Children and Adolescents in Romania
Valeria Negovan, Vlad Petre Glăveanu and Elena Stănculescu
V. Negovan () · E. Stănculescu
University of Bucharest, 90, Panduri Avenue, Bucharest, Romania
e-mail: [email protected] E. Stănculescu
e-mail: [email protected] V. P. Glăveanu
Aalborg University, Kroghstræde 3, 9220, Aalborg, Denmark
e-mail: [email protected]
Introduction
Understanding children and adolescents’ psycho- logical wellbeing is a global imperative. Conduct- ing this type of research in Romania, a country that underwent major transformations in the past two decades at a political, economic, and social level, is even more pressing. Both the family life and school system of the country have been sub- jected to significant changes (Mărginean, 2002;
Robila, 2004; Schifirnet, 2007; Stănciulescu, 2010), raising important questions about chil- dren’s experiences amidst such changes and to what degree their life, education, and wellbeing are affected by them. This is particularly impor- tant because an accurate identification of how the main actors of the school system in Romania (students and teachers) make sense of psycho- logical wellbeing is central for the development of healthy schools and communities, aligned with international standards for contemporary education.
As such, the effort to “map psychological well- being” among Romanian children and adolescents
is motivated by a series of objective factors. First and foremost, educators and psychologists in this country lack a unified conceptual framework of wellbeing as well as a clear understanding of its development, main actors, determinant factors, and consequences (Băban, Crăciun, Balazsi, Ghenea, & Olsavszky, 2007). Second, although such models exist in the broader literature (Brad- shaw, Rees, Keung, & Goswami, 2010; Brad- shaw & Keung, 2011; Cummins & Lau, 2005), they cannot be directly applied in Romania with- out taking into account the cultural specificities of this particular developmental and educational context. Research conducted in this setting would be able not only to generate a context-specific model of wellbeing but also potentially enrich global frameworks by highlighting the role of cultural differences. Thirdly, on a practical note, the educational system in Romania has been ex- periencing in the past years a deep-seated process of restructuring (The Ministry of Education, Re- search and Youth, 2007; Zamfir, 1997) and, as a consequence, it is in dire need of a solid ground on which to build programmes for optimising student learning and wellbeing and improving student–teacher relations. The research reported in this chapter has the potential to address these theoretical and practical issues.
The present study was conducted as part of the project Promoting Psychological Wellbeing Globally, initiated and coordinated by Bonnie Nastasi, under the auspices of the International School Psychology Association (ISPA) and the Society for the Study of School Psychology
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016
B. K. Nastasi, A. P. Borja (eds.), International Handbook of Psychological Well-Being in Children and Adolescents, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-2833-0_10
(SSSP). The research performed in Romania fol- lowed the general objectives and methodology of the project (see Chap. 2) while being sensitive to the specificity of the local population and attuned to the tradition of Romanian school psychology (Negru & Băban, 2009; Stevens, Constantinescu,
& Butucescu, 2011). In particular, we followed a grounded approach to uncovering what educa- tional communities understand by psychological health in the case of children and adolescents, in an effort to support the development of evidence- based programmes for promoting students’ well- being through individual and ecological change.
This chapter reports data collected from students and adolescents through the use of ecomaps, in- dividual stories, and focus group interviews. Be- fore outlining the main findings, we offer below a brief summary of existing literature on the Ro- manian setting and a review of the (few) sources that consider wellbeing in this context.
Growing Up in Romania
In order to “locate” our findings about children and adolescents’ psychological wellbeing, we need to reflect on what is characteristic for the Romanian context, particularly in what children, families, and education are concerned. However, to understand this context, we must start from some basic notions about the historical and social coordinates of the country. Romania is a country situated in southeastern Europe, with a popula- tion of about 21 million, slightly more than half living in urban settings (Robila, 2004). The rela- tively high percentage of people living in rural areas points to one defining characteristic of the Romanian culture, its proximity to nature, con- nection to the land, and values related to family and community life. Another important sociocul- tural feature relates to the country’s Latin origins, a unique element among the predominantly Slav- ic cultures of Eastern Europe. Indeed, Romanians seem to have “preserved an awareness of their Latin origins throughout the centuries, . . . . serv- ing both as a means of defence and self-preser- vation” (Treptow, 1997, p. 74). These origins are reflected in the use of a romance language and a
self-representation that brings this ethnic group closer to Italian, French, and Spanish communi- ties and their association with warm, passionate, and extravert personalities (Oakland, Iliescu, Dincă, & Dempsey, 2009; Triandis, 1995).
However, unlike the former, Romania has been, due to its geographical location, subjected to very different historical influences, starting from its initial belonging to the Byzantine world (Treptow, 1997). As a consequence, the religion of the country is Christian orthodox, and this adds further complexity to our cultural portrait.
Orthodoxy is characterised by the importance of religious rituals and central role of the church in the life of the community. Nonetheless, this in- fluence has been contested in Romania during decades of communism following World War II.
The communist regime, in addition to affecting the state’s economic infrastructure (Robila, 2004;
Volgyes, 1995; Zamfir, Postill, & Stan, 2001), brought a new, collectivist mentality, based on in- terpersonal distrust and dependency on the state.
The slow transition to democracy and a market economy disappointed many Romanians, and it still affects the population’s sense of self-efficacy more than two decades after the fall of commu- nism (and despite Romania’s accession to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] and the European Union). Economic hardships, expe- rienced recently due to the 2008 global financial crisis, continue to impact the lives of many Ro- manians and leave their mark on families, school, and society.
Although there is no real consensus on wheth- er Romania as a culture is collectivistic or in- dividualistic, there is little doubt that its people there is little doubt of the importance of unity of family, friends and group to the identity of eth- nic Romanians (Trimbitas, Lin, & Clark, 2007).
The Latin and Orthodox coordinates of this na- tional group, as well as the historical legacy of imposed collectivism, created a cultural context in which sociality as a value and family life as a context of development gain prominence. In ad- dition, Romanians have inherited a society based on hierarchies and bureaucracy, something that suggests relatively high levels of power distance.
Riel (1997) talks in this regard about ethnic
153 10 Mapping Psychological Well-Being: The Case of Children and Adolescents in Romania
Romanians’ display of more indirect communi- cation, an approach adopted in order to avoid of- fending others. This feature is also reflected in the education of children, who are taught early on the rules of being polite with others, both fam- ily members and strangers. In Romania, “one of the most important missions for parents is transmitting and teaching their children attitudes and values” (Robila, 2004, p. 149). To achieve this, parents place heavy emphasis on children’s education and providing them with the best conditions to study, including “paying for pri- vate language, music, dance and sport classes”
(Stănciulescu, 2010, p. 325).
In summary, in Romania, the child is consid- ered a central value of the family (Denham, Caal, Basset, Benga, & Geangu, 2004; Robila, 2003;
Robila & Krishnakumar, 2004; Zamfir, 1997) and the “object” of parents’ investment, regard- less of economic difficulties. Within the fam- ily, “the main duty of children is to study, and parents do whatever they can to support them”
(Robila, 2004, p. 149). This general observation has strong implications for the wellbeing of chil- dren. For as long as they perform well in school (achievements usually reflected in good grades and positive teacher reports), parents are happy and supportive. However, poor results in school and disrespect for family members can lead to strained relationships, to scolding or even punish- ing children. This also raises the question of chil- dren’s agency within the family and the school.
In addition, an understanding of “the child as a social actor” (Stănciulescu, 2010, p. 318) has re-emerged relatively recently in the Romanian literature on the topic, a signal that further work is needed to understand and theorise Romanian children’s place within their community and the broader society.
Children’s and Adolescents’ Wellbeing in Romania
A general exploration of Romanian literature on the topic of child and adolescent psychology reveals a growing body of research on topics such as the cognitive development of preschool
children, attachment styles, school readiness, the developmental social psychology of identity, self-awareness and self-understanding in adoles- cence, adolescent personality, self-knowledge and vocational orientation in adolescence, values in adolescence, relationships between parents and adolescents, high-school students’ anxiety and coping strategies in academic assessment, emotional and behavioural difficulties, and drug addiction in adolescence. Despite this increasing variety, researchers have not been concerned, by and large, with the explicit study of children and adolescents’ positive aspects of psychological functioning, namely their psychological and sub- jective wellbeing.
The concept of wellbeing itself, and, in partic- ular, in relation to children and adolescents, has only recently started to preoccupy psychologists in Romania, after being a point of focus in the so- ciological and psychosociological literature (usu- ally associated with quality of life). Lacking a
“local” psychological methodology for the study of this concept, a series of Romanian researchers participated in European or international surveys of children and adolescents’ wellbeing, not all of them using indicators of a psychological nature.
Romania was thus represented in a several large-scale studies such as the opinion survey of children and young people in Europe and Central Asia (United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF], 2001), the Third European Quality of Life Survey (Anderson, Dubois, Leoncikas, & Sándor, 2012) and, most importantly, the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC; Currie et al. 2004, 2008; Currie, Gabhainn, Godeau and the Interna- tional HBSC Network Coordinating Committee, 2009; Currie, Zanottim, & Morgan et al., 2012), one of the first and best known international sur- veys of children/adolescent health and wellbeing.
The 2009/2010 report of the HBSC survey (Cur- rie et al., 2012) offered a review of children’s wellbeing with the aim of understanding why some children feel unhappy with their lives, and what can be done to improve their situation. The Romanian participants in this extensive survey contributed, for instance, to our understanding of internal and external assets for Romanian adoles- cents’ health (Băban & Crăciun, 2010). In sum-
mary, the international surveys cited above (as well as others: Land, Lamb, Meadows, & Taylor, 2007; Menchini, Marnie, & Tiberti, 2009), man- aged to test different indicators of wellbeing spe- cific for children and/or adolescents.
For instance, in an attempt to develop a mul- tidimensional index of wellbeing for children living in Central and Eastern European countries and the Commonwealth of Independent States, Richardson, Hoelscher, and Bradshaw (2008) of- fered a comprehensive image of children’s life situations, taking into consideration children’s own points of view beyond traditional indicators.
Their index includes seven dimensions of well- being: material situation, housing, health, educa- tion, personal and social wellbeing, family forms and care, and risk and safety. Using this index, the authors concluded that Romanian children display a medium level of wellbeing (considering its different dimensions and components). The 2009 report of this study places Romania among countries with a personal wellbeing below aver- age (Bradshaw & Richardson, 2009).
Another study, using the (Screening for and pro- motion of health-related quality of life in children and adolescents) KIDSCREEN-10 Index (an in- strument created for detecting mental health prob- lems and lower levels of wellbeing in 8–18-year- olds) was conducted in 41 countries including Romania (Erhart et al., 2009). Findings showed lower scores of wellbeing for older children and girls, with gender differences increasing with age.
Another research study by Grob, Little, Wanner, and Wearing (1996) focused on the effects of so- ciocultural contexts on psychological wellbeing and perceived control in adolescence in 14 Western and Eastern countries and the USA. Although East- ern adolescents generally obtained lower scores of wellbeing, they also showed more perceived con- trol by comparison to Western adolescents. Over- all, however, Diener and Diener (1995) concluded that, in relation to levels of happiness, the Roma- nian adult population occupies the bottom position among both Western and Eastern countries.
In addition to these international surveys, an- other category of studies is represented by corre- lational research trying to establish relationships between wellbeing (or some of its dimensions such as satisfaction with life or happiness) and
factors considered to be either antecedents or con- sequences of wellbeing (Muntele Hendreş 2004, 2009), for example, physical health (Roşeanu, 2006), socio-demographic variables (Bălţătescu, 2004, 2007a, b, 2009; Vorone, Vorobyov, & Ne- govan, 2012), implication in volunteering ac- tivities (Negovan, 2007), perception of social support (Negovan, 2008), positive development (Negru & Băban, 2009), personal temporal per- spective and motivation (Roşeanu & Drugaş, 2009), self-determined motivation (Dincă, Ne- govan, Gherghinescu, Danciu, & Savu, 2010), parental style (Negru, Damian, & Băban, 2010), perception of family support (Popa, 2012), and proactive coping and place attachment (Bogdan, Rioux, & Negovan, 2012).
Correlational studies are mostly based on self- report questionnaires. Romanian authors adapt- ed, in this regard, widely known scales or theo- retical models used by prominent representatives of positive psychology. For instance, Negovan (2007, 2008, 2010), using samples of late adoles- cents (college students), explored the dimensions and correlates of psychosocial wellbeing, adapt- ing frameworks promoted by Diener (1984), Seligman (2002), Ryff (1989) and Keyes (1998, 2007). These studies revealed positive relation- ships between the dimensions of psychosocial wellbeing (subjective, psychological, and social), dimensions of optimal psychological and social functioning and academic achievement, and vol- unteering activities. Significant differences were observed between first-year and third-year stu- dents, the former showing higher scores on psy- chological wellbeing.
Other studies highlighted positive relations between subjective wellbeing in adolescence and optimism, resources of the self (such as self-es- teem, general self-efficacy, social self-efficacy), and negative relations with interpersonal stress, and loneliness (Stănculescu, 2008a, b, 2009). In addition, Brassai, Piko and Steger (2011), explor- ing Romanian samples, found that high levels of meaning in life are very important during adoles- cence, due to their protective role against poor psychological wellbeing, depressive tendencies, or substance abuse.
In summary, although Romania was repre- sented in some of the major international surveys
155 10 Mapping Psychological Well-Being: The Case of Children and Adolescents in Romania
related to wellbeing in recent years, and the cat- egory of correlational studies—mainly on samples of adolescents—is constantly growing, there is no unified conceptual model of wellbeing construct- ed in the Romanian context. We currently know little about the dimensions or factors of wellbeing, the main actors that shape its level, and the ways in which children and adolescents in Romania ex- perience stress or support and react to them. This is partially because there are almost no qualitative studies investigating these aspects, studies that would bring to the fore the perspectives of chil- dren and adolescents, and offer rich data on per- sonal experiences of stress and support among this population. Most of the current research does not inquire into what children think about their hous- ing, neighbours, access to transport, play space, or recreation (Bradshaw & Richardson, 2009), and, as a consequence, Romanian NGOs started con- ducting their own studies, interviewing children about their subjective experience of growing up in their families and communities (Stănciulescu, 2010). The present study expands these efforts in an effort to address existing gaps in the literature.
Methodology
This study utilised the methodology of the Pro- moting Psychological Wellbeing Globally Proj- ect, as described in Chap. 2 of this book. This section presents information about implementa- tion of the study within the Romanian context, including participants, materials, and procedures, for data collection and analysis.
Participants
The Romanian sample was represented by stu- dents from two public schools (an elementary school and a high-school) in Bucharest, Roma- nia, both with upper middle academic achieve- ments (as defined by student results). Both these schools enjoy a good reputation among parents for facilitating student access to higher educa- tion. The elementary school includes grades 1 –8;
the high school serves 9th–12th-grade students.
The elementary school, with a total number of
750–800 students, is situated in a medium-sized neighbourhood in Bucharest, with a heteroge- neous population in terms of living standards.
These characteristics are similar for the high school, serving a slightly higher number of stu- dents (approximately 1000).
The study included a total of 64 students, 32 of whom were between the ages of 6 and 11 years (16 girls, 16 boys) and the other 32 between the ages of 12 and 17 years (16 girls, 16 boys), se- lected based on convenience stratified sampling.
All were ethnic Romanians and their religion was Christian Orthodox. Most of their parents had completed high school or university educa- tion. Family income was average (compared to national standards) and, for the vast majority of participants, the parents were married (except for five cases of divorce and three single parents).
Materials
The research in Romania followed the general methodology of the project (see Chap. 2), based on the use of ecomaps, interviews for collecting student stories, and focus groups with students, parents, and teachers. Materials for the research included interview questions and demographic forms, focus group discussion questions, and ecomap activities. In addition, standardised in- structions were offered on how to elicit data about stressors and supportive elements during interviews. For the purposes of this chapter, we focus only on students’ ecomaps and their associ- ated stories (recalling a supportive and a stress- ful situation), as well as focus group discussions with students.
Procedure
The translation of all research from English to Romanian followed the back-translation pro- cedure and confirmation of the interpretative validity of the translated version (by a third party). Before completing the translation, each item was checked for content validity and cul- tural relevance by a panel of university students and schoolteachers. All items were considered
relevant. After translation, two English-speak- ing academics verified if the instructions had the same meaning as in English—especially for terms such as psychological wellbeing, stressor, coping mechanism, etc.—and also ensured that culture-specific language was suitably used. The back-translation (from Romanian to English) was performed independently by two bilingual university students. The back-translation did not suggest that rewording was needed for any of the items. Further, a pilot study was conducted to verify that the translated version of the questions was appropriately understood by participants. In order to check the comprehensibility/clarity of the items, two students from each class were in- terviewed after participating in the research.
In parallel, the research team obtained ethi- cal clearance for the study from the University’s Institutional Review Board. Following this, the principals from both schools were contacted and a partnership was created with an NGO (Perspec- tives on Innovation Science Knowledge; PISC) to ensure access and prepare materials necessary for the study. Informed consent for the research was obtained from both students and parents. Be- fore the fieldwork, 12 university students were trained as volunteers for data collection.
Data collection took place during the 2007–
2008 academic year, and the Romanian project team comprised two faculty researchers and ten students from the Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences. Focus group and ecomap activities were recorded in both audio (with the help of tape recorders) and written form (by the interviewers). Interviewers were instructed to re- cord as much as possible during the discussion and use audiotapes as a supplement for checking the accuracy and completeness of their record.
The ecomap activity and focus groups (which lasted approximately one hour) took place at the school. Students were actively engaged in these activities and enthusiastically received the eco- map task. All data were transcribed by university teacher-and-student pairs for written data and by PISC volunteers for audio data. Transcripts were crosschecked and reunited into a single account.
They were then translated into English by profi- cient English speakers.
Data Analysis
A total of 64 ecomaps and associated stories about a supportive and stressful situation were analysed for the frequency of terms referring to the fol- lowing categories: sources of stress (person/role, situation, or event), sources of support (person/
role, situation, or event), reactions to stress and support (behavioural, cognitive, or emotional), and students’ conception of happiness and sad- ness. The focus group discussions were analysed for the above categories and words that reflect valued competencies, specific expectations, and norms (for what it means to be a good student, friend, citizen, teacher, and parent).
Ecomaps, stories, and focus group discussions were subjected to content analysis. The main coding categories (e.g. stressful, supportive, and ambiguous relationships, reactions to stress and reactions to support, etc.) were suggested by the international team of the project. However, these categories were only loosely defined, and this al- lowed some flexibility in interpreting and apply- ing the codes in a culture-sensitive manner, tak- ing into account children’s own understandings of their life experience. For some of the constructs studied here (conceptions of happiness/sadness, valued competencies) a thematic summary was preferred for being closer to the actual answers.
Quality criteria for qualitative research (see Gas- kell & Bauer, 2000) were observed, especially reflexivity and triangulation (codes and their ap- plication were discussed by three members of the Romanian team and also checked by the inter- national team of the project), transparency and procedural clarity (in relation to participants and also in reporting the findings), and thick descrip- tion (whenever possible in the report children’s answers are offered verbatim). Since parts of this content analysis resulted in numerical values, chi square tests and contingency tables were used to determine any significant relations between vari- ables. The effect size indicator for contingency tables was Cramer’s V. The size of Cramer’s V was interpreted similarly to the size of a correla- tion coefficient. Similar mixtures of quantitative and qualitative analyses based on drawings and interviews with Romanian children were suc- cessfully used in the past (Glăveanu, 2013).