This study focuses on analyzing the effects of emphasized teaching on pupils’ learning and learning-related attitudes. School choice was enabled in Finland with the new educational legislation passed in the 1990s. Even though school choice can be connected to wider international policy reforms, in Finland it has its own unique characteristics. The choices are made within the public school-system and are more restricted than in open enrolment-countries. One central feature of the Finnish model is the emphasized teaching. The new legislation allowed schools to specialize and have an increased amount of lessons in a certain domain area, thereby forming so–called “emphasized” classes (e.g. in music, languages etc.), which have the right to select pupils with entrance exams. The number of these classes, as well as pupils attending them, has increased continuously, especially in large cities (Seppänen et. al. 2012).

Choosing an emphasized class has been seen typical to highly educated families (e.g. Kosunen 2013). Therefore it has been claimed that emphasized classes might jeopardize the equality of the Finnish comprehensive school by accelerating the differentation of schools (Seppänen et. al. 2012). Families who choose the emphasized teaching often justify their choice with arguments referring to the peer group and the atmosphere in the class (Koivuhovi 2012). Parents seem to believe that selective emphasized classes would provide a supportive environment for learning, which, in turn, would benefit their child. This study aims to clarify whether there is any empirical evidence to support these assumptions.  In this presentation the focus is on cognitive competencies and pupils’ trust in their own abilities. The aim is to find out if studying in emphasized class brings any added value to the development of these.

It has been understood for decades that peers can have an important role as supporters – or distracters – of learning. However it is unclear whether the findings tell us more about similar learners seeking each other’s company or pupils starting to resemble their peers when spending time together (Rodkin & Ryan 2012). Even though the exact mechanisms of the peer group effects are not yet unambiguously clarified, the shared view is that peers do have on impact on individuals’ achievement (e.g. Wentzel 2005) and motivation (e.g. Kindermann 2007). Educational psychological studies of peer influence can be divided into two categories: studies which are concerned with characteristics of peers and the influence they have on child’s behavior, attitudes and achievement; and those that are more interested about the quality of friendship and its effects on child’s well-being and adjustment to school (Berndt 1999). Peer influence has been studied also on the field of educational sociology and economics where studies have concentrated on the peer effects on the school and neighborhood level (e.g. Lauen 2007). In this study the peer effects are examined in respect of pupils’ learning attitudes and achievements on a class level and in smaller peer groups.

Research questions:

How do children’s cognitive competencies and trust in own abilities develop from grade 4 to 6 in emphasized versus general class pupils?

How do different demographic factors (gender, GPA and parents education level) explain that development?

What are the roles of the class (general vs. emphasized class) and the peer groups (self-named friends) in explaining that development?

Berndt, T. 1999. Friends’ Influence on Students’ Adjustement to School. Educational Psychologist, 34 (1), 15–28. Hautamäki, J., Arinen, P., Eronen, S., Hautamäki, A., Kupiainen, S., Lindblom, B., Niemivirta, M., Pakaslahti, L., Rantanen, P. & Scheinin, P. 2002. Assessing learningto- learn. A framework. National Board of Education, Evaluation 4/2002. Kindermann, T. 2007. Effects of Naturally Existing Peer Groups on Changes in Academic Engagement in a Cohort of Sixth Graders. Child Development 78 (4), 1186–1203. Koivuhovi, S. 2012. Lähikoulu vai painotettu opetus? Kouluvalintatyyppien mallintaminen Espoon kouluvalintatilassa. [Local school or emphasized teaching? Modelling the school choice routes in the local school choice space of Espoo.] In P. Atjonen (eds.) Oppiminen ajassa – kasvatus tulevaisuuteen. [Learning in time – education for the future. Article collection of the best presentations in the FERA conference in Joensuu 2011]. Research in Educational Sciences 61, FERA Kosunen, S. 2013.Reputation and parental logics of action in local school choice space in Finland. Journal of Education Policy, DOI:10.1080/02680939.2013.844859 Published online: 14 Oct 2013. Lauen, D.L. 2007. Contextual Explanations of School Choice. Sociology of Education, 80 (3), 179–209. Rodkin, P. & Ryan, A. 2012. Child and Adolescent Peer Relations In Educational Context. In K.Harris, S.Graham & T. Urdan (eds.) APA Educational Psychology Handbook: Vol 2. Individual Differences and Cultural and Contextual Factors. American Psychological Association. Seppänen, P. Rinne, R. & Riipinen, P. 2012.Yläkouluvalinnat, koulujen suosio ja perheiden sosiaalinen asema – Lohkoutuuko perusopetus kaupungeissa? [School choice, school popularity and families’social status – segmentation of basic education in Finnish cities?] Kasvatus 43 (3), 226–243. Wentzel, K. 2005. Peer relationship, motivation, and academic performance at school. In A.J. Elliot & C. Dweck (eds.) Handbook of Competence and Motivation. New York: The Guilford Press, 279–296.