رابطه معلم ـ کودک، برداشت کودک و پرخاشگری در گسترش قربانی شدن همسالان
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|29866||2013||9 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||9464 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, Volume 34, Issue 6, November–December 2013, Pages 319–327
The study examined pre-kindergarten teacher–child relationship as a predictor of peer victimization up to first grade, assessed whether this role moderated risks from children's social withdrawal and/or aggression. Participants were 377 Australian children from 12 schools. Parent ratings of victimization in pre-kindergarten, kindergarten and first grade were used, as well as prekindergarten self-ratings of parenting. Teacher-ratings of conflict and closeness, child aggression and social withdrawal were collected in pre-kindergarten. Two-part growth curve analyses conjointly modeled the likelihood of being victimized and severity of victimization. Teacher–child conflict in prekindergarten predicted the likelihood of concurrent and first grade victimization; closeness in prekindergarten was protective of more severe victimization over time. Conflict also moderated the relationship between social withdrawal and growth in severity of victimization. Discussion focuses on elucidating the ‘invisible hand’ of the teacher in peer dynamics, and on interventions for reducing conflict and promoting closeness in the classroom.
Children entering primary school are immersed in a novel context involving new figures of authority and a new peer group. Most children adapt well to this new setting (Quinn & Hennessy, 2010), but this new social sphere is not always benign. Some children are victimized by their peers, posing risks for children's adjustment, including peer rejection, loneliness, and school avoidance (Kochenderfer and Ladd, 1996 and Van Lier and Koot, 2010). Socio-emotional consequences of sustained victimization can include reduced academic achievement (Buhs, Ladd, & Herald, 2006), externalizing problems (Leadbeater & Hoglund, 2009) and internalizing problems (e.g., Boivin et al., 1995 and Hanish and Guerra, 2002), and in extreme cases, suicidal ideation (Brunstein Klomek et al., 2008 and Kim et al., 2005). What determines whom peers victimize? Research suggests that this is a function of Child × Environment interactions (Gazelle, 2006). Child × Environment models (Cairns et al., 1996, Magnusson, 1988 and Sameroff, 1993) emphasize that neither child behavior nor social contexts alone are adequate to account for children's developmental outcomes, but that an analysis of specific behaviors in particular contexts is required. For peer victimization, children's own behavior may serve to partly determine whether or not they are targets. Indeed, research has addressed aspects of the child's social behavior that can influence peer status, with social withdrawal (e.g., Gazelle & Ladd, 2003) and physical aggression (e.g., Barker et al., 2008) particularly important in understanding the development of victimization. But these behaviors may be of greater or lesser risk depending on the social context in which they are experienced. A small body of research has examined how teacher–child (T–C) relationship quality might serve as a risk for peer victimization; another small body of research has examined T–C relationship and/or classroom climate as a moderator of children's behavioral risk (e.g., Arbeau et al., 2010, Gazelle, 2006 and Spangler Avant et al., 2011). But to date, no longitudinal studies examined whether teacher–child relationship quality moderates children's behavioral risk over time to predict children's risk of peer victimization. Peer victimization and children's social behavior On average, peer victimization increases over the early years (Barker et al., 2008) and appears to stabilize thereafter (Snyder et al., 2003). Yet many if not most children experience little or no victimization in the early school years (Løhre, Lydersen, Paulsen, Mæhle, & Vatten, 2011); Barker et al. (2008) note that one in ten young children is a target of victimization. Nevertheless, by late childhood, some children have developed stable reputations as victims (Biggs et al., 2010 and Boivin et al., 2010). To understand who is targeted, it may be necessary to consider how children's social behaviors may confer risk of peer victimization. Research on peer victimization has established individual vulnerabilities that increase children's victimization risk (Kochenderfer-Ladd & Troop-Gordon, 2010). Children who display physical aggression may themselves become targets of other's aggression (Olweus, 1978). The evidence for the role of aggression in children's peer victimization, however, is mixed. Externalizing behaviors appear to predict the initial risk that a child will be victimized in kindergarten, but not necessarily subsequent changes in victimization status (Reavis, Keane, & Calkins, 2010). The role of aggression in predicting victimization is complicated by the potential for aggression to suppress further victimization, at least in the short term (Snyder et al., 2003). In light of this mixed evidence, further research examining the predictive role of early aggression on the likelihood and severity of victimization over time is warranted. Children who are socially withdrawn in peer contexts are more likely to be excluded by peers in first grade (Arbeau et al., 2010) and to become passive victims (Boulton, 1999 and Hodges et al., 1997). Social withdrawal predicts subsequent peer victimization in the middle-school years, accounting for previous levels of peer victimization (Boivin et al., 2010). Given the stability of social inhibition in childhood (Pfeifer, Goldsmith, Davison, & Rickman, 2002), further research examining the role of early social withdrawal on children's victimization is needed. Moreover, Gazelle's (2006) work suggests that the relationship of social withdrawal to peer adversity should be examined in relation to the specific social contexts in which withdrawal occurs.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The means (and standard deviations) for victimization through pre-kindergarten showed very slight increase in average victimization over this period (see Table 1). However, as expected, the victimization variables were severely skewed, with half of the children at the minimum possible value at each time point. Table 1 also presents zero-order correlations for study variables. Teachers who reported higher levels of aggression in their students also reported higher levels of conflict with the students, but conflict was not associated with withdrawal. T–C closeness was significantly and negatively correlated with both aggression and withdrawal. Of the parenting predictors, only authoritarian control was associated with children's teacher-rated social withdrawal.