Individual and familial factors predict formation and improvement of adolescents' academic expectations: A longitudinal study in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents' high academic expectations predict future health and successful societal integration. Yet, little is known about which factors may promote adolescents' expectations of their future education and academic achievement. AIMS: To explore whether potentially modifiable factors such as parents' engagement and expectations regarding their child's education; or student individual factors such as school engagement, academic achievement, sense of identity, and positive mental health predict positive development of academic expectations in early adolescence.
METHODS: A longitudinal study of 3,203 adolescents and their parents was conducted with information collected between 7th grade (13 years of age) and 9th grade (16 years of age). Parental and adolescents' own academic expectations and engagement in school, academic achievement, identity synthesis, and mental health were self-reported in annual questionnaires. We used logistic regression to analyze the associations between the aforementioned factors and two binary outcomes related to changes in expectations from 7th to 9th grade: A. resolved uncertainty regarding own academic expectations; B. raised academic expectations.
RESULTS: Student engagement, and higher academic grades predicted both resolved uncertainty in expectations and raised academic expectations. Higher parental involvement in education was related to resolved uncertainty, while high parental expectations were related to raised student expectations. Identity synthesis and mental health did not appear to predict either outcome.
CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that a supportive parental attitude concerning their child's education during adolescence, student engagement, and positive progressions in academic achievements may contribute to a positive development of academic expectations, thus to positive educational trajectories.

Introduction

Studies have consistently linked adolescents’ high academic expectations or aspirations with higher academic achievement [1-3], and more positive mental health [4-6]. A better understanding of the potentially modifiable factors that influence adolescents’ academic expectations may be important for the development of potential educational and mental health trajectories.

Although research on the determinants of academic expectations is relatively scant, several previous studies have determined some important potentially modifiable antecedents of academic expectations or aspirations. Parental attitudes towards education may be of particular importance for adolescents’ development of academic expectations. In fact, parental expectations for their children appear to be one of the most consistent predictors of adolescents’ own academic expectations [7-9]. Parental involvement in their children’s education, however, is less clearly understood. While this has been described as one of the most important predictors of academic expectations [10], others have reported null findings [11, 12].

According to the Expectancy-Value theory, academic motivation and achievement are predicted by the combination of ability self-concept and the subjective value put on certain tasks [13]. Previous academic achievement is likely to inform ability self-concept, and academic engagement may be an important aspect in the valuing of education and schoolwork. Previous studies have found intrinsic motivation towards schoolwork [7] and own academic ability or achievement to be important contributors to adolescent academic expectations [7, 8]. Some studies, however, cast doubt on the extent to which adolescents actually adjust their academic expectations according to their own ability or achievement [14, 15]. Mental health may also be an important aspect in relation to the development of academic expectations and goals and has previously been found to predict academic expectations [16].

Identity development is another factor which is closely linked to educational and vocational choices and future planning in general [17]. According to Erikson’s psychological stage theory, adolescence is the developmental stage where young people primarily face conflicts between identity synthesis and confusion. It is important at this stage for them to establish a sense of who they are and what their goals are [18]. Though identity formation is a very individual process, at least one school-based intervention has succeeded in modifying identity development [19]. Few quantitative studies have investigated aspects of identity formation in relation to academic expectations.

During adolescence, academic expectations from external sources (typically parents and teachers) often become more demanding, while intrinsic motivation in school [20] as well as academic self-concept [21] tend to deteriorate. At the same time, specific goals and future planning are likely to become more definite, as decisions become closer and more central in the lives of adolescents [8]. Along with increasing rational thinking, some adolescents may adjust their expectations to more realistic or achievable goals over time. Previous studies have come to conflicting conclusions about whether own expectations on average tend to increase [22], decrease [23] or stay the same [10, 14] during early adolescence.

Our understanding of potentially malleable factors that influence the development of adolescent academic expectations, however, remains poor. For instance, few studies have addressed the question of which factors explain positive changes in academic expectations during the critical time of adolescence. One particularly interesting change at this age is the transition between uncertain expectations to more definite visions about own future educational development, a topic often neglected in this type of study. On one hand, uncertainty in early adolescence may be a natural response related to healthy identity formation and adaptiveness [24]. On the other hand, prolonged uncertainty may lead to delayed goal setting and subsequent undesirable outcomes such as poor academic performance and attainments later on [7]. A better understanding of which factors influence an improvement in academic expectations before the transition to high school, including resolving uncertainty would be important in order to design consistent strategies to promote positive adolescent educational goals.

In Sweden, 9th grade (age 16) marks the end of compulsory school. At this point the students choose whether or not they want to attend upper-secondary education and if so, whether they would like to follow a vocational track, or a theoretical track, this latter often in preparation for university studies [25]. The time between 7th and 9th grade is therefore particularly critical for the development of educational plans in the Swedish context.

This study aims to explore potentially modifiable factors in the family environment and at the individual adolescent’s level that may promote positive change in academic expectations during the final block of the Swedish compulsory school, i.e. between 7th and 9th grade. Specifically, we explored whether parental involvement with school, parental expectations, student engagement, academic grades, sense of identity, and mental health are associated with an improvement in academic expectations or with a resolution of uncertainty in these expectations.

Methods

Study population and design

This study is part of the KUPOL cohort study (a Swedish acronym for Knowledge about Young People’s Mental Health and Learning). Details of the study design and the data collection methods have previously been published [26] and will be summarized here. One hundred and one schools (19% of those eligible) were recruited from southern and central Sweden. Within these schools, the parents of 3,959 students (32% of the eligible) gave informed consent for their children’s participation in the study during the 2013–2014 or 2014–2015 academic years. Of the students allowed to participate, 3,671 answered the baseline questionnaire in the 7th grade (age 13). Yearly follow-up surveys were conducted in the 8th and 9th grade using similar questionnaires. There were 3,203 adolescents who participated both in the baseline and in the second follow up survey. Parents of the index adolescents also answered a similar questionnaire each year with 3,645 answering the baseline questionnaire and 2,977 answering at both the baseline and 2nd follow-up.

The KUPOL study was approved by the Stockholm Ethics Review Board (reference numbers: 2012/1904-31/1 and 2016/1280-32).

Measures

Outcome

We measured academic expectations by asking adolescents both in 7th grade and in 9th grade how far they thought they would go in their education with the possible responses; “I don’t know”, “high school-vocational track”, “high school-theoretical track”, and “university”. From these answers we derived two outcomes representing positive changes in academic expectations in two sub-populations. We first considered those with uncertain expectations in the 7th grade (N = 1,429) and compared those who remained uncertain with those who endorsed a specific expectation in the 9th grade. Next, we considered those who reported some definite expectation in the 7th grade (N = 595) and compared those who raised their expectations between the 7th and the 9th grade with those who did not. We excluded those participants who reported university expectations at baseline (N = 1,017) from the main analysis, as it was not possible for them to experience any upward development in expectations. However, in secondary analyses we compared those who lowered their expectations between 7th and 9th grade with those who sustained or raised their expectations (N = 1,577).

Predictors

Parental involvement in their child’s education was measured using the child-reported Family Support for Learning (FSL) subscale of the validated Student Engagement Instrument [27]. This subscale measures how engaged and supportive children feel that their families are concerning school life using four items with five response alternatives ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”. The total score is calculated as a mean of the four items [28] where a higher score indicates more family engagement in school. The Cronbach’s alpha was .79 in this sample.

Parental academic expectations for their children were measured by asking how far parents expected their children to go in school. We categorized this variable as “university expectations” vs. “less than university expectations”.

Adolescent engagement with school was measured using the Future aspirations and Goals subscale of the Student Engagement Instrument. This subscale includes five items related to future academic plans, general future prospects, and the importance put on school. A sample item is “School is important for achieving my future goals”. Items are answered on a five-point scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. The scale score is an average of the five items with a higher score indicating higher engagement. The Cronbach’s alpha was .79 in this population.

Academic grades obtained during the 7th grade were retrospectively reported by the adolescent in either 8th or 9th grade for the subjects Swedish, English, and mathematics. Each grade was represented by a numeric value that was then added across subjects to derive a total score (a higher score indicating higher academic achievement).

Identity synthesis was assessed using five items from the Identity subscale of the Erikson Psychological Stage Inventory. This subscale indicates how secure the child feels with his or her own identity and has previously been validated [29]. The score was calculated as a mean of the five items, with a higher score indicating stronger identity synthesis. The Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .71.

Mental health was self-reported by the adolescent using two measures. The well validated Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale for Children (CES-DC) [30] was used to measure depressive symptoms. This scale assesses how often depressive symptoms have occurred during the last week. We used the cutoff point of 30 recommended for Swedish adolescents to separate normal and high scores [31]. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire was used to measure multiple dimensions of mental health [32]. This scale assesses symptoms related to emotional problems, peer problems, conduct problems, and hyperactivity during the last six months. The recommended cutoff point of 18 was used in order to separate normal and high scores [33].

All predictors were measured at baseline when adolescents were in the 7th grade (age 13) except for academic grades which were reported retrospectively.

Covariates

Some additional variables were considered as potential confounders because they could theoretically determine both academic expectations and their predictors. These were: adolescents’ gender; family living arrangement (living with two parents or one or neither of them), derived from the child’s questionnaire; parents’ education and country of birth, obtained from the parents’ questionnaire and categorized as “at least one parent with university education vs. neither parent with university education” and “both parents born in Sweden vs. one parent born outside of Sweden” respectively. Being female, living in a two-parent family, having a higher SES, and identifying as an ethnicity other than white have all previously been found to be related to having higher academic expectations [34]. These factors are also likely to be related to parental and own engagement in school, parental expectations, academic achievement, sense of identity and mental health.

Statistical analysis

We analyzed baseline characteristics of the study population separately according to the two main outcome variables (resolved uncertainty and raised expectations) using chi-square tests for categorical variables and Kruskall-Wallis tests for continuous variables.

We used logistic regression models to estimate: A. the likelihood of endorsing specific expectations in 9th grade rather than remaining undecided among those reporting undecided expectations at baseline. B. the likelihood of raising expectations between 7th and 9th among those who reported a definite expectation in 7th grade.

Models were adjusted for sex, living arrangement, parents’ education, and parents’ country of birth.

As a secondary analysis, we explored the additional outcome of lowering expectations from 7th to 9th grade compared to those who maintained or raised their expectations.

We used multi-level models to accommodate for clustering at the school level. Because estimates and model test statistics (-2 log likelihood) were nearly identical in the two models, results are presented ignoring the school-level cluster.

All analyses were conducted using SAS enterprise guide 7.1.

Results

About two thirds of adolescents who did not endorse a definite academic expectation at baseline resolved their uncertainty by the 9th grade. Among those who reported definite academic expectations at baseline, 47% raised their expectations. Table 1 shows the distribution of 9th grade expectations according to 7th grade expectations.

Table 1

Expectations reported in the 9th grade according to 7th grade expectations.

	Expectations 9th grade
Expectations 7th grade	I don’t know	High school vocational	High school theoretical	University	Total
	N (%)	N (%)	N (%)	N (%)
I don’t know	472 (33)	229 (16)	248 (17)	480 (34)	1429 (100)
Highschool vocational	52 (20)	82 (31)	72 (28)	55 (21)	261 (100)
High school theoretical	51 (15)	49 (15)	84 (25)	150 (45)	334 (100)
University	91 (9)	35 (4)	71 (7)	785 (8+)	982 (100)
Total	666	395	475	1470	3006

Adolescents living with both parents were more likely to resolve their uncertainty. Median student engagement, parental support and grades were higher among those who resolved their uncertainty between 7th and 9th grade. Girls, adolescents with parents with university education, those whose parents expected them to go to university, and those with at least one parent born outside of Sweden were more likely to raise their expectations between 7th and 9th grade. Median grades in 7th grade and student engagement were higher among those who raised their expectations between 7th and 9th grade. (Table 2).

Table 2

Baseline characteristics and change in aspirations between 7th and 9th grade among those with undecided expectations and those with decided expectations below university in 7th grade.

		Uncertain expectations at baseline			Decided expectations at baseline
		Sustained uncertainty	Uncertainty resolved		No raised expectations	Raised expectations
		N = 472	N = 957		N = 318	N = 277
		N (%)	N (%)	P-valuea	N (%)	N (%)	P-valuea
Sex of child	Girls	235 (32)	506 (68)		144 (49)	152 (51)
	Boys	237 (34)	451 (66)	0.2723	174 (58)	125 (42)	0.0196
Living arrangement	Both parents	434 (32)	907 (68)		291 (53)	259 (47)
	Not with both parents	37 (43)	49 (57)	0.0416	27 (60)	18 (40)	0.3592
Parental education	University education	292 (31)	643 (69)		193 (49)	202 (51)
	No university education	169 (36)	303 (64)	0.0843	125 (63)	73 (37)	0.0010
Parents’ birth country	Both Sweden	357 (33)	733 (67)		253 (55)	209 (45)
	At least one outside of Sweden	85 (35)	158 (65)	0.5049	39 (43)	52 (57)	0.0376
Parents expectations	University	241 (31)	547 (69)		136 (42)	188 (58)
	Less than university	182 (35)	333 (65)	0.0730	156 (72)	61 (28)	< .0001
CES-DC	Non-problematic score	424 (33)	854 (67)		268 (53)	242 (47)
	High score	42 (33)	87 (67)	0.8868	46 (57)	35 (43)	0.4774
SDQ total	Non-problematic score	422 (33)	865 (67)		277 (53)	247 (47)
	High score	43 (34)	82 (66)	0.7145	38 (58)	28 (42)	0.4695
		Median	Median		Median	Median	P-valuea
Future aspirations and goals		4.20	4.40	0.0013	4.40	4.60	0.0002
Family support for learning		4.75	5.00	0.0040	4.75	4.75	0.2876
Grades		40.00	42.50	< .0001	40.00	45.00	< .0001
Identity synthesis		3.83	3.83	0.9899	3.83	3.67	0.3499

CES-DC = Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale for Children, SDQ = Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.

a P-values correspond to chi-square tests for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous variables.

Higher parental support was associated with a greater odds of transition to defined expectations (adjusted OR 1.37 95% CI 1.12–1.67), while high parental expectations were not. Student engagement in school was also associated with a significant increase in the odds of resolving uncertainty in expectations (OR 1.29 95% CI 1.09–1.54). Higher academic grades were associated with greater odds of resolving uncertainty (OR 1.03 95% CI 1.01–1.04). Identity synthesis and the absence of problematic depressive or mental health symptoms did not appear to be significant predictors of resolving uncertainty (Table 3).

Table 3

Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for transition to definite expectations between 7th and 9th grade among adolescents who reported no definite expectations at baseline, according to family and individual predictors (N = 1,429).

Variable	Model 1a	Model 2b
	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)
Family support for learning (continuous)	1.31 (1.07–1.58)	1.37 (1.12–1.67)
Parental expectations university vs. other	1.24 (0.98–1.57)	1.17 (0.90–1.52)
Future aspirations and goals (continuous)	1.27 (1.08–1.51)	1.29 (1.09–1.54)
Grades (continuous)	1.03 (1.02–1.04)	1.03 (1.01–1.04)
Identity synthesis (continuous)	1.00 (0.87–1.14)	1.06 (0.91–1.23)
CES-DC (ref = high score for depressive symptoms)	0.97 (0.66–1.43)	1.08 (0.72–1.64)
SDQ total (ref = high score for total difficulties)	1.08 (0.73–1.58)	1.14 (0.76–1.70)

OR = odds ratio, CI = confidence interval, CES-DC = Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale for Children, SDQ = Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.

a Model 1 is unadjusted.

b Model 2 is adjusted for child’s gender, living arrangement, parental education, and parents’ country of birth.

Parental university expectations were associated with greater odds of their children raising their own academic expectations (OR 3.14 95% CI 2.06–4.79), as was adolescents engagement in school (OR 1.53 95% CI 1.16–2.04) and having higher academic grades (OR 1.05 95% CI 1.03–1.07). Parental involvement in their child’s education, identity synthesis, and absence of depressive or emotional and behavioral symptoms did not appear to be important predictors of raising academic expectations (Table 4).

Table 4

Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of raised own academic expectations among adolescents reporting a definite academic expectation at baseline according to family and individual predictors (N = 595).

Variable	Model 1a	Model 2b
	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)
Family support for learning (continuous)	1.03 (0.77–1.36)	1.09 (0.81–1.46)
Parental expectations university vs. other	3.54 (2.44–5.11)	3.14 (2.06–4.79)
Future aspirations and goals (continuous)	1.67 (1.27–2.18)	1.53 (1.16–2.04)
Grades (continuous)	1.06 (1.04–1.08)	1.05 (1.03–1.07)
Identity synthesis (continuous)	0.93 (0.76–1.13)	1.02 (0.81–1.29)
CES-DC (ref = high score for depressive symptoms)	1.19 (0.74–1.90)	1.34 (0.80–2.24)
SDQ total (ref = high score for total difficulties)	1.21 (0.72–2.03)	1.34 (0.77–2.34)

OR = odds ratio, CI = confidence interval, CES-DC = Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale for Children, SDQ = Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.

a Model 1 is unadjusted

b Model 2 is adjusted for child’s gender, living arrangement, parental education, and parents’ country of birth.

Secondary analyses of lowered expectations revealed a similar pattern, with higher parental expectations, student engagement, and academic grades all being significant predictors of a lower odds of adolescents lowering their expectations. Parental engagement, identity synthesis, and a normal score on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire did not significantly predict lowered expectations. However, having a normal score on the CES-DC depression scale was associated with a decreased odds of lowering expectations (S1 Table).

Discussion

In this large longitudinal study, we found that both parental attitudes and adolescents’ engagement and achievements were associated with an improvement in the future expectations about own education. Specifically, higher parental involvement in education, higher student engagement, and academic grades predicted whether students who in the 7th grade could not endorse any definite expectations would resolve this uncertainty two years later. Likewise, higher parental academic expectations, higher student engagement and higher academic grades predicted raised academic expectations between 7th and 9th grade. However, psychological factors at a typically individual level such as identity synthesis and positive mental health were not longitudinally associated with positive change in academic expectations in this cohort.

Previous studies have consistently found parental expectations to predict adolescents’ own expectations [7-9]. However, studies investigating the association between parental involvement in or support for learning and their children’s academic expectations tend to come to different conclusions. Several found parental involvement in education to be an important predictor of adolescent academic expectations [9, 10, 35] while others reported null associations [11, 12]. However, measures of parental engagement vary between studies. For instance, some of these studies measured parental involvement in terms of how often parents met with teachers or attended meetings. This behavior may not be an uncontroversial measure of engagement, since it is likely to also reflect children’s difficulties in school, thus hampering a direct interpretation of this association. We measured parental involvement through the children’s perception of their parents’ engagement and communication related to schoolwork. Interestingly, in this study parental involvement in the child’s education appeared especially important for resolving uncertainty in expectations, while parental academic expectations appeared especially important for predicting a raise in adolescents’ academic expectations. It is possible that parental non-directive engagement in the adolescents’ education promotes the process of autonomous decision making and goal setting rather than the absolute level of these goals [36]. On the other hand, parents communicating high academic expectations may prompt their children to strive for higher specific goals.

Higher own engagement in school has been found to be related to academic expectations in qualitative [37] and quantitative studies [38], to the point that expectations and engagement are sometimes measured as a single construct of “engagement with educational goals” [39]. Our findings support that engagement in school predicts a positive shift in academic expectations during this phase of adolescents.

A bi-directional relationship between academic achievement and academic expectations has previously been hypothesized. Some studies have found that adolescents adjust their expectations based on their own achievement. For instance, one study found that adolescents’ high achievement predicted higher expectations [8], but other studies did not find such a relationship. In one study, only very large changes in average grades predicted a change in expectations [14]. In another study the majority of adolescents did not adjust their expectations to reflect their current achievements [15]. Our findings present some support for the hypothesis that own achievement is important in inspiring higher expectations. This is in line with Expectancy-Value theory, where achievement and motivation are predicted by ability self-concept (previous achievement) and subjective task value (engagement) [13]. It is likely that academic achievement and expectations reinforce each other over time indicating that adolescents adjust their expectations according to their own achievements, and that improving expectations is likely to also improve future achievements.

Sense of identity has sometimes been described as closely related to the formation of academic and career goals [40], but a long period of exploration takes place before identity commitments are made [41]. In our study, a greater sense of identity synthesis was not related to resolving uncertainty of expectations or to raised expectations. It may be that both identity and academic expectations develop simultaneously rather than early adolescent identity development predicting later changes in expectations. Though identity formation is supposed to take place during adolescence, it is unclear at exactly what age identity synthesis should be achieved [42]. The adolescents in our sample may have been too young at baseline to convey useful information about their identity development. It is also possible that identity formation and academic expectations actually represent two different and independent processes. Adolescents may be able to separate their specific academic goals from who they feel they are as a person overall.

Previous studies have found that measures of mental health or well-being tend to be associated with higher educational expectations or aspirations [6, 12, 16, 43], though some of these studies were cross-sectional and offered different explanations of the causal direction of these associations [6, 43]. In our study, mental health measures did not predict a positive change in academic expectations. It may be that the relationship between mental well-being and positive expectations is already established at an early age.

Inequalities in Swedish education are growing in terms of an increasing gap between the highest and lowest achievers in general, as well as a growing achievement gap between those with high and low socioeconomic status [44]. Those who are thriving in the current academic system may be particularly adaptive individuals with supportive families and more optimistic perceptions of their potential opportunities for the future.

Several limitations of our study need to be considered. The original cohort had a low response rate at the individual level (ca 30%) and was rather selected with an over-representation of highly educated parents and an under-representations of parents born outside of Sweden [26]. For this reason, the generalizability of these results may be limited. Additionally, we lacked finer insights in the question measuring academic expectations, as university was the highest level of education possible for the student to report. We also only had a select number of items from the Erikson Psychological Stage Inventory, and thus may not have captured all aspects of identity development. Relying on retrospectively reported grades also led to poorer quality data in this variable. Finally, unmeasured confounding cannot be ruled out, for instance parents’ mental health, the child’s cognitive ability, or personality traits such as optimism.

Conclusion

This study found that potentially modifiable factors at the family and at the individual level such as parental engagement in education, parental academic expectations, and adolescent engagement and achievement in school are predictors of a positive development in academic expectations during the final years of Swedish compulsory school. These findings point toward the high value of school-family communication, which is likely to impact on parental engagement in children’s education and on how parental expectations are formed and communicated. In turn these processes would facilitate adolescents’ identification of their academic goals and ultimately their social, psychological, and educational trajectories.

Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for lowering own academic expectations among adolescents reporting a definite academic expectation at baseline according to family and individual predictors (N = 1,577).

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

22 Nov 2019

PONE-D-19-23059

Individual and familial factors predict formation and improvement of adolescents’ academic expectations: a longitudinal study in Sweden

PLOS ONE

Dear Ms. Almroth,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please find the reviewers report below this email and address their comments which would be helpful in preparing the revised manuscript. They all agree that is an important and well written study but they have some queries regarding data and analysis.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Jan 06 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Muhammad A. Z. Mughal

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2.  We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

*In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: A fair study with rich data. Here I have a few comments to, hopefully, improve the manuscript.

1) Please make a table / figure to indicate the statistics on academic expectation improvement, no change, and decrease.

2) Related to (1)—this manuscript only considered positive factors. I suggest investigating the factors associated with decrease of academic expectation, too.

3) It seems factors in Table 2 were put into the model separately. How about putting them all into the same model to find which remain significant?

4) The language is fine in the main text; in comparison, the Abstract seemed coarse. For example, the second sentence “This is unfortunate xxx”, which is out of line for a research paper; in the third sentence the first prep. “in” should be removed. Please refine the Abstract.

Reviewer #2: This submission reports on a project that examined change in young adolescent expectations regarding future education. Two kinds of variables were assessed: family variables and individual student variables. The family variables included parental engagement with education and their educational expectations for their children. The individual variables included student engagement with education, their educational expectations, the extent of their identity work, academic achievement and mental health status. One of the nice things about this submission is the longitudinal design. Data were analysed using logistic regression

And the reported results were straightforward and unsurprising, and supported certain other findings in the literature. For example, what matters for resolving uncertainty in expectations and rising educational expectations? Student engagement and good grades. Also, higher parental involvement in education and parental expectations was related to rising expectations. Certain variables did not work out, e.g., mental health and identity synthesis did not predict educational expectations.

Although the results seem sensible some methodological decisions were made that give me pause. First, the variable Adolescent Engagement with School was measured with two items from the "future aspirations" and "goals" subscale(s) of the Student Engagement Inventory. A reader will want to know if there were items other than these two to be found on the SEI subscales and, if so, why weren't they included?

Second, it is a puzzle why the Likert-type scaling of this measure was transformed into a dichotomy. Insofar as the original scaling was on a continuum, what would be the advantage of ignoring the continuum to create the dichotomous variable---surely not to accommodate logistic regression. I should think that much information, and variability is lost ignoring the continuum.

Third, are we confident that young adolescents can retrospectively report their grades? This is not a big deal, but I wonder if more could be learned by NOT averaging the Swedish, English and mathematics grades into one academic achievement variable. I suspect that students' expectations of their future might hinge on how well they do in mathematics (for example) more than, say, Swedish, and, again, a potential clarifying finding is left unexplored.

Finally, I do worry about the proliferation of covariates. I am not as convinced as the authors' that they are included out of theoretical considerations (for no theory is offered).

Reviewer #3: The study explores whether potentially modifiable family factors, such as parental engagement and expectations regarding the education of their children, as well as individual factors such as school engagement, academic performance, sense of identity and mental health, predict the positive development of academic expectations in early adolescence. To do this, the authors use a longitudinal study with 3,204 adolescents and their parents. The data is collected through a questionnaire applied annually. For the analysis of the associations between the aforementioned factors, logistic regression is used, establishing: A. the student resolves the uncertainty regarding the academic expectations themselves; B. Increase in academic expectations between 7th and 9th grades. Concerning the results, school commitment and higher academic grades predicted the resolution of uncertainty in expectations, as well as an increase in academic expectations. Also, the participation of parents in the education of their children was related to the uncertainty resolved, while the expectations of the parents were related to the increase in expectations between 7th and 9th grade. Regarding identity and mental health, these variables failed to predict any of the results.

The strengths of the study lie fundamentally in the breadth of the sample and in the relevance of the established associations. Regarding the weaknesses of this study, although I have marked "yes" in question 2, I doubt the statistical analysis models used. In this sense, I wonder if it would not have been better to use a model of structural equations, specifying the use of developed indicators to capture the characteristics of categorical variables. The use of SEM would require a larger number of items of the Adolescent engagement with school scale (only 2 items are used).

Details:

Details:

Q. 7. The Alpha value is not provided in the Adolescent engagement with school Scale.

P. 12. The notes in Table 1 refer to the standard deviation (SD), but I cannot find that data in the table (nor in the other tables).

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Daniel Lapsley

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

20 Jan 2020

Reviewer 1

Comment 1: A fair study with rich data. Here I have a few comments to, hopefully, improve the manuscript. Please make a table / figure to indicate the statistics on academic expectation improvement, no change, and decrease.

Response: Thank you for the generous appraisal of our study and the comments. We have now included a table showing adolescents’ 9th grade expectations according to their expectations at baseline. It is therefore possible to see the academic expectations’ trajectory of all individuals in the study (page 10).

Comment 2: Related to (1)—this manuscript only considered positive factors. I suggest investigating the factors associated with decrease of academic expectation, too.

Response: We have now included a supplementary analysis, where the outcome is conceptualized as lowered expectations versus sustained or raised expectations among students who from the start endorsed definite expectations. (page 7, 9, 14, and 24).

Comment 3: It seems factors in Table 2 were put into the model separately. How about putting them all into the same model to find which remain significant?

Response: Our goal was to look at the direct effects of potential predictors of positive changes in academic expectations while adjusting for potential confounding factors. These were chosen a priori based of their potential to be (causally) related to both the exposure and outcome but not laying in the causal pathway between the two. Combining all potential predictors into one model could result in a distorted interpretation of the effects of each variable due to over-adjustment on factors which do not have a clear potential to be confounding factors, or work as mediators. This adjustment could lead to spurious associations or to an underestimation of the total causal effect.

Comment 4: The language is fine in the main text; in comparison, the Abstract seemed coarse. For example, the second sentence “This is unfortunate xxx”, which is out of line for a research paper; in the third sentence the first prep. “in” should be removed. Please refine the Abstract.

Response: We have now revised the abstract to improve language and clarity (page 2).

Reviewer 2

Comment 1: This submission reports on a project that examined change in young adolescent expectations regarding future education. Two kinds of variables were assessed: family variables and individual student variables. The family variables included parental engagement with education and their educational expectations for their children. The individual variables included student engagement with education, their educational expectations, the extent of their identity work, academic achievement and mental health status. One of the nice things about this submission is the longitudinal design. Data were analyzed using logistic regression

And the reported results were straightforward and unsurprising, and supported certain other findings in the literature. For example, what matters for resolving uncertainty in expectations and rising educational expectations? Student engagement and good grades. Also, higher parental involvement in education and parental expectations was related to rising expectations. Certain variables did not work out, e.g., mental health and identity synthesis did not predict educational expectations.

Response: Thank you for your accurate summary of our study and for taking the time to review it.

Comment 2: Although the results seem sensible some methodological decisions were made that give me pause. First, the variable Adolescent Engagement with School was measured with two items from the "future aspirations" and "goals" subscale(s) of the Student Engagement Inventory. A reader will want to know if there were items other than these two to be found on the SEI subscales and, if so, why weren't they included?

Response: We originally omitted the items in the SEI that related directly to future academic plans because they did not seem to convey new information (e.g., that agreeing with the statement “I want to continue my education after high school” would almost certainly predict university expectations). Therefore, we originally chose to analyze only the two items that would best represent academic engagement. However, supplementary analyses revealed that the items related directly to future academic plans were not more correlated with the outcomes than the items on academic engagement. In the revised version, we used the entire scale (page 7).

Comment 3: Second, it is a puzzle why the Likert-type scaling of this measure was transformed into a dichotomy. Insofar as the original scaling was on a continuum, what would be the advantage of ignoring the continuum to create the dichotomous variable---surely not to accommodate logistic regression. I should think that much information, and variability is lost ignoring the continuum.

Response: This choice was originally made because the distribution of the answers was centrally skewed, i.e. there were very few who did not agree or strongly agree with either of the statements (around 5-7%). In addition, Likert scale response alternatives are ordinal/categorical, not continuous. Using the total scale score in the revised version, however, automatically solves this problem.

Comment 4: Third, are we confident that young adolescents can retrospectively report their grades? This is not a big deal, but I wonder if more could be learned by NOT averaging the Swedish, English and mathematics grades into one academic achievement variable. I suspect that students' expectations of their future might hinge on how well they do in mathematics (for example) more than, say, Swedish, and, again, a potential clarifying finding is left unexplored.

Response: We agree that complete reliability cannot be expected when adolescents retrospectively reported their grades, a limitation that we now address in the corresponding section (Page 18). Indeed, among those who reported their 7th grade grades in both 8th and 9th grade, the correlation between these two time points was 0.82 for Swedish, 0.85 for English, and 0.86 for math indicating that there is not complete matching between these self-reports. Upon your request, we also looked at the effects of grades in each of the three subjects. We found the estimates for English to be slightly lower and math to be slightly higher for both outcomes, but confidence intervals were overlapping. We chose not to report these results in the revised manuscript.

Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for resolved uncertainty according to subject specific grades

Unadjusted Adjusted

Swedish 1.07 (1.04-1.10) 1.06 (1.03-1.10)

English 1.04 (1.02-1.08) 1.05 (1.02-1.08)

Math 1.07 (1.04-1.10) 1.07 (1.04-1.10)

adjusted for child’s gender, living arrangement, parental education, and parents’ country of birth.

Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for raised expectations according to subject specific grades

Unadjusted Adjusted

Swedish 1.14 (1.08-1.21) 1.11 (1.05-1.18)

English 1.10 (1.05-1.15) 1.08 (1.03-1.13)

Math 1.14 (1.09-1.20) 1.12 (1.07-1.17)

adjusted for child’s gender, living arrangement, parental education, and parents’ country of birth.

Comment 5: Finally, I do worry about the proliferation of covariates. I am not as convinced as the authors' that they are included out of theoretical considerations (for no theory is offered).

Response: We have now added in the introduction theoretical perspectives in our choices of potential predictors (page 3) and further explanation of our choice of confounders (page 8-9).

Reviewer 3

Comment 1: The study explores whether potentially modifiable family factors, such as parental engagement and expectations regarding the education of their children, as well as individual factors such as school engagement, academic performance, sense of identity and mental health, predict the positive development of academic expectations in early adolescence. To do this, the authors use a longitudinal study with 3,204 adolescents and their parents. The data is collected through a questionnaire applied annually. For the analysis of the associations between the aforementioned factors, logistic regression is used, establishing: A. the student resolves the uncertainty regarding the academic expectations themselves; B. Increase in academic expectations between 7th and 9th grades. Concerning the results, school commitment and higher academic grades predicted the resolution of uncertainty in expectations, as well as an increase in academic expectations. Also, the participation of parents in the education of their children was related to the uncertainty resolved, while the expectations of the parents were related to the increase in expectations between 7th and 9th grade. Regarding identity and mental health, these variables failed to predict any of the results.

Response: Thank you for taking the time to give feedback on our manuscript.

Comment 2: The strengths of the study lie fundamentally in the breadth of the sample and in the relevance of the established associations. Regarding the weaknesses of this study, although I have marked "yes" in question 2, I doubt the statistical analysis models used. In this sense, I wonder if it would not have been better to use a model of structural equations, specifying the use of developed indicators to capture the characteristics of categorical variables. The use of SEM would require a larger number of items of the Adolescent engagement with school scale (only 2 items are used).

Response: Our interest was in the direct associations of the various predictors with positive changes in academic expectations. In this regard, we doubt that using SEM would convey a perceivable advantage compared to logistic regression.

Comment 3: Q. 7. The Alpha value is not provided in the Adolescent engagement with school Scale.

Response: We report the Cronbach’s alpha for this scale in the revised version (page 7).

Comment 4: P. 12. The notes in Table 1 refer to the standard deviation (SD), but I cannot find that data in the table (nor in the other tables).

Response: Thank you for pointing out this mistake, which is now corrected.

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

10 Feb 2020

Individual and familial factors predict formation and improvement of adolescents’ academic expectations: a longitudinal study in Sweden

PONE-D-19-23059R1

Dear Dr. Almroth,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Muhammad A. Z. Mughal

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: My comments were addressed.

My comments were addressed.

My comments were addressed.

My comments were addressed.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Daniel Lapsley

12 Feb 2020

PONE-D-19-23059R1

Individual and familial factors predict formation and improvement of adolescents’ academic expectations: a longitudinal study in Sweden

Dear Dr. Almroth:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Muhammad A. Z. Mughal

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE