CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Historical background

The compound noun, ‘psychosocial’, first emerges in the 1890s. Although a metaphysical insistence on a deep and mutually constitutive connection between personality and social life had been a common place throughout the nineteenth century. Victorian moralists drew from the philosophies of Plato and Hegel.

An organic vision of society that emphasized the close involvement of self and community (Harris, 1992; Collini, 1990). This vision was upheld by a broadcasts of cultural commentators, from radical socialists through to Liberal Anglicans, who agreed that working practices and social relationships were constitutive of human personality (Burkitt, 1991, Hayward, 2007).

Although they differed over the precise nature of this process of constitution, these proponents held up the experience of fellowship with friends, family or nation as the essential and defining aspect of human kind, whereas independence and alienation became the markers of psychological ill health (Douglas-Fairhust, 2002 &; Clark, 1988).

Previous studies on the subject on  history students’ academic performance indicated that there exist several factors that influence history students’ academic performance, but students’ and lecturers’ attitudes, students’ academic self-efficacy and students-lecturers’ interaction remained the key determinant of academic performance (Maina, 2012).

According to Adunola (2011)), lecturing is a collaborative process that involve interaction between students’ and the teachers that at the end brings about change in the students behavior. But,  psychosocial factors in history teaching and learning process is a multidimensional concept that measures various interrelated aspect of learning in educational system which include students’ attitudes towards teachers, students’ academic self-efficacy and student-lecturer interaction.

Therefore, consistent evaluation of the aforementioned psychosocial factors is very crucial most especially among students’ of secondary education in Cameroon which are potential teachers of secondary schools since in practice, the factors are directly linked with students’ academic performance (Maina & Fan, 2012).

Conceptual review

In understanding the term “psychosocial”, it refers to the close connection between psychosocial aspects of our experiences (our thoughts, emotions and behavior) and our wider social experience (our relationships, tradition and culture). Learners and teachers are psychologically affected by the surrounding social conditions that may disrupt or enhance the quality and effectiveness of learning (Ferre, 2009).

Eckersley, (2014) describes psychosocial factors as complex multifaceted phenomenon which grows from simple interactions between persons, instilling specific social experiences and psychological interpretation of given contexts. It is a subtle force that works from within, but manifests in thought processes and feelings of an individual causing some specific and spontaneous responses. These tendencies develop into learners’ personality and a state of well-being, manifested in the productivity of life. Psychosocial factors can be viewed as underlying forces that operate behind a learner’s life due to their psychological and social state affecting the level of productivity.

The psychosocial changes presents huge impression on the outcomes of individual history learners and educational institutions. They influence the thoughts, motivation and decision-making in the academic endeavors.

The role played by the family, school and students’ self-efficacy in influencing academic outcomes cannot be underestimated. Deliberate efforts have been evidenced attempting to enhance values in families, schools and individual students towards academic success but with insignificant gain (Becker & Luther, 2002). Nonetheless, little has been documented on the pervasive influence of psychosocial factors emanating from family background, school environment and students’ self-efficacy on history student academic performance.

The subjective psychosocial dynamics of students can be classified as low, medium or high according to Vilar, Santoa & Sabral (2015). Low psychosocial dynamics may be characterized by disadvantaging socioeconomic status, dissatisfying family cohesion and disparaging parenting despite the coping mechanisms (Brooks, 2011).

The students portray negative attitude towards school and learning of history. They are also surrounded by poorly perceived and unreliable psychosocial support systems (McNeil, Prater and Busch, 2009). Such learners have low self-efficacy that causes them to hesitate starting an academic task and undermining their ability push such tasks to the desired completion (Park, Peterson & Seligman, 2004).

Students with high perceived psychosocial dynamics are different and seem to enjoy adequate socioeconomic status, cordial family cohesion and warm parenting. In school, the students are optimistic and express warm attitude towards schooling and enjoy earnest psychosocial support system (McNeil, Prater & Busch, 2009). Their personality is characterised with determination and pragmatism in academic endeavours that enables them to set high standard goals which they pursue to the successful end (Park, Peterson & Seligman, 2004).

Mackay (2006) emphasized the power of family structure on academic performance. The study observes that children who experience parental separation are more disadvantaged in many ways. Hijazi and Naqvi (2006) showed a positive correlation between socioeconomic status, students’ personality and academic performance. The state of psychosocial needs and nature of support systems in students determine how they weigh challenges. Students with challenges related to academic performance also suffer from emotional disturbance, but lack sufficient support from the school (Lembo, 2014).

Academic performance is mainly evaluated through examinations and more attention has been focused on examination outcomes than in the learning process (Obeta, 2014). This focus on examination results has caused a paradigm shift in teaching-learning process.

More focus is emphasized on coaching students to do well in examinations than in competency based knowledge. The academic performance also faces many hindrances that undermine precious endeavors rendered by the stakeholders. The Commonwealth Secretariat (2006) observed this and warned that failure to address such factors disadvantages students for life.

Mwaura (2010) who assessed the factors affecting academic performance of students categorized the factors into personality, home and school related dynamics. A majority of studies focus on the physical factors that influence academic performance, but their redress does not sustain performance in the long run (Otieno & Colclough, 2009).

Theoretical background

Theoretically three theories have provide a link between psychosocial and academic performance, they include Erickson’s stages of Development, Kohlberg theory of Moral development (1958) and Bronfenbrenner ecological system theory (1974).

These three theories are selected because they gave a relationship between  psychosocial factors s and academic performance  and  suggested that student learn and develop through their person-to-person interaction with parent, teachers, and peers and through the influence of their personal characteristics.

Statement of the Problem

History student Success in school is associated with academic achievement which has attracted heavy funding from the stakeholders run, (Otieno & Colclough, 2009).  The provision of facilities, infrastructure, physical and human resources are meant to facilitate academic performance.

As a result, strategies such as increasing students’ contact hours with teachers, improving student-textbook ratio, enhancement of facilities and infrastructure and giving financial support to the needy students have been witnessed (Jemimah, 2018).

However, the psychosocial factors have received little attention which could have kept the academic performance hurting. The few studies found on psychosocial dynamics explored the variables on home, school or personality factors separately.

According to the systems theory that informs this study, the difficulties in academic performance cannot be understood by exploring the variables separately. It is in this spirit that the study was done to assess the effect of psychosocial factors on the academic performance of history student

Objectives of the Study

General objective

To examine the effect of psychosocial influence on history student performance in Buea Sub Division.

 Specific objective

1. To examine the effect of family structure on history student performance in Buea Sub Division.
2. To examine the effect of school facilities on history student performance in Buea Sub Division.
3. To examine the effect of student self-efficacy on history student performance in Buea Sub Division.
4. To examine the effect of social interaction on history student performance in Buea Sub Division.

Check Out: Curriculum Studies Project Topics with Materials