Expectations for the transition from kindergarten to primary school amongst teachers, parents and children

This article was downloaded by: [Aston University]On: 12 January 2014, At: 05:40Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Early Child Development and CarePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20

Expectations for the transition fromkindergarten to primary schoolamongst teachers, parents and childrenWai Ling Chan aa Department of Early Childhood Education , The Hong KongInstitute of Education , Hong Kong , ChinaPublished online: 03 Jun 2011.

To cite this article: Wai Ling Chan (2012) Expectations for the transition from kindergarten toprimary school amongst teachers, parents and children, Early Child Development and Care, 182:5,639-664, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2011.569543

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.569543

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/03004430.2011.569543

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.569543

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Early Child Development and Care

ISSN 0300-4430 print/ISSN 1476-8275 online© 2012 Taylor & Francis

http://www.tandfonline.com

Expectations for the transition from kindergarten to primary school amongst teachers, parents and children

Wai Ling Chan*

Department of Early Childhood Education, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong, ChinaTaylor and FrancisGECD_A_569543.sgm(Received 10 August 2010; final version received 3 March 2011)10.1080/03004430.2011.569543Early Child Development and Care0300-4430 (print)/1476-8275 (online)Original Article2011Taylor & Francis0000000002011Wai [email protected]

This paper reports the results of a study concerning the expectations for thetransition from kindergarten to primary school amongst teachers, parents andchildren in Hong Kong. It probes the expectations that teachers and parents haveabout children’s competence in five specific areas of child development thought tobe essential for a smooth such transition, as well as children’s competence in thesedifferent developmental areas and their performance upon the transition to primaryschool. The study’s data were obtained through questionnaires, semi-structuredinterviews and classroom observations, and its results will serve as a reference forevaluation of existing transitional practices and the design of effective transitionprogrammes in the local context. Children’s voices and their observedperformance during the transition period indicate that they have variedexpectations of the transition. Parents, in contrast, have high expectations for theirchildren’s academic ability and self-discipline. Both primary school teachers andthe parents of kindergartners rank pre-academic skills as the most importantdevelopmental area, whereas kindergarten teachers rank them as the leastimportant. Most of the adult respondents in this study agree that a strongerconnection amongst kindergartens, primary schools and parents would facilitate asmoother transition to primary school.

Keywords: Expectations; children’s competence; effective transitionalprogrammes; kindergarten; primary school

Introduction

Research conducted in the Western context has identified the long-term significancefor children of having a smooth transition between kindergarten and primary school,as it sets the tone and direction of their future school careers (Pianta & Kraft-Sayre,1999). Alexander and Entwisle (1988) provided evidence to show that a child’sachievements during primary school are a function of the extent to which he or shehas made a successful transition from kindergarten. Research also suggests that inaddition to better academic achievement, children who experience a smooth such tran-sition and early school success also tend to have higher levels of social competence(Alexander & Entwisle, 1988; Early, Pianta, & Cox, 1999; Luster & McAdoo, 1996;Shepard & Smith, 1989), and a number of studies have identified a link between asuccessful transition to school and later academic and social success (Dockett &Perry, 2003a, 2004; Pianta, Rimm-Kaufman, & Cox, 1999; Ramey & Ramey, 1998).

*Email: [email protected]

Vol. 182, No. 5, May 2012, 639–664

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.569543

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

It can thus be safely concluded that the transition to school is one of the mostimportant changes that occurs in early childhood (Curtis, 1986). A significant devel-opmental and transactional process during which children change and grow, this tran-sition also involves interaction with children’s peer groups, families, teachers andschools, and even with the community as a whole (Ramey & Ramey, 1994). Bronfen-brenner (1979), Balaban (1985), and Edgar (1986) postulated that the best results areachieved when parents, teachers and children work as equal partners in the transitionto school, and there is concrete evidence to show that effective transition-to-schoolprogrammes work well when they link the home, early childhood education andprimary school settings (Graue, 1992) and when input is received from parents, teach-ers and children (Dockett & Perry, 2001).

The importance of the transition to school is increasingly being emphasised world-wide (Dockett & Perry, 2002a; Dunlop & Fabian, 2002; Clarke & Sharpe, 2003;Peters, 2000), and the study reported herein was carried out to examine the expecta-tions for and experiences of this transition amongst teachers, parents and children inHong Kong. It was conducted in three kindergartens and three primary schools, withthe focus on upper kindergarten (K3) and Primary One (P1) classes. The teachers ofall six classes and the parents of the children within these classes completed question-naires and took part in interviews. To capture the voices of the children involved, K3classes (with pupils aged 5 to 6) in one kindergarten and P1 classes (with pupils aged6 to 7) in one primary school were selected for classroom observation, during whichthe teachers engaged the children in a discussion of their understanding of, expecta-tions for and concerns about the transition process. The K3 classes were also observedduring visits to one of the primary schools, and follow-up interviews were alsoconducted with several children, and their parents and teachers, once they had begunprimary school.

Approximately 95% of children aged 3 to 6 in Hong Kong receive pre-primaryeducation. According to the Hong Kong Education Bureau (EDB), there were 1015kindergartens with 140,783 pupils in 2007 (Education Bureau, 2007). All of the pre-primary educational institutions in Hong Kong belong to the private sector and areeither non-profit-making or private independent schools run by voluntary organisa-tions or private individuals/organisations. The territory’s children are required by lawto begin formal schooling by the age of 5 years, 8 months. Although pre-primaryeducation is not a prerequisite for primary school eligibility, most parents enrol theirchildren in kindergarten because they believe it will prepare them for school (Ebbeck,1995).

Concern with the transition to school amongst Hong Kong’s educational authori-ties and the academic community can be dated to about 1993, when the EDB beganits investigation into the continuity of teaching practices between kindergartens andprimary schools. The Bureau’s Guide to the Pre-primary Curriculum, which waspublished in 2006, states that the transition between the two should be taken intoconsideration in the pre-primary education curriculum (Curriculum DevelopmentCouncil, 2006). It is anticipated that the results of the study reported in this paper,which gathered information on this transition from the perspectives of its most impor-tant participants, that is, children, teachers and parents, will contribute to the designof guidelines for effective transition programmes for young children in Hong Kong.

The study’s conceptual framework was designed with reference to US psycholo-gist Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory, which posits that the ecologicalenvironment within which child development takes place comprises several systems:

W.L. Chan640

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

a microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).Brofenbrenner suggested that there is a mutually dependent, mutually beneficial andmutually growing relationship between individuals and environments that can beregarded as co-existence or a co-existent organised system. The key principles of histheory are that children influence the contexts in which they live and that thosecontexts act as proximal processes influencing their development (Brofenbrenner,1979). In addition, biological systems interact with ecological systems through achild’s relationships with his or her parents, siblings, extended family and teachers. InPianta and Walsh’s (1996) view, the child/family and schooling form a web ofcomplex and interdependent systems that act in concert with one another and consti-tute the context in which the child develops. It is thus clear that any investigation ofchildren’s transition to school must include all participants in the process, includingthe child him or herself and his or her parents and teachers. The influences of thefamily, classroom (kindergarten and primary school), and community contexts and therelationships amongst them must inform the guidelines for effective transitionprogrammes.

Although Dockett and Perry (2002a, 2002b) found effective such programmes tobe the result of close partnerships amongst early childhood and primary school teach-ers and parents and children, two Hong Kong-based studies have identified amismatch between the skills that kindergarten and P1 teachers believe necessary toprepare children for school (Opper, 1993; Wong, 2003), thus raising the question ofhow children respond to these different sets of expectations. With regard to the homeand school contexts, previous research has also found that certain types of teacher–parent relationships are more conducive to a smooth school transition than others(Dockett & Perry, 2001). The present study examined the expectations concerning thistransition amongst the three main stakeholders, including the elements each groupconsiders to be most important to a smooth such transition. It also investigated theareas of child development most significant to a successful school transition, the diffi-culties encountered during that transition, and suitable transition activities and prac-tices. The five specific areas of child development considered include pre-academic,social and self-sufficiency skills, personal qualities, and rules and regulations.

Blair et al. (2007) (cited in Pianta, Cox, & Snow, 2007) noted that these five areashave important correlations with children’s readiness for school. Although suchreadiness has no single comprehensive definition, research has identified a number ofindicators for it (Blair et al., 2007). Amongst children, these indicators include pre-literacy, general cognitive, and language abilities and pre-academic, self-disciplineand social skills. On the part of the school, they include teachers’ practices andabilities, administrative policies and the availability of a high-quality preschool expe-rience. These indicators are reckoned to be a small part of the multidimensional matrixof school readiness. Chow (1993) pointed out that the different views held by kinder-garten and primary school teachers concerning children’s readiness for primary schoolcould hinder children’s adaptation to school.

Docket and Perry (2003a) and Lin, Lawrence, and Gorell (2003) consider schoolreadiness to include skills and knowledge associated with success in school.Piotrkowski (2004) (cited in Pianta, Cox, & Snow, 2007) noted that when asked aboutthe important skills that children will require for primary school, kindergarten teacherstend to emphasise the social and emotional aspects of school readiness rather than pre-academic skills, although more recent research on teacher expectations has foundgreater weight given to these skills. Parents too have been found to place more

Early Child Development and Care 641

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

importance on pre-academic skills, such as learning the English alphabet and numbers(Piotrkowski, 2004).

Although interrelationships have been acknowledged amongst many domains ofschool readiness, empirical studies remain very limited for most of these relationships,as Pianta, Cox, and Snow (2007) have pointed out. There is also a need for a moreinnovative design and measurement strategy in addition to greater efforts to explorethese relationships fully. The study reported herein was carried out to meet theseneeds. Further, in line with Pianta, Cox, and Snow’s (2007) contention that the qualityof children’s transition from kindergarten to primary school during the first few yearsof their school careers is dependent not only upon their social, economic and educa-tional circumstances but also upon adult expectations, this paper focuses on adults’expectations concerning different areas of child development. Of course, as childrenare the leading figures in this transition, their expectations and experiences are also ofgreat importance and, accordingly, given an airing here.

Transition expectations amongst teachers, parents and children

As previously noted, a number of international studies have investigated the expecta-tions of teachers and parents concerning the transition to school (Dockett & Perry,2003b; Dockett, Perry, Howard, & Meckley, 1999), young children’s developmentand pre-primary education (Allen, Thompson, Hoadley, Engelking, & Drapeaux,1997; Weikart, 1999; Welch & White, 1999). Some of the major factors that havebeen recognised as important both to this transition and to young children’s develop-ment include social and self-sufficiency skills, knowledge, physical attributes, rules,and personal qualities. Ojala (2000), Weikart (1999) and Welch and White (1999)found that although both teachers and parents prioritise knowledge and pre-academicand social skills, the former tend to place greater emphasis on social skills and thelatter on pre-academic skills. Dockett and Perry (2003a) found that young childrenperceive rules and disposition to matter most, as they are keenly aware that primaryschools have a long list of rules with which they must comply. Although Ojala (2000)and Weikart (1999) reported the cultural context to have a bearing on the preferencesof teachers and parents, most of the aforementioned studies concluded that the twogroups are in agreement concerning children’s educational success.

In Chow’s (1993) Hong Kong study, both kindergarten and primary school teach-ers ranked self-sufficiency as the most important skill for children to develop,followed by good classroom conduct and social and communication skills, with pre-academic skills ranked last. Weikart (1999), in contrast, reported pre-academic skillsto be considered paramount by parents, followed by language skills, thus demonstrat-ing the poor congruence between the expectations of kindergarten teachers and theexpectations of parents concerning the former’s responsibilities. Although these stud-ies provide an overview of teachers’ and parents’ expectations for children’s develop-ment, none has examined the expectations of both for the transition activities carriedout at the kindergarten level or the arrangements made in the P1 curriculum to easethe transition to primary school.

Kitson (2002) posited culture as another key factor in this transition, with aculture’s educational values reflected in interactions amongst children, parents andteachers. Okagaki and Diamond (2000) reviewed a number of studies in this arena andreported that children’s adjustment to the school environment is affected by the degreeof congruence between their parents’ beliefs and cultural values and those of the

W.L. Chan642

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

school. Mallory and New (1994) (cited in Kitson, 2002) noted that a school’s level ofacademic achievement may also be influenced by differences between the culture ofthe school and that of the children. In other words, children may need to adapt to newvalues and a new set of rules that run contrary to their family’s expectations and innateprinciples.

Within the educational context itself, Kitson (2002) found that kindergarten teach-ers place great emphasis on the expectations of P1 teachers and feel tremendous pres-sure to fulfil those expectations. Those surveyed by Kitson (2002) also commented onthe insufficiency of the pre-primary curriculum to meet the needs of the primarycurriculum and reported that expectations for the former curriculum often exceededits reach. Strikingly, she found none of these kindergarten teachers to be responsive tochildren’s needs, concerns or interests with regard to primary school, which is reflec-tive of teachers’ and parents’ perceptions of children as passive recipients of knowl-edge and further highlights the importance of the current study’s focus on listening tochildren to better understand their needs and concerns. To date, only a handful of stud-ies have sought children’s comments and views on the transition to school and thedeterminants of a successful such transition (e.g. Brostrom, 2003; Dockett & Perry,2003a; Dockett & Simpson, 2003; Peters, 2000). In fact, according to Dockett andPerry’s (2004) findings, in planning transition-to-school programmes, teachers areoften concerned primarily with their own theoretical standpoints, rather than viewingchildren and parents as active participants in the construction of the social–culturalenvironment.

Parents too bring their own views and feelings to the table. They are often nervouswhen their children start school, and their expectations, worries and hopes can affecttheir children in verbal and non-verbal ways and determine the level of support thelatter receive (Yeboah, 2002). Because, as we have seen, parents and teachers oftendiffer in their views of the factors that moderate the transition to school, as well as thebest pedagogical approaches to employ, thus greater consensus is needed to ensurethat parents understand exactly what teachers can and cannot do at school, thus allow-ing them to provide better assistance to their own children to help them to adapt toschool (Niesel & Griebel, 2000). Evidence suggests that children experience this tran-sition as a process (Pianta & Kraft-Sayre, 2003). One-third of the parents interviewedby Wong (2003) reported that their children were still experiencing transition difficul-ties one month after beginning school, with only 25% stating that their children werehaving no such difficulties at all. About a third of these parents felt that their chil-dren’s transition difficulties stemmed from an inability to deal with new and unfamil-iar teaching approaches, whereas a quarter stated a lack of friends as the issue ofgreatest concern. The primary school teachers in Wong’s (2003) study reported rulesand regulations to be most problematic for children, with individual differences inchildren’s competence and disposition contributing strongly to the transition difficul-ties encountered.

Research conducted in Australia has resulted in a set of guidelines for effectivetransition programmes (Dockett & Perry, 2001). These guidelines include establishingpositive relationships amongst children, parents and teachers; facilitating children’sdevelopment as capable learners; providing more than a simple orientation; andinvolving all stakeholders. However, without further investigation, we cannot assumethat these guidelines are appropriate for Hong Kong, as differences in socio-culturalcontexts must be taken into account. Although Hong Kong research has delved intosuch related areas as the skills that teachers deem necessary for children entering P1


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

(Chow, 1993), the transition problems these children face (Chan, Lau, & Poon, 1999;Wong, 2003), and curriculum and teaching practice issues (Curriculum DevelopmentCouncil, 2006), the evidence is far from complete. The results of the study discussedherein, which surveyed the expectations for the transition from kindergarten toprimary school amongst K3 and P1 teachers, parents and children, will contribute toa more complete knowledge base from which to identify guidelines for the develop-ment of effective transition programmes in Hong Kong.

Methods and procedures

Data were collected from teachers and parents through questionnaires and semi-struc-tured interviews and from children during classroom observations and in informalconversations and interviews. The study sample comprised six randomly choseneducational institutions in different locations of Hong Kong: three kindergartens andthree government-aided primary schools. The study was limited to K3 and P1 chil-dren, and one kindergarten and one primary school were selected for the classroomobservations.

The breakdown of the study participants is as follows:

(1) 26 K3 teachers(2) 12 P1 teachers(3) 259 parents of K3 children(4) 523 parents of P1 children(5) 40 K3 children (attending their last year of kindergarten)(6) 32 P1 children (attending their first year of primary school)

The investigation consisted of four parts:

(1) Questionnaires(2) Semi-structured interviews(3) Classroom observations(4) Follow-up interviews

The study investigated the following three research questions:

(1) What are P1 and K3 teachers’ expectations concerning children’s transition toprimary school?

(2) What expectations prevail amongst the parents of K3 and P1 children withregard to this transition?

(3) What are K3 and P1 children’s expectations for and experience of this transition?

Questionnaires

Following a pilot study, four different sets of questionnaires were distributed to theparents and teachers of the participating K3 and P1 classes with the aim of identify-ing the similarities and differences amongst their expectations for children’s transi-tion from kindergarten to primary school. This survey, which provided quantitativedata, was accompanied by interviews with the P1 teachers and parents to providequalitative insights and to illuminate the information obtained in the quantitative

W.L. Chan644

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

stage. Qualitative interviewing allows the researcher to enter into the inner world ofanother person and gain an understanding of his or her perspective (Patton, 2002).

Although 820 questionnaires were distributed, only 418 were properlycompleted and returned, 6.22% of them by kindergarten teachers, 17.46% bykindergarten parents, 2.40% by primary school teachers and 73.92% by primaryschool parents. A five-point Likert scale was used to measure the items on the foursets of questionnaires, with ‘5’ indicating the most positive response and ‘1’ theleast. The mean scores given to each item by the different respondent groups werecalculated for comparison, with differences interpreted as discontinuities amongstthe groups.

Semi-structured interviews with teachers and parents

All of the questionnaires were accompanied by an invitation to participate in a semi-structured interview, with an optional consent form to be returned if respondents wereinterested. All of the teachers who returned the consent form, 11 kindergarten teachersand nine primary school teachers, were interviewed. A large number of parents werewilling to be interviewed, and hence four each from the participating kindergartensand primary schools were chosen randomly, for a total of 24 parent interviews.

All of the interviews were conducted by the author of this paper, and four differentsets of 10–12 open-ended interview questions were constructed for the four differentinterviewee groups. Participants were interviewed individually for about 20–30minutes each. All of the interviews were recorded, and the content was later tran-scribed for purposes of analysis. The following are sample questions asked in theinterviews with the two sets of teachers and the two sets of parents, respectively:

Sample interview questions for K3 and P1 teachers:

(1) What expectations do you have concerning children’s promotion to P1?(2) How do you expect P1 (K3) teachers to assist your pupils in adapting to P1

school life?(3) What role do you think parents play in children’s transition to P1 life?(4) In what ways do you think kindergartens and primary schools can cooperate

in easing children’s transition to P1?(5) From the macro perspective, what do you consider the major reasons for

children’s transition difficulties when moving up to P1?

Sample interview questions for K3 and P1 parents:

(1) What expectations do you have concerning your child’s promotion to P1?(2) What expectations do you have for the kindergarten and the school, and why?(3) Do kindergartens and primary schools provide sufficient support to parents in

assisting their children in adapting to P1?(4) What kind of support/assistance do you expect them to provide to parents and

children?(5) From the macro perspective, what do you consider the major reasons for

children’s transition difficulties when moving up to P1?


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Observations

Classroom observation in kindergarten

The first observation was undertaken in one of the kindergartens after the children’svisits to three primary schools, during which they engaged in drawing, discussion,interview and reporting activities. This observation involved 40 children in threedifferent K3 classes whose teachers engaged them in a discussion of topics concerningprimary school and primary school life. The teachers introduced these topics and thenelicited the children’s related expectations, worries and existing knowledge. The chil-dren were asked to express their feelings about and expectations of the transition toprimary school in verbal form. The following are some of the questions the teachersasked during the classroom discussion:

(1) Do you know what the differences between P1 and kindergarten life are?Where did you learn about them?

(2) How do you feel about being promoted to P1?(3) Would you like to be promoted to P1 as soon as possible? Why?(4) What activities would you like to do in P1?(5) What kind of teachers do you hope to have?(6) What would you like to learn during your primary school life?

The classroom discussions were taped, and some of the dialogues between the chil-dren and the teachers were transcribed. Field notes were taken to record some of theinformation gleaned through informal conversations with the child participants, andsome of their written work was copied. A total of 24 hours of observations were under-taken, including eight hours of observation during the children’s primary school visits.

Classroom observation in primary school

To allow comparison of young children’s expectations of the transition from kinder-garten to primary school with their actual experience of it, the second observation tookplace in one of the primary schools two weeks after P1 classes had begun. Yeboahclaimed that ‘when a child moves from early childhood education to the primaryschool, transition to school is said to occur’ (2002, p. 52), and Alexander and Entwisle(1988) defined a successful such transition as a child moving from the early childhoodeducation to primary education phase with little difficulty. The focus of the secondobservation carried out for the current study was on the children’s performance inclass, at recess and during lunch time, and four target areas were assessed: pre-academic skills, social skills, self-sufficiency and discipline (including their ability toobey rules and regulations and follow instructions). One P1 class comprising childrenwho had previously attended one of the participating kindergartens was observed forthree consecutive days. Four hours of observations of normal lessons, recess and lunchtime took place each day. The objectives were to investigate children’s performance,responses and behaviour in different school situations and to observe their level ofadaptability to the new physical and social setting in which they had been placed.

Follow-up interviews with parents, teachers and children

In line with Yeboah’s (2002) observation that parents are very often nervous whentheir children start school, and that they may unconsciously convey their worries to

W.L. Chan646

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

their children, follow-up interviews were carried out with four P1 parents twomonths after their children had begun school to obtain more detailed informationabout how the children were coping in the new learning environment. Three of thechildren’s teachers also participated in follow-up interviews. Finally, as it is alsoimportant to afford children an opportunity to give voice to their experiences, inter-views were also carried out with four K3 children just before they had finishedtheir kindergarten careers, when they were about 6 years old, and then againapproximately four months later, just after they had entered primary school. AsZinnecker (cited in Griebel & Niesel, 2002) noted, free conversation with childrenoffers a chance to overcome the barrier separating the child and the adult worlds.The following are sample questions from the follow-up interviews with the P1parents, teachers and children:

Sample follow-up interview questions for P1 parents and teachers:

(1) How are the children adapting (in terms of communication with peers,academic ability, independence, ability to take care of themselves and class-room deportment)?

(2) What has been their greatest difficulty in terms of adaptation?(3) How are you assisting them in coping with their transition difficulties?

Sample follow-up interview questions for P1 children:

(1) Are you enjoying primary school life?(2) What are your favourite primary school activities, and why?(3) What are your least favourite activities, and why?(4) Do you like your primary school assignments? Why or why not?(5) What have you learnt in primary school?(6) What has been your happiest experience in your primary school life so far?

Findings

Questionnaires

Adult expectations of the skills and abilities required for a smooth transition to P1

With respect to the pre-academic skills listed in Table 1, the majority of the kinder-garten children’s parents had high expectations for their children’s interest in readingafter primary school entry (mean = 4.37), whilst most of the kindergarten teachershad greater expectations for these children’s ability to express their own opinionswith clarity (mean = 4.50). (All mean scores are based on a scale ranging from 1 to5.) With regard to social skills, the highest expectation of both the kindergartenteachers and the parents was that the children would have a good grasp of basicmanners, such as proper greetings (mean = 3.87–4.38), whereas the primary schoolteachers had rather low expectations in this regard (mean = 3.50–3.70). In terms ofpersonal qualities, all three groups expected the children to be honest. These findingssuggest that kindergarten parents expect P1 students to possess strong academicskills and desirable personal qualities, whereas kindergarten teachers are moreconcerned with their self-sufficiency skills, and are thus in line with Dockett and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Tabl

e 1.

Adu

lt e

xpec

tati

ons

of s

kill

s an

d ab

ilit

ies

requ

ired

for

a s

moo

th t

rans

itio

n to

P1.

Per

cent

age

and

mea

n

Kin

derg

arte

n te

ache

rsP

rim

ary

scho

ol t

each

ers

Kin

derg

arte

n pa

rent

s

Chi

ldre

n’s

com

pete

nce

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

n5(

%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

n5 (%

)4 (%

)3 (%

)2 (%

)1 (%

)M

ean

Tot

al

Pre

-aca

dem

ic s

kill

sG

reat

int

eres

t in

rea

ding

4235

230

04.

1930

6010

00

4.20

5431

141

04.

374.

31C

reat

ive

thin

king

4242

150

04.

2730

4030

00

4.00

3935

224

04.

084.

12P

robl

em-s

olvi

ng s

kill

s50

3911

00

4.38

3040

200

03.

9043

3225

00

4.18

4.20

Cla

rity

in

expr

essi

ng o

nese

lf a

nd

one’

s ow

n op

inio

ns58

357

00

4.50

3050

200

04.

1042

3721

00

4.21

4.27

Doe

s ho

mew

ork

on o

wn

init

iati

ve54

2719

00

4.35

2070

100

04.

1047

2924

00

4.23

4.25

Bas

ic w

riti

ng s

kill

s46

4212

00

4.35

2060

200

04.

0054

2719

00

4.35

4.23

Soci

al s

kill

sW

illi

ngne

ss t

o de

al w

ith

stra

nger

s31

5415

00

4.15

2010

700

03.

5029

3631

31

3.87

3.91

Sel

f-m

otiv

atio

n42

508

00

4.35

2020

600

03.

6038

4514

30

4.18

4.17

Exp

ress

es e

mot

ions

in

a su

itab

le

man

ner

3854

80

04.

3110

5040

00

3.70

3838

221

04.

134.

13

Bas

ic s

ocia

l m

anne

rs (

e.g.

pro

per

gree

ting

s)46

468

00

4.38

1050

400

03.

7043

3321

30

4.17

4.18

Self

-suf

fici

ency

ski

lls

Abi

lity

to

pack

ow

n sc

hool

bag

5042

80

04.

4220

3020

300

3.40

3831

310

04.

074.

09A

bili

ty t

o fi

nish

mea

ls42

508

00

4.35

1030

4020

03.

3037

2934

00

4.03

4.04

Abi

lity

to

go t

o th

e w

ashr

oom

al

one

at t

he a

ppro

pria

te t

ime

5834

80

04.

5030

3040

00

3.90

3434

293

04.

004.

11

Abi

lity

to

put

away

obj

ects

aft

er

use

5834

80

04.

5010

5030

100

3.60

3838

240

04.

144.

18

W.L. Chan648

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Tabl

e 1.

(Con

tinu

ed).

Per

cent

age

and

mea

n

Kin

derg

arte

n te

ache

rsP

rim

ary

scho

ol t

each

ers

Kin

derg

arte

n pa

rent

s

Chi

ldre

n’s

com

pete

nce

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

n5 (%

)4 (%

)3 (%

)2 (%

)1 (%

)M

ean

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

nT

otal

Per

sona

l qu

alit

ies

Sel

f-co

nfid

ence

5834

80

04.

5020

1070

00

3.50

6525

100

04.

564.

44P

olit

enes

s65

278

00

4.58

3040

300

04.

0056

3211

00

4.45

4.44

Hon

esty

7323

40

04.

6940

5010

00

4.30

6522

130

04.

524.

54E

ager

ness

to

try

6523

120

04.

5450

2030

00

4.20

6426

100

04.

544.

51

Self

-dis

cipl

ine

(rul

es a

nd r

egul

atio

ns)

Rai

ses

hand

bef

ore

spea

king

5031

190

04.

3150

1040

00

4.10

3735

253

04.

074.

13O

beys

sch

ool

rule

s50

428

00

4.42

3050

200

04.

1043

2928

00

4.14

4.21

Que

ues

5831

110

04.

4620

5030

00

3.90

4235

221

03.

904.

21

Key

: 5

= a

ver

y gr

eat

deal

, 4 =

a l

ot, 3

= a

lit

tle,

2 =

ver

y li

ttle

, 1 =

not

at

all.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Perry’s (2007) finding that parents are most concerned with the curriculum duringtheir children’s transition to school.

P1 pupils’ competence in different areas of development

The questionnaire results in Table 2 show that most of the kindergarten and primaryschool teachers and primary school parents recognised P1 pupils’ ability to copy thehomework list (mean = 3.78), with their ability to finish their homework on their owninitiative gaining the lowest score (mean = 3.20). With respect to the children’s self-sufficiency skills, most of the adults rated them highly in their ability to be able to goto the washroom on their own when they needed to (mean = 4.07), but they were lessconfident about the children’s ability to follow instructions without the teacher’s help(mean = 3.36). The majority of the adults were satisfied with the P1 pupils’ self-suffi-ciency performance in terms of queuing up properly (mean = 3.91), but doubted theirability to remain seated during lessons (mean = 3.72). Overall, there were differencesbetween P1 pupils’ actual performance and the adults’ expectations for their perfor-mance, particularly in terms of academic skills and self-discipline.

Most important areas of development

Table 3 shows that both the primary school teachers and the kindergarten parentsranked pre-academic skills as the most important area of development, whereas thekindergarten teachers considered it to be the least important. These results are in linewith those presented in Table 1.

Changes in children after the transition to primary school

Only the parents with children in primary school answered this set of questions, andmost of them stated that their children’s habits were either unchanged or had improved(Table 4). It is noteworthy, however, that 15% thought that their children’s willing-ness to do their homework had worsened, perhaps because the amount of homeworkhad increased from 30 minutes to 1–2 hours.

Perceptions of the transition to school

All four respondent groups expressed similar levels of agreement or disagreementwith Questions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6, as shown in Table 5. Surprisingly, about half said theywere uncertain or had no idea about Questions 7 and 8. The parents were generallymore satisfied with the arrangements made by the kindergartens than with those madeby the primary schools.

Semi-structured interviews

Expectations of new entrants

During the interviews, few of the primary school teachers expressed high expectationsof the children who had just entered primary school. They tended to emphasise disci-pline, self-sufficiency and the ability to pay attention over academic achievements. Asone teacher stated, ‘Learning can come later. It’s better to have their discipline trained

W.L. Chan650

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Tabl

e 2.

P1

pupi

ls’ c

ompe

tenc

e in

dif

fere

nt a

reas

of

deve

lopm

ent.

Per

cent

age

and

mea

n

Kin

derg

arte

n te

ache

rsP

rim

ary

scho

ol t

each

ers

Pri

mar

y sc

hool

par

ents

Chi

ldre

n’s

com

pete

nce

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

n5 (%

)4 (%

)3 (%

)2 (%

)1 (%

)M

ean

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

nT

otal

Pre

-aca

dem

ic s

kill

sM

anag

es t

o co

py h

omew

ork

list

054

388

03.

4630

300

400

3.50

3922

2214

33.

813.

78C

an h

andl

e ex

ams/

test

s/di

ctat

ions

w

ith

ease

027

4231

02.

960

2040

400

2.80

1526

3618

53.

283.

24

Con

cent

rate

s in

cla

ss8

2369

00

3.38

1040

2030

03.

3015

3533

152

3.46

3.45

Fin

ishe

s ho

mew

ork

on o

wn

init

iati

ve8

3158

40

3.42

00

100

00

3.00

1822

2923

83.

193.

20

Soci

al s

kill

sS

hare

s fo

od a

nd i

tem

s w

ith

clas

smat

es19

5031

00

3.88

2040

400

03.

8033

3823

60

3.97

3.96

Wor

ks a

nd p

lays

wit

h cl

assm

ates

co

oper

ativ

ely

1946

350

03.

8510

4050

00

3.60

2342

286

03.

823.

82

Car

es a

bout

cla

ssm

ates

1561

230

03.

9210

5040

00

3.70

2442

295

03.

873.

86E

xpre

sses

ow

n op

inio

ns a

nd

pref

eren

ces

clea

rly

842

428

03.

5010

2050

200

3.20

2238

2613

13.

673.

64

Self

-suf

fici

ency

ski

lls

Is a

ble

to g

o to

the

was

hroo

m a

t th

e ap

prop

riat

e ti

me

3538

198

04.

000

3060

100

3.20

4231

234

04.

114.

07

Is a

ble

to f

inis

h m

eals

on

own

2529

2917

03.

6210

2050

200

3.20

3129

2513

23.

753.

73Is

abl

e to

inf

orm

tea

cher

s w

hen

feel

ing

unco

mfo

rtab

le o

r ha

s ne

eds

2334

358

03.

7310

6030

00

3.80

2538

288

13.

783.

78

Fol

low

s al

l in

stru

ctio

ns w

itho

ut a

ny

help

fro

m t

each

ers

446

388

43.

3810

2030

3010

2.90

1234

3519

03.

383.

36

Dis

play

s no

reg

ress

ive

beha

viou

r (e

.g. u

rina

ry i

ncon

tine

nce,

bit

ing

fing

erna

ils)

835

3423

03.

2720

6020

00

4.00

5319

175

64.

084.

02


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Tabl

e 2.

(Con

tinu

ed).

Per

cent

age

and

mea

n

Kin

derg

arte

n te

ache

rsP

rim

ary

scho

ol t

each

ers

Pri

mar

y sc

hool

par

ents

Chi

ldre

n’s

com

pete

nce

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

n5 (%

)4 (%

)3 (%

)2 (%

)1 (%

)M

ean

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1(%

)M

ean

Tot

al

Per

sona

l qu

alit

ies

Mak

es n

o ex

cuse

s to

lea

ve s

choo

l15

5427

40

3.81

1070

200

03.

9065

1512

26

4.29

4.24

Is d

elig

hted

to

go t

o sc

hool

3134

314

03.

9230

5020

00

4.10

4930

165

04.

214.

19L

ikes

to

talk

abo

ut s

choo

l li

fe27

4223

80

3.88

2050

2010

03.

8040

3416

91

4.04

4.02

Lov

es t

each

ers/

clas

smat

es27

3831

40

3.88

1060

300

03.

8039

3421

41

4.08

4.06

Self

-dis

cipl

ine

(rul

es a

nd r

egul

atio

ns)

Rai

ses

hand

bef

ore

spea

king

1150

318

03.

6510

1040

400

2.90

3131

2711

03.

803.

76R

emai

ns s

eate

d du

ring

les

sons

446

500

03.

5410

3020

400

3.10

3129

2515

03.

763.

72Is

abl

e to

wai

t in

a q

ueue

850

384

03.

6210

2040

300

3.10

3632

267

03.

963.

91

Key

: 5

= a

lway

s, 4

= o

ften

, 3 =

som

etim

es, 2

= s

eldo

m, 1

= n

ever

.

W.L. Chan652

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

first’. The kindergarten teachers and parents, in contrast, emphasised their desire forchildren to enjoy school and develop good pre-academic, self-sufficiency and socialskills.

Competence of new entrants

Both the primary school teachers and parents told the interviewer that the children hadtaken one to four weeks to adapt to primary school life and that they generallydisplayed good pre-academic, social and self-sufficiency skills. Both sets of teachersreported more significant problems in pre-academic skills and classroom discipline(obeying rules, sitting still and not talking in class), whereas most of the parents noteddifficulties only with pre-academic skills, although several also mentioned socialskills.

Major factors accounting for the difficulties encountered by children during the transition to school

The sudden change from a less formal to a much stricter learning environment wascited by many of the interview respondents as having the most significant impact onyoung children. The next most cited factors were changes in the physical environmentand daily routine, which caused anxiety for the children and affected their competence

Table 3. Most important areas of development.

Kindergarten teachers

Primary school teachers Kindergarten parents

Area of development Rank Total marks Rank Total marks Rank Total marks

Pre-academic skills 5 52 1 31 1 228Social skills 3 73 5 22 5 149Self-sufficiency skills 1 90 3 28 3 190Personal qualities 2 89 2 30 2 210Conduct 4 71 4 24 4 179

Each respondent gave marks (5 to 1) for each area of development (5 → 1 [most important → leastimportant]).

Table 4. Changes in children after transition to primary school.

Percentage and mean

Children’s habits 3(%) 2(%) 1(%) Mean

Eating habits 31 66 3 2.28Resting habits 41 50 9 2.33Communication with parents 45 51 4 2.41Willingness to attend school 43 51 6 2.37Willingness to do homework 21 64 15 2.06Willingness to learn and read on own initiative 41 50 9 2.32

Key: 3 = improved, 2 = unchanged, 1 = worsened.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Tabl

e 5.

Perc

epti

ons

of t

rans

itio

n to

sch

ool.

Per

cent

age

and

mea

n

Kin

derg

arte

n te

ache

rsP

rim

ary

scho

ol t

each

ers

Kin

derg

arte

n pa

rent

sP

rim

ary

scho

ol p

aren

ts

Que

stio

n5 (%

)4 (%

)3 (%

)2 (%

)1 (%

)M

ean

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

n5 (%

)4 (%

)3 (%

)2 (%

)1 (%

)M

ean

5 (%)

4 (%)

3 (%)

2 (%)

1 (%)

Mea

nT

otal

Q1

1527

1535

83.

800

5030

200

3.30

2736

1719

13.

6911

2828

294

3.13

3.23

Q2

4840

84

04.

3280

200

00

4.80

5621

167

04.

2639

4215

22

4.15

4.20

Q3

012

046

421.

810

00

100

02.

002

1411

5617

2.27

48

1356

192.

242.

21Q

462

380

00

4.62

3060

100

04.

2030

4710

103

3.91

2558

115

14.

014.

04Q

569

310

00

4.69

8020

00

04.

8066

322

00

4.65

6632

20

04.

634.

64Q

642

3919

00

4.23

060

400

03.

6024

4130

50

3.83

1843

308

13.

703.

76Q

720

6416

00

4.04

1030

600

03.

508

3746

90

3.46

1042

3512

03.

503.

53Q

88

2765

00

2.42

050

400

03.

301

1451

331

2.82

122

4629

22.

912.

87

Not

es:

Q1:

Are

wee

kly

test

s or

dic

tati

ons

too

muc

h fo

r th

e P

1 cu

rric

ulum

?Q

2: S

houl

d th

e nu

mbe

r of

pup

ils

in a

P1

clas

s be

red

uced

to

25?

Q3:

Is

it t

he s

ole

resp

onsi

bili

ty o

f te

ache

rs t

o he

lp c

hild

ren

to m

ake

a sm

ooth

tra

nsit

ion

to p

rim

ary

scho

ol?

Q4:

Do

pare

nts

play

a v

ital

rol

e in

chi

ldre

n’s

tran

siti

on t

o pr

imar

y sc

hool

?Q

5: D

o pa

rent

s, t

each

ers

and

scho

ols

need

to

coll

abor

ate

to e

nhan

ce t

his

tran

siti

on?

Q6:

Are

the

con

nect

ions

and

lev

el o

f co

mm

unic

atio

n be

twee

n pr

esch

ools

and

pri

mar

y sc

hool

s in

suffi

cien

t?Q

7: A

re y

ou s

atis

fied

wit

h th

e tr

ansi

tion

arr

ange

men

ts m

ade

by y

our

chil

d’s

kind

erga

rten

?Q

8: D

o yo

u th

ink

prim

ary

scho

ols

prov

ide

a su

ffici

ent

leve

l of

sup

port

for

the

tra

nsit

ion

to s

choo

l?

W.L. Chan654

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

in other areas. Another major factor was the student–teacher ratio, which oneprimarily school teacher considered to be correlated with teaching practice: ‘I thinkmost kindergartens have small class sizes, say, around 15 students. But we have manymore students, more than 30 … so we ask the students to sit still in class’. Both groupsof parents felt that primary schools demand too much of young children, with a longschool day (from 8:00 am to 3:30 or 3:45 pm) and a huge amount of homework (threeto six tasks per day). Other factors mentioned included children’s high expectationsfor the transition, the new social setting, and individual personal characteristics andcompetences.

Suggestions for a more effective transition

The respondents made several practical suggestions for the provision of better supportto children when they start primary school: the establishment of a transition week,summer school, a reduction in the length of the P1 school day and the preparation ofperformance reports for primary school teachers by kindergarten teachers. Both teach-ers and parents expressed a desire for smaller primary class sizes and fewer mechan-ical copying and dictation exercises and tests. Most of the kindergarten teachers feltthat an activity-based approach should be incorporated into the conventional approachto teaching.

Some of the teachers felt that parents should provide more support for childrenduring the transition and devote greater effort to preparing them for it, whereas a fewof the parents stated that primary school teachers should make fewer academic anddisciplinary demands on children in the first academic semester. As children may betoo frightened to tell their parents about poor marks, weekly tests or dictation exer-cises may exert too much pressure on them. These parents suggested decreasing thefrequency of these activities in the first term of P1, whereas the kindergarten teachersproposed that they be scrapped altogether in the first term, accompanied by a bigreduction in the homework load. Some parents also felt that the school day should beshortened to ease the transition from kindergarten.

Classroom observations

Kindergarten children’s voices

As noted, an important part of this study was listening to the voices of the childreninvolved in the transition to school. During the K3 class discussions following thechildren’s visits to primary schools, the children were observed to provide positivefeedback on the visits, but to note differences in the environment, routine and learningmethods. Most stated that they thought primary school symbolised their transition to‘older child’ status. They were excited during the discussions and expressed theireagerness to transfer to school. The expectations of their teachers and parents hadclearly had an impact on their views of their position and learning role at school(Dockett & Perry, 2004). The children expressed the following comments and ques-tions during the K3 discussions:

Do the teachers scold students?I am afraid that my teacher will scold me because I cannot finish all of my lunch.I want to get full marks in the exams.Will there be lots of homework?


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Primary schools are very big and beautiful!I want to study in primary school sooner, as I can make many friends.There are many stairs in primary schools.I like to have recess, as I can bring food to eat.I will have to wake up early when studying in primary school.I am afraid of getting lost and not being able to find my classroom.I am afraid of not making new friends.I will be big when I study in Primary 1.

Listening to these children’s voices, we can hear that they are looking forward toprimary school life, but are also apprehensive about their academic abilities and socialskills. Griebel and Niesel (2002) identified several issues that children have to dealwith during the transition to school. They are often worried that they will lose contactwith their kindergarten friends and/or need to make new friends. They may also expe-rience negative emotions, such as fear, worry, nervousness and anger, when they startschool, and some may even lose confidence and develop a negative self-image.

Children’s behaviour at primary school

During the classroom observation in the primary school, which took place two weeksafter the start of the school year, the children generally displayed short attention spans,especially during English and Putonghua lessons, as their first language is Cantonese.They also experienced difficulty in copying the homework lists from the whiteboard.During recess, however, when the children were free to gather on the playground,most behaved and socialised well, sharing food and talking and playing with otherchildren, and were able to find their own way to the toilet. Only a few remained alone,failing to play with or talk to other children.

In terms of discipline, many were unable to queue quietly, listen to the teacherduring assembly, or sit still and keep quiet in class. They appeared to have not yetbecome accustomed to the more formal practices of the primary school classroom.Few problems with self-sufficiency skills were observed, and most of the children atetheir lunch properly and cleaned up afterwards. Quite a few children were unable tofinish their meals, however, probably because of the short period of time allotted.

In summary, the primary school classroom observations showed most of the chil-dren to be able to look after themselves well and to perform fairly well socially.However, some of them encountered transition difficulties in terms of academic skills,and most in terms of discipline.

Follow-up interviews

Interviews with parents

All four of the P1 parents interviewed two months after the start of the school yearreported that their children were performing fairly well in general: they were able tofollow their subjects in class, get along well with their new friends and look afterthemselves. Two of the four children were reported to have a few disciplinary prob-lems, such as failing to obey classroom rules, experiencing problems with dictationand expressing a desire to stay home from school. Three of the parents felt that theirchildren were more independent than they had been at kindergarten, although one feltthat her child had regressed. All of the children were said to have a positive attitudeabout school most of the time.

W.L. Chan656

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

When asked about any unpleasant experiences their children had had in the firstmonth of school, two parents mentioned punishment for misbehaviour. One stated thather child had been unhappy because a classmate had stolen some of her stationery, andanother that her child had cried over a poor mark. The children had told their parentsthat they enjoyed art and physical education (PE) lessons, recess and extra-curricularactivities the most, and they had also revealed some of their thoughts about primaryschool life. One child had hoped that there would be toys and that the teachers wouldbe nicer to them, and another was under the impression that teachers paid more atten-tion to pupils who were misbehaving.

Interviews with children

Four children engaged in free conversation with the interviewer four months afterstarting primary school. All four expressed a positive attitude towards school,including one child who was said to have initially had quite serious emotional prob-lems. None expressed worries about the amount of homework or dictation orreported any difficulties in copying the homework list. The children seemed to havebecome accustomed to the primary school routine. Most said that they enjoyedrecess the most, as they were able to interact freely with their fellow pupils andtheir teachers, although they said they also enjoyed their lessons. They did reportfeeling tired, however. One child said: ‘I feel tired … we have Chinese, English andMathematics every day. I have to work till late at night’. Another stated: ‘I feel verytired because I had to make a Christmas card yesterday, and I couldn’t take a nap inthe afternoon’. A representative sample of their comments follows:

I like going to school, as I can learn a lot of things.I miss my kindergarten teachers very much.There are no toys in my classroom.I feel unhappy, as my teachers always punish XXX and tell him to stop talking.I like going to school, as there are many teachers and I love them.I like having recess, as I can eat food.We should walk slowly during recess.I like PE lessons most.I dislike English lessons most, as I don’t know what the teachers are talking about.

Interviews with primary school teachers

During the follow-up interviews with the P1 teachers two months after the start of thenew school year, they reported that most of the pupils had adapted to the primaryschool routine, although there were some individual problems. With only a few excep-tions, most performed well academically, were able to manage dictation and home-work, were generally self-sufficient and had established good peer relationships. Aspupils’ standards and level of competence varied, the teachers said they had had to asksome of the children’s families for assistance, although not all had been cooperative.The school had also instituted some changes at parents’ request, the teachers reported,such as the use of Cantonese as the medium of instruction in addition to English. Theteachers noted that the pupils who had family support were better able and quicker toadapt than those without such support.

In summary, the findings of the follow-up interviews, which took place twomonths into the academic year, suggest some individual differences in the academic


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

performance of P1 pupils, although both their parents and teachers reported that mostperformed fairly well academically, and some children were reported to havediscipline problems. Both the questionnaire ratings and interviews with parentssuggest some degree of discrepancy between P1 pupils’ overall performance andparental expectations of that performance.

Discussion

The results of this study provide insight into the expectations of teachers, parents andchildren concerning the latter’s transition to school, the relationship between kinder-garten and primary school and the importance of parental attention in easing the tran-sition. Further analysis of the most significant findings is provided in this section,following by suggestions for improvement.

Children’s competence

Pre-academic skills

Although the primary school teachers in this study were generally satisfied with theacademic performance of the new entrants, who had acquired appropriate skills andknowledge in kindergarten and were familiar with the primary syllabus, some of thechildren continued to experience academic problems, particularly in English andPutonghua, copying the homework list and taking dictation and tests. These problemsmay result from the difficulty of the current primary curriculum or from the exceed-ingly high expectations of children’s pre-academic skills amongst primary schoolteachers in Hong Kong. Both may have roots in cultural factors, as primary institu-tions in Hong Kong emphasise the cultivation of children’s learning ability. Indeed,Ng and Rao (2008) and Pearson and Rao (2006) found that in classrooms with a tradi-tional Confucian culture, including those in Hong Kong, emphasis is placed onconformity, discipline, behavioural control and academic achievement, all of whichare evidenced in teacher–child interactions.

Social skills

The children’s social skills and peer relationships were reported to be fairly good,although a few found it difficult to make friends at primary school. It would be idealif these children could seek the assistance of their teachers or a social worker to dealwith their socialisation difficulties, as children’s early social experiences affect theirdevelopment and motivation to learn (Deegan, 1996). It is the responsibility of theschool to construct a social setting that facilitates social interaction amongst children.

Rules and regulations, and self-sufficiency

The children’s standards of discipline (with regard to remaining seated and payingattention during lessons, raising a hand before speaking and queuing quietly duringassembly, for example) appear not to have lived up to the expectations of theirprimary school teachers. Whether such standards are developmentally appropriate foryoung children or constitute classroom control measures remains open to debate. Both

W.L. Chan658

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

the kindergarten and primary school teachers expected the children to look after them-selves and to be well organised, although this was often not the case in reality. Ashorter school day in the first semester of primary school could ease the transitionproblems in this area.

Psychological adjustment

Children’s attitude towards school

With a few minor exceptions, the children were as enthusiastic about going to schoolas their teachers and parents had expected them to be, which is consistent withWong’s (2003) finding that children enjoy going to primary school.

Children’s autonomy

Several mismatches in expectations of autonomy were noted. According to their parents,for example, the children expected to have greater autonomy, choice and freedom inprimary school, as they were now older. However, whilst in kindergarten they had hadaccess to art materials and learning kits whenever they wanted, both resources and free-dom were limited in primary school. Peters (2000) reported that Grade 1 students inAustralia experienced less freedom and greater limitations than they had in kindergarten,which represents a major discontinuity between pre-primary and primary education.

Sense of achievement

The children had no concept of marks in kindergarten, and thus they often felt discour-aged in primary school when they tried their best but still received only fair marks.Research suggests that early academic failure has long-term effects, with students whohave to repeat a year or who consistently obtain poor marks being more likely to dropout of school (Alexander, Entwisle, & Dauber, 1994; Entwisle, Alexander, & Olson,1997). It is therefore high time to review the common assessment practices for youngchildren at the primary school level.

Curriculum and pedagogy

The study respondents repeatedly mentioned the discontinuity between the curriculumand pedagogy of kindergartens and primary schools, with most of the teachers andparents considering it to be the major cause of transition difficulties. Wong similarlyconcluded that these difficulties were ‘predominantly [due to] the discontinuity ofpedagogy and rather less [to] the discontinuity of the social-ecology context’ (20003,p. 92). Many of the parents and kindergarten teachers said they would like primaryschools to adopt the activity approach and to include less rote learning and fewerhandwriting drills, which are believed to be developmentally inappropriate for youngchildren. The Curriculum Development Council’s Basic Education CurriculumGuide: Building on Strength (Primary One-Secondary 3) (2002) suggests that writtenassignments and tests be reduced and replaced with other means of assessment, suchas oral presentations and group work. Few of the kindergarten teachers and parentswould like to see the kindergarten curriculum become more structured, as doing sowould diminish opportunities for play and exploration in learning and development.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Student–teacher ratio

All of the adult respondents expressed the belief that the student–teacher ratio inprimary classes is too high, thereby preventing individual attention, a close student–teacher relationship, scaffolding and sufficient support during the transition process(Peters, 2000). A lower student–teacher ratio is also needed if the activity approach isto be implemented. Although 55% of primary schools in Hong Kong claim to haveadopted this approach (Education and Manpower Bureau, School Education Team ofStatistics Section, 2003), many schools report class size to be an obstacle to its fullimplementation.

Further recommendations

Although the transition-to-school process is continual, developmental and transac-tional in nature (Lloyd, Steinberg, & Wilhelm-Chapin, 1999; Pianta & Walsh, 1996),and there is no solution that suits all individuals and all situations, it is believed thatthe measures suggested in this section would improve the overall situation and mini-mise the discontinuities between kindergarten and primary school.

Suggestions for an effective transition

Psychological adjustments

Psychological preparation for the transition to school is important for both childrenand adults. The latter need to be prepared for emotional and behavioural changes inthe former, and parents need to modify their own expectations to help their childrento adjust to the new school routine. As the relationship between adults and children isasymmetric, parents and teachers should take a more active position in interactionswith children (Greenspan, 1989), such as responding more meaningfully to their workand demonstrating care and support (Smolkin, 1999). Studies on expectations ofacademic performance amongst P1 students (Sharpe & Gan, 2000) suggest thatgreater communication between kindergarten and primary teachers is required toimprove understanding and resolve difficulties. A deeper understanding on the part ofparents would also help children to face the challenges of the transition. As the wayin which parents prepare their children for schooling is affected by their own experi-ences, it is important to analyse parental opinions and perspectives on the transition toschool (Barnett & Taylor, 2008).

Curricular and pedagogical adjustments

Curriculum frameworks and pedagogy. It may be appropriate to evaluate and modifycurrent practices and curricula for P1–P3 classes. According to the CurriculumDevelopment Council (2002), a learning environment that is ‘warm and stimulating’fosters a sense of belonging in children and inspires them. Further, as children’s learn-ing motivation in their first year of school grows out of their interests, it is recom-mended that teachers provide opportunities for children to establish and develop thethinking ability and skills necessary to become independent learners (Kitson, 2004).It is also suggested that dictation practice be removed from the first semester of theP1 curriculum. The copying of homework lists is also developmentally inappropriatefor young children, particularly in the first semester of primary school.

W.L. Chan660

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Similar pedagogy and approach for kindergartens and primary schools

Pedagogy has been identified as a major factor underlying children’s difficulties in thetransition to school, with unfamiliar learning styles hindering learning continuity(Sharpe & Gan, 2000). The Curriculum Development Council (2006) encourages theuse of the ‘inquiry approach’ in ‘theme- or module-based’ learning, advocates astudent-centred curriculum and proposes that primary teachers employ a variety ofactivities similar to those used in kindergartens to reduce pedagogical and curriculargaps, especially in the first semester. The wisdom of this advice is evidenced by Wong’s(2003) finding that children who attend primary schools in Hong Kong with associatedkindergartens develop a greater sense of belonging and adapt to school more easily.

Pedagogical practices. Three major instructional adjustments are suggested for primaryschools: the adoption of a more meaningful and flexible assessment system, a classactivity period and a lower student–teacher ratio. In terms of the first adjustment, it isrecommended that teachers employ different types of assessments, such as perfor-mance reports, and offer rewards and compliments instead of conventional marks,which result in competition amongst pupils. A class activity period that includesgames, songs, stories and whole-class discussion would provide opportunities forcommunication between teachers and children and would provide a less formal andmore interactive learning environment. Finally, a lower student–teacher ratio wouldallow teachers to provide more individual attention, thus leading to better academicachievement and behaviour amongst pupils. Although the academic benefits of small-class teaching remain a subject of debate in Hong Kong, it would certainly ensure amore effective transition to school for young children.

Conclusion

Children’s expectations of school are affected by the expectations of adults, both parentsand teachers. This investigation of the expectations for the transition to school amongstteachers, parents and children in Hong Kong has identified a number of discontinuitiesthat can lead to incoherence and misunderstandings amongst the three parties duringthe transition process, despite the environmental, social, curricular and pedagogicalcontinuities that exist. For example, primary school teachers expect children to be wellbehaved in class, whereas parents and kindergarten teachers are more concerned thatprimary schools cater to the developmental needs of young children and recognise theirindividual differences. Children want less homework and more attention from teachers,and both teachers and parents desire a lower student–teacher ratio. The lack of commu-nication and collaboration between the two educational levels, curricular and pedagog-ical discontinuities, and the unreasonable expectations of teachers and parents all hinderchildren’s transition to school, although most adapt within a few months.

As this study has not investigated the long-term effects of this transition on chil-dren, further research in this direction is warranted. Nevertheless, it is clear that actionis required to ensure that young children have a smoother and more effective, or atleast a shorter and easier, transition from kindergarten to primary school. Continuityof experience is the key to a successful such transition (Kitson, 2002). Ensuring thatcontinuity, and thus creating a supportive learning environment for young children,will require communication between schools and families and a better understandingof children’s expectations and experiences.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Notes on contributorWai Ling Chan is assistant professor at the Department of Early Childhood Education, HongKong Institute of Education. This research project was supported by the Internal ResearchGrants from the Hong Kong Institute of Education.

ReferencesAlexander, K.L., & Entwisle, D.R. (1988). Achievement in the first two years of school:

Patterns and processes. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development(Serial No. 218), 53(2), 1–157.

Alexander, K.L., Entwisle, D.R., & Dauber, S.L. (1994). On the success of failure: A reas-sessment of the effects of retention in the primary grades. New York, NY: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Allen, S.M., Thompson, R.H., Hoadley, M., Engelking, J., & Drapeaux, J. (1997, March).What teachers want from parents and what parents want from teachers: Similarities anddifferences. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education ResearchAssociation, Chicago, IL.

Balaban, N. (1985). Starting school: From separation to independence. New York, NY:Teachers College Press.

Barnett, M.A., & Taylor, L.C. (2008). Parental recollections of school experiences and currentkindergarten transition practices. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(2),140–148.

Blair, C., Knipe, H., Commings, E., Baker, D.P., Gamson, D., Eslinger, P., & Thorne, S.L.(2007). A developmental neuroscience approach to the study of school readiness. In R.C.Pianta, M.J. Cox, & K.L. Snow (Eds.), School readiness & the transition to kindergartenin the era of accountability (pp. 149–173). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature anddesign. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Brostrom, S. (2003). Problems and barriers in children’s learning when they transit fromkindergarten to kindergarten class in school. In A.-W. Dunlop & H. Fabian (Eds.),Transition. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal Monograph Series,1, 51–65.

Chan, P.L., Lau, C.K., & Poon, L.M. (1999). Shatin qu xiaoyi xuesheng shiying wenti yanjiu[Study on the adjustment issues of Primary One pupils in Sha Tin]. Hong Kong: WorkingGroup on Education, Committee on Education and Welfare, Sha Tin Provisional DistrictCouncil.

Chow, Y.H. (1993). Kindergarten and primary school teachers’ expectations of school readi-ness skills in young children. In S. Opper (Ed.), Early childhood education in Hong Kong(The Education Papers Series, Vol. 16, pp. 67–90). Hong Kong: Faculty of Education,University of Hong Kong.

Clarke, C., & Sharpe, P. (2003). Transition from preschool to primary school: An overviewof the personal experiences of children and their parents in Singapore. In A.-W. Dunlop& H. Fabian (Eds.), Transitions. European Early Childhood Education ResearchJournal Monograph Series, 1, 15–24.

Curtis, A.M. (1986). A curriculum for the pre-school child: Learning to learn. Windsor:NFER-Nelson.

Curriculum Development Council. (2002). Basic education curriculum guide: Building onstrength (Primary one-Secondary 3). Hong Kong: Government Printer.

Curriculum Development Council. (2006). Guide to the pre-primary curriculum. Hong Kong:Curriculum Development Institute.

Deegan, J.G. (1996). Children’s friendships in culturally diverse classrooms. London: FalmerPress.

Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2001). Starting school: Effective transitions. Early ChildhoodResearch and Practice, 3(2). Retrieved February 14, 2009, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v3n2/dockett.html

Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2002a). Who’s ready for what? Young children starting school.Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3(1), 67–89.

W.L. Chan662

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (Eds.). (2002b). Beginning school together: Sharing strengths.Watson: Australian Early Childhood Association.

Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2003a). The transition to school: What’s important? EducationalLeadership, 60(7), 30–34.

Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2003b). Children’s view and children’s voices in starting school.Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 26(1), 12–27.

Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2004). What makes a successful transition to school? Views of Austra-lian parents and teachers. International Journal of Early Years Education, 12(3), 217–230.

Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2007). Starting school: Perceptions, experiences and expectations.Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.

Dockett, S., Perry, B., Howard, P., & Meckley, A. (1999, December). What do early child-hood educators and parents think is important about children’s transition to school? Acomparison between data from the city and the bush. Paper presented at the joint confer-ence of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Melbourne.

Dockett, S., & Simpson, S. (2003). This is school … where people come to learn for school:What children need to know when they start school. Early Childhood Folio, 7, 14–17.

Dunlop, A.-W., & Fabian, H. (2002). Conclusions: Debating transitions, continuity andprogression in the early years. In H. Fabian & A.-W. Dunlop (Eds.), Transition in theearly years: Debating continuity and progression for young children in early education(pp. 146–154). London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Early, D.M., Pianta, R.C., & Cox, M.J. (1999). Kindergarten teachers and classrooms: A tran-sition context. Early Education and Development, 10(1), 25–46.

Ebbeck, M. (1995). Purposes of early childhood education: Expressed views of teachers andparents in Hong Kong. International Journal of Early Years Education, 3(2), 3–18.

Edgar, D. (1986). Family background and the transition to school. Primary Education, 17(4),16–21.

Education Bureau. (2007). Key statistics for kindergarten education. Retrieved April 30,2007, from http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?langno=1&nodeid=1037

Education and Manpower Bureau, School Education Team of Statistics Section. (2003). Keystatistics. Retrieved January 12, 2006, from http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?nodeID=1038&langno=1

Entwisle, D.R., Alexander, K.L., & Olson, L.S. (1997). Children, school and inequality. NewYork, NY: Westview Press.

Graue, M.E. (1992). Social interpretations of readiness for kindergarten. Early ChildhoodResearch Quarterly, 7, 225–243.

Greenspan, S.T. (1989). Development of the ego. Madison, CT: International Universities Press.Griebel, W., & Niesel, R. (2002). Co-constructing transition into kindergarten and school by

children, parents and teachers. In H. Fabian & A. Dunlop (Eds.), Transitions in the earlyyears: Debating continuity and progression for children in early education (pp. 64–75).London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Kitson, R. (2002). Starting school in Negara Brunei Darussalam: The voices of children,parents, teachers and principles (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://arrow.unisa.edu.au:8081/1959.8/25020

Kitson, R. (2004). Starting school in Brunei: Listening to children, parents and teachers.Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 5(2), 236–242.

Lin, H.L., Lawrence, F.R., & Gorrell, J. (2003). Kindergarten teachers’ views of children’sreadiness for school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 225–237.

Lloyd, J.W., Steinberg, D.R., & Wilhelm-Chapin, M.K. (1999). Research on the transition tokindergarten. In R.C. Pianta & M.J. Cox (Eds.), The transition to kindergarten (pp. 305–316). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Luster, T., & McAdoo, H. (1996). Family and child influences on educational attainment: Asecondary analysis of the High Scope/Perry Preschool data. Developmental Psychology,32, 26–39.

Mallory, B.L., & New, R.S. (Eds.). (1994). Diversity and developmentally appropriate prac-tices: Challenges for early childhood education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Ng, S.N.S., & Rao, N. (2008). Mathematics teaching during the early years in Hong Kong:A reflection of constructivism with Chinese characteristics? Early Years: Journal ofInternational Research & Development, 28(2), 159–172.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Niesel, R., & Griebel, W. (2000, August–September). The children’s voice in the complextransition into kindergarten and school. Paper presented at 10th European Early Child-hood Education Research Association Conference on Quality ‘Complexity, Diversity andMultiple Perspectives in Early Childhood Services’, London.

Ojala, M. (2000). Parent and teacher expectations for developing young children: A cross-cultural comparison between Ireland and Finland. European Early Childhood EducationResearch Journal, 8(2), 39–61.

Okagaki, L., & Diamond, K.E. (2000). Responding to cultural and linguistic differences in thebeliefs and practices of families with young children. Young Children, 55(3), 74–80.

Opper, S. (1993). Development of Hong Kong preschool. Hong Kong: Faculty of Education,University of Hong Kong.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Pearson, E., & Rao, N. (2006). Early childhood education policy reform in Hong Kong:Challenges in effecting change in practices. Childhood Education, 82(6), 363–369.

Peters, S. (2000, August–September). Multiple perspectives on continuity in early learning andthe transition to school. Paper presented at the 10th European Early Childhood EducationResearch Association Conference on Quality ‘Complexity, Diversity and MultiplePerspectives in Early Childhood Services’, London.

Pianta, R.C., Cox, M.J., & Snow, K.L. (Eds.). (2007). School readiness & the transition tokindergarten in the era of accountability. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Pianta, R.C., & Kraft-Sayre, M. (1999). Parents’ observations about their children’s transi-tions to kindergarten. Young Children, 54(3), 47–52.

Pianta, R.C., & Kraft-Sayre, M. (2003). Successful kindergarten transition: Your guide toconnecting children, families & schools. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Pianta, R.C., Rimm-Kaufman, S.E., & Cox, M.J. (1999). Introduction: An ecological approachto kindergarten transition. In R.C. Pianta & M.J. Cox (Eds.), The transition to kindergar-ten (pp. 3–13). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Pianta, R.C., & Walsh, D. (1996). High-risk children in schools: Constructing sustaining rela-tionships. New York, NY: Routledge.

Piotrkowski, C.S. (2004). A community-based approach to school readiness in Head Start. InE. Zigler & S.J. Styfco (Eds.), The Head Start debates (pp. 129–142). Baltimore, MD:Paul H. Brookes.

Ramey, S.L., & Ramey, C.T. (1994). The transition to school: Why the first few years matterfor a lifetime. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(3), 194–198.

Ramey, S.L., & Ramey, C.T. (1998). The transition to school: Opportunities and challengesfor children, families, educators, and communities. The Elementary School Journal, 98(4),293–295.

Sharpe, R., & Gan, L. (2000). Aspects of adjustment to primary school – Some guidelines forteachers and parents in investing in our future. In C. Tan-Niam & M.L. Quoh (Eds.),Investing in our future: The early years (pp. 242–257). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.

Shepard, I.A., & Smith, M.L. (1989). Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention.New York, NY: Falmer.

Smolkin, L.B. (1999). The practice of effective transitions: Players who make a winning team.In R.C. Pianta & M.J. Cox (Eds.), The transition to kindergarten (pp. 325–349). Baltimore,MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Weikart, D.P. (Ed.). (1999). What should young children learn? Teacher and parent views in15 countries. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.

Welch, M.D., & White, B. (1999). Teacher and parent expectations for kindergarten readi-ness. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 437 225). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED437225.pdf

Wong, N.C. (2003). A study of children’s difficulties in transition to school in Hong Kong.Early Child Development and Care, 173(1), 83–96.

Yeboah, D.A. (2002). Enhancing transition from early childhood phase to primary education:evidence from the research literature. Early Years, 22(1), 51–68.

W.L. Chan664

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

05:

40 1

2 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Documents

Expectations for the transition from kindergarten to primary school amongst teachers, parents and children