Time: Wednesday, 28/Aug/2024: 9:30 - 11:00 Session Chair: Erna Nairz-Wirth |
Location: Room B228 in ΘΕΕ 02 (Faculty of Pure & Applied Sciences [FST02]) [Floor -2] Cap: 36 |
Paper
Perceptions and Experiences of Parents, Children, Youth Care Professionals, and Teachers about Cooperation
1Fontys Hogescholen, Netherlands, The; 2Radboud University, the Netherlands
Presenting Author:"I try to get the best out of my students, but there are parents who have a hard time supporting their child. And when the child has ADHD, I find it difficult. What is my responsibility as a teacher, and what is the responsibility of other support services? I tend to take it on myself anyway and to direct the parents” (teacher).
It is of great social importance to optimize the developmental opportunities of children in vulnerable families. When home, school, and care are well connected, this has a positive effect on children's well-being, learning performance and behaviour (De Greef, 2019), and leads to more self-efficacy within parents who feel insecure about parenting (Hoover-Dempsey et al.,2005; Waanders et al.,2007). Parental self-efficacy is strongly correlated with positive parent and child psychological functioning, child adjustment, parenting competence and parenting satisfaction (Jones & Prinz, 2005). For those families living in difficult situations, enhancing parenting self-efficacy may serve as a potential mechanism by which to improve the well-being of parents and children (Ibid, 2005).
Therefore, professionals should consider parents as competent and knowledgeable caregivers regarding their children's needs (Minjarez et al.,2013), and as equal and capable decision-making partners in determining the best support for themselves and their children (Damen et al.,2018). It is part of the professional ethical standard of teachers and youth care professionals to recognize the importance of the role of parents as educators, regardless of how problematic parenting might be and how insecure parents might feel. It also is important to incorporate the views of children through an active participation agenda, in the fulfilment of children’s rights under the obligations of the UN Convention for the Rights of the Child.
The purpose of youth care and special education is to reduce children's problems, increase their well-being, ensure that they can return home, or get them on the right track. Ultimately, parents must regain control over the upbringing of their children (Weiss et al.,2012), while children should have a say in how they grow up (Boomkens et al.,2018). Consequently, it is not only the relationship between parents and professionals, their cooperation and joint decision-making (‘alliance’) that matters, but also how competent parents feel about their parenting and how children feel that they are heard and seen. This is why this study focuses on parents’ self-efficacy (regarding parenting competences) and on children's voice, in addition to the usual aspects of the alliance (bond, goal, task).
We conducted a questionnaire study (N=479) in a wide variety of institutions in the Netherlands to compare perceptions of parents, children, youth care professionals and special education teachers about cooperation within different contexts (outpatient assistance, residential care, and special education). Forty-five interviews were carried out to explore how this cooperation is experienced in practice. The theoretical framework of the study is based on alliance research (Hawley & Garland, 2008; Lamers et al.,2015), with an extra focus on parental self-efficacy and children's voice. The findings suggest that cooperation with parents is going well, but professionals find it difficult to support parents’ self-efficacy concerning parenting competences (both questionnaire and interview study). Also, when children's voice gets enough attention, this influences the relationship positively. The interviews show that parental self-efficacy is insufficiently and inadequately supported by almost all professionals. It is positive to conclude, however, that many professionals are able to ‘see past’ incompetent parenting styles and different values on growing up (children) and bringing up (parents). Each context (outpatient assistance, residential youth care, and special education) has its own challenges, which is outlined in this presentation.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
Participants were parents, children, youth care professionals and teachers from three contexts: outpatient assistance, residential care, and special education. Questionnaire data were analysed from a total of 479 respondents: 174 children (10-18 years old), 114 parents, 132 youth care professionals and 59 teachers. Children and parents within the three contexts reported on their cooperation with youth care professionals. Professionals providing outpatient assistance or residential care and special education teachers reported on their cooperation with parents and children.
In addition to the questionnaire study, 45 semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with children, parents and professionals in the same contexts. The interviews focused om how the cooperation between parents, children and professionals is organised and experienced, especially among vulnerable children, parents, families and/or different values about parenting and growing up.
We used the Work Alliance Questionnaire (WAV-12-R; Lamers et al., 2015) to assess the quality of the cooperation between children/parents and youth care professionals/teachers. The original questionnaire was adapted to assess the quality of the alliance with children and parents in general, instead of with one specific child/parent, from the perspective of youth care professionals and teachers. The questionnaire consists of three scales. The Bond scale measures children’s and parents’ perceptions of professionals’ friendliness, acceptance, understanding, and support during care. The scale Goal relates to the degree of agreement between children/parents and professionals regarding the goals of care. The Task scale measures the agreement between children/parents and professionals regarding the tasks to work on during care. The questionnaire was supplemented with four self-constructed items relating to the child’s perceived level of voice, and with four self-constructed items about the extent to which parents feel that the support contributes to their self-efficacy regarding parenting competences.
Questionnaire data were analysed using SPSS. Statistical differences were evaluated by one-way ANOVA analysis with post-hoc tests. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The transcripts were analysed by qualitative thematic analysis (Boyatzis, 1998) using AtlasTi. A total of 729 relevant quotations were selected and analysed:
Children's voice: 211 citations (100 children; 26 parents; 85 professionals)
Parental self efficacy: 178 quotes (9 children; 101 parents; 68 professionals)
Parental values and conflicting interests: 120 quotes (15 children; 26 parents; 79 professionals)
To ensure validity and reliability, multiple rounds of analysis were conducted by three researchers, as well as peer debriefing sessions with the entire research team.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
The results of the questionnaire study show that
Parents are positive about the relationship with the professional, the focus on (treatment) goals, and task (working on the right thing), but they score relatively low on the extent to which they feel empowered in their parenting skills.
It is difficult for professionals to empower parents to deal better with the upbringing of their children, and to make vulnerable parents feel important as educators. Special education teachers find this the most difficult.
Children feel less heard and seen than professionals think they do. The difference is the greatest in the residential setting.
Special education teachers find it the most difficult to take childrens's voice into account.
The results of the interview study are consistent with the questionnaire survey and illustrate how cooperation is experienced in practice. Clinical implications will be shared in our presentation.
A substantial number of quotations show that attention for the voice of vulnerable children is appropriate, e.g., in line with what children can handle, but it is also common for children not to feel heard at all.
Parental self-efficacy is not always supported by professionals. Parents feel that 'giving advice' does not help them. It is effective when professionals guide parents, step-by-step, reflecting together about possible alternatives in specific situations.
Parents feel annoyed by 'professional language' and 'their child as a problem'.
Remarkably, many professionals are able to 'see past' incompetent parenting styles or values and know how to connect with the family's need for help.
From a clinical perspective, our findings highlight the importance of an enduring attention to children's perspectives, desires and needs. Also, there is still much to be gained if professionals focus more on supporting parenting skills, especially for at risk families.
References
Boomkens, C., Metz, J.W., van Regenmortel, T., & Schalk, R. (2018). The development of agency in professional youth work with girls and young women in the Netherlands. Journal of social work. doi: 10.1177/1468017318784079
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. New York: Sage.
Damen, H., Veerman, J. W., Vermulst, A. A., van Pagée, R., Nieuwhoff, R., & Scholte, R. H. J. (2018). Parental empowerment and child behavioural problems during youth care. Child & Family Social Work, 1-10.
De Greef, M. (2019). Addressing the alliance. The parent-professional alliance in home-based parenting support: Importance and associated factors. Nijmegen/ Arnhem: Radboud Universiteit/ HAN.
Hawley, F. & Garland, A. F. (2008). Working alliance in adolescent outpatient therapy: Youth, parent and therapist reports and associations with therapy outcomes. Child & Youth Care Forum 37(2), 59-74.
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Walker, J. M. T., Sandler, H. M., Whetsel, D., Green, C.L., Wilkins, A.S., & Closson, K. (2005). Why do parents become involved? Research findings and implications. The Elementary School Journal, 106(2), 105-130.
Jones, T.L. & Prinz, R.J. (2005). Potential roles of parental self-efficacy in parent and child adjustment: A review. Clinical Psychology Review, 25, 341-363.
Lamers, A., Delsing, M. J. M. H., Van Widenfelt, B. M., & Vermeiren, R. R. (2015). A measure of the parent-team alliance in youth residential psychiatry: the revised short working alliance inventory. Child & Youth Care Forum, 44, 801-817.
Minjarez, M. B., Mercier, E. M., Williams, S. E., & Hardan, A. Y. (2013). Impact of pivotal response training group therapy on stress and empowerment in parents of children with autism, Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 15(2), 71-78.
Ten Brummelaar, M. D. C., Harder, A. T., Kalverboer, M. E., Post, W. J., & North, E. J. (2018). Participation of youth in decision-making procedures during residential care: A narrative review. Child & Family Social Work, 23(1), 33-44.
Waanders, C., Mendez, J. L., & Downer, J. T. (2007). Parent characteristics, economic stress and neighborhood context as predictors of parent involvement in preschool children's education. Journal of School Psychology, 45(6), 619-636. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2007.07.003
Weiss, J. A., Cappadocia, M. C., MacMullin, J. A.,Viecili, M., & Lunsky,Y. (2012). The impact of child problem behaviors of children with ASD on parent mental health: The mediating role of acceptance and empowerment. Autism, the International Journal of Research and Practice, 16(3), 261-274.
Paper
Disciplinary Practices of Primary School Teachers Under the Influence of Student Composition
University of Wuppertal, Germany
Presenting Author:Students' behavioural problems are one of the greatest challenges facing teachers. At the same time, they have far-reaching consequences: There is a close connection between "deviant behaviour" in school, academic performance and later delinquent behaviour in adult live. According to these authors, an important driver is the disciplinary practice of teachers: the stricter and harsher it is, the more likely it is that deviant behaviour will intensify (Amemiya et al. 2020) and academic performance will decline (Del Toro & Wang 2022). This fact deserves attention because the disciplinary practices of teachers can vary greatly with comparable student behaviour. Although the nature of the behaviour itself has an influence on disciplinary responses, this is also influenced by contextual characteristics such as class composition (Rocque & Paternoster 2011; Payne & Welch, 2010; Welch & Payne, 2018). Our main interest in the present study is the question of how student behaviour develops over time under the influence of teacher behaviour and student composition.
Empirical studies on this question are generally rare, especially for primary schools, and only relate to partial aspects of the question. The available studies allow the following assessment: a) Deviant behaviour is higher in schools with a less privileged student body than in schools with a privileged student body, and this gap widens over time. B) Harsh punishments such as exclusion from school and lessons or a referral to the principal by teachers increase with the proportion of students from non-privileged families, even when controlling for student behaviour (Payne & Welch, 2010; Welch & Payne, 2018; Roque & Paternoster 2011 and Kinsler 2011 for primary school). C) Aggressive student behaviour occurs more frequently when minor deviant behaviour has previously been punished by official documentation (Amemiya et al., 2020). However, Amemiya et al. (2020) did not investigate the contextual influences on this development. These results suggest that deviant student behaviour is increasing as a result of harsher disciplinary practices by teachers, especially in schools with non-privileged students compared to schools with privileged students. However, as yet there is a lack of empirical evidence for this.
For a theoretical approach labelling theory can be used. According to this approach, teachers have to interpret behaviour in order to classify it as a rule violation and react to it. Primary school teachers, for example, react very differently to deviant behaviour, even to serious violations of school rules (Psunder, 2005; Skiba, 1997), ranging from ignoring to mild and harsh punishments. Punishments carried out in the presence of classmates can take on the function of labels. This means that a punishment labels a pupil as "deviant" and the following interactions refer to this label. This can result in teachers imposing increasingly strict sanctions (Bowditch 1993) and pupils describing themselves as deviant (Chiricos et al., 2007) and being more likely to join deviant groups of pupils (Bernburg et al. 2006). These effects of labelling lead to an increase in deviant behaviour over time. Although not explicitly modelled theoretically in the labelling approach, labelling processes could occur more frequently in schools with a less privileged student body. Teachers might expect more intense deviant behaviour in these schools, see their (cultural) authority at risk and believe they have to assert it through harsh punishments (Payne & Welch, 2010; Welch & Payne, 2010; Rocque and Paternoster, 2011). With this in mind, we expect the following: Harsher disciplinary practice is more common in schools with low-privileged compared to schools with privileged student bodies for the same student behaviour, which subsequently leads to higher proportions of deviant behaviour by students in schools with low-privileged compared to schools with privileged student bodies.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
Methodology: Procedure: The sample consisted of 14 first grade classes at 14 primary schools in Germany. The deviant behaviour of the pupils and the reactions of the teachers were recorded by means of classroom observations during the first grade. These were carried out on four survey dates each. A total of 7,892 behavioural units of 314 pupils and 3085 disciplinary reactions of teachers were observed. The deviant behaviour was recorded in units of minutes per lesson (e.g. Amina runs through the class). Teacher behaviour (e.g. "Amina, stop it") was also recorded. Two trained observers were always present in a class.
The material was then coded. A coding scheme was developed for coding deviant pupil behaviour, which was primarily based on the already validated instrument "Behavioural Observation of Students in Schools" (Shapiro, 2011). Student behaviour was assigned to the following categories: motor (unauthorised movement around the room or in the square), verbal (unauthorised utterances such as shouting, chatting), aggression (non-physical: insults, verbal abuse; physical aggression: destruction of objects, physical attacks on people) and passivity (passive inattention), other. Teacher behaviour in response to deviant pupil behaviour was also recorded. An inductive procedure was used to differentiate between 22 categories (e.g. "no reaction", "non-verbal reaction", "exclusion from ongoing lessons"). "Intensive" disciplining was coded if students they were excluded from lessons or classroom activities or punished by the removal of (sometimes symbolic) privileges.
Variables: A sum score was calculated for each student per survey from the deviant behaviours, which represents the dependent variable. Furthermore, the individual proportion of general teacher reactions to individual deviant behaviour of a pupil and the proportion of "intensive disciplinary" teacher reactions to individual deviant behaviour were calculated for each wave. Teacher information was also available on how high the proportion of pupils from low-privileged families was at a school. A distinction was made between schools with a high (60-90%, N = 4 schools) and low (0-40%, n = 10 schools) proportion of low-privileged pupils.
Method: Mixed-effects linear regressions were calculated taking into account the multi-level structure (behaviour nested in pupils nested in classes). The sum score of student behaviour at time tn was regressed on the individual proportion of intensive disciplinary teacher responses at time tn-1, controlling for individual student behaviour and the individual proportion of all teacher responses at time tn-1. Furthermore, interaction effects between the intensive disciplining practice and the student composition were calculated.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
The results show that already at the beginning of primary school, the proportion of deviant behaviour is higher in schools with higher proportions of low-privileged pupils than in schools with higher proportions of privileged pupils; this applies in particular to motor and verbal deviant behaviour. Similarly, even when controlling for the type and frequency of pupil behaviour, the intensively punitive teacher reactions are more frequent at the former schools. However, according to preliminary evaluations, there are no indications that a) intensively punishing teacher behaviour increases the frequency of deviant student behaviour and b) that such a development is more likely to occur in schools with a less privileged student body than in schools with a privileged student body. However, there are indications that the more likely a teacher intensely disciplines a pupil's disruptive behaviour, the higher the individual share of disruptive behaviour, but not the frequency, and this development is more likely to occur with pupils who are already more disruptive to begin with and at schools with a less privileged pupil body than at schools with a privileged pupil body. This means that many pupils adapt to the behavioural expectations in the course of the first year and show more compliant behaviour, while pupils with higher initial values tend to maintain their behaviour in response to an intensive disciplinary practice and thus take up a higher proportion of the disruptive behaviour overall. This development in the course of the first class does not indicate either the theoretically expected general dynamic or a context-specific dynamic of labelling processes, as the quality of the behaviour does not change significantly either. The extent to which these developments will unfold in the further course of primary school will have to be shown by further surveys in the coming school years.
References
Amemiya, J., Mortenson, E. & Wang, M. (2020). Minor infractions are not minor: school infractions for minor misconduct may increase adolescents’ defiant behavior and contribute to racial disparities in school discipline. American Psychologist, 75(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000475
Bernburg, J. G., Krohn, M. D., & Rivera, C. J. (2006). Official labeling, criminal embeddedness, and subsequent delinquency: A longitudinal test of labeling theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427805280068
Bowditch, C. (1993). Getting rid of troublemakers: High school disciplinary procedures and the production of dropouts. Social Problems, 40(4), 493–509. https://doi.org/10.2307/3096864
Chiricos, T., Barrick, K., Bales, W., & Bontrager, S. (2007). The labeling of convicted felons and its consequences for recidivism. Criminology, 45(3), 547–581.
Kinsler, J. (2011). Understanding the black–white school discipline gap. Economics of Education Review, 30(6), 1370–1383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.07.004
Payne, A. A., & Welch, K. (2010). Modeling the effects of racial threat on punitive and restorative school discipline practices. Criminology: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 48(4), 1019–1062. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2010.00211.x
Psunder, M. P. (2005). How effective is school discipline in preparing students to become responsible citizens? Slovenian teachers’ and students’ views. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(3), 273–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.005
Rocque, M., & Paternoster, R. (2011). Understanding the antecedents of the „school-to-jail“ link: The relationship between race and school discipline. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 101(2), 633–666.
Shapiro, E. S. (2010). Academic skills problems fourth edition workbook. Guilford Press.
Skiba, R. J., Peterson, R. L., & Williams, T. (1997). Office referrals and suspension: disciplinary intervention in middle schools. Education and Treatment of Children, 20(3), 295–315. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42900491
Del Toro, J. & Wang, M. (2022). The roles of suspensions for minor infractions and school climate in predicting academic performance among adolescents. American Psychologist, 77(2), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000854
Welch, K., & Payne, A. A. (2010). Racial threat and punitive school discipline. Social Problems, 57(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2010.57.1.25
Welch, K. & Payne, A. A. (2018). Latino/a Student threat and school disciplinary policies and practices. Sociology of Education, 91(2), 91–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040718757720
Paper
Segregation of ECEC personnel
1Tampere University, Finland; 2University of Eastern Finland
Presenting Author:The shortage of qualified educators has raised concerns all over Europe and beyond. In Finland, the most drastic shortage of qualified staff is among early childhood education and care (ECEC) teachers (Työvoimabarometri 2022, Kosunen et al 2023). The earlier research suggests that socio-economic composition of areas influences the professional choices and turnover of qualified educators. For example, studies focused on teachers' work preferences in comprehensive education show that teachers prefer to work in affluent institutions (e.g. Ingersoll & May 2012). The paper examines whether this vicious cycle of segregation where teacher segregation and socio-economic segregation of the neighborhoods are associated, that has been identified in comprehensive education can be identified also in ECEC.
This paper investigates the segregation of educators in ECEC in Finland, focusing on the relationship between socio-spatial and institutional segregation. Socio-spatial segregation refers to the differentiation of residential areas in terms of their socio-economic composition (e.g., Boterman et al. 2019). In this paper, institutional segregation refers to differentiation between educational institutions, such as ECEC centres, in terms of the distribution of qualified and non-qualified educators. While socio-spatial and institutional segregation have been extensively studied in comprehensive education (e.g. Boterman et al. 2019; Kauppinen et al. 2020), research related to ECEC is limited.
We ask:
1. How are the qualified and non-qualified educators distributed accross ECEC centers?
2. Is there an association between institutional teacher segregation and the socio-economic composition of the neighbourhood?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
The study utilizes national register data on ECEC personnel in Finnish ECEC to examine the association between institutional segregation, and the connection with the social composition of their neighborhoods. The data sources are early childhood education information repository: VARDA; and socio-demographics on residential areas data, Statistics of Finland). The data comprise qualification information on 26,196 ECEC center educators, including ECEC teachers, social pedagogues, child carers, assistants, family daycare workers, and the information of the ECEC centre they work in. By using postal codes, we connect this information to data on socio-demographics of the area the centres are located at. Regression analysis is used for examining the association between socioeconomic structure of the area and the proportion of qualified educators.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
Initial analysis shows that private ECEC centres have larger proportion of unqualified personnel compared to public ECEC centres. Also, initial analysis shows that there is a connection between socio-economic composition of the area and the proportion of qualified educators. The paper suggests that analyzing the educator segregation in publicly funded Finnish ECEC system can provide valuable insights into teacher segregation within a welfare state. The concentration of qualified educators in affluent areas may exacerbate educational inequalities, as children in disadvantaged areas may have less experienced or unqualified teachers.
References
Boterman, W., Musterd, S., Pacchi, C., & Ranci, C. (2019). School segregation in contemporary cities: Socio-spatial dy-namics, institutional context and urban outcomes. Urban Studies, 56(15), 3055–3073.
Ingersoll, R. M., & May, H. (2012). The magnitude, destinations and determinants of mathematics and science teacher turnover. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(4), 435–464.
Kauppinen, T. M., van Ham, M., & Bernelius, V. (2020). Understanding the effects of school catchment areas and house-holds with children in ethnic residential segregation. Housing Studies, 1–25.
Kosunen, S., Saari, J., Huilla, H. & Hienonen, N. (2023). Missing teachers: The Regional Determinants of Teaching Staff Recruitment and the Segregation of Teachers in Finland. Yhteiskuntapolitiikka.
Työvoimabarometri (2022). [Labour Force Barometer] https://www.ammattibarometri.fi/ (accessed 5.6.2023)