Advertisement

Connected Dynamics: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives on Family Life and the Transition to School

  • Dominik KrinningerEmail author
  • Marc Schulz
Chapter
Part of the International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Development book series (CHILD, volume 21)

Abstract

Our main focus is the analysis of familial resources and strengths in terms of education and care within the wider context of policies and practices that pose challenges to families in their contact with the public educational system. First of all, we analyse three key concepts. They define the ways in which family can be seen as an educational environment of its own, and how institutions address families with specific demands. Against the background of empirical studies, we argue that little knowledge exists around how families deal in practice with the expectations placed upon them in their daily lives. The results of our study will help to close this gap by reconstructing how the process of transition to school is shaped by the family, and how its relation to the school has a deep impact on the family. Finally, we argue for differentiation within the empirical and theoretical modelling of the transition process.

References

  1. Andresen, S., Künstler, S., & Seddig, N. (2015). Von Adressatinnen und Nutzerinnen: Eltern in Kita und Schule. In M. Urban, M. Schulz, K. Meser, & S. Thoms (Eds.), Inklusion und Übergang – Perspektiven der Vernetzung von Kita und Grundschule (pp. 63–75). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.Google Scholar
  2. Betz, T. (2015). Das Ideal der Bildungs- und Erziehungspartnerschaft. Kritische Fragen an eine verstärkte Zusammenarbeit zwischen Kindertageseinrichtungen, Grundschulen und Familie. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung.Google Scholar
  3. Büchner, P. (2011). Familie als Bildungsinstanz. In H. Macha & M. Witzke (Eds.), Familie. Handbuch der Erziehungswissenschaft 5 (pp. 153–175). Schöningh: Paderborn.Google Scholar
  4. Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend (BMFSFJ). (2006). Familie zwischen Flexibilität und Verlässlichkeit. Perspektiven für eine lebenslaufbezogene Familienpolitik. Siebter Familienbericht. http://www.bmfsfj.de/doku/Publikationen/familienbericht/download/familienbericht_gesamt.pdf. Accessed 7 Sept 2015.
  5. Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2007). Transitions to school. Perceptions, experiences and expectations. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dockett, S., Perry, B., & Kearney, E. (2012). Family transitions as children start school. Family Matters, 90, 57–67.Google Scholar
  7. Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Sheldon, S. B., Simon, B. S., Salinas, K. C., Jansorn, N. R., et al. (2009). School, family, and community partnerships: Your handbook for action (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  8. Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-network-theory in education. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Finch, J. (2007). Displaying families. Sociology, 41, 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gillies, V. (2012). Family policy and the politics of parenting: From function to competence. In M. Richter & S. Andresen (Eds.), The politicization of parenthood. Shifting private and public responsibilities in education and child rearing (pp. 13–26). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Grant, K. B., & Ray, J. A. (Eds.). (2015). Home, school, and community collaboration: Culturally responsive family engagement. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Graßhoff, G., Binz, C., Pfaff, A., Schmenger, S., & Ullrich, H. (2013). Eltern als Akteure im Übergang vom Elementar- in den Primarbereich. Wiesbaden: VS.Google Scholar
  13. Griebel, W., Wildgruber, A., Held, J., Schuster, A., & Nagel, B. (2013). Partizipation im Übergangsmanagement von Kitas und Schulen. Eltern als Ressource. bildungsforschung 10(1). http://bildungsforschung.org/index.php/bildungsforschung/article/view/160/pdf_6. Accessed 7 Sept 2015.
  14. Haase, K. (2012). Erziehungs- und Bildungspartnerschaft von Familie, Schule und Kinder- und Jugendhilfe im Kontext von Schulentwicklung. Kooperation auf “gleicher Augenhöhe” – realistische Leitvorstellung oder unerfüllbare Vision. Pädagogische Rundschau, 66(1), 29–44.Google Scholar
  15. Jurczyk, K. (2014). Familie als Herstellungsleistung. Hintergründe und Konturen einer neuen Perspektive auf Familie. In K. Jurczyk, A. Lange, & B. Thiessen (Eds.), Doing family. Warum Familienleben heute nicht mehr selbstverständlich ist (pp. 50–70). Weinheim/Basel: Beltz Juventa.Google Scholar
  16. Krinninger, D. (2015). Family life as education. Ethnographic perspectives on how familial education emerges in families and in educational family research. In S. Bollig, M.-S. Honig, S. Neumann, & C. Seele (Eds.), MultiPluriTrans. Emerging fields in educational ethnography (pp. 297–314). Bielefeld: Transcript/New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Krinninger, D., & Müller, H.-R. (2012). Die Bildung der Familie. Zwischenergebnisse aus einem ethnographischen Forschungsprojekt. Zeitschrift für Soziologie der Erziehung und Sozialisation, 32(3), 233–249.Google Scholar
  18. Kruse, W. (2003). Lifelong learning in Germany – Financing and innovation: Skill development, education networks, support structures. Report of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) for the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on “Good practice in the financing of lifeleong learning” within the framework of the project “Co-financing Lifelong Learning”. http://www.bmbf.de/pub/lifelong_learning_oecd_2003.pdf. Accessed 28 Aug 2015.
  19. Margetts, K., & Kienig, A. (Eds.). (2013). International perspectives on transition to school: Reconceptualising beliefs, policy and practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Morgan, D. H. J. (2011). Rethinking family practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Morrow, R. (2009). Norbert Elias and figurational sociology: The comeback of the century. Contemporary Sociology, 38(3), 215–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nawrotzki, K. D. (2012). Parent-school relations in England and the USA: Partnership, problematized. In M. Richter & S. Andresen (Eds.), The Politicization of parenthood. Shifting private and public responsibilities in education and child rearing (pp. 69–83). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Reutlinger, C. (2008). Bildungsorte, Bildungsräume und Bildungslandschaft im Spiegel von Ungleichheit – Kritischer Blick auf das “Räumeln” im Bildungsdiskurs. In P. Bollweg & H.-U. Otto (Eds.), Räume flexibler Bildung. Bildungslandschaft in der Diskussion (pp. 51–69). Wiesbaden: VS.Google Scholar
  24. Richter, M., & Andresen, S. (Eds.). (2012). The politicization of parenthood. Shifting private and public responsibilities in education and child rearing. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Urban, M., Cloos, P., Meser, K., Objartel, V., Richter, A., Schulz, M., Thoms, S., Velten, J., & Werning, R. (2015). Prozessorientierte Verfahren der Bildungsdokumentation in inklusiven Settings. Opladen: Barbara Budrich.Google Scholar
  26. Walper, S., & Ross, J. (2001). Die Einschulung als Herausforderung und Chance für die ganze Familie. In G. Faust-Siehl & A. Speck-Hamdan (Eds.), Schulanfang ohne Umwege (pp. 30–52). Frankfurt: Grundschulverband.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational ScienceUniversity of OsnabrückOsnabrückGermany
  2. 2.Cologne University of Applied SciencesCologneGermany

Personalised recommendations