RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIAL INTERACTION AND MEMORY DEVELOPMENT AMONG ADOLESCENTS IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN KADUNA NORTH

Authors: Obainoke Edith Ayowie, Ovie Oboatarhe Akise, David Markus Shekwolo & Jonathan Iornenge Ugese

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the relationship between social interaction and memory development among adolescents in secondary schools in Kaduna North. The study employed a survey design using two instruments Working Memory Questionnaire (WMQ) and Social Interaction Scale to collect data from some selected secondary schools in Kaduna North of Kaduna State, Baptist Secondary School Taiwo Road, Adeyemo Secondary School, Katsina Road, and Government Secondary School Independent Way, Kaduna North.  Random sampling technique was used to select male and female participants from the ages of 11-20 years respectively in the class of JSS 3- SS 3. Two hypotheses were tested. Hypothesis one revealed that social interaction significantly correlated with students’ retrospective functioning (r= .200; P < .01). In other words, the hypothesis was partly confirmed in this study. Hypothesis four results revealed no statistically significant t(174)= -0.018, P > 0.05 difference between male and female students in social interaction in Kaduna State. In other words, this hypothesis was not confirmed significant in this study. We concluded and recommended that there is a partly significant relationship between social interaction and memory development among adolescents in Secondary Schools in Kaduna State.  There should be communication in the family between the parents and children as communication is the central quality of the human social environment.

Keywords: Social Interaction, Memory Development, Adolescents, and Secondary Schools.

REFERENCES

  • Bagwell, K.H., Bukowski, W.M., & Parker. J.G. (2001). Peer interactions, relationships and groups. In:
  • Eisenberg, N, Damon, W, Lerner, RM (eds) Handbook of Child Psychology: Social, Emotional and Personality Development, vol. 3. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley,pp. 571–645.
  • Berk, E.C. (2009). The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project: Technical Paper 8b –
  • Measuring the Impact of Pre-School on Children’s   Social/ Behavioural Development over the Pre-School Period. London: DfES/Institute of Education,University of London.
  • Boo, J., & Prins, R. (2007). A factor analytic study of the HOME scale for infants. Developmental Psychology,    21: 1196–1203.
  • Brickeh, M., & Milich, G. (1990). “Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition,” Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Clark, A., & Kinney, P. (2006). Listening to young children: the mosaic approach. 2nd ed. London: National        Children’s  Bureau.
  • Friedman, D.L., & Wolfe, B. (2003). Child care quality: does it matter or does it need to be improvised? Special
  • Report no. 78. November Madison, WI: Institute of Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
  • Kutnick, P., & Kington, A. (2005). Children’s friendships and learning in school: cognitive enhancement through social interaction? British Journal of Educational Psychology 75: 521–538.
  • Kutnick, P., Brighi, A., & Avgitidou, S. (2007). The role and practice of interpersonal relationships in European early education settings: sites for enhancing social inclusion, personal growth and learning? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 15(3): 379–406.
  • Lee, L. R., & Gupta, M. J. (2009). “Short-term retention of individual verbal items”. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 58 (3):    193–198. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.227.1807. Doi: 10.1037/h0049234.
  • Lihenderson, W., & Zunbango, D.S. (2000). The child in America: Behavior problems and programs. New York: Knopf.
  • Melhuish, E.C. (2004). A literature review of the impact of early year’s provision upon young children, with emphasis given to children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Report to the Comptroller and Auditor General. London: National Audit Office.
  • Mikani, A., & Hinshaw, P., (2006). Models of working memory. Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-58325-X.
  • Oates, R., Purdon, S., & Schneider, V. (2005). Early education pilot for two year old children evaluation. Research Brief DCFS-RB134. July. London: Department for Children, Schools and Families.
  • Pollock. J.; Husain, M.; Bays, P. M. (2009). “Changing concepts of working memory”. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 17 (3): 347–356. doi:10.1038/nn.3655.
  • Sammons, P., Sylva, K., & Melhuish, E.C. (2008). The Effective Pre-School and Primary Education 3–11
  • (EPPE 3–11.) Project: Influences on Children’s Attainment and Progress in Key Stage 2: Cognitive in Year 6. London: DCSF/Institute of Education, University of          London.
  • Sammons, P., Kington, A., & Day, C. (2008). Stories and statistics: describing a mixed method study of effective classroom practice. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(2): 103–125.
  • Sylva, K., Melhuish, E.C., & Sammons, P. (2010). Early childhood matters evidence from the effective Pre-school and primary education Project. London: Routledge.
  • Sylva, K., Melhuish, E.C., & Sammons, P. (2011). Pre-school quality and educational outcomes at age 11: low quality has little benefit. Journal of Early Childhood Research 9(2): 109–124.
  • Trawick, L., Smith, D. (2014). The challenge of the high scope perry preschool study. In: Reynolds, AJ, Rolnick,
  • AJ, Englund, MM. (eds) Childhood Programs and Practices in the First Decade of Life: A Human Capital Integration. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 157–167.
  • Vallat- Aouvi, R., Karweit, N.L, Wasik, B.A.  (2009). Preventing early school failure: Research, policy, and practice. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Vander- Oord, R., Awh, E., & Ma, W.J. (2005). “Factorial comparison of working memory models”. Psychological Review. 121 (1): 124 149. Doi:10.1037/a0035234. PMC 4159389.