Self-Esteem and Academic Performance of 4th Graders in two Elementary Schools in Kingston and St. Andrew, Jamaica

Asian Journal of Business Management 4(1): 36-57, 2012

ISSN: 2041-8752

© Maxwell Scientific Organization, 2012

Submitted: July 22, 2011 Accepted: October 07, 2011 Published: February 20, 2012

Corresponding Author: P.A. Bourne, Socio-Medical Research Institute Formerly, Department of Community Health and

Psychiatry, the University of the West Indies, Mona

Self-Esteem and Academic Performance of 4th Graders in two Elementary
Schools in Kingston and St. Andrew, Jamaica
1L.K. Colquhoun and 2P.A. Bourne
1Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF)
2Socio-Medical Research Institute Formerly, Department of Community Health and Psychiatry,
The University of the West Indies, Mona


Abstract:

 In 2005, 62% of pupils who sat the 4th grade literacy and numeracy examination attained mastery,
which increased to 67% in 2009 from 50% in 2001. No study has examined the role of self-esteem on the
academic performance of Jamaican 4th graders. The main objectives were, 1) evaluate the influence of selfesteem
on academic performance, 2) determine factors that account for changes in self-esteem, and 3) examine
factors of academic performance. The sample for this research was one hundred and twenty (120) respondents.
Multiple repression techniques were conducted to identify variables explaining performance, with self-esteem
being among the variables. A p-value #0.10 was used to indicate statistical significance. There is a positive
correlation between self-esteem and academic performance (rs = 0.611, P<0.0001). Four variables emerged as
statistical significant factors of self-esteem-academic performance, age of respondents, gender and parental
behaviour, which explain 64.4% of the variability in self-esteem. Boys had a lower self-esteem (b = -3.911)
than their female counterparts. Self-esteem is the most influential factor that account for academic performance.
Of the nine variables used, four emerged as explaining academic performance, which explained 73.6% of the
variability in academic performance. The emerging findings and knowledge gleaned from this work present
a critical guide and a framework for policy practitioners to implement measure that can effectively address low
performance among 4th graders.
Key words: Academic performance, Jamaica, parental involvement, preparatory school, primary school, selfesteem,
teachers’ behavior

INTRODUCTION

For some time now, there is a public discourse that
something is fundamentally amiss with the educational
system in Jamaica. The justifications for such a discussion
is based on the low performance of students on the
Caribbean Examination Council’s examinations (CXC),
Grade Six Achievement Test (G-SAT - formerly Common
Entrance Examination), Advanced Level Examinations,
literacy and numeracy rate of the populace and the
number of students who are literate on leaving secondary
schools. Statistics revealed that between 2000-2009, less
than 40% of Jamaicans annually have failed CXC
mathematics (Planning Institute of Jamaica, 2000-2011).
On disaggregating the CXC mathematics results, there is
a clear disparity between the passes of those students in
traditional compared with those in non-traditional
(currently upgraded high) schools. Pupils who attended
non-traditional high schools performed poorly compared
to their traditional high school counterparts (Planning
Institute of Jamaica, 2000-2010). In 2007, a study
conducted by Powell and colleagues, using a probability
sample of one thousand, three hundred and thirty eight
(1,338) Jamaicans, found that school and education was
listed among the top three national problems in the
country (Powell et al., 2007). The problems in the
educational system, therefore, have surpassed corruption,
poverty, cost of living, health care and governance,
indicating people’s dissatisfactions with the performance
(or lack) among students who attend schools.
(Abbot 1993 in Bourne, 2004) posited that Jamaica
is one of the countries in the Third World and the Western
Hemisphere with the highest failure rate in the Principles
of Accounts Examination at the General Certificate of
Education Advanced Level. It may seem surprising that
the performance of our students is that low; but the failure
rate for mathematics and English language is even lower
than for accounts (Cambridge University, 1991-2004;
Statistical Institute of Jamaica, 1989-2000). In 1991,
statistics revealed that 65.0% of Jamaicans have at most
primary level education, with 94.5% having at most
secondary level education (Statistical Institute of Jamaica,
1999). In 2001, 70% of children in primary and all-age
schools were literate, (Statistical Institute of Jamaica,
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
37
2002) and in 2007 at most primary level education was
32.9% and 81.6% with at most secondary (Boxill et al.,
2007).
Even before sitting CXC or CAPE examination or
attending post-secondary education, the low performance
of Jamaicans pupils at the primary level warranted a
modification of the curriculum. It was poor performance
of primary (including preparatory) schools students that
saw the introduction of the grade four (4) literacy
examination and a modification of the Common Entrance
Examination [currently Achievement Test (G-SAT)] that
was used to place students in the academic oriented
secondary educational institutions (or traditional high
schools). In 2005, 62% of pupils who sat the 4th grade
literacy and numeracy examination attained mastery,
which increased to 67% in 2009 from 50% in 2001
(Roxborough-Wright, 2002; Ministry of Education, 2009).
On disaggregating the results by typology of schools
(primary and preparatory), it was revealed that
preparatory schools’ students had a level degree of
mastery (71%) compared to primary schools’ pupils
(67%) (Ministry of Education, 2009). The percent of
students receiving mastery at one public school (St.
Michael Primary) was as low as 31% (Ministry of
Education, 2009), indicating that the Jamaican
educational system has failed the pupils.
The contemporary educational system in Jamaica was
framed from the British system. The grammar schools
(traditional high schools) were established to train pupils
for further studies as well as supply ‘high quality’ labour
to the productive sectors. Statistics showed that less than
15% of the population has had post-secondary level
education and the majority has had at most secondary
level training (Statistical Institute of Jamaica, 1999),
which means that the problems which emerged in the
primary level continued and reflected in the low postsecondary
attainment.
According to Bourne (2004): In Western civilization,
examinations have been used as the method of assessing
peoples’ aptitude and abilities. That social reality means
that there is skewness towards examination results in
quantifying academic performance. Within this construct,
the yardstick for evaluating an individual’s knowledge
reservoir, skills level and competence in performing a
particular task is normally an examination. As such, for
an individual to be considered an authority within any
field, s/he is expected to have successfully sat various
examination(s). Consequently, the formal education is the
metre used for assessing future social development, and
this plays a determining role in even success. Hence, this
criterion, according to many stakeholders, in judging
competence is crucial evidence that is used to evaluate
learned skills, knowledge, expertise and standards to
which teachers are assessed and must apply within the
classroom. As such, this determines to a larger degree that
aptitude, which would be a classroom phenomenon
(Bourne, 2004).
Bourne’s perspective highlights the emphasis that is
placed on examination in evaluating the performance of
students (from basic or pre-school to university).
Empirical evidence has established an association
between self-esteem and academic achievement (Auer,
1992; Benham, 1993; Klein and Keller, 1990; Solley and
Stagner, 1956). It can be deduced from the
aforementioned works that failure on examinations further
deteriorate the self-esteem of young children, particularly
those who had low esteem in the first place. Stipek (1984)
posited that children enter school expecting to be
successful and feeling good about themselves, and they
are not concerned about achievement outcomes. The
socialization of children places emphasis on performance,
which denotes that over time they will be cognizant of
their social role and grades will be become a part of the
focus.
With the continuous measurement of performance,
particular academic, pupils with low self-esteem could be
destroyed long before reaching secondary level education.
The manner in which children are given feedback on their
performance during the development, their cognitive
development would be the difference between future
failure and excellence, particularly of the social
background and transferred self-esteem. Importantly,
children will come to accept the emphasis of external
valuation for achievement that is common in the school
system (Stipek, 1984). It can be deduced from Stipek’s
work that both academic performance and interpersonal
relationship are influenced by self-esteem over the cover
of daily interactions.
With studies establishing that self-esteem influences
academic performance (Auer, 1992; Benham, 1993; Klein
and Keller, 1990; Solley and Stagner, 1956), does selfesteem
offer an explanation for the low academic
performance of 4th graders in Jamaica? Self-esteem is
focused on feelings of personal worth and the level of
satisfaction regarding one’s self, suggesting that selfesteem
is shaped by self-concept. Self-concept is the
totality of a complex, organized and dynamic system of
learned beliefs, attitudes and opinions that each person
holds to be true about his/her personal existence (Purkey,
1988). This concept of self impacts the academic
performance of students (Purkey, 1970). Self-concept and
self-esteem of children are framed by parental upbringing,
which offers some explanation for academic performance.
There exists great deal of research that concluded that
family support is a major influence of self-esteem. One
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
38
study analysed group data of the family structure, function
and support of nine hundred and thirteen (913) mothers
and their one (1) year old children (Yabiku et al., 1999).
Parenting (including guardianship) plays an integral part
in the development of self-esteem in children, later
success on examinations, life and general well being. One
scholar provided a particularly compelling view of selfesteem
that offers justification for quality of life,
performance on examination and life satisfaction
(including happiness). According to Brandon (1994) selfesteem
has two interrelated aspects, self-efficacy and selfrespect.
Self-efficacy relates to the sense of personal
efficacy or confidence in one’s ability to think and act.
Self-respect speaks to an affirmative attitude towards
one’s right to live and to be happy. In a succinct manner,
self-esteem is the disposition to experience oneself as
component to cope with challenges of life and to be
deserving of happiness. Most people’s feelings and
thoughts about themselves fluctuate based of their daily
experiences. This encapsulates examination scores, social
interaction (including romantic relationship) and general
quality of life. Brandon opined that people with poor
basic self-esteem that the “ups and downs” in life may
make all the difference in the world (Brandon, 1994).
An extensive search of the literature found no
research that has examined self-esteem and academic
performance of 4th graders in Jamaica. The current work
will fill the gap in the literature. The objectives of the
present work are:
C Academic performance is determined by particular
demographic characteristics and self-esteem among
some 4th graders in two Corporate Area primary and
preparatory schools in Jamaica
C Self-esteem is influenced by social and psychological
factors as well as academic performance among some
4th graders in two Corporate Area primary and
preparatory schools in Jamaica.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Self esteem has long been considered an essential
component of good health. It is a widely used concept
both in popular language and psychology. Self esteem is
a set of attitudes and beliefs that a person brings with
himself/herself to the world. It includes beliefs as to
whether he or she can expect success or failure. How
much effort should be put forth into activities, whether
failure at a task will “hurt” or “benefit” the individual and
whether he or she will become more capable as a result of
difficult experiences to cope in life is embedded in one’s
self-esteem (Brandon, 1994; Coppersmith, 1981). One of
the areas in self-esteem research is the relationship
between self esteem and academic achievement (Purkey,
1970). Simply put, the low (or high) can be attributed to
the role of self-esteem. A group of academic researchers
examining self-esteem found that it interfaces with
mortality salience. They opined that:
Self-esteem confers resilience against the
psychological threat of death, and therefore the
findings provided direct support for a fundamental
tenet of terror management theory regarding the
anxiety-buffering role of self-esteem (Schmeichel
et al., 2009; 1077)
Schmeichel and colleagues’ work emphasized the
role of self-esteem in life, life survival and holds the key
in understanding how cognitive development can be
enhanced or harmed by self-esteem, which is a
justification for the performance. According to
Baumeister et al. (2003), self-esteem is strongly
associated with happiness, confidence, and a moderate
relationship with academic performance. They also found,
that individuals with high self-esteem are likely to do
better on the jobs and with particular tasks (work
performance) than those with low self-esteem (Baumeister
et al., 2003, 36; Campbell and Fehr, 1990; Brockner,
1983; Tharenou, 1979). Other studies have disagreed with
the correlation between self-esteem and performance
(Wallace and Baumeister, 2002). In fact, Wallace and
Baumeister (2002), using arithmetic problem with varying
degree of challenges, found that the students’ self-esteem
did not affect their performance which had already been
established on a test of nonverbal intelligence (Baumeister
et al., 1993). However, other empirical studies have
established a statistical correlation between self-esteem
and academic performance (Wylie, 1979; Hansford and
Hattie, 1982; Simon and Simon, 1975). Other studies have
found statistical correlation between self-esteem and
academic performance; but, they noted that this was weak
(Davies and Brember, 1999; Kugle et al., 1983).
Howerton et al. (1994), when further as they found that
self-esteem can predict grades and school achievement.
Clearly there are different sides to the discourse on selfesteem
and performance (including academic
achievement). Self-esteem seems to hold some
explanation for academic performance, which means that
it is worth exploring in details.
Theories on self esteem: The most broad and frequent
cited definition of self esteem within psychology is
Rosenberg’s (1965), who described it as a favourable or
unfavourable attitude towards the self. Self esteem is
generally considered the evaluative component of self
concept, a broader representation of the self that includes
cognitive behavioural aspects as well as evaluative or
effective ones (Blascovich and Tomaka, 1991). Wilson
(2002) suggested that basic self esteem is a standard by
which a person judges her/himself, an estimate, a feeling,
and an emotion. This self evaluation is the single most
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
39
significant key to behaviour, which affects the thinking
processes, emotions, desires, values, and goals. Brandon
(1994) stated that to understand a person psychologically,
it is vital to understand the nature a degree of self esteem.
His definition is a synthesis of earlier interpretations.
Brandon (1994) noted that there are two strands of self
esteem that is competence and worthiness, but
emphasized that the relationship between the two strands
as another factor in understanding self esteem. He
reiterated that self esteem “is the conviction that one is
competent to live and worthy of living” (Brandon, 1994).
He further posited that to understand a person
psychologically, it is vital to understand the nature and
degree of self-esteem as his definition is a synthesis of
earlier interpretations. Brandon (1994) suggested that The
Six Pillars of Self Esteem, which formed the foundation of
self esteem are: 1) the practice of living consciously; 2)
the practice of self acceptance; 3) the practice of self
responsibility; 4) the practice of self assertiveness; 5) the
practice of living purposefully, and 6) the practice of
personal integrity.
The literature on self esteem promotes the outlook of
self esteem as a construct that explains a person’s ability
to adapt to the environment. The inner balance and
stability which each person achieve is directly related to
their emotions, social relationships, and behaviours
(Blascovich & Tomaka, 1991; Brandon, 1969; Rosenberg,
1979).
James (1983) in his Principle of Psychology defined
self esteem as being the sum of an individual’s successes
divided by what they think they ought to achieve. Self
esteem can be increased by achieving greater successes
and maintained by avoiding failures. Raised self esteem
can be argued, also be achieved and maintained by
adopting less ambitious goals. Self esteem was therefore
defined as being competence- oriented but also opens to
change. Alexander (2001), the founder of the Self Esteem
Network in Britain, viewed self esteem as a syndrome,
and as a set of indictors for well-being. The core of self
esteem is an “unconditional appreciation of oneself”
meaning an appreciation of both an individual’s positive
and negative potential in its fullest sense. Alexander also
distinguished between ‘trait’ self esteem which reflects
confidence or ability in a particular area, such as work or
port, and ‘global’ self esteem which is intrinsic worthiness
regardless of what particular abilities or qualities an
individual may possess.
Coppersmith (1981) in his study on the antecedent of
self-esteem, suggested four major factors which are
important in the development of self esteem:
C The treatment and acceptance received from
significant others in life
C A person past success
C The value and aspiration which modifies and
interpret a person’s experiences
C How a person responds to devaluation
Self esteem is described by Coppersmith (1981) as a
process of integration, where the individual becomes a
member of the group and internalizes ideas and attitudes
as a mirror image, via key figures and by observing
actions and attitudes. Self esteem is a form of self
protection since any loss of self esteem brings a feeling of
distress. Since the presence of anxiety can minimize our
self esteem, defenses allows the maintenance of an
idealized image. This philosophy is supported by Diaz
(1984) who posited that the events and the people which
surrounds the individual have a direct relationship with
the development of self esteem.
Additionally, recent research has examined the
concept of protective factors in a wide range of adolescent
risk behaviour and, increasingly, to understand
adolescent’s behaviour. One such protective factor is self
esteem which refers to the positive or negative regard in
which an individual holds him or herself. There is
widespread recognition of self esteem’s importance for
resilience and personal well being in a variety of diverse
contexts (Gecas and Seff, 1990; Rosenberg, 1979). Self
esteem is important for personal well being because it
motivates behaviour. Rosenberg (1979) suggested that the
motivation to achieve and maintain self esteem is the most
powerful in the entire human repertoire and motives. Even
individuals with low self esteem are motivated to
maintain that level of self worth and not feel any less
worthy.
Although many scholars who study self esteem
emphasized that low self esteem impairs effective
decision-making (Tice, 1993), recent reviews and
commentaries (Baumeister, 1996; Gecas and Seff, 1990)
stressed that self esteem cannot be considered a panacea
that protects youth from all manner of risk. (Baumeister,
1996) proposed that high self esteem is more a result than
a cause of success behaviour. Similarly, Gecas and Seff
(1990) suggested that self esteem must be combined with
other positive characteristics for it to have salutary effects.
Notwithstanding, Pearlin et al. (1981) postulated that
dimension of self concept, such as self esteem are
psychological resources upon which a person can draw to
deal with problems.
Self Esteem and academic achievement: The
relationship between self-esteem and academic
performance has been well documented in the literature.
Different studies have reached the conclusion that self
esteem and academics are positively correlated (Bankston
and Zhou, 2002; Lockett and Harrell, 2003). Similarly,
Wylie (1979) found a positive correlation between self
esteem and academic performance (rs = 0.30) as students
with greater self-esteem had higher grade point average.
Another study, conducted by Carr et al. (1991) found selfesteem
to be a significant predictor of reading awareness
as pupils with higher self-esteem were more able to read
and reading ready compared to those with lower selfesteem.
They had used pre-and-post test, and found
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
40
greater score among those with higher self-esteem. Like
Car and colleagues, Kugle et al. (1983) had found earlier,
that direct relationship between reading achievement and
self-esteem (rs = 0.18). However, when they controlled for
ethnicity, the association between self-esteem and reading
achievement disappeared.
From a standard achievement test, using 3,001 British
pupils, Davies and Brember (1999) found a weak positive
correlation between self-esteem and better academic
performance, indicating that positive self-esteem is good
for academic performance. Even before Davies and
Brember’s work, Simon and Simon (1975) had found a
positive correlation on IQ test and self-esteem (rs = 0.33),
which means that feeling good about one’s self will mean
a greater score on an IQ test. Purkey (1970) found that
self esteem is positively related to some components of
success, academic or verbal performance. Like other
studies, Purkey work showed that a positive concept of
self is highly likely to directly influence better scores on
particular test. He concluded that there is a continuous
interaction between self esteem and academic
achievement, as the pupil thinking better of
himself/herself transfer this positive self-image into
challenging issues and difficult things can be tackled with
more ease. Hence, the desire to succeed is greater and the
willingness to confront challenges is transferred to
problem-solving and reading. Covington (1989) reported
that as the level of self esteem increases, so does the level
of academic achievement scores but as the level of self
esteem decreases, achievement declines. He concluded
that self esteem can be modified through direct
instructions which can lead to achievement gains.
However, there has been conflicting reports showing
positive and negative relationship between self esteem
and academic performance. Van Tuinen and Ramanaiah
(1979) researched the prediction of academic performance
of specific and global self esteem in undergraduate
students. He reported that specific self esteem was a
significant predictor of actual performance on concept
attainment tasks, whereas global self esteem was not an
adequate predictor. Yogev and Ilan (1987) produced a
conflicting report that self esteem was generally not
related to educational aspirations, but the relationship was
important to some student’s feeling competence. The
differences in the reports can be attributed to differences
in the conceptions and definitions of: general and specific
self concept, self concept and self esteem. However, other
studies supported the relationship between high self
esteem and academic achievement in school age children
(Purkey, 1970).
There are many critiques to the “self esteem
perspective” in the academic field. Some argued that
when self esteem is pursued in the context of making
students feel good about themselves, this misconception
can lead to indiscriminate praise and the assumption that
one should protect his or her student from failure
(Baumeister, 1996; Learner, 1996). These theorists
suggested that students who feel good and are satisfied
with their work do not necessarily achieve or develop
habits that lead to success. These criticisms are justified.
There is little evidence that students who are
indiscriminately praised and protected from failure do in
fact develop genuine self esteem
In fact, others argued that there is a distinction
between genuine self esteem versus narcissism or self –
aggrandizement. Katz (1993) suggested that there is a
clear difference between the two as genuine self esteem
has little to do with the feelings reported by students. In
fact, feelings have unconscious self beliefs, formed over
a life time, reflecting our perceptions of our abilities, our
lovability, and how we attribute causality for the events in
our lives. These unconscious self –perception have been
molded, often deeply, into our being and therefore can
only be altered by significant and repeated new
experiences that reconditions our hearts and minds.
Self esteem development in children: Cooley (1902)
contributed the theory of the "looking glass self," which
states that people see themselves through the eyes of
others. Interestingly, Rosenberg (1965) posited that as
early as age five (5) or six (6) years old children role
playing abilities are sufficiently developed to enable them
to consider the perceived judgments and reaction of
others. However, they are unable to make sophisticated
social comparisons or reflected appraisals at least until
age seven (7) or eight (8). What matters most to children
is that they feel they matter to their parent, that is they feel
that they are of value to their parents, and that they think
their parents care about what happens to them. Rosenberg
(1965) also found that students who believed that their
parents lacked interest in them had much lower levels of
self esteem. He stated further that when children enter
school, the self portrait consists of a social exterior and
their judgment of themselves in seven dimensions:
Physical appearance, physical abilities, peer relation,
parent’s relation, reading, math, and school subjects.
There is also some evidence that by 4th grade that they
have a perception of their character, their personal
responsibilities, as well as the other dimensions.
Low self-esteem youngsters are three times as likely
as those with high self-esteem to report average or below
average expectations of being successful at their adult
work. They are more apt to express negative attitudes
towards school and their classmates. Adolescents tend to
be highly introspective and self-conscious. Their thoughts
often center on their fears, desires, beliefs, attitudes, and
expectations. Their feelings about self vary considerably.
Rosenberg (1965) further stated that in one extensive
study 60% percent of adolescents had feelings that were
unpredictable; 29% had stable self-feelings, and 11%
were unstable or oscillating. Most had positive feelings in
some situations and negative feelings in others. By the
end of 8th grade more that one-third had consistently high
global self-esteem. Thirty-one percent experienced
reasonably high self-esteem and a modest gain in feelings
of self-worth over the past two (2) years. One-fifth (12%)
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
41
reported a decline in self-esteem after entering Junior
High School and 13% had low self-esteem throughout
Middle School. Those with declining self-esteem had
more psychological symptoms, fluctuating academic
records, diminished peer support and increased
depression. Findings showed that young people gained
greater stability in self-feeling, fewer disruptions, and
milder fluctuations as they leave adolescence.
Scarr and Thompson (1994) proposed that children’s
academic and social competence can be predicted mainly
by their family background, it may be anticipated that
parents’ psychological support in children’s educational
expectancy would be the most influential among all other
sources of support. However, early adolescents’ relation
with peers provides them with experiences unique in
shaping their personalities and beliefs. The time
adolescents spend with peers is only rivaled by their
parents (Hartup, 1983). Moreover, some researchers have
suggested that the teacher is unlikely to be more
influential than other facilitators of change (Hattie, 1992)
because in the school setting, the teacher is the most
salient source of feedback for a student’s academic
proficiency. In fact, it contends further, that the teacher is
the most powerful source of reinforcement in the
formation of academic self esteem and development of
academic behaviour. Therefore from the literature of self
concept and person-environment, both personal
expectancy in educational achievement and perceived
support from significant others would have significant
positive impact on self esteem, interest in schoolwork and
overall academic performance.
Teacher’s impact on students’ via self esteem on
academic achievement: In study done by Simon and
Simon (1975), they discovered that children’s self esteem
experienced a self- fulfilling prophecy related to poor
performance. This they said occurred when a child’s
parents and/ or teacher developed a negative view of the
child over time. This view was supported by Berk (2003)
who concluded that the child will personally adopt that
view for him or herself and perform accordingly.
Similarly, Rosenthal and Jacobson (1966) demonstrated
that the teacher’s expectancies significantly affect
students’ performance and gains in IQ scores. Moreover,
a large scale study composed of one thousand, five
hundred and thirty- nine (1,539) children demonstrated
that teacher’s underestimation of students’ academic
achievement potential significantly predicted future
achievements. (Madon et al., 1997)
Similarly, Marchesi and Martin (2002) postulated that
the key element for the pupil’s personal and academic
development is the value given from teacher to pupil and
vice versa are usually reciprocal, highlighting additionally
the personal relationship. These same authors found that
the teacher’s expectations have significantly influenced
student’s results. For them, the teachers’ assessment is
mediated by two variables: 1) the student’s intelligence,
that is, the greater the intelligence, the better the academic
results and the better the reciprocal appreciation between
teacher and student, and 2) family support for study also
makes the student value his teacher highly (Castejon and
Perez, 1998). Other studies found positive relationships
between the teacher’s motivation and that of the student
(Atkinson, 2000). Teacher- pupil relations are also
mediated by the teacher’s attribution of poor performance
to the student (Georgiou et al., 2002). Therefore, children
whose potential is underestimated by either parents or
teachers may experience low self esteem and perform
cognitively at a level lower than they are capable of. This
might occur as a result of the manner in which teachers
communicate and encourage students, as teachers provide
more attention and positive feedback to those students for
which high expectations are held.
Parents income impact on self esteem via academic
performance: It is argued that social class is mediated in
a cultural level, which in turn determines family
expectation, values and attitudes regarding education. In
other words, motivation to succeed depends more on the
parents’ level of learning than on their level of income
(Llorente, 1990). Other studies indicated that the most
influential family components on performance are not
socio-cultural or economic, but rather those pertaining to
the affective or psychological dimensions: that is,
although good academic preparation is provided by the
parent, and a positive cultural environment, favour
scholastic performance, it is the affective and rational
variables which stands out the most as factors that
contributes to better performance.
The influence of the family’s educational
environment is defined by the parenting style or help that
the child receives from the family; this is determined by
elements of the family context, like the dynamics of
communication and psychological relationships, attitudes
towards values and expectations (Marchesi and Martin,
2002). They postulated further that parents’ expectations
have a notable influence on academic results, even when
controlling for initial knowledge and socio economic
context.
Castejon and Perez (1998) found indirect
relationships with performance and students’ perception
of how much importance his or her parents assigned to
studying at home. Other studies showed that the level of
family cohesion (Caplan et al., 2002) and family
relationships (Buote, 2001) proved themselves capable of
predicting performance. The parenting style is also
influential both in students’ educational process as well as
in family- school relations; research such as that by Moos
and Moos (1976) demonstrated that positive family
environment favors the development of well-shaped,
mature, stable and integrated subjects, and an
unfavourable family climate promotes non- adaptive,
immaturity, and lack of balance and insecurity.
Peers impact on student’s self esteem and academic
performance: Peers’ influence on the child’s
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
42
development occurs by similar mechanisms as those used
by adults: reinforcement, modeling and direct teaching
and skills. Interaction with peers also promotes
acquisition of social competencies such as controlling
aggressive impulses and the expression of prosocial
behaviours. In relation to academic performance, the
sociometric status of the student’s influences performance
both directly and indirectly, since it is influenced by
intelligence (Castejon and Perez, 1998). Other research
also shows that positive correlation exist between
performance and peer relationships (Buote, 2001), while
Montero (1990) demonstrated in another study that
students failing in school are those most rejected by their
group class.
In summary, the literature provided a platform upon
which a study on academic performance of 4th graders in
two primary level schools (including all-age and
preparatory) can be examined. Unlike the literature this
research is different as it examines more variables and in
a single work evaluates students, parents and teachers in
order to frame a comprehensive understanding of the
phenomenon. The literature has shown two sides to the
discourse on the influence of self-esteem, teachers and
parents on academic performance.
METHODOLOGY
Historically, scientific inquiry was based on logic,
precision, general principles, principles of verification, the
standard of rigor, gradual development, “search for truth”
and proofs (Balashow and Rosenberg, 2002). The proofs
were critical to the pure sciences before the establishment
of laws, principles, theories and apparatuses.
Traditionally, science therefore, was guided by positivism
(Polgar and Thomas, 2008; Crotty, 2005). Positivism
holds itself to:
C The collection of quantitative data
C Separation of the researcher from the research
process
C Objectivity
C Measurability
C Generalizability
C Repetition
Thus, when the social science was born, the
researchers embodied inquiries using the same approaches
as the pure sciences. It follows that what was known
about human behaviour had to be discovered through
positivism and/or logical positivism. Social sciences like
the natural sciences, was guided by logic (the study of
valid forms of reasoning), metaphysics, the fundamental
finds of things that really exist and the justification of
knowledge (epistemology) which saw experimentative
research been widely used to conduct inquiries. Science
therefore was about the study of truth and not meanings
(Balashow and Rosenberg, 2002). Why people do things,
(i.e., meaning) was not important in research it was rather
about the discovery of truth and not merely empirical
research.
While empiricism is responsible for plethora of
germane and critical discoveries that have aided humans’
existence, it fails to explore potent things about people.
Peoples’ behaviours are not predictable, stationary, and
while some generalizability exist therein, the ‘whys’
(meanings) are still unasked with the use of empirical
inquiry (or objectivity and measurability). Qualitative
inquiry mitigates against some of the inadequacies of
objectivity, provides rich data on humans’ experiences,
and aids in a total understanding of people (Balashow and
Rosenberg, 2002; Silverman, 2005; Neuman, 2003; Kuhn,
1996; Berg, 2001; Burnham et al., 2004; Goel, 1988)
Thus, qualitative inquiry should not therefore be seen as
an alternate paradigm to quantitative inquiry, but as a
member of the understanding apparatus. This supports
Schlick (1979) argument that we cannot know the truth
without knowing the meaning.
Max Weber (1949, 1974, 1981) was the first to argue
that an ‘Interpretivism’ approach can be employed in the
examination of social phenomenon, read also
(Haralambus and Holborn, 2002). Weber opined that why
human behave the way they do is lost in quantitative
methodologies (or positivism). He therefore, forwarded
the use of subjectivity (feels, beliefs or meanings) in
social inquiry (Rabinow and Sullivan, 1979).
One scholar (Kuhn, 1996) argued that science not
only embodies objectivity, logic, precision and general
principles as humans are social beings (Kuhn, 1996). As
such, we must understand the meaning behind their
behaviour which cannot be found by the use of objective
methodologies. This gives rise to the use of subjective
methodologies. One such subjective methodology which
is long established in the literature is phenomenology
(Crotty, 2005; Silverman, 2005; Neuman, 2003; Berg,
2001; Burnham et al., 2004; Goel, 1988; Hakim, 1987;
Booth et al., 2008; Babbie, 2007). Phenomenology is one
of the methodologies in qualitative research that evolved
from revolution of science. It focuses on a particular
issue. The current work examines a phenomenon
(Performance of Grade 4 children in two selected primary
and preparatory schools in the Corporate Area) and within
the context of meanings, the researcher believes that this
is best fitted for the work. This will be accommodated
with particular methods:
C Case study
C Document analysis
C Statistical analysis
C Interviews
C Narrative (Babbie, 2007; Neuman, 2003; Burnham
et al., 2004; Booth et al., 2008; Silverman, 2005).
The current work is a descriptive study (Davis, 2005;
Polgar and Thomas, 2008) which examined a single
phenomenon, using a mixed methodology approach
(Neuman, 2003; Babbie, 2007). Based on the type of
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
43
research, the researcher reviewed documents, interviewed
teachers, used a survey approach as well as narrative in
order to comprehensively understand the phenomenon.
This research is a case study. According to a scholar,
“Case Studies involve in-depth contextual analyses of
similar situations in organizations, where the nature and
definition of the problem happens to be the same as
experienced in the current situation” (Sekaran, 2006).
This Case Study which focuses on a single phenomenon
has three tenets-the students, parents and teachers. Clearly
a problem exists in Jamaica where policy makers have
been restructuring curriculum in order to address the low
literacy and numeracy in the primary (including
preparatory) school system. The examination of this
phenomenon will provide pertinent information that will
guide future policy and research. Babbie (2007) asserts
that this type of research is generally done for three main
purposes firstly, to satisfy interest and the need for more
information on the topic. Secondly, to determine the
viability of embarking on different types of research and
this might be more costly.
Instrumentation: Questionnaires were the choice of
reaching the targeted population as a result of the relative
ease of distribution and return. According to Babbie
(2007) a questionnaire is a collection of questions or items
included on a document which is designed to solicit
feedback that is suitable for an investigation or study. It is
also believed that this method is more efficient and less
time consuming which also allows for greater control over
the administering and data collection process. The
questionnaires sought to cover areas such as the
demographics of sample, self-esteem, performance, and
information on parents as well teachers. Three different
questionnaires were administered to selected sub-sample
-students, teachers, and parents.
The student’s questionnaire comprised of thirty-four
(34) close-ended questions. The average completion time
was 10- 20 min. The open-ended questions are those in
which the respondents were asked to provide their own
answer to the questions and the space was provided to
write in the answer. The close- ended questions are those
where the respondents were asked to select an answer
from among a list provided by the researcher (ie tick or
circle). These type of questions were more frequently
used as they provided greater consistency of responses
and are more easily processed. These questions were
typed and administered to respondents for completion. A
trial testing of the questionnaires was done with some
volunteers to identify likely ambiguity, grammatical
errors, sentence structuring and ease of reading for
respondents. From the trial testing, necessary corrections
were made, and then the questionnaires were administered
to the actual sample (Babbie, 2007).
Teacher questionnaire: The instrument (questionnaires)
comprised of seventeen (17) open-ended and close-ended
questions. The average completion time was 10-15
minutes . The open-ended questions are those in which
the respondents are asked to provide their own answer to
the questions and the space is provided to write in the
answer (Items 4; 7-to-9). These will provide valuable
narrative for the work, and pertinent insights to meanings,
actions and behaviour. On the other hand, the closed
ended questions are those where the respondents are
asked to select an answer from among a list provided by
the researcher. These types of questions are more
frequently used as they provided greater consistency of
responses and are more easily processed. These questions
were typed and administered to respondents for
completion. A trial testing of the questionnaires was done
with some volunteers to identify likely ambiguity,
grammatical errors, sentence structuring and ease of
reading for respondents. From the trial testing, necessary
corrections were made, and then the questionnaires were
administered to the actual sample (Babbie, 2007).
Sample and sampling method: The sample for this
research was one hundred and twenty (120) respondents,
with a non-response rate of less than 5%. The eligibility
and inclusion criteria were 1) being teachers of the 4th
grade (from primary and preparatory schools-n = 30), 2)
parents of 4th graders (n = 30) and 3) 4th grade students (n
= 60). The targeted population excluded Ministry of
Education personnel (Education officer), Bursars,
Principals and Vice Principal (except they teaching a
grade four class), pupils of grades 1-3, 5 and 6,
administrative staffers, ancillary staffers and only
included the aforementioned categories of people. The
sample was parents, teachers and pupils who attend two
primary and/or preparatory schools in the parishes of
Kingston and St. Andrew (Rosa Mount Preparatory and
Eva-Dean Primary schools-pseudo names) and were from
varying economic backgrounds.
Non probability sample was used to find the
respondents for the current study. Purposive sampling
technique was used to select the sample. The researcher
selected the two schools based on the purpose of the
study, and being familiar with at least a teacher and a
parent at each location. The sample size was selected due
to the time constraints and the difficulty of not having a
population of all students during this time. Without
having an access to a population of 4th graders in July, it
was difficult to use any probability sampling technique to
draw a sample. Hence, purposive sample technique was
used by the researcher. A purposive (or judgmental)
sampling technique was adopted in the study. According
to Babbie (2007) sampling methods are referred to as
either probability or non-probability. Non-probability
method is based on personal judgment about some
appropriate characteristics of the sample members. The
researcher, knowing a few people who were teachers and
parents, contacted and informed them of the interest,
which resulted in seeking approval from the principals of
the two named schools. Such an approach is purposive
and non-probability in nature.
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
44
Effective use of purposive sampling techniques
requires that the researcher utilizes his/her special
knowledge or expertise of the subject that is largely
representative of the population (Babbie, 2007). The
researchers are cognizant of the structure and population
of primary, all age and preparatory schools in the
Corporate area, particularly Eva-Dean Primary and Rosa
Mount Preparatory Schools-pseudo names. This structure
is of such that each is headed by a principal, with viceprincipal
senior and junior teachers, administrative and
ancillary staffers (including security guards).
DOCUMENT REVIEWS
The researcher reviewed written documents such as
Ministry of Education Report, articles on self-esteem,
performance, class report, statistical reports on the
performance of grade four students in Jamaica. Both the
Ministry of Education Report and the statistical reports
outlined the performance of grade four students across
Jamaica, and these were classified by parish and school
type-primary, all age and preparatory schools. The review
was to determine the performance of students, policies
implemented by the Ministry of Education, and plans of
the Ministry of Education, the extent to which the plans
were working, issues of inequality in academic
performance among 4th grade students and identify some
causes. A major reason for the document review was to
assist in triangulating and validating information obtained
in the interview and surveys. Once scholars opined that
interviews “rarely constitute the sole source of data in
research” (Bryman, 2001), which was the rationale for
multiple methods and approaches.
Statistical analysis: The close-ended questions from the
items from the questionnaire were stored and retrieved in
the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for
Widows, version 17.0 (SPSS Inc; Chicago, IL, USA).
Multiple repression techniques were conducted to identify
variables explaining performance, with self-esteem being
among the variables. A p value #0.10 was used to indicate
statistical significance. Where collinearity existed
(r2>0.75), the variables were placed independently in
order to determine whether to retain it in the final model
construction (Polit, 1996). Outside of the OLS, descriptive
statistics were done to provide pertinent information as
well as bivariate analyses (including Chi-square,
Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation). The open-ended
questions were analyzed using a narrative and thematic
approach (Silverman, 2005).
The results (data) were presented in tables and figures
such as pie charts.
Operationalization of variables: Self-esteem is
measured using Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Appendix).
Questions 2, 5, 6, 8 and 9 were reversed coded, and these
were summed with questions 1, 3, 4, 7, and 10.
Gender is a dummied variable, where 1 = boys (male) and
0 = girls (female).
Distance from school which was a Likert scale
question (Question 3) was coded into a dummy variable
-1 = close to school (less than 1 ½ miles), 0 = far from
school (1 ½+ miles). Self-esteem is coded based on the
Rosenberg’s Foundation stipulations. Scoring: SA = 3, A
= 2, D = 1, SD = 0. Items with an asterisk are reverse
scored, that is, SA = 0, A = 1, D = 2, SD = 3. Sum the
scores for the 10 items. The higher the score, the higher
the self esteem. The scores range from 0 to 30.
School type was re-coded as a dummy variable -1 =
Preparatory and 0 = otherwise.
With whom do you live was re-coded as a dummy
variable -1 = guardian and other, 0 = otherwise.
Age cohort was re-coded as 1= younger ages (8-to-9
years) and 0 = otherwise (10-to-11 years old).
Occupation (questions 5 and 6) was re-coded as a
dummy variable -1 = professional and 0 = otherwise.
The question, ‘Do your parents shout at you?’ was recoded
as 1= all the time and most times, 0 = otherwise.
The question, ‘Does your teacher shout at you?’ was
re-coded as a dummy variable -1 = always and most
times, 0 = otherwise.
Academic performance is the average scores for the
final term of 2011 (June).
Ethical concerns: This study dealt with human subjects
(teachers, parents and students), which is the justification
for ethical issues. Among the ethical issues in social
research (or natural) is the protection of the subjects
(participants or respondents) as well as ensuring that the
participants are never harmed, socially, psychologically or
politically because of the study (Babbie, 2007; Neuman,
2003). The considerations of these ethical issues were
necessary for the purpose of ensuring the privacy as well
as the safety of the studied individuals. Among the ethical
issues that were considered in the research process was
consent before engagement in the study, relating the
purpose of the work, ensuring confidentially and secrecy.
The respondents were advised that they could withdraw
from the study at any point during the process. They were
asked not to place their names on the instrument or any
other personal identifier.
Limitations to the study: This study utilizes nonprobability
sampling technique which means that the
results are:
C Non-generalizable
C Non-predictable
C Specialized to the respondents
C Non-repeatable.
However, these methods still provide insightful, rich
and critical information about the studied phenomenon.
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
45
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
Gift Money Toys/
games
Praise Good grades
in school
Motivation
Preparatory
Primary
Yes No Some time Most time
Compliment from parents[s] for doing some thing good
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
Table 1: Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents by primary
and preparatory schools
Preparatory (n = 17) Primary (n = 15)
------------------------ -----------------------
Characteristic gender n % n %
Boy 11 64.7 4 26.7
Girl 6 35.3 11 73.3
Age cohort
8 - 9 Years old 4 23.5 5 33.3
10 – 11 Years old 13 76.5 10 66.7
Distance from school
½ Mile 5 29.4 4 26.7
1 Mile 2 11.8 2 13.3
1½ Miles 3 17.6 2 13.3
2 Miles - - 2 13.3
2+ Miles 7 41.2 5 33.3
Resides with
Mother, only 5 29.4 6 40.0
Father, only 1 5.9 1 6.7
Aunt 1 5.9 2 13.3
Guardian 1 5.9 5 33.3
Both mother and father 9 52.9 1 6.7
Occupation - Mother
Trades’ woman 2 11.8 -
Home maker 2 11.8 -
Farmer 1 5.9 -
Professional 6 35.3 9 60.0
Service attendant 2 11.8 - -
Business woman 3 17.6 1 6.7
Unemployed 1 5.9 - -
Other - - 5 33.3
Occupation – Father
Trades’ man 1 5.9 4 26.7
Business man 9 52.9 8 53.3
Service attendant 2 11.8 - -
Professional 2 11.8 2 13.3
Unemployed 2 11.8 - -
Other 1 5.9 1 6.7
Perceived academic ability-bright
Yes 16 94.1 13 86.7
No 1 5.9 2 13.3
Like Kuhn (1996) and Max Weber (in Haralambus and
Holborn, 2002) have indicated, research is equally
informative even when it is qualitative and nonprobability
sampling technique is utilised to collect the
data.
FINDINGS
Table 1 displays information on the sociodemographic
characteristics of the student participants. Of
the 32 pupils in this study, 53.1% were from preparatory
schools and the others are from the primary schools. Most
of the pupils who attended preparatory schools resided
with both biological parents (52.9%) compared with those
who attended primary schools (6.7%). The majority of the
students who attended primary schools, mothers were
professionals (60%) compared with 35.3% of those in
preparatory schools. Most of the students in both
preparatory and primary schools indicated that their
fathers were businessmen, 52.9 and 53.3% respectively.
Seven per cent more students who attended preparatory
schools indicated that they were bright (academic
performance) compared with those in primary schools
(86.7%).
Fig. 1: Student response to big motivated
Fig. 2: Complement from parents to student for doing good deed
When the students were asked to explain “What
makes you think that way [are you bright]”, the responses
ranged from:
C High scores
C Effort
C Reasoning ability
C Potential
C Parental encouragement
C People’s perspective.
One pupil who responded no to the question perspective.
One pupil who responded no to the question “Do you
think you are a bright girl or boy? Gave the reason that
“Because people tell me I am [a] dunce.”
When the pupils were asked ‘What motivates you as
a person?’ the responses are represented in Fig. 1. The
majority of pupils in both school types were motivated by
the grades they received in schools.
Ninety-four per cent of the pupils indicated that they
are compliment by their parent(s) for doing something
good. Only 25% mentioned that they are compliment
most times. Figure 2 presents the disaggregates of the
responses of the pupils on “When you do something good;
are you complimented by yours parent(s)? Marginally
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
46
Yes No Some time Most time
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
Admiration of peers
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
Professional
Business person
Trade person
Service person
Other
Aspired occupation
Yes No Some times Most times
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
Compliment from teachers
Fig. 3: Admiration of participants by peer
Fig. 4: Aspired occupation of students
Fig. 5: Compliments to student from teachers
more of the students in primary schools indicated some
times compared with their preparatory counterparts, with
the reverse being the case for most time (Fig. 2).
Figure 3 displays pupils’ responses on the admiration
of their peers. Clearly, substantially more pupils
who attended primary schools indicated that they are
admired by their peer compared with those in preparatory
schools.
Table 2: Selected variables on participants
C Preparatory (n = 17) Primary (n = 15)
------------------------- -----------------------
Characteristic n % n %
Feeling after low performance
Down 5 29.4 7 46.7
Self-pity 0 0 1 6.7
Depressed 1 5.9 2 13.3
Work harder 6 35.3 2 13.3
Motivated to do better 5 29.4 3 20.0
Feeling after doing something wrong
Like crying 0 0 3 20.0
Do not care 2 11.8 2 13.3
Feel guilty 12 70.6 6 40.0
Feel sad 3 17.6 4 26.7
Feel good 0 0 0 0
Does you teacher shout at you?
Always 0 0 1 6.7
Most times 4 23.5 1 6.7
Sometimes 11 64.7 10 66.7
Occasionally 0 0 0 0
Never 2 11.8 3 20.0
Feeling after doing something good
Very happy 6 35.3 7 46.7
Somewhat happy 1 5.9 1 6.7
Happy 3 17.6 5 33.3
Great 7 41.2 2 13.3
Don’t feel anyway 0 0 0 0
Frequency of class participation
Always 7 41.2 3 20.0
Most times 7 41.2 3 26.7
Sometimes 3 17.7 8 53.3
Occasionally 0 0 0 0
Never 0 0 0 0
Confidence in class performance
Very confident 7 41.2 5 33.3
Somewhat confident 5 29.4 2 13.3
Confident 4 23.5 7 46.7
Doubtful 1 5.9 0 0
Not confident 0 0 1 6.7
Fifty percent of the pupils indicated wanting to be a
professional, with 28.1% indicated Other. Substantially
more students in primary schools indicated wanting to be
service providers and trades’ person compared with those
in preparatory schools. Six per cent more pupils of
preparatory school want to be professionals compared to
those in primary schools (46.7%) (Fig. 4).
Of the sample of students (n = 32), 9.4% indicated
that they were not complimented by their teachers. Fig. 5
presents a disaggregation of the pupils’ responses.
Marginally more pupils who attended preparatory schools
indicated being complimented most times by their
teachers (3.1%) compared with their primary school
counterparts (8.7%).
Table 2 presents information on selected variables of
pupils. Substantially more students who attended primary
schools indicated feeling down after a low test
performance (46.7%) compared with those in preparatory
schools (29.4%). The majority of pupils in both types of
schools indicated that they have been shouted at
(sometimes) by teachers. Almost 65% of those in
preparatory schools mentioned sometimes compared
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
47
60
50
40
30
20
0
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
Always Most times Some times Never
Parents shout at pupil
70
80
90
*
25
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Self esteem index
Preparatory Primary
School type
1611
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Self esteem index
12
11
Always Most time Some time None at all
Consistently gets good grades
Preparatory Primary
School type
21
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
Average scores
Fig. 6: Frequency of parents shouting at their children
Fig. 7: Self-esteem index by school type
Fig. 8: Self-esteem index by consistently getting good grades
(pupils)
Fig. 9: Academic performance (average score) by school type
Table 3: Pearson’s correlation of self-esteem index and average scores
(academic performance)
Self-esteem Average
index scores
Self-esteem index Pearson correlation 1 0.611**
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
N 32 32
Average scores Pearson correlation 0.611** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
N 32 32
**: Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
with 67% of those in primary schools. A preponderance
of pupils in preparatory schools said they were frequently
shouted at their teachers (23.5%) compared to their
primary school counterparts (6.7%). Pupils in preparatory
schools were more confident in their class performance
(41.2%), unlike their primary school counterparts
(33.3%). Two times more pupils in preparatory schools
mentioned that they frequently participated in class
(always) compared to those in primary schools (20%).
Seventy-five percent of pupils indicated that their
parents shout at them sometimes, with 9.4% said always.
Fig. 6 presents the disaggregation of the pupils’ responses
on the frequency of their parents shouting at them.
Substantially more children in primary schools have never
been shouted at (14/1%) compared to those in preparatory
schools.
Figure 7 shows the self-esteem of pupils by school
typology. The mean score for self-esteem of pupils in
preparatory schools (20) is greater than that of those in
primary schools (18). The lower self-esteem quartiles for
both groups are the same. However, the upper self-esteem
quartile is greater for those in preparatory schools (22 out
of 30) compared with those in primary schools (20 out of
30).
Pupils who consistently get good grades had the
greatest self-esteem compared with those who had never
got good grades (Fig. 8).
The median score for the sample was 74%, with 25%
received a score of 64%. Students in preparatory school
on average received higher scores (78%) than their
primary school counterparts (67%) (Fig. 9).
A moderate positive correlation exists between selfesteem
index and academic performance of students, rs =
0.611, p<0.0001 (Table 3). This means that as selfesteem
increases, academic performance improves and
vice versa.
Table 4 presents variables that explain (or not) selfesteem
of pupils in sample. Four variables emerged as
statistical significant factors of self-esteem-academic
performance, age of respondents, gender and parental
behaviour, which explain 64.4% of the variability in selfesteem.
Using beta weights, academic performance has
the most influence on self-esteem followed by age, gender
and parental behaviour. Boys had a lower self-esteem (b
= -3.911) than their female counterparts (Table 4).
Self-esteem is the most influential factor that account
for academic performance (using beta weights). Of the
nine variables, four emerged as explaining academic
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
48
Table 4: Ordinary least square (OLS) regression of variables that explain self-esteem of pupils
Unstandardized Collinearity
coefficients CI (95%) Statistics
------------- ------------------------------------- ----------------------------
Characteristic B S.E B p- value Lower bound Upper bound Tolerance VIF
Constant 6.925 6.684 0.310 - 6.869 20.719
Academic performance 0.199 0.098 0.490 0.000 - 0.003 0.402 0.506 1.978
Younger ages - 4.359 2.095 - 0.395 0.048 - 8.683 -0.034 0.818 1.222
Boys (1 = Yes) - 3.911 1.967 - 0.393 0.012 -7.970 0.148 0.754 1.326
Preparatory school (1 = Yes) - 1.396 2.136 - 0.140 0.520 - 5.805 3.012 0.639 1.564
Distance from school (1 = Close) - 0.043 2.277 - 0.004 0.985 - 4.742 4.657 0.693 1.443
Shouting parent (1 = Yes) 3.075 2.896 0.205 0.030 - 2.902 9.053 0.792 1.263
Shouting teacher (1 = Yes) 0.659 2.472 0.052 0.792 - 4.443 5.761 0.780 1.282
R = 0.803; R2 = 0.644; F-statistic [7, 24] = 4.423, p<0.002; N = 31
Dependent variable: Self-Esteem index
Table 5: Ordinary least square (OLS) regression of variables that explain academic performance of pupils
Unstandardized Collinearity
coefficients CI (95%) statistics
-------------- ----------------------------------- -------------------------------
Characteristic B S.E $ Sig. Lower Bound upper Bound tolerance VIF
Constant 37.070 8.219 0.000 20.024 54.115
Preparatory school 5.435 3.428 0.198 0.127 - 1.674 12.543 0.769 1.300
Distance from school 4.515 3.881 0.148 0.257 - 3.533 12.563 0.739 1.353
Mother professional - 0.860 3.346 - 0.031 0.800 - 7.799 6.080 0.807 1.240
Father professional - 7.356 5.149 - 0.178 0.167 - 18.034 3.322 0.776 1.289
Shouting parent - 13.583 4.847 - 0.328 0.010 - 23.635 -3.531 0.875 1.142
Shouting teacher - 10.227 4.177 - 0.292 0.023 - 18.890 -1.564 0.846 1.182
Boys 7.980 3.561 0.291 0.035 0.594 15.365 0.712 1.404
Younger ages 0.870 4.166 0.029 0.837 - 7.769 9.509 0.641 1.559
Self-esteem index 1.723 0.349 0.624 0.000 0.998 2.447 0.749 1.334
R = 0.858; R2 = 0.736; F-statistic [9, 22] = 6.815, p<0.000; N = 31
Dependent variable: Academic performance
performance (p<0.001), which explain 73.6% of the
variability in academic performance (Table 5). The
findings show that boys were performing better than girls.
Table 6 presents information on the profile of the
teachers. Almost 52% of the teachers were from
preparatory schools. Thirty-three per cent of the sample
indicated that they always teach self-esteem in class.
Substantially more teachers in the primary schools do this
compared to those in preparatory schools.
Less than 7% of teachers indicated below 15% of the
class are at or above the class level (Table 7). Eight-eight
per cent of the teachers said that less than 15% of the
class is below the grade level; and 87.9% of teachers
mentioned that after praising the children, it results in
behavioural changes at least most of the times.
When the teachers were asked to give their views on
performance and self-esteem among students within their
class, many responded as follows:
C Generally, students have a high self-esteem
C Those with low self-esteem are normally withdrawn
C Children perform better when they are not plagued by
self-esteem problems
C Those who exhibit higher self-esteem are usually the
better performers
C Self-esteem is important for high academic
performance
C Social and financial hardship is a barrier to academic
performance and high self-esteem
C Self-esteem influences academic performance and
assertiveness
C Motivated students will give greater academic
performance
Varying reasons were given for the identification of
those with low self-esteem. These were:
C Low academic performance
C Less self-expression
C Low level of confidence
C Withdrawal
C Shyness
C Interpersonal behavioural problems
When asked ‘How do you respond to your students when
they do something good?’ the teachers wrote the
following:
C Verbal commendation
C Applause from peers
C Certificate for good behaviour
C Positive reinforcement-books, goodies, stickers,
smiling faces
C Hugs
C Kisses
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
49
Table 6: Profile of teacher based on sampled respondents
Preparatory (n = 17) Primary (n = 16)
------------------------- ------------------------
Characteristic Gender n % n %
Male 6 35.3 3 18.8
Female 11 64.7 13 81.2
Age cohort
16-25 years 2 11.8 1 6.3
26-35 years 5 29.4 7 43.8
36-45 years 6 35.3 7 43.8
46-50 years 4 23.5 1 6.3
50-59 years 0 0.0 0 0.0
Teaching self-esteem in class
Always 3 21.4 8 50.0
Most times 7 50.0 6 37.5
Sometimes 3 21.4 21 2.5
Seldom 1 7.2 0 0.0
Never 0 0.0 0 0.0
Identification of low self-esteem
Outward appearance 5 29.5 6 40.0
Work output 4 23.5 2 13.3
Academic performance 4 23.5 2 40.0
Otherwise 4 2.5 1 6.7
Teachers should be trained to deal with low
self-esteemed pupils
Strongly agree 10 58.8 13 81.3
Somewhat agree 4 23.5 1 6.3
Agree 3 17.6 2 12.4
Strongly disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0
Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0
Students’ perception of self
Winners 5 29.4 8 53.3
High achievers 8 47.1 2 13.3
Role model for their 1 5.9 1 6.7
Peers
Leaders 2 11.8 4 26.7
Failure 1 5.9 0 0.0
The responses on ‘How do you respond to your students
when they do something wrong/bad?’ included:
C Reprimand
C Scolding
C Retract reward
C Encourage better behaviour
C Punishment by sending pupil to naught corner
C Encourage improvement
C Pray with them
C Writing lines
C Let the child evaluate his/her behaviour and
recommend changes.
Table 8 presents information on selected
characteristics of parents, perception of self-esteem and
intended occupation of child. It was revealed that no of
the parents want their children to be police personnel.
However, marginally more of the parents of children in
primary schools want their children to be medical doctors
compared with those of preparatory pupils. Six per cent
more parents of children in primary school had
tertiarylevel education compared with those of
preparatory school pupils.
Eighteen per cent more parents of primary school
pupils indicated that they always aid in the development
Table 7: Teachers’ perception of students in regard performance and
self-esteem
Characteristic Preparatory (n = 17) Primary (n = 16)
----------------------- -----------------------
n % n %
% of class at or above class level
5 1 5.9 0 0.0
10 0 0.0 1 6.3
15 1 5.9 0 0.0
20 5 29.4 8 50.0
20+ 10 58.8 7 43.7
% of class below class level
5 8 47.1 8 50.0
10 6 35.3 7 43.7
15 1 5.9 0 0.0
20 0 0.0 1 6.3
20+ 2 11.8 0 0.0
% of class with positive self-esteem
5 1 5.9 0 0.0
10 2 11.8 1 6.3
15 0 0.0 8 50.0
20 5 29.4 1 6.3
20+ 9 52.9 6 37.4
Does socio-economic background affect self-esteem?
Strongly agree 4 23.5 3 18.8
Somewhat agree 8 47.1 10 62.5
Agree 5 29.4 3 18.8
Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0
Strongly disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0
Does behaviour change after praising a child?
Always 5 29.4 7 46.7
Most times 10 58.8 7 46.7
Sometimes 2 11.8 1 6.7
Seldom 0 0.0 0 0.0
Never 0 0.0 0 0.0
Table 8: Particular characteristics parents, perception of self-esteem
and intended occupation of child
Preparatory (n = 17) Primary (n =
17)
--------------------- -------------------
Characteristic gender n % n %
Male 4 23.5 4 23.5
Female 13 76.5 13 76.5
Age cohort
16-25 years 2 11.8 3 17.6
26-35 years 8 47.1 5 29.4
36-45 years 5 29.4 3 47.1
46-50 years 2 11.8 4 5.0
50+ years 0 0.0 0 0.0
Educational achievement
Tertiary-BSc, MSc, PhD 9 52.9 7 41.2
Diploma 1 5.9 2 11.8
Secondary 6 35.3 7 41.2
All-age 0 0.0 1 5.9
Primary 0 0.0 0 0.0
Vocational 1 5.9 0 0.0
Self-Esteem is
Feeling good about oneself 11 68.8 13 76.5
Aware of oneself 2 12.5 0 0.0
Personal gratification 2 12.5 3 17.6
Success 1 6.3 1 5.9
Happiness 0 0.0 0 0.0
Intended occupation of child
Doctor 3 18.8 2 12.6
Nurse 0 0.0 1 6.3
Teacher 0 0.0 1 6.3
Police 0 0.0 0 0.0
Information technologist 3 18.8 2 12.6
Lawyer 1 6.3 4 25.0
Other 9 56.3 6 37.5
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
50
60
50
40
30
20
0
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
Always Most times Some times
70
80
90
Assist in development of self-esteem
60
50
40
30
20
0
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
Always Most times
70
80
100
Never
Important of having a good self-esteem
90
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
Always Most times Never
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Do you praise your children ?
Some times
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Self esteem index
Professional
Business
person
Trade person
Service person
Other
Intended professional (future desired occupational type)
25
60.0%
50.0%
Beat Shout at Embarrass
them
Sit and
talk to them
All of
the above
Response to cheildren doing some thing wrong
Percent
Preparatory
Primary
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
Professional
Business
person
Trade person
Service person
Other
Future desired occupation type
Fig. 10: Assist in the development of self-esteem of child by
school type
Fig.11: Parental perception: Importance of having a good
self-esteem by school type
Fig. 12: Comparative praises of children by parents of
preparatory and primary schools
of their child’s self-esteem compared with parents
of children in preparatory schools (Fig. 10).
Figure 11 depicts the perception of parents on the
importance of having a good self-esteem by school type.
Marginally more parents of pupils in primary schools
(12%) indicated that they always see the importance of
having a good self-esteem compared with those of
children in preparatory schools.
Fig. 13: Parental response to children doing something wrong
by school type
Fig. 14: Future desired occupational type and self-esteem
index of pupils
Fig. 15: Future desired occupational type and average scores
of pupils
Figure 12 displays the parents responses to “Do you
praise your children?’ by type of school. More parent of
children in primary school indicated that they do
praise their children at least most of the times compared
with those parents of children in preparatory schools.
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
51
More parents of children in primary school beat, less
shout, more embarrassed, and sit and talk to pupils
compared to parents of children in preparatory schools
(Fig. 13).
Figure 14 depicts the self-esteem for pupils who
desire a particular occupational type. Children who desire
to be professional (doctors, nurse, teachers, et cetera) had
the highest self-esteem compared to those who want to be
business person, trade persona and service attendants.
Pupils with the highest scores are more likely want to
be professionals compared to the other occupational types
(Fig. 15). Those who indicated a desire to be trade and/or
service persons received low grades.
DISCUSSION
Statistics revealed that academic performance of 4th
graders in primary schools (including all age) have always
been lower than those in preparatory schools (MoE). Even
though the national average on the grade 4 literacy test
was 67% in 2009, one school’s average was 14%
(Hillside Primary in St. Thomas), another 0% (Old Pera
Primary) and some schools scored below 50% (MoE).
The high prevalence of Jamaicans who had not surpassed
primary level education is an indictment of the
educational system. The Common Entrance Examination
has been replaced with the G-SAT examination and signs
are still evident that something needs to be done to
immediately rectify the low literacy and numeracy among
pupils of primary schools (including all age and
preparatory).
Research provides an avenue for policy changes by
equipping policy makers with evidence, understanding of
the issues and a scope of the problem. A Caribbean
criminologist, Professor Harriott (2004), opined that crime
problem in the region has resulted in extensive public
policy concerns as well as quest for solutions. He stated
that “While policy should be informed by an appreciation
of the problem involving at least an analytic description
of it, policy elaboration need not await a definitive
analysis of its sources or the causes” (2004, p.
238).Embedded in criminologist’s perspective is the value
of research in the policy process. Research is not only
about policy formulation and intervention programmes; it
provides a platform in understanding issues and insights
into cause.
Within the context of the general problem of low
academic performance in the grade four (4) Literacy Test
(Douglas, 2010; Davis, 2004), the recognition that
education is the third national problem in Jamaica, low
literacy and numeracy among students, the percentage of
students performing below the grade level (Ministry of
Education and Youth and Culture, 2004) and the
correlation between low literacy at the primary level and
future academic performance into the post-secondary
level, and the importance of the human capital in the
productive process, the researcher believes that the matter
must be studied to provide insight into the problem and
role of self-esteem in explaining academic performance.
The researcher is of the view that self-esteem plays a
pivotal role in the life of children, and offers a
justification for the disparity between the performance of
pupils in preparatory and primary schools. The low
performance on the grade four (4) Literacy Test coupled
with the high percentage of Jamaicans who have not
attained education beyond the primary level, were the
primary motivation that stimulated my interest in the topic
as well as the inequality between pupils’ performance
based on typology of schools, which has implications for
socio-economic background.
Academic performance of Jamaican students on the
grade 4 literacy test has been steadily increasing since
2001. Statistics revealed that in 2005, 62% of pupils who
sat the 4th grade literacy and numeracy examination
attained mastery, which increased to 67% in 2009 from
50% in 2001 (Roxborough-Wright, 2002; Ministry of
Education, 2009). On disaggregating the results by
typology of schools (primary and preparatory), it was
revealed that preparatory schools’ students had a level
degree of mastery (71%) compared to primary schools’
pupils (67%) (Ministry of Education, 2009). The percent
of students receiving mastery at one public school (St.
Michael Primary) was as low as 31% (Ministry of
Education, 2009). Using the grade 3 diagnostic tests as a
precursor to the 4th grade literacy test the results showed
that there are fundamental weakness in literacy of 4th
graders. In 2004, on the Grade Three Diagnostic Test,
53.1% of pupils mastered phonics, 27.5% mastered
structure and mechanic, 39.6% vocabulary, 28.8% study
kills and 30.6% reading and listening comprehension
(Planning Institute of Jamaica, 2000-2011). There is a
something fundamental amiss with the performance of
Jamaican students, particularly those less than 12 years
old. This problem was identified by the Ministry of
Education (2009), which resulted in the testing of students
before they say the G-SAT. The problem has not abated,
which speaks to a justification for having a research on
the phenomenon.
The current study found that there is a direct
correlation between academic performance and selfesteem,
and that self-esteem was the most influential
factor explaining academic performance of 4th graders at
two Corporate Area primary and preparatory schools in
Jamaica. The association between academic performance
and self-esteem was equally identified by almost all the
teachers, and one teacher said that majority of the times
when a child is motivated, he/she will perform better in
class. One teacher summarized this aptly saying that “If
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
52
you don’t believe in yourself, how can you believe that
your answers are correct?” suggesting the positive
correlation between self-esteem and academic
performance. The present study concurs with empirical
evidence that there is direct correlation between selfesteem
and academic performance (Purkey, 1970;
Baumeister et al., 2003; Bankston and Zhou, 2002;
Lockett and Harrell, 2003). It should not be surprising that
a teacher in the current work said that “Those who exhibit
[higher] self-esteem are usually [the] better performers,
which concurs with the average grades and self-esteem
index. One of the participants in this research mentioned
that self-esteem is important for good performance, which
has already been forwarded by other scholars and
concretized by the correlation from using the Rosenberg’s
Self-esteem Index and the average performance of grade
4 students.
Based on plethora of students studied on self-esteem
and academic performance, there is no denial self-esteem
is good for academic performance. From a standard
achievement test, using 3,001 British pupils, Davies and
Brember (1999) found a weak positive correlation
between self-esteem and better academic performance,
and even prior to that study Davies and Brember’s, Simon
and Simon (1975) had found a positive correlation on IQ
test and self-esteem (rs = 0.33), which means that feeling
good about one’s self will mean a greater score on an IQ
test. Purkey (1970) opined that self esteem is positively
related to some components of success, academic or
verbal performance. Unlike the aforementioned research,
this one found a higher correlation between general
academic performance and self-esteem (rs = 0.611,
p<0.0001). This work goes further, using ordinary least
square regression, to show that of nine variables entered
into a single regression model, four emerged as explaining
academic performance (p<0.001), with self-esteem being
the most influential factor (using beta weights). Like the
teachers who participated in of this research said, selfesteem
is important for good academic performance.
One academic researcher reported that as the level of
self esteem increases, so does the level of academic
achievement scores, but as the level of self esteem
decreases, achievement declines (Covington, 1989),
highlighting the direct (positive) correlation between selfesteem
and academic performance. The present findings
concur with the aforementioned a direction, and
proposition of Covington (1989) that self esteem can be
modified through direct instructions which can lead to
achievement gains was identified by teachers in this
research. The teachers who participated in this research
identified self-esteem issues with:
C Low performance
C Social isolation
C Social interaction problem with pupil and peer
C Self-expression
C Shyness
From the ordinary least square regression model, four
variables emerged as statistical significant factors of selfesteem-
academic performance, age of respondents, gender
and parental behaviour, with academic performance
having the most influence on self-esteem. Not only is selfesteem
influence academic performance, the reverse is
also true which would support motivation and increased
performance.
Although this work disagrees with previous empirical
findings on the negative correlation or no correlation
between self-esteem and academic performance, and
concurs with those that have a positive association, it
disagrees with works that offered self-esteem as a
predictor. Again, Van Tuinen and Ramanaiah (1979)
reported that specific self esteem was a significant
predictor of actual performance on concept attainment
tasks, whereas global self esteem was not an adequate
predictor. Using Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Index and
average scores for the last term for some 4th graders, this
work found that only 37.4% of the explained variability in
academic performance could be explained by self-esteem.
Self-esteem could not be said to be a predictor of
academic performance for 4th grades, neither is another of
the other factors that account for academic performance.
Although collectively, the factors that explain academic
performance are predictors, singly they cannot be
assumed to have predictive explanations. Hence, for this
research, self-esteem is a stronger factor than identified in
the literature; but with a square r of 37.4%, the researcher
could not ascribe predictability to this weak explanation.
Like many other discourse, one side critiques the
“self esteem perspective” on the academic field. Scholars
have purported that self esteem is pursued in the context
of making students feel good about them; this
misconception can lead to indiscriminate praise and the
assumption that one should protect his or her student from
failure (Baumeister, 1996; Learner, 1996). These theorists
suggested that students who feel good and are satisfied
with their work do not necessarily achieve or develop
habits that lead to success. Those criticisms have some
merit, which emerged in the present work. This study
found that there is a positive association between selfesteem
and shouting parents; but a shouting parent and/or
teacher detracts from better academic performance.
Suggesting that positive reinforcement has a direct link to
better academic performance among 4th graders, and
negative criticisms have the reverse role on performance
compared to positive motivational mechanisms. The
young child (pupil) is, therefore, vulnerable to external
influences that are likely shape in one way or another selfesteem
and academic performance. This work highlights
that the positives of self-esteem on performance can be
depleted by the parental and teachers’ actions, which
supports the theorists who believed that feeling good and
are satisfied with their work do not necessarily achieve or
develop habits that lead to success.
Rosenberg (1965) perspective that as early as age five
(5) or six (6) years old children role playing abilities are
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
53
sufficiently developed to enable them to consider the
perceived judgments and reaction of others helps to
explains the parental and teachers’ actions on the
performance of 4th graders. Although parents mean their
children well, shouting is negative affecting their
children’s performance and the same thing can be said of
their teachers. With the majority of teachers developing
positive self-esteem in their pupils, other negative
behaviour will erode the gains of self-esteem building on
performance. One teacher said that “Children perform
better when they are not plagued with self-esteem
problem” which is true; but academic performance can be
depleted by negative reinforcement (shouting, name
calling, et cetera) by the teacher and/or the parents.
Another teacher mentioned that “Honestly at times I
respond in the negative way, but I [have] learn[t] to
realize that it’s not healthy for the student/students so I
have to teach them the right way along with measures for
them to continue doing the right and not the bad”,
emphasizing the teacher’s negative action on
performance. Hence, not all low performance, therefore,
should be ascribed to self-esteem as this may be as a
result of external stimuli (such as parental and teachers’
actions). There can be a blur of the line of low
performance attributable to self-esteem and other stimuli,
as one teacher said “The ones with lower self-esteem
usually perform poorly”, without realizing the
demarcation. Rosenberg (1965) helped us to understand
the role of other stimuli in self-esteem problems when he
opined that students who believed that their parents
lacked interest in them had much lower levels of self
esteem. Again, parental involvement as is the case of
teacher’s involvement could account for the disparity in
low and high performers.
Scarr and Thompson (1994) offered the perspective
that children’s academic and social competence can be
predicted mainly by their family background, parents’
psychological support and the most influential being other
sources of support. Aspects of Scarr and Thompson’s
work have some potency with this study; but, there are
some disagreements between the two studies. In this one,
no single factor of academic performance or self-esteem
can be said to be a predictor, and social support is not the
most influential factor of academic performance. Clearly,
the involvement of parents and teachers play a role in
academic performance of 4th graders in Jamaica, however,
it is self-esteem that is driving the performance among
this group unlike the findings purported by Scarr and
Thompson (1994). While the social support plays a role in
allocating the educational resources, school type, extra
classes, functions (museums, swimming, karate classes,
et cetera) and is pivotal to the establishment and
development of self-esteem, the end product of selfesteem
is what account for the better grades of 4th graders
is.
Some academic researchers purported that the teacher
is unlikely to be more influential than other facilitators of
change in academic performance (Hattie, 1992), because
in the school setting, the teacher is the most salient source
of feedback for a student’s academic proficiency.
Undoubtedly the teacher is a facilitator, teaches the
curriculum, provides the feedback, re-teach the lesson,
and guide academic work, which common sense may
have people believe that the teacher is the most influential
factor on performance, this research found that parental
attitude has influence than that of the teacher’s behaviour
on academic performance of 4th graders, and that selfesteem
play a critical role to all other factors that explain
performance. The teachers’ role is critical as it relates to
the information, correctness of the materials, cognitive
thinking on the material, and the child’s ability to interpret
the materials, but it is the internal concept of self that
drives interaction with the intended knowledge, and
provides a high competence with the knowledge base.
Empirical studies have identified many other factors
that account for better academic performance such as peer
relationship (Buote, 2001; (Montero, 1990); family
cohesion (Caplan et al., 2002); importance his or her
parents assign to study at home (Castejon and Perez,
1998); parents’ level of learning than on their level of
income (Llorente, 1990); teacher’s motivation and that of
the student (Atkinson, 2000), and teacher’s expectancies
(Rosenthal and Jacobson, 1966). Rightfully so the
aforementioned issues could increase the explanatory
power of the current model, but collectively they would
only account for less than 26.4% of the variance in
academic performance as self-esteem, gender, parent
action, and teachers’ behaviour account for 73.6% of the
variability in academic performance of 4th graders in
Jamaica. Clearly, with 26.4% of academic performance
still unexplained by the present work, there are other
factors that provide some explanations, with self-esteem
explaining 37.4% (or 50.8% of the explanatory power of
the model) which would indicate that no other factors
inside or outside of the current model can be more
influential than self-esteem on academic performance.
According to Simon and Simon (1975), children’s
self esteem experienced a self- fulfilling prophecy related
to poor performance. One pupil in the current research,
when asked ‘Do you think you are a bright girl or boy?’
responded no and gave the reasons as “Because people
tell me I am dunce.” The child’s average for the term was
40% and chose other as her future occupational type.
With Simon and Simon’s perspective that a child’s
parents and/or teacher can developed a negative view of
the child over time, could explain why the aforementioned
participant mentioned that she was complimented by per
parents and teachers, but did not select ‘sometimes’ or
‘most times’. Berk’s work (2003) supports that of Simon
and Simon as he commented that the child will personally
adopt that view for him or herself and perform
accordingly. Berk is absolutely correct as the identified
participant in the current study had low score and would
be acting out the perception stereotype of her. The same
participant indicated that she was not confident in her
class performance; she sometimes got good scores, her
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
54
parent call her names and consistently shouts at her. The
identified pupil has been demoralized by the parental
involvement, and while she sometimes received good
scores, she is playing to the general script of a poor
performer (‘dunce’).
On the other hand, another student who attended the
same school as the perceived ‘dunce’ student gave “My
parents encouragement” makes her believing that she is a
bright pupil. This student had a grade of 72% and that she
is mostly complimented by her parents, sometimes by her
teacher and wants to be a professional. A positive selfesteem,
therefore, extends beyond academic performance
and the same can be said of a low self-esteem
(Schmeichel et al., 2009, 1077; Baumeister et al., 2003;
Campbell and Fehr, 1990; Brockner, 1983; Tharenou,
1979). Baumeister et al. (2003) theorized that self-esteem
is strongly associated with happiness, confidence, and a
moderate relationship with academic performance. They
noted that individuals with high self-esteem are likely to
do better on the jobs and with particular tasks (work
performance) than those with low self-esteem. Selfesteem
is not only influential task performance and job
performance it is equally affect future occupational
desires as was revealed by the current work. Hence, selfesteem
is impacting on the student’s performance,
charting a desired career path, stimulating ‘positiveness’
about oneself as this is supported by good academic
performance.
CONCLUSION
Fourth graders academic performance cannot be
drastically change with a fundamental improvement in
their self-esteem. While the Ministry of Education
continues to formulate policies and identify new
approaches to the teaching the curriculum, it has failed to
chart a pathway of self-esteem development. The children
low academic performance is mirrored on the poor selfesteem,
poor supervision from teachers and parents and
this is compounded by the infrequent school attendance,
nutrition, state of depression among the children and
social isolation. The emerging findings and knowledge
gleaned from this work present a critical guide and a
framework for policy practitioners to implement measure
that can effectively address low performance among 4th
graders.
REFERENCES
Abbot, P., 1993. Academic performance of candidates
who sat A’Level Accounting. In: Bourne, P.A.
(2004). An Inquiry of certain factors that influence
the academic performance of students who write the
Advanced Level Accounting Examination, 2004. The
University of the West Indies, Mona, Unpublished
Bachelor of Science Thesis. Kingston.
Alexander, T., 2001. Defining self-esteem. What is selfesteem
and why does it matter? Self-esteem as an aid
to understanding and recovery. Mental Healthcare,
4(10): 332-335.
Atkinson, E., 2000. An Investigation into the relationship
between Teacher motivation and pupil motivation.
Educ. Psychol. 20(1): 45-57.
Auer, C.J., 1992. A comparison of the locus of control of
first and second grade students in whole language,
Basal reader and Eclectic instructional approach
classroom doctoral dissertation. North Illinois
University. Dissertation Abstract International, 5(11):
3856.
Babbie, E., 2007. The Practice of Social Research
Wadsworth. 10th Edn., A Division of Thomson
Learning, Inc., Ohio.
Balashow, Y. and A. Rosenberg, 2002. Philosophy of
Science Contemporary Readings. Routledge,
London.
Bankston, C.L. and M. Zhou, 2002. Being well vs. doing
well: Self-esteem and school performance among
immigrant and non-immigrant racial and ethnic
groups. Inter. Migration Rev., 36: 389-415.
Baumeister, R., 1996. Should Schools try to Boost Self
Esteem? American Educator Summer, pp; 9-42.
Baumeister, R.F., J.D. Campbell, J.I. Krueger and
K.D. Vohs, 2003. Does high self-esteem cause better
performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or
healthier lifestyles? Psychol. Sci. Public Interest,
4(1): 1-44.
Baumeister, R.F., T.F. Heatherton and D.M. Tice, 1993.
When ego threats lead to self-regulation failure:
Negative consequences of high self-esteem. J.
Person. Soc. Psychol., 64: 141-156.
Benham, M.J., 1993. Fostering Self-Motivated Behavior,
Personal Responsibility and Internal Locus of
Control, Eugene, Oregon. Office of Educational
Research and Improvement (ERIC Document
Reproduction No. ED 386 621).
Berk, L.E., 2003. Child Development. 6th Edn., Allyn
and Bacon, Boston.
Berg, B.L., 2001. Qualitative Research Methods for the
Social Sciences. 4th Edn., Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
Blascovich, J. and J. Tomaka, 1991. Measures of
Self-Esteem. In: Robinson, J.P., P.R. Shaver and
L.S. Wrights man, (Eds.), Measures of Personality
and Social Psychological Attitudes, Volume I.
Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Booth, W.C., G.G. Colomb and J.M. Williams, 2008. The
Craft of Research, 3rd Edn., Chicago University
Press, Chicago.
Bourne, P.A., 2004. An Inquiry of certain factors that
influence the academic performance of students who
write the Advanced Level Accounting Examination,
2004. The University of the West Indies, Mona,
Unpublished Bachelor of Science Thesis, Kingston.
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
55
Boxill, I., B. Lewis, R. Russell, A. Bailey, L. Waller,
C. James, P. Martin, A. Gibbs and M.A. Seligson,
2007. Political culture of democracy in Jamaica,
2006 Americas Barameter. The University of the
West Indies, Mona, Kingston.
Buote, C.A., 2001. Relations of Autonomy and
Relatedness to School Functioning and Psychological
adjustment during adolescence. Dissertation
Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and
Social Science
Brockner, J., 1983. Low self-esteem and behavioural
plasticity: Some implications. In: L. Wheeler and P.
Shaver, (Eds.), Review of Personality and Social
Psychology, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 4: 237-271.
Brandon, N., 1994. The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem.
Bantam, New York.
Brandon, N., 1969. The Psychology of Self-Esteem.
Bantam, New York.
Bryman, A., 2001. Social Research Methods. Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
Burnham, P., K. Gilland, W. Grant and Z. Layton-Henry,
2004. Research Methods in Politics. Palgrave
Macmillan, New York.
Caplan, S., C. Henderson, J. Henderson and D. Fleming,
2002. Socioemotional factors contributing to
adjustment among early-entrance college students.
Gifted Child Quart., 46(2): 124-134.
Cambridge University, 1991-2004. Cambridge-
Examination Reports. Cambridge University Press,
London.
Campbell, J.D. and B.A. Fehr, 1990. Self-esteem and
perceptions of conveyed impressions: Is negative
affectivity associated with greater realism? J. Person.
Soc. Psychol., 58: 122-133.
Castejon, J.L. and A.M. Perez, 1998. A causative
explicative model of about the influence of psychosocial
variables on academic achievement. Bordón,
50: 171-185.
Carr, M., J. Borkowski and S. Maxwell, 1991.
Motivational components of underachievers. Dev.
Psychol., 27: 108-118.
Coppersmith, M.V., 1981. The Antecedents of Self-
Esteem. Freeman, San Francisco.
Cooley, C.H., 1902. Human Nature and the Social Order.
Scribner’s, New York.
Covington, M.V., 1989. Self-esteem and Failure in
School. The Social Importance of Self-Esteem.
University of Cambridge Press, Berkeley, CA.
Crotty, M., 2005. The Foundations of Social Research:
Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process.
London, Sage.
Davis, D., 2005. Business Research for Decision Making.
6th Edn., Thomson South-Western, Ohio.
Davis, R., 2004. Task Force on Educational Reform,
Jamaica: A Transformed Educational System. Final
Report. Ministry of Education, Youth and Culture,
Kingston.
Davies, J. and I. Brember, 1999. Reading and
mathematics attainments and self-esteem in years 2
and 6-an eight-year cross-sectional study. Educ.
Stud., 25: 145-157.
Diaz, J.O.P., 1984. A cross-cultural study of the reliability
of the coopersmith self esteem inventory. Educ.
Psychol. Measur. 44: 575-581.
Douglas, L., 2010. Bad News for Grade 4 Literacy: JTA
says Test Results Demoralizing to Teachers. Jamaica
Observer, Kingston.
Gecas, S.V. and M.A. Seff, 1990. Families and
adolescents: A review of the 1980s. J. Marriage
Family, 52: 941-58.
Georgiou, S., et al., 2002. Teachers attributions of student
failure and teacher behavior toward the failing
student. Psychol. Schools, 39(5): 583-596.
Goel, M.L., 1988. Political Science Research: A Methods
Handbook. Iowa State University Press, Iowa.
Hakim, C., 1987. Research Design: Strategies and
Choices in the Design of Social Research. Unwin
Hyman, London.
Hansford, B.C. and J.A. Hattie, 1982. The relationship
between self and achievement/performance
measures. Rev. Educ. Res., 52: 123-142.
Hartup, W.W., 1983. Peer Relations. In: Mussen, P. and
E.M. Hetherington, (Eds.), Manual of Child
Psychology. 4th Edn., John Wiley & Sons, New
York.
Hattie, J., 1992. Self-concept, Hillsdale, NJ:
Haralambus, M. and M. Holborn, 2002. Sociology:
Themes and Perspective. University Tutorial Press,
London.
Harriott, A., 2004. The Jamaican Crime Problem: Some
Policy Consideration. In: Harriott, A., F. Brathwaite
and S. Wortley, (Eds.), Crime and Criminal Justice in
the Caribbean. Arawak Publishers, Kingston, pp:
238-264.
Howerton, D.L., J.M. Enger and C.R. Cobbs, 1994. Selfesteem
and achievement of at-risk adolescent Black
males. Res. Schools, 1: 23-27.
James, W., 1983. The Principles of Psychology. Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Katz, L.G., 1993. Distinction between Self Esteem and
Narcissism: Implications for Practice. Perspectives
from ERIC/EEC, Monograph Series, No.5 (ERIC.
Document Reproduction No. ED 363452.
Klein, J.D. and J. Keller, 1990. Influence of Student
Ability. Locus of control and type of instructional
control performance and confidence. J. Educ. Res.,
83(3): 14046.
Kugle, C.L., R.O. Clements and P.M. Powell, 1983. Level
and stability of self-esteem in relation to academic
behaviour of second graders. J. Person. Soc. Psychol.
44: 201-207.
Kuhn, T.S., 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,
3rd Edn., University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
56
Learner, B., 1996. Self-Esteem and Excellence: The
Choice and the Paradox. American Educator,
Summer, 9-13.
Llorente, M., 1990. School Failure and Social Origin.
Universidad Ponteficia de Salamanca, Tesina.
Lockett, C.T. and J.P. Harrell, 2003. Racial Identity, selfesteem
and academic achievement: Too little
supporting data. J. Black Psychol., 29(3): 325-336.
Madon, S., L. Jussim and J. Eccles, 1997. In Search of the
powerful self fulfilling prophecy. J. Person. Soc.
Psychol.
Marchesi, A. and E. Martin, 2002. Evaluation in
Secondary Education. Snapshot from a Controversial
Era. Institution IDEA, S.M., Madrid.
Ministry of Education (MOE), 2009. Grade Four Literacy
Test Results for Public Schools by Region. MOE,
Kingston.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Culture, 2004. The
Development of Education: National Report on
Jamaica, 2004. Kingston: Ministry of Education,
Youth and Culture. Retrieved from: http://www.
ibe.unesco.org/International/ICE47/English/Natrep
s/reports/jamaica.pdf, (Accessed on: July 14, 2011)
Moos, R.H. and B.S. Moos, 1976. A typology of social
environment. Family Process, 15(4): 357-371.
Montero, M.C., 1990. Predicting academic performance.
A study of intervening variables in a sample of 8th
grade students with follow-up in the 10th grade].
Tesis Universidad Pontifica de Salamanca.
Neuman, W.L., 2003. Social Research Methods:
Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 5th Ed.
Pearson Education, New York.
Pearlin, L.I., M.A. Lieberman, E.G. Menaghan and
J.T. Mullan, 1981. The stress process. J. Health Soc.
Behav, 22: 337-356.
Planning Institute of Jamaica (PIOJ), 2000-2011.
Economic and Social Survey, Jamaica, 2001-2010.
PIOJ, Kingston.
Polgar, S. and S.A. Thomas, 2008. Introduction to
Research in the Health Sciences, 5th Edn., Churchill
Livinstone Elsevier, Philadelphia.
Polit, D.F., 1996. Data Analysis and Statistics for Nursing
Research. Appleton and Lange Publisher, Stamford.
Powell, L.A., P. Bourne and L. Waller, 2007. Probing
Jamaica’s Political Culture: Main Trends in the July-
August 2006 Leadership and Governance Survey.
Department of Government, the University of the
West Indies, Mona, Kingston.
Purkey, W., 1988. An Overview of Self-Concept Theory
for Counselors. ERIC Clearing House on Counseling
and Personal Services, Ann Arbor, Mich. (An
ERIC/CAPS Digest: ED 304630). Retrieved form:
http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/files/selfconc.html.
Purkey, W.W., 1970. Self-Concept and School
Achievement. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, NJ.
Rabinow, P. and W.M. Sullivan, 1979. Interpretive Social
Science: A Reader. University of California Press,
Los Angeles.
Rosenberg, M., 1965. Society and the Adolescent Self-
Image. Princeton, Princeton University Press, NJ.
Rosenberg, M., 1979. Conceiving the Self. Basic Books,
New York.
Rosenthal, R. and L. Jacobson, 1966. Pygmalion in the
Classroom: Teacher Expectation and Pupils’
Intellectual Development. Holt, New York.
Roxborough-Wright, P., 2002. Grade 4 Literacy test said
not Effective. Jamaica Observer, Kingston.
Scarr, S. and W. Thompson, 1994. Effects of maternal
employment and nonmaternal infant care on
development at two and four years. Early Dev.
Parenting, 3(2): 113-123.
Schmeichel, B.J., M.T. Gailliot, E.A. Filardo,
I. McGregor, S. Gitter and R.F. Baumeister, 2009.
Terror management theory and self-esteem revisited:
The roles of implicit and explicit self-esteem in
mortality salience effects. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol.,
96(5): 1077-1087.
Sekaran, U., 2006. Research Methods for Business: A
Skill Building Approach, 4 Edn., Wiley India, pp: 35.
Schlick, M., 1979. Philosophical Paper. Mulder, H.L. and
B.E.B. Van De Velde-Schlick, (Eds.), Reidel,
Dordrecht, 2: 210-224.
Silverman, D., 2005. Interpreting Qualitative Data:
Methods for Analyzing Talk, Text and Interaction.
2nd Edn., Sage Publication, London, pp: 124.
Simon, W.E. and M.G. Simon, 1975. Self-esteem,
intelligence and standardized academic achievement.
Psychology Schools, 12: 97-100.
Solley, C.M. and R. Stagner, 1956. Effects of magnitude
of temporal barriers. Types of perception of self. J.
Experimental Psychol. 51: 62-70.
Statistical Institute of Jamaica (STATIN), 1989-2000.
Statistical Yearbook of Jamaica, 1990-1999.
STATIN, Kingston.
Statistical Institute of Jamaica (STATIN). (2002).
Population Census, Jamaica, 2001. STATIN,
Kingston.
Statistical Institute of Jamaica (STATIN), 1999.
Pocketbook of Statistics, Jamaica, 1999. STATIN,
Kingston.
Stipek, D.K., 1984. The Development of Achievement
Motivation. In: R. Ames, and C. Ames, (Eds.),
Research on Motivation and Education. Vol. 1,
Orlando, Academic Press, Florida.
Tharenou, P., 1979. Employee self-esteem: A review of
the literature. J. Vocational Behaviour, 15: 316-346.
Tice, D.M., 1993. The Social Motivations of People with
Low Self-Esteem. pp: 37-53 in Self-Esteem: The
much interpretation, too little supporting data. J.
Black Psychol., 29(3): 325-336.
Van Tuinen, M. and N.V. Ramanaiah, 1979. A
multimethod analysis of selected self-esteem
measures. J. Res. Personality, 13: 16-24.
Asian J. Bus. Manage., 4(1): 36-57, 2012
57
Wallace, H.M. and R.F. Baumeister, 2002. The
performance of narcissists rises and falls with
perceived opportunity for glory. J. Personality Soc.
Psychology, 82: 819-834.
Weber, M., 1949. The Methodology of the Social
Sciences, Trans. Shils, E. and H. Finch, (Eds.), Free
Press, New York.
Weber, M., 1974. Subjectivity and Determinism. In:
Giddens, A., (Ed.), Positivism and Sociology.
Heinemann, London, pp: 23-32.
Weber, M., 1981. Some Categories of Interpretative
Sociology. Sociological Quarterly, 22: 151-180.
Wilson, T.D., 2002. Strangers to Ourselves: Discovering
the Adaptive Unconscious. Harvard Univ. Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Wylie, R.C., 1979. The Self-Concept: Theory and
Research on Selected Topics. University of Nebraska
Press, Lincoln, Vol. 2.
Yabiku, S.T., W.G. Axinn and A. Thornton, 1999. Family
integration and children’s self-esteem. Am. J. Soc.
104: 1494.
Yogev, Y. and Y. Ilan, 1987. Does self-esteem affect
education aspirations? The case of the ethnic enclave.
Urban Educ., 22: 182-202.