Content uploaded by David Osher
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by David Osher on Jan 07, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
School Influences on Child and Youth
Development
David Osher, Kimberly Kendziora, Elizabeth Spier, & Mark L. Garibaldi
American Institutes for Research
A Historical View of the Function and
Organization of the School as a Social Institution
Schools have played a key role in youth development throughout American
history, both serving as social microcosms of the broader society and reciprocally
influencing people and communities (Kidron & Osher, in press; Rury, 2002).
Schools are both affected by and affect family and community outcomes
(Coleman, 1966, 1988; Baum, Ma, & Payea, 2010). Educational events have often
become cultural milestones, such as the contested integration of schools following
Brown v. the Board of Education of Topeka in 1954, the establishment of Head
Start in 1965, and the mandate to provide a free and appropriate education to all
students through the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975.
Education policy and practices have been often controversial, including the
opposition to compulsory education by many members of ethnic minority
communities.
In more recent years, the influences of public accountability for the
achievement of all subgroups of students under No Child Left Behind (NCLB) the
expansion of charter schools and school choice initiatives, and the special focus on
persistently low-performing schools under Race to the Top have influenced not
only how communities engage with their school systems but also the kinds of
educational outcomes students attain. These recent influences appear to have had
some paradoxical effects. On one hand, one unanticipated consequence of NCLB
has been a narrowing of the curricula to focus on tested subjects (e.g.,
mathematics, reading) and a de-emphasis on support for students’ social
development (Center for Educational Policy, 2007; Morton & Dalton, 2007). On
the other hand, NCLB has mandated the reporting of disaggregated data, which
allows the public to see the consequences of not addressing student support and
the conditions for learning for traditionally underserved groups. This had led to
increasing calls for a focus on the whole child and student support.
The importance of schools to youth development was emphasized by John
Dewey and is well-specified in life course/social field theory (Kellam, Branch,
Agrawal, & Ensminger, 1975). In this perspective, one or more main social fields
are critically important in each stage of life, and in each social field there are
2 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
defined social task demands. Success or failure in regard to social roles is marked
by the adequacy of behavioral responses of each individual to the specific social
task demands faced within each main social field at each stage of life. The social
task demands are defined by, and the adequacy of responses are rated by, natural
raters, such as parents in the family, teachers in the classroom, or significant peers
in the peer group. Not only the individual’s performance, but also chance and the
fit of the individual in the social context play roles in success or failure.
Aggression, academic problems, and other early antecedents to problem outcomes
must be viewed, therefore, as residing not merely in the child, but also as the
social fields of family, school, and community.
Within the social field of the school, students confront major developmental
challenges, negotiate group and intergroup social relationships, and acquire (or
fail to acquire) important capacities that may enable them to thrive (Cairns &
Cairns, 1994). From the perspective of risk and protection, schools may function
as a protective factor, creating a safe harbor, offering both challenge and a sense
of mission, fostering positive relationships with adults and peers, developing
competencies and a sense of efficacy, and providing students with access to social
capital, mental health supports and leadership opportunities. Unfortunately,
schools may also be stressful places that function as a risk factor, as youth adapt
their behaviors to relatively inflexible bureaucratic structures and adult-driven
demands within a high-stakes environment (e.g., Eccles & Midgely, 1989).
Instead of safe harbors, schools can expose students to physical and emotional
violence, boredom, alienation, academic frustration, negative relationships with
adults and peers, teasing, bullying, gangs, humiliation and failure, harsh
punishment, and expulsion from the school community and its resources.
In this chapter, we examine schools as a social institution, examining relevant
student-, teacher-, and building-level characteristics that are particularly salient to
prevention scientists. We also briefly describe schools as a locus for preventive
interventions.
Student-Level Predictors of Academic and Social
Development
A plethora of developmental research addresses student-level competencies and
academic achievement. In this section, we review those student-level variables
that interact with individual students’ social, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral
competencies: (a) cognitive skills, (b) self-regulation, and (c) social and emotional
competencies.
Cognitive/Learning Skills
The central importance of cognitive skills for academic achievement cannot be
ignored. Using well-established IQ tests that are culturally and linguistically
appropriate, the magnitude of reported concurrent IQ-achievement correlations is
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
consistently in the range of .60 to .80 (Sattler & Dumont, 2004; Watkins, Lei, &
Canivez, 2007). The strength of this association is among the strongest reported
across all fields of psychology.
Intelligence, however, is understood to be a multifaceted trait that can be
strongly influenced by the environment. The specific cognitive skills involved in
learning (although there are many diverse models and lists) generally consist of
attention, perception, memory, and reasoning. As students get older, problem
solving, higher order and critical thinking, and analysis and synthesis skills also
become important for postsecondary success. Additionally, metacognition refers
to awareness of, and the exertion of active control over, the specific cognitive
functions associated with learning (Kuhn, 2000; Nelson & Narens, 1994).
Teaching practices congruent with a metacognitive approach to learning include
those that focus on sense-making, self-assessment, and reflection on what worked
and what needs improving. Sense-making in particular can be subjective and
culture bound, but understanding the way students make sense of things can help
them break through achievement barriers. Metacognitive teaching practices have
been shown to increase the degree to which students transfer their learning to new
settings and events (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999; Wirkala, & Kuhn,
2011).
Children who are raised in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods start
kindergarten with significantly lower cognitive skills than do middle-class
children (Lee & Burkam, 2002; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). Before starting
school, the average cognitive score of children in the highest SES group is 60%
higher than that of children in the lowest group. Socioeconomic status is by far the
most powerful factor influencing the results of tests of cognitive skills. Factors
that affect this include family educational expectations, exposure to language and
reading, child care quality, computer use, and television habits (e.g., Hart &
Risley, 1995). However, high-quality early childhood education for poor children
does produce long-lasting improvements in students’ academic success, (Barnett,
1998).
Self-Regulation
Heckman, in a series of econometric studies, has demonstrated the importance
of what he conceptualizes as “non-cognitive” factors such as personality traits,
persistence, motivation, and charm in determining school and labor market
outcomes (Borghans, Duckworth, Heckman, & Weel, 2008; Heckman, &
Rubinstein, 2001; Heckman, Stixrud, & Urzua, 2006). One critical noncognitive
factor for student outcomes is self-regulation, which involves the management of
emotions and emotion-related behaviors, focusing attention, planning and
problem-solving, and delay of gratification (Barkley, 1997; Casey et al., 2011;
Eisenberg et al., 1997; Hoyle & Bradfield, 2010; Kochanska, Murray, & Coy,
1997). Students who show positive self-regulation are able to demonstrate
persistence and attention to tasks, and are able to manage their emotions in a way
4 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
that allows them to benefit from a collaborative classroom environment (e.g.,
handling corrective feedback on their performance from a teacher, successfully
resolving disagreements with peers). Students who have difficulty managing
negative emotions early on are especially likely to suffer later behavior problems
compared with peers (Eisenberg, et al., 2005).
Empirical evidence supports a positive relationship between self regulation and
academic outcomes. For example, Fantuzzo et al. (2007) found that 8.8% of
variance in early mathematics was uniquely predicted by children’s ability to
regulate their behavior. McClelland et al. (2007) found that not only was
behavioral regulation positively related to early academic achievement, but that
growth in behavioral regulation during the course of a preschool year predicted
growth in children’s school readiness in three areas important to cognitive
development.
One special application of self regulation is the concept of grit (Duckworth,
Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007; Duckworth & Quinn, 2009), which is defined
as
!"##$%
& '
( ) *
+ ! ,
+ - . "##$%
) "##/% *
) )
) )
0
) Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000% 1
21345."##6%('
7* 866$9 1
"##:%&;
2*
< & + =
>866?%
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
Social and Emotional Learning
Social and emotional learning (SEL; Zins & Elias, 2006) refers to the process
of developing the cognitive and emotional capacities to recognize and manage
emotions, solve problems effectively, and establish positive relationships with
others. SEL involves acquiring and effectively applying the knowledge, attitudes,
and skills necessary allow children to calm themselves when angry, make friends,
resolve conflicts respectfully, and make ethical and safe choices (CASEL,
2007).A growing body of research has demonstrated that programs teaching SEL
promotes positive development among children and youth, reduces problem
behaviors, and improves academic performance, citizenship, and health-related
behaviors (CASEL, 2007; Durlak et al., 2011).
Teacher-Level Predictors of Academic and Social
Development
Although teachers often work in isolated classrooms, many exogenous factors
affect their behavior. Key factors discussed here include pre-service training and
public policy. Pre-service training has been criticized for failing to prepare
teachers to manage classrooms, serve diverse learners or collaborate with families
(Osher, Coggshall, Colombi, & Woodruff, in press). Public policy effectively caps
the amount of resources for hiring and paying teachers, which may contribute to
large class sizes and constrain the capacity of teachers to differentiate instruction
and support (Finn & Achilles, 1999). Similarly, high student-teacher ratios
directly and indirectly affect the willingness and ability of teachers to collaborate
with families outside of school (Cirone, 1997).
Teachers’ high expectations and sense of responsibility for student academic
achievement influence positive student outcomes (Gooddard, Hoy, & Hoy, 2010;
Hinnant O’Brien, & Ghazarian, 2009; Pederson, Faucher, & Eaton, 1978) and
enable the implementation of student-centered approaches (Bryk & Schneider,
2002; Osher, Sandler, & Nelson, 2001). Teachers who are themselves socially and
emotionally competent can encourage prosocial communication among students,
create a positive climate (Brackett, Katulak, Kremenitzer, Alster, & Caruso,
2008), and influence student conduct, engagement, connectedness to school, and
academic performance (Hawkins, 1997; Schaps, Battistich, & Solomon, 1997,
2004; Sutton & Wheatley, 2003; Wentzel, 2002). Alternatively, teachers whose
own social and emotional skills are poorer tend to experience greater stress and
burnout (Tsouloupas, Carson, Matthews, Grawitch, & Barber, 2010).
Community factors contribute to these teacher effects. Students in poorer
neighborhoods and communities are more likely to be served by teachers who are
lower-performing (Glazerman & Max, 2011) and teachers in these schools often
experience poorer conditions for teaching, which include higher student: teacher
rations, a lack of planning time, and little support for reaching out to families
(Duncan & Murnane, 2011).
6 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
In the following section, we examine one well-known teacher correlate of
student outcomes (training/experience) and two lesser-known indicators—
mindfulness and cultural competence—that are beginning to accrue research
evidence for its significance.
Teacher Training
Although researchers consistently demonstrate the overwhelming importance
of teachers for student outcomes (e.g., Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kain, 2005), the
specific characteristics that make a teacher effective are vigorously debated.
Researchers examining measurable proxies of quality, such as certification,
academic degrees, and years of experience, have found that these bear some
relationship to student achievement, but the size of the effect is generally modest
(Ballou & Podgursky, 2000; Darling-Hammond, 2000; Darling-Hammond &
Youngs, 2002; Goldhaber & Brewer, 1999; 2005; U.S. Department of Education,
2002). Alternatively, teachers’ high verbal ability and content knowledge may be
more strongly related to student academic achievement than specialized training
on how to teach (e.g., student teaching, education course work; Ballou &
Podgursky, 2000; Finn, 1999).
Mindfulness
In a meta-analysis of more than 100 studies of classroom management,
Marzano, Marzano, and Pickering (2003) found that “mental set” had the largest
effect on reductions in disruptive behavior (d = -1.3). The construct of mental set
is similar to Langer’s (1997) construct of “mindfulness,” which refers to “a
heightened sense of situational awareness and a conscious control over one’s
thoughts and behavior relative to that situation” (Marzano et al., 2003, p. 65). In
contrast, “mindlessness” is a state of “automatic pilot” where one operates with
little conscious awareness. Mindfulness also includes emotional objectivity.
Teachers who remain cool under pressure—for example, addressing disciplinary
issues in a “matter-of-fact” way without taking behaviors personally— are the
most effective classroom managers (Boles, Dean, Ricks, Short, & Wang, 2000;
Jennings & Greenberg, 2009; Kokkinos, 2006; Pines & Keinan, 2005). Research
shows that high levels of teacher stress and burnout are linked to perceived high
demands and low control in the job (Betoret, 2009; Santa-Virta, Solovieva, &
Theorell, 2007). Increasing mindfulness can increase perceptions of control.
To develop teachers’ skills for coping with stress, evidence-based social and
emotional learning programs like the RULER Approach (Recognizing,
Understanding, Labeling, Expressing, and Regulating emotions; Brackett et al.,
2008) and the Garrison Institute’s CARE (Cultivating Awareness and Resilience
in Education) provide training for teachers, administrators and students. Evidence
shows that RULER improves academic achievement, reduces student problem
behaviors, and creates a more positive climate (Reyes, Brackett, Rivers, Elbertson,
& Salovey, in press; Reyes et al., in press). CARE is a professional development
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
program that reduces stress and promotes improvements in teachers’ well-being,
motivational orientation/efficacy, and mindfulness, as well as improves teachers’
organizational, instructional, and emotional support for students (Jennings, 2011).
Evaluations of this program indicate that participating teachers report an improved
sense of well-being and the ability to provide effective social and emotional
support for students (Jennings, Snowberg, Coccia, & Greenberg, 2011),
particularly among teachers working in urban settings.
Cultural Competence
Cultural discontinuity between teachers and students, which includes a lack of
understanding of behavioral and learning styles, may contribute lower
expectations as well as to disproportionate rates of disciplinary referrals,
suspensions, and expulsions (Boykin, 1983; Gay, 2000; Skiba, Michael, Nardo, &
Peterson, 2000). These problems may be exacerbated by attribution biases and
what social psychologists conceptualize as aversive racism (Artiles, Kozleski,
Trent, Osher & Ortiz, 2010; Dovidio, Gaertner, & Pearson 2009). Cultural
competence, which involves the capacity to “step outside of our own framework”
(Harry, 1992, p.334) and to treat people individually while respecting and
acknowledging their cultural beliefs and values, has been suggested as key to
addressing the discontinuity (Osher, et al., 2004; Osher, et al., in press).
School-Level Predictors of Academic and Social
Development
In this section, we briefly review selected building-level factors that influence
student development: conditions for learning, connectedness, and discipline.
School Climate and Conditions for Learning
“Conditions for learning” refer to those aspects of school climate that are
proximally related to learning and development. There are at least four conditions
for learning: (a) physical and emotional safety, (b) challenge and engagement, (c)
support for students and their connection to school, and (d) the social and
emotional competencies of students. These conditions can be facilitated by student
support, positive behavioral approaches, robust curricula, strong pedagogy, and
support for social and emotional learning (Osher, Dwyer, & Jimerson, 2005;
Osterman, 2000; Lee, Smith, Perry, & Smylie, 1999; Ryan & Patrick, 2001;
Thuen & Bru, 2009).
A National Research Council report (Bowman, Donovan, & Burns, 2001)
pointed out that “one of the most consistent findings in the early childhood
literature is that an emotionally warm and positive approach in learning situations
leads to constructive behavior in children.” Pianta and his colleagues (2008) have
shown that better emotional quality of classroom interactions positively predicts
8 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
growth in reading and math achievement from first through fifth grade. Starting
early is very important, but across all years of schooling, enhancing social and
emotional behaviors can have a strong impact on success in school and ultimately
in life (Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg, & Walberg, 2004).
Conditions for learning are shaped by several characteristics, such as caring
and supportive interpersonal relationships (e.g., consistent acknowledgement of all
students, recognition for good work); student and adult social and emotional,
approaches to discipline (e.g., Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Supports,
Restorative Justice); opportunities for meaningful participation for students (e.g.,
student decision-making with classroom management), effective classroom
management practices; and high levels of academic and behavioral expectations
and support to realize them.(Osher, Sidana, & Kelly, 2008).
The literature concerning climate and conditions for learning shows an
association between level of school climate and academic achievement (e.g.,
Kendziora, Osher, & Chinen, 2008; Klem & Connell, 2004; Osher, Spier,
Kendziora, & Cai, 2009; Spier, Cai, & Osher, 2007; Spier, Cai, Osher, &
Kendziora, 2007). In addition, researchers have shown that regardless of the level
of school climate, improving school climate is associated with increases in student
performance in reading, writing, and mathematics (Osher et al., 2009).
Although conditions for learning vary among schools, they also are affected by
community factors. Students of color as well as economically disadvantaged
students are more likely to experience poorer conditions for learning and attend
schools with worse climates (Duncan & Murnane, 2011). For example, a cross-
sectional analysis of school climate data in Chicago found that African American
students reported poorer conditions for learning than other students, regardless of
their school lunch status (Kendziora et al., 2008).
School Connectedness
Connectedness denotes students’ school experiences and perceptions that
learning is important; their sense that teachers are respectful and supportive; and
feelings that other students and school personnel are safe, close, and united across
the school. In fact, longitudinal evidence suggests that school connectedness is the
second most salient predictor (family connectedness being the first) for protecting
adolescents from emotional distress, eating disorders, and suicidal ideation and
attempts (Blum, McNeely, & Rinehart, 2002; Cairns & Cairns, 1994; Goodenow,
1993; Resnick et al., 1997; Resnick Harris, & Blum, 1993).
Connections with adults (teachers, administrators) is strongly associated with
positive academic and social outcomes for students (Barber & Olsen, 2004;
Bergin & Bergin, 2009; Cornelius-White, 2007; Hamre & Pianta, 2003; Wu,
Hughes, & Kwok, 2010), as well as a reduction in dropout and delinquent
behaviors (Bernard, 2004; Colarossi & Eccles, 2003; Croninger & Lee, 2001;
Hughes, Cavell, & Jackson, 1999; Kesner, 2000; Kirby, 2001; Pianta, Hamre, &
Stuhlman, 2003). Students’ perceptions that teachers care about them are also
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
associated with their academic success and well-being (Barber & Oson, 1997;
Connell, Halpern-Felsher, Clifford, Crichlow, & Usinger, 1995; Hamre & Pianta,
2005; Wentzel & Wigfield, 1998).
School Discipline Practices
The approaches schools take to ensure compliance with behavioral expectations
matter for student outcomes. Although issues of school discipline have always
affected schools, since the spread of “zero tolerance” policies in the 1990s,
discipline policy has become more punitive, exclusionary, and pervasive (Hanson,
2005). These approaches to discipline have been linked to a range of negative
outcomes (Balfanz & Boccanfuso, 2007; Dishion & Dodge, 2005; Gottfredson,
Gottfredson, Payne, & Gottfredson, 2005; Gregory, Skiba, & Noguera, 2010;
Raffaele Mendez & Knoff, 2003; Skiba & Rausch, 2004, 2006). For example,
after following approximately 1 million Texas public school students for nearly
six years, Fabelo et al. (2011) found that expulsion from school significantly
increased the likelihood that a student would repeat a grade, not graduate, and/or
be adjudicated into the juvenile justice system.
Despite the availability of risk assessments to determine an appropriate level of
treatment (e.g., expulsion vs. counselor support) for individual delinquent
behavior, zero tolerance policies in schools result in the application of sanctions
regardless of the context or the student’s potential risk to others (Curwin &
Mendler, 1999). This is particularly salient for minorities and students with
emotional and behavioral disorders who are disproportionately suspended and
expelled from schools (Gregory et al., 2010; Morrison et al., 2001; Osher,
Morrison, & Bailey, 2003; Osher, Woodruff, & Sims, 2002; Townsend, 2000);
thereby exacerbating lost opportunities to learn, as well as increasing
disengagement and the risk of dropout. Harsh intervention for youth whose
behavior does not warrant intense disciplinary action may also be harmful,
particularly without additional support for low-risk youth (Mendez, 2003).
In contrast to reactive and exclusionary punishments, schools are widely
adopting models that explicitly teach behavioral expectations. On the frontier in
school discipline are ecological approaches focused on fostering self-discipline
and self-control (Osher, Bear, Sprague & Doyle, 2010). These strategies focus on
improving the efficacy and holding power of the classroom activities in which
students participate (see Bear, 2010; Doyle, 2006). Early research in this area has
shown that proactive strategies for managing classroom group structures can
promote student engagement in the classroom (Gump, 1990; Kounin, 1970).
Neighborhood factors as well as the impact of implicit bias appear affect
current disciplinary approaches and outcomes (Allison & Welch, 2010; Rocque,
2010). Students of color and economically disadvantaged students are more likely
to attend schools where the disciplinary environment of harsh and exclusionary
(Duncan & Murnane, 2011). In addition, studies of school discipline show
consistently that African American students and First Nation students are
10 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
disproportionately removed from schools, and the disparities are greatest in
discretionary areas and regarding infarctions for which there are no concrete
referents (e.g., disrespect as opposed to possessing a weapon) (Fabelo et al., 2011;
Losen, 2011; Skiba et al., 2000).
Promotion and Prevention in Schools
As a universal institution, schools are in a unique position to both promote
student health and to benefit from the presence of healthy students. Schools can do
this by implementing universal promotion and prevention. School-based
promotion includes developing student’s social and emotional competencies and
improving the conditions for learning in a school, including helping students
express their voice, experience leadership opportunities, and connect to adults and
prosocial peers.
Long lists of exemplary school-based promotion and prevention programs
have been developed and are widely available (e.g., Center for the Study and
Prevention of Violence, 2006, SAMHSA’s National registry of evidence-based
programs and practices, n.d.). School-based prevention programs are most
effective when they are tailored based on the characteristics of participating
children and youth and settings, such as age, culture, organizational capacity, and
community context. Programs for children in elementary schools are most
effective when they focus on improving both academic and social and emotional
learning, while programs for middle school and high school students are most
effective when they focus on building academic and social competences, such as
good study habits, drug resistance skills, and positive relationships with peers
(National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2011). Prevention efforts can be especially
effective—even among high-risk youth—when provided at key transition points
(such as moving from middle school to high school), and provided to the general
population (rather than singling out and labeling individuals; Institute of
Medicine, 2009). Although specific violence and substance abuse prevention
curricula are available, schools can also take steps to prevent adverse outcomes by
ensuring that teachers apply good classroom management practices, such as
reinforcing positive behaviors (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2011), and
creating a positive school climate.
In the remainder of this section, we focus on student health, nutrition, and
mental health, and consider social and emotional learning as an organizing
framework for school interventions.
Physical Health
To perform well academically, students must first attend school (Windham,
Bohrnstedt, Brown, Seidel, & Kendziora, 2011). It is not surprising that students
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
with chronic conditions such as asthma and obesity have poorer attendance than
healthy students, and improving student health also improves student attendance.
There is evidence that when schools increase student health conditions for
students, such as by facilitating student access to health services and increasing
physical activity, student absences decrease (Basch, 2011a). Therefore, schools
can take steps to improve student attendance by focusing on improving student
health.
Schools have long promoted student health at the population level through
physical education classes and recess. Children who are physically active for at
least 60 minutes per day have a significantly reduced risk of later cardiovascular
disease and diabetes relative to less active children (Physical Activity Guidelines
Advisory Committee, 2008). In addition, exercise has been demonstrated
experimentally to improve academic performance (Stevens, To, Stevenson, &
Lochbaum, 2008; Telford et al., 2012).
There is substantial evidence that allocating time for physical activity during
the school day does not detract from children’s academic performance, and may
even improve it. In 2010, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
undertook a review of 50 studies that examined the relationship between physical
activity time at school and academic performance. Just over half of these studies
showed that student participation in school-based physical activities conferred
positive benefits on children’s academic performance, just under half showed no
effect on academic performance, and only one study showed a negative effect
(CDC, 2010).
Nutrition
Adequate nutrition is a cornerstone of child health and development. Multiple
studies have demonstrated the negative effect of food insecurity on school-age
children’s academic achievement, behavior, and social relationships with peers
(Cook & Frank, 2008). The Federally-funded National School Lunch Program
exists to address food insecurity among students, but even when food is provided
to students, it may fail to meet existing nutrition requirements (New America
Foundation, 2011). Among undernourished populations, school breakfast
programs improve attendance, cognitive functioning, and academic performance
(Basch, 2011a, 2011b).
Mental Health
For children with mental health needs, schools, not the specialty mental health
sector, are the primary providers of services (Hoagwood & Erwin, 1997). Schools
have not been very successful, however, in meeting the needs of children with
emotional disturbances. Compared to other students with disabilities, students
with emotional disturbances are identified later and are more likely to be in
restrictive placements and drop out of school (U.S. Department of Education,
2011; Wagner et al, 2006). Children with mental health issues do not involve
12 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
disruptive behavior, such as those with depression or anxiety, are particularly
likely to be identified late or not at all. In addition, research suggests that that
there is a “dual track” to services, in which a disproportionate number of children
of color as compared to Caucasian children first receive mental health services
only after they encounter the child welfare or juvenile justice system (Huang,
2007).
Social and Emotional Learning Interventions
SEL interventions build the internal competencies that are critical for positive
child and youth development, and although often viewed as an “add-on” to
academic instruction, are in fact an essential part of education. Over the past two
decades, researchers have produced increasingly compelling evidence that
interventions promoting SEL improve academic performance. Zins, Weissberg,
Wang, and Walberg (2004) reported that students who become more self-aware
and confident about their learning abilities try harder in school. Students who set
high academic goals, have self-discipline, motivate themselves, manage their
stress, and organize their approach to work learn more and get better grades
(Duckworth, & Seligman, 2005; Elliot & Dweck, 2005). Further, research in
neuroscience suggests that SEL programs may improve central executive
cognitive functions, such as inhibitory control, planning, and set-shifting by
building greater cognitive-affective regulation in pre-frontal areas of the cortex
(Riggs, Greenberg, Kusché, & Pentz, 2006).
Students in schools that use an evidence-based SEL curriculum (one that has
been scientifically evaluated and found effective) significantly improve in their
attitudes toward school, their behaviors, and their academic performance (Durlak
et al, 2011). Durlak et al.’s (2011) meta-analysis of 30 studies found that SEL
results in improvements in students’ achievement test scores—by an average of 11
percentile points over students who are not involved in SEL programming. In a
multi-year study, Hawkins, Smith, and Catalano (2004) found that by the time
they were adults, students who received SEL interventions in grades 1–6 had an
11 percent higher grade-point average and significantly greater levels of school
commitment and attachment to school at age 18. Further, students who received
SEL interventions showed a 30 percent lower incidence of school behavior
problems, a 20 percent lower rate of violent delinquency, and a 40 percent lower
rate of heavy alcohol use by age 18.
In a meta-analysis of 207 studies of SEL programs, Durlak et al. (2011) found
that, compared to controls, students demonstrated enhanced SEL skills, attitudes,
and positive social behaviors following intervention and also demonstrated fewer
conduct problems and had lower levels of emotional distress. Further, academic
performance was significantly improved, with overall mean effect sizes for test
scores and grades of 0.27 and 0.33, respectively. SEL programs with the best
outcomes are multiyear in duration, use interactive rather than purely knowledge-
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
based instructional methods, and are integrated into the life of the school rather
than being implemented as marginal add-ons.
SEL is very closely related to the concept of “positive youth development”
(PYD; see Lerner, Phelps, Forman, & Bowers, 2009 for a review). Both are
focused on building strengths rather than preventing negative behaviors
(consistent with positive psychology, Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), and
both foster resilience through individual strategies and establishing caring
environments. PYD tends to be the preferred umbrella term for those focused on
older children and adolescents and those working in out-of-school and
community-based settings. As such, PYD tends to place greater emphasis on
autonomy, optimism, youth voice, participation and empowerment. SEL and PYD
have more in common than they have differences, however, and as Catalano and
his colleagues suggested when comparing PYD and prevention science
frameworks (Catalano, Hawkins, Berglund, Pollard, & Arthur, 2002), cooperation
is the best way forward.
Concluding Remarks: Frontiers with Positive
Youth Development and Social Emotional
Development
The challenge for schools and communities is to create environments where
students are supported in developing the skills and capacities to thrive. Doing this
successfully involves leveraging and disseminating information about the
connections between learning and academic performance. For example, in Alaska,
where AIR developed a survey to assess the impact of a youth development
initiative across 18 school districts, we found that not only were several aspects of
school climate and connectedness consistently related to student achievement, but
also that positive change in school climate and connectedness was related to
significant gains in student scores on statewide achievement tests. Our findings
showed that whether a school started with high or low school climate and
connectedness, or high or low achievement scores, changing that school’s climate
and connectedness for the better was associated with increases in student
performance in reading, writing, and mathematics (Spier et al., 2007). Similarly
work we have done in previously troubled schools in the South Bronx suggested
that mental health supports, when coupled with family engagement and
organizational efficacy were effective in creating more positive conditions for
learning in these schools (Kendziora et al., 2008).
Although research that demonstrates the importance of the social and emotional
conditions for learning in schools is accumulating, these factors remain relatively
marginalized in the education community. Steps that may be taken to create
emotionally safe and supportive schools that promote students’ positive social,
emotional, and academic learning include (a) adopting SEL as a framework for
school improvement, (b) helping districts and states develop the capacity to assess
14 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
and monitor their social and emotional conditions for learning; and (c) providing
schools and communities with effective tools and strategies to improve these
conditions. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
(ASCD, a professional association for educators) has adopted a Whole Child
Initiative that stresses and approach consistent with the interventions we have
described. They write, “Each child, in each school, in each of our communities
deserves to be healthy, safe, engaged, supported, and challenged. That’s what a
whole child approach to learning, teaching, and community engagement really is.”
References
Allison, A. P., & Welch, K. (2010). Modeling the effects of racial threat on
punitive and restorative school discipline practices. Criminology, 48,
1019–1062. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2010.00211.x
Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E. B., Trent, S. C., Osher, D., & Ortiz, A. (2010).
Justifying and explaining disproportionality, 1968-2008: a critique of
underlying views of culture. Exceptional Children, 76(3), 279-299.
Balfanz, R., & Boccanfuso, C. (2007). Falling off the path to graduation: Middle
grade indicators in [an unidentified northeastern city]. Baltimore: Center
for Social Organization of Schools.
Ballou, D., & Podgursky, M. (2000). Reforming teacher preparation and licensing:
What is the evidence? Teachers College Record, 102, 5–27.
Barber, B. K. and Olsen, J. (1997). Socialization in context: Connection,
regulation, and autonomy in the family, school, and neighborhood and
with peers. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12, 287–315.
Barber, B. K., & Olsen, J. A. (2004). Assessing the transitions to middle and high
school. Journal of Adolescent Research 19(1), 3–30.
Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive
functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychological
Bulletin, 121, 65–94.
Barnett, W. S. (1998). Long term effects on cognitive development and school
success. In W. S. Barnett, & S. S. Boocock (Eds.). Early care and
education for children in poverty: Promises, programs, and long-term
results (pp. 11–44). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Basch, C. E. (2011a). Healthier students are better learners: A missing link in
school reforms to close the achievement gap. Journal of School Health,
81, 593–598.
Basch, C. E. (2011b). Breakfast and the achievement gap among urban minority
youth. Journal of School Health, 81, 635–640.
Baum, S., Ma, J., Payea, K. (2010). Education pays: The benefits of higher
education for individuals and society. New York: College Board.
Bear, G. G. (2010). From school discipline to self-discipline. New York: Guilford.
Bergin, C., & Bergin, D. (2009). Attachment in the classroom. Educational
Psychology Review, 21(2), 141–170.
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
Bernard, B. (2004). Resiliency: What we have learned. San Francisco: WestEd.
Betoret, F. D. (2009). Self-efficacy, school resources, job stressors, and burnout
among Spanish primary and secondary school teachers: A structural
equation approach. Educational Psychology, 29(1), 45–68.
Blum R. W., McNeely C. A., & Rinehart, P. M. (2002). Improving the odds: The
untapped power of schools to improve the health of teens. Minneapolis,
MN: Center for Adolescent Health and Development, University of
Minnesota.
Boles, J. S., Dean, D. H., Ricks, J. M., Short, J. C., & Wang, G. (2000). The
dimensionality of the Maslach Burnout Inventory across small business
owners and educators. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 12–34.
Borghans, L., Duckworth, A. L., Heckman, J. J., & Weel, B. (2008). Symposium
on noncognitive skills and their development: The economics and
psychology of personality traits. Journal of Human Resources, 43, 972–
1059.
Bowman, B. T., Donovan, M. S., & Burns, M. S. (Eds.) (2001). Eager to learn:
Educating our preschoolers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Boykin, A. W. (1983). The academic achievement performance of Afro-American
Children. In J. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp.
324–371). San Francisco: Freeman.
Brackett, M. A., Katulak, N. A., Kremenitzer, J. P., Alster, B., & Caruso, D. R.
(2008). Emotionally literate teaching. In M. A. Brackett, J. P.
Kremenitzer, M. Maurer, M. D. Carpenter, S. E. Rivers, & N. A. Katulak
(Eds.), Emotional literacy in the classroom: Upper elementary . Port
Chester, NY: National Professional Resources.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people
learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2005). Trust in schools: A core resource for reform.
New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Cairns R. B. & Cairns B. D. (1994). Lifelines and risks: Pathways of youth in our
time. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Casey, B. J., Somerville, L. H., Gotlib, I. H., Aydukc, O., Franklin, N. T., Askren,
M. K., Jonides, J., Berman, M. G., Wilson, N. L., Teslovich, T., Glover,
G., Zayas, V., Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (2011). Behavioral and neural
correlates of delay of gratification 40 years later. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 108, 14998-15003.
Catalano, R. F., Hawkins, J. D., Berglund, M. L., Pollard, J. A., & Arthur, M. W.
(2002). Prevention science and positive youth development: competitive
or cooperative frameworks? Journal of Adolescent Health, 31, 230–239.
Center for Educational Policy. (2007, December). Choices, changes, and
challenges: Curriculum and instruction in the NCLB era. Washington
DC: Author.
Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence. (2006, August). Blueprints
model program descriptions. Boulder, CO: Author.
16 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010). The association between
school-based physical activity, including physical education, and
academic performance. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services.
Cirone, B. (1997, September). Class size reduction: A one-year status check.
Thrust for Educational Leadership, 27, 6–11.
Colarossi, L. G., & Eccles, J. S. (2003). Differential effects of support providers
on adolescents’ mental health. Social Work Research, 27, 19–30.
Coleman, J. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: US
Government Printing Office.
Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American
Journal of Sociology, 94 (issue supplement), S95–S120.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2007).The impact
of after-school programs that promote personal and social skills.
Chicago, IL: Author.
Connell, J. P., Halpern-Felsher, B., Clifford, E., Crichlow, W. E., & Usinger, P.
(1995). Hanging in there: Behavioral, psychological, and contextual
factors affecting whether African American adolescents stay in high
school, Journal of Adolescent Research, 10, 41–63.
Cook, J. T., & Frank, D. A. (2008). Food security, poverty, and human
development in the United States. Annals of the New York Academy of
Sciences, 1136, 193–209.
Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are
effective: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 113–
143.
Croninger, R. G., & Lee, V. E. (2001). Social capital and dropping out of high
school: Benefits to at-risk students of teachers' support and guidance.
Teachers College Record, 103, 548–582.
Curwin, R. L., & Mendler, A. N. (1999). Zero tolerance for zero tolerance. Phi
Delta Kappan, 81, l19–124.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Reforming teacher preparation and licensing:
Debating the evidence. Teachers College Record, 102, 28–56.
Darling-Hammond, L. & Youngs, P. (2002). Defining “highly qualified teachers:”
What does “scientifically-based research” actually tell us? Educational
Researcher, 31(9), 13–25.
Diamond, A., Barnett, W. S., Thomas, J., & Munro, S. (2007). Preschool program
improves cognitive control. Science, 318 (5855): 1387–1388. doi:
10.1126/science.1151148
Dishion, T. J., & Dodge, K. A. (2005). Peer contagion in interventions for children
and adolescents: Moving towards an understanding of the ecology and
dynamics of change. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 395–
400.
Dovidio, J. F, Gaertner, S. L., & Pearson, A. (2009). The nature of contemporary
prejudice: Insights from aversive racism. Social and Personality
Psychology Compass, 3, 314–338.
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
Doyle, W. (2006). Ecological approaches to classroom management. In C.
Evertson & C. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management:
Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 97–125). New York:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in
predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science,
16, 939–944.
Duckworth, A.L., & Quinn, P.D. (2009). Development and validation of the Short
Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166–174.
Duckworth, A.L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M.D., & Kelly, D.R. (2007). Grit:
Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 92, 1087–1101.
Duncan, G. J., & Murnane, R. (Eds.) (2011). Whither opportunity? Rising
inequality, schools, and children's life chances. New York: Russell Sage.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K.
B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional
learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child
Development, 82, 405–432.
Eccles, J. S., & Midgely, C. (1989). Stage-environment fit: Developmentally
appropriate classrooms for young adolescents. In C. Ames & R. Ames
(Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Goals and cognitions (Vol.
3, pp. 139–186). New York: Academic Press.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R., Shepard, S., Murphy, B., Guthrie, I., Jones, P., Friedman,
J., Poulin, P., & Maszk, P. (1997). Contemporaneous and longitudinal
prediction of children’s social functioning from regulation and
emotionality. Child Development, 68, 642–664.
Eisenberg, N., Sadovsky, A., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Lasoya, S. H., Valiente,
C., Reiser, M., Cumberland, A. & Shephard, S. A. (2005). The relations
of problem behavior status to children’s negative emotionality, effortful
control, and impulsivity: Concurrent relations and prediction of change.
Developmental Psychology, 41, 193–211.
Elliot, A. J., & Dweck. C. S. (Eds). (2005). Handbook of competence and
motivation. New York. Guilford Press.
Elliot, D. S. (1998). Prevention programs that work for youth: Violence
prevention. Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of
Violence.
Fabelo, T., Thompson, M. D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael, D., Marchbanks, M. P. III,
& Booth, E. A. (2011). Breaking schools’ rules: A statewide study of how
school discipline relates to students’ success and juvenile justice
involvement. New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center.
Fantuzzo, J., Bulotsky-Shearer, R., McDermott, P. A., McWayne, C., Frye, D., &
Perlman, S. (2007). Investigation of dimensions of social-emotional
classroom behavior and school readiness for low-income urban preschool
children. School Psychology Review, 36, 44–62.
18 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
Finn, C. E. (1999). Foreword. In M. Kanstoroom & C. E. Finn, Jr. (Eds.), Better
teacher, better schools (pp. v–vii). Washington, DC: Fordham
Foundation.
Finn, J. D. & Achilles, C. M. (1999). Tennessee’s class size study: Findings,
implications, misconceptions. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 21(2), 97–109.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Gilliam, W. S. (2005). Prekindergarteners left behind: Expulsion rates in state
prekindergarten systems. New Haven, CT: Yale University Child Study
Center.
Glazerman, S., & Max, J. (2011). Do low-income students have equal access to
the highest-performing teachers? NCEE Evaluation Brief. Washington,
DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its
meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American
Educational Research Journal, 37, 479–507.
Goldhaber, D., & Brewer, D. (1999). Teacher licensing and student achievement.
In M. Kanstoroom & C. E. Finn, Jr. (Eds.) Better teachers, better schools
(pp. 83–102). Washington, DC: Fordham Foundation.
Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among
adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates. Psychology
in the Schools, 30, 79–90. doi: 10.1002/1520-6807(199301)30:1<79::
AID-PITS2310300113>3.0.CO; 2-X
Gottfredson, G. D., Gottfredson, D. C., Payne, A. A., & Gottfredson, N. C. (2005).
School climate predictors of school disorder: Results from a national
study of delinquency prevention in schools. Journal of Research in Crime
and Delinquency, 42, 412–444.
Gregory, A., Skiba, R. J., & Noguera, P. (2010). The achievement gap and the
discipline gap: Two sides of the same coin? Educational Researcher, 39,
59–68.
Gump, P. V. (1990). A short history of the Midwest Psychological Field Station.
Environment and Behavior, 22, 436–457.
Halpern-Felsher, B. L., Connell, J. P., Spencer, M. B., Aber, J. L., Duncan, G. J.,
Clifford, E., Crichlow, W. E., Usinger, P. A., Cole, S. P., Allen, L., &
Seidman, E. (1997). Neighborhood and family factors predicting
educational risk and attainment in African American and white children
and adolescents. In J. Brooks-Gunn, G. J. Duncan, and J. L. Aber (Eds.).
Neighborhood poverty: Context and consequences for children (pp. 146–
173). New York: Russell Sage.
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2003). Early teacher–child relationships and the
trajectory of children's school outcomes through eighth grade. Child
Development, 72, 625–638.
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2005). Can instructional and emotional support in
the first-grade classroom make a difference for children at risk of school
failure? Child Development, 76, 949–967.
Hanson, A. L., (2005). Have zero tolerance school discipline policies turned into a
nightmare? The American dream’s promise of equal educational
opportunity grounded in Brown v. Board of Education. UC Davis Journal
of Juvenile Law and Policy, 9, 289–379.
Harry, B. (1992). Cultural diversity, families, and the special education system:
Communication and empowerment. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1995).Meaningful differences in the everyday experiences
of young American children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Hawkins, J. D., Smith, B. H., & Catalano, R. F. (2004). Social development and
social and emotional learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang,
& H. J. Walberg (Eds.) Building academic success on social and
emotional learning. What does the research say? (pp. 135–150). New
York: Teachers College Press.
Hawkins, J.D. (1997). Academic performance and school success: Sources and
consequences. In R. P. Weissberg, T. P. Gullotta, R. L. Hampton, B. A.
Ryan, & G. R. Adams (Eds.), Healthy children 2010: Enhancing
children’s wellness (pp. 278–305). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Heckman, J. J., & Rubinstein, Y. (2001). The importance of noncognitive skills:
Lessons from the GED testing program. American Economic Review, 91,
145-149.
Heckman, J. J., Stixrud, J., & Urzua, S. (2006). The effects of cognitive and
noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior.
Journal of Labor Economics, 24, 411–482.
Hinnant, J. B., O’Brien, M., & Ghazarian, S. R. (2009). The longitudinal relations
of teacher expectations to achievement in the early school years. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 101, 662–670.
Hoagwood, K., & Erwin, H, (1997). Effectiveness of school-based mental health
services for children: A 10-year research review. Journal of Child and
Family Studies, 6, 435-451.
Hoyle, R. H. & Bradfield, E. K. (2010, February). Measurement and modeling of
self-regulation: Is standardization a reasonable goal? Working paper
prepared for the National Research Council Workshop on Advancing
Social Science Theory: The Importance of Common Metrics,
Washington, DC.
Huang, L. (2007, May). “Wicked problems” and collective solutions: Reducing
disparities in mental health care for underserved populations. Plenary
presentation at Building Family Strengths Conference of the Research
and Training Center on Family Support and Children’s Mental Health,
Portland, OR.
Hughes, J. N., Cavell, T. A., & Jackson, T. (1999). Influence of teacher-student
relationship on childhood conduct problems: A prospective study.
Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 28, 173–184.
20 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
Institute of Medicine. (2009). Preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral
disorders among young people: Progress and possibilities. Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press.
Jennings, P. A. (2011). Promoting teachers’ social and emotional competencies to
support performance and reduce burnout. In A. Cohan & A. Honigsfeld
(Eds.), Breaking the mold of preservice and inservice teacher education:
Innovative and successful practices for the twenty-first century . New
York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher
social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom
outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79, 491–525.
Jennings, P. A., Snowberg, K. E., Coccia, M. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2011).
Improving classroom learning environments by Cultivating Awareness
and Resilience in Education (CARE): Results of two pilot studies.
Journal of Classroom Interaction, 46(1), 37–48.
Kellam, S. G., Branch, J. D., Agrawal, K. C., & Ensminger, M. E. (1975). Mental
health and going to school: The Woodlawn program of assessment, early
intervention, and evaluation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kendziora, K., Osher, D., & Chinen, M. (2008). Student connection research:
Final narrative report to the Spencer Foundation. Washington, DC:
American Institutes for Research.
Kesner, J. E. (2000). Teacher characteristics and the quality of child-teacher
relationships. Journal of School Psychology, 28(2), 133–149.
Kidron, Y. & Osher, D. (in press). The history and direction of research on
prosocial education. In P. Brown, M. Corrigan, A. H. D’Allesandro (Eds.)
The Handbook of Prosocial Education. Lanham, MD: Roman &
Littlefield.
Kirby, D. (2001). Emerging answers: Research findings on programs to prevent
teen pregnancy. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen
Pregnancy.
Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher
support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School
Health, 74, 262–273.
Kochanska, G., Murray, K., & Coy, K. (1997). Inhibitory control as a contributor
to conscience in childhood: From toddler to early school Age. Child
Development, 68, 263–277.
Kokkinos, C. M. (2006). Factor structure and psychometric properties of the
Maslach Burnout Inventory – Educators Survey among elementary and
secondary school teachers in Cyprus. Stress and Health, 22, 25–33.
Kounin, J. S. (1970). Discipline and group management in classrooms. New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9, 178–181.
Langer, E. J. (1997). The Power of Mindful Learning. New York: Merloyd
Lawrence.
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
Lee, V. E., & Burkam, D. T. (2002). Inequality at the Starting Gate: Social Back
ground Differences in Achievement as Children Begin School. Washing
ton, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
Lee, V. E., Smith, J. B., Perry, T. E., & Smylie, M. A. (1999). Social support,
academic press, and student achievement: A view from the middle grades
in Chicago. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
Lerner, J. V., Phelps, E., Forman, Y. E., & Bowers, E. (2009). Positive youth
development. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of
adolescent psychology: Vol. 1. Individual bases of adolescent
development (3rd ed., pp. 524–558). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Losen, D. J. (2011, October). Discipline policies, successful schools, and racial
justice. Boulder, CO: National Educational Policy Center.
Marzano, R. J., Marzano, J. S., & Pickering, D. J. (2003). Classroom management
that works. Alexandra, VA: ASCD.
McClelland, M. M., Connor, C. M., Jewkes, A. M., Cameron, C. E., Farris, C. L.
& Morrison, F. J. (2007). Links between behavioral regulation and
preschoolers’ literacy, vocabulary, and math skills. Developmental
Psychology, 43, 947–959.
Mendez, L. M. R. (2003). Predictors of suspension and negative school outcomes:
A longitudinal investigation. In J. Wald & D. Losen (Eds.), New
directions for youth development: Deconstructing the school-to-prison
pipeline (pp. 17–34). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Morrison, G. M., Anthony, S., Storino, M. H., Cheng, J. J., Furlong, M. J., &
Morrison, R. L. (2001). School expulsion as a process and an event:
Before and after effects on children at-risk for school discipline. New
Directions for Youth Development, 92, 45–71.
Morton, B. A., & Dalton, B. (2007). Changes in Instructional hours in four
subjects by public school teachers of grades 1 through 4. Washington
DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
National Institute on Drug Abuse (2011). Info facts: Lessons from prevention
research. Accessed on January 27, 2012, at
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/infofacts/lessons-prevention-
research
National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2009). Preventing mental,
emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people: Progress and
possibilities. Committee on the Prevention of Mental Disorders and
Substance Abuse Among Children, Youth, and Young Adults: Research
Advances and Promising Interventions. Mary Ellen O’Connell, Thomas
Boat, and Kenneth E. Warner, Editors. Board on Children, Youth, and
Families, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In J. Metcalfe
& A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–
25). Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books.
New America Foundation (2011). Background and analysis: School nutrition
programs. Retrieved January 25, 2012, from
22 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
http://febp.newamerica.net/background-analysis/federal-school-nutrition-
programs
Osher, D., Bear, G. G., Sprague, J. R., & Doyle, W. (2010). How can we improve
school discipline? Educational Researcher, 39, 48–58.
Osher, D., Cartledge, G., Oswald, D., Sutherland, K. S., Artiles, A. J., & Coutinho,
M. (2004). Issues of cultural and linguistic competency and
disproportionate representation. In R. B. Rutherford, M. M. Quinn, & S.
Mathur (Eds.), Handbook of research in emotional and behavioral
disorders (pp. 54–77). New York: Guilford Press.
Osher, D., Coggshall, J., Colombi, G. & Woodruff, D. (in press). Building school
and teacher capacity to eliminate the school-to-prison pipeline. Teaching
Exceptional Children.
Osher, D., Dwyer, K., & Jimerson, S. (2006). Foundations of school violence and
safety. In S. Jimerson & M. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of school
violence and school safety: From research to practice (pp. 51–71).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Osher, D., Morrison, G., & Bailey, W. (2003). Exploring the relationship between
student mobility and dropout among students with emotional and
behavioral disorders. Journal of Negro Education, 72, 79–96.
Osher, D., Sandler, S., & Nelson, C. (2001). The best approach to safety is to fix
schools and support children and staff. New Directions in Youth
Development, 92, 127–154.
Osher, D., Sidana, A., & Kelly, P. (2008). Improving conditions for learning for
youth who are neglected or delinquent. Washington, DC: National
Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center.
Osher, D., Spier, E., Kendziora, K., & Cai, C. (2009). Improving academic
achievement through improving school climate and student
connectedness. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Researchers Association, San Diego, CA.
Osher, D., Woodruff, D., & Sims, A. (2002). Schools make a difference: The
relationship between education services for African American children
and youth and their overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system. In
D. Losen (Ed.), Minority issues in special education (pp. 93–116).
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Publishing Group.
Osterman, K. F. (2000). Students’ need for belonging in the school community.
Review of Educational Research, 70, 323–367.
Pedersen, E., Faucher, T. A., & Eaton, W. W. (1978). A new perspective on the
effects of first-grade teachers on children's subsequent adult status.
Harvard Educational Review, 48, 1–31.
Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee (2008). Physical Activity
Guidelines Advisory Committee report. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services.
Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., & Stuhlman, M. W. (2003). Relationships between
teachers and children. In W. M. Reynolds & G. E. Miller (Eds.),
Handbook of psychology: Educational psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 199–234).
New York: Wiley.
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
Pianta, R., Belsky, J., Vandergrift, N., Houts, R., Morrison, F., & the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care
Research Network. (2008). Classroom effects on children’s achievement
trajectories in elementary school. American Educational Research
Journal, 45, 365–397.
Pines, A. M., & Keinan, G. (2005). Stress and burnout: The significant difference.
Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 625–635.
Raffaele Mendez, L. M., & Knoff, H. M. (2003). Who gets suspended from school
and why: A demographic analysis of schools and disciplinary infractions
in a large school district. Education & Treatment of Children, 26, 30–51.
Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M.,
Jones, J., et al. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from
the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. Journal of the
American Medical Association, 278, 823–832.
Resnick, M. D., Harris L. J., & Blum R. W. (1993). The impact of caring and
connectedness on adolescent health and well-being. Journal of Pediatrics
& Child Health; 29(Suppl1), S3–S9.
Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., Elbertson, N., & Salovey, P. (in
press). The interaction effects of program training, dosage, and
implementation quality on targeted student outcomes for The RULER
Approach to social and emotional learning, School Psychology Review.
Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., Mashburn, A. J., &
Salovey, P. (in press). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement,
and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology.
Riggs, N. R., Greenberg, M. T., Kusché, C. A., & Pentz, M. A. (2006). The
mediational role of neurocognition in the behavioral outcomes of a
social-emotional prevention program in elementary school students:
Effects of the PATHS curriculum. Prevention Science, 7, 91–102. doi:
10.1007/s11121-005-0022-1.
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and
academic achievement. Econometrica, 73, 417–458.
Rocque, M. (2010). Office discipline and student behavior: Does race matter?
American Journal of Education, 116, 557–581.
Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and schools: Using social, economic, and educational
reform to close the black-white achievement gap. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Rury, J. L. (2002). Education and social change: Themes in the history of
American schooling. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes
in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school.
American Educational Research Journal, 38, 437–460.
Santavirta, N., Solovieva, S. and Theorell, T. (2007) The association between job
strain and emotional exhaustion in a cohort of 1028 Finnish teachers,
British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 77, pp. 213–228.
Sattler, J. M., & Dumont, R. (2004). Assessment of children: WISC-IV and
WPPSI-III supplement. San Diego: Jerome M. Sattler Publisher.
24 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
Scales, P.C., & Leffert, N. (1999). Developmental assets: A synthesis of the
scientific research on adolescent development. Minneapolis, MN: Search
Institute.
Schaps, E., Battistich, V., & Solomon, D. (1997). School as a caring community: A
key to character education. In A. Molnar (Ed.), The construction of
children’s character, part II, ninety-sixth yearbook of the National Society
for the Study of Education (pp. 127–139). Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Schaps, E., Battistich, V., & Solomon, D. (2004). Community in school as key to
student growth: Findings from the Child Development Project. In J. E.
Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.) Building
academic success on social and emotional learning. What does the
research say? (pp. 189–205). New York: Teachers College Press.
Seligman, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An
introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.
Shonkoff, J., & Phillips (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of
early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Skiba, R. J., Michael R., Nardo, A., & Peterson, R. (2000). The color of
discipline: Gender and racial disparities in school punishment.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana Education Policy Center.
Skiba, R., & Rausch, M. K. (2004). The relationship between achievement,
discipline, and race: An analysis of factors predicting ISTEP scores.
Bloomington, IN: Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.
Skiba, R., & Rausch, M. K. (2006). Zero tolerance, suspension, and expulsion:
Questions of equity and effectiveness. In C. M. Evertson & C. S.
Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research,
practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 1063–1089). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Spier, E., Cai, C., Osher, D., & Kendziora, K. (2007, September). School climate
and connectedness and student achievement in 11 Alaska school districts.
Unpublished report, American Institutes for Research.
Stevens, T. A., To, Y., Stevenson, S. J., & Lochbaum, M. R. (2008). The
importance of physical activity and physical education in the prediction
of academic achievement. Journal of Sport Behavior, 31, 368–388.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration (n.d.). National registry of
evidence-based programs and practices. Available at
http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/.
Sutton, R. E., & Wheatley, K.F. (2003). Teachers’ emotions and teaching: A
review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational
Psychology, 15(4), 327–358.
Telford, R. D., Cunningham, R. B., Fitzgerald, R., Olive, L. S., Prosser, L., Jiang,
X., Telford, R. M. (2012). Physical education, obesity, and academic
achievement: A 2-year longitudinal investigation of Australian elementary
school children. American Journal of Public Health, 102.
School Influences on Child and Youth Development 35
Thuen, E. & Bru, E. (2009). Are changes in students’ perceptions of the learning
environment related to changes in emotional and behavioural problems?
School Psychology International, 30, 115–136.
Townsend, B. L. (2000). The disproportionate discipline of African-American
learners: Reducing school suspensions and expulsions. Exceptional
Children, 66, 381–391.
Tsouloupas, C. N., Carson, R. L., Matthews, R., Grawitch, M., & Barber, L. K.
(2010). Exploring the association between teachers’ perceived student
misbehaviour and emotional exhaustion: The importance of teacher
efficacy beliefs and emotional regulation. Educational Psychology, 30,
173–189.
U.S. Department of Education (2002). The Secretary’s report on teacher quality.
Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Education. (2011). 30th annual report to Congress on the
implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2008 .
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Wagner, M., Friend, M., Bursuck, W. D., Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., Sumi, W.
C. , & Epstein, M. H.. (2006). Educating students with emotional
disturbances: A national perspective on school programs and services.
Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 14, 12–30.
Watkins, M. W., Lei, P-W., & Canivez, G. L. (2007). Psychometric intelligence
and achievement: A cross-lagged panel analysis. Intelligence, 35, 59–68.
Wentzel, K. R. (2002). Are good teachers like good parents? Teaching styles and
student adjustment in early adolescence. Child Development, 73, 287–
301.
Wentzel, K. R., & Wigfield, A. (1998). Academic and social motivational
influences on students' academic performance. Educational Psychology
Review, 10, 155–175.
Windham, A., Bohrnstedt, G., Brown, L., Seidel, D., & Kendziora, K. (2011,
December). Weather, transportation, attendance, and student
achievement in the Syracuse City School District. Washington DC:
American Institutes for Research.
Wirkala, C., & Kuhn, D. (2011). Problem-based learning in K–12 education: Is it
effective and how does it achieve its effects? American Educational
Research Journal, 48, 1157–1186. doi: 10.3102/0002831211419491
Wu, J., Hughes, J. N., & Kwok, O. (2010). Teacher–student relationship quality
type in elementary grades: Effects on trajectories for achievement and
engagement. Journal of School Psychology, 48, 357–387.
Zins, J. E., & Elias, M. E. (2006). Social and emotional learning. In G. G. Bear &
K. M. Minke (eds.) Children’s needs III: Development, prevention, and
intervention (pp. 1–13). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (2004). The
scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. In
Zins, J. E., Weissberg, R. P., Wang, M. C., & Walberg, H. J. (Eds.).
Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does
26 School Influences on Child and Youth Development
the research say? (pp. 3–22). New York: Teachers College, Columbia
University.
Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.) (2004). Building
academic success on social and emotional learning. What does the
research say? New York: Teachers College Press.
