Early childhood education and care in Luxembourg. Attendance and associations with early learning performance.

Report (2023)

Luxembourg’s student population is highly diverse in terms of language and family background and shows disparities in learning performances as early as first grade (Cycle 2.1). Achievement gaps might be ... [more ▼]

Luxembourg’s student population is highly diverse in terms of language and family background and shows disparities in learning performances as early as first grade (Cycle 2.1). Achievement gaps might be increased by the high language demands in the traditional Luxembourgish school system. Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) including for instance crèche, précoce and Cycle 1, is one of the possible mechanisms to reduce these gaps that is currently discussed by researchers, policy makers, and the broad public. A lot of international literature points towards a positive association of ECEC and child development. However, findings vary widely with characteristics of ECEC, as well as characteristics of children and their families. For this report, we used data from the Luxembourg School Monitoring Programme “ÉpStan” from 2015 to 2021 including students’ learning performances in three domains in Cycle 2.1 – Luxembourgish listening comprehension, early literacy, mathematics – as well as student and parent questionnaire data. Additionally, data from ÉpStan 2022 on German and Luxembourgish listening comprehension and students’ language exposure at home are presented. Who attends which type of ECEC in Luxembourg? We find that the attendance in ECEC is generally high. On average, crèches were attended at a moderate level of intensity and duration. Family background (socioeconomic status, migration background and home language group) interacts in a complex way with attendance in ECEC. For example, children from families with a high socioeconomic status speaking Portuguese or French at home, attended crèche for more hours a week than children from families with a high socioeconomic status speaking Luxembourgish at home. In regard to language exposure in ECEC, Luxembourgish appears to play a dominant role for most children. How are ECEC attendance and family background associated with learning performance in Cycle 2.1? Most importantly, non-formal (crèche) and formal types of ECEC (précoce, Cycle 1) have positive but small to moderate associations with learning performance in the three learning domains. Looking at crèche attendance in more detail, effects of crèche intensities are different for Portuguese speaking and Luxembourgish speaking children – i.e., only Portuguese speaking children benefit from higher intensity attendance in crèche. As can be expected, all children benefit most in their Luxembourgish listening comprehension if they attended a crèche in which Luxembourgish was spoken. Well-known performance disparities in the three learning domains between children of different backgrounds have been confirmed – with advantages for native, Luxembourgish speaking children from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. Is the pattern of differences between children of different home language groups the same in Luxembourgish and German listening comprehension? Children’s performances in German listening comprehension show even larger disparities between home language groups than those in Luxembourgish listening comprehension. This argues against the assumption of a transfer from Luxembourgish to German language skills for all children. Conclusively, this report points towards ECEC as a key adjustable parameter to improve learning development and concludes with the call to collect data on ECEC quality. Structural (e.g., child-caregiver-ratio) and procedural (e.g., characteristics of interaction) aspects of quality should be regulated and systematically evaluated to ensure positive child development and equal opportunities for every child. With more monitoring data on diverse quality aspects and language practices in ECEC, important insights on the effects of new reforms in the educational system could be gained. Additionally, the present results reveal a significant negative relationship between children’s learning performance and a previous allongement de cycle in Cycle 1, calling for a thorough revision of this frequently used procedure. Finally, the continuity between languages in ECEC and the successive schooling is important. This alignment is currently not ensured due to more flexible language policies in ECEC and more rigid language practices in formal schooling. For example, the plurilingual education in ECEC promoting Luxembourgish and French, could build a solid basis for a French literacy acquisition, yet explicit promotion of the current instruction language of reading and writing acquisition, German, in Cycle 2 is still missing. A crucial demand therefore arises to revise the language demands in the curricula and policies – to continuously support ECEC’s plurilingual education in formal schooling (e.g., European and international schools or French literacy acquisition) and to explicitly promote German in ECEC to build a solid basis for literacy acquisition in German. [less ▲]

Fairness as seen by students - a differentiated look at perceived assessment fairness by 7th and 9th graders in Luxembourg

Scientific Conference (2022, November 10)

Assessment is probably the central factor in every educational biography: On the one hand, through direct consequences for school career decisions, on the other hand, through repercussions on each ... [more ▼]

Assessment is probably the central factor in every educational biography: On the one hand, through direct consequences for school career decisions, on the other hand, through repercussions on each student’s self-concept in the respective subject, for one's own work behavior and the perception of institutional fairness in general. A crucial factor is the subjective, perceived fairness of assessment, which has been shown to influence students' satisfaction, motivation, and attitudes toward learning (Chory-Assad, 2002; Wendorf & Alexander, 2005). The current study examines how Luxembourgish students experience fairness of assessment on the basis of representative samples of the 7iéme (N > 700 students) and 9iéme/ 5iéme (N > 2200, 35% of the total cohort) and gives a first insight into the connection with school interest and self-concept. Special attention is given to the heterogeneity of the Luxembourgish student population: the extent to which language background, socioeconomic status, and gender are related to these perceptions of fairness will be analyzed. Data was collected as part of the nationwide Épreuves standardisées in fall 2021 using the Fairness Barometer (Sonnleitner & Kovacs, 2020) - a standardized instrument to measure informational and procedural fairness in student assessment. The analyses are theoretically based on Classroom Justice Theory and educational psychology (Chory-Assad and Paulsel, 2004; Chory, 2007; Duplaga & Astani, 2010) and utilize latent variable models (SEM) to study the complex interplay between perceived assessment practices and students’ school-related motivational factors. The insights offered by this study are internationally unique in their scope and provide a first glimpse on fairness perceptions of groups of Luxembourgish students in known disadvantaged situations. Results aim to sensitize especially active teachers and educators to the central importance of assessment in schools and offer some concrete advice how to improve it. References: Chory, R. M. (2007). Enhancing student perceptions of fairness: the relationship between instructor credibility and classroom justice. Commun. Educ. 56, 89–105. doi: 10.1080/03634520600994300 Chory-Assad, R. M., and Paulsel, M. L. (2004). Classroom justice: student aggression and resistance as reactions to perceived unfairness. Commun. Educ. 53, 253–273. doi: 10.1080/0363452042000265189 Chory-Assad, R. M. (2002). Classroom justice: perceptions of fairness as a predictor of student motivation, learning, and aggression. Commun. Q. 50, 58–77. doi: 10.1080/01463370209385646 Duplaga, E. A., and Astani, M. (2010). An exploratory study of student perceptions of which classroom policies are fairest. Decision Sci. J. Innov. Educ. 8, 9–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4609.2009.00241.x Sonnleitner, P., & Kovacs, C. (2020, February). Differences between students’ and teachers’ fairness perceptions: Exploring the potential of a self-administered questionnaire to improve teachers’ assessment practices. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 5, p. 17). Frontiers Media SA. Wendorf, C. A., and Alexander, S. (2005). The influence of individual- and class-level fairness-related perceptions on student satisfaction. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 30, 190–206. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.003 [less ▲]

Findings from the ÉpStan National Education Monitoring against the Background of the COVID-19 Pandemic

E-print/Working paper (2022)

Subjektives Wohlbefinden in der 5. und 9. Schulklasse: gibt es einen Zusammenhang mit dem Bildungsweg und der schulischen Leistung?

Scientific Conference (2022, March 09)

Der Bildungsauftrag unserer heutigen Wissensgesellschaft vereint ein vielseitiges Spektrum an Kompetenzen, die den Schüler*innen vermittelt werden sollen. Die Lernziele beinhalten nicht nur akademischen ... [more ▼]

Der Bildungsauftrag unserer heutigen Wissensgesellschaft vereint ein vielseitiges Spektrum an Kompetenzen, die den Schüler*innen vermittelt werden sollen. Die Lernziele beinhalten nicht nur akademischen Erfolg, sondern auch schulisches Wohlbefinden. In der Bildungsforschung haben affektive und sozio-emotionale Faktoren sowie deren Einfluss auf das Erreichen von Lernzielen über die letzten Jahrzehnte an Interesse gewonnen (s.a. Hascher et al., 2018). Subjektives Wohlbefinden (SWB) ist ein komplexes, multidimensionales Phänomen, welches emotionale, soziale und kognitive Facetten umfasst (Hascher & Edlinger, 2009). Das SWB wird als Grundlage für erfolgreiches Lernen betrachtet (Hascher & Hagenauer, 2011), wobei der Zusammenhang je nach Entwicklungsstadium der Schüler*innen variieren kann. Ergebnisse einer Metaanalyse (Bücker et al., 2018) zeigten eine statistisch signifikante mittlere Effektstärke für den Zusammenhang zwischen SWB und Leistung, wobei diese Ergebnisse über verschiedene Ebenen soziodemografischer Merkmale, SWB-Domäne und Indikatoren der Leistung hinweg stabil waren. Außerdem zeigten Gutman und Voraus (2012) in einer längsschnittlichen Studie mit einer Kohorte von Schüler*innen zwischen 7 und 13 Jahren, schwache bis mittlere Korrelationen zwischen unterschiedlichen Dimensionen des Wohlbefindens und aktueller sowie späterer akademischer Leistung. In dieser Studie haben wir den Zusammenhang zwischen verschiedenen Dimensionen des SWB und standardisierten Kompetenztestergebnissen zu verschiedenen Zeitpunkten (5. und 9. Schulkasse) untersucht. Ein erstes Ziel bestand darin, die Unterschiede des Wohlbefindens in Bezug auf das Entwicklungsstadium zu untersuchen, wobei wir auch den Einfluss von Klassenwiederholung und Schulzweig betrachteten. Ein weiteres Ziel der Studie bestand darin, den Zusammenhang zwischen SWB und Leistung unter Berücksichtigung sozio-demografischer Variablen zu ermitteln. Die Ergebnisse basieren auf den Daten der gesamte Kohorte von Fünft- und Neuntklässler*innen (N=5159 bzw. N=6279), die im Rahmen des nationalen Schulmonitoring (Luxembourg School Monitoring Programm „Épreuves Standardisées“; Martin et al., 2015) im November 2018 in Luxemburg erhoben wurden. Im Rahmen dieser Erhebung wurden sowohl standardisierte Schulleistungstests als auch ein Fragebogen zu soziodemographischen und sozio-emotionalen Aspekten durchgeführt. Vier Domäne des SWB wurden erfasst: Selbstkonzept, Schulangst, soziale- sowie emotionale Inklusion. Die standardisierten Leistungstests umfassten Leseverstehen in Deutsch und Französisch sowie Mathematik. Zusätzlich wurden über einen Schüler- oder Elternfragebogen weitere sozio-demographische Merkmale erfasst. Der Zusammenhang zwischen SWB und Entwicklungsstadium (Schulklasse) unter Einbeziehung von Klassenwiederholung und Schulzweig wurde mittels zwei mixed model Analysen überprüft. Die Ergebnisse zeigten, dass Schüler*innen in der 5. Klasse höhere Werte von SWB angaben als Schüler*innen in der 9. Klasse, F(8,121164)=180.61, p<.001. Zusätzlich wurde das SWB negativ beeinflusst durch Klassenwiederholung, F(8, 63989)=17.75, p<.001. Neuntklässler*innen in anspruchsvolleren Schulzweigen gaben höhere Werte von SWB an als Schüler*innen in niedrigeren Schulzweigen, F(2,40219)=15.71, p<001. Die Schulleistung wurde über eine schrittweise Regression vorhergesagt: zunächst wurden sozio-demographische Hintergrundvariable (Geschlecht, Migrationshintergrund, HISEI der Eltern) dem Model hinzugefügt und, in einem zweiten Schritt, Indikatoren des SWB. Die Ergebnisse zeigten, dass in der 5. Klasse 13% und in der 9. Klasse 19% der Varianz in der Schulleistung durch soziodemografische Variablen vorausgesagt werden kann. Sowohl für Fünft- als auch für Neuntklässler*innen, erklärten die Dimensionen des SWB zusätzliche 6% bzw. 4% der Varianz. Die Ergebnisse dieser Studie zeigten, dass Entwicklungsstadium, Klassenwiederholung und Schulzweig einen Einfluß auf das SWB der Schüler*innen haben. Darüber hinaus zeigten die Ergebnisse, dass das SWB über soziodemografische Merkmale hinaus zur Erklärung der schulischen Leistung beiträgt. In Anbetracht ihrer Ergebnisse, kann diese Studie auch die Diskussion um Klassenwiederholung als pädagogische Intervention und um die Praxis der Aufgliederung von Schüler*innen nach Leistungsniveau innerhalb und zwischen Schulformen bereichern. Während sich die meisten Studien zu den Effekten dieser Interventionen auf die schulische Leistung konzentrierten, zeigt die vorliegende Studie, dass diese Maßnahmen auch das SWB betreffen. Weitere (längsschnittliche) Studien könnten darauf eingehen, inwieweit es letztendlich zu einem kumulativen Effekt auf die schulische Leistung kommen kann oder ob und inwiefern das SWB den Zusammenhang zwischen diesen Faktoren und der schulischen Leistung beeinflussen kann. [less ▲]

Academic Achievement and Subjective Well-being: A Representative Cross-sectional Study

in Heinen, Andreas; Samuel, Robin; Vögele, Claus (Eds.) et al Wohlbefinden und Gesundheit im Jugendalter (2022)

Formal education is a very important, time-intensive, and highly consequential aspect of adolescents’ everyday life. School as well as education can influence adolescents’ well-being in both the short ... [more ▼]

Formal education is a very important, time-intensive, and highly consequential aspect of adolescents’ everyday life. School as well as education can influence adolescents’ well-being in both the short- and long-term. In return, adolescents’ well-being in- and outside school may affect their educational achievement. The objective of the present study is to investigate how self-reported dimensions of adolescents’ subjective well-being (SWB) in an educational context (i.e., academic self-concept, school anxiety, social and emotional inclusion) relate to educational pathways (regular vs. irregular school transitions; attendance of more vs. less prestigious secondary school tracks) and standardized assessment scores in key academic areas (i.e., mathematics and languages). Drawing on representative data emerging from the Luxembourg School Monitoring Programme “Épreuves Standardisées” (academic year 2018/2019), the relationship between academic achievement and students’ self-reported well-being was analysed cross-sectionally for the entire student cohorts of 5th and 9th graders. Result indicated that grades and educational pathways affect SWB, whereby in general lower ratings of SWB were observed in older students, students that experienced grade retention and students in lower secondary school tracks. Furthermore, ratings of SWB explained a significant proportion of variance in academic achievement in bot Grade 5 and Grade 9. These findings highlight the importance of student´ SWB in education. SWB may not only affect academic achievement, but also impact motivation and engagement and hence long-term educational success. Implications of the findings for research and educational debate are discussed. [less ▲]

Findings from the ÉpStan National Education Monitoring against the Background of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Online Supplement

E-print/Working paper (2022)

Neue längsschnittliche Befunde aus dem nationalen Bildungsmonitoring ÉpStan in der 1. und 3. Klasse: Negativer Trend in der Kompetenzentwicklung und kein Erfolg bei Klassenwiederholungen.

in LUCET; SCRIPT (Eds.) Nationaler Bildungsbericht Luxemburg 2021 (2021)

Befunde aus dem nationalen Bildungsmonitoring ÉpStan vor dem Hintergrund der COVID-19- Pandemie

in LUCET; SCRIPT (Eds.) Nationaler Bildungsbericht Luxemburg 2021 (2021)

Befunde aus dem nationalen Bildungsmonitoring ÉpStan vor dem Hintergrund der COVID-19 Pandemie (Supplement)

in LUCET; SCRIPT (Eds.) Nationaler Bildungsbericht Luxemburg 2021 (2021)

Need for Cognition and its relation to Self-Control and Action Orientation in Secondary School Students in Luxembourg

Scientific Conference (2021, November)