Search

The present study analyzed concurrent and predictive validity of single-item scales for assessing principal stress and coping. We examined concurrent and prospective relations among stress and coping single-items with principal job satisfaction, overall health, perceptions of school safety, and principal leadership self-efficacy. We also compared principals and teachers on their stress and coping levels using the same single-item scales. Consistent with the literature on teacher stress and coping, the correlations of principal coping with different outcomes-job satisfaction, overall health, leadership efficacy, and safety perceptions--were stronger in comparison to the correlations between principal stress and those same outcomes. In regression models with both stress and coping, only principal coping predicted concurrent and future principal job satisfaction and overall health, as well as change in those outcomes. Coping also predicted concurrent but not future perceptions of school safety. Stress and coping did not consistently predict concurrent or future measures of leadership self-efficacy. Last, we found that principals reported even higher levels of stress than the well-documented high levels reported by teachers. We discuss areas for further research and potential use of these measures.

This study utilized latent profile analysis (LPA) to examine patterns of principal stress and coping and its relations with principal (n = 125), teacher (n = 3671), and student (n = 19,390) outcomes. LPA analysis of school principals based on their reports of stress and coping showed that most principals were classified as having high stress and high coping (74%) whereas 19% of principals were classified as high stress and low coping. Only a small percentage of principals (7%) were characterized by low stress and high coping. We also examined whether stress and coping profiles of school principals predicted concurrent and prospective measures of principal and teacher wellbeing and efficacy, principal and teacher perceptions of school climate, and measures of student behavior and dispositions. The principal latent profiles significantly predicted concurrent and prospective measures of principal and teacher well-being, with large effect sizes for prospective principal health (Cohen's d = 1.93) and satisfaction (d = 0.94), and a medium effect size for prospective teacher health (d = 0.68). Changes in principal health (d = 1.30) and satisfaction (d= 0.49) over time were also significant. However, the latent profiles did not predict prospective measures of principal and teacher efficacy, perceptions of school climate, and student classroom behaviors. The results of this study show that examining patterns of principal stress and coping together is important to understand and improve principal and teacher well-being.

As an example of how historical events may influence the findings and interpretations of a randomized trial, we use a school-based evaluation of a classroom management program that was conducted in a nearby district before and after the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri (N = 102 teachers and 1,450 students). The findings suggest that the event differentially affected teacher and student response within and across conditions. Black teachers benefited more from the intervention as evidenced by their independently observed classroom management skills and praise-to-reprimand ratios; however, these effects were minimized or disappeared after the event. Additionally, although the intervention equally benefited the academic achievement of Black and White students before the event, the opportunity gap widened after the event. Implications for the design, analysis, and reporting of findings from randomized controlled trials are discussed.

Much recent literature has highlighted the stressful nature of teaching and its relations with teacher and student well-being. The present study extended this literature to focus on special education teachers. We first conducted a latent class analysis to characterize patterns of stress and coping among special education teachers (N = 404). Consistent with several prior studies with general education teachers and principals, we found three profiles: normative (high stress/high coping), maladaptive (high stress/low coping), and adaptive (low stress/high coping). Next, we examined school contextual predictors of these profiles including leadership characteristics (collegial, instructional), density of special education teachers (an indicator of professional isolation), and climate factors (teacher affiliation, school structure and support, safety, expectations). The maladaptive class was distinguished by a lower proportion of special education teachers, worse perceptions of school disciplinary structure and school safety, and higher academic expectations. The findings have implications for improving the burnout model presented in the special series overview and for creating school contexts that improve special education teacher well-being, persistence, and implementation fidelity.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created unprecedented challenges for the U.S. education system and for teachers. The present study examined correlates and predictors of teacher wellbeing in the immediate aftermath of school closures related to the pandemic. Data were collected as part of a larger group randomized trial. Six hundred and thirty-nine teachers completed surveys about their stress, coping, health, job satisfaction, and internalizing symptoms in Fall 2019, before the pandemic, and May 2020, during the pandemic. Teachers also provided ratings during COVID-19 of their teaching, student attendance and engagement, and concern about students and families. Teachers reported lower levels of work-related stress after the pandemic's onset compared to their prepandemic levels. Multilevel regression analyses revealed teacher confidence in their ability to manage student behaviors as a consistent and robust predictor of teacher well-being outcomes. Additionally, pre-COVID-19 school-level factors measured in Fall 2019, including collegial school leadership and fair and equitable school discipline structures, also predicted aspects of teacher well-being at the onset of COVID-19. Findings suggest the importance of teacher competence and perceived efficacy in managing student behavior and engaging them in learning to help them adapt to the stressors of a pandemic. Additionally, aspects of organizational health and climate may also help facilitate or hinder teacher adjustment. [This article was published in "School Psychology" (EJ1316222).]

Much recent literature has highlighted the stressful nature of teaching and its relations with teacher and student wellbeing. The present study extended this literature to focus on special education teachers. We first conducted a latent class analysis to characterize patterns of stress and coping among special education teachers (N = 404). Consistent with several prior studies with general education teachers and principals, we found three profiles: normative (high stress/high coping), maladaptive (high stress/low coping), and adaptive (low stress/high coping). Next, we examined school contextual predictors of these profiles including leadership characteristics (collegial, instructional), density of special education teachers (an indicator of professional isolation), and climate factors (teacher affiliation, school structure and support, safety, expectations). The maladaptive class was distinguished by a lower proportion of special education teachers, worse perceptions of school disciplinary structure and school safety, and higher academic expectations. The findings have implications for improving the burnout model presented in the special series overview and for creating school contexts that improve special education teacher well-being, persistence, and implementation fidelity.

Despite decades of concern about disparities in educational outcomes for low SES students and students of color, there has been limited rigorous study of programmatic approaches for reducing these disparities in elementary or middle schools. We conducted integrative data analysis (IDA) of the combined data from eight Institute of Education Sciences funded cluster randomized trials to address the research gaps on social and behavioral outcome disparities. The final analytic sample includes 90,880 students in varying grade levels from kindergarten to grade 8 in 387 schools in 4 states (Maryland, Missouri, Virginia, and Texas). Two-level hierarchical linear modeling was used for multilevel moderation analysis. This study provided empirical evidence that there were significant gender, racial, and socioeconomic disparities on social and behavioral outcome measures for elementary and middle school students, the disparities significantly varied across schools, and the disparities could be reduced by interventions. We discussed our findings, implications for interpreting effect sizes of interventions using disparities as empirical benchmarks, and study limitations. We concluded with suggestions for future research. [For the corresponding grantee submission, see ED622033.]

The article describes a prevention science approach to impacting population health. We use activities of the Missouri Prevention Science Institute that address youth mental health concerns with a public health approach to illustrate the approach. In particular, we focus on several lessons that may be relevant for advancing the success of prevention and health promotion scholars in addressing major societal problems: connecting small ideas to big solutions, matching intervention targets with goals, developing reliable and systemic monitoring data streams, ensuring data and prevention efforts account for cultural context, and helping people/systems change.

The challenges presented by the growing prevalence, burden, and unmet service needs of youth mental health problems are formidable. During the past decade, scholars and other stakeholders of the Missouri Prevention Center (MPC) have been using a prevention and implementation science approach to develop, implement, evaluate, and disseminate recommended practices in promoting youth mental health in real world contexts. The purpose of this article is to describe the multidisciplinary contributions of MPC to improve the social, emotional, and behavioral health of youth, locally and nationally. We briefly summarize MPC scholarship that has addressed the individual and social-contextual risk and protective factors of youth mental health at home, school, and community. The article concludes with a description of two large-scale community projects, funded by an innovative local sales tax, that represent the systematic application of MPC scholarship and outreach. Together these projects provide mental health screening for every youth in our county three times per year and a single point of entry into the mental health service system where any family in our county can access an evaluation and referral for their child at no cost to them. The projects serve as model demonstrations for how communities can address the challenges of youth mental health concerns through multidisciplinary collaborations.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created unprecedented challenges for the U.S. education system and for teachers. The present study examined correlates and predictors of teacher well-being in the immediate aftermath of school closures related to the pandemic. Data were collected as part of a larger group randomized trial. Six hundred and thirty-nine teachers completed surveys about their stress, coping, health, job satisfaction, and internalizing symptoms in Fall 2019, before the pandemic, and May 2020, during the pandemic. Teachers also provided ratings during COVID-19 of their teaching, student attendance and engagement, and concern about students and families. Teachers reported lower levels of work-related stress after the pandemic's onset compared to their prepandemic levels. Multilevel regression analyses revealed teacher confidence in their ability to manage student behaviors as a consistent and robust predictor of teacher well-being outcomes. Additionally, pre-COVID-19 school-level factors measured in Fall 2019, including collegial school leadership and fair and equitable school discipline structures, also predicted aspects of teacher well-being at the onset of COVID-19. Findings suggest the importance of teacher competence and perceived efficacy in managing student behavior and engaging them in learning to help them adapt to the stressors of a pandemic. Additionally, aspects of organizational health and climate may also help facilitate or hinder teacher adjustment.

This study examined the benefit of utilizing one-item academic and one-item behavior readiness teacher-rated screeners at the beginning of the school year to predict end-of-school year outcomes for middle school students. The Middle School Academic and Behavior Readiness (M-ABR) screeners were developed to provide an efficient and effective way to assess readiness in students. Participants included 889 students in 62 middle school classrooms in an urban Missouri school district. Concurrent validity with the M-ABR items and other indicators of readiness in the fall were evaluated using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients, with the academic readiness item having medium to strong correlations with other baseline academic indicators (r = ± 0.56 to 0.91) and the behavior readiness item having low to strong correlations with baseline behavior items (r = ± 0.20 to 0.79). Next, the predictive validity of the M-ABR items was analyzed with hierarchical linear regressions using end-of-year outcomes as the dependent variable. The academic and behavior readiness items demonstrated adequate validity for all outcomes with moderate effects ([beta] = ± 0.31 to 0.73 for academic outcomes and [beta] = ± 0.24 to 0.59 for behavioral outcomes) after controlling for baseline demographics. Even after controlling for baseline scores, the M-ABR items predicted unique variance in almost all outcome variables. Four conditional probability indices were calculated to obtain an optimal cut score, to determine ready vs. not ready, for both single-item M-ABR scales. The cut point of "fair" yielded the most acceptable values for the indices. The odd ratios (OR) of experiencing negative outcomes given a "fair" or lower readiness rating (2 or below on the M-ABR screeners) at the beginning of the year were significant and strong for all outcomes (OR = 2.29 to OR = 14.46), except for internalizing problems. These findings suggest promise for using single readiness items to screen for varying negative end-of-year student outcomes.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of a brief and feasible universal screener for kindergarten readiness for predicting follow-up outcomes in first grade. Participants included kindergarten and first-grade teachers and students from 6 urban elementary schools. Students included slightly more males than females (54%; 46%), the race/ethnicity of the students was predominantly African American (74%) or White (23%), and 36% of students qualified for free or reduced lunch. Data included in this study were collected for children in the fall (October) of their kindergarten year and the Spring (April) of their first-grade year. Kindergarten teachers completed single-item ratings of student readiness as well as full-scale ratings of student behaviors and academic competence. Students also completed a standardized academic achievement test. Main findings from this study include that the single-item screener continued to predict negative academic and social behavior outcomes at a follow-up 18 months later. The percentage of unique variance explained by the readiness items was significant and, in the majority of cases, remained significant even after the baseline variables were entered into the analyses. Children rated poor in their academic readiness were over 9-10 times as likely to have low reading performance at the end of their first-grade year. Furthermore, children rated as poor in their behavior readiness were at over 6 times greater risk for low prosocial and high disruptive behavior teacher ratings in first grade. The screener could be used to screen for children low in readiness in order to provide supports and monitoring for early intervention. Kindergarten entry is a critical time to screen children and support them in developing skills to ameliorate deficits and build essential early academic and social behavior skills. Impact and Implications: This study highlights the importance of screening children for their readiness for kindergarten. By determining who is not academically and/or socially ready for kindergarten, we can provide instructive and supportive strategies to teach and support children who need it as early as possible.

The purpose of the study was to explore the effectiveness of a brief, feasible, and cost-effective universal screener for kindergarten readiness. The study examined whether teacher ratings of kindergarteners' academic, behavioral, and overall readiness at the beginning of the year were predictive of academic, emotional, and behavioral outcomes at the end of the year. Participants included 19 kindergarten teachers and their students (n = 350) from 6 urban elementary schools; all teachers were female and the majority of children were African American (74%) or White (23%). Thirty-six percent of children qualified for free or reduced lunch. Teachers completed single-item ratings of student readiness as well as full scale ratings of student prosocial skills, disruptive behaviors, and academic competence. Students also completed a standardized academic achievement test. Independent observers rated disruptive behaviors in the classroom. Readiness items had statistically significant relations with a range of academic, emotional, and behavior indicators. Hierarchical linear regression analyses found that readiness items predicted end-of-year outcomes when controlling for baseline covariates. Items also predicted higher likelihood of negative academic and behavior categorical outcomes and demonstrated classification utility. Schools need universal screening options that are feasible and easy to implement school-wide. The screening tool presented in this study offers a viable, psychometrically strong option for school teams and professionals interested in universal screening.

There is widespread agreement that science, technology, engineering, and mathematics programs should provide undergraduates with research experience. Practical issues and limited resources, however, make this a challenge. We have developed a bioinformatics project that provides a course-based research experience for students at a diverse group of schools and offers the opportunity to tailor this experience to local curriculum and institution-specific student needs. We assessed both attitude and knowledge gains, looking for insights into how students respond given this wide range of curricular and institutional variables. While different approaches all appear to result in learning gains, we find that a significant investment of course time is required to enable students to show gains commensurate to a summer research experience. An alumni survey revealed that time spent on a research project is also a significant factor in the value former students assign to the experience one or more years later. We conclude: 1) implementation of a bioinformatics project within the biology curriculum provides a mechanism for successfully engaging large numbers of students in undergraduate research; 2) benefits to students are achievable at a wide variety of academic institutions; and 3) successful implementation of course-based research experiences requires significant investment of instructional time for students to gain full benefit. [Contains 82 pages of Supplemental Material, which can be found at: http://www.lifescied.org/content/suppl/2014/02/12/13.1.111.DC1.html.]

Decades of research have demonstrated, now convincingly, that emotional and behavioral syndromes and many of their antecedent risks can be prevented. Much of this progress can be traced to the founding and expansion of the relatively young field called prevention science, an interdisciplinary field that emerged in the early 1990s to address the need for an integrated model for prevention-related research. The present article is intended to provide a specific example of prevention science in action for counseling psychologists. To illustrate key preventive science principles, the authors describe the formation and activities of the Missouri Prevention Center, a program that uses prevention science to promote children's mental health. In particular, the authors use research produced by the center to highlight the various phases of prevention intervention research. They conclude with implications for counseling psychologists. (Contains 2 tables and 2 figures.)

Empirically supported school-based programs have been shown to reduce the present and future risk for various emotional disturbances. Unfortunately, few of these programs have been successfully transported or maintained outside the context of controlled research studies. Central to attaining this goal is the pressing need to train the next generation of school psychology faculty leaders, versed in evidence-based practices (EBPs), who can train school personnel to deliver existing EBPs, design and develop innovative new practices, and conduct rigorous research to evaluate the effectiveness of these practices. In part to address this critical need, we developed the Missouri Prevention Center (MPC). In this article we describe the training, service, and research activities associated with MPC. The Center works toward supporting a high-quality training program for school psychologists who will lead the nation, state, and individual school districts in overcoming barriers to using EBPs in schools. (Contains 1 figure.)