Assignment 2:

A Written Analysis of Issues Impacting

Young Childrens Learning in Family and
Community Contexts: A focus on last born
children and children of single parent
families.
Asha Lloyd
Student I.D. 23245059

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

The study of the contexts of child development and their consequences for
children is important for educators as we are in the position to modify and
improve these contexts to ensure optimal learning and development for the
children effected (Bowes, Grace, & Hayes, 2012). In this written analysis, I will be
determining the effects and teaching implications of two different contexts in
which could arise in childrens lives; being the last born child of a family and
coming from a single parent family. Additionally, I will explore some of the
statistics in Australia surrounding both contexts, as well as using theoretical
concepts to explain the contexts.

PART ONE
Family Dynamics, Siblings, Childs Family Position
Part one will be discussing how sibling order can effect a childs learning and
development, particularly being the youngest child. On a personal not, I am the
youngest of seven, therefore I am interested in exploring the effects of being the
youngest sibling on learning and development. In Australia, the 2011 Census
found that there were 5,684,062 families and the average number of children per
family was 1.9 (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2013). This suggests that
most family households have more than one child, therefore leading to a youngest
child whose learning and development could be impacted by their sibling order.
Brofenbrenners Bioecological Theory suggests that as well as biological
predispositions, environmental influences directly impact childrens leaarning
and development (Couchenour & Chrisman, 2012). Brofenbrenners theory
suggests five environmental systems, of which two are relevant in this context; the
microsystem and the mesosytem. The microsystem consists of settings in which
the child lives or close by, including home, school and the community
(Couchenour & Chrisman, 2012). The mesosystem is the relationship of people in
the settings from the microsystem, and can effect the child when two individuals
from the microsystem communicate or connect. Lastly, Brofenbrenners theory
suggests that although a holistic, high quality early education is important for
childrens learning and development, family is even more significant

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

(Couchenour & Chrisman, 2012). This theory can be used to describe the
importance of understanding a childs sibling order, which comes under their
microsystem, and how a childs interaction with their older siblings can impact
their learning and development, which comes under the mesosystem.
Various research suggests that last born children differ from first born children in
terms of their learning, personality, and academic achievement (Silles, 2010;
Bonesronning & Massih, 2011; Skinner, & Fox-Francoeur, 2010; Carette, Anseel, &
Yperen, 2011). Silles (2010) found in her study that first born children are likely to
obtain higher text scores than last born children, while Bonesronning & Massih
(2011) found highly significant effects on students academic achievement for first
born and last born children. Therefore, if a child was showing signs of slowed
learning and development, being the last born of their family may be an aspect
that the educator can consider in order to improve their academic achievement.
Skinner & Fox-Francoeur (2010) suggest that first born children are more likely to
be adaptors who thrive on structure; procedures, rules and guidelines (p. 237),
while last born children are more likely to be innovators who follow a more
intuitive style of life. As a consequence, last born children may not respond well
to classrooms that involve strict rules and procedures which can effect their
learning and development. Lastly, Carette, Anseel, & Yperen (2011) found that
first born children tend to have a preference for mastery goals where they base
themselves on self-referenced standards rather than other peoples performances,
which differs from last born children who prefer performance goals which are
based on other peoples competence standards. Thus, if educators determine
achievement goals for last born children in which they compare to their own
competence standards, they are likely to lack motivation to achieve these goals. In
summary of current literature, last born children on average achieve lesser scores
on academic tests than first born children, last born children follow a more
intuitive style of learning, and are more likely to conform to performance goals
that are compared to their peers standards. These variants of personality and
learning styles translate into pedagogical concepts that educators can follow in

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

order to achieve optimal learning and development for last born children, based
on current research evidence.
Based on current research regarding last born children and their learning styles
and academic achievement, educators have an opportunity to become aware of
areas last born children may struggle with, thus can develop effective individual
learning and development strategies. As last born children are generally
innovative learners, to optimise learning and development, educators can ensure
the classroom is an innovative learning environment. Innovative learning
environments involve intrinsic motivation through creating learner purpose
activities, relevance and interest based activities, challenging activities, and
activities that generate curiosity, as well as incorporating practical applications
and opportunities for children to teach each other (Atkins, 2010). In conjunction,
educators may encourage last born children to adopt mastery goals rather than
performance based goals, as performance based goals cause a tendency to avoid
difficult tasks for fear of failure and cause uncreative behaviour (Ee, Seng,
Kwang, 2007). Mastery goals could easily be embedded in an innovative learning
environment through learner based activities and evaluation. Thus, if educators
attempt to create mastery goals in the context of an innovative learning
environment, last born children may thrive and achieve optimal learning and
development.

PART TWO
Family Dynamics Who Lives With The Family: Single Parenting
Part two will be discussing how single parent families can effect childrens
learning and development, particularly when there is minimal contact with one
parent. From experience, I personally believe it is becoming more common to be
working with a single mother who has more than one child, thus the children may
experience the effects of being the last born child and a child to a single parent at
the same time. In June 2012, there were 961 000 single parent families in Australia,

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

of which 81% were single mother families (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS],
2013b). In conjunction, 67% of single parent families were living with
dependants, which may have lead to 750,000 children in formal child care centres,
of which 78% had a single parent (ABS, 2013b; Australian Bureau of Statistics
[ABS], 2011). These alarming statistics lead to significant issues that children may
experience as a result of being a child to a single parent and in child care for long
hours, all of which educators have to be aware of and act upon.
Brofenbrenners Bioecological Theory can also be used to describe how the
environmental impacts of a single parent family can effect the learning and
development of children. Brofenbrenners theory states that parents are more
capable of providing physically and psychologically for their children when they
have a loving relationship with a second parent, therefore single parents may
struggle to optimally provide for their childrens needs trying to do it all on their
own (Couchenour & Chrisman, 2014). Brofenbrenners five environmental
systems also come into play in this context, particularly the macrosystem that
involves societal institution (Couchener & Chrisman, 2014). The societal
institution of single parent families may effect childrens learning and
development due to feeling different to both parent families and their children,
being closed off from some societal events due only being in contact with one
parent, and only being exposed to one gender role for majority of the time.
Similarly, Vygotskys approach of the sociocultural theory states that childrens
thinking is derived from social and historical assumptions stemmed from their
families, therefore children who have limited exposure to gender roles due to
single parents may have experience biased or illogical thoughts (Couchenour &
Chrisman, 2014). Thus, children who spend majority of their time around either
their mother or father, may have their views and beliefs, and therefore their
learning styles, altered as a result of any biases or strong values or beliefs bought
down from their single parent, rather than gaining different values and beliefs
from both parents.

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

Children of single parent families face many issues that can have an effect on their
learning and development (Bowes & Warburton, 2012; De Lange, Dronkers &
Wolbers, 2013; ). Although some single parent families function smoothly, the
average single parent child is more likely to suffer from depression and emotional
distress, learning difficulties and behavioural problems, and be forced to take on
adult roles and responsibilities way beyond their level of maturity (Bowes &
Warburton, 2012). Therefore, childrens learning and development is
disadvantaged by issues that can distract the child in the classroom and prevent
them from learning until these issues are addressed. In conjunction, De Lange,
Dronkers & Wolbers (2013) found that schools who have majority of children with
single parents perform less well on academic tests compared to school with
majority two parent families. As a result, children of single parent families may be
surrounded by other children who are experiencing the same issues therefore
may not be inclined to learn from their peers of higher ability or strive to be like
their peers. The study also found that single mothers are more likely to move to a
lower socio-economic area, which contains schools with less resources, thus
childrens learning difficulties are less likely to be recognised and attended to (De
Lange, Dronkers & Wolbers, 2013). Therefore, educators may not have the
knowledge or resources to attend to single parent childrens needs which may
lead to a downwards spiral of their learning and development. Similarly, single
parent families are more likely to reside in areas that are significantly linked with
limited social connectedness, less engagement with key social institutions, and
reduced access to opportunities for participation (p. 291). Thus, children are less
likely to be involved in social events that will address the behavioural and mental
problems previously addressed, leading to further distraction from learning and
development.
Through recognising the impacts of a single parent family on children and the
problems that may lead to these implications, educators are able to assess the
school community as a whole and how they can develop better partnerships with
the families to determine what the school community needs to help the children
thrive. The Family-School Partnerships Framework has developed 7 areas that

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

schools can follow in order to improve their partnerships with families. These
involve: communicating, connecting learning at home and school, building
community and identity, recognising the role of the family, consultative decision
making, collaborating beyond the school, and participating. (Department of
Education, Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR], 2015). Educators can
follow this framework in order to attend to the problem of single parents residing
in one area, insufficient resources, and issues associated with single parenting
families.
CONCLUSION
Overall, educators play a vital role in developing an understanding of a childs
context and how that may impact their learning and development. Furthermore,
they have a responsibility to tweak the learning environment to attend to
childrens learning and developmental needs. This unit has been thoroughly
engaging and informative, in which I now feel equipped with the knowledge and
skills required to recognise and evaluate various contexts that I may come across
in my future as an educator.

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

REFERENCING
Atkins, J. (2010). What Makes A Learning Environment Innovative. Retrieved 23rd
October, 2015 from
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/Documents/school/teachers/support/atkin.
pdf.
Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS] (2011). Childcare. Retrieved 22nd October,
2015 from
http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/LookupAttach/4102.0
Publication30.06.106/$File/41020_ChildCare.pdf.
Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS] (2013a). 2011 Census QuickStats [Fact Sheet].
Retrieved 21st October, 2015 from
http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2011/q
uickstat/0.
Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS] (2013b). One Parent Families. Retrieved 22nd
October, 2015 from
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/6224.0.55.001~Jun%202012
~Chapter~one%20Parent%20Families.
Bonesronning, H., & Massih, S.S. (2011). Birth order effects on young students
academic achievement. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(6), pp. 824-832. Doi:
doi:10.1016/j.socec.2011.08.010.
Bowes, J. & Warburton, W. (2012). Family as the primary context of childrens
development. In J. Bowes, R. Grace, & K. Hodge (Eds.). Children, Families &
Communities: Contexts and Consequences, (pp. 97-115). South Melbourne, VIC:
Oxford University Press.

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

Bowes. J, Grace, R., & Hayes A. (2012). The role of context in childrens
development. In J. Bowes, R. Grace, & K. Hodge (Eds.). Children, Families &
Communities: Contexts and Consequences, (pp. 3-14). South Melbourne, VIC: Oxford
University Press.
Carette, B., Anseel, F., & Yperen, N.W.V (2011). Born to learn or born to win? Birth
order effects on achievement goals. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(5), pp. 500503. Doi: doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2011.06.008.
Couchenour, D. & Chrisman, K. (2014). Theory-based approach to family
involvement in early childhood education. In D. Couchenour & K. Chrisman
(Eds.), Families, Schools and Communities: Together for Young Children, (5th ed), pp.
2-27. Belmont, Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR]
(2015). Family-School Partnerships Framework: A Guide for Schools and Families.
Retrieved 23rd October, 2015 from
http://www.familyschool.org.au/files/3013/8451/8364/Familyschool_partnerships_framework.pdf.
De Lange, M., Dronkers, J., & Wolbers, M.H.J. (2012). Single-parent family forms
and childrens educational performance in a comparative perspective: effects of
schools share of single- parent families. School Effectiveness & School Improvement,
25(3), pp. 329-350. Doi: 10.1080/09243453.2013.809773.
Ee, J., Seng, T.O., & Kwang, N.A. (2007). Styles of creativity: adaptors and
innovators in a Singapore context. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(3), pp. 364-373.
Retrieved 23rd October, 2015 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ811071.pdf.
Silles, M.A. (2010). The implications of family size and birth order for test scores
and behavioral development. Economics of Education Review, 29(5), pp. 795-803.
Doi: doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.02.004.

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

Skinner, N.F., & Fox-Francoeur, C.A. (2010). Personality implications of adaptioninnovation: v. birth order as a determinant of cognitive style. Social Behavior and
Personality, 38(2), pp. 237-240. Doi: 10.2224/sbp.2010.38.2.237

Asha Lloyd

Assignment 2

10