The Role of School in Adolescents Identity Development A Literature Review Educational Psychology Review Springer Nature Link

The purpose of the present study was to extend our prior work for the TIES Center (see Conradi et al.2022) by mapping the state of the research literature related to the involvement of students with ESN in SWPBIS that has been published since the initial 2006 call to action in RPSD. SWPBIS has consistently been shown to reduce schools’ use of punitive and exclusionary discipline practices such as detention, suspension, seclusion, and restraint (Grasley-Boy et al.2019; Lee and Gage 2020). This feature of SWPBIS has particularly important implications for students with ESN. Third, a critical feature of SWPBIS is a focus on providing a school-wide discipline system that includes a continuum of responses to challenging behavior as an alternative to traditional punishment-based and exclusionary consequences. This is accomplished in part by establishing clearly defined expectations, creating predictable school-wide and classroom routines, increasing prompts for positive behavior, and providing more positive feedback than corrective feedback (Simonsen et al.2020).

• They noted that this process should focus on equitable practices and problem solving that relies on data reflecting the experiences of students with ESN.
• The originality of this study is to examine the links among four sources of social support (father, mother, teachers, and peers), sense of school belonging, and multidimensional engagement among middle-school students from two contrasted types of school.
• The authors engage with accounts from young people to demonstrate a common sense of disillusionment with the promise of higher education for more secure employment, while utilising strategies to navigate uncertainty towards their desired futures.
• Positive outcomes of service learning include fostering students’ intellectual development, personal development, civic development, and other social attitudes (Lin & Shek, 2021).

Unlearn the “boxes” of traditional education: embracing localities and place-based learning

In some cases, the inclusion of GSA spaces within schools may mean that, generally, the larger school spaces are unsafe for LGBTQ youth, influencing the concrete actions that educational stakeholders can take to provide support and opportunities for their students. However, studies have shown that family acceptance was a type of social support that fostered LGBTQ youths’ critical thinking and advocacy for safe spaces in schools to support marginalized students 40, 124. In addition, through partnerships with community organizations, schools offer health, mental health, and social services to help students overcome barriers to learning.

Strategies and activities

Hesitations to support LGBTQ youth include the ban of GSA creation, sending a message regarding LGBTQ invisibility in school environments . Supportive government and school board policies allowed for organizations (i.e., GSAs) to be accepted, subsequently fostering community connection and support for LGBTQ youth 69, 106. Policies from the broader context can provide the support needed for schools to have inclusive school policies.

Teaching and non-teaching school staff were ineffective in supporting LGBTQ students

Teachers can also focus on regular praise and encouragement to students who are in class and emphasize that their attendance is valued. These refer to engaging in the implemented practices in an ongoing fashion and providing real-time data about student outcomes using various channels of communication. https://www.thenationalcouncil.org/event/southeast-ccbhc-learning-community/ A Tier 1 school-based team would then efficiently determine, via the academic partnership algorithms described earlier, if school absences and any related impairment are temporary and nonproblematic or emerging and thus in need of early intervention. With respect to engaging consumers, key SISTER strategies include intervening and communicating with students, families, and other staff to enhance uptake and fidelity and involving students, family members, and other staff (Lyon et al., 2019). Each of these represent typical extant meeting times for school-based teams. The timeframe of the implementation plan proposed here involves the beginning to the end of the academic year (e.g., September to May), whereas milestones involve biweekly attendance data review, main grading periods, and end of semester points.

Research indicates that children in foster care are more likely than their non-foster care peers to be absent from school, have special education needs, and to experience traumatic life events. It does not seem that these programs prevented bullying, suicidal behaviors or the outcomes they targeted but they appear to make students feel more connected to one another and increase self-esteem or the peer leaders. But we are reluctant to highlight training which does not result in measured positive mental health impacts on recipients. The Sources of Strength program is very good but I believe 10% off the staff are trained in addition to the students and there are adults that supervise the student leaders and support them.

Once we reached consensus on how to most accurately summarize the extracted data, the team reviewed all extracted data to identify patterns across studies to develop a framework for reporting and presenting our results. Prior to engaging in the scoping review process, we determined that our overarching purpose was to examine research addressing the involvement of students with ESN in SWPBIS. We conducted a scoping review of research focused on SWPBIS and students with ESN following the methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) and advanced recommendations set forth by Levac and colleagues (2010). This can result in students with ESN failing to receive appropriate access to less intensive supports provided at Tiers 1 and 2. Although SWPBIS clearly has potential benefits for students with ESN, researchers and scholars have expressed concerns related to the extent to which this student population has access to the full range of SWPBIS supports. Although students with disabilities make up only about 13% of total school enrollment in the United States, they experience more than half of all suspensions, restraints, and seclusions (Office of Civil Rights 2020).

Increased screening, including evaluating MH problemsamong youth with school attendance problems, coupled with efforts to increasereadiness of school staff to respond to MH needs, build relationships, andreduce stigma may support early detection and treatment of underserved youthwith MH problems. In particular,poor relationships with school-based adults and low perceived efficacy ofprofessional treatment may prevent youth from disclosing symptoms or engagingwith available services. Although schools are uniquely positionedto address these needs, modifications to current systems and practices areneeded to adequately identify and engage youth in need of care. However, early detection is of no value if theinfrastructure is not in place to appropriately refer and/or treat all youth whoare identified.40 Even so, inhigh-need, under-resourced schools, providing targeted screening andcomprehensive MH evaluations may be a potentially cost-beneficial interventionfor youth with school attendance problems.