Sense of Belonging Pre/Post Transition to Secondary School: Privileging Student Voice

Abstract

In Queensland, Australia, there has been a major reform shifting Year 7 from Primary to Secondary Schools and implementing the Junior Secondary initiative for Years 7-9 in government schools. Six Guiding Principles, including establishing a Distinct Identity, provide the framework. This study examined 317 students transitioning from Year 6 to 7, with a focus on how, and to what extent, they established a Distinct Identity, evident in their sense of belonging and connectedness, and of feeling safe and confident in their school. This longitudinal study was conducted in two Phases with data collected over a year. Phase 1, pre-transition, involved 471 Year 6 students in 18 primary schools. Phase 2, post-transition, involved 317 matched respondents now in Year 7 in 11 secondary schools. Student voice is featured in this study as a key point of difference to previous studies about young people’s transitions. The findings reveal that students’ sense of belonging at school remained mostly stable and positive across the Year 6 to 7 transition, with a small decline in mean scores. This finding is a positive reflection on the effectiveness of the Junior Secondary initiative, which set out to address declines previously reported in the literature.

Keywords:

• sense of belonging
• middle grades
• student voice
• transition
• junior secondary
• identity

The development of a “distinct identity” is one of the six Guiding Principles of the Queensland Government’s Junior Secondary Policy, which was implemented in conjunction with the movement of Year 7 students in Queensland into secondary school. This strategy, under the umbrella of a broader collection of reforms including a six-month earlier school starting age, was incorporated in the policy The Flying Start (Department of Education, Training and Employment, 2010). Distinct identity is defined as a student feeling a sense of belonging and connectedness to their school and feeling safe and confident in this environment (Queensland Government, 2012). Supporting young adolescents to establish a distinct individual and group identity can strengthen their social and emotional wellbeing and enhance school outcomes (Queensland Government, 2012), and a strong sense of school belonging correlates with the formation of a positive identity (Allen et al., 2016).

The transition from primary to secondary school frequently has been identified as a critical point for middle years students, yet there is a paucity of research seeking student views related to this transition (Johnstone, 2010) and even few studies on the effect of this transition upon a sense of school belonging to school (Allen et al., 2016; Vaz et al., 2015). This study offers a unique perspective by obtaining the unmediated experiences of young adolescents whilst they transition from primary to secondary school (Ganeson, 2006; Longaretti, 2020).

This study set out to explore the experiences of Year 7 students following their transition from primary to secondary school. The study was designed to capture students’ points of view and analyze their reported experiences regarding the establishment of a distinct junior school identity during the actual implementation of the reform. The study used a mixed methods approach to fully explore students’ experiences whilst they were in transition from primary to secondary school. Data were collected prior to the transition when students were in Year 6 and then again following the transition when students were in Year 7.

Literature Review

The Journey

The movement from Year 6 in primary school to Year 7 in secondary school in Queensland is a relatively new transition. Prior to 2015, Year 7 was typically the last year of primary school. The rationale for the shift of Year 7 into the secondary school settings was multifaceted: students were, on average, six months older in Year 7, resulting from a change to the school starting age; there was extensive support for Year 7 students to have access to specialist teachers; the shift was a strategy to address the middle years “plunge;” and many felt moving Year 7 to secondary offered better alignment with developmental needs of young adolescents (Pendergast et al., 2015). Along with the shift of Year 7 into secondary, junior secondary for Years 7–9 was implemented.

During the 2007 school year, Prep (similar to kindergarten in the United States) was introduced in Queensland, and in 2008 the Year 1 entry age was raised by six months. This resulted in more than half of the students in Year 7 turning 13 in 2015 during their eighth year of schooling. These changes were significant because it brought Queensland into line with the other Australian states. The change to the average age of students in Year 7 as well as the introduction of an extra year of formal schooling at prep level provided an unprecedented opportunity to move Year 7 to secondary school. In 2015, for the first time, Year 7 students who participated in the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) tests were on average the same age across Australia. Begun in 2008, NAPLAN is a national cohort testing program that comprises standardized external tests in literacy and numeracy and is conducted annually for students in Year 3, 5, 7, and 9. Pendergast et al. (2015) stated, “[W]hen taken together, shifting Year 7 to secondary and implementing the Guiding Principles represent one of the most significant reforms undertaken in Queensland education” (p. 7).

Since the reform, there are three identified phases of schooling in Queensland: primary (Prep to Year 6), junior secondary (Years 7–9), and senior secondary (Years 10–12). In Queensland, both junior secondary and senior secondary are typically located on the same campus, which is different from some countries, such as the United States, where there are separate campuses for middle level schools. All state schools were also mandated to implement a junior secondary policy involving all students from Year 7–9. The decision to introduce junior secondary was made in direct response to the parent feedback received from A Flying Start for Queensland Children: Education Green Paper for Public Consultation (Department of Education, Training and Employment, 2009). Parents expressed the need to strengthen support for students in transition from primary to secondary school, in particular Year 7 students (Department of Education, Training and Employment, 2009). Year 7 students in secondary school would have access to specialist teachers to ensure depth of learning in areas such as science, history, languages, and the arts. The significance of this initiative was underscored by the implementation of the Australian Curriculum commencing in 2012 with full roll out implemented by 2016 (Department of Education, Training and Employment, 2012).

In order to understand the context of this government reform, it is important to briefly discuss the history of the journey from middle schooling to junior secondary in Queensland. Junior secondary schooling draws on a considerable base of middle schooling literature, reports, and initiatives. Table 1 lists these key documents along with a brief summary of the purpose of each. These documents point to a clear link between the previous middle schooling initiatives and the Queensland Government’s Flying Start initiative and associated junior secondary policies (Bahr & Crosswell, 2011). Pendergast (2010) also linked middle schooling to the Flying Start initiative, noting that “[A] Flying Start for Queensland (D.E.T.E, 2010) provides the rationale for attention to the question of what makes the best possible conditions for student learning in the middle years” (p. 12).

Table 1 Key Queensland Government Middle Schooling/Junior Secondary Reports

Year	Key Queensland Government Middle Schooling/Junior Secondary Reports	Explanation
2002	Queensland Government – Education and Training Reforms for the Future (ETRF): White Paper	Major focus was for all young people to complete Year 10 and then go on to gain at least a Senior Certificate or a Certificate III. Included commitments to strengthen the middle years of schooling.
2002	Carrington – The Middle Years of Schooling in Queensland: A Way Forward	Discussion paper prepared for Education Queensland. This paper analyzed international and national trends in the middle years, identified a number of key themes from this literature and provided a number of recommendations to scaffold a way forward for middle years schooling in Queensland.
2003	Queensland Government – See the Future: The Middle Phase of Learning State School Action Plan	This action plan recognized the special needs of students across Years 4 to 9 and provided actions for implementation. It sets the direction, clarified expectations and accountabilities for all Queensland schools related to the Middle Phase of Learning.
2009	D.E.T.E. – A Flying Start for Queensland Children: Green Paper	This paper sought the views of Queensland about how we can best give our children a flying start to prepare them for the transition to primary school and then into secondary school. This included three major objectives. Objective 2 was to improve transitions from primary to secondary school and supporting adolescent development. This included moving Year 7 from primary to high school for the first time in Queensland.
2010	D.E.T.E. – Flying Start for Queensland Children: White Paper	The White Paper confirmed the suggested initiatives and proposals of the Green Paper after public consultation. The outcomes of this consultation informed the education reform package presented in the White Paper.
2012	A.C.E.R – Junior Secondary: Theory and Practice	The purpose of this paper was to elaborate on the six principles underpinning the new junior secondary phase of education in Queensland government schools. The paper describes the evidence base and practical applications of the junior secondary principles.
2012	Queensland Government - Junior Secondary Agenda 2012–2015	This document identifies the six guiding principles of junior secondary which would provide the framework for schools to design and implement practices to support staff, students, parents and the wider school community in the move to junior secondary.

In Queensland, the Education Training and Reforms for the Future Report (2002) responded to the growing concerns of young adolescent’s disengagement with school and declining student achievement. The action plan identified Years 4–9 as the critical middle phase of learning and, for the first time, provided a sharp focus on learning, teaching, and curriculum that was shaped differently for young adolescent learners. From the report, the government made a commitment to 19 actions. In particular, Action 3 stated “[W]e will take a new approach to teaching and learning in the middle years of schooling” (Department of Education, Training and Employment, 2002, p. 8). Middle schooling provided a clear philosophy relevant for early adolescents and accompanying signature practices designed to produce optimal outcomes for these students. Also in 2002, the Education Department commissioned a report, titled The Middle Years of Schooling in Queensland: A Way Forward, that stated “the middle years of schooling in Queensland is poised to move towards a new generation of reform” (Carrington, 2002, p. 25).

In 2003, the Queensland government launched the See the Future: The Middle Phase of Learning State School Action Plan (Queensland Government, 2003). This action plan set a direction, clarified expectations and accountabilities, and committed systemic support for middle schooling reforms in every Queensland state school (Pendergast, 2010). The See the Future plan had significant impact within all state schools in Queensland (Bahr & Crosswell, 2011). It served to legitimize the middle years practices already being implemented by many Queensland schools, and it further influenced all schools to address middle years concerns. As a consequence, the action plan highlighted middle years at a systemic level in Queensland. Although commitment to middle years reform appeared to be well timed and flexible it was often poorly implemented in schools (Bahr & Crosswell, 2011). Pendergast (2010) stated that “[M]iddle Schooling is not new in Australia but has experienced variable, patchy and unsustained commitment in its implementation” (p. 6). Pendergast (2010) has suggested that there was a failure to maintain the momentum beyond a period of one to two years resulting in a lack of sustainable reforms specifically relating to middle schooling initiatives. The Queensland government had undertaken an extensive consultation exploring the possible uptake of middle years practices at a systemic level, and there was much activity around the possibilities of a revival for middle schooling. Bahr and Crosswell (2011) proposed that middle years practices are implicitly embedded in the Flying Start strategy and the junior secondary policy, but the fact that they are not intentionally connected to the middle years causes concern for middle schooling advocates. Ultimately, the Flying Start strategy and associated junior secondary policy has risen out of the previous years of work in the middle years in Queensland (Bahr & Crosswell, 2011). This historical documentation of the journey points to a progressive approach to reforming the middle years with the shift of Year 7 students from primary to secondary settings (Pendergast et al., 2015, p. 6).

The Middle Years Plunge

The phenomenon of “the middle years plunge” was one of the major contributing factors considered by the Queensland Education Department when moving Year 7 students into secondary school. Some research suggested that many students in the middle years were not benefiting from their schooling experiences (Carrington, 2006; Middle Years of Schooling Association [MYSA], 2008; West & Schwerdt, 2012). The transition from primary school to secondary school is a substantial contributing factor to the growth, or lack of growth, that young adolescents may experience at this stage in their lives (Bahr & Pendergast, 2007; Coffey et al., 2013). For example, studies have shown that students make the least progress in learning in the middle years (Years 5–9) (Goss et al., 2016; Hill & Russell, 1999; Pendergast et al., 2017). Moreover, the gap between low and high achievers increases markedly as students’ progress through school, and the transition from primary to secondary school is problematic for some students (Barratt, 1998; Carrington, 2006; Hill & Russell, 1999). This gap is described as the “middle years slump” (Carrington, 2006; Hill & Russell, 1999; MYSA, 2008) or “middle years plunge” (Hyman, 2015; Pendergast, 2017; West & Schwerdt, 2012). Researchers have often concluded that academic achievement frequently declines across school transitions that occur during early adolescence (Anderman, 2013; Phillips, 2017). Analysis by the Grattan Institute report, Widening Gaps, illustrated that learning gaps widen alarmingly as students move throughout school, with Goss et al. (2016) noting:

[T]he spread for the middle 60 per cent of students more than doubles between Year 3 to Year 9, from 2 years, 5 months to 5 and a half years. We estimate that by the time they reach Year 9, the top ten per cent of students are about eight years ahead of the bottom ten per cent. (p. 18)

Junior Secondary and Distinct Identity

The junior secondary policy is underpinned by six guiding principles (see Table 2 for an explanation of these principles):

Table 2 Junior Secondary Guiding Principles

Guiding Principle	Explanation
Distinct Identity	Junior secondary students will be encouraged and supported to develop their own group identity within the wider high school. This can involve dedicated school areas and events.
Quality Teaching	Teachers working with students in the junior secondary years will be given the skills they need through additional professional development, so they can support young teens through these crucial early high school years.
Student Wellbeing	We will meet the social and emotional needs of junior secondary students with a strong focus on pastoral care. For example, schools could provide a home room to support students as they adjust to new routines and greater academic demands.
Parent and Community Involvement	We want parents to stay connected with their students’ learning when they enter high school. Parent involvement in assemblies, special events, award ceremonies and leadership presentations will be welcomed.
Leadership	Schools will be encouraged to create leadership roles for students in Year 7, 8 and 9. Dedicated teachers experienced with teaching young adolescents will lead junior secondary supported by the principal and administration team
Local Decision-making	The needs of each school community will influence how junior secondary is implemented in each school.

Adapted from Pendergast et al. (2015, p. 3).

This article focuses upon the principle of “distinct identity.” This principle requires a systemic commitment to “students feeling a sense of belonging and connectedness to their school and to feeling safe and confident in this environment” (Australian Council for Educational Research, 2012, p. 11). Through this policy, it was proposed that junior secondary students are supported to develop their own group identity within the broader school community and have a strong sense of belonging and ownership of their school and their learning (Queensland Government, 2012).

Rumble and Aspland (2010) identified three key features associated with forging a distinct identity in the lower secondary school years: the presence of a dedicated school space for learning, a changed teaching and learning culture, and new leadership patterns. These features reinforce that external factors such as school policy can have an effect upon the development of an individual and group identity. The school context and the academic, cultural, and physical environment have an effect upon young adolescent identity formation. Therefore, efforts of schools must be centered on the identity needs of the young adolescent in order for optimal outcomes to occur (Davis, 2012). Forms of student identities, both positive and negative, may emerge, in part, from a mismatch between the early adolescents’ needs and the middle school environments (Phillips, 2017; Roeser & Lau, 2002). The junior secondary principle of distinct identity is comprised of two indicators: sense of belonging and school connectedness (Queensland Government, 2012). Each will be considered in turn.

Sense of Belonging

Johnstone (2010) studied the transition to high school and identified students’ continuous search to recapture a sense of belonging after the transition as a key finding. Cowan (1991) believed individuals attempt to regain a sense of stability upon experiencing a transition phenomenon whereby they experience a period of “deorganization.” Being able to recapture a sense of belonging indicates an individual has an understanding of how to cope with de-organization. Cowan (1991) claimed that change could only be referred to as a life transition if there was evidence of a significant shift in an individual’s view of the self and the world and evidence of changes in major social relationships. This is particularly pertinent as experience of young adolescents transitioning from primary to secondary school represents a significant event in their lives.

In primary school, students often have well-developed social connections and an in-depth knowledge of the mechanisms of their school developed over a period of either six or seven years (Mitra, 2004). This often provides students with a healthy sense of belonging to their primary school environment. Urban myths often cloud primary school student perceptions of what secondary school will be like, and for many students the differences between the primary school and the secondary school may be pronounced (Coffey et al., 2013). This directly tests their ability to adapt, and in order to ensure early success students have to “position” themselves in this new environment. Recapturing a sense of belonging is not simply a task to be ticked off, but an ongoing and complex matter (Johnstone, 2010). The focus for students both prior to leaving primary school and throughout their first year of secondary school is to recapture or maintain this healthy sense of belonging that they may have experienced in primary school. The concept of a “sense of belonging at school” (SOBAS) appears throughout associated literature and research (Chui et al., 2016; Fabris et al., 2023; Pendergast et al., 2018). It has a number of associated terms including school connectedness, attachment, and belongingness (Pendergast et al., 2018, p. 4).

Goodenow (1993a) conducted an empirical study that linked student’s subjective SOBAS with variation in school-related outcomes. The study found that middle years students who reported a positive general SOBAS were more likely to be regularly motivated at school and have higher expectations of academic success. This seminal research study of 353 sixth, seventh, and eighth grade young adolescents investigated their sense of belonging and support. The author defined belonging as

… students’ sense of being accepted, valued, included, and encouraged by others (teachers and peers) in the academic classroom setting and of feeling oneself to be an important part of the life and activity of the class. More than simple perceived liking or warmth, it also involves support and respect for personal autonomy and for the student as an individual. (p. 23)

Goodenow developed and validated a measure of adolescent’s perceived belonging or psychological membership in the school environment called the Psychological Sense of School Membership (PSSM) scale (Goodenow, 1993b). PSSM is often utilized in studies measuring belonging, school connectedness, school transition (Wagle et al., 2018). Research has found that the PSSM has high validity and reliability (Allen & Kern, 2017). The customized survey implemented in the current study draws heavily upon the PSSM and the research of Goodenow.

Influences on the SOBAS include variables related to teachers, peers, and associated structures and policies of the school (Dukynaitė & Dudaitė, 2017). The most significant factor in forming a positive or negative SOBAS was how students perceive their relationships with teachers (Allen et al., 2016; Dukynaitė & Dudaitė, 2017). Students who believe they have positive relationships with their teachers are more likely to experience a greater sense of belonging than students who perceive a negative relationship with their teachers (Allen et al., 2016). When students feel connected to their teachers their SOBAS is enhanced. They feel connected when teachers offer support through positive interactions such as taking notice of them and being caring, fair, and empathetic (Allen et al., 2016).

The 2015 PISA (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], 2017) results reported that a major threat to students’ SOBAS is their perception of negative relationships with their teachers. Twenty percent of students revealed they experienced some form of unfair treatment by their teacher (e.g., harshly disciplined, ridiculed in front of class) at least a few times in a given month. Happier students tended to report positive relationships with their teachers and therefore associated school with a positive sense of belonging. Students with a high SOBAS reported disciplined classrooms with a teacher who support them and treated them fairly (OECD, 2017).

Another significant factor influencing SOBAS is the relationship with peers. This relationship can shape the social and emotional experience of the student at school. Students may feel they don’t “fit” in the social and structural hierarchy of the school setting unless they have peers who know them and offer emotional support. Students who perceive a lack of support from peers often do not establish a strong SOBAS which puts them at risk of poorer schooling outcomes (Kiefer et al., 2015). Students need to feel known and accepted by their peers in order to foster a SOBAS (Pendergast et al., 2018). Positive social relations with peers such as friendship, acceptance and connection can significantly enhance a healthy SOBAS (Allen & Kern, 2017).

A pivotal report published by ACER in 2018 explored aspects of student’s general attitudes toward school, including their SOBAS (DeBortoli, 2018, p. iii). In 2015 students in Australia had a mean index of −0.12 on the SOBAS survey, which was significantly lower than the OECD average of 0.02 suggesting that Australian students reported having a significantly poorer SOBAS compared to students across the OECD. In 2018, the gap in PISA SOBAS outcomes had widened again to a mean index of 0.19 for Australia and OECD average of 0.00 (Thomson et al., 2020). In Australia, the SOBAS declined between 2012 and 2018 with a ten-percentage decrease for Australian students who agreed or strongly agreed that I feel I belong at school (Thomson et al., 2020). In both reports, Australian students, on average, reported having a significantly poorer SOBAS compared to students across the OECD (DeBortoli, 2018; Thomson et al., 2020).

Some research, though, presents contrary findings. Vaz et al. (2015) analyzed longitudinal data from a survey of 266 students with and without disabilities who transitioned from 52 Primary schools to 152 Secondary schools to measure SOBAS after the primary to secondary transition. This study concluded that SOBAS was stable across the primary to secondary school transition. Vaz et al. (2015) reiterated this point:

[G]iven that prior research reports that the perception of school belongingness decreases as students’ progress through the secondary years of school, the findings of the current study are encouraging, suggesting that Australian students’ perception of school belongingness is stable across the primary-secondary school transition. (p. 20)

Schools offer unique opportunities for students to develop a SOBAS, and the literature points to the need to better understand this phenomenon, especially given the somewhat divergent evidence. The need to belong to a social group is incontestable. For young adolescents, this need is often met in school and family settings, hence the focus on specific policy and practice changes that have the potential to increase students’ SOBAS are a priority (Anderman & Leake, 2007). Furthermore, studies of the transition to secondary school may benefit from including a more focused exploration of the phenomenon of students recapturing their sense of belonging in the high school environment (Johnstone, 2010). It is unknown if and how students redefine their SOBAS across the primary-to-secondary school transition. Empirical evidence on whether students’ perceptions of school belongingness change after transition to secondary school remains largely unexplored (Vaz et al., 2015). This study explicitly takes up this direction in order to address this gap in the research.

School Connectedness

Mayberry and Reupert (2007) defined “school connectedness” as

… a sense of belonging to the school, the extent to which students feel accepted, respected and supported by others in the school environment, how much students like school, active engagement in school activities and finally a belief in the fairness of school rules and discipline. (p. 105)

The strong association between SOBAS and school connectedness is clear, as a feeling of belonging is a vital ingredient of school connectedness (Bradley et al., 2021; Osterman, 2000). Adolescents must feel they belong in a school to forge a connection. Moreover, students must feel close to school personnel and their peers in order to develop a strong attachment to the school itself. Subsequently, the connectedness that students experience to their school community has been associated with their academic performance, adjustment, and emotional wellbeing (Rowe & Stewart, 2009). It is also positively associated with student engagement, attendance, and high school graduation (McNeely, 2013). School connectedness deals with students’ emotional affiliation with their school, trust in school authorities, sense of safety, and confidence in the school’s commitment to students (Young, 2005).

In terms of student outcomes, Bond et al. (2007) determined that school connectedness measured in the eighth grade positively predicted secondary school completion. The study was conducted with a sample of Australian adolescents from twenty-six secondary schools. School connectedness was measured as a composite of commitment to school, perceptions that teachers are fair, attachment to peers, a sense of belonging, and perceptions of student’s autonomy within the school (Bond et al., 2007). An environment that nurtures and reinforces student’s sense of belonging and identity may create the most advantageous atmosphere to foster connectedness in students (Groundwater-Smith et al., 2007).

The transition from primary to secondary school clearly has an impact upon the level of school connectedness for the transitioning students. Students’ feelings of connectedness may suffer as they negotiate the transition between primary and secondary school while adjusting simultaneously to the changes associated with puberty (Phillips, 2017). Social issues may be intensified at transition, as students are also on the cusp of adolescence. Therefore, school transitions that occur during adolescence often magnify risk factors of alienation with schooling (Cueto et al., 2010). Between middle and secondary school, students begin to disengage from school with ever widening gaps in connectedness (Young, 2005). While some negative outcomes have been found at the transition—such as reduced school connectedness, greater anxiety, and social difficulties—these appear to be short-term for most students, and many students can experience a positive transition to secondary school (Vaz et al., 2015).

Increasingly, educators are incentivized or mandated to monitor school climate and connectedness and implement strategies to improve them. McNeely (2013) has considered the difficulty of measuring the effectiveness of school connectedness; for instance, there is unlikely to be an agreement on a single conceptualization of connectedness and how to measure it. Young (2005) noted, “[E]ven though establishing connections with adolescents in school is the single most important thing that educators do for young people, its value is sometimes overshadowed by the demands of high-stakes testing” (p. 9). Often the priories of teachers and school leaders in terms of what is best for students does not match with what students think or perceive. Therefore, the importance of student voice is crucial to be considered when making decisions or committing to strategies involving the students themselves.

This study endeavors to determine the extent that a distinct junior secondary school identity was established by Year 7 students in secondary school with a specific focus on the indicators of SOBAS and connectedness with the school attained by the students in Year 6 and following their transition in Year 7.

Student Voice in Research

The views of students themselves are often neglected in middle years and transition research (Johnstone, 2010; Longaretti, 2020). Scant research focuses on Australian students’ views of their transition to high school, despite them being the key stakeholder group in this process (Ganeson, 2006; Johnstone, 2010). Swain (2014) reiterates this point, noting “educational reform often fails to capture the voices of those who matter most. Those who seek insight into educational practices and issues need to reposition students in educational research and reform” (p. 283). It is argued that opportunities for student “voice” to be heard when exploring interactions of the impact of educational systems and structures, especially from within, are paramount (Dinham & Rowe, 2007; Swain, 2014). This position is supported by international advocates such as the OCED (2017), which pointed out that student sense of belonging can be improved by giving voice to students. This voice may offer an alternative perspective on the views of school staff (OECD, 2017). Furthermore, providing opportunities for student voice is an avenue to foster a SOBAS to the school community by elevating students as valuable stakeholders in their learning experiences. This study investigated the experiences of transition by seeking insights from the students themselves rather than teachers and school administrators. By understanding what young adolescents experience, schools, teachers, and policy makers will be better equipped to facilitate students’ transition during this time.

Methodology

This study explored the research question: How and to what extent has a distinct junior school identity been established by Year 7 students in secondary school? The research design was in two phases beginning with the administration of a digital survey to students in Year 6 (phase 1) in 2017 and re-administration of the same survey at following students’ transition into Year 7 in 2018 (phase 2). The same students received the survey in the pre and post transition design of the study. The survey collected data related to student school experience, specifically their SOBAS and school connectedness. The survey included both quantitative and qualitative data in the form of student drawings and accompanying text. The mixed-methods longitudinal study combined quantitative and qualitative approaches to synergize the strengths of multiple methods. This enabled a fuller understanding of the phenomenon than is possible using either quantitative or qualitative methods alone (Gay et al., 2011). This article reports one aspect of the mixed-method study—the components of the survey related to distinct identity.

The Survey Instrument

The survey comprises 28 items was developed to gather responses related to a SOBAS and school connectedness, which are key indicators of the junior secondary Guiding Principle of distinct identity. This purpose-designed survey was adapted from the original 18 items of the PSSM survey (Goodenow, 1993a). This scale was developed by Goodenow (1993a) as a measure of the psychological sense of school membership for use with adolescents. The PSSM was chosen due to its common use in the research related to assessment of SOBAS and its proven validity and reliability with an internal consistency (i.e., Cronbach’s alpha) ranging from 0.77 to 0.88 across different samples (Allen & Kern, 2017). The PSSM survey has three distinct subscales: Identification and Participation in school, Perception of Fitting in among Peers, and Generalized Connection to Teachers (Beck, 2019; Ye & Wallace, 2014). The customized survey for the present study was based on the PSSM and analyzed utilizing SPSS to calculate descriptive statistics including means, standard deviations, and percentages. All of these were calculated and presented in terms of Year 6, Year 7, overall, males, and females, and also in terms of the subscales noted and utilized by Ye and Wallace (2014): Subscale 1 – Identification and Participation in School, Subscale 2 – Perception of Fitting in among Peers, and Subscale 3 – Generalized Connection to Teachers. SPSS software was utilized to calculate inferential statistics such as paired sample t-test.

Additional items derived from the literature were added to provide further insights into the distinct identity phenomenon represented by SOBAS and school connectedness. The survey was grouped into three subscales and tested in a pilot survey and focus groups. Participants selected their responses from a Likert scale of five points ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The language of the survey was adapted for the participants who were students of 10–13 years in age with varying degrees of academic and literate ability.

In order to ensure validity, a pilot survey was implemented with a sub sample of similar students. Some benefits of this included a dress rehearsal of the data collection procedures and testing of the instrument as well as gaining related feedback from the pilot sample participants via a focus group (Gorard, 2001). The pilot survey was conducted including a test–retest reliability procedure (Field, 2009), with the same survey being administered twice to similar study participants. The two sets of scores were then correlated and evaluated (Creswell, 2012). The coefficient was .811, which is a high positive correlation (Gay et al., 2011).

The Cronbach alpha test was utilized to test the reliability of the items measured on the Likert-type scale results of the pilot survey. This statistic indicates the extent to which a group of questions are asking for the same basic underlying information. The Cronbach alpha test was utilized as the items are scored as continuous variables (e.g., strongly agree to strongly disagree), and it provides a coefficient to estimate consistency of scores on the instrument. The initial coefficient score was .771. Two low scoring items were then removed from the survey improving the score to .820. This is a high reliability score consistent with the original PSSM survey used by Goodenow. Researchers reported establishing high reliability for the total score (α = .88) (Goodenow, 1993a).

A focus group of 10 Year 7 students who had completed the pilot questionnaire (2 weeks apart) was conducted to provide feedback about their experiences whilst completing the questionnaire. This provided further validity related to response processes (Creswell, 2012). This feedback was extremely valuable as it included information related to the use of the technology in the administration of the survey. As a result of this feedback, some changes were made to the survey including the order of some questions.

Survey Administration

The survey was administered online during school hours at the school site. In phase 1 of data collection, the survey was administered to 480 Year 6 students who had provided consent at 18 primary schools. In phase 2, the survey was administered to 321 of the same students in Year 7after they had transitioned into 11 secondary schools. In phase 1, 471 surveys were useable and, in phase 2, 317 surveys were useable. There was an attrition rate of 36.3% between the phase 1 and phase 2 data collection points. The attrition rates were impacted by 38 students unable to be located, incomplete consent forms at phase 2, and student’s absences on survey administration days. In order to limit possible validity issues, only matched samples from phase 1 and phase 2 were used in the analysis for a total of 317 students.

Data Analysis

Student responses from the survey were exported from the online surveys into SPSS software. Descriptive statistics were utilized for the presentation of the research findings including the measures of means, standard deviations, and percentage calculations as well as paired sample T-Test results.

Findings

The findings are presented in three sections: (a) phase 1 – pre-transition (Year 6), (b) phase 2 – post-transition (Year 7), and (c) comparison between Year 6 and Year 7. Statistics were reported in terms of average mean, standard deviation, and percentages of agreement. Data were analyzed and reported for each individual phase in terms of general, gender, and subscales.

Phase One – Pre-Transition (Year 6)

The data were analyzed using SPSS, with values allocated to each of the five points on the scale: Strongly Agree = 5, Agree = 4, Not Sure = 3, Disagree = 2, Strongly Disagree = 1. The frequency for each of the 28 items is presented in Table 3, which is grouped into the three subscales. The mean for all 28 questions was 3.99 on the 5-point Likert scale, indicating that Year 6 students were overall positive in agreement (A/SA) with their Year 6 experience in primary school, based on the three subscales. The overall standard deviation was 1.02, indicating low variance in the student responses. See Table 3 for all Year 6 results.

Table 3 Phase One – Pre-Transition (Year 6)

Subscale 1: Identification and Participation in School	GENERAL		MALES		FEMALES
Item	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN
NO 1 - My school is a place where I really like to go each day.	75.7%	3.93	77.3%	3.92	75.7%	3.94
NO 4 - I feel like a real part of this school.	73.4%	3.93	74.2%	3.93	73.4%	3.92
NO 6 - I feel connected to this school.	74.6%	3.82	67.4%	3.84	74.6%	3.81
NO 7 - I contribute to this school in a positive way.	80.4%	4.12	82.9%	4.15	80,4%	4.09
NO 9 - I feel like I belong at this school.	72.5%	3.90	71.6%	3.92	72.5%	3.89
NO 11 - This school is a place where I am happy.	74.6%	3.95	76.0%	3.99	74.6%	3.91
NO 13 - I believe that I can succeed at my school.	86.4%	4.28	87.5%	4.29	86.4%	4.26
NO 14 - At this school I am involved in many extracurricular activities.	73.4%	3.95	77.5%	4.08	73.4%	3.83
NO 22 - There are many activities to do at this school that interest me.	81.3%	4.08	78.9%	4.05	81.3%	4.11
NO 25 - I get to do work at my school that interests me.	76.6%	3.98	77.9%	4.02	76.6%	3.94
NO 27 - There is real school spirit at this school.	68.6%	3.87	67.4%	3.83	68.6%	3.90
	Mean Average	3.98	Mean Average	4.00	Mean Average	3.96
Subscale 2: Perception of Fitting in among Peers	GENERAL		MALES		FEMALES
Item	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN
NO 2 - This school is a place where I have good friends.	93.5%	4.54	93.4%	4.50	93.5%	4.57
NO 10 - I get along with most people at this school.	79.6%	4.04	79.9%	3.99	79.6%	4.09
NO 12 - I feel safe at this school.	80.6%	4.18	79.8%	4.12	80.6%	4.24
NO 17 - I feel important at this school.	61.0%	3.60	60.1%	3.58	61.0%	3.63
NO 20 - Students have a voice/say in this school.	63.0%	3.71	61.4%	3.72	63.0%	3.72
NO 23 - I can really be myself at this school.	73.6%	3.90	73.6%	3.92	73.6%	3.88
NO 24 - At this school people here notice when I’m good at something.	73.9%	3.97	72.9%	3.93	73.9%	4.00
	Mean Average	4.04	Mean Average	3.97	Mean Average	4.02
Subscale 3: Generalized connection to Teachers	GENERAL		MALES		FEMALES
Item	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN
NO 3 - Teachers have high expectations for me at this school.	78.9%	4.14	78.1%	4.12	78.9%	4.17
NO 8 - Most teachers at this school are interested in me.	48.7%	3.51	46.8%	3.48	48.7%	3.55
NO 15 - I get along with most of my teachers at this school.	85.0%	4.19	84.6%	4.18	85.0%	4.22
NO 16 - Teachers treat students fairly and respectfully at this school.	72.7%	3.91	70.0%	3.91	72.7%	3.93
NO 18 - My teachers take a personal interest in helping me with my schoolwork.	75.0%	3.99	73.4%	3.97	75.0%	4.00
NO 19 - There’s at least one teacher or staff member at this school that I can talk to if I have a problem.	84.8%	4.32	85.8%	4.32	84.8%	4.31
NO 21 - My teachers say something positive to me when I have done my best.	87.3%	4.28	86.7%	4.25	87.3%	4.30
NO 26 - The teachers at my school respect me.	76.5%	4.01	76.4%	4.02	76.5%	4.02
NO 28 - At this school teachers care about me.	76.0%	4.05	76.0%	4.03	76.0%	4.07
	Mean Average	4.04	Mean Average	4.03	Mean Average	4.06

Gender (Year 6)

There is minimal difference between males and females in Year 6 in terms of mean (M = 3.97, 4.01) and standard deviation (SD = 1.00, 1.03). The biggest difference between the males and females was survey item 14. Males (M = 4.08) expressed that they were involved in more extracurricular activities than females (M = 3.83), but both mean scores were still high.

Year 6 Subscales

There was minimal difference between all three of the subscales in Year 6 in terms of general and gender results. These results were presented in terms of average mean. The findings for subscale 1 were (a) general (M = 3.96), males (M = 3.94), and females (M = 3.98); the findings for subscale 2 were (a) general (M = 3.96), males (M = 3.94), and females (M = 3.98); and the findings for subscale 3 were (a) general (M = 4.03), males (M = 4.01), and females (M = 4.04). See Table 3 for all Year 6 subscale results.

Phase Two – Post-Transition (Year 7)

The overall mean for Year 7 was 3.80. This is 0.19 lower than the score from Year 6 and also indicates that Year 7 students were positive in agreement overall with their Year 7 experience in secondary school. The overall standard deviation was 1.00, which indicates that there was low variance in the survey responses. See Table 4 for all Year 7 results.

Table 4 Phase Two – Post – Transition (Year 7)

Subscale 1: Identification and Participation in School	GENERAL		MALES		FEMALES
Item	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN
NO 1 - My school is a place where I really like to go each day.	70.9%	3.84	70.1%	3.85	71.9%	3.83
NO 4 - I feel like a real part of this school.	57.4%	3.56	59.9%	3.67	55.0%	3.45
NO 6 - I feel connected to this school.	53.3%	3.47	55.2%	3.51	51.2%	3.44
NO 7 - I contribute to this school in a positive way.	71.6%	3.85	71.6%	3.82	69.4%	3.89
NO 9 - I feel like I belong at this school.	62.8%	3.60	61.1%	3.56	64.4%	3.63
NO 11 - This school is a place where I am happy.	67.5%	3.79	66.8%	3.78	66.9%	3.79
NO 13 - I believe that I can succeed at my school.	81.4%	4.10	81.5%	4.07	81.3%	4.11
NO 14 - At this school I am involved in many extracurricular activities.	57.7%	3.60	59.2%	3.60	56.3%	3.61
NO 22 - There are many activities to do at this school that interest me.	74.5%	3.93	76.5%	3.98	71.2%	3.88
NO 25 - I get to do work at my school that interests me.	72.2%	3.82	78.3%	3.93	66.2%	3.71
NO 27 - There is real school spirit at this school.	67.9%	3.83	70.1%	3.84	65.6%	3.83
	Mean Average	3.76	Mean Average	3.78	Mean Average	3.74
Subscale 2: Perception of Fitting in among Peers	GENERAL		MALES		FEMALES
Item	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN
NO 2 - This school is a place where I have good friends.	91.5%	4.45	91.7%	4.45	91.2%	4.46
NO 10 - I get along with most people at this school.	80.1%	4.00	83.5%	4.05	76.9%	3.95
NO 12 - I feel safe at this school.	66.9%	3.80	66.8%	3.82	66.9%	3.78
NO 17 - I feel important at this school.	53.3%	3.44	52.2%	3.47	54.4%	3.41
NO 20 - Students have a voice/say in this school.	61.6%	3.65	60.5%	3.65	62.5%	3.64
NO 23 - I can really be myself at this school.	67.8%	3.76	65.6%	3.71	70.0%	3.80
NO 24 - At this school people here notice when I’m good at something.	65.6%	3.72	65.0%	3.75	66.3%	3.70
	Mean Average	3.83	Mean Average	3.84	Mean Average	3.82
Subscale 3: Generalised Connection to Teachers	GENERAL		MALES		FEMALES
Item	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN	Agreement (SA/A%)	MEAN
NO 3 - Teachers have high expectations for me at this school.	78.0%	4.07	79.0%	4.06	77.6%	4.09
NO 8 - Most teachers at this school are interested in me.	44.2%	3.36	42.1%	3.30	46.3%	3.41
NO 15 - I get along with most of my teachers at this school.	76.7%	3.96	78.3%	3.92	75.0%	3.99
NO 16 - Teachers treat students fairly and respectfully at this school.	61.8%	3.58	61.2%	3.58	62.6%	3.58
NO 18 - My teachers take a personal interest in helping me with my schoolwork.	65.9%	3.76	68.2%	3.85	63.8%	3.68
NO 19 - There’s at least one teacher or staff member at this school that I can talk to if I have a problem.	74.4%	4.08	73.9%	4.03	75.0%	4.13
NO 21 - My teachers say something positive to me when I have done my best.	74.5%	3.93	74.5%	3.98	74.4%	3.89
NO 26 - The teachers at my school respect me.	71.0%	3.82	70.1%	3.78	71.9%	3.86
NO 28 - At this school teachers care about me.	69.4%	3.82	65.6%	3.79	73.2%	3.85
	Mean Average	3.82	Mean Average	3.81	Mean Average	3.83

Gender (Year 7)

There was minimal difference between males and females in secondary school (Year 7) in terms of mean (M = 3.81, 3.79) and standard deviation (SD = .99, 1.02). The two biggest differences between males and females were survey items 4 (I feel a real part of this school.) and 25 (I get to do work at this school that interests me.), although the difference was still small (.22) favoring males for both.

Year 7 Sub Scales

There was minimal difference between all three of the subscales in Year 7 in terms of general and gender results. These results were presented in terms of average mean. The findings for subscale 1 were (a) general (M = 3.76), males (M = 3.78), and females (M = 3.74); the findings for subscale 2 were (a) general (M = 3.83), males (M = 3.84), and females (M = 3.82); and the findings for subscale 3 were (a) general (M = 3.79), males (M = 3.81), and females (M = 3.83). See Table 4 for all results.

Comparison Between Phase 1 and Phase 2

A t-test was conducted on the Year 6 and Year 7 data to measure the difference between the means of two groups and determine whether this difference was significant. At t₁ the majority of Year 6 students reported a high sense of school belongingness in primary school with a mean score of 3.99. At t₂ the majority of Year 7 students, now in secondary school, also reported a high sense of school belongingness with a mean score of 3.80. Overall, the SOBAS was stable as high across the Year 6 to 7 transition with a minimal negative difference in mean from Year 6 (M = 3.99) to Year 7 (M = 3.80) and little change in standard deviation (SD = 1.02, 1.00). The t-test reported a p value of < .001 which is considerably less than the critical p value of <.05 when measuring significance. This indicates that there is strong evidence against a null hypothesis as there is less than 0.1% probability that the null is correct.

Gender (Males and Females Across Year 6 to 7)

There was little decrease in SOBAS by both males (.16) and females (.22) across Year 6 to 7. There were very slight changes in standard deviation for both males (SD = .01) and females (SD = .01) across the transition. See Tables 3 and 4 for full results.

Overall – Subscales

There was minimal decrease in subscale 1 in relation to the establishment of a positive sense of belonging across Year 6 to 7. See Tables 3 and 4 for complete subscale 1, 2 and 3 results for both Year 6 and Year 7. The most movement between Year 6 and 7 for males was item 14 (I contribute to this school in a positive way.) with M = 4.04 and M = 3.60, respectively. For females, it was item 4 (I feel like a real part of this school.) with M = 3.93 and M = 3.45, respectively.

There was minimal decrease in subscale 2 in relation to an establishment of a positive sense of belonging across Year 6 and 7. The greatest change between Year 6 and 7 was item 12 (I feel safe at this school.) for both males (M = 4.10, 3.81) and females (M = 4.13, 3.81), respectively. See Tables 3 and 4 for full results.

There was minimal decrease in subscale 3 in relation to an establishment of a positive sense of belonging across Years 6 and 7. The greatest movement between Year 6 and 7 for males was item 19 (There’s at least one teacher or staff member at this school that I can talk to if I have a problem.), with M = 4.31 and M = 4.03, respectively; and, for females, item 16 (Teachers treat students fairly and respectfully at this school.), with M = 3.94 and M = 3.58, respectively.

Discussion

This study addressed the research question: How and to what extent has a distinct junior school identity been established by Year 7 students in secondary school? This question has been addressed by exploring self-reported student perceptions of their SOBAS and their school connectedness pre and post transition from primary to secondary school settings.

There are three key findings emerging from this dataset that contribute to understanding the research aim:

1. Student SOBAS is stable and mostly positive across the primary and secondary transition.

2. SOBAS is consistent for females and males.

   • A. The two most important factors in influencing SOBAS are connection to peers and connection to teachers.

Each of these will be considered in turn.

Stability of SOBAS Across the Primary to Secondary Transition

An important finding of this study is that student SOBAS remained mostly stable and positive across the primary to secondary transition from Year 6 to Year 7. This was evidenced by the insignificant decrease in average mean of the survey scores from Year 6 (M = 3.99) to Year 7 (M = 3.80) across this juncture and the results of the t-test that was conducted.

The transition from primary to secondary school is often seen as a rite of passage and one in which some children may not continue on the same positive trajectory they had established before leaving primary school (Barratt, 1998; Carrington, 2006; Phillips, 2017). Primary school is often reported as a time when students have developed a strong SOBAS over a period of time (Mitra, 2004), and this may not be recaptured in the transition to secondary school (Johnstone, 2010). The literature has described this phenomenon as the “middle years slump” (Carrington, 2006; MYSA, 2008) or the “middle years plunge” (Pendergast, 2017; West & Schwerdt, 2012). Addressing this was one of the key justifications for the implementation of the junior secondary Guiding Principles that accompanied the shift of Year 7 to secondary schools in Queensland in 2015.

The findings from this study revealed that SOBAS remained mostly stable and positive across the primary/secondary transition from Year 6 to Year 7, indicating success at limiting the occurrence of the middle years plunge through implementation of the Flying Start strategy and junior secondary policy in Queensland and, in particular, in terms of the implementation of the Guiding Principle of distinct identity (SOBAS/school connectedness). This finding is positive in confirming the effectiveness of the strategies associated with the Guiding Principles, which demonstrate that Year 6 students in primary school were able to establish a strong SOBAS and then maintain this as Year 7 students following transition to secondary school.

Gender and SOBAS

This study revealed that gender did not have an effect on the establishment of a SOBAS during the transition from primary to secondary school. Research on the differences in transition and school belonginess related to gender has been mixed (Pendergast et al., 2018), although gender differences in social adjustment are reported in the literature, the specifics of these difficulties are inconsistent (Martínez et al., 2011).

Some research studies report findings that are not consistent with the findings of this study, for instance that females fare better than males during transition (Marston, 2008) and, to the contrary, that females tend to feel less connected than males (McNeely, 2013). In the 2015 report, PISA: Sense of Belonging at School, male students were reported to have a significantly greater sense of belonging than female students (DeBortoli, 2018).

Factors Influencing SOBAS

The two most important factors in this study influencing a strong SOBAS were (a) connection to peers and (b) connection to teachers. Pendergast et al. (2018) discussed the concept of social capital in relation to understanding social belonging and relationships. The building and maintaining of strong social networks with both peers and teachers by adolescents is vital for a healthy SOBAS. Students who have fewer personal connections, particularly with peers and teachers, and therefore less social capital, are more likely to have a poorer SOBAS (Pendergast et al., 2018). Pendergast et al. (2018) noted: “[T]hese collective findings strongly indicate that educators need to understand the importance of teacher and peer relationships in supporting young adolescents, responding to their needs, encouraging their academic engagement and motivation, and in turn strengthening their SOBAS” (p. 7). Goodenow’s (1993a) seminal empirical study also found that teacher support and peer support were the two most important factors in the attainment of a positive SOBAS.

The findings of this study point to the two most important variables in establishing a strong SOBAS as connection to peers and connection to teachers. The two highest average mean scores in the subscales of the Year 7 survey were subscale 2 (M = 3.83) and subscale 3 (M = 3.82).

The highest scoring item in the survey and subscale 2 was item 2 (This school is a place where I have really good friends.), with scores of M = 4.45 and 91.5% positive agreement (SA/A). Support from peers provides students with a sense that they can rely on others which influences their establishment of a SOBAS.

The highest scoring items in subscale 3 were item 3 (Teachers have high expectations for me at this school.), with scores of M = 4.07 and 78% positive agreement (SA/A), and item 19 (There’s at least one teacher or staff member at this school that I can talk to if I have a problem.), with scores of M = 4.08 and 74.4% positive agreement (SA/A).

Pendergast et al. (2018) discussed the importance of a significant adult to students who are experiencing the transition to secondary school and endeavoring to recapture the healthy SOBAS that they may have experienced in primary school. Students need to have at least one adult with whom they can safely talk and feel supported (see item 19) and a teacher who cares about their success or lack thereof (see item 3).

Limitations

The study participants were located in 18 primary schools and 11 secondary schools located in a geographical area south of Brisbane, Queensland—the Logan/Gold Coast North region, which is an area in the eastern corner of the state of Queensland. Across the state, there are 1,141 primary schools and 276 secondary schools, and there has been no attempt to stratify the schools engaged in this study to be representative of the wider population of schools. Hence, a limitation to the generalization of these findings is the lack of participation of students from regional or remote areas. Another limitation affecting validity was an attrition rate of 36% in terms of survey completion by research participants across the transition from Year 6 to Year 7. The effect was minimized by including only matched participants across the two phases of data collection in the analysis and reported results.

This article analyzed and reported findings utilizing the survey as the sole source of data. The study may benefit from the triangulation of the data through multiple data collection methods (Creswell, 2012). A future research direction may be to conduct a similar study that extends longitudinally, tracking students into Year 8 in secondary school to see how they progress in terms of the establishment of a junior secondary distinct identity and related SOBAS as they travel through junior secondary.

Summary and Implications

This study was conducted at a time of significant reform implementation in Queensland, Australia. The literature identified that there was an issue with student SOBAS in the jurisdiction of this study, and this was actively addressed by a major reform that was implemented to address established declines in SOBAS for middle years students as they transitioned from primary to secondary schools. The specific focus on the Junior Secondary Guiding Principles and, in this case, distinct identity achieved through SOBAS and school connectedness, points to these characteristics remaining relatively constant across the transition. While this cannot be specifically attributed to the reform, what it clearly demonstrates is that the middle school plunge was not evident in the students who participated in this study. In order to be able to establish a causal effect, baseline data prior to the implementation of the reform would have been required.

This research is significant as it privileges student voice as the primary data source. It gives voice to young adolescents forging their junior secondary distinct identity through establishing a strong SOBAS whilst experiencing the transition from Year 6 in primary school to Year 7 in secondary school. The knowledge gained from this research will inform schools and education systems to enable students’ transition and build confidence regarding the impact of the reform.

This study also highlights the need for education systems and schools to devise and implement primary-to-secondary transition programs and junior secondary curriculum/policy with the aim of fostering strong junior secondary distinct identity/SOBAS amongst their students. These strategies should have an explicit focus on fostering connection with peers and teachers by junior secondary students during the transition from primary to secondary school in order to influence positive SOBAS development.

The findings of this study highlight the importance for primary schools to foster and assess SOBAS amongst their students and convey this information to secondary schools as part of the transition from primary to secondary school. This is in line with the findings of Vaz et al. (2015) who suggested, “This ensures a greater chance of minimizing the middle years plunge through enhancing the primary–secondary school transition.” Both primary and secondary schools should measure SOBAS frequently and longitudinally with year cohorts as they travel through their schooling. The survey utilized in this study is one example of an instrument that can be administered to achieve that aim.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).