Transfer is usually interpreted as the move from one stage of schooling and from one school to another whereas transition is the move from one year to another within the same school (Demetriou, Goalen, & Rudduck, 2000). However, some research uses the term transition for a transfer from elementary or primary school to secondary
school. In this thesis, the term ‘transfer’ will be used for the move from one type of school in the education system to another. Students can transfer at various ages with the most common experiences in New Zealand being Year 6 to Year 7 (intermediate school for Years 7 and 8) and Year 8 to Year 9 (secondary school). Variations exist, with some schools catering for Years 1 to 8, others Years 7 to 13. In New Zealand the transfer from primary school to intermediate is viewed almost as a rite de passage. It is an interim move, challenging students personally, socially, academically, and structurally in terms of a school’s organization. Transfer usually coincides with passages in child development such as the move from childhood to adolescence.
The consistent research findings from both the United Kingdom and the United States provided evidence of dips in pupil progress at each point in transfer─primary to middle school or middle to junior high (Anderson, Jacobs, Schramm, & Splittgerber, 2000; Galton & Morrison, 2000). Noyes (2006) raised the issue, specifically using the context of mathematics, of trajectories and how school transfer acts like a prism diffracting the social and academic trajectories of students as they pass through it. Students showed signs of anxiety and excitement at the prospect of moving to a new school which is often a much larger school and some students expressed difficulties with sustaining commitments to learning and in understanding the continuities in learning (Demetriou et al., 2000). However, for the majority of students any fears had largely disappeared after the first term. The main problem that typically remained was a lack of continuity across the curriculum. Students were faced with revision and a lower level of task demand which led to boredom (Galton, Morrison, & Pell, 2000), lack of motivation (Anderman & Maehr, 1994; Athanasiou & Philippou, 2006), disengagement from school (Anderson et al., 2000) and dips in progress (Catterall, 1998). This dip in achievement has been attributed to a lack of curriculum continuity between the primary and secondary stages of schooling, variations in teaching approaches, and the consequent failure of students to take account of these differences (Galton et al., 2000). What the research does not at this stage indicate is whether that dip in progress resulting from transfer is cumulative— hence the need for longitudinal studies.
Another contributing factor could be the practice of tabula rasa or ‘fresh start’ (Galton & Hargreaves, 2002). The justification for this practice is that secondary schools feel they are better equipped to make judgements about students’ abilities in subject areas because of teachers’ specialist knowledge. Galton and Hargreaves (2002) wrote that it was questionable, therefore, whether curriculum continuity is taken seriously and is an achievable goal. Addressing this issue, a Finnish study (Pietarinen, 2000) showed that professional dialogue between the teachers improved their ability to take account of a student’s learning environment and learning strategies. An extensive national Scottish report by Simpson and Goulder (1998) identified the liaison between primary and secondary schools as a vital component in the provision of continuity in students’ experiences. However, it was recognized as a complex process and attributed the issue with many difficulties. For example, they cited primary teachers’ perceptions of them as subject specialists as a barrier to successful liaison, lack of coordinated liaison activities, inconsistencies between records from different schools, the reliability of records from sending schools, and usefulness for planning for the secondary school when they considered them to be vague and sometimes misleading. With a potential level of distrust, it gives rise to the question as to whether teachers should spend considerable time and effort on compiling, improving, and refining records.
There is an expectation that schools will prepare students well for schooling in the next stage of the hierarchical educational system (Galton, 2000). Schools are held accountable for this preparation, but the Education Review Office (2006) found that there was a lack of focus on preparing students for the transfer to secondary school. This is despite many schools having strategic plans with statements pertaining to successful entry and transfer to secondary school. The Education Review Office reported that for the diverse groups of students, there were “limited or no opportunities to develop awareness of their strengths and abilities” and the students were “at risk of being unprepared for the transition to secondary school” (p. 2). This lack of focus on preparedness by teachers is supported in a New Zealand study by Hawk and Hill (2001) who found that many teachers were so focused on curriculum coverage that they did not take the time to prepare students for school transfer. Schumacker and Sayler (1995) found that students may lack adequate study and time management skills in making transfers, although the focus of this study was on the
transfer to early university entrance programmes. They also suggested the need for good organizing, recording, and reporting skills as well as good study habits and motivation.
A recent study (n=100) in New Zealand (Ministry of Education, 2008) found that transferring from primary to secondary schooling was “not the disaster that is often feared” (p. 4). Most students adapted quickly to the organizational changes, but the ‘danger period’ with respect to relationships with teachers, and learning and teaching in general, was in the second half of their year in the new school. Students’ achievements in mathematics showed a marked decline over the transfer from primary to secondary, but improved during the year. Students became “less engaged in aspects of their learning at school over time and more critical about some of the teaching they were experiencing” (p. 6). This study used Assessment Tools for Teaching and Learning (asTTle) items to measure achievements in mathematics, but did not focus specifically on gifted and talented students.
Parental interest and support is recognized as one factor that enables students to make successful transfers (Dauber, Alexander, & Entwistle, 1996). Mac Iver (1990) found that when parents were involved in the transfer process, they tended to stay involved with their children throughout secondary school. Successful transfers also occurred when reception schools made every effort to create a sense of community and belonging, and where students, parents, and staff were involved (Smith, 2001). According to Smith’s United State’s nationally representative sample, transfer programmes that targeted a combination of students, parents, and school staff had a measured impact. This positive effect worked only when the school provided complete support—students, parents, and staff. A comprehensive study (n=297) by Berndt and Keefe (1995) showed that friends also influenced adolescents’ adjustments to school. Both the characteristics of the friends and the quality of the friendships affected this school adjustment. The importance of keeping friends in the transfer process was also reported by Whitton and Perry (2005). Research has also shown that friendship, peer acceptance, and group membership has an established link with students’ academic achievements (Wentzel & Caldwell, 1997). Additionally, Anderson and colleagues (2000) found that students were more likely
to experience successful transfers if attention was paid to student preparedness and support, before, during, and after the transfer.
A longitudinal New Zealand study (Wylie, 2006) followed 500 students from their final early childhood years through their schooling years and compared views of school and performance levels at ages 12 and 14. The majority of students were looking forward to secondary school; 25% were expecting more challenge, 22% more choice and independence. No negative effects on student competency levels were found with their move to new schools and no major patterns associated with differences in social experiences and resources. The findings of concern were an increase in the level of boredom and those who thought they could do better if they tried. This study showed that in New Zealand there were not the dips in performance as feared. However, the data analysis did not differentiate among ability levels. Students experience several transitions and transfers during their years of schooling. Each transfer is important and worthy of consideration in any child’s schooling. However, just because a student has successfully negotiated one transfer does not mean that he or she will successfully negotiate the next one. The growing body of research on transfer has found that the overall impact from elementary or primary school to junior secondary school can be negative, leading to decreased self-esteem, lower self-concept of ability in school subject domains, declines in perceptions of competence, decreased liking in specific school subject domains, and lower school grades (Galton et al., 2000). However, the nature and extent of change is dependent on the school and a student’s level of achievement. Parental involvement also plays a role in successful transfer (Mizelle, 2005); when parents are involved in the transfer process they tend to stay involved with their children throughout secondary school (Mac Iver, 1990). However, parental involvement tends to drop significantly as children enter the secondary system unless schools and teachers deliberately work to keep parents involved at this level.
The issue of transfer is attracting wider interest nationally and internationally. This is related to the drive for increased levels of student achievement especially in the areas of literacy and mathematics. However, whilst studies such as those previously described, contribute to our understandings of the process and potential challenges
academically, socially, and affectively, most do not attend to special populations such as gifted and talented students. More specifically, they do not attend to the process for mathematically gifted students. We know little about the practice of
tabula rasa or ‘fresh start’, the use or non use of sending schools’ records (for example, NumPA results), and student preparedness. These are further aspects addressed in this study.
2.8.1 Conceptual Framework for Examining Transfer
Students face challenges in making a transfer at two levels—the macro level of the school’s physical structures and organization and at a micro level in the classroom with a teacher who is a subject specialist and a teacher who may use different teaching approaches. Anderson and colleagues (2000) suggested a framework with three major concepts for understanding and improving school transfer and success. These concepts were preparedness, support, and transitional success or failure. According to the researchers, preparedness is multidimensional and includes academic preparedness, independence and industriousness, conformity to adult standards, and coping mechanisms. Support from others, be it informational, tangible (resources), emotional or social, facilitates successful transfer. This support may come from peers, teachers, or parents. Transitional success or failure can be judged by factors such as grades, appropriateness of a student’s post-transfer behaviour, social relationships with peers, and academic orientation. These indicators are what are commonly commented on report cards, namely: achievement, conduct, and effort. This framework has been recognized as useful for also addressing transfer problems (Galton & Morrison, 2000). The issue of transfer needs to be considered along with the wider transition process. Galton and Morrison state that “the development of pupils as ‘professional learners’ requires not just our attention when pupils move from one school to the next but continuously” (p. 448).