was at my old school. And…here the
teachers are…rude. I don't know, some of my teachers are really rude to me and I
just don't feel like they respect us the way that we should be respected.
P4: I think it's actually less difficult because they lay everything out on the table
and they want you to succeed and they make it really easy for you. You just have,
it's just you getting those credits in and you getting those electives in and
everything that you need.
107
P4: The school makes teachers go to … lessons on how to…be a better teacher
and how like kids learn and what the best methods are to get them to learn and to
understand and retain information...some teachers…lay it out on the table and
they want you, like they'll help you….some teachers do test corrections if you
failed the test so that you can get it up to passing….Teachers offer study groups
and time after school and if you're failing…they'll come and talk to you, and be
like, hey, do you know why you're failing right now…you need to know this.
P5: I‟ve become such a better writer…. I‟m a poet, sort of. And like if I was still
there I don‟t think, I think I‟d be focusing on sports more than I would like
English, which I need to work on.
P5: When I, my first day had school…and I was looking at the standards and I'm
like, what do I just get myself into? I was like, cause I remember I had geography
the first period and I was like, you know, what am I gonna do? Like these
standards were really high.
4. Experience gaps and redundancies in their program of study after changing
schools. The following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem to
support this notion:
P2: Well we came in right when they were reading, they just finished a book or
they were…towards the end of the book and we've never read the book or
anything and they were like having tests on it and everything…. Originally I think
[the teacher] was gonna have us take the test because there was a play going on at
school about the book that we were reading, but then after she realized that we
had no idea what it was even about, she didn't count any of it.
P2: “They told us that we would have like gaps…and we can't do anything about it „cause
it's from where we came from....So now I'm behind in history… I'm in junior history [and
math] classes.”
P2: “Like my math class now….I've known pretty much everything that we've been
doing the whole half of the year…. I feel good. I actually feel smart because I know
everything that's going on.”
108
P2: In Spanish I got help cause I was in Spanish 2 and then they realized that my
Spanish teacher in Virginia didn't really teach me that much, so I had to go back
to Spanish 1 and they did that without a problem.
P3: In Virginia they split up Algebra 1….part 1 you take your, either your
freshman year or sophomore year, and part 2 you'll take either your sophomore
year or junior year….And here you take Algebra 1…as freshmen, so when I
moved here I was a sophomore and I was in my second part of Algebra 1 part 2,
so I had to go down into freshman classes to finish the full year of Algebra.
P3: Because I guess we learned things like backwards, so like we learned U.S.
history as one year and here they learn it as two years. So it's kind of like the
same thing with math but opposite, so I have to learn history within two years
rather than one year.
P3: Yeah, and also chemistry. Because we didn‟t have labs in Virginia…in New
Jersey you have to…take…chemistry with a lab and biology with a lab…So when
I moved here I had to take biology with a lab and then I couldn't take chemistry
with a lab until I took Algebra 2. So now I'm in Algebra 2 taking my second year
of chemistry with a lab.
P4: [keeping up grades] It's a lot harder to do that…in Austin than it is in New
Jersey because we have different like curriculum set out…. The only unfortunate
thing is, in New Jersey we weren't supposed to take Algebra until high school.
Like that was just…New Jersey‟s curriculum plan. In Texas…you were supposed
to take Algebra 1 in middle school…then go into Geometry freshman year…
P4: The unfortunate thing for me is that I did a lot of things…in New Jersey that I
wish could‟ve been transferred over….like we had gym every year and we had
health every year and we had…computer technology and…cooking and home ec
and stuff like that…I need to take again, which is really…unfortunate because… I
have the credits for it. But…New Jersey is…not...approved by them, I can‟t get
the credit for it…So that‟s…one thing that‟s really frustrating…
P5: Very big gaps. I went to tutoring for over 160 hours at [a private tutor
service]…. I was very behind….I was always the kid that did well in standardized
testing. I mean I was advanced proficiency on everything. And…when I moved
out here I saw that my [old] school…really didn't have much. And when I moved
out here I saw the total difference….I was taking…classes to…help me get into
everything.… my parents…spent well over $2,000.00 getting me tutoring for
Math and English…. I'd say with English for 80 hours, and I did math tutoring for
80 hours. I remember some days during the summer I took study skills classes to
help me, too. And I was at the tutoring center for four hours a day. I was… their
whole morning shift, every day, five days a week.
109
5. Experience a recovery in their grades after time ranging from three weeks to
two years. The following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem
to support this notion:
P1: So at first I went to school to adapt and my grades showed it. But after a
while, it took me about three, four months and then my grades started getting
better….after a while… the habit of school…clicks in and I was able to be more
consistent with my grades and sort of focus on the academic part of
school….what I mean by habit of school is…just the basic routine of what school
is academically, of paying attention in classes, of focusing on the subject you're
studying, asking the teacher whenever you need help, doing the homework
properly, following up on any doubts or questions you have and just performing
better in school, concentrating on the academic part of school as a priority. And it
has been a gradual improvement from the year I came, my sophomore year, and
then last year getting better to now, to where they are now.
P2: It started to get better [my grades], like once you start making friends then it's not so
like horrible going to school, „cause it's like people actually know you and like want to
talk to you.
P3: I actually just got my report card yesterday and my GPA is a 2.8. I mean it's
not terrible, but it's not good. Like it's not like really good. But I think I've, my
grades have come up because first marking period I had a 2.5.
P5: Yeah, right away I didn't do well and then I have this thing where I am
terrible in school first semester, but second semester apparently something
kicks…in…and I start doing what I'm supposed to be doing…. before the move, I
did what I was supposed to do, and then when I moved out here it was just like
this new pattern. Like I remember my English teacher last year, she yelled at me
so much….I stayed after with her…and she's like, “you know, if you would've
done this first semester, you'd be in pre AP English recommended, not just CP”. I
remember her telling me that.
6. Believe that non-academic factors impacted their grades in a negative way.
The following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem to support
this notion:
110
P1: And then in the classes…themselves, I wasn't paying that much attention. I
was sort of not concentrating that much, I guess because of all the new things I
was thinking about. I didn't really have time to, really didn't have the focus to do
that well in the classes. But that was something that came with the, with the
newness, with the unknown and just discovering the new things. But after a while
sort of the habit of school, like clicks in and I was able to be more consistent with
my grades and sort of focus on the academic part of school.
P2: “…if you like going to school to hang out with your friends then it would help me
like pay attention in my class and everything and not so focused on meeting friends.”
P2: “We have like chainsaws going off while we're trying to work and do tests „cause
we're getting construction done.”
P3: So my grades are getting better but classes are also getting easier for me, just
because I know that I'm almost done with school and, like my chemistry class I
have four senior girls in, which is good. So it's like I have them to be with in my
class. And like last year in my chemistry class I was with all seniors but we were
in like a regular chemistry and this year I'm in it with a lab. So it's like making it
better. Like I don't know I think my grades are getting a little bit better cause I'm
meeting like more people and making more friends and stuff. It like makes me, it
helps me concentrate knowing I have friends to be with.
P4: I'm doing well in all of my classes except pretty much Geometry because I
struggle with that, but I'm doing stuff to get help and I work on it and I just try
and study as much as I can so that I cannot get a C…. It could, because I feel that
if I was in a better class, that I was in a class, you know, without the people who
just failed and like goofed off and like didn't care, that I would like be ahead and
maybe it would've been a little bit easier.
7. Believe that academic placement was worse after changing schools and
negatively impacted their grades and their ability to make appropriate friends. The
following specific statements from the process notes and interviews seem to support this
notion:
P2: …when I first moved here I was put in…college prep classes or just normal
classes and then they realized that…was too hard for me so they put me [in] basic
classes this year and I'm doing pretty well in them….It was fine with me „cause
all like, pretty much growing up every school that I went to, like in Connecticut, I
111
had like a hard time with school and everything and I was in like special ed
classes and then once I got to Virginia I got out of all that.
P3: I liked my classes „cause I was in like all classes with the same people, like
all, with all my grade and when I moved here I was…set [back] in junior classes,
so I liked it better down there [in Virginia] „cause I was with all my friends and
had everyone like, I was, it was…easier and I understand more. The teachers
were a lot more, like better at teaching.
P3: Yeah, I'm with juniors, which have become most of my friends because I'm
with them all the time. I don't really have many friends in my grade, unless
they're like friends from sports teams….I feel left out from all the seniors.
P3: I feel, like I feel like I mostly understood things better cause I was more like
comfortable in where I was and because I was in like people in my grade. And I
feel like now that I'm in like younger classes, I have to try and like understand
more because everyone's like, oh, you're a senior in junior classes. Like I feel like
it's harder for me to understand because I'm so like overwhelmed with being with
juniors.
P3: I think here they tried to make it as easy as they could, like putting us in the
classes together. But like, I don't know…I think it made a difference but not
exactly. „Cause then like we didn't really…talk to anyone else besides each other.
P3: I do, but again most of my friends are not in my grade because of my classes.
I'm not really sure because I'm still like just as outgoing. It's just that I feel more
comfortable if like my friends that I'm in my classes with, like rather than going
up to random like seniors that are in my grade and just start talking to them. Like
I feel like weird doing that.
P3: “Yeah because last year, like I had a lot of friends…but not many of them were in
any of my classes. Like this year in maybe one of my classes.”
P4: I didn't take it. So I went into Algebra 1 in freshman year like a lot of other
people did. Unfortunately I was put into a class because they had failed, either
failed it during, in the Texas…or they had been transferred just like me. So I was
in like a really not very good class, because it was just like a bunch of bad kids
who failed the classes „cause they don't do work. So that was really, really
unfortunate and really like, really unfortunate and a disadvantage on my part for,
for Algebra…. Yeah, it, it... I mean for once math actually did come rather easy to
me in Algebra. I just got it for some reason, but the class would not keep their
mouth shut and were really, really rude and my teacher did not know what to do
to get them to be quite.... Like it just frustrated me to the point where I wanted to
112
scream at them. So that was, that was really a setback. I did well in Algebra. I
did really well, but just the class was not fun.
Discrepant and Non-Confirming Data
In the course of the long interviews it was normal to touch on topics from several
angles and in some cases get anomalous comments. These are recorded here in context
and organized by the theme they relate to.
2. Experience lower grades after changing schools. One student, the one that left
New Jersey and moved to Texas, found that grades did not lower after changing schools.
It was acknowledged that it was difficult to keep grades up. It was also stated that the
teachers were very supportive and helped keep grades up.
P4: Everything seemed rather, you know…straightforward and really well taught
because I had a lot of good teachers for the most part in freshman year and, you
know, the teachers laid everything up on the table and were really…strict about
things, just like everybody in New Jersey was. … I kept up my grades. It's a lot
harder to do that though in Austin than it is in New Jersey because we have
different like curriculum set out.
3. Experience stress and anxiety in connection to changing their social group.
Two participants‟ comments seemed anomalous in terms of other comments they each
made. One was in connection to leaving behind a negative environment where a bully
was imapcting her own self esteem. Leaving him behind was a positive element of
moving and then later she discussed how she was able to “reinvent” herself with higher
self esteem. P4: “It was easy saying goodbye to this one kid who always made fun of
me….that was really easy…” The second was in connection to the experience built by
prior moves. In a single comment, this participant alluded to the development of a
113
cognitive confidence that making friends would eventually happen and that the stress and
anxiety were just natural emotional responses to moving again.
P5: I've been to nine different schools and I have lived in multiple houses and I've
gone, I've moved like many times and I've always been able to make friends so I
wasn't nervous at all when it came to making friends.
7. Experience social reception in New Jersey to be initially harder to connect to,
and/or less diverse. One student‟s comments seemed anomalous in terms of other
comments he made. The new students were described as less diverse and less warm or
welcoming. Yet, in these two comments the teachers are described as welcoming and
working hard to help the student get into activities which were described by the student
as important to making friends.
P1: … the new school, I think most of the teachers were very aware of my
situation, so it was good to come across people that were sensitive to what you
were doing and to what your situation was. That was a big help….in general just
like encouraging me and giving me the opportunity to join different activities.
The school overall just sort of like looked out for me to become a part of the
community as fast as I could.
P1: …The fact that the teachers at least, and some of the students, seemed to be
very aware of my situation so they were all very welcoming. They all helped me
in the sense that they were actively inviting me to whatever it is they were doing.
So it was more individually each teacher, but I guess that was*** because as a
group or as a school they decided on it.
7. Believe that academic placement was worse after changing schools and
negatively impacted their grades and their ability to make appropriate friends. This
participant expressed comfort with having friends from all different grades and social
groups. The placement was difficult academically, this student spent hours with tutors
and services to bring up grades but socially, there was no identified conflict. It should be
noted that this student was a freshman and had multiple senior and junior friends in a
114
similar situation as participant three. Participant three reported a difficult social
adjustment after the senior friends graduated and the participant was left in the school
with no significant attachment to classmates in her own grade. There seems to be a
potential negative imapct socially within two years. Participant three‟s experience is
discussed further in chapter five.
P5: And like, friends are like, how do you know who this is? And I'm like, I don't
know. Because some of my classes are mixed classes. Like over half my class, my
math, science, finance; four of my eight classes are mixed classes, which means I
have freshman, junior, senior, sophomores in them. In my class with [my friend],
I'm the only freshman….I like them, because it gives me a chance not to just
about friends with freshman, but it gives me a chance to be friends with
upperclassmen….
8. Find moving in high school to be different from moving in any other grade
level. This participant is one that moved over nine times. In the discussion, middle
school and high school were often grouped together. It became increasingly difficult to
separate out one example from the other with any confidence.
P5: …but for high school as well, and middle school I was terrified. I remember I
didn't, like I said, I didn't sleep the night before because I didn't know anything. I
didn't know what my teachers were like, I didn't know anybody. Basically I was
just a wreck. I remember I came home that day and, after soccer practice, and I
crashed.
Summary
This phenomenological study of student mobility, specifically the experiences of
middle socio-economic and upper socio-economic class high school students, revealed
patterns and generalizations of meaning across the participants. Comments supporting
eight non-academic and seven academic themes related to the frames of analysis: 1)
changing environment, 2) changing school, 3) changing friends and 4) changing as an
115
individual were summarized in detail. Though these non-academic and academic themes
surfaced during the data analysis procedures creating the summaries, it was determined
that the participants‟ perspectives and experiences clustered into the four main frames of
analysis and thus were used to generate the main outline as described by Amos Hatch‟s
nine step analysis process, which is an appropriate tool for phenomenological analysis
(2002). The resulting three dimensional outline illustrated how the academic and non-
academic factors related to one another during student mobility which is discussed further
in chapter five. In addition, the participants offered advice that they would give a student
about to experience student mobility in high school. These comments will be discussed
in full in chapter five.
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to find meaning from the
academic (student achievement) and non academic experiences of middle socio-
economic class and upper socio-economic class high school children in New Jersey who
had experienced student mobility and their description of the impact it had on their own
student achievment.
The following research questions were used in this study:
1. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience student mobility in regard to non-academic elements?
2. How do middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic class high
school students experience the academic (student achievement) elements associated with
student mobility?
The population was defined as students currently in grades 9-12 who have
changed both school and residence to, from, or within New Jersey within a three year
period. Both a snow ball technique and a cooperative effort with local private schools
were used to identify potential participants. A total of five participants were interviewed
for this study. This is a limitation of this study for the original intent was to find ten
participants. After nine months of struggling with privacy policies and trying to find
willing participants, the results were written using the only five participants that could be
contacted.
117
Hatch‟s (2002) nine-step inductive analysis model was used to conduct the
analysis of the data. Data collected included descriptions of what it was like to relocate
from one school to another, characteristics of the schools and the family, and descriptions
of the preparation, resources, and support utilized during relocation. In addition,
descriptions of the academic aspects (student achievement) and non academic aspects of
the student mobility experience of the participant were collected during the interview
process.
This phenomenological study of student mobility revealed patterns and
generalizations of meaning across the five participants. Comments supporting eight non-
academic and seven academic themes related to the frames of analysis: 1) changing
environment, 2) changing school, 3) changing friends and 4) changing as an individual
were described in chapter four. Though these non-academic and academic themes
surfaced during the data analysis procedures creating the thematic summaries, it was
determined that, the participants‟ perspectives and experiences were best presented in an
information rich summary. Thus, they were combined to generate the main outline as
described by Amos Hatch‟s nine step analysis process. The resulting three dimensional
outline (available in full in Appendix C) illustrated how the academic and non-academic
factors related to one another. The full description, the completed summary is presented
here in chapter five. Both research questions are discussed together in this one
information rich summary. In addition, the participants offered advice that they would
give a student about to experience student mobility and identified the differences they
experienced when moving at different grade levels. These have been included in the
118
summary although they were not substantiated enough to qualify as a theme for chapter
four. The participants also provided suggestions for education, things that they believe
might have helped them adapt or improve their own student achievement. These have
been included in the recommendations for education section of this chapter.
Conclusions
The main outline generated by Amos Hatch‟s nine-step analysis process
represents a three dimensional answer to both research questions. The alignment of each
research question to each part of this outline is available in Appendix C. This section is a
rich description of student mobility as it was experienced by the five participants. The
conclusions are focused into seven main areas of description: 1) changing environment,
2) changing schools, 3) making friends, 4) role of attitude in adaptation, 5) changing of
individual, 6) advice to other mobile students, and 7) mobility at different grade levels.
Changing Environment
As mentioned in the literature review, not all student mobility is detrimental or
involuntary; some families move to secure better jobs or find a more appropriate school.
Family mobility is also associated with optional moves in the interest of improving the
living conditions and opportunities for the family; this is considered the changing
environment. Tiebout mobility, as described by economists, was defined as the instances
where parents changed districts in search of higher quality schools. P5 changed location
in part to secure better schools and opportunities. One study in Texas showed an average
increase in school quality for district switchers (Hanushek, Kain& Rivkin, 2001). P4
119
relocated from New Jersey to Texas and described an increase in school quality.
Similarly, corporate relocation or reassignment can improve the economic status of the
family and increase the standard of living and educational opportunities. All five of the
participants experienced some improvement in economic status.
When describing the change of environment the emotions felt by the participants
at the time became critical to the conversation. The description in this section is limited
to topics related to any aspect other than the school environment which is covered in a
later section. The emotions felt by the participants were focused in three major areas: 1)
the cause for the mobility, 2) the process of leaving their home, and 3) the process of
leaving their social groups.
When describing student mobility and any connection it may have to student
achievement it is critical to describe the non-academic specifically the emotional aspects
of the mobility. Psychologists theorized that children who move should deal with
grieving for lost connections, fears of the unknown, and lessened parental attention, all of
which may lead to emotional and behavioral problems (Blakeman, 1993; Dobson &
Henthorne, 1999; Heiderson & Stiles, 1994). Furthermore, children do not choose to
move; they are helpless members of the family subjected to the events around them,
although parents may take into account their children and the ages of their children when
choosing to move (Norford & Medway, 2002). Parents, preoccupied or exhausted with
the physical and social demands of moving such as locating medical or child care in a
new community and getting established in new employment situations, may be less
120
attuned to their child's fears or needs. This research was substantiated by the data
collected in this study.
All but one of the participants in this study experienced mobility because of
parental occupation requiring the family to relocate. The four participants in this
situation all described feelings of anxiety, fear, helplessness, powerlessness, and anger.
They all felt that their parents were doing this to them at some level and resented it. They
all described wanting to either ignore the impending move, maintaining a certain level of
denial, or trying to change their parents‟ minds and convince them to not make the move.
Two of the participants experienced a change in these initial feelings and they evolved a
cooperative attitude, trying to make the process easier on everyone by adapting to the
idea and focus on perceived positives. Two of the participants experienced no change in
the negative initial feelings and so did not evolve a positive attitude about the move.
These two participants developed a belief that if they did not adapt well that perhaps their
parents would change their minds and move back. Both participants described fighting
with their parents yet, they acknowledged that their parents were actively trying to
support them through the stress of changing environments and friends. Both of these
participants reflected that their parents were helpless too because the reason for the move
was occupationally related. Through the interview the participant was able to recognize
this duality of powerlessness.
P3: “Because I didn't want to make new friends and me and [my sister] thought that if we
like gave my parents such a hard time that we would like move back, but I guess not.”
Q: “You wanted to go home.”
121
P3: “Yeah.”
Q: “Did you really think that maybe your parents would turn around and move back if it
was hard for you?”
P3: “We thought about it but we knew that they couldn't.”
Q: “Can you talk about that powerlessness? How did that affect you?”
P3: “Well we had, like we couldn't do anything to change it so it was like pretty much all
on them and they couldn't do it either, so we had no other option.”
Q: “How did this impact your relationship with your parents?”
P3: “We like fought about it a lot. And we kind of still do, but there's like nothing we
can do now. There's no point of even going back.”
Q: “If you had to guess, how do you think your parents feel about the whole situation?”
P3: “I think they feel bad because they always tell us that. But like they say there's
nothing they could do.”
Q: “So that powerlessness is affecting them too.”
P3: “Yeah.”
Powerless feelings were not an issue for one participant that actually motivated
the move independently. This participant was the only one to move for a reason other
than parental occupation, her situation revolved around a custody change. The pressures
and anxiety involved were different but equally stressful to the family. In addition the
participant expressed wanting to move for better opportunities academically. This
experience would qualify as tiebout mobility.
122
For this participant the environment change was a good one for opportunities
academic and sports related. However, she was leaving behind a close knit family
including extended family in the community. The participant was also leaving behind a
sister that she was sharing a room with. This led to a positive feeling of no longer having
to share a room with a negative feeling of leaving a family member several states away.
These kinds of conflicted emotions about the move were pervasive throughout the data.
Although a mother and a blood sister were the closest family members left behind, one
participant stayed behind while their primary family moved months earlier, and all
participants left extended family members behind. The mourning of leaving these kinds
of connections gave a negative tone to even the most positive of reasons for relocating.
The process of actually leaving the physical home was described in detail by one
participant. The stress of the change was magnified because of the depth of connection to
this location. This was the only participant that had no prior move experience. The
change in environment was critical for this participant because the process of leaving this
beloved home behind was negative. There was a desire for closure with the house as
much as closure with the social network. Her words capture the emotion and experience
best here. The description is available in full in chapter four.
P4: And on the day that we left… we were just hanging out in my house like
normal and my mom was being crazy and weird and [my two visiting friends]
were being crazy and weird and we were all just like, you know, together and it
was really nice. But then like this moving truck, all of a sudden we hear it, beep,
beep, beep, backing up our driveway, you know, while we're packing up the car,
while we're saying goodbye to the house and everything and….The people started
to unload the truck, you know. They‟re coming into the house and my dad is livid
because he built this house. This is his house. This is our property. This is our
last day. They had to be that heartless to come and take that like really emotional
time for all of us away.
123
All five participants described feeling levels of fear, anger, anxiety, and sadness
over leaving their social networks behind. These networks included family, school
friends, neighborhood friends, and teachers. For additional supporting data note theme
three under research question one in chapter four. In some cases teachers were close and
so leaving them behind as a mentor or guidance source was described as difficult. The
sending schools did not have any process to support the closure of these social networks.
This same participant expressed a positive emotion from changing environments
specifically the social network. One fellow student was persistently bothering her and
giving her negative input about her own self image. Leaving this environment allowed
her the opportunity to reject these negative images and reinvent her own image of herself.
This experience illustrates a positive outcome of student mobility, the opportunity to get
away from negative influences. This participant was able to magnify her own positive
self image once she was away from this bully.
All five participants described staying in touch with friends left behind. They
used a variety of contact methods including: 1) phones (calls, texting), 2) computers
(Facebook, AIM, e-mail, twitter), and 3) physical visits. Of these, physical visits were
used the least often due to distance, time restraints, and busy schedules.
In preparation for changing environments, all five participants either visited the
location, participated in home purchasing, or did research using the internet to learn more
about where they were going and what it might be like to live there. One participant kept
a personal journal of her thoughts, positives, negatives, and possible outcomes. This kind
of preparation was not immediately appreciated by some of the participants, however
124
they acknowledged that it did help with adapting to the change later. Therefore parents
should encourage participation in these behaviors even if there is voiced resistance at
first.
Social preparation that focused on making deeper connections with the existing
environment seemed to help at the time but made things increasingly difficult when the
move actually took place. Two participants described trying to memorize their
experiences and make deeper connections with friends. This is important for the actual
moving day however, it was identified equally as “helpful” and “more painful”.
Change, whether positive or negative, causes stress and anxiety. The positive
causes of mobility were simply events that were categorized in a positive light; however
one cannot make assumptions about the impact such an event might have had on a child
in the family (Norford & Medway, 2002). For example, marriage or remarriage,
although often positive, represented change, and carried social and emotional baggage or
a sense of displacement which could have had a negative impact on student achievement
with or without mobility (Brodkin, 2006). This was true for all five participants in this
study. Although their ultimate situations were positive, self described as opportunities,
there was increased stress and anxiety felt by the participants concerning the change in
environment focusing on the reasons for the move, the changing of their homes, and the
loss of their social networks and support systems.
Reactions to student mobility vary from person to person, and adjustment
occurred along a broad continuum. Some individuals made the transition smoothly,
while others found it a traumatic event. Mobile students face the psychological challenge
125
of coping with a new school environment and social community (Rumberger, 2003).
Having to leave friends behind and in some cases family members was described as the
single hardest part of relocating according to Blakeman (1993). This was supported by
the descriptions collected in this study.
The difficulty associated with leaving friends cannot be underestimated especially
when considered in the context of its impact on a student‟s ability to focus on learning
(Holland, Kaplan & Davis, 1974). All five participants described the anxiety and stress
associated with leaving their friends behind and having to develop a new social network.
This increase in stress and anxiety ultimately led to some level of impact on their student
achievement in school. This impact is described below.
Changing Schools
Regardless of the cause, student mobility was disruptive to education, either
directly by disrupting curriculum continuity and progression, or indirectly through
domestic stress or poor social adjustment, or through distraction due to the stress and
anxiety associated with change. In the literature review, it was the variety of causes that
made it difficult to make generalizations concerning mobility. The generalization that
when families change places of residence, the children face problems of disruptions in
school curricula, teachers, and social support systems (Rumberger, 2003) was supported
when specifically discussing middle socio-economic class and upper socio-economic
class families in this study.
For a successful transition to occur from one school to the next, students should
achieve three goals: (a) students need to find a place among their peers that is acceptable;
126
(b) students should become successful in the academic areas and behavioral standards
they have been placed in, and (c) students should experience a sense of acceptance by the
faculty as an appropriate and successful member of the class (Blakeman, 1993; Titus,
2007). This is the focus of this section of the description. All five participants described
transitioning from one school to another and their experiences where they struggled or
succeed in different areas. The progression for this part of the description is focused on
the second two goals and is organized as follows: 1) preparation, 2) first day of school
and first three weeks, 3) different learning environments, and 4) gaps and redundancies.
The making of new friends, which is represented as the first goal required for successful
transition (Blakeman, 1993; Titus, 2007), is covered in a section dedicated solely to that
critical issue.
Preparation
In preparation for transitioning between schools all five of the participants said
the sending school did minimal to nothing. There was no formal “good bye” or send off
to promote closure for the student. One participant explained that he knew the school
“wished him well” but other than that felt no clear support. There was no gathering of
academic achievement or curriculum data to aid in the transition of records. No
descriptions of courses provided to aid in future placement. There were stress and
anxiety emotions attached to the thoughts of academic transition that were never
discussed. There was no counselor or guidance outreach to support the student through
some of the non-academic changes. Only one participant described academic preparation
that he independently committed to in an effort to make a smooth academic transition
127
which was motivated from prior move experience. For supportive data note theme one
under research question number two in chapter four.
All of the participants focused on the non-academic aspect of preparation which
was to dedicate energy to remembering events and sustaining existing friendships. P4
described how she finally made a close friend the year she was leaving. Despite wanting
to focus on each detail of the sending school and the friends there, all five participants
described initial attempts to develop a positive attitude about the new school too. For
example, P4 held onto the idea that she would be eligible to drive earlier than had she
stayed in her old state. These kinds of little positives carried the participants forward
even though they were actively mourning the loss of their social networks and facing
their fears. Mobile students may need assistance developing these positive attitudes and
finding a detail like learning to drive earlier may be a key to such evolution in thinking.
First Day and First Three Weeks
The first day of school was described consistently by all five participants. There
is no theme in chapter four that captures this critical time period in isolation so a brief
description is included here. Even though there were different types of schools and even
different states, all five participants had common features in their description. The
common elements were 1) being the “new” person, 2) expectations of new classes and
teachers, 3) logistics of the day. Theme two for research question two in chapter four has
extensive data in support of these elements. However, this statement shows the emotions
and the role of making friends in the initial day.
P2: I think I cried every minute of the day….We like met with our guidance
counselors before we went to, we started at school and she had two girls walk us
128
around school for two days and just show us like where everything was and get us
from our classes and everything. And they tried, they like, she tried helping us
like meet new people, but like usually with the first day of school everyone's like,
“Oh, you're new. Where are you from?” And then the rest of the day they don't
really care about you.
The academic and non-academic challenges continued for all five participants
through the first three weeks and had immediate impacts on student achievement. All
five participants described different levels of distraction during the first three weeks of
school. This period of time was described as the most critical for fitting in with peers and
adapting to the new school environment. It was also described as the critical period for
placement in classes and addressing gaps in the curriculum. Finally, the first three weeks
were the key to adapting to the non-academic differences in the school. For example,
differences with homework expectations, discipline, types of relationships with making
friends, and program of study (graduation) requirements. These are described in theme
three under research question two in chapter four. One participant summarized the
elements involved in adaptation very well.
P1: The first three weeks the new friends you begin to talk to or the new
classmates you begin to interact with. Also, things like, you think about outside
of school the new house, the new location where you are, the things around where
you live, the people you're interacting outside of schools or around your house. I
mean like neighbors and things like that. Also the activities, like I said, I
mentioned before, what activities you're trying to get into, what things you want
to do with your free time. And then just more general, like your place in that new
environment like how are you fitting in or how are you adapting to it.
Thus, students are primarily focused on adapting and making connections to friends,
teachers, and the environment. They are not focused on grades, placement, or even
clearly communicating with teachers their needs or questions. Educators must allow for
this initial period of time when welcoming mobile students.
129
Different Learning Environments
Five out of five of the participants described different learning environments after
they experienced student mobility. Theme three under research question two in chapter
four has data that describes these in detail. One participant explained how the technology
was used differently in the classroom and he found that it took some time to adjust to the
differences. One participant found that the purpose of certain academic tools were
different, for example the purpose of homework went from something used to simply
practice the classroom lessons until the student felt comfortable to something used by a
teacher to grade the lesson. That is, a required grade to “test” the student on mastery.
Three of the participants described significant differences in the teachers‟
approaches to students. The participants described the differences as having “better” or
“worse” teachers but when pushed to describe exactly what made one group of teachers
“better” or “worse” they all described the amount of support or help the teacher offered
the students. Additional support is available in chapter four, theme three under research
question two. Teachers that had clear objectives and intervened to help mobile students
meet these objectives were described as “better” even when the objectives were
significantly harder than the student was experiencing in prior schools. Teachers that
refused to “hand hold” students through these transitions were described as “worse” and
the participants resented being “abandoned” or “left to fail”.
When a student changes from a highly structured and supportive environment to
one that demands a certain level of self-sufficiency the student experiences a sense of loss
and dysfunction that impacts their short and long term student achievement. In addition,
130
these students felt it was the teachers‟ lack of skill and support that “abandoned” them to
this fate and not a lack in their own skills or self-directed learning or self discipline. “My
teacher was like, you're in high school, we shouldn't have to…baby you…”
One participant described the teacher‟s inability to control the classroom behavior
as a distraction for her own learning. The class grouping was for students that transferred
in from different schools that had gaps in the curriculum or students that had failed the
class once. The participant described the class as disrespectful and rude which drove her
to distraction. She began blaming the teacher but then described how the teacher tried
everything and finally that it really as the students. She wished she were in a different
group of students so that she could just do her work and learn.
One participant described the change in language as being a major factor in an
earlier move but not the most recent move. He moved from Mexico to Brussels and
adjusted to the change in language there. The subsequent moves to London and then the
United States were all using English which was still not his native language. Finally, one
participant described the increase in testing as a huge change in the learning environment.
Adjusting to the testing schedule and the test preparation schedule in class was a change
for this student and required an increase in her academic preparation. She felt this was
supported by the faculty and described the change as “harder” but “sell supported by
teachers” in fact she said, “they lay it all out and make sure you are succeeding”.
Academic Gaps and Redundancies
All five participants described academic gaps and redundancies connected with
their student mobility experiences. In general the redundancies were described as positive
131
and often allowed the students to focus their efforts on other more demanding aspects of
adapting to the move. They also allowed the participants to increase their confidence in
their own academic performance. However, the gaps were described by the participants
as negatives, they felt they had learned things “wrong” or “backwards”. This is evident
in the data supporting theme four under research question two in chapter four.
One participant described how he struggled significantly when he moved from
Mexico to Brussels. The gaps in the curriculum as well as the language gap impacted his
academic achievement negatively. However, he went on to explain that moving again to
London and then finally to America proved far easier because there was no longer a
language barrier and he had adjusted to a very demanding school academically which
placed him in an advantageous position. The resulting redundancies combined with the
experience from prior moves allowed him to succeed in this most recent student mobility
experience. His ability to adapt to change had been honed or magnified by the prior
moves.
One participant described how the teacher expectations led to lower student
achievement on test scores because of gaps in the curriculum. The student felt unable to
speak with the teacher about the gaps because of the perception that it would be
“arguing” and so remained quiet. One participant had a similar experience, in the same
school, but the teacher adjusted the expectations to allow for the gap.
The described gaps and redundancies were in the academic program of study or
curriculum but they had both academic and non-academic impacts on the participants. At
times the gaps were revealed after academic placement and the students had to be moved
132
again to adjust for the gaps in the curriculum. The placement of the participants in
certain classes and with certain student groups was often dictated by the existing gaps in
the curriculum. The resulting placement framed the non-academic social network or
friends that the participant was in contact with primarily. This became a long term
negative for three of the participants.
Role of Academic Placement
Academic placement was a significant part of mobility for four of the five
participants. There were three major aspects of placement that were identified: 1)
placement with grade level, 2) placement grouping, 3)placement based on complete or
timely records. These kinds of non-academic distractions and frustrations were
attributed to lower student achievement by four of the five participants.
When participants were placed in classes with students that were in different
grade levels they described feeling displaced from their grade level and found it difficult
to make friends. They described feeling a stigma from being with lower grade level
students academically. This real or perceived stigma was a distraction and put
participants in a negative learning environment.
P3: I feel…I mostly understood things better cause I was more like comfortable in
where I was and because I was in like people in my grade. And I feel like now
that I'm in like younger classes, I have to try and like understand more because
everyone's like, oh, you're a senior in junior classes. Like I feel like it's harder for
me to understand because I'm so like overwhelmed with being with juniors.
Three out of five of the participants described this placement as detrimental to their
ability to make friends in their own grades.
133
P3: Yeah, I'm with juniors, which have become most of my friends because I'm
with them all the time. I don't really have many friends in my grade, unless
they're like friends from sports teams….I feel left out from all the seniors.
This inability to connect with their own grade level is magnified in high school where
many of the programs are departmentalized and students have few structured times to
meet new people. The social arrangements assume some level of prior social connection.
Thus, friends for mobile students are made with the people in their academic classes
where social interaction is structured by the learning environment. Thus, mobile students
may be permanently isolated from their own grade level. This kind of isolation was
described as a cause for decreased motivation to attend or focus academically at school.
Mixed classes can have yet another negative long term impact. One participant
described how she made friends with upperclassmen and felt connected to them only to
have them all graduate that year and leave her without a social group again. This
repeated loss of the social network and the sense of having to “start all over” left the
participant detached and unwilling to make the effort to connect with her own grade.
This isolation from her own grade impacted her own senior year as she moved forward
disconnected and unwilling to put forth the effort into making friends because she knew
they were all going to graduate again soon. Three participants were in some version of
this scenario either at the beginning of it, excited about being friends with upperclassmen
or at the end of it feeling detached and trying to reconcile their social networks until
graduation.
Placement grouping of students can have similar long term effects on academic
achievement. One participant described being placed in a class where all of the students
134
had either failed the course once already or were transfers from other schools. This
participant was used to being in honors classes and found the behavior and academic
attitude of this group of students distracting and frustrating. A full description is available
in chapter four.
P4: Unfortunately I was put into a class because they had failed, either failed
it…or they had been transferred just like me. So I was in like a really not very
good class, because it was just like a bunch of bad kids who failed the classes
„cause they don't do work….Like it just frustrated me to the point where I wanted
to scream at them. So that was, that was really a setback.
This grouping continued into Geometry, so placement grouping had a long-term impact
on the success of the student within the discipline the academic gaps occurred.
The accuracy and depth of records is a critical feature. Another participant was
switched from special education courses to the college prep courses until she struggled
there and her mother came in to address the placement grouping which resulted in her
being placed in basic level courses. She had been in special education courses and then
standard courses over the course of several prior moves. She was placed in the basic
courses after the critical three week adaptation period which disrupted her social network
yet again. She described the basic classes as easier but boring and so she continued to be
frustrated. Her boredom was twofold. 1) She never got any homework because they did
all of the work in class. She described wanting to do something else in class like talk
about the reading or something fun, rather than just completing the reading there. 2) She
had all this time at home, with no homework and no friends to hang out with which left
her resentful.
135
Three of the five participants were told that they could not take the missing
courses over the summer because those courses were only for students that had failed the
courses once already. To address curriculum gaps only one participant took the
opportunity to use an outside program or tutor system so that they could participate in
grade level appropriate classes.
The depth of the records becomes critical when dealing with graduation
requirements and prior credits. One participant described academic gaps that impacted
her placement that were only gaps because the courses she completed previously were
not accepted by the new school. She described this as the single most frustrating aspect
of the gaps in curriculum because there was a sense of injustice attached to the situation.
“The unfortunate thing for me is that I did a lot of things…in New Jersey that is… not
...approved by them, I can‟t get the credit for it…So that‟s…one thing that‟s really
frustrating…”
Student Achievement
Student mobility tended to compound or magnify issues, both positive and
negative, that impact student achievement. All five participants described some level of
negative impact on their own student achievement from their experience with student
mobility. The evidence for this can be seen clearly in the data supporting both theme five
and theme six under research question two in chapter four. The strongest factors
connected to student achievement were described as: 1) distraction due to need to adapt
to new environment, 2) distraction due to need to make new friends, 3) distraction due to
negative academic placement, 4) differences between teacher expectations, and 5) gaps in
136
the curriculum. The degree of impact and how long it lasted varied. One participant
showed initial improvement after about four months, while others suggested there were
still negative academic impacts from the move existing over two years later.
Student mobility tended to compound or magnify issues, both positive and
negative, that impact student achievement. In this study participants described some
negative issues that were compounded or magnified: 1) existing academic challenges, 2)
shyness or a propensity to rely on existing friendships rather than reach out, and 3)
emotional distress due to negative feelings about move. Two participants described
struggling academically before the move and found it increasingly difficult to perform
academically after the move. This was compounded by placement issues and gaps in the
curriculum. One participant described feeling shy and was stressed by having to make
friends. She felt she had friends before based on time invested and to start all over was
overwhelming. This was also compounded by placement issues. This magnified shyness
was described as critical to her student achievement because this student was distracted
from school academically by her not having any friends at school. “It started to get better
[my grades], like once you start making friends then it's not so…horrible going to school,
because [sic]…people actually know you and like want to talk to you.”
Finally, two participants described feeling distressed about the move and feeling
that if they did not adapt they might be able to return to their home. This was
compounded by placement issues and gaps in the curriculum as well.
Participants described some positive issues that were compounded: 1) outgoing
nature or propensity to make friends easily, and 2) the development of adaptation skills.
137
Four out of five participants described developing adaptations skills and honing ways to
make friends. These are described in detail below.
Graduation
The literature showed the strongest impact of mobility was on graduation rates.
“There is overwhelming evidence that mobility during high school diminishes the
prospects for graduation” (Rumberger, 2003, p. 3). However, the research focused on
several different relationships for example, Swanson and Schneider (1999) and
Rumberger (1995), used longitudinal data on eighth graders concluded that there was a
different effect on dropout rates when the mobility occurred between grades 1-8 verses
grades 8-10. Although both increased the chances of dropping out by grade 10 the
chances were higher when the mobility occurred in grades 8-10. In extension to these
studies one more looked at the same data in relation to grade 12. Rumberger and Larson
(1998) found that mobility between grades 8 through 12 increased the odds of dropping
out of school by grade 12. “…[W]ith even one school change during high school
decreasing the odds of graduating from high school by more than 50%” (p. 4). Further
studies isolated the range of mobility changes to grades 8-10 as the most critical for
staying in one location to prevent dropout. Individuals who then relocated after grade 10
actually decreased the odds of dropout which supported the theory that mobility has a
negative impact on some students and a positive impact on others (Rumberger, 2003).
All five participants at the point of this interview were still in school and they did
not describe any intention of dropping out of school. One participant reflected that they
would rather be with their original graduating class. Another described feeling fear of
138
not having enough credits to graduate with the different requirements. “Well at first I
was scared because…we had…different…requirements to graduate…And I was afraid I
wasn't going to make them from moving.”
Still one other participant described the complications that not having friends in
her graduating class was having on her motivation to be involved with school. These
elements had not resulted in the participant dropping out of school however, she
described elements that can complicate a student‟s adjustment to school and highlights
areas for further research.
Making Friends
The final goal for a successful transition to occur from one school to the next, is
for students to find a place among their peers that is acceptable (Blakeman, 1993; Titus,
2007). New friendships may be difficult to form. Children who are starting to develop
socialization skills and friendships may not be adept at forming new ones. Adolescents
may find it hard to break into established cliques or to navigate new academic or
behavior expectations.
The need to make connections to and feel accepted by the new school
environment was described as the single most important factor in transition. All five
participants described needing to feel welcomed or included in the social network at the
new school. All five participants described some impact on their student achievement as
discussed above when they were feeling left out or were distracted by trying to make
friends. One key to adaptation is found in the development of social connections, or
139
friends. All five participants described their experiences trying to make friends, what
they did to succeed, and what upon reflection they think could have helped.
All five participants attributed both academic and non-academic success to this
single element of student mobility, the making of friends. The challenges of making
friends were categorized into two major areas 1) making connections to school
environment, and 2) making connections to greater community environment. The first
can be broken down further into four areas of description: 1) personal attitude, 2)
placement, 3) activities and sports, and 4) reception from students and school community.
The second can be broken down further into two areas of description: 1) role of family,
and 2) neighborhood. All five participants connected the time and energy it took to make
friends to negative student achievement. The amount of time it took to feel connected to
a social group was inversely related to the negative impact on student achievement. The
longer a student felt disconnected or isolated from friends the worse they did
academically. “I think my grades are getting a little bit better cause I'm meeting like
more people and making more friends and stuff. It like makes me, it helps me
concentrate knowing I have friends to be with.”
One participant described getting better at making friends after experiencing
student mobility. She described mastering the process of making friends and that student
mobility actually magnified her natural ability to make friends easily.
P5: I've been to nine different schools and I have lived in multiple houses and I've
gone, I've moved like many times and I've always been able to make friends so I
wasn't nervous at all when it came to making friends….my little sister…said, „I'm
getting pretty good at this moving thing‟, because we had moved so much.
140
Making Connections to School Environment
All five participants described personal attitude as a key part of their ability to
connect to the school environment. The connection to the school environment was
described as the best way to make friends and adapt quickly. Additional supporting data
is found in themes two, four, and six under research question one in chapter four.
P1: I think that the most important thing is your attitude because…there is nothing
that can prepare you really for the new things you'll be encountering…It's more
your own personal attitude. … how you go into the situation. And I‟d say the
more positive you are about everything, the more … it makes everything a lot
easier, a lot more fun and you start making friends quicker…
As described earlier, placement plays a large role in a mobile student‟s ability to adapt to
a new school. Four out of five participants described their academic placement as
important to both their academic and non-academic adjustment. One school placed two
sisters in the same classes together to help with their transition. However, the sisters
explained that this helped in the beginning but they only spoke to one another and so
ended up isolated for longer. Academic placement is one key to making friends, all five
participants suggested that their friends came in part from their academic classes.
The placement in mixed classes was described as a factor in making friends.
There was evidence that it helped make connections with other grade levels which was
described as a positive. However, it was also described as a negative when the students
were unable to connect with their own grade levels. Data in support of this is found in
theme six and seven under research question two in chapter four.
Four out of five participants described participation in sports or activities as a key
element in their ability to meet people and make new friends. Attending school events or
141
participating in sports and activities was described as an effective strategy to adapting to
a new school environment. “I‟ve used sports as a way to kind of get in to the inner
workings….And during the move I seemed to get more friends, cause the school had
sports camps…I had friends from those.” Note that additional supporting data is located
in theme six under research question one in chapter four.
P1: So I didn't really care that much about what it was I was doing, it was just
participating in something, in some group, and I just started to meet people in…
like the soccer club, or maybe the debate team, or even like a history club….I
maybe wasn't there because it was my biggest interest, but my interest was to
meet other people and to have fun.
Reception from Students and School Community
Four out of five participants described dealing with cliques, or groups of friends
that were close and difficult to approach. All four participants that mentioned cliques as
a negative moved to New Jersey. These cliques were described as a new and challenging
part of making friends. The cliques were defined as being a group of friends that had
been “together for a long time” and from the outsider‟s point of view these friends
seemed “uninviting” or “not very friendly”. “Just like the people here, they're not so like
friendly, I guess,…they've all been friends since…middle school, I guess, and they're not
really…open about letting…new people in their little…clique of groups and everything.”
This difficult reception is described in detail in theme seven under research question one
in chapter four.
One participant described using her ability to adapt and be outgoing to, in her own
words, “break the cliques”. She agreed the cliques were difficult in New Jersey and she
shared her explanation for how she connected with them. She found similarities with
142
each group and refused to isolate any others. She identified the three main cliques in her
school as “the kids that don't have much, the kids that have a lot, and the jocks”.
One participant described this New Jersey reception from a different point of
view. She actually moved from New Jersey to Texas and described her surprise at the
warm reception she got there. Her words are used here to show the change in expectation
and the honest reflection on how she viewed mobile students in the past. This is the
foundation for the call for educators to increase both the teacher and student awareness of
the needs of mobile students.
P4: That everybody was way too nice….In comparison to New Jersey, you know,
when you meet a new student, unless, you know, they're gonna be automatically
popular because they're pretty or they have money or, you know, it's a really cool
looking guy, or something like that, you're gonna be left alone for a really long
time. You know, be like the nerd outcast and just like working on science
homework alone in the cafeteria, you know. Like that's what I thought my first
day was gonna be like, that I would sit alone and not talk to anybody and no one
was gonna talk to me, but like second period, first period, I already started talking
to people, you know. Like they were all like really nice and everyone was just
like yapping because it, it's so, I thought, like I felt like I was gonna be the only
person new and everybody was gonna know everybody else. I was very, very
surprised and wrong at that thought because everyone was coming from like four
different middle schools and there were transfers from other schools, from other
middle schools as well, coming into [this school]. There's like 3,500 students
there. So, I mean they're coming from all different experiences, all different
backgrounds as well, like, just like me. So it was really, it was really shocking to
have people be that polite to me and be like, hey how are you? Yeah, blah, blah,
blah. Like, how are you liking school? Yeah, I know it‟s boring, you know, just
getting a conversation out into the air. Like, I never thought about doing that.
Like I always try to be nice to new students but we didn't really have that many
new students to be nice to, so I don't think anybody in New Jersey had like the
experience and notion to be that polite to somebody, so we just weren't.
This participant described the support found when other students shared an experience
with student mobility. The empathy of others who understand what one is going through
can help when trying to adapt. This participant described finding someone in her class
143
that had also just moved. She explained that the area she lived in had high mobility and
high diversity. This combination led to greater empathy from the social groups and she
did not experience the clique phenomenon as it was described by the other four
participants in New Jersey.
P4: …I thought I was gonna …have to step in on other peoples…little social
groups and like put myself out there, but it really wasn't….everybody was really
laid back and… really welcoming to getting to know new people as well because
they were all just…extremely nice.
One participant had a mixed experience. He described his reception as
welcoming from teachers and students, they were a help to him and aided his
participation in activities.
P1: …the fact that the teachers at least, and some of the students, seemed to be
very aware of my situation so they were all very welcoming. They all helped me
in the sense that they were actively inviting me to whatever it is they were doing.
So it was more individually each teacher, but I guess that was [just] because as a
group or as a school they decided on it…
He also found that some students struggled at first with the fact that he was so different
from what they were used to. He also had prior mobility experiences that made him
overcome cultural barriers.
P1: Well at first I found it very hard to, to just sort of get the, get the feel for what,
what the people were like. It's difficult to explain, but people really are different
in just the way they, in the way they talk.… like the things they think about, the
things they do, the things, like what friends do to get together, the way they relate
to each other. So at the beginning it was, it was hard because coming from a,
from such a different culture and type of friendship… it took me a while to sort of
adapt and to see how these people, how these guys here, were friends with each
other. But after a while I actually just felt that by getting involved in everything,
by…being around and, at school doing things, doing as many activities as I could,
I just started to meet people and in the end I discovered that I could still be friends
even if I was different from them.
144
Additional comments are available in theme seven under research question one in chapter
four. Yet, this participant described feeling very welcomed and a part of the community
after time passed. He attributes his comfort to the school community reaching out to him
and making it a part of the culture of the school to be inclusive. He described this as a
reflection of the principles of the school. “…being in a community that is based on
principles and values it's more, it was more welcoming.” This suggests that schools can
develop policies and programs to support mobile students and increase their ability to
make friends and adapt quickly even if they are not highly mobile communities or
naturally diverse.
Making Connections to Greater Community
The attitude and support of the family members, community and school
environment all impact the ability of the mobile child to adjust to their new surroundings
and ultimately student achievement (Tucker, Marx & Long, 1998). Where ever possible,
appropriate preparations and interventions should be included in the transitioning process
(Blakeman, 1993; Walls, 2003; Rumberger, 2003; Engec, 2006; Hannusheck, Kain &
Rivin, 2001). All five participants described their family members as critical to their
ability to adapt and make friends. For some it was a parent reaching out and finding
connections locally, for others it was a parent or sibling being there with a positive and
supportive attitude. Additional examples are located in theme four under research
question one in chapter four.
P4: My mom actually sent out e-mails through our neighborhood e-mails in Texas
and said like, „We're moving down here. Anybody between the ages of like 13,
14, 15, wanna…meet my daughter…‟ Stuff like that, so that I could meet some
people and actually know some faces while I was at school. So I did meet some
145
girls from my neighborhood and became pretty good friends with them. They
were someone to know at school so I wouldn‟t be alone.
When trying to make friends, the participants described a collection of decisions
they needed to make concerning their attitude. What would they do to try and fit in?
Would they have to change themselves to be accepted by their peers? One participant
voiced his answer this way:
P1: Well, the process of adapting to a new place for me was, I tried to keep it
balanced. Balanced in the sense that…I realized I didn't need to change to be a
part of this new community…. [I]t's just more getting used to in the sense of
adapting,… making those new things a part of your life rather than actually
changing too much yourself.
Other participants voiced their answers as advice to other students. They suggested not
“trying too hard” to fit in with peers. They warned about “doing stupid things” or “lying
to get attention”. These things were counter-productive when trying to make quality
friends.
After experiencing several moves, some participants described feeling they were
tired of trying to make friends. They described how they held back from exerting the
effort and energy it took to make friends. They connected this to moving in high school
because they felt they were going to graduate soon and have to recreate social
connections yet again. Instead, they only tried to make connections for “basic survival” at
school. That is, socialize peripherally with many groups and not try to make any close
friends.
Role of Attitude for Adaptation
All five participants connected personal and family attitude to their ability to
adapt and make friends. The need for a positive attitude was described as critical for
146
academic and non-academic success. Four out of five participants also acknowledged
that their attitude was possibly affecting their parents who were also struggling with
mobility and adjusting to a new situation. Additional data support is found in themes
two, four, and six under research question one in chapter four.
P4: I was tired of always being, you know, a brat about it and being like, „no I
hate this. Why are you ruining my life?‟…I wanted to show them that I could
be…a mature person and I could grow and to show them, hey you know, I'm not
gonna like this but maybe it‟ll be a new experience and, you know, just to let
them know that I'm not gonna give up and…be…one of those emotional kids that
just …shut themselves up in their room and like refuse to leave and make it
harder and more stressful on them, because I know…we are having to clean out
this house that they've lived in even longer than me….my dad built that house….I
guess it was just like a growth for me in my life when I…became mature.
The participants described focusing on the positives to help adapt to the new
environment. One participant described feeling excited that the driving age was lower
where she was moving. “That I'm gonna drive really soon. I'm so excited for that. Like,
I'm getting my license in two weeks. Like that wouldn't happen in New Jersey.”
One participant described the role of attitude in connection to making friends.
This was in the same school as her sister yet, they had very different experiences with
making friends. She attributes the difference to her own attitude. “Well now I realize
that she has way more friends than me…because…she doesn't really care who she talks
to…I wouldn‟t be the first one to go up …and…talk to you. I need people to…come to
me first.”
Research suggested that the impact of family attitude and support for the move
had a significant impact on the ultimate adjustment and future student achievement scores
of the children involved (Engec, 2006; Liang & Chen, 2007). All five participants
147
identified their family support and closeness as a critical factor in their ability to succeed
and adapt. Blakeman (1993) suggested that adolescents grieved particularly hard for lost
peer connections, and often suffered a period of stress and disorganization directly after
relocation. “Moving is a stressful event which can cause problems, depending on how it
is handled” (p.9). This was true even if the long term effects of the move were ultimately
positive; students needed guidance to ease the immediate impact. All five participants
described needing a period of time to adapt to the new situation. In addition, they needed
support from their family in order to succeed academically and non-academically.
Changing of Individual
Student mobility is magnifier. That is, it compounds or magnifies existing
strengths or challenges in a student‟s life. The idea that student mobility affected
different individuals in different ways led to the logical conclusion that student mobility
had a compounding or magnifying effect on both positive and negative issues. For
example, an individual who had natural abilities to make friends easily would develop
and practice the skill honing it to a powerful level when highly mobile. Indeed some
grew in their skill development through student mobility and after an initial adaptation
period, thrived. For example, in some cases children took the opportunity of relocation to
discover within themselves skills that could thrive in their new environment. It should be
noted that, in this study the participants did not “reinvent themselves” rather, they
experienced a magnification of their existing strengths and challenges. Many individuals
did develop coping skills and adaptation strategies during relocation that might never
148
have been recognized without mobility, and thus strengthened their potential ability to
transition well throughout the rest of their education or future mobility experiences.
When a student experiences difficulties, changing schools can compound the
issues faced by the individual and exacerbate problems where they already existed
(Hartman, 2006). This study supported this statement. One participant described how
she had hopes of starting over and just found herself facing the same challenges in an
increasingly difficult situation. She described the disappointment in realizing that
moving was not going to make her inhibitions, shyness, or problems, simply go away.
There was no dramatic development in who she was or opportunity to “reinvent” herself.
“No. I'm still myself.” What did happen was a magnification of her shyness.
Q: “Did you end up more shy?”
P2: “I think I did, because like I still like even still I don't know half like the people in my
grade.”
Two participants described their ability to be outgoing and reach out to the new
community to make friends. This was a complicated point because the participants were
outgoing and still had to struggle with the initial stress of starting over again. The
experience of student mobility magnified their existing characteristic of being outgoing.
“I think I am more…confident about myself, like I‟m a little bit more sure of myself now
than I was back then. So I think I‟m a little more outgoing now.”
One student described how she realized she was brave. She had always had
courage, but after the move she felt braver, she had actually needed and thus expressed
149
her courage in the face of challenges. In response to being asked how she knew she
became brave she said:
P3: I guess because I was able to go through all the things that I've gone through
and like I'm afraid of it, but I do it. And like I take chances by doing things like…
like last year with all my friends leaving I could have had nothing this year, but I
was still able to make friends…I think that… stuff was like mostly the same. I
don't know if I was as like brave as I am now, but I still like had a lot of courage.
One student described how the new academic opportunities were embraced. She
originally struggled with English classes and now she described herself as an aspiring
poet. This is a transformation from when she only described herself as an athlete.
Another student described her own new ability to identify with mobile students
and a change in the way she would personally receive mobile students in her school. The
entire conversation is included here because it captures several points made in this
section.
Q: “Do you think moving up to New Jersey has helped you in your own development?”
P3: “No, I don't think so. But I think it's made me more aware of like when new students
come to school.”
Q: “What do you think should happen when new students come to school?”
P3: “I think like people should welcome them and introduce themselves and like not just
talk to them for a few days, and like try and help them fit in with other people, like fit in
with people and groups of friends.”
Q: “Do you think that's something that could be taught? Do you think that's something
that we should have as a policy or a program? If you could do it all again, what would
you change about schools this way?
150
P2: Like I think students should just know that when you see a new student you
should be nice to them and treat them as if they were one of your friends. Like I
feel like that should be something that is an instinct to people. Oh, a new student,
I'm just gonna go introduce myself and like talk to them for a little bit. Like when
you see a new student I go and talk to them and ask them if they wanna like hang
out on weekends cause I know what they're going through.
The participants struggled with separating natural changes that tend to occur
during high school with the changes that were a direct result of the move. “…Because
I‟m a teenager so I‟ve changed, not just like with the move, but I changed a lot.” The
changes that occur when a student is in high school include so many social adjustments
and elements of maturation that it continues to be difficult to identify what elements are a
direct result from mobility and what are just a product of growing up. “Some of my
friends…say that I am different. But I think it's just because …, when I lived there I was
only a freshman…but now…I'm a senior so I feel like everything is so different. Like I
think I've just matured.” As high school students experience mobility, educators and
families must consider the chances that even the most successful and well adjusted
students may have some academic gaps or natural non-academic insecurities that will get
magnified and thus exposed during mobility. These are reflections of normal high school
experiences magnified.
Many of the participants suggested that things were magnified because of the
mobility but they were things they were dealing with all along. One participant found
that mobility released her from a bully situation and she was able to mature and develop a
positive self image faster than she might have back where she used to live. “So I became
a better person and I grew because I finally fought back all that low self-esteem and
just…broke out of my shell.”
151
One participant described his reflection on the move after time and showed the
maturity of both his adaptation to the powerlessness of the event and the positive
developments that are unique to having experienced student mobility. “I look at all the
good things that have come from my being here…and just realize that they would not
have been possible had my life gone another way,…for me that's a positive way to book
on an event that is passed and you can't do anything about now.” A follow up with
students after time passes is a way to help mobile students find these reflections and build
an appreciation for their new situation. “[I feel like] I needed it. Like God presents me
with these opportunities for a reason and I take it and now I just got to see what
happens.” Additional descriptions of similar experiences of maturing over time and
reconciling with the moves in these reflections are found in chapter four, theme two
under research question one.
Advice to other mobile students
The interviews allowed the participants the opportunity to give advice based on
their own experiences to imaginary students facing student mobility during high school.
Their advice focused on keeping a positive and open attitude about the experience,
keeping close connections to family, and never giving up. Here are their responses.
The participants described some possible ways to help mobile students focus their
attitude so that they can see the positives and not just the negatives that they are
experiencing in the beginning. “Just try not to think too much about leaving everything
behind and just try as hard as you can to start over.”
152
The need for strong metacognition skills was stressed. “think about what
opportunities you‟re gonna have….Because you‟re focusing on the good things about it
instead of the bad…the bad usually makes you…all depressed about the situation instead
of being excited about these new things that are gonna happen.” Mobile students must
think about their own thinking and control the negatives and build the positives
consciously. It may be too much to ask, that they just “wait and see” that everything will
work out and they will make new friends. “I guess never like give up on what you want
to do, and always like keep trying to make friends because you'll eventually make them.”
All five participants stressed the need to build a positive attitude and develop
perseverance, never giving up even though things are difficult.
One participant gave some advice about focusing on the academics before you
leave. Consider working extra hard to get placed in the academic classes with your grade
level. “…it‟s easy to sort of forget about the work and sort of get a bit lazy and that
certainly doesn‟t help when you're going to a different place.”
When approaching mobility in high school all five participants suggested the
connection to keeping a positive or restoring a positive connection with primary family
members. “…to be optimistic and keep those strongest ties, being family and those
friends that will last.” The participants described the primary family relationships as the
key to maintaining a positive attitude. If home is a positive place to be than adapting to
the changes at school will be easier.
P4: I would tell them that even though they're not wanting to right now, even
though they're thinking that they hate their parents and that nothing's gonna get
better,…[they should think] I'll learn new things and … meet new people and I'll
just grow as a person and be optimistic about it and don't fight with your parents
153
because that will just make it even harder for you because then you won‟t even
have your family to fall back on. You'll just, you'll just be alone. So…keep your
friend ties, but be optimistic about where you‟re going.
One way parents can help here is to reassure the mobile student that there will be
no additional moves.
P5: Yeah, cause I remember one of the biggest things when I moved out here was
my dad said, “don't worry, we're not moving „til you go to college”. So that kind
of reassured me, you know, I'm not gonna move any more. It kind of was like a
good feeling to think, you know what? This is my last school. I can plant seeds
here and I'm not gonna have to uproot them again.
Additional support for this is found in themes two, four, and six under research question
one in chapter four.
Three of the participants stressed the need for mobile high school students to stay
true to themselves while trying to adapt to a new social situation. Participants warned
against “trying too hard” to fit in or actually doing things just to fit in. Fabricating
stories, negative or dangerous behaviors, and pretending to be “something you know you
are not just to fit in” was described as “always backfiring” or ending up with even fewer
friends in the end. “Take the right friends and don't like do stupid things to try and be
friends with other people.” Even the participant that described a lack of diversity found
that he was able to fit in over time without changing himself. One strategy is to talk to as
many people as possible. “Like don't be afraid to talk to all the people there.” That way
you find people that already share your interests or you make new connections that
genuinely motivate you to adapt. “Be yourself...try to adapt…just stick it out. There's a
reason you're [here]…think with an open mind. Think as if you've always lived
here…like go into it with an open mind, open heart, open eyes.” Although this is simple
154
advice, to a shy or insecure teenager this is an intimidating process and educators and
family should find ways to model or support the process.
Mobility at different grade levels
Four out of the five participants experienced moves at different grade levels.
They described some of the differences as they experienced them.
P1: The first move was very important for me to be able to then succeed in the
second move simply because you, you're attitude changes about the new things
you will encounter. The first move is much harder because, simply because it's
the first time and the things you're not sure about or that are new and unknown to
you simply shock you that much more because it's the first time. But the second
time you move you sort of come to terms with the new things that you will be
facing and realize that the best thing you can do is just to take it in stride to be
positive and to embrace the new challenges.
The participants described the single largest difference as the change in social network.
Elementary students tend to be more dependent on their families than they are on their
friends. In middle school and high school that begins to shift so some students rely on
their peers more than their families. The participants also described a different level of
awareness as to what was actually happening to them. For example, in elementary school
they were not as aware of the changes in social network. The participants explained that
as the grade level got higher the social groups were more difficult to join for two reasons.
1) The friends had been together longer and had tighter bonds that were difficult to build
new relationships with.
P3: I think moving …from 7th to 8th grade, it like effected [me] but not a lot
because I didn't really know I was moving while I was in school. So the only
people that knew were like my close friends and I was young so I
was…okay…whatever I have to do I guess I'll do it. … I didn't have that
many…friends like…when you're in…middle school, elementary school…you're
only with…a certain…few friends. Not everyone has…their cliques and groups
and stuff.
155
2) The schools were departmentalized so having access to the social groups was more
difficult and socializing became even more of a distraction from academic work because
the classroom was the only time there was a forced social connection. Finally, changes in
teacher expectations, and still having to adapt to the newness of the experience was also
mentioned. Here are their descriptions of the significant differences. Additional data is
noted in chapter four, theme eight under research question one.
One interesting point was expressed by one of the participants that had moved
over nine times. The idea of lineage, having a lasting link to the school in some way can
be lost and mourned by students that move during high school. There are certain awards,
accolades, and privileges that schools attach to the number of years certain tasks or
achievements are completed. Schools are unknowingly isolating mobile students from
achieving these connections and opening the door for students to mourn additional losses
over the long term.
P5: …if you look at all the banners the kids that succeeded in freshman year
stayed here all 4 years and they succeeded all 4 years. And, like, I was supposed
to stay at the school. I was supposed to start, they said I was guaranteed a spot on
varsity if I stayed there through freshman year at the old school and like, I don't
know it's just kind of leaving your mark on the school. Like, I don't know, if you
move I guess you feel like you didn't leave your mark and that you could've done
more if you stayed there so it's kind of like the what if factor, kind of it sits in the
back of your brain like forever, cause you're thinking, you know, what if I stayed?
What if I did this? What if I did that?
Recommendations for Education
When families, any families, changed places of residence, the children faced
problems of disruptions in school curricula, teachers, and social support systems. The
evidence suggested that in order to enforce the aims of NCLB, states and districts should
156
recognize student mobility, potentially making this a timely issue. When educators
understand how student mobility impacts individuals both academically (student
achievement) and non academically there may be a basis for better meeting the needs of
all individuals who experience student mobility.
Student achievement became compromised when very real or perceived social
and emotional issues confronted a child during mobility events (Bartolomeo, 2006;
Blakeman, 1993; Brodkin, 2006). Although not supported by formal research,
experience suggests that schools and parents could minimize the negative and maximize
the positive impacts of student mobility with some planning and flexibility. In addition,
all five participants gave specific advice to schools that they believed might have helped
them during their own experiences with student mobility. There are ten
recommendations with several possible areas of consideration explored.
1) Some complicating factors included the time and resources needed to process
and support individuals during transition (Titus, 2007). A review of the literature showed
multiple facets of the problem: (a) tranfer of records (e.g. satisfied graduation
requirements, transcripts, medical paperwork including innoculations), (b) support
information for special needs (e.g. IEP records, evaulation results), (c) social or counselor
support needs for the individual (Bartolomeo, 2006; Beaman & Schaefer, 2002; Black,
2006; Brodkin, 2006; Cook, 2006; Lennon & Markatos, 2002; Picou & Marshall, 2007;
Titus, 2007). The results of these studies showed repeatedly that individuals frustrated by
being told they do not have enough credits to graduate with their age group dropout.
Districts should consider cooperation with each other to support transferring students.
157
Specifically the timely transfer of student records, descriptions of curriculum and courses
for completion of graduation requirements, and academic placement suggestions.
Consider participation in a national database for student records and curriculum
descriptions. Schagen (2007) suggested that military mobility reflected all of the same
characteristics of civilian mobility and the tools used by one should easily fit the needs of
the other. The results suggested there was room to research a national database for the
easy transfer of records (Borden, 2004). This idea was on the table for both college level
data, as seen in the report from the National Center for Higher Education Management
Systems (Ewell, Schild & Paulson, 2003), and high school children in the United States.
Similarly, there was a national database of educational information for the highly mobile
population of individuals suffering from the impact of Katrina.
2) Districts should consider flexibility in academic placement to maximize
connection with appropriate grade level. Consider academic programs to address gaps
including a tutor, summer classes, or alternative routes so that mobile students can
address academic program of study gaps while staying with their appropriate grade level
in terms of placement. Studies showed that individuals who struggle with improper
placement or are arrested in their progress by the removal of support services cannot
perform academically (Norford & Medway, 2002; Titus, 2007; Walls, 2003). Fowler-
Finn (2001) suggested low student achievement compounded by poor attendance and
gaps in learning may be decreased still further when students seek to dropout of school as
a result of social or emotional concerns. In addition, the stress and anxiety derived from
158
inappropriate placement or the removal of prior levels of support (i.e. student with special
needs), has the potential to exacerbate social and emotional concerns.
3) Faculty can prepare in advance for incoming mobile students and facilitate the
transition of incoming mobile students as soon as they arrive. Consider entrance
interviews to determine what actual material they have been exposed to and what areas
should not be graded. Consider that the mobile student is distracted and focused on
meeting their immediate social needs in the first three weeks of adaptation. Consider
limiting testing or quizzing during this critical period of time.
4) Blakeman (1993) reported that all schools needed to develop procedure for
integrating mobile individuals. The role of the school community in aiding a mobile
individual through the challenges of relocation was critical for academic (student
achievement) success (Titus, 2007). Schools should establish ongoing activities and
procedures to address the needs of new students. Consider having a follow up interview
with mobile students to evaluate their adaptation and offer interventions if needed.
Follow up with mobile student after three weeks, six months, and one year. Consider a
welcoming group that meets routinely and discussed the experiences of mobile students
in your district.
P2: “If there was a group with all the new kids that came in from the like the past years
and they helped out because they knew, like they know how it is and what they're going
through.”
159
P2: I would definitely get like a welcoming group or something. Like even have
kids from every grade come and just like get to know the new person and show
them around and hang out with them and get them like, make them feel like their
own home.
Consider having “buddies” for longer than one day.
Q: “Do you think the school could have done anything to help you or support you with
that situation… what recommendation would you give to the school to help you with
that?”
P2: Well I don't really know because they gave like, one of our first few days at
school they gave us like two girls to walk with us to class so we like knew how to
get around, but like after those two days we didn't, those girls like didn't talk to us
at all.
5) Assess the past enrollment history of incoming students, including the number
of previous school changes, and closely monitor the educational progress of students with
three or more previous school changes. Children who moved three or more times were at
increased risk for emotional/behavioral and school problems (Blakeman, 1993; Simpson
& Fowler, 1994). Thus, it was recommended that pediatricians, other health
professionals, and educators be alert to the potential educational and psychological
problems among children from highly mobile families (1994). Highly mobile students are
at risk of no longer wanting to invest the critical energy it requires to make new friends.
Without these connections students are at risk of having a negative impact on their
student achievement or dropping out of school entirely (Rumberger, 2004).
6) Faculty and Parents may also be able to mitigate the potentially harmful
negatives that can be magnified by student mobility. Consider resolving any academic or
160
non-academic problems at school before leaving. Consider actually changing schools
between semesters or years.
P1: Well, I had the chance of making the move during the summer so I didn't have
to cut through, or come in halfway through a year, through a school year. So
during the summer I was able to sort of prepare a little bit more in just mentally,
by living here in New Jersey.
On the first day of school, parents should personally sign students into their new
school and meet with a school counselor. They should also make sure that their child's
school records are forwarded in a timely manner from their previous school. Finally,
parents should consider a follow-up appointment with a school counselor and teachers
two or three weeks after the move to see how their child is adjusting to the new school.
7) Develop programs or policies to increase awareness of teachers and students
concerning mobile students. One participant described how students did not seem to
understand that new students needed to be approached and included.
P2: “Just by asking to like hang out or go to like the basketball game with them.”
P2: There was one teacher that helped us along. Like even in like, she was my
English teacher and she like, even with like homework she would make sure, she
would like focus on us and be like, “… do you understand this? Do you get it”?
And like she didn't want us falling behind because she knew that we were already
behind. But she would help us get through everything.
8) Encourage involvement in and make it easy for mobile students to join clubs
and sports. Faculty might consider reaching out to the mobile students and encourage
participation in activities and school events.
P1: …I think most of the teachers were very aware of my situation, so it was good
to come across people that were sensitive to what you were doing and to what
your situation was. That was a big help. And also in general just like
encouraging me and giving me the opportunity to join different activities. The
161
school overall just sort of like looked out for me to become a part of the
community as fast as I could.
9) Simpson and Fowler (1994) suggested that children going through key
developmental stages may be particularly vulnerable to the stress of moving, or that
moving could compound problems which already existed either in the child or in the
family. Alternatively, an increased number of moves may be a marker for highly chaotic,
stressed families, who are also characterized by the emotional and school problems noted.
Similarly, Blakeman (1993) suggested that adolescents grieved particularly hard for lost
peer connections, and often suffered a period of stress and disorganization directly after
relocation. “Moving is a stressful event which can cause problems, depending on how it
is handled” (p. 9). This was true even if the long term effects of the move were
ultimately positive; students needed guidance to ease the immediate impact. Consider an
adult mentor for mobile students, someone that can discuss differences in policies,
culture, language, and gaps in the curriculum that might be confusing mobile students.
Consider having a meeting with a key teacher, parents, and a counselor to aid in mobile
student adaptation.
P2: I would just thing like a greeting, friendly environment for when they first
come into a school…. Yeah, like even the students and the teachers. Like maybe
if all the teachers sat down with you and your parents and met them…. Just so the
teachers know about you and how you are with, like I guess like school and
everything. Like for me I was more, I had, I like needed more attention so like,
for my teachers to make sure that I'm like doing well. And I needed more
support.
One study suggested that the disruption was minimal when the parents were supportive
and highly involved in the transitioning process (Hanushek, Kain & Rivkin, 2001).
162
10) Consider a closure activity at sending school. One report focusing on
adolescents suggested that, because student mobility was a crisis event and the social
aspect of it was critical, an exit policy from the former school to aid both the mobile
individual and the community left behind to give closure would aid in the transition
(1993).
A report from the U.S. General Accounting Office in 1994 suggested that during a
four year period, the proportion of students who remained in school for the full year fell
below 50% in many schools. These older statistics were the most current available at this
time and represent a gap in the literature. Yet, in these cases, when the classroom door
resembled a revolving door, the literature suggested it became increasingly difficult for
the school organization to measure or observe the results of program reforms such as
smaller classes, better trained teachers, and curricular alignment (Rhodes, 2007). The
literature explored the conflict with the current practice of using students‟ test score data
to evaluate the effectiveness of a school‟s program if the mobility of individuals impacted
these scores beyond the control of the school organization or the actual quality of their
program (Offenberg, 2004).
As presented above, student achievement was affected by many background
factors and circumstances; however, it was also affected by the characteristics of the
school attended (Rumberger & Larson, 1998; Rumberger & Thomas, 2000). Two studies
suggested that student mobility was, in part, directly related to what goes on in schools.
The literature also showed ample evidence that schools that had a high population of
mobile students showed a decrease in student achievement overall (Black, 2006;
163
Rumberger & Thomas, 2000; Slater, 2005; The New York Board of Education, 1992).
One reason educators and policy makers should be more concerned about student
mobility is “…that research suggests that student mobility is generally detrimental both to
individuals and to the schools they attend” (Rumberger & Larson, 1998, p. 3). By
considering some of these recommendations, schools can meet the needs of mobile
students and better the learning experience for all students.
Recommendations for Further Study
This study raises several issues and questions for further study.
First, a review of the literature suggested that the positive causes of mobility,
namely upward economic movement, upward social movement, better housing, and
better schooling environments were the least studied of the causes. There was a need to
explore these reasons for student mobility because they represented experiences without
the added complications of the negative causes. All five participants in this study did not
have any intention of dropping out of school. This supports the idea that learning more
about how middle and upper socioeconomic status high school students experience
student mobility could be important in learning about ways to support all students
experiencing student mobility. Therefore a similar study to this should be conducted
including a larger population of high school students.
Second, participants observed that reflections and verbalization about their
experiences allowed them to understand those experiences more meaningfully. In effect,
the interview process appears to have provided an opportunity for some participants to
164
reflect and articulate their own feelings and attitude about student mobility for the first
time. Further investigation might address the following questions: Are mobile students
given enough opportunities to reflect and discuss their mobility experiences with trusted
adults or friends? Does a relationship exist between a student‟s access to a trusted adult
and the time it takes for them to adapt to their new academic situation? Does a
relationship exist between a student‟s understanding of the reason for their mobility and
their relationship with their family before during and after mobility?
Third, further investigation is needed into the apparent gap between school
curriculums, and graduation requirements. To meet the needs of mobile students, schools
will need to have access to more information about academic courses. This kind of
curriculum data information can assist schools in accepting credits as satisfied and
prevent students from experiencing the injustice and frustration of repeating courses that
they have already taken. Would a password protected database of curriculum mapping
data help in this area? Would a format similar to the Department of Defense‟s
standardized graduation requirements help in these cases? Would it be possible to
include curriculum data in student records so teachers know what exact curriculum the
report card data is aligned to?
Fourth, participants described academic placement as a contributing factor to both
academic and non-academic performance. Several questions can be generated from this
observation: To what extent does having friends impact student achievement? To what
extent should schools take non-academic factors into consideration when grouping
165
students academically? What are the short term and long term social impacts of mixed
grade level academic placements?
Fifth, similar to the curriculum gap concerns there was a time gap experienced
when student records were transferred. One student was placed in regular level classes
and had to be reassigned to classes after moving. She explained that she had been in
special education classes and then was taken out of all of those when she first moved.
There are many possible reasons but the receiving school would have benefited from
having access to all of these records at the time of initial academic placement. The
mother had to intervene and help with her child‟s academic placement after the social
adaptation had already begun and the participant was expending energy to make friends
and connections. In light of the importance of this adaptation period, several questions
arise: Is there a way to speed up record transfers for mobile students? Would a password
protected database of student records data help in this area?
Sixth, the role of family cannot be understated in the descriptions of all five
participants. Perhaps further study into what behaviors family members can do to
support one another, to dissipate the initial emotions about the move and embrace the
positive and supportive emotions as quickly as possible. What kinds of policies can
school, neighborhoods, and towns have to support mobile families with these kinds of
transitions and adaptations?
Seventh, Simpson and Fowler (1994) established that any negative correlation
between student mobility and student achievement was only in relation to high mobility
(moving three or more times). Additional individuals added the connection to complex
166
family and personal background factors (Fields, 1995; Schuler, 1990; Wood, et al., 1993).
There was a level of interdependence between student mobility and these social and
emotional concerns that should be recognized by both parents and teachers. In light of
the conflicting results in the literature, there is still a need for further research that can
control for additional factors that complicate the discussion of student mobility.
Implications for Social Change
The implications for positive social change include a better understanding of
student mobility, its impact on student achievement, and the potential to minimize its
negative influences and maximize its potential positives. Although a substantial body of
research suggests that students may be affected psychologically, socially, and
academically from changing schools, the impact of mobility depends on such factors as
the number of school changes, when they occur, the reason for the changes, and the
student's personal and family situation (Rumberger, 2002). This was supported by the
results of this study.
The fact was, student mobility affected each participant differently even in the
cases where twin sisters moved at the same time to the same school with the same family
support. The sisters had different experiences and different adaptation to friends and
academics. If one began outgoing then she described honing her ability to make friends
and adapt socially even though her personal attitude was negative about the move. The
other began shy and even though she did not want to be shy any longer, described being
even shyer after the move and still not having the types of friends or connections she
167
longed for. These descriptions show that student mobility, when isolated from economic,
location, and family factors, was a magnifier. In other words, it was a magnifier of what
was going on with the participants before the transition. If there were academic
difficulties before student mobility they were described as even harder after the move. If
there were difficulties making friends before student mobility then they were described as
even harder to make after the move. Likewise, if the participant described themselves as
proficient at making friends and as outgoing, they were described as better at making
friends and more outgoing after the move.
It is possible for some mobile families to not suffer the consequences of student
mobility to the same degree because of preparation, adaption to the lifestyle, and parental
commitment to education (Liang & Chen, 2007). To minimize the negative influences
and maximize the positive influences of student mobility parents and schools must
embrace the understanding of student mobility as a magnifier of what is already going on
in a student‟s social, emotional and academic life at the time of the move. Helping a
student and the family members identify the trigger areas of their own personal situations
may help minimize the negatives and in some cases identify areas of a student‟s life that
might be enhanced or developed further because of the opportunity of moving.
When trying to do this, we should begin with the following questions: To what
extent might a high school student be experiencing insecurities that would be magnified
by mobility at this time? To what extent might a high school student be experiencing
academic pressures or difficulties that would be magnified by mobility at this time? To
what extent might a high school student be dependent on their non mobile social network
168
above their family network and how negative will that be when magnified by mobility at
this time? These questions cannot be addressed without further research. However,
based upon the descriptions provided in this study all people touched by student mobility
should pause and consider that the strengths and challenges of each individual will be like
when magnified during the transition. No participant described getting to reinvent
themselves or change dramatically from who they were before the move. Even those
who actively tried to do this reported that they were still who they always were, only
“more so” after the move. To meet the needs of mobile students, families, communities,
and schools must understand this magnifying property of mobility and plan for it
accordingly.
At the time the first complete draft of this dissertation was submitted I met with a
colleague in education and shared the recommendations for education. She found several
aspects of this dissertation immediately supportive as she was working with several
schools that were struggling with high levels of student mobility.
1) The fact that the study was focused on middle class students and so described
what a majority of her students might actually be dealing with as they experience student
mobility.
2) It provided not only an information rich summary of the experiences of
students with quotes to share with involved faculty, but also detailed recommendations
for how schools might address some of the concerns in surprisingly inexpensive and
reasonable ways.
169
3) It offered a starting point for discussing student mobility with faculty and
administrators, demonstrating that many educators may unconsciously already be
working to support mobile students and just need to make it a concrete part of the school
identify for teachers and students. Thus, capitalizing on current practices and focusing
their efforts as a group to increase efficacy.
4) The fact that it challenged current thinking about student mobility as simply
overwhelming and impossible to respond to. She identified several assumptions she
originally had about student mobility and felt that the recommendations were logical,
reflected common sense, and seemed where possible like inexpensive and very “doable”
to help mobile students. She wondered why many of them were not being done already.
She suggested that schools are just so busy and overwhelmed they did not bother to
reflect on what could be done to help in this area of need.
Researcher’s Experience of the Study
This study grew out of a combination of my prior experiences of mobility
specifically during high school, and my profession as an education consultant working
with curriculum, instruction and assessment practices. I originally thought to test a
possible strategy to help the transfer of records and the depth and breadth of student
records particularly in the areas of curriculum and assessments through curriculum
mapping. When I researched that idea I found that there was no real evidence that
student mobility impacted student achievement, or that the gaps and redundancies in the
curriculum were a significant issue. I then began learning about the phenomenon of
student mobility and how little we actually understood about the experience.
170
Moving away from my professional topics of curriculum, instruction, and
assessment has made this dissertation process a wonderful experience beyond learning
about the research process. By abandoning the ideas I had of solving the issue, I was
open to learning everything I could about the phenomenon. It became easier to bracket
my prior notions about mobility and simply describe the experience from the point of
view established here. I am astounded by the multitude of useful suggestions that have
emerged. They are far from where I might have originally taken this work had I stayed
on the original course. Flexibility and an open mind have been the keys to success in this
case.
REFERENCES
Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Dauber, S. L. (1996). Children in motion: School
transfers and elementary school performance. The Journal of Educational
Research , 90, 3-12.
Bartolomeo, C. (2006, March). When mom's a Marine. NEA Today , 24 (6), p. 1.
Beaman, R. H., & Schaefer, R. R. (2002). Benchmarking public education in Worcester.
Center for Community Performance Measurement, Worcester Reginal Research
Bureau. New York, NY: Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.
Bernard Van Leer Foundation, The Hague (Netherlands). (1994, October). Mobility and
young children. Bernard van Leer Foundation Newsletter , 76, p. 25.
Black, S. (2006). Stabilizing schools with kids on the move. Education Digest , 72 (3),
46-51.
Blakeman, L. W. (1993, June). Adolescents on the move: Providing for relocated
students. Guides - non-classroom use (055) , 19.
Borden, V. M. (2004). Accommodating student swirl: When traditional students are no
longer the tradition. Change , 36 (2), 8.
Brodkin, A. M. (2006, May). Coping with change. Scholastic Parent & Child , 13 (6), pp.
24-25.
Coleman, J. (1988). "Social capital" and schools. Education Digest , 53 (8), 6-9.
Cook, G. (2006, May). Schooling the forgotton kids of hurricane Katrina. Edcuation
Digest , 71 (9), pp. 7-13.
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.
172
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dobson, J., & Henthorne, K. (1999, October 29). Leavers who don't fare well. Times
Educational Supplement (4348), p. 19.
Engec, N. (2006). Relationship Between mobility and student performance and behavior.
The Journal of Educational Research , 99 (3), 167-178.
Ewell, P. T., Schild, P. R., & Paulson, K. (2003). Following the mobile student: Can we
develop the capacity for a comprehensive database to assess student progression?
National Center for Higher Education Management Systems. Lumina Foundation
for Education.
Fields, B. A. (1995, Winter). Family mobility. Youth Studies Australia , 14 (2), p. 5.
Fowler-Finn, T. (2001). Student stability vs. mobility. School Administrator , 58 (7), 36-
40.
Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods , 3 (1), 26.
Hammersley, M. (2000). Taking sides in social research. London: Routledge.
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2001). Disrupting versus tiebout
improvement: The costs and benefits of switching schools. Andrew W. Mellon
Foundation. New York: Annual Meeting of the Society of Labor Economists.
Hartman, C. (2006). Students on the move. Educational Leadership , 63 (5), 20-24.
Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing Qualitative Research in Edcation Settings. Albany: State
University Press of New York.
Heiderson, M., & Stiles, M. (1994). Instructional needs of currently migratory students in
173
the central migrant stream. Office of the Under Secretary. United States
Department of Education.
Holland, J. V., Kaplan, D. M., & Davis, S. D. (1974). Interschool transfers: A mental
health challenge. Journal of School Health , 44, 74-79.
Humke, C., & Schaffer, C. (1995). Relocation: A review of the effect of residential
mobility on children and adolescents. Psychology , 32 (1), 16-24.
Kerbow, D. (1996). Patterns of urban student mobility and local school reform. Journal
of education of Students Placed at Risk , 1, 147-169.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lee, V. E., & Burkam, D. T. (1992). Transferring high schools: An alternative to
dropping out? American Journal of Education , 100, 420-453.
Lennon, J., & Markatos, B. (2002). The same high standards for migrant students:
Holding Title I schools accountable Volume II: Measurement of migrant student
educational achievement. Research Triangle Institute, Office of the Under
Secretary. Raliegh : U.S. Department of Education.
Liang, Z., & Chen, Y. P. (2007). The educational consequences of migration for children
in China. Social Science Research , 36 (1), 28-47.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Long, L. (1992). International perspectives on the residential mobility of America's
children. journal of Marriage & Family , 54 (4), 861-869.
Morken, E. M., Divitini, M., & Haugalokken, O. K. (2007). Enriching spaces in practice-
174
based education to support collaboration while mobile: the case of teacher
education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 23 (4), 300-311.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2003). IES National Center for Education
Statistics. (U. S. Education, Producer, & Institute of Education Sciences)
Retrieved January 15, 2008, from Institute of Education Sciences:
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/index
New York State Education Department. (1992). Student and teacher mobility: Impact on
school performance in New York City public schools. The University of the State
of New York, Office for Planning, Research, and Support Services. Albany: The
State Education Department.
Norford, B. C., & Medway, F. J. (2002). Adolescents mobility histories and present
social adjustment. Psychology in the Schools , 39 (1), 51-62.
Offenberg, R. M. (2004). Inferring adequate yearly progress of schools from student
achievement in highly mobile communities. Journal of Education for Students
Placed at Risk , 9 (4), 337-355.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluative methods. Thousand oaks, CA:
Sage.
Picou, S. J., & Marshall, B. K. (2007). Social impacts of hurricane Katrina on displaced
K-12 students and educational institutions in costal Alabama counties: Some
preliminary observations. Sociological Spectrum , 27, 767-780.
Pittman, J. F., & Bowen, G. L. (1994). Adolescents on the move: Adjustment to family
175
relocation. Youth & Society , 26 (1), 69-91.
Rhodes, V. (2007). Student mobility: The elephant in NCLB's living room. ERS
Spectrum , 25 (1), 1-10.
Rumberger, R. W. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel analysis of
students and schools. American Education Research Journal , 32 (3), 583-625.
Rumberger, R. W. (2002, June). Student mobility and academic achievement. Retrieved
May 14, 2007, from ERIC Publications; ERIC Digests in Full Text:
www.eric.ed.gov
Rumberger, R. W. (2003). The causes and consequences of student mobility. Journal of
Negro Education , 72 (1), 6-22.
Rumberger, R. W., & Larson, K. A. (1998). Student mobility and the increased risk of
high school dropout. American Journal of Education , 107, 1-35.
Rumberger, R. W., & Thomas, S. L. (2000). The distribution of dropout and turnover
rates among urban and suburban high schools. Sociology of education , 73, 39-67.
Rumberger, R. W., Larson, K. A., Ream, R. K., & Palardy, G. A. (1999). The educational
consequences of mobility for California students and schools. Berkely . Berkely,
CA: California Education.
Schagen, I. (2007). Service children, mobility and school performance. Education
Journal (105), 1.
Schuler, D. B. (1990). Effects of family mobility on student achievement. ERS Spectrum:
Journal of School Research and INformation , 8 (4), 17-24.
Simpson, G. A., & Fowler, M. G. (1994). Geographic mobility and children's
176
emotional/behavioral adjustment and school functioning. Pediatrics , 93 (2), 7.
Slater, J. (2005). Staff under strain from mobile pupils. Times Educational Supplement
(4624), 16-16.
Smrekar, C., Gunthrie, J. W., Owens, D., & Sims, P. G. (2001). March toward
excellence: School success and minority achievement in Department of Defence
Schools. Washington D.C.: National Educational Goals Panel.
South, S., Haynie, D., & Bose, S. (2007). Student mobility and school dropout. Social
Science Research , 36 (1), 68-94.
Strand, S., & Demie, F. (2006). Pupil mobility, attainment and progress in primary
school. British Educational Research Journal , 32 (4), 551-568.
Strand, S., & Demie, F. (2007). Pupil mobility, attainment and progress in secondary
school. Educational Studies , 33 (3), 19.
Swanson, C. B., & Schneider, B. (1999). Students on the move: Residential and
educational mobility in America's schools. Sociology in Education , 72, 54-67.
Titus, D. (2007). Straegies and resources for enhancing the achievement of mobile
students. NASSP Bulletin , 91 (1), 81-97.
Tucker, J. C., Marx, J., & Long, L. (1998). "Moving on": Residential mobility and
children's school lives. Sociology of Education , 71, 111-129.
United States Census Bureau. (2006). Household income. Housing and Household
Economic Statistics Information Staff.
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032006/hhinc/new02_0001.htm Accessed on
March 1, 2008.
177
United States Census Bureau. (n.d.). www.census.gov. Retrieved January 15, 2008, from
Search@Census: http://www.census.gov/search
United States Department of Education. (2002). The same high standards for migrant
students: Holding Title I schools accountable: Executive summary. Washington
D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
United States General Accounting Office. (1994). Elementary school children: Many
change schools frequently, harming their education. Washington D.C.: U.S.
General Accounting Office.
Walls, C. A. (2003, November). Providing highly mobile students with and effective
education. (E. D. Team, Ed.) Retrieved May 14, 2007, from ERIC Digests:
http://www.eric.ed.gov
Wood, D., Halfon, N., Scarla, D., Newacheck, P., & Nessim, S. (1993). Impact of family
relocation on children's growth, development, school function, and behavior.
Journal of the American Medical Association , 270, 1334-38.
Zehr, M. A. (2007). Mobility of Native American students can pose challenges to
achievement. Education Week , 27 (7), 1-14.
APPENDIX A:
Question Guide Sheet for Interviews
How long ago did you move?
Why did you move?
What was it like for you at your school before the move?
How did you do in your classes at your school before the move?
What kinds of activities were you involved in at your school before the move?
How did you feel about the move?
Did that change over time?
What did you do to prepare for the move?
What do you remember about the actual move?
What do you think the greatest challenge was for you?
What did you find easiest for you?
Where you nervous about anything before you moved (academic or
nonacademic)?
Were you looking forward to anything before you moved?
During the move, how did the transition go at school?
What was your first day at your new school like for you?
How did you do in your classes right after you moved (first three weeks)?
Did either of your schools do anything to help you during the move?
What is it like at your school now?
How are you doing in your classes now?
179
What kinds of activities are you involved in now?
Is your new school more or less difficult for you?
What are the biggest differences between your school life before and now?
How do you feel about the move now, after time has gone by?
What was your least favorite part of the move? Why?
What was your favorite part of the move? Why?
If you had a friends that was about to move, what kind of advice would you give them to
help them through the process?
APPENDIX B:
Domains
Emotions (Prior to Move)
50/42 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Confident
Is a kind of
Emotion thinking
about academics at
a new school B Nervous -
C Stressed / fear
Inclusion
55/41 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Nervous
Is a kind of
Emotion thinking
about potential
new environment
non-academic at a
new school
B Excited –
C Stressful / Anxiety–
D Disappointment –
E Confident –
F Relief – Inclusion
51 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Excited
Is a kind of
Emotion about
actually moving B Scared
C Hope for new Opportunities
D Hate
E Helpless – Powerless Inclusion
52 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Anger toward, Is a kind of
Emotion toward
family members B Powerless – helpless –
5 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Pain (friends, significant others,
teachers, home, family members) p.9
Is a kind of
Emotion about
having to leave
friends, home,
teachers behind
prior to move
B Fear of starting all over again “what
if” factor: can‟t build new connections
C Need to anchor memories, hold on to
them even closer
D Sense of loss and mourning, weather,
backyard, home “father built”, culture,
graduating class
p. 16
E. Relief leaving behind bullies and
negative influences
Inclusion
181
C Appreciation for prior to move
D Pressured to change mind
E Closer Inclusion
39 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Academic
Is a kind of
Source for feeling
nervous before the
move B Making Friends –
C Environment
D Starting Over –
Inclusion
Emotions (After the Move)
55.5/41.5 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Positive –
Is a kind of
Emotion about
new environment
at a new school
after the move
B Disappointed
C Relief – surprised –
Inclusion
53.5/8.5 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Positive –
Is a kind of
Emotion about
social environment
left behind after
the move
B Negative – (Bully)
C Friendlier (Virginia, England)
Inclusion
50.5/42.5 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Surprised at some differences –
Is a kind of
Emotion about
academics at a new
school after the
move
B Disappointed –
C Over-whelmed
Inclusion
51.5/15.5 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Excited
Is a kind of
Emotion about
actually moving
after the move B Scared
C Hope for new Opportunities
D Hate
E Helpless – Powerless Inclusion
182
39.5 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Academic
Is a kind of
Source for feeling
nervous B Making Friends –
C Environment
D Starting Over –
Inclusion
First Day to First Three Weeks
25 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Finding classes
Is a step in
Experiences on the
first day of school. B Talking to teachers
C Talking to students
D Learning changes in rules
E Learning changes in academics Sequence
26 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Lower grades
Is a step in
Experiences during
the first three
weeks. B Focus on making friends
C Focus on getting involved in activities
D Focus on adjusting to changes in
environment
E Focus on adjusting to changes in
academics
Sequence
52.5 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Anger toward –
Is a kind of
Emotion toward
family members
immediately (first
two years) after the
move
B Powerless – helpless –
C Appreciation
D Pressured to change mind
E Closer – Inclusion
5.5/ Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Pain (friends, significant others,
teachers, home, family members) p.9
Is a kind of
Emotion about
having to leave
friends, home,
teachers behind
after the move
B. Missing and loneliness
C. Regret and wish to return
D Sense of loss and mourning, weather,
backyard, home “father built”, culture,
graduating class
p. 16
E. Relief leaving behind bullies and
negative influences
Inclusion
183
27 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Improper placement (academic and
non-academic)
Is a reason for doing
Lower grades
during first three
week to first two
years. B No friends (non-academic)
C Focus on new environment and new
friends (non-academic)
D Tests and quizzes on gaps in
curriculum (academic)
E Different values or styles (academic) Rational
Moving (Residence)
101 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Conflict with family
Is a result of
The decision being
made to move. B Anger / guilt
C Powerless / helpless
D Negative attitude
E Pressure to change mind Cause / effect
17 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Dad‟s Job
Is a kind of
Reason for moving
to another state or
country B Opportunities –pg. 35
C Want to leave state –
Inclusion
36 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Visit new house
Is a kind of
Preparation before
the move B Visit new school
C Stay focused in your current classes
D visit new environment X
E Move in the summer if possible
F Take time to adjust X
G Anchor every memory
H keep a journal
I List the pros and cons for situations
Inclusion
2 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Phone
Is a way to
Keep in touch with
friends left behind
after the move. B My Space
C Facebook
D AIM
E Travel - visiting Means-end
184
Moving (Schools)
21 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A School adjustment: graduation
requirements, grading scale, schedules,
discipline, size, values, expectations,
navigation
Is a result of
Changing schools
(academic)
B Learning environment adjustment:
technology, number of classes per day,
appropriate social support
C Teacher adjustment: policies,
methods, homework, support, grading
(p. 19)
D Curriculum adjustment: gaps and/or
redundancies in program of study
E Placement adjustment: too high or low
difficulty level, different grade level
students, different motivation or
behavior level of students.
Cause / effect
10 (21) Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A ”what if” factor: Lost chance to have
legacy type impact
Is a result of
Changing schools
(non-academic)
B Cliques adjustment: preexisting social
circles and connections
C Social isolation/exposure being in
different classes from grade level
D Social environment adjustment: rules,
discipline, values, humor, ways to relate,
interests, attitude toward new students
E Adjustment to different sports and
activities
Cause / effect
503 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Start packing
Is used for
Showing a change
in attitude and
maturation B Clean room
C Think about positives
D Keeping journal
Function
185
Being the teenaged Mobile Student (non academic)
12 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Some maturation required
Is a result of
Moving as a
teenager B Begin to like myself more p35
C Begin to take care of myself
physically
D Adaption skills developed
E Some values change or become self
identity
F New interests can be found
G some changes from being a teen
merge with being mobile
H New skills developed
Cause / Effect
18 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Left my friends behind
Is a reason for doing
Detaching from
social groups and
not really trying to
hang out or talk to
people to make
close friends
B Senior friends left
C Soon graduating and leaving anyway
myself
D associate with several groups instead
of close friends p41
E Still miss friends back home
F Fear of moving again soon
G Need people to approach me
H low energy from stress p47
Rational
16 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A High stress and anxiety levels
Is a characteristic of
Moving as a
teenager B Change during time of change anyway
p35
C Anger at parents
D Excitement of new opportunities to
build skills
E Pain from losing most important
network of friends
F Different rites of passage p4
G Need to rebuild friend network
Attribution
186
Making Friends
9 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A neighborhood - Bus stop
Is a place for doing
Social networking
and making of
friends with
common interests.
B academic classes
C Non-academic school activities and
events
D Sports team related activities, events
E Church
F social hanging out p. 9 Location
6 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Fear
Is a result of
Thinking about
making new
friends – starting
over socially
B Stress
C Excitement
D Nervous
E Confidence Cause / Effect
11 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Maturation
Is a characteristic of
Being a teenager
B Growing up
C Language change “like”
D Getting better at things
E Tomboy into “girlier”
Attribution
7 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A All grade levels
Is a characteristic of
Friends through
sports, clubs, non-
academic
activities, and
study groups
B Diverse group
C Common interest
D Can meet before school starts p41
E Organized time outside academics Attribution
102 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Bad placement (academic)
Is a way to do
Not feel included
and make it harder
to build friendships B Have a negative attitude
Means-end
187
104 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Say “hi” and introduce yourself
Is a step in
Supporting
someone who has
moved into your
school
B Follow up invitation and invite to
event or to “hang out”
C Introduce other friends
D Include in activities
E Feel empathy p37 Sequence
108 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A placement (non-academic
consideration)
Is a step in
School support of
a mobile student
B welcoming committee
C Social education about mobility for
teachers and students
D Meeting with teachers and parents
3 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Join Sports teams
Is a way to do
Make friends after
the move B Join clubs
C Attend school events
D Talk to people
E Go out with people after school
F Respond when people reach out to you
G Adapt to the culture
H Connect with local church
I Join study groups
J Reach out to neighborhood p2 Means-End
38 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Do not speak to at all
Is a kind of
Reaction to new
student B Really interested in where they are
from and who they are
C Say “hi” then leave alone
D Reach out and invite to events or to
“hang out”
E Reject after some time
F Polite but never include in events
beyond school
G Introduce themselves and then invite
student to join them and introduce other
friends
Inclusion
188
E Consider make up of credits to support
placement
F Consider prior credits to support
placement
G Friendly environment p19
H Create study groups to address gaps Sequence
Adaptation
4 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Turn to family members
Is a way to do
Adapt to the move
and begin making
“real” friends B Teachers
C Friends introduce to new friends
D neighborhood
E positive attitude
F prior moves experience
G non academic activities
H sports teams
I school events
J talking to people
Means-End
500 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A More shy now
Is a result of
Moving in High
School B More brave now
C appreciate family
D Matured
E. Make friends easily Cause / Effect
43 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Don‟t change self just to fit in
Is a way to do
Adapt to new
situation B Get used to everything “new”
C take differences in stride
D use interests to make connections p30
Means-End
106 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Good grades
Is a reason for doing
Focus on making
connections
quickly to make
friends
B Positive adjustment
C reduce family stress p42
Rational
189
Placement
20 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A prior curriculum
Is a way to do
Select placement
in academic
classes B prior grades of entering student
C current grades of student shortly after
entering
D feedback from student shortly after
entering
E to adjust for gaps or redundancies in
curriculum p2 X
Means - end
107 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A good grades
Is a reason for doing
students on
placement for
academic and non-
academic reasons
B making friends
C making connections
D positive attitude
E adaptation Rational
47 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Soccer – Volley ball
Is a kind of
Sport or activity
that can be an
interest B Community Service
C Debate team
D DECA
E Gay – straight Alliance
F Lacrosse
G Field Hockey
H Band
I Tennis
J Track Inclusion
23 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A With students in mixed grades either
lower or higher X
Is a kind of
Placement in
academic classes
B with students that have failed the class
previously
C wrong level academically for student
D with family member
E that reflects a gap in the curriculum
p11
F that reflects a redundancy in the
curriculum p13
Inclusion
190
Grades
24 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Bad placement
Is a way to do
Worse in school
academically right
after moving B different homework purposes
C different teachers
D different classes of students
E gaps in the curriculum
F redundancies in the curriculum
G Distraction from having no friends
H more testing than usual
I different schedule
J make up tests on gaps in the material
K Distraction from everything being
different
Means-End
44 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Get into “habit” of school
Is a way to do
Improve grades in
school right after
moving B tutor in school
C Tutor outside school (sylvan)
D study groups
E Make some friends p26
F teacher outreach p19
G parent outreach p14
H Study harder and focus on work
I website for parents to monitor and
communicate with school
Means-End
22 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Different homework purposes
Is a characteristic of
Academic classes
after the move B Different values sports/academics
C Need tutor
D Cannot focus on right away
E gaps in curriculum
F redundancies in curriculum
G Different grading system
H different amount of testing
I Need more support from teacher
J Need to get into “habit” of school
Attribution
191
After Time
49 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Positive attitudep15
Is a result of
Time going by and
having time to
reflect on the move B Maturation
C humor at what was “new” p16
D grades raised
E Still working at adjustment 1 year +
grades and friends
F New skills or interests develop - poet
G feel “needed” move p30
H loss of “making mark” the “what if
factor” p39
Cause / Effect
4 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Turn to family members
Is a way to do
Adapt to the move
and begin making
“real” friends B Teachers
C Friends introduce to new friends
D neighborhood
E positive attitude
F prior moves experience
G non academic activities
H sports teams
I school events
J talking to people
Means-End
The Role of Attitude
35 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Healthier self
Is a reason for doing
What it takes to
have a positive
attitude B Adaptation to new situation
C Family happiness
D Good grades
E Make friends Rational
13 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Adaptation
Is a step in
Moving
Successfully -
upon reflection B Making friends
C Connect to family
D Maturation
Sequence
192
505 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Take care of self physically
Is a way to do
Build or maintain a
positive attitude B Turn to family members
C Keep an open mind / heart p18
D Look at positives
E Identify personal strengths Means-End
37 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Being different
Is a kind of
Personal challenge
that is a barrier to
adaptation B Not knowing culture
C Making friends
D Stress of starting over p14, 11
E Distance
F Language
G Disorder (medicated)
H leaving family behind p30
I leaving net work behind Inclusion
105 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Fitting in with teammates
Is a kind of
Personal Strength
B positive attitude
C prior moves experience
D make friends easily “outgoing” p37
E variety of interests
F family support
Inclusion
60 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Get a positive attitude p17
Is a kind of
Advice to a friend
that is moving B Turn to Family
C Pick good friends
D Don‟t try too hard
E Never give up
F focus on future not past
G Adapt
F don‟t change yourself just to fit in
Inclusion
Moving in High School as compared to other grade levels
193
Family
103 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Being placed in same classes
Is a way to
Stress family
relationships B Participating in the same activities and
sports
C Trying to force parents to not move of
move back by not adapting
D Leaving house “dad built”
E Negative attitude
F No home only a house
G Leaving family behind
H Divide family for a time during move
I Long drive together in car Means - end
14 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Hope
Is a result of
Family being near
and open. B Positive attitude
C Feeling supported
Cause / Effect
200 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Rely on family more
Is a characteristic of
Moving in
elementary school B Redundancies in curriculum
C Gaps in curriculum
D May not really understand what is
going on
Attribution
201 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Rely on family and friends
Is a characteristic of
Moving in Middle
school B changes in schedule and format
C Gaps in curriculum
Attribution
202 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Rely on friends more
Is a characteristic of
Moving in High
School B more stress in life
C harder to make friends
D gaps in curriculum
Attribution
194
School Identity
45 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Wish for the best
Is a way to do
For a school to
handle a student
that is leaving B Nothing
C Friends cut school
D Said good bye to teachers
Means-End
46 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Nothing
Is a way to do
For a school to
handle a student
that is arriving new
to the area
B Tell teachers for support
C Tell students for support
D Allow make up work to be in proper
classes
E Put in classes with family members
F Match with a buddy for the first day
G Orientation day
H Allow to join in sports and activities
late in year
I Encourage community service
J Create group to welcome new students
and stay in touch more than one day
K Create group of students that have
moved for support
L Social curriculum for students that
have never moved about what it is like
and how to welcome new students
M Social sensitive placement Means-End
28 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Feeling left out
Is a result of
Cliques in NJ
because students
do not tend to B Harder to make friends
C Harder to get close
506 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Welcoming
Is a characteristic of
School identity
where the student
felt successful in
the adaptation to a
new environment
B Supportive
C Inclusive
D Demanding
Attribution
195
D Anger and Pain move and have a
longer history
together
E Feel need to break up the cliques Cause / Effect
31 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Friendlier
Is a characteristic of
Boarding school in
England B Homework for practice
C More Diverse
D Closer and more personal friends
E harder to participate in interests
F Good academically (no grade for
effort)
G Fewer classes in a day
H Boarding school
I Different curriculum
J Different discipline (detention not a
“talking to” or peers)
Attribution
33 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A More populated
Is a characteristic of
School in Virginia
B Friendlier
C Better teachers (more supportive)
D More clubs available
E Different curriculum
F Sports very important Attribution
29 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Friendlier
Is a characteristic of
School in Texas
B More transient group of students so
VERY welcoming
C No field hockey available
D Dog days for orientation
E Bigger Attribution
196
32 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Rural
Is a characteristic of
School in Illinois
B Smaller
C Sports centered
D Fewer opportunities to be recognized
by division I schools
E Different curriculum Attribution
30 Terms Semantic Relationship Cover Term
A Not as close p15 X
Is a characteristic of
NJ students and
friends B Harder to make
C Different humor, speech
D Not welcoming X
E Very Welcoming X Attribution
APPENDIX C:
Master Outline Aligned to Major Themes
I. Changing environment
A. Emotions before the move – RQ1 Theme 1
1. Reason for the move
a. Dad‟s job – RQ1 Theme 4
b. custody change – RQ1 Theme 4
2. Leaving house or home behind – RQ1 Theme 1
a. Leaving family behind – RQ1 Theme 4
b. leaving comfortable life behind – RQ1 Theme 1
3. Friends left behind
a. Stress of having to make new friends – RQ1 Theme 3
b. left behind some bullies – RQ1 Theme 2
II. Changing schools
A. preparation for leaving
1. focus on school work to prevent gaps – RQ2 Theme 1
2. try to remember details and friends – RQ1 Theme 3
3. development of a positive attitude – RQ1 Theme 2
B. First day of school
1. Stress
a. being new person – RQ1 Theme 3
b. expectations of new classes – RQ2 Theme 1
2. logistics of the day
a. finding classes – RQ1 Theme 5
b. new faces (students and teachers) – RQ1 Theme 3
c. placement (requirements, grades, gaps, redundancies) – RQ2 Theme 4
d. schedule – RQ1 Theme 5
C. First three weeks of school
1. distraction of dealing with “newness” – RQ1 Theme 5
a. impacts grades – RQ2 Theme 2
2. adaptation to differences
a. homework – RQ1 Theme 5
b. discipline – RQ1 Theme 5
c. types of relationships with friends – RQ1 Theme 5
d. requirements – RQ1 Theme 5
D. Gaps and Redundancies
1. grade impact (academic) – RQ2 Theme 2, 4
2. drop out rate – RQ2 Theme 7
2. social impact (non-academic) – RQ1 Theme 7 / RQ2 Theme 7
3. Role of Placement –RQ2 Theme 6, 7
E. Different learning environments – RQ2 Theme 3
1. technology – RQ2 Theme 3
2. teachers – RQ2 Theme 3
198
3. Language – RQ2 Theme 3
III. Making Friends
A. In connection to school
1. Placement
a. types of classes – RQ2 Theme 7
b. connections to own grade level – RQ2 Theme 7
c. impact of family (in classes, parents supporting placement) – RQ1 Theme 4
2. activities
a. sports – RQ1 Theme 5
b. clubs – RQ1 Theme 5
c. attending events at school – RQ1 Theme 5
3. reception from students
a. welcoming – RQ1 Theme 7
b. acknowledge of differences – RQ1 Theme 7
c. inattentive and not welcoming – RQ1 Theme 7
d. role of diversity – RQ1 Theme 7
4. takes time (impact on academic) – RQ1 Theme 8
B. in connection to greater environment
1. family (network to neighborhood, church) – RQ1 Theme 4
2. Hanging out with friends – RQ1 Theme 6
IV. Role of Attitude
A. Emotions after the move – RQ1 Theme 2
1. Grades
a. grades getting better – RQ2 Theme 5
b. long-term impact (non-academic) of placement still visible – RQ 2 Theme 7
2. Making friends
a. good friends here too – RQ1 Theme 2
b. easier making friends after prior moves – RQ1 Theme 6, 8
c. pulling back - some friends graduated and soon will again – RQ2 Theme 7
3. Connection to family – RQ1 Theme 4
B. Adaptation to move – RQ1 Theme 6
1. experience from prior moves – RQ1 Theme 6
V. Changing of Self
A. personal characteristics / skills – RQ1 Theme 6
1. propensity to be shy – RQ1 Theme 6
2. propensity to be outgoing – RQ1 Theme 6
3. propensity to be brave – RQ1 Theme 6
4. propensity to be academically inclined (poet) – RQ2 Theme 3
5. propensity to make friends easily – RQ1 Theme 6
6. propensity to welcome mobile students w/ increased empathy – RQ1 Theme 2
B. Maturity
1. Being a mobile teenager
a. taking better care of self physically – RQ 1 Theme 2
b. creating new positive image of self – RQ1 Theme 2
199
c. Girlier evolution from being tom-boy – RQ1 Theme 2
d. different sports or activities – RQ1 Theme 5
VI. Looking forward
A. Advice to teenage mobile students
1. how it is different from elementary or middle school mobility – RQ1 Theme 8
2. how to focus attitude to maximize adaptation – RQ1 Theme 6
3. how to prepare to address gaps in the curriculum – RQ2 Theme 1
4. consider working harder academically to be placed in classes with grade level –
RQ2 Theme 6, 7
B. Advice to schools that have mobile students
1. increase awareness of teachers and students concerning mobile students – RQ1
Theme 7 and RQ2 Theme 3
2. encourage involvement in and make it easy for mobile students to join clubs
and sports – RQ1 Theme 6, 7
3. consider non-academic factors when arranging academic placement – RQ2
Theme 6, 7
4. consider a welcoming group that might host regular events for mobile students
to meet students and teachers – RQ1 Theme 3, 6, 7 & RQ2 Theme 3, 5, 6, 7
5. consider an adult mentor for mobile students, someone that can discuss
Differences in policies, culture, language, and gaps in the curriculum that
might be confusing mobile students – RQ1 Theme 3, 5, 7, 8 & RQ2 Theme
2, 3, 4, 6, 7
CURRICULUM VITAE:
Marie Alcock
[email protected] (973) 479-7724
Experience
President of Learning Systems Associates L.L.C. a national consulting company
based in New Jersey.
National and International Education Consultant for curriculum mapping and
professional development in curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Actively
travel to both public and private schools and lead them through presentations and
workshops dedicated to the mapping process.
National Speaker, key-note speaker, and Guest Presenter with Dr. Heidi Hayes
Jacobs on Mapping and Implementation.
Part time professor for Walden University‟s Masters in Curriculum, Instruction,
and Assessment.
Administrative and business experience includes: finance, budgeting, marketing,
web-based advertising, interviewing, scheduling, billing, client communication,
and value estimations.
National consultant for accreditation process. Assist schools and programs
prepare for and acquire proper accreditation.
Education research ambassador to China March 2006 with People to People
Hosted 1000+ professional development seminars for teachers working with
curriculum issues including: mapping, content, skills, essential questions,
assessment, alignment, inclusion, rubrics, accreditation and technology.
Coordinated business and educational aspects of a before-school, after-school and
summer camp program for 4 years. Designed marketing, billing, database
management, and financial balance. Designed and implemented nine after school
201
programs in six different schools including private and public institutions.
Maintained NAYCE accreditation for grades Kindergarten through eighth.
Regularly conduct, collate and analyze governance, faculty, parent, and student
survey reports and self-study objectives.
Led a private school with a ten year old curriculum document through a
modernization into a web-based, fully mapped curriculum. It is currently used by
both teachers and administrators to vertically and horizontally analyze the
curriculum. Researched and implemented a narrative assessment program.
Taught five plus years of fifth grade through eighth grade social studies courses
including U.S. history, geography, civics, Ancient history, World history and
Modern History.
Taught in a year round program in North Carolina.
Worked with a high risk youth program in Vermont.
Teaching experience includes: writing curriculum, team teaching, inclusion
classroom, over 75 class trips including 5 day trips, integration with other
departments, block scheduling and utilizing portfolio assessment programs.
Technology experience includes: E-college, Blackboard, Web-based mapping,
database management, Microsoft word, excel, power-point, access, Website
programming, Student tutorial programming, Mac support specialist, Networking,
internet research, Adobe page-maker, Microsoft office programs, publisher, and
project.
Education
Masters in Education - summa cum laude / Canter program at MaryGrove College
BA in Social Science - summa cum laude / History, Sociology, Economics, Political
Science and Geography at Vermont State in Castleton
Mendham High School in New Jersey
Personal
202
Husband is Jim Hubley and I enjoy traveling, gardening, biking, camping, fishing,
skiing, gaming, theatre, piano playing and was the 2002 N.J. State bowling champion.
