AME2004 Nov8 04

50 %
50 %
Information about AME2004 Nov8 04
Education

Published on March 15, 2008

Author: Vilfrid

Source: authorstream.com

Slide1:  Denise Buote & Kimberly Schonert-Reichl The University of British Columbia Presentation at the Annual Meeting Association for Moral Education Dana Point, California November 12, 2004 The Role of School-Based Significant Adults in the Promotion of Social, Emotional and Academic Adjustment Among Children The VSB/UBC Partnership: Identifying the Essential Ingredients for Promoting Social Responsibility in Children:  The VSB/UBC Partnership: Identifying the Essential Ingredients for Promoting Social Responsibility in Children A Developmental Approach Creation of a “Caring Context” A Strengths-Based Approach Attention to Implementation and Evaluation School Assets:  School Assets Effective involvement in the school Participation in school activities Supportive school environment Connectedness to school Relationship with one significant adult Protective Factors:  Protective Factors Werner (1989) clustered protective factors into three major categories Protective Factors:  Protective Factors A protective factor can be defined as a mechanism which results in the “amelioration” (protection) of the reaction to a factor that in ordinary circumstances leads to a maladaptive outcome (Rutter, 1987) Slide6:  “Human Beings of all ages are happiest and able to deploy their talents to best advantage” when they experience trusted others as “standing behind them.” (Bowlby, 1973) A Strengths-Based Approach: The Role of Schools:  A Strengths-Based Approach: The Role of Schools Non-Related Significant Adults Previous research has linked significant adults to “at risk” children’s resilience There is very little research that has examined this relation in the school context, especially elementary school. Almost no research has asked children to describe the characteristics of the adults whom children identify as significant. Schools as communities of care:  Schools as communities of care Communities are….places where members care about and support each other, actively participate in and have influence on the group’s activities and decisions, feel a sense of belonging and identification with the group, and have common norms, goals and values. (cf. Bryk & Driscoll, 1998; Goodenow, 1993a, 1993b; Higgins et al., 1984; McMillan & Chavis, 1986; Solomon, Watson, Battistich, Schaps, & Delucchi, 1992; Wehlage, Rutter, Smith, Lesko, & Fernandez, 1990) Slide9:  Early adolescents, when asked via an open-ended questionnaire to list people who were important to them, the majority of early adolescents listed a non-related adult. (Blyth et al., 1982) What we have learned from children and adolescents… Children and Adolescents Who Are At-risk Who Identify at Least One Caring Adult…:  Children and Adolescents Who Are At-risk Who Identify at Least One Caring Adult… Higher levels of self-understanding Better psychological adjustment Fewer conduct disorders Better coping skills More positive self-image Heightened interpersonal skills Better adjustment and coping with ADHD Less problems with drugs and alcohol Higher academic achievement Better school attendance Cityview Elementary Community School Surrounding Neighbourhood:  Cityview Elementary Community School Surrounding Neighbourhood BC Stats – Local Health Area reports that Vancouver is #1 crime region in Province. Ranks 1of 78. The Vancouver Police Department corroborates high crime statistics in Hastings area: Prostitution ranks #1 or #2; Violent crime highest in City. The area in general is characterized by “high crime” and socially at risk children. Cityview Elementary Community School:  Cityview Elementary Community School 670 children (425 English Program) Dual Track French Immersion – District Program Inner City School Meal Programs Community School Annex (175 K-4) 50% ESL, 50 language groups Cityview Elementary Community School Support:  Cityview Elementary Community School Support 6 Family Programs 31 Programs for Children (aside from activities) 8 Programs for Parents 10 Programs for Community and Families This year there are over 55 volunteers working weekly in the school. This school year about 3900 people will be served by the various programs. Method:  Method Participants 158 students from the 5th-7th grades. 50% girls, 42% first language English, 35% Chinese, and 23% other, Of the 238 children who participated in Time 1 (2003), 66% of children participated in Time 2 in 2004 (n =158) Measures:  Measures School/Academic Dimensions School Self-Concept (SDQ; Marsh, 1998) Sense of Classroom as a Community Scale (Battistich et al., 1997) Academic Self-Efficacy (Wentzel, 1998) Behavioural Dimensions Self-ratings of Prosocial Behaviours (Bandura et al., 1996) Measures (cont’d):  Measures (cont’d) Socio-Emotional Dimensions General Self-Concept (SDQ; Marsh, 1998) Prosocial Goals (Wentzel, 1994) Social Responsibility Goals (Wentzel, 1994) Perspective-Taking (Davis, 1983) Empathy (Davis, 1983) Teacher supportiveness (Roeser et al., 1996) Resiliency Inventory (Song, 2003)* * Time Two only Research Questions:  Research Questions 1. Do children identify a significant school based non-related adult? 2. If so, do children who identify at least 1 significant adult differ on social and school competence as compared to those children who do not identify anyone or children who identify more than one significant adult? 3. What aspects do children identify as being important to them in terms of their relationships with these significant adults? 4. What is the relation between relationship stability to children’s social, emotional, and academic competence? Significant Adults at Cityview:  Significant Adults at Cityview Students were asked the following: Make a list of the adults from the school who are important to you. Choose one adult and make a list of all the ways that this person is important to you. Results: Significant Adults:  Results: Significant Adults TIME ONE 54 children did not name an adult 45 children named at least one adult 59 children named two or more adults TIME TWO 49 children did not name an adult 35 children named at least one adult 74 children named two or more adults Results: Year One - Significant Adults :  Results: Year One - Significant Adults Children made comments reflecting the following adults Teachers ………………………………….………..62% Coach……………………………………….………..4% Counsellor…………………………………….…….14% Youth and Childcare Worker…………………….…6% Other (Administrators, Daycare Staff)……………14% Results: Year Two - Significant Adults:  Results: Year Two - Significant Adults Children made comments reflecting the following adults Teachers …………………………………..66% Counsellor………………………………….11% Youth and Childcare Worker………………3% Other (Administrators, Daycare Staff)……………20% Categories:  Categories Supportive teaching (adult is actively involved in promoting positive learning experiences for the child). “She taught me times tables” “He teaches us good things.” Nurturant/supportive (adult supports the child with managing emotions; demonstrates warmth and caring) “She makes me forget all the bad things in my life.” “She is very kind to me.” Positive personality traits (adult possesses personality traits that are positive, such as humor, trustworthiness) “Trustworthy” “Playful” Other (not able to be coded in above) Time 1: School Dimensions:  Time 1: School Dimensions Time 1: Social Responsibility Dimensions:  Time 1: Social Responsibility Dimensions Time 1: Empathy & Prosocial Behaviour:  Time 1: Empathy & Prosocial Behaviour Time 2: School Dimensions:  Time 2: School Dimensions Time 2: School Relatedness:  Time 2: School Relatedness Time 2: Social Responsibility Dimensions:  Time 2: Social Responsibility Dimensions Time 2: Resiliency Dimensions:  Time 2: Resiliency Dimensions Time 2: Resiliency Dimensions:  Time 2: Resiliency Dimensions Change from Year One to Year Two:  Change from Year One to Year Two Research Question: What is the relation between continuity and discontinuity in relationships with significant school-based adults and dimensions of social, emotional and academic competence? In order to address this question, a series of multivariate analyses (MANOVAs) were conducted. Dependent variable: change scores (Time 2 -Time 1) *positive number = positive change Slide32:  Students were categorized into one of four groups reflecting changes or stability in their relationships with adults from time one to time two. Group one: no one in year one no one in year two Group two: no one in year one someone in year two Group three: someone in year one no one in year two Group four: someone in year one someone in year two Change from Time One to Time Two Change from Time one to time two: Empathy and Perspective Taking:  Change from Time one to time two: Empathy and Perspective Taking Change from time one to time two: Prosocial Goals and School Self-Efficacy:  Change from time one to time two: Prosocial Goals and School Self-Efficacy Future Directions:  Future Directions Examining closer the reasons why children identify no one as being significant In depth interviews as to reasons why connectedness status changes for certain students and the impact of these changes Exploring the ways in which teachers connect with students who are considered more challenging Exploring children’s experiences of being in relationship with significant adults at school

Add a comment

Related presentations