that people make to respond to stressors. Maladaptive coping strategies include denying or concealing problems (Crean, 2004; Garber & Little, 1999;
Marchand & Skinner, 2007) and using drugs or alcohol (de Anda et al., 2000).
Most of these studies (Crean, 2004; de Anda et al., 2000; Garber & Little, 1999) used Likert-type scales where students could state how often they act in various ways, such as “I make sure no one finds out” or “I plan ways to get back at them.” Swanson and colleagues (2003) found that African American males with exaggerated stereotypical ideas about males and race developed reactive coping attitudes and had poorer school performance. Maladaptive coping strategies resemble some of the same patterns as aggressive or antisocial behavior examined elsewhere in this book.
Student Interviews
A few studies used interviews to collect information about student coping. In these studies, authors collected stories about each respondent’s experiences in high school. Newman and colleagues (2000) asked open-ended questions about the strategies students used to respond to stress and categorized responses as individual (hard work), academic (studying), and social (hanging out with the right crowd). Authors did not explain the difference between hard work and studying or the process for classifying these responses into these broad categories.
Measurement of resilience—risk Factors, Successful
is a risk factor, whereas Von Secker (2004) states that being female is a risk factor. Another study categorized high-risk students as those with a learning disability (Sorensen et al., 2003). Studies of resilience identified at-risk students by establishing thresholds for at-risk categories and using data to assign students meeting those thresholds to the study sample (Kwok et al., 2007).
Family traits, such as poverty (Gayles, 2005; Reis et al., 2005) or having a mother with a serious psychological disorder (Garber & Little, 1999), also constitute risk factors. The school context, such as high poverty or academically struggling schools, contributes to risks (Shin et al., 2007).
This review of noncognitive skills focuses on their influence on school success. Although resilient outcomes may encompass a range of outcomes, the studies of resilience discussed here define success in terms of academic
Table 8-3. Definitions of resilience
risk Factors Successful Outcome Study
• Poverty
• Being an African American male
Academic achievement (GPA in top 10 percent of their graduating class)
Gayles, 2005
• Poverty (free/
reduced-price lunch)
• English Language Learners
Mathematics achievement (score on California’s SAT9 exam)
Kanevsky et al., 2008
• Student in inner- city school, first- generation college attendee
Academic success (GPA) Kenny et al.,
2002
• Below median score on state 1st-grade literacy assessment
Woodcock-Johnson III Broad Reading and Broad Math tests of achievement
Kwok et al., 2007
• Economic disadvantage
Academic achievement (above 90th percentile on academic achievement tests)
Reis et al., 2005
• Urban, ethnic minority
School engagement (General Attitude Toward School subscale of the School Sentiment Index)
Shin et al., 2007
• Designation as learning disabled
Academic achievement (Wechsler Individual Achievement Test)
Sorenson et al., 2003
• Low socioeconomic status, ethnic minority, female
Science achievement on the National Assessment of Educational Progress exam
Von Secker, 2004
achievement, such as grades or scores on standardized exams. Most of these measures of risk factors and successful outcomes are available in school administrative records. These studies of resilience try to identify the mechanisms through which these at-risk students succeeded academically and explored various protective factors. Having identified at-risk students, the authors then employed a retrospective approach and asked questions about students’ experiences to determine how the successful at-risk students differ from those who continued to struggle in school.
Protective factors include attitudes toward self and school, relationships with adults, and having a resilient personality. Kwok et al. (2007) note that resilient personality traits include adaptability, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Table 8-4 presents the measures of protective factors that other researchers could replicate. All but two of the studies of resilience used surveys. One of the other studies used student interviews, and the second one was a case study. The interviews highlight the process of resilience and focused on attitudes about oneself at school that may contribute to resilience, such as belief in oneself (Reis et al., 2005). The case study examined factors such as the student’s construction of the meaning of academic achievement (Gayles, 2005).
Table 8-4. Replicable measures of protective factors associated with resilience Measure Name
Data Source
Subscales or
Components Intended population example articlesa psychometric properties
Psychosocial
characteristics (Personal Development Survey)
Student survey
Character, academic self-concept, academic self-efficacy, attitude toward school
Elementary school students
Kanevsky et al. (2008); instrument developed by authors
8 items (character); 7 items (academic self-concept)
9 items (academic self-efficacy); 9 items (attitude toward school) Internal consistency reliability (α): Ranged from .78 to .82.
(Source: Kanevsky et al., 2008) Parental Attachment
Questionnaire
Student survey
Affective quality of attachment scale, parental fostering of autonomy scale
Adolescents Kenny et al. (2002);
instrument from Kenny (1987)
26 items (affective quality of attachment) 4 items (parental fostering of autonomy)
Internal consistency reliability (α): .87 (both father scales), .91 (maternal affective quality scale), .94 (maternal fostering autonomy) (Source: Kenny, 1987)
California Child Q-Set Teacher survey
Ego-resiliency Personality inventory for children designed for administration by nonprofessionals
Kwok et al. (2007); instrument from Caspi et al. (1992)
7 items
Internal consistency reliability (α): .85 (Source: Kwok et al., 2007)
General Attitude Toward School subscale of the School Sentiment Index
Student survey
NA Kindergarten through
grade 12
Shin et al. (2007); instrument from Frith
& Narikawa (1970)
11 items
Internal consistency reliability (α): .72 (Source: Shin et al., 2007)
Attitudes about science Student survey
NA Grades 4, 8, and 12 Von Secker (2004);
instrument developed by author
8 items
(Source: Von Secker, 2004)
a No measure was included in more than one study.
The remaining studies of resilience employed surveys. Table 8-4 presents the ways each of these studies measured protective factors. Some surveys addressed attitudes toward school. One of these studies analyzed items assessing students’ feelings about school subjects and attending school (Kanevsky et al., 2008). Shin and colleagues (2007) used the General Attitude Toward School subscale of the School Sentiment Index, which assessed student attitudes toward teaching, learning, school climate, and peers. A study examining science performance focused on items that measure students’
attitudes about science and their beliefs about their ability to do well in science (Von Secker, 2004). These attitudes toward school are conceptually similar to the noncognitive skills of academic self-concept and sense of control described in detail elsewhere in this report.
Another study focused on the protective nature of relationships with adults.
Kenny and colleagues (2002) distinguished two aspects of the strength of relationships with each parent using the Affective Quality of Attachment scale, which included items such as “My father is someone I can count on to listen to me when I’m upset,” and the Parental Fostering of Autonomy scale, which included items such as “My mother respects my privacy.”
Table 8-4. Replicable measures of protective factors associated with resilience Measure Name
Data Source
Subscales or
Components Intended population example articlesa psychometric properties
Psychosocial
characteristics (Personal Development Survey)
Student survey
Character, academic self-concept, academic self-efficacy, attitude toward school
Elementary school students
Kanevsky et al.
(2008); instrument developed by authors
8 items (character); 7 items (academic self-concept)
9 items (academic self-efficacy); 9 items (attitude toward school) Internal consistency reliability (α): Ranged from .78 to .82.
(Source: Kanevsky et al., 2008) Parental Attachment
Questionnaire
Student survey
Affective quality of attachment scale, parental fostering of autonomy scale
Adolescents Kenny et al. (2002);
instrument from Kenny (1987)
26 items (affective quality of attachment) 4 items (parental fostering of autonomy)
Internal consistency reliability (α): .87 (both father scales), .91 (maternal affective quality scale), .94 (maternal fostering autonomy) (Source: Kenny, 1987)
California Child Q-Set Teacher survey
Ego-resiliency Personality inventory for children designed for administration by nonprofessionals
Kwok et al. (2007);
instrument from Caspi et al. (1992)
7 items
Internal consistency reliability (α): .85 (Source: Kwok et al., 2007)
General Attitude Toward School subscale of the School Sentiment Index
Student survey
NA Kindergarten through
grade 12
Shin et al. (2007);
instrument from Frith
& Narikawa (1970)
11 items
Internal consistency reliability (α): .72 (Source: Shin et al., 2007)
Attitudes about science Student survey
NA Grades 4, 8, and 12 Von Secker (2004);
instrument developed by author
8 items
(Source: Von Secker, 2004)
a No measure was included in more than one study.
One’s temperament can also protect from risks. Teachers assessed students’
ego-resilience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness using the California Child Q-SET. Items in the ego-resiliency scale include four positively worded items, such as “curious” and “persistent,” and three negatively worded ones, such as “rapid mood shifts.” The agreeableness scale had nine items, including “is helpful and unselfish”; the conscientiousness scale had eight items, including
“does a thorough job” (Kwok et al., 2007).