29 an individual to be more prone to develop problems in amidst of adversity while protective factors are the characteristics that reduce the negative effect of an adversity (Masten, & Reed, 2002;
Theron, & Carrigan, 2011).
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
30 factors such as personality are said to be influenced by the environment which results in the likely contribution to meaningful coping behaviours that seek to optimise developmental advantages.
Masten (2014) posits that during the 21st century, where it is possible to share in stories through various platforms such as the social media, newspaper articles and television, people remain captive with stories young people tell. These stories entail how they have faced grave danger or grew up in poverty but still turned out well. The reason behind the fascination on the stories is that they are the kinds of stories that capture a fundamental truth about human resilience (Masten, 2014). Resilience is stated to have emerged from the same adaptive systems for human development. Adaptive systems are those such as close relationships with competent and caring adults as well as effective schools and communities with positive interactions that facilita te self- nurturing (Masten, 2014). Thus, this highlights a condition in which the life story work has to happen in a safe, trusting, nurturing environment.
The current study explored adversity and resilience of female South African students through the analysis of their narrative life stories. Furthermore, it assessed how education has impacted their resilience. This theory allows for a better understanding of the underpinnings that are constitutive of ones’ resilience. The theory helps to consider the interrelated discourses such as cultural and societal norms. The ecological framework is appropriate for focusing on the individual within the different ecosystems and to understand how one interacts with the other systems. Theron (2015) underlines the efficiency of having youth-generated accounts of attributes of supportive youth living in majority world context to beat the odds.
2.8.1 Resilience within the systems
Masten (2016, p.298) defines resilience in systems perspective as “the capacity for successful adaption to disturbances that threaten system function, viability and development”. Moreover, the broad system definition is accommodative and allows for generalisability across different system levels, and this facilitates assimilative conversations and science disciplines concerning human adaption (Masten, 2016). The author revealed that the fatal threats to human development are entrenched within multiple systems such as poverty, family conflicts and disease epidemics (Masten, 2016). This calls for an increase in resilience capacity building into diverse and multi- level systems ranging from families, communities or computers and ecologies that respond to the systems.
31 Literature relevant to the current study examined the risk and protective factors as two imperative concepts that are intrinsic to understanding resilience (Rutter, 1990). The study also focused much on how both these concepts may significantly contribute to the understanding of how students continue to succeed in school despite the presence of adversity (Green & Conrad, 2002).
2.8.2 Defining risk factors
Toland and Carrigan (2011) stated that resilience can be defined only when an individual has experienced some form of risk factor or adversity. Masten and Reed (2002) asserts that it becomes rather difficult if there is no significant risk which then leads to children being labelled as competent, well-adjusted and normal but cannot be resilient. According to Green and Conrad (2002), conditions that increase the prospect of a likelihood of problems are described as risk factors.
According to Williams (2011), risk factors constitute individual characteristics or contextual conditions of a sub-population, commonly related to children and youth. These factors are suggested to induce the likelihood of undesirable outcomes (Masten, 1997). Fraser (2004) reiterates the importance of acknowledging that risk factors do not guarantee that children will have academic and behavioural problems, rather they increase the probability that problems of such nature may occur. Hence, genetic, biological, behavioural, socio-cultural and socio- demographic conditions all constitute to the many facets that attribute to the probability of a poor developmental outcome for children (Fraser, 2004).
2.8.3 Adversity
A general overview of an adversity stipulates low achievement levels among children and youth originating and/or born in socio-economically impoverished backgrounds. However, a striking variation persists in outcomes of individuals exposed to high adversity (Ellis et al., 2017).
Adversities facing young people can range from long term chronic stressors to short-term acute stressors or even traumatic stressful events. Fergus and Zimmerman (2005) stipulate that some risk exposures may have an immediate, acute effect on the youth. The authors also state that another issue persisting with adversities is how the same adverse event or condition may differ across different youth and it is pivotal to refrain from assuming that an event is normatively experienced negatively by all youth (Fergus & Zimmerman, 2005). Some of the individuals residing in high- risk backgrounds are still able to beat the odds. Literature has revealed that multiple adverse
32 conditions impact negatively on the resilience capacity and healthy development of children and youth (Williams, 2011). Fergus and Zimmerman (2005) argue that resilience literature has limited the focus to typically single risk and protective factors whereas in reality, most young people are confronted by multiple risk factors which in turn possess multiple assets and have access to multiple resources.