Abstract
This study investigates the extent to which transition programs are offered to students at international secondary schools. Components of professional development, orientation and departure programs, and transition support teams were examined. Participants included school administrators at 11 international schools across five continents. Findings suggest that systematic transition interventions are underutilized to support Third Culture Kids, and suggest a lack of awareness among administrators about the issue of transitional problems associated with international mobility.
Mobility and the third culture kid experience
So-called Third Culture Kids (TCKs), having spent a significant portion of their formative years outside of their home countries, have a unique perspective on the world. A typical TCK might transition to a new community several times within their educational experience; there are advantages and disadvantages to such a lifestyle. Allan (2002: 78) points out that at each juncture there are opportunities for the formation of cultural identities and resulting behavior patterns, inter-cultural communication, cultural acceptance, rejection or social exclusion. TCKs interact with the school culture (often an English-medium international school, catering particularly for such children, who are often from many different national and cultural backgrounds), the culture of the host country, the majority student culture, the faculty cultures and others. Although this can be positive for students, it is also in these interactions that cultural dissonance can occur (Allan, 2002).
There is limited research about types of transition programs offered in international schools. This article attempts to ascertain if programs are offered, or not offered, and to what degree they function or malfunction, in particular schools. Risch (2008) conducted a study of 58 responding schools within members of the East Asia Regional Council of Overseas Schools, and in that study he identified key components of formal transition programs in international schools. Similar to that study, this project aims to identify the degree to which transition programs are being offered in international schools. But instead of identifying components of programs, as Risch (2008) did, this study focuses on the success or failure of three components in particular: professional development, orientation and departure programs, and the use of transition teams.
Increased international mobility
The 1990 US Census counted 925,845 US federal workers living outside of the USA; by 2007 that number had increased to approximately 4 million (Knowlton, 2007). In 2011, the Association of Americans Resident Overseas reported that 5.08 million Americans lived in over 160 countries throughout the world (2011). The USA is not the only nation facing increased migration of citizens; since 1990, the number of worldwide citizens living outside of their native country rose by over 1.5 million people. One statistical estimation indicated approximately 214 million people living, working, or attending school outside of their home country by 2010 (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2008). With such an increase in global mobility, it is not surprising that research in the field of international education has also increased over the past several decades. The increase in globally mobile individuals means that transition support for these individuals needs to be addressed in some depth.
Socialization in TCKs
Examination of current models for transition programs could promote the improved socialization in TCKs. Anecdotal accounts of how such students cope with transition are conflicting, and dozens of such accounts can be found across the current literature (Pollock and Van Reken, 2009; US Department of State, 2011). Several researchers indicate that globally mobile adolescents prefer to socialize with other TCKs from various cultural backgrounds, including the culture of their home country. They also often prefer this multicultural socialization to socialization within a monoculture (Eakin, 1998; Pollock and Van Reken, 2009). Transition programs in schools could provide a basis for such positive interactions. It could be argued that transition programs could serve as a bridge between the student’s personal cultural identity and the greater culture of the school community, or host community. Heyward (2002) discusses the importance of international students not only grasping communication within the monoculture, but also improving their ability to communicate cross-culturally, to develop what he defines as intercultural literacy. Well-crafted, school-based transition programs could support opportunities for cross-cultural communication.
Advantages of the TCK experience
The experience of a globally mobile adolescent TCK is complex and many advantages and disadvantages are associated with their lifestyles. Affluence and internationalism (Bonebright, 2009) are seen as advantages (Hayden, 2006; Simandiraki, 2006). Another factor viewed as an advantage is educational opportunity, due, in part, to first-hand cultural experiences and travel (Gillies, 1998). TCKs are resilient and often have greater communication skills and problem solving skills than their home country peers because they are frequently forced to adapt in new ways to new situations (Hayden, 2006; McLachlan, 2007); Bonebright (2009) refers to this as constructive marginality. Although TCKs have a life-experience that tends to be somewhat unstable, they have a marked ability to solve day-to-day problems as they arise, especially after explicit training in creative problem solving (Lee et al., 2007; Sears, 2011). They have backgrounds that are rich with a variety of experiences, which allows for the innate ability to communicate effectively across cultural lines and identify with people from various cultures (Al-Issa, 2004). TCKs also tend to have strong family bonds and attachments (Langford et al., 2002: 35), despite the fact that they see their hard-working fathers and faraway extended family members less frequently than non-mobile children (McLachlan, 2007). Because international schools often act as community centers for international families, many parents of TCKs interact closely with the school community and are active participants in the educational experience of their children (Sears, 2011). Families who deliberately try to strengthen the family unit while maintaining a mobile lifestyle are the most cohesive (Hausman and Reed, in McLachlan, 2007). Perhaps a similar cohesiveness may be achieved for international school communities that work to build transitional support systems.
Disadvantages of the TCK experience
Research indicates some disadvantages to the TCK experience. Anecdotal evidence suggests an element of estrangement from home country as well as social and emotional problems which result from the experience and lifestyle of the TCK. There is a fear among some who work with TCKs that these children might not stay in a location long enough to develop emotional security (McLachlan, 2007). With each move, TCKs commonly experience loss of home, friendships, belongings, teachers and sense of place. This loss leads to feelings of grief (Pollock and Van Reken, 2009). Students can experience depression, anxiety and stress while transitioning between cultures (Davis et al., 2010). TCKs may also struggle with sojourner adjustment, described as ‘the psychological adjustment of relatively short-term visitors to new geographical areas where permanent settlement is not intended, and where assimilation into the host culture is not expected’ (Berry et al., 2002 as cited in Hayden, 2006: 55). TCKs report feeling different from others and as outsiders in many places, but also report feeling connected to other TCKs (Walters and Auton-Cuff, 2009). These students can also experience difficulties forming and maintaining a sense of self in adolescence which, for some, leads to problems with personal identity well into adulthood (Grimshaw and Sears 2008; Sears, 2011). Support in international schools, such as transition programs, could be a part of the solution to this problem.
Problems of repatriation have also been noted, which might be improved by the implementation of transition programs in schools. Although TCKs may want to acclimate to the home culture, it is often more difficult to do so than anticipated. The number of repatriations also affects social-emotional well-being; the more times a TCK experiences repatriation, the more negative may be the effect (Peterson and Plamondon, 2009). Social challenges relating to cultural norms, rootlessness, and loss are exacerbated by repatriation. TCKs may experience feelings of isolation and distance from their peers upon returning to their nation of birth. There is a noticeable gap between TCKs and others who have not shared a similar experience; this is often an experience felt by TCKs as they re-enter their home culture (Eakin, 1998; Sheard, 2008). TCKs may feel disappointment when they discover differences between themselves and the once-familiar home country peers, who have never lived abroad. TCK may be accused of bragging, so they hide their experiences from others (Pollock and Van Reken, 2009).
Another troubling factor for TCKs may be the inconvenience of an equally mobile school community. The experience of frequent moving is often shared by all members of the international school. Students must adjust and cope with their own move, as well as the movement of teachers and administrators (Sears, 2011). Even students who remain in a school for a number of years may experience the loss of friendships as they see their friends move (McLachlan, 2007).
Transition support in international schools
Research has indicated a need for internationally educated students to be supported through transitions from one nation to the next. This study attempts to identify if transitional support is being used in international schools and aims to examine critically why, or why not, such support is being offered. Some TCKs, upon reaching adulthood, struggle with unresolved grief, feelings of isolation, rootlessness and loss, owing to difficulties arising from their highly mobile lifestyle (Hayden, 2006; Langford et al., 2002; Pollock and Van Reken, 2009). This study investigates three common transitional forms of support for TCKs in international schools: orientation and departure programs, professional development, and transition support teams. Support through transition could lessen the negative impact of continued mobility and instability in TCKs. Pollock and Van Reken (2009) describe a transition experience as consisting of five stages: involvement; leaving; transition; entering; and involvement. Several studies have been devoted to the idea of supporting students during transitions (Al-Issa, 2004; Alspaugh, 1998; Davis et al., 2010; Hayden, 2006; Pollock and Van Reken, 2009; Risch, 2008; Seidman et al., 1994). Few studies have been dedicated specifically to the availability of formal transition programs within the context of international schools. Also, studies identifying concrete methods for supporting TCKs in transition are fairly rare in the context of international education. Although transition programs exist in many international schools, some schools do not have such programs. Furthermore, of schools without transition programs, some have even reported being unaware that a need for such programs exists (Risch, 2008).
Theoretical framework: international transitions
Theories of transition describe chronological stages of emotional adaptation to cultural or international movement. These stages are finite and predictable among those who interact with new communities. Heyward (2002) creates an excellent comparison of two early adaptations of this idea: the U-curve model and the W-curve model. He credits these models to the theory of culture shock, developed by Oberg (1958, in Heyward, 2002: 12) which describes a condition of a person who is negatively impacted by the cross-cultural experience.
The U-curve model includes three predicable stages (Lysgaard, 1955; Sewel and Davidson, 1956). This model was later expanded to a four stage W-Curve model (Gullahorn and Gullahorn, 1963, 1966, in Heyward, 2002: 12). Both offer a framework from which to observe the international experience but are somewhat limited, and are not necessarily specific to the TCK experience. Based on the early models, Heyward (2002) develops a greatly expanded and multidimensional framework which better describes the stages of inter-cultural communication from the perspectives of understandings, competencies and attitudes. Like the U-curve and W-curve, Heyward (2002) describes chronological stages of adaptation by describing the relationship between a foreign individual and the host culture. These transition frameworks are limited because they capture only a part of the TCK experience. They allow for insights into how the TCK might respond to the culture of the host country, but not to the culture of the international school, or family. Pollock and Van Reken (2009) offer another expanded model which is more specific to the TCK experience. Table 1 illustrates the relationship between various transition theories.
Transition theories compared.
Notes: aLysgaard (1955), Sewel and Davidson (1956); bGullahorn and Gullahorn (1963, 1966); cHeyward (2002); dPollock and Van Reken (2009).
Transitional programs at international schools
Risch (2008: 52) defines a formal transition program as:
a clearly articulated and labeled transition program that provides activities and events to help students and families transition to, within, and from international schools. Such programs also provide them with strategies to manage their transitions.
Transitional programs are considered useful in order to alleviate distress in TCKs. One study focuses on 36 18–20-year-old missionary students attending a transition seminar upon repatriation to the USA. Assessment data alludes to a significant difference in stress levels before and after the transition seminars; of the sample, 43 percent of participants reported moderate to severe distress before a transition seminar, with only 17 percent of participants reporting moderate to severe distress after the seminar (Davis et al., 2010). Although it may be difficult, due to curricular constraints, to implement day long seminars, international schools could benefit from incorporating transitional supports throughout the curriculum in order to ease stress for students throughout the transition cycle.
More studies on such transition programs are not readily available within current research. O’Boyle (2009), in a study relating to the perceptions of international students, also indicates the lack of information in this area; he writes ‘For international schools, studies on transition and transfer to secondary schools are sparse’ (O’Boyle, 2009: 32).
Components of successful transition programs
Gillies (1998: 38) indicates that specific elements of transition programs imbedded within the curriculum could be useful, and that there are several ways of successfully doing so. To support transition and alleviate distress in TCKs, transition programs should incorporate valuing an international perspective without exaggerating it, welcoming new students by creating partnerships between new and existing students, forming cooperative learning groups to encourage student involvement, creating opportunities for community building and problem solving, acknowledging the difficulties and rewards of international mobility through class discussion or individual meetings with students, and treating students as individuals and not ‘new students’ (Gillies, 1998). Gillies (1998) also states that such strategies can be implemented at any point during the students’ transition cycle. McKillop-Ostrom (2000) advises improved efforts for professional development around the topic of transition in relation to cultural awareness in international schools. Transition-related activities are suggested such as orientation and departure programs for incoming and outgoing students. Also suggested are curricular supports for other students at the international school who need to adjust to a mobile culture where peers, teachers and administrators move frequently. McKillop-Ostrom (2000) suggests the implementation of transition support teams, and cites the United Nations International School of Hanoi as an example of a school where such interventions were a success. Transition teams are described as consisting of 7–10 volunteers including teachers, parents, counselors, administrators and students who collaborate in order to make transitions smooth for students entering and leaving the community. Policy and budgetary supports are stated to be relevant and important to the success or failure of transition programs (McKillop-Ostrom, 2000).Transition teams in international schools serve a variety of purposes including consolidation of transition efforts, increased transition expertise, transition education and cultural awareness, implementation of transition activities, customized transition services, institutionalized transition programming and year-round transition support (Langford, 2006; McKillop-Ostrom, 2000).
Langford (2006: 53) states that ‘it is in the international school community’s own interests to understand why families sometimes fail to adjust and how they as educators can help improve the transition process for their pupils’. Hayden (2006) identifies her extensive review of literature which suggests that TCKs need to be oriented upon arrival to the school’s philosophies and educational objectives. Teachers were cited as agreeing with objectives to aid students in transition, as well as support students within the context of the regular curriculum objectives. Also noted is the importance of counseling services for students in international schools, as well as the creation and maintenance of portfolios to accompany students between schools. Langford (in Hayden, 2006) also suggests orientation and departure activities, parent counseling and community information to support the home structure. Others have made similar suggestions. Pollock and Van Reken (2009) mark the importance of addressing solutions to problems within transition. They identify four important concepts tied to the acronym RAFT: reconciliation; affirmation; farewells; and think destination. Because components of transition programs have been identified across schools, the study described here aims to identify perceptions of three particular components: orientation and departure programs, transition teams and professional development.
Responsibilities of the international school
Orr (1976: 30) states that ‘when schools operate outside of the controlled, publicly accountable context of their nation state, as international schools do, they have a greater level of responsibility to uphold policies that support and enrich school stake holders’. Sheard (2008: 35), meanwhile, suggests that schools have an obligation to support the unique identities of TCKs:
One lesson is that when parents and educators heighten a child’s level of global awareness above that of most children, the parents and educators should be alert to possible social and emotional consequences that might ensue from the gap between the child and others without heightened levels of awareness. Children need to learn methods to cope with their heightened global awareness, just as they need to appreciate the advantages and disadvantages of their heightened global awareness.
Al-Issa (2004) notes the success of an intercultural communication course in encouraging self-exploration of cultural identity within the school setting, and created assignments, opportunities and activities to support cultural identity (Al-Issa, 2004). Internationalism, a frame of mind whereby one’s concept of oneself is as a member of the international community, might also be supported through school transitional supports, since it is an attitude of cooperation over competition and interdependence over independence (Orr and Glenn, 1974).
Rationale
Although limited research exists on the topic of transition in international schools, some key ideas have surfaced. I believe there is a need for further study to examine components of successful transition programs. By examining current practices, support for the development of future programs can potentially be improved. Findings from the study upon which this article is based will be useful to administrators, teachers and faculty in international schools, who have the ability to encourage and implement transition programs for TCKs. School board members, as well as parents of TCKs, may also benefit. This study provides the means for parents to become more informed in order better to advocate for the implementation of such programs, as well as to allow school board members to make more informed budgetary decisions regarding such programs. This article is intended both for international school communities already aware of the importance of transition programs, and for those in a more novice stage of awareness. Key stakeholders in the well-being of international families may also benefit from learning about the topic of transition. By doing so, they could better serve and support mobile families. TCKs will also benefit when institutions adopt and implement programs perceived as successful.
Methodology
This study expands the current discussion of transition programs in international schools, by addressing the following research questions.
Do international schools use professional development, orientation and departure programs, and transition teams to support TCKs experiencing the upheaval of transition?
From the perspective of the school administrator, what factors help or hinder the implementation of transition programs in international school communities?
Using a web-based survey as the primary research tool, this study was exploratory in nature, with qualitative and quantitative components. Professional development for transition, orientation and departure programs, and transition support teams were examined through the reported perception of the school administrator. In order to illuminate positive and negative trends in the implementation of transition programs, administrators rated the success or failure of program components. Administrators also shared perceptions about what helps or hinders effective implementation of transition programs, which may offer insight to other school communities trying to implement similar programs elsewhere.
Data about school population and cohorts within that population were also examined. Cohorts included in the analysis were the student body, support staff, professional teaching faculty and administrative faculty. In order to identify its impact, if any, on transition programs, the following information about the student body was also gathered: number of languages used at the school, number of nationalities within the school, percentage of students fluent in more than one language, and the percentage of students with dual citizenship. This study aimed to quantify the level of mobility within any one particular school, and assess how that mobility impacts the existence and implementation of transition programs. This was accomplished by seeking to identify approximate percentages of graduating seniors having attended the same school for 1, 2, 3 or 4 years, and comparing those percentages with components of transition programs offered. The study also quantifies the frequency of student moves as compared to the likelihood that those moves occurred at what might be considered logical transition points within the school calendar.
Procedure
A survey to gather secondary school administrator perceptions on successful transition programs for TCKs was sent to participants via email using a web-based survey tool. Out of 41 schools contacted, 11 responded to the survey. A list of international schools from the website of International Schools Review (ISR), an organization dedicated to reviewing international schools and directors, was used as the immediate sample frame. As of August 2011, the website had updated a list of 803 international schools, listed alphabetically by country. A systematic sampling was taken from the schools listed, by the researcher first choosing a random starting point between one and six and counting every 20th school.
This method was chosen for two reasons. First, the small sample size allowed for more personalized communication between the researcher and the participants. Second, systematic sampling seemed appropriate for an alphabetized list, since it generally eliminates the possibility of clustered responses by region, aside from cases where certain countries have higher numbers of international schools.
Participants
Participants were introduced to the project via email. The researcher distributed an introductory letter with a description of the project and a request for participation; specifics of the survey were not given. Using an online survey tool, for those schools with a direct email link, 36 self-administered questionnaires were distributed via email to the head of each sample school during October 2011. For schools without a direct email link, or which had not responded by email, 5 hard copies of surveys were distributed by mail. Follow up reminders were sent via email during the two week survey window. In total, seven personalized survey reminders were sent to each participant via email over the course of two weeks. Due to financial constraints, reminders were not sent to those schools without working email.
Forty-one schools in 36 different countries were represented in the overall sample. Of the 41 schools contacted, 11 responded to the survey. Of the 11 respondents, regional distribution of selected international schools included one each in North America, South America, Europe, Africa and 7 in Asia. At individual schools, the size of the administrative team ranged from one to four school administrators, with the exception of the case of one respondent who did not indicate the size of the administrative team. Of respondents, one had only one administrator, four had two administrators, one had three administrators and four had four administrators. Non-administrative professional faculty within schools ranged from 7 to 260 teachers. Support staff members ranged from 0 to 60 persons. In all cases many members of the student body held passports from more than one country.
Survey instrument
The main instrument in this study was an online 30 item questionnaire, distributed by email and composed of items relating to transition programs offered at international schools. Items were based on a five-point Likert scale to which respondents indicated their perceptions of the success or failure of professional development, orientation and departure programs, and the use of transition teams to support transition. Respondents indicated whether they perceived support was exceptionally successful, successful, not successful, problematic or not offered. Respondents were given several open-ended questions relating to programs offered, as well as problems and successes within programs. The survey was divided into six parts.
Part I: implied consent and demographic information – was created to gather consent and identify the name of the respondent, the school and the geographic location. This was done to verify and validate the identity of respondents.
Part II: professional development for transition – sought to gather descriptions of professional development offered, the degree of perceived success, and factors that helped or hindered the support.
Part III: orientation and departure programs and Part IV: transition support teams – asked the same questions of orientation and departure programs, and the use of transition teams in individual schools.
Part V: school population variables – allowed respondents to indicate the following: size of student body and faculty populations, curriculum at the school, and variables within the community such as parent employment type.
Part VI: student mobility trends – identified the level of mobility in terms of how long students had remained at each school and the likelihood of moves happening at logical transition points in the school year such as the beginning or ending of a semester.
Delimitations
The purpose of this study was to gather administrator perceptions of transition programs for TCKs in international secondary schools. Although findings from this study are expected to be useful to parents, teachers, board members and students, perceptions of those school community members were not considered within the context of this study. This study sought only the perceptions of administrators for two reasons. First, administrators are uniquely poised to implement systematic and programmatic changes within a school. After considering this study, administrators would be poised to discuss, design and support the addition of a transition program, or improve an existing model, more so than any other school community member. Second, administrators have a comprehensive point of view and theoretically support changes which support student learning, including those that support the well-being of students.
As identified above, this study is also intended to identify three components of transition programs that have been identified in international schools: professional development to support transition, orientation and departure programs, and the use of transition teams (Risch, 2008). Also considered are factors which help or hinder the three components, as well as how they are rated in terms of success or failure. Not considered in the study are components deemed by the researcher as less common, systematic or concrete, such as opportunities for social emotional interventions, intercultural communication, self-exploration, cooperative learning, curricular supports, mentoring or peer support, counseling or school to family communication.
The study identifies limited quantitative data about school population and cohorts within that population for the purposes of comparison. Cohorts included in the study include population, student body, support staff, professional teaching faculty and administrative faculty. Not identified are quantitative measures deemed by the researcher as inconsequential to successful transition, such as family income. Only secondary schools were selected for the purpose of this study in order to limit age as a variable.
The level of mobility within schools, frequency and timing of student moves, employment of parents, curriculum models, number of languages used at the school, number of nationalities within the school, percentage of students fluent in more than one language, and the percentage of students with dual citizenship are quantified. Less measurable subjective factors such as school climate, faculty and staff job satisfaction, student happiness and school spirit were intentionally excluded.
Limitations
Despite efforts of the researcher, there are some limitations to consider. Because the sample is small, information should be used more to identify similarities and differences between and among particular programs than to generalize across larger populations. Of 41 schools contacted to participate in the study, 11 responded. Low response rate could have been due to a number of reasons, one primarily relating to school internet security. The Children’s Internet Protection Act requires that schools hold a higher standard for email filtration than other businesses (Grama, 2011), which could have led to some administrators not completing the survey if they were unable to retrieve it; there is a potential, especially in schools, for unrecognized email to be filtered as spam. Also, several schools did not list administrators by name or direct email, so administrative assistants needed to be contacted instead; at this juncture, problems could have occurred in the transference of the survey request. In those particular cases, a hard copy of the research tool was sent via postal mail.
Data
Sample: bilingualism, dual citizenship and curricular systems
More than one nationality was represented in 10 out of 11 schools sampled. Five responding administrators reported that 50–75 percent of students hold passports from more than one country. Two administrators stated that less than 25 percent of students held passports from more than one country and two other respondents reported that 25–50 percent of students held more than one passport. The number of languages spoken fluently by students varied among schools; no schools reported fluency in only one language. One school each reported two, three, four or five languages spoken by students. No school reported six languages spoken, but seven schools reported more than six languages spoken fluently by students. Two administrators described the curriculum as British system, seven as American system, while two each described it as bilingual or ‘other’, and none described the curriculum as Canadian, denominational or differentiated. Schools reported parents’ employment as mostly corporate employees (n = 10), mostly diplomats (n = 5), mostly teachers (n = 2), mostly involved in missionary work (n = 1), some combination of the above (n = 4) or other (n = 2).
Of the 11 survey respondents, all but one reported new students (14–19 years) entering the school community from another country in the previous 12 months. All 11 respondents reported students exiting their school community, to move out of the country, in the previous 12 months. Administrators reported a wide range of student movement in both areas, as represented in Table 2. In Table 2, discrepancy between the numbers of students versus teachers could be due to a respondent reporting a total of K-12 teachers at the school, without indicating the number of secondary teachers exclusively.
School population.
Missing data: question left blank.
When do students come and go, and how long do they stay?
School administrators reported the likelihood of students entering and exiting at logical transition points, such as the start of the school year, or semester break, on the five-point Likert scale: never; not likely at all; somewhat likely; very likely; or always. The most common responses among respondents were that students were very likely to enter (n = 8) and exit (n = 9) at logical transition points during the school year. Few administrators indicated that students were somewhat likely to enter (n = 2) and exit (n = 1) at logical transition points. Only one administrator reported that students never enter at a logical transition point, and only one administrator indicated that students always exit at logical transition points.
When asked what percentage of graduating seniors had attended each school for at least one year, 10 reported 50-75 percent, and one reported that they did not know. One school reported that 50-75 percent of graduating seniors had attended the school for at least 2 years, nine schools reported greater than 75 percent, and one reported that they did not know. When asked what percentage of graduating seniors had attended the school for at least 3 years, one reported 25-50 percent, four reported 50-75 percent, four reported greater than 75 percent, and one reported that they did not know. When asked what percentage of graduating seniors had attended each school for their entire high school experience, three administrators reported less than 25 percent, two reported 25-50 percent, one reported 50-75 percent, four reported greater than 75 percent and one reported that they did not know.
Professional development, orientation and departure programs, and transition support teams
Administrators responded to several open-ended questions regarding transition. Participants were asked to describe three types of transition programs being offered: professional development to support transition, orientation and departure programs, and transition support teams. Participants were then asked to describe the level of success of such programs with a five-point Likert scale. After rating the success or failure of the three types of programs, respondents were asked to offer insights into what helped or hindered such programs. The analysis of the results of that survey is outlined below.
Participants were first asked to describe professional development opportunities offered to support the transition process for teens. Of respondents, five reported that they did not offer any professional development to support transition at their schools. Of those schools offering professional development, three schools reported using local and regional conferences and events as an avenue for learning about transition, rather than offering programs within the school itself. Peer counseling, coaching or new teacher training programs for transition were reported by three of the eleven survey respondents. Collaboration among faculty, such as the development of transition strategies and the identification of key stages of transition, were reported by two schools. On only two occasions had a school offered more than one type of professional development for transition.
More schools reported offering orientation programs for new students than departure programs for exiting students. The most commonly reported orientation support was the school’s use of peer supports. Five schools reported linking the new student with a peer buddy for at least the first week. One school also reported connecting the new student to a peer group trained to support transitioning students, in addition to the peer buddy. Three respondents reported offering new student orientation sessions and one school indicated that homeroom teachers offered additional support to new students. One school reported offering nothing in terms of orientation, and two schools reported offering nothing at departure. Counseling intervention was offered at both orientation and departure. Counseling for new students was offered by two schools upon entrance, and three schools upon departure. Aside from the three schools offering counseling services, not many interventions or supports were reported for the departing student. Of the 11 survey respondents, three offered counseling at departure, one offered a leaver session and one noted contacting the new school with records and pertinent information. Two reported offering no departure program at all. One respondent noted the difficulty of providing transition services upon departure, by noting that ‘when parents decide to move on, there is less that we can do to help; this is often mid-year and at very short notice so all we can do is prepare reports and transcripts to ensure that the new school knows as much as possible about students who will be joining them’ (school administrator). It would be interesting to attempt to determine, through further research, whether this is a common feeling among educators at international schools, or an opinion shared by only a few.
When asked about the use of transition teams, most responded with a yes or no response, or a phrase indicating yes or no, without elaboration. Most schools did not offer transition support teams for students, while only one school indicated that they did utilize transition support teams. Specifically, one school reported utilizing transition teams, three schools indicated only partially utilizing transition teams, and seven schools reported not using transition support teams at all. It is unclear from the responses given whether or not formal transition teams, as suggested by McKillop-Ostrom (2000), were used.
When implemented in schools, are transitional supports successful?
Administrators were asked to describe professional development opportunities to support transition, orientation and departure programs, and to describe transition support teams as exceptionally successful, successful, not successful, problematic or not yet offered. Of the eleven survey respondents, one reported professional development to support transition as exceptionally successful, while no respondents reported orientation and departure programs or transition teams as exceptionally successful. All three programs were commonly viewed as successful; five respondents reported professional development as successful, six reported orientation and departure programs as being successful, and four reported transition support teams as successful. Five respondents reported that their schools did not offer such professional development for transition, four reported not offering orientation and departure programs, and seven reported not utilizing transition support teams. Despite this, none of the 11 schools reported professional development or transition support teams as problematic, and only one respondent reported orientation and departure programs as problematic.
What helps or hinders implementation of programs?
The study also sought to gather perspectives of school administrators about what factors help, or hinder, the implementation of transition programs in international school communities. Administrators were given an open-ended question asking about factors which helped or hindered professional development for transition, in terms of professional development, orientation and departure programs, and the use of transition teams. Factors that appeared to prevent the implementation of professional development in international schools were lack of funding and adequate resources; this was reported by four schools. Lack of awareness for the problems associated with transition and TCKs was reported by two schools. Language barriers were reported as a hindrance to the implementation of professional development in one school. One respondent reported it being a struggle to offer professional development for transition, owing to the demands for curricular professional development. Some factors aided in the development of professional development for transition. For example, one school reported the size of their small school allowed for more flexibility and programmatic choices, and three schools reported the importance of having a strong facilitator of professional development and a faculty skilled in collaborative efforts. It was reported by one school that student interest contributed positively to the implementation of professional development for transition.
Participants reported on factors that were helpful to orientation and departure programs, as well as detrimental factors. Although three schools reported that nothing helps or hinders orientation and departure programs, some contributing and limiting factors were reported. Efficient processing of paperwork at departure and parent involvement were each listed by at least one school as something that helps in orientation and departure. Although not a controllable factor in schools, one school reported that their small school size improved their ability to foster orientation and departure programs. As reported by two schools, student involvement and attitude were viewed as a potential help, or hindrance, depending on the particular situation. Other hindrances to the implementation of orientation and departure programs included the transient nature of the school population, funding, lack of awareness, time constraints and student scheduling conflicts.
Of schools that reported using transition teams to support students, responses about what helps or hinders those teams were remarkably similar. One respondent referred to the need for the transition team to be made up of ‘the right group of people’ (school administrator). Two schools noted that the care and support of teachers is important to the transition support team. Small school size and communication and planning were also said to contribute positively to transition support teams. Hindrances to the use of transition support teams were not suggested by any respondents.
Critical analysis
Several studies indicate the importance of transition programs for students in international schools (Davis et al., 2010; Langford, 2006; McKillop-Ostrom, 2000; Pollock and Van Reken 2009; Risch 2008). Although most schools in this study reported a highly mobile student body, several international schools appeared to be lacking in transitional support available to students. Of the four components outlined in the survey (professional development, orientation programs, departure programs and transition support teams), only two schools reported offering all four. Although three schools offered three of the four, six schools reported no or one component offered. In the present study, lack of awareness for the problems associated with transition and TCKs was indicated by two schools. This finding is somewhat consistent with that of Risch (2008), whose study indicates a lack of awareness of programs in three schools.
One school in the present study reported utilizing transition teams, three schools indicated only partially utilizing transition teams, and seven schools reported not using transition support teams at all. McKillop-Ostrom (2000) outlined the importance of formal transition teams in international schools; the extent to which the schools offered formal or informal transition teams in this study is unclear from the responses gathered. What is clear is that transition teams may be underutilized in international schools.
When asked about orientation and departure programs for students in transition, supports at orientation appeared to be much more widely implemented than supports at departure. This is consistent with Risch (2008), who indicates interventions aimed at welcoming the student to the new community and support upon orientation as the most commonly used element of transition intervention. The most commonly reported orientation support in the present study was the schools’ use of peer support. Five schools reported linking the new student with a peer buddy for at least the first week.
In the present study, what is most notable in terms of professional development for transition in international schools is that the majority of schools did not offer it. Of those schools offering professional development, three schools reported using local and regional conferences and events as an avenue for learning about transition, instead of providing support within the school. Peer counseling, coaching or new teacher training programs for transition were reported by three schools. Collaboration among faculty, such as the development of transition strategies and the identification of key stages of transition, was reported by two schools. On only two occasions did a school offer more than one type of professional development for transition.
Although this study is quite small and results cannot be generalized across a larger population, the results still offer insights into the lack of transition program components within some schools. It is interesting to note that, of the responses, only one response indicated an extensive knowledge of the importance of transition programs and how that knowledge was used to support transition. In contrast, most open-ended responses were limited in length and scope, despite the fact that respondents were offered access to a website providing more information on the nature of the study, problems TCKs face, and about research on transition programs. It is also notable that only 11 out of 41 schools responded, despite numerous reminders and personalized requests for participation. There are several possibilities for the lack of response, including the possibility of flaws within the overall research design, such as the initial sample size being too small. Of those responding, feedback was also quite limited in many of the open-ended responses. Although this could be due to time constraints, there is a possibility that there is a shocking lack of interest in the topic of transition programs in international schools. If this is the case, the findings have several implications for members within international school communities, the first being to increase awareness of the impact of transition on TCKs in international schools.
Suggestions for further research
Because of a limited response rate, a suggestion for further research includes a larger study of the use and implementation of transitional support in international schools, including – but not limited to – the use of professional development, orientation programs, departure programs and transition support teams. Another way to further enhance depth of understanding about the importance of this topic would be to undertake a case study of a school offering all four components. This study identified some variables among schools included in the study, such as school population size, and the size of the faculty and administrative team. In further research it may be important to limit some of these variables. One smaller school, for example, reported that transitional support was unnecessary because of the inherent close-knit community, while a response from one large school indicated a lack of awareness that transition programs are needed within international schools. Also, a similar study with a longitudinal design would allow for greater analysis into the extent to which transitional supports are successful.