Protective factors related to antisocial behavior trajectories

Morrison, Gale M.; Robertson, Laurel; Laurie, Beth; Kelly, Jennifer E.

doi:10.1002/jclp.10022

Cited by 79 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(45 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, disengaged students have lower levels of school satisfaction (Elmore and Huebner 2010). Furthermore, Morrison et al (2002) found that the best predictor of decreases in antisocial behavior for middle school students were student perceptions of social support, parent supervision, and classroom engagement. Additionally, research suggests student engagement might help buffer against poor social-emotional and behavioral outcomes such as school failure and dropout, juvenile delinquency, and substance abuse (Alexander et al 2001;Finn 1989;Manlove 1998).…”

Section: Student Engagementmentioning

confidence: 41%

Getting students engaged might not be enough: the importance of psychological needs satisfaction on social-emotional and behavioral functioning among early adolescents

Saeki

Quirk

2015

Soc Psychol Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the relations between students' social-emotional/ behavioral functioning, engagement, and basic psychological needs satisfaction among a sample of N = 83 sixth grade students. A mediation model was tested to examine the role of needs satisfaction on the relations between engagement and socialemotional/behavioral functioning. Results indicated that engaged students have lower social-emotional and behavioral risk; however, this relation can be explained almost entirely by students' underlying satisfaction of basic psychological needs. These results suggest that targeting student engagement is not sufficient when attempting to improve social-emotional/behavioral outcomes; rather, students must also feel autonomous, competent, and experience a genuine connection with their school. Therefore, it appears that school-based programs designed to improve students' engagement in school might only have a limited impact on supporting social-emotional/behavioral functioning if basic psychological needs satisfaction is not also addressed.

show abstract

Section: Student Engagementmentioning

confidence: 41%

Getting students engaged might not be enough: the importance of psychological needs satisfaction on social-emotional and behavioral functioning among early adolescents

Saeki

Quirk

2015

Soc Psychol Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All student and teacher antecedents discussed above are involvedautonomy and autonomy support, competence and structure, and relatedness and involvement (e.g., Salmela-Aro, . When any of these factors are bolstered, rates of delinquency, drop-out, anti-social behaviors, and other undesirable school related outcomes (e.g., teen pregnancy) decrease (Morrison, Robertson, Laurie, & Kelly, 2002;Schwartz, Gorman, Nakmoto, & McKay, 2006). In some studies, a greater effect on student success is shown for students in demographically at-risk populations (e.g., Coll, et al, 1996;Fall & Roberts, 2012).…”

Section: Engagement In Elementary and Secondary Educationmentioning

confidence: 40%

Classroom Engagement as a Proximal Lever for Student Success in Higher Education: What a Self-Determination Framework within a Multi-Level Developmental System Tells Us

Ji¹

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the role of course engagement in college student success, especially for students who have multiple life commitments and few social supports.Building on previous measurement work and based in self-determination theory, the study was organized in five steps. Relying on information provided by 860 undergraduates from 12 upper and lower division Psychology classes, the first step was to improve the measurement of course engagement, by mapping the increased complexity found in self-reports of college students (by incorporating items capturing engagement in "out-of-classroom" activities and general orientation, to standard items tapping classroom engaged and disaffected behavior and emotion). 12 items were selected to create a brief assessment covering the conceptual scope of this multidimensional construct; its performance was compared to the full scale and found to be nearly identical.Second, the assessment was validated by examining the functioning of course engagement within the classroom model: As predicted, engagement was linked to proposed contextual and personal antecedents as well as course performance, and fully or partially mediated the effects of both context and self-perceptions on actual class grades; findings also indicated the importance of including a marker of perceived course difficulty. Third, the university level model was examined, which postulated key predictors of students' overall academic performance and persistence toward graduation.Unexpectedly, academic identity was found to be the primary driver of persistence and the sole predictor of GPA; moreover, it mediated the effects of learning experiences and course engagement on both outcomes. College success and student engagement / iiThe fourth and most important step was to integrate the classroom and university models through course engagement, to examine whether students' daily engagement predicted their overall performance and persistence at the university level. As expected, course engagement indeed showed a significant indirect effect (through academic identity) on both success outcomes, and these effects were maintained, even when controlling for the effects of university supports. Finally, student circumstances were added to the integrated model, specifically focusing on whether course engagement buffered cumulative non-academic demands on performance and persistence. Although unexpected, most interesting was the marginal interaction revealing that students whose lives were higher in non-academic demands showed the highest levels of persistence when their course engagement was high (and were the least likely to return next term when their engagement was low). Future measurement work and longitudinal studies are suggested to examine how course engagement cumulatively shapes academic identity, especially for students with differentiated profiles of non-academic demands and supports. Implications of findings are discussed for improving student engagement and success, and for using the brief assessment of cours...

show abstract

“…An increasing body of research supports the value of protective factors (e.g., connected with teachers and school, empathy, engagement, pro-social peer groups) as a means of addressing students' needs proactively through a competency-based lens [26][27][28][29][30][31]. By identifying students who lack core protective factors relative to others in their school setting, behavioral supports and interventions can be designed and implemented proactively to mitigate risk before externalizing and/ or internalizing behaviors emerge.…”

Section: Building Local Norms Using Protective Factorsmentioning

confidence: 42%

Commentary: Universal Screening for Social, Emotional and Behavioral Risk in Schools Using Protective Factors

Morrison¹,

Rollenhagen²

2017

J Psychol Psychother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protective factors related to antisocial behavior trajectories

Cited by 79 publications

References 39 publications

Getting students engaged might not be enough: the importance of psychological needs satisfaction on social-emotional and behavioral functioning among early adolescents

Getting students engaged might not be enough: the importance of psychological needs satisfaction on social-emotional and behavioral functioning among early adolescents

Classroom Engagement as a Proximal Lever for Student Success in Higher Education: What a Self-Determination Framework within a Multi-Level Developmental System Tells Us

Commentary: Universal Screening for Social, Emotional and Behavioral Risk in Schools Using Protective Factors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About