an exploration of meaningful participation and caring relationships as contexts for school...

43

An Exploration of Meaningful Participation and CaringRelationships as Contexts for School Engagement

Greg JenningsCalifornia State University, Hayward

The purpose of this article is two-fold; (1) to inform school psychologists of connections betweenmodels of school engagement, psychological needs, and strength-based assets and (2) to sharedata collected with the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) to understand the relationshipsbetween academic performance and two environmental protective factors (caring relations andmeaningful participation in school). Hypotheses and findings are presented to generate futureresearch questions for study of strength-based measures and school engagement. This is one ofthe first studies examining the CHKS and academic outcomes. Participants were an ethnicallyand culturally diverse group of 229 7th-grade students. Results indicate that students with moder-ate Meaningful Participation in Schools (MPS) had higher Grade Point Averages (GPAs) thanstudents with low MPS. Further, MPS was significantly related to caring peer and adult relation-ships in schools. Thus, results emphasize the importance of often-overlooked social-emotionalcontexts of school engagement. The article also discusses limitations of the study and proposeshome and school support as an important focus for future research in school engagement.

Keywords: School engagement, Resiliency, Meaningful participation, Caring relationships,Cultural diversity

The California School Psychologist, Vol. 8, pp. 43-52, 2003Copyright 2003 California Association of School Psychologists

“We observe that, despite the overwhelming pressures in the environment, 75-80 percent of thechildren can use school activities as a support for healthy adjustment and achievement when schoolsare sensitive to them and their burdens” (Garbarino, Dubrow, Kostelny, & Pardo, 1992, p.121).

Most models of academic performance and school engagement have neglected the influence ofsocial and emotional variables related to academic competence (Christenson & Anderson, 2002). How-ever, recent national fervor over academic testing performance has rejuvenated interest in theory andinvestigation of student motivation and engagement in learning activities. School psychologists canlearn from a number of models in the literature including those of psychological need (Ryan, 1995),participation and identification (Finn, 1997), and internal/external assets (Benard, 2002; Scales &Leffert, 1999). The primary purpose of this article is to present connections between these models andthe school environment to promote student learning.

Learning requires a context. Lerner (1991) described development and change as the process ofindividual and environmental characteristics interacting, “Because change in the organism alwaysoccurs in dynamic connection with changes in the context (and vice versa), then change in organism-context relations are the basic change process in development” (p. 27). Individual characteristics, suchas age and ethnicity, as well as school contexts (e.g., school climate, peer group characteristics, familysupport, and participation in extracurricular activities) can explain significant variance in risk behaviorsuch as school misconduct, antisocial behavior, alcohol use, hard and soft drug use, and sexual activity

Please send correspondence regarding this manuscript to Greg Jennings, California State University, Hayward;College of Education; Educational Psychology; 25800 Carlos Bee Blvd.; Hayward, CA; 94542-3076 or [email protected]. The author wishes to thank the following graduate research assistants for their sup-port in this project and their shared learning: Amy Cronin, Karrah Domoto, Sue Hyun, and Lauren La Plante.

The California School Psychologist, 2003, Vol. 844

(Perkins, Lerner, & Keith, 1996). The following sections highlight caring relationships and meaning-ful participation in school as contexts that promote academic development.

A Model of Psychological Need

Students are motivated to learn and develop because of a drive to satisfy three core needs: compe-tence, autonomy, and relatedness (Ryan,1995). A central question for educators is, “How are theseneeds targeted through relationships and participation?”

First, a sense of academic competence is fostered in relationships with adults as two importantsources of academic resiliency are provided: opportunities to develop social emotional skills (e.g.,emotional regulation, Gumora & Arsenio, 2002); and positive attitudes and beliefs (Baker, 1999).Further, DiPerna & Elliot (2002) present a model of academic competence that emphasizes learningenablers, such as motivation, interpersonal skills, and engagement as well as academic skills.

Second, a sense of autonomy emerges as students have the opportunity to commit to productivepursuits and to value the meaning of their time (Jordan & Nettles, 2000). Through adult support ofschool activities, students develop a sense of personal investment, “the process whereby people takecertain resources - their time, talent, and energy - and distribute them as they choose” (Maehr &Braskamp, 1986, as cited in Jordan & Nettles, 2000, p. 219).

Third, a sense of relatedness, or secure connection with others, is a powerful academic motivatorwhen social goals are aligned with the pursuit of social goals (Wentzel & Watkins, 2002). Students aremore likely to be engaged in learning when schools help to connect achievement and affiliation needs(Wentzel, 1996). Further, learning experiences become more authentic and motivating when outsidelife experiences (e.g., peer and community relationships) are connected to learning experiences withinschool (Ares & Gorrell, 2002).

Participation-Identification Model of School Engagement

The Participation-Identification Model (Finn, 1989) provides one model for positive social andemotional experiences that emphasizes relationships and school engagement. In this model, students’academic performance, successful completion of K-12 schooling, and reduction of negative outcomes(e.g., drug use, teen pregnancy, and antisocial behavior) are mediated by “active participation in schooland classroom activities and a concomitant feeling of identification with school” (Finn, 1989, p.123).Students’ related feelings and experiences include attachment, commitment, and a sense of belonging.There is a commitment to caring peers and adults as well as to the place of learning, the school.

Participation includes the range of behaviors most associated with school engagement (e.g., read-ing, writing, and attending during learning experiences). Additionally, participation in sports, socialactivities, and school-sponsored events represent necessary but insufficient incentives and opportuni-ties for students to maintain attendance and academic effort. Participation must also entail relevantlearning content and opportunities. For example, diverse students who are at risk of disengagementbecause of stressors outside of school are much more engaged in learning when instruction is challeng-ing, relevant, and academically demanding (Yair, 2000). Although participation, as a behavior, is re-lated to academic success, it is difficult to understand this relationship without identifying psychologi-cal factors that enhance motivation and learning.

According to Finn (1997), identification is an internal state with two central components: internal-ized belongingness to the school environment (e.g., affiliation, attachment, and bond) and commit-ment (e.g., acceptance of academic values and value of school as an important place). This delineationof internal experiences and external context and action is important in formulating processes in which

45

the school environment supports students’ experiences of school engagement. The following sectionapplies internal and external strength, assets, to student development and learning.

Internal and External Assets

Over a decade ago the Search Institute conceptualized developmental assets as the opportunities,positive relationships, self-perceptions, values, and competencies that youth need to grow and succeed(Scales & Leffert, 1999). A model of assets emerged from longitudinal resiliency research of indi-vidual (internal) strengths and characteristics as well as social supportive (external) resources.

Youth need caring and responsive adults in schools to structure academic and social environmentsin order to have meaningful experiences in schools. Those positive relationships with adults and peers(external assets) provide opportunities to gradually build skills, competencies, and positive self-per-ceptions (Benson, Leffert, Scales, & Blyth, 1998). Thus, the school environment has a profound im-pact on the students’ development.

Previously, Leffert, Benson, Scales, Sharma, Drake, and Blyth (1998) identified school engage-ment as an internal asset - a commitment to learning demonstrated through active engagement inlearning. This asset was a negative predictor of school problems including skipping school and gradepoint averages below a “C.” Further, it has been negatively associated with antisocial behaviors suchas drug dealing.

In order to build upon resiliency models in schools, Constantine, Benard, & Diaz (1999) devel-oped the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS). The CHKS is a theoretical and practical strength-based assessment of youth development in schools (Rhee, Furlong, Turner, & Harari, 2001). The Re-siliency Module of the survey was based on the theoretical resilience framework that youth can attainacademic success and healthy development in spite of stress and risk when home, school, and commu-nity environments meet their psychological needs (Benard, 2002). The following section presents arationale for integrating and studying psychological need, engagement, identification and participa-tion, in the context of meaningful participation and caring relationships in schools.

Investigating Meaningful Participation and Caring Relationships

School engagement requires a sense of autonomy, dignity, control and ownership, and belonging,the goals of a social, motivating school community (Osterman, 2000). Jordan & Nettles (2000) utilizedNational Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88; National Center for Educational Statistics,1988) data to measure participation as the frequency and the depth of involvement in clubs and orga-nizations in schools (e.g., leadership roles). Depth of involvement was moderately correlated with10th-grade reading test performance.

The CHKS external asset of Meaningful Participation is a robust indicator of opportunities todevelop these skills. “Meaningful participation is defined as the involvement of the student in relevant,engaging, and interesting activities with the opportunities for responsibility and contribution. Provid-ing young people with opportunities for meaningful participation is a natural outcome of environmentsthat convey high expectations” (Benard, 2002, p.9).

Perez (2000) describes an ethic of care as a core concern for the wellness of youth as persons aswell as learners. This ethic is particularly important for ethnically and culturally diverse youth who areat considerable risk for becoming “invisible” and alienated in schools. Caring teachers, according toPerez, can encourage identification with school as well as engagement in learning. The emergingquestion for educators therefore becomes, “What do teachers do to promote this ethic of caring?” Foursignature elements of caring include: (1) noticing students and checking into their well-being; (2)

Participation and Relationships as Contexts of School Engagement


making discussions relevant to students’ experiences; (3) listening without judgment; and (4) invitingstudents to talk outside of class time (Schlosser, 1992 as cited in Perez, 2000).

Caring teacher and peer relationships are important factors in understanding student experiencesof motivation to learn and achievement. Goodenow (1993) operationalized “Psychological Member-ship” as a sense of caring, support, acceptance, and respect in a study of achievement and motivationamong 610 suburban middle school students. Results suggested that Psychological Membership wasstrongly related to achievement, as measured by grades. Given the construct’s contribution to variancein motivation, the author proposes that Psychological Membership influences achievement indirectlythrough motivation. Results support the position that “A caring relationship with a teacher is perhapsthe most powerful motivator for academic success” (Benard, 2002, p. 12).

Peer relationships are also significant influences on identification with school as well as withacademic achievement. Despite some early, conflicting results of studies suggesting negative relationsbetween pursuit of social goals and academic achievement, Wentzel (1996) reports consistently posi-tive relations between pro-social pursuit of peer friendships and students’ academic motivation andperformance. In addition, the impact of caring relationships on academic performance continues be-yond K-12 education and has been associated with academic success and persistence through college(Jones, 1992).

Considering the extant literature, the current study investigated six hypotheses:1. Students who report high levels Meaningful Participation in School (MPS) have

higher academic performance (grade point averages, GPA) than students whoreport low levels of meaningful participation.

2. Students who report moderate levels of Meaningful Participation in School (MPS)have higher academic performance (grade point averages, GPA) than studentswho report low levels of meaningful participation.

3. MPS will be positively correlated with Caring Peer Relationships in school.4. MPS will be positively correlated with Caring Adult Relationships in school.5. Caring Peer Relationships in schools will be positively correlated with GPA.6. Caring Adult Relationships in schools will be positively correlated with GPA.

METHOD

Participants

This exploratory study included 229 7th-grade middle students from four middle schools in adiverse, urban Northern Californian school district. These students represented substantial AfricanAmerican, Filipino American, Latino American, and European American communities. The diversityof this group is evidenced by the fact that 73 of the participant selected more than one ethnicity whenasked to identify their ethnic background. See Table 1 for frequencies of participants’ ethnic self-identification responses. Each participant completed the California Healthy Kids Survey in the springof 2000.

Instrumentation

California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS; WestED, 2000). The CHKS (2000 version ) consisted ofthree sections: Core Module - health (e.g., diet and exercise), general drug and alcohol use, generalrisk/behavior (e.g., theft, violence, vandalism, destruction of property, and gang membership), andsafety; Tobacco Supplement (e.g., attitudes and use of cigarettes), and Resiliency Module. The Resil-iency module was divided into three external assets: Caring Relationships, High Expectations, and

47

Meaningful Participation. There were six areas of internal assets: Cooperation and Communication,Self-efficacy, Empathy, Problem Solving, Self-Awareness, and Goals and Aspirations.

The CHKS asset clusters were developed to improve upon Benson, Leffert, Scales, and Blyth’s(1998) asset assessment constructs by increasing the number of response items and insuring consis-tently high alphas. Alphas were reported for Meaningful Participation in School (MPS), .67, CaringPeer Relationships in Schools, .80, and Caring Adult Relationships in School, .75 (Constantine et al.,1999). The following Resiliency Module items were utilized in the current study (responses to ques-tions were 1: Not at all true; 2: A little true; 3: Pretty true; and 4: Very much true):

Meaningful Participation in School(1) I do meaningful activities at school(2) At school, I help decide things like class activities or rules(3) I do things at my school that make a difference.

Caring Relationships in SchoolAdults - At my school, there is a teacher or some other adult who…

(1) cares about me;(2) notices when I’m not there;(3) listens to me when I have something to say.

Peers - I have a friend about my own age who…(1) really cares about me;(2) talks with me about my problems;(3) helps me when I’m having a hard time.

Procedure

Teachers sent informed consent permission letters to students to participate in the study. In addi-tion to a school district letter that explained district-wide administration of the CHKS, the researchersent a separate letter requesting permission for students to be a part of a resiliency research study.

The investigator collected archival school district data for the spring 2000 and Fall 2000 quarters’grade point averages (GPA). (Additional data, for a later longitudinal study, included backgroundinformation such as participation in free/reduced lunch program and special educational participationas well as test results from the Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition; Harcourt Brace, 1996).


Table 1Number of Participants’ Ethnic Group Self-Identification Responses

Asian American 63African American 61Latino/ Hispanic 58White/ Caucasian 57Indian or Alaskan 14Hawaiian 12Other 37

Note. Subjects were able to identify more than one ethnic group Membership; thus, there are moreself-identification responses (n=302) than there are participants (n=229).


Data Analyses

In preparation for data analysis, averages for Meaningful Participation in School (MPS) and Car-ing Peer and Caring Adult Relationship responses were calculated. Students’ average MPS responseswere transformed into high, medium, and low levels. Response averages below 2 were low level;response averages greater than or equal to 2 and less than 3 were moderate level; and response aver-ages greater than 3 were high level. Grade point averages were calculated as the average of spring2000 and fall 2000 grades. It should be noted that complete GPA and MPA data was available for 198students.

Three analyses were conducted in this exploration of Meaningful Participation and Caring Rela-tionships: two-tailed t-tests for levels of MPS and GPA, Pearson correlations between MPS and Car-ing Peer and Adult Relationships, and correlations between GPA and Caring Peer and Adult Relation-ships. All hypotheses were tested in the null and rejected at the .05 level of significance.

RESULTS

Hypothesis 1: Students with high levels of MPS did not have significantly higher GPA (M = 2.50,SD = .96) than students with low MPS (M = 2.34, SD= .98), t(66) = .78, p=.43. Therefore, the nullhypothesis was not rejected.

Hypothesis 2: However, students with moderate levels of MPS had significantly higher GPAs(M=2.71, SD =.97) than students with low MPS (M = 2.34, SD = .98), t(129.70) = 2.36, p = .02.Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.

Hypothesis 3: There were significant, positive correlations between MPS and Caring Peer Rela-tionships in School r(204) = .28 ,p <.001 and Hypothesis 4 : between MPS and Caring Adult Relation-ships in School r(187) = .25 ,p <.01. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected for each type of schoolrelationship.

Hypothesis 5: There was a significant, positive correlation between GPA and Caring Peer Rela-tionships in r(209) = .21 ,p <.01. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. In contrast, the correla-tion between Hypothesis 6: GPA and Caring Adult Relationships in School was not significant r(182)= .04, p >.05. Therefore, this null hypothesis was not rejected.

DISCUSSION

Results of the current empirical exploration suggest that students with the social emotional expe-rience of meaningful participation in school have higher GPAs than students who find little meaning intheir school experiences. Further, there is support for positive association between meaningful in-volvement in school activities and the development of supportive relationships with peers and adultsin schools. Caring relationships in schools are necessary for academic success in that students aremore likely to pursue academic goals when they perceive emotional support and nurturance in school(Wentzel & Watkins, 2002).

The social skills developed in relationships and in active participation in schools are predictors ofacademic performance. Teacher perceptions of social skills were a stronger predictor of GPA than wasacademic ability (Seyfried, 1998). However, in the current study, Caring Peer Relationships, but notCaring Adult Relationships, were correlated with GPA. This finding was surprising, given previouswritings and empirical support for the concept of caring adult relationships as external assets thatfoster resiliency (Benard, 2002; Benson, Leffert, Scales & Blyth, 1998). Thus, current findings raisefurther questions for future research.

49

The first question is, “Why were peer relationships, unlike caring adult relationships, significantlyrelated to GPA?” Wentzel’s (1996) review of peer relationships and academic performance providesthe clearest developmental response to this question. After transition to middle school, peers becomeprimary sources of support and motivation to achieve while the quality of teacher-student relationshipstends to decline with time (Wentzel, 1996). Concomitantly, there are declines in academic motivationand achievement (Midgley, Feldlauger & Eccles, 1989). From this developmental perspective, it isunderstandable that peer relationships would have a stronger relationship with academic performancethan teacher relationships. Adolescents have rated relationships with teachers as significantly lowerthan parental and peer relationships in dimensions such instrumental aid and nurturance (Lempers &Clark-Lempers,1992).

A second question is, “What characteristics of peer relationships positively influence academicperformance?” Wentzel (1996) identifies three powerful motives for positive peer influence on achieve-ment: (1) need for social approval (e.g., praise and popularity); (2) identification with friends (e.g.,desire to think and behave like friends); (3) self-enhancement (e.g., social comparison that motivatesdesire to improve skills). In contrast, negative characteristics of relationships, such as high levels ofconflict and rivalry, are related to increased disruptive behavior and negative attitudes toward learning.Further, negative characteristics of close friendships may have stronger effects on individuals thanpositive characteristics (Berndt & Keefe, 1995). In the current study, students who reported high car-ing relationships with peers were likely to experience the positive motives in their peer relationships.Specifically, academic goals were more closely aligned with the pursuit of social goals when studentshad friends who talked to about their problems or helped when they are having a hard time.

Participants in the current study who reported caring relationships with adults in school had teach-ers who notice when students are not present and listen when students have something to say. Theseare important characteristics that promote instrumental support and positive classroom structure. How-ever, current results suggest that the peer relationships have stronger connection to achievement, giventheir developmental importance in adolescence. Future research can clarify this issue by tracking theprogression of connections between academic achievement and peer and adult caring relationships.

The finding that moderate levels of MPS (Meaningful Participation in School), not high levels,were positively correlated with GPA was another surprise, given previous support for MPS as anexternal asset (Benson, 1997; Benard, 2000). Therefore, a brief discussion of some cultural contextsfor school participation may provide some explanation for the current findings. (See Ogbu & Simons(1994) for a model of cultural identity, academic achievement, and experience in school).

Participants of the current study live in diverse communities that provide opportunities for cross-cultural interactions through involvement in school activities (e.g., interest and culture clubs, sportteams, and student governance). Meaningful participation in such activities, however, implies a posi-tive perception of involvement in the school institution. Some of the potential constraints to higherlevels of perceived meaningful participation in school include the following: social isolation of lan-guage learners and perception of limited opportunities, particularly among Latino students (Conchas,2001), familial value on academic activity over time spent on pursuing peer-related activities amongAsian American students (Huan & Waxman, 1995), and experience of, social distance from traditionalschool activities (Cadwallader, Farmer, Cairns, Leung, Clemmer, Gut, and Reese, 2002), and percep-tion that, experience outside of school is as important as activities within the school for African Ameri-can students (Ogbu & Simons, 1998). There is no specific evidence that the current participants’ schoolshave failed to account for these constraints to participation; however, future strength-based assess-ments of student participation should consider these variables in order to study levels of importance ordegree of belonging associated with MPS.



Limitations

Limitations in the current study include small sample size, non-random selection of participants,and loss of some cases due to incomplete CHKS surveys. These limitations are, in part, to be expectedin an exploratory project. The process of developing a collaborative study with a school district andcollecting data for a longitudinal study is an arduous task. However, the investigator gained consider-able insight into middle school students’ experiences of school through the survey data collection. Theauthor therefore recommends that school psychologists consider utilizing the California Healthy KidsSurvey as a tool to understand the needs and strengths of students. In particular, the external assetsprovide a picture of the opportunities for students to identify with school and connect with caringothers. “Giving youth opportunities to participate in meaningful activities and roles in the classroomand school community helps engage their intrinsic motivation and innate ability to learn” (Benard,2002, p. 14).

Future research should also investigate the relationships between support in home, school, andcommunity environments (external assets) and students’ individual strengths (internal assets). Withoutan understanding of the collective and individual influences of these sources of support, it is difficultfor school psychologists to promote resilience at a systems level (Jennings & Ho, 2001).

REFERENCES

Ares, N. & Gorrell, J. (2002). Middle school students’ understanding of meaningful learning and engaging classroomactivities. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 16 (2), 263-277.

Baker, J.A. (1999). Teacher-student interaction in urban at-risk classrooms: differential behavior, relationshipquality, and student satisfaction with school. The Elementary School Journal, 100, 57-70.

Benard, B. (2002). Resilience and youth development module report. Sacramento, CA: WestED. Retrieved December2, 2002, from www.wested.org.

Benard, B. (1996). Fostering resiliency in urban schools. In B. Williams (Ed.) Closing the achievement gap: avision for changing beliefs and practices. Alexandria, VA.: Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment.

Benson, P. L., Leffert, N., Scales, P.C., & Blyth, D.A. (1998). Beyond the “village” rhetoric: creating healthycommunities for children ad adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 2(3), 138-159.

Benson, P.L. (1997). All kids are our kids: What communities must do to raise caring and responsible children andadolescents. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Berndt, T., & Keefe, K. (1995). Friend’s influence on adolescents’ adjustment to school. Child Development, 66,1312-1329.

Cadwallader, T.W., Farmer, T.W., Cairns, B.D., Leung, M.C., Clemmer, J.T., Gut, D.M., & Reese, L.E. (2002).The social relations of rural African American early adolescents and proximal impact of the school engagementproject. Journal of School Psychology, 40 (3), 213-237.

Christenson, S. L., & Anderson, A. R. (2002). Commentary: The centrality of learning context for students’ academicenabler skills. School Psychology Review, 31, 378-393.

Conchas, G. (2001). Structuring failure and success: understanding the variability in Latino school engagement.Harvard Educational Review, 71 (3), 475-503.

Constantine, N., Benard, B., & Diaz, M. (1999). Measuring protective factors and resilience traits in youth: TheHealthy Kids Resilience assessment. Paper presented at the Seventh Annual Meeting of the Society for PreventionResearch, New Orleans, LA. June, 1999.

DiPerna, J.C., & Elliot, S.N. (2002). Promoting academic enablers to improve student achievement: an introductionto the mini-series. School Psychology Review, 31, 293-297.

Finn, J.D. (1997). Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82,221-234.

Finn, J.D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of educational research, 59 (2), 117-142.Garbarino, J., Dubrow, N., Kostelny, K., & Pardo, C. (1992). Children in danger: Coping with the Consequences

of Community Violence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: scale development and

educational correlates, Psychology in the Schools, 30, 79-90.

51

Gumora, G., & Arsenio, W.F. (2002). Emotionality, emotional regulation, and school performance in middleschool children. Journal of School Psychology, 40 (5), 395-413.

Harcourt Brace Educational Measurement (1996). Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition. San Antonio, Tx:Harcourt Brace.

Huang, S. L., & Waxman, H. C. (1995). Motivation and learning environment differences between Asian-Americanand white middle school students in mathematics. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 28 (4),208-219.

Jennings, R.G., & Ho, B.S. (2001). An integrated service delivery model for systemic resiliency. Paper presentedat the Annual Convention of the California Association of School Psychologists, San Francisco, CA. March10, 2001.

Jones, C. (1992). Relationship of entering students’ values to academic achievement and persistence in college.College Student Journal. 24(4), 353-355.

Jordan, W.J. & Nettles, S.M. (2000). How students invest their time outside of school: Effects on school-relatedoutcomes. Social Psychology of Education, 3, 217-243.

Joyner, M. H. (1996). The effects of perceived support and home environment upon children’s school engagement,Unpublished Dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, U.S.

Lerner, R. (1991). Changing organism-context relations as the basic process of development: a developmentalcontextual perspective. Developmental Psychology, 27, 27-32.

Leffert, N., Benson, P.L., Scales, P.C., Sharma, A.R., Drake, D.R., & Blyth, D.A. (1998). Developmental assets:Measurement and prediction of risk behaviors among adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 2 (4),209-230.

Lempers, J.D. & Clark-Lempers, D.S. (1992). Young, middle, and late adolescents’ comparisons of the functionalimportance of five significant relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21(44), 53.

Midgley, C., Feldlauger, H. & Eccles, J. (1989). Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics beforeand after the transition to junior high school. Child Development, 60, 981-992.

National Center for Educational Statistics (1988). National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988. Washington,DC: National Center for Educational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

Ogbu, J. & Simons, H. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-ecological theory of schoolperformance with some implications for education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29 (2), 155-188.

Ogbu, J. & Simons, H. (1994). Cultural Models of School Achievement: A Quantitative Test of Ogbu’s Theory.Cultural Models of Literacy: A Comparative Study. Project 12. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Researchand Improvement.

Osterman, K.F. (2000). Students’ needs for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research,70 (3), 323-367.

Perez, S.A. (2000). An ethic of caring in teaching culturally diverse students. Education, 12, 102-105.Perkins, D.F., Lerner, R.M., & Keith, J.G. (1996). Individual and contextual variables related to risk behaviors

and resiliency among diverse youth. Presented at the 1995 Annual Conference of the National Council onFamily Relations, Portland, Oregon.

Rhee, S., Furlong, M.J., Turner, J.A., & Harari, I. (2001). Integrating strength-based perspectives inpsychoeducational evaluations. The California School Psychologist, 6, 5-17.

Ryan, R.M. (1995). Psychological needs and facilitation of integrative process. Journal of Personality, 63 (3)397-427.

Scales, P.C., & Leffert, N. (1999). Developmental assets: a synthesis of the scientific research on adolescentdevelopment . Minneapolis: Search Institute.

Seyfried, S. (1998). Academic achievement of African American preadolescents: The influence of teacherperceptions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 381-402.

Wentzel, K.R. (1996). Social goals and social relationships as motivators of school adjustment. In J. Juvonen &K.R. Wentzel (Eds.), Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Wentzel, K. R., & Watkins, D. E., (2002). Peer relationships and collaborative learning as contexts for academicenablers. School Psychology Review, 31, 366-377.

WestEd (2000). California Healthy Kids Survey. Los Alamitos, CA: WestEd.Yair, G. (2000). Educational battlefields in America: the tug-of-war over students’ engagement with instruction.

Sociology of Education, 73, 247-269.


an exploration of meaningful participation and caring relationships as contexts for school...

Documents