Presentation on theme: "Hope Study Overview Mark J. Van Ryzin University of Minnesota Examining School Effectiveness in terms of Engagement and Hope."— Presentation transcript:
Hope Study Overview Mark J. Van Ryzin University of Minnesota Examining School Effectiveness in terms of Engagement and Hope
Adolescence is a Critical Time Adolescence oftentimes marks the emergence of psychological disturbances, such as depression, anxiety, eating disorders Can be accompanied by an increase in high-risk behaviors, such as alcohol and/or drug abuse, delinquency, teenage pregnancy Experiences in adolescence can impact life trajectories (i.e., overall educational attainment, employment opportunities) in significant ways Secondary school experiences can provide a strong platform for future success, OR can solidify negative attitudes and self-concepts for life
Assessing School Effectiveness Academics (i.e., standardized test scores) are only a piece of the puzzle From a developmental psychology perspective, student beliefs about themselves (i.e., psychological health) and their attitudes towards school (i.e., motivation and engagement) are also significant Important to encourage a strong self-concept to enable students to weather the difficult times in the future Instead of squashing curiosity, schools should seek to develop motivated, passionate, life-long learners Student needs should be at the center of secondary education, not on the periphery
Pursuing Positive Outcomes Stage-Environment Fit Theory: A mismatch or misfit between adolescent developmental needs and the educational environment can result in negative outcomes like disengagement, drop-out, negative self-image and behavioral problems A better match in terms of adolescent needs and the educational environment should result in higher levels of motivation and engagement Placing students in a more developmentally appropriate environment should have a positive effect on student psychological health
Adolescent Developmental Needs Autonomy: personal causation; making choices according to your own personal interests and desires; being the origin of your own behavior Belongingness: the depth and quality of the interpersonal relationships in an individuals life (both peer-to-peer and student-teacher) Competence: confidence when approaching a learning situation; preference for challenging tasks
Our Measurement Instruments Autonomy: Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire by Ed Deci, University of Rochester Belongingness: Classroom Life Scale by David and Roger Johnson, University of Minnesota Teacher Support (student-teacher relationships) Student Support (peer relationships) Competence: Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey by Midgley and Maehr, University of Michigan Task vs. Performance Goal Orientation Engagement: Engagement vs. Disaffection with Learning by Ellen Skinner, Portland State University Psychological Health: Dispositional Hope Scale by Rick Snyder, University of Kansas
Measuring Psychological Health Hope: a generalized expectancy for achieving goals Correlated with dispositional optimism, positive outcome expectations, self-esteem, happiness Correlates negatively with depression, anxiety In a longitudinal study of college students, hope scores predicted GPA even after controlling for entrance examination scores on the ACT In the same study, 57% of the higher-hope individuals had graduated from college after six years, while only 40% of the lower-hope individuals had graduated
Relationship Between Variables Psych Health (Hope) Autonomy Peer Support Engagement pos. Advisor/ Teacher Support Task Goal Orientation pos. Performance Goal Orientation neg.
Typical School Report VariableSchool ScoreRating Autonomy1.58Outstanding Belongingness Advisor Personal Support3.97Good Advisor Academic Support4.34Very Good Peer Personal Support3.26Fair Peer Academic Support2.98Improvement Goal Orientation Task Goal Orientation4.20Very Good Performance Goal Orientation2.16Very Good Engagement6.69Good Hope (change)1.81Outstanding
Comparison Study Measurements taken in November/December 2004 and April/May 2005 (end of fall semester to end of spring semester) Data collected from 3 closely-matched schools Two EdVisions schools (Schools A and B) and one traditional school (School C); 231 students in total Located in rural area southwest of Minneapolis within 50 miles of each other Similar demographics and teacher qualities School A uses project-based learning full-time School B uses project-based learning part-time Schools A and B use advisory grouping
Comparing Environments Estimated Marginal Means from ANCOVA Comparisons Between Schools Variable School NABC Autonomy227 1.75 a.62 b -.91 c Teacher Personal Support229 4.16 a 4.09 a 3.27 b Teacher Academic Support229 4.47 a 4.44 a 3.80 b Peer Personal Support229 3.37 a,b 3.58 a 3.19 b Engagement228 9.94 a 8.14 a 4.34 b Hope230 50.24 a 49.97 a 47.50 a Note. Means in the same row that do not share the same subscript are significantly different in a planned comparison. A Bonferroni adjustment is used to ensure α FW <.05. Student-level differences in age, gender, race, SES, previous educational experience & number of years in current school are controlled.
Assessing Change over Time Change in Hope over Time School Time Point A (n = 54) B (n = 117) C (n = 54) Hope250.6949.4548.35 Hope148.8747.4748.59 Difference-1.82*1.98***-.24 Note. *p <.05. *** p <.001.
Discussion of Findings Project-based learning seems to encourage significantly higher levels of autonomy School A > School B > School C Advisory grouping seems to enable the creation of significantly better teacher/student relationships Schools A and B > School C on teacher relationships Effects on peer relations somewhat ambiguous Students in more supportive environments seem to exhibit greater engagement in learning and demonstrate healthy psychological development Schools A and B > School C
Other Conclusions Any school can benefit from continuous improvement through regular measurement Areas of concern can be identified and addressed The impact of environmental/structural changes can be measured in terms of their effects on students Example: EdVisions found that their model does not significantly impact peer relations, and as a result they can implement change to their model and measure the results Results can also be helpful in many other ways Marketing materials Parent meetings and presentations Review sessions with sponsoring organization
To get involved… Contact: Ron Newell, EdVisions Ron@EdVisions.coop Mark J. Van Ryzin, U of MN Vanr0040@umn.edu