No abstract

Worldwide, prevalence rates of students experiencing mental health difficulties are growing, with only one in five receiving treatment. The role of teachers in collaborative efforts both to identify and to provide effective services for these students is an essential one. However, scant research has explored the mental health literacy of pre-service teachers. In the present study, 186 pre-service teachers completed a vignette-based measure (Child or Adolescent version based on each teacher’s experience) in order to assess their mental health literacy, comprised of beliefs and knowledge. Results indicate that participants expressed lower efficacy when teaching children or adolescents with externalizing as compared to internalizing behaviours but believed that a child or adolescent experiencing behaviours indicative of depression was of the greatest concern and in need of intervention. Pre-service teachers were able to correctly identify cases of anxiety and ADHD, but many attributed behaviours typical of depression to home life difficulties (Child version) or substance use/abuse (Adolescent version). Results are discussed in light of previous research in the field; recommendations for future research and practice are provided.

terms of both psychological and academic outcomes. Growing numbers of students are placed “at risk” as a result. A mental health promotion approach suggests that students can develop a number of skills and competencies, namely those related to social-emotional learning (SEL), which can reduce their chance of developing mental health difficulties. In Canada, a wide range of curricula, frameworks, initiatives, and programs have been put in place that address elements of SEL. In this paper, a sampling of these drawn from across the country is described. The emphasis on SEL apparent in many provinces and territories is evidence of the shared understanding of its importance with respect to improving student outcomes. However, a lack of evidence to support these approaches, inconsistencies in terms of terminology and practices, the lack of alignment between SEL and academics, and the piecemeal approach adopted within some provinces leave SEL and mental health promotion approaches vulnerable to being labelled “add-ons” and becoming transient initiatives.

Differentiated Instruction (DI) is a framework that supports planning for diversity within K-12 classrooms. Research has grown steadily over the past 15 years that explores DI implementation, as well as beliefs and practices. Literature to date has focused heavily on the experiences of educators, with limited attention given to the role of leadership in implementing DI in schools. The current study explores the perspectives of 19 school and board-level administrators regarding the ways in which a differentiated instruction framework was implemented within their school board as well as facilitators and barriers to the implementation and uptake of the framework. Interviews revealed five themes: a) DI continuum, b) differentiated professional learning supports, c) making space for shared professional learning, d) align/integrate/embed, and e) multi-level leadership. Our findings reflect a strong belief system of most of the participants with respect to the foundations of DI as well as an understanding of effective approaches to professional learning and school change.

Research indicates that early intervention can improve long term outcomes for students who struggle early in school. However, in multi-layered organization such as the school system, many elements may come into play when deciding which students will receive support. This study examined these elements including system requirements and expectations at the provincial and school board levels, current practice in schools and classrooms, and the beliefs and knowledge of individuals surrounding the assessment and identification of at-risk students. Using a qualitative approach, 23 individuals were interviewed. Relevant provincial and school board documents as well as artifacts were gathered to provide further information. The findings indicate that many elements influence the identification of a student as at-risk including the characteristics of the student, and the particular classroom, school, and school board the student attends. The results of this study reveal a lack of clarity as well as differing perspectives and priorities when it comes to the concept of at-risk. The study findings contribute to our understanding of practice and beliefs around young students at-risk and how the interactions of the various elements involved impact the identification of individual students.