Wellbeing, student engagement and resilience
Academic Digest
A study into wellbeing, student engagement and resilience in early-adolescent international school students
Authors: Phillipa McKeering; Yoon-Suk Hwang and Clarence Ng (Australian Catholic University, Brisbane)
Digest By: Dr Stephen Whithead
Every generation throws up its own language, its own symbols, its own buzz words.
And this generation is no exception – and the current buzzword is ‘wellbeing’.
Wellbeing is fast assuming a global aspiration akin to happiness in the lexicon of the 21st century. That is, we are constantly urged to aspire towards it and use it as a definer of the quality of our very existence.
But can you define ‘wellbeing’?
Unlikely.
Which is precisely what makes it such a powerful discourse. If it feels like something we should have but remains beyond definition then that opens it up to multiple interpretations, all of them subjective. E.g. my sense of wellbeing doesn’t need to match yours in order for it to be valid.
Wellbeing, happiness, everlasting true love, equality for all, soulmates, paradise, justice, freedom of speech, consumer choice – just a few of the powerful words and phrases that have so much emotional impact yet prove to be beyond definition.
And, even if you can offer a definition, you’ll still have difficulty putting any of these terms into practice.
Which makes any attempt to seriously research these words or phrases as they are experienced by real people, quite a challenge.
But this is the challenge taken on by McKeering, Hwang and Ng, who ‘investigate wellbeing, engagement and resilience’ of early adolescent international school students in Singapore.
They start by placing the term in a global context:
“The wellbeing of an individual has been argued by the World Health Organisation (WHO, 2014) to encompass an individual’s ability to cope with normal stresses of life, work productivity and fruitfully, and contribute to the community. Whilst there is no consensus around a single definition of wellbeing, it can include key psychological dimensions, such as the presence of a positive emotional state and positive outlook (Liddle and Carter, 2015) and the ability to make decisions and take responsibility in achieving a fulfilled life (Ager et al., 2015; Roscoe, 2009). “ (p. 71)
This all-encompassing description is precisely why I tend to hold a rather jaundiced view towards the whole concept of wellbeing – I’ve yet to meet any person who meets all the above criteria or at least does so consistently throughout their life.
In other words, wellbeing is a state of mine and being a state of mind it is not stable, predictable, constant or immune from all the variables which might influence it, from deep emotional trauma to a boozy night out with your pals.
So how does one measure this state of mind, especially in international school students who may well be experiencing deep emotional trauma and a boozy night out with their pals, simultaneously?
Not to mention the fact that…
“Psychological problems associated with mobility experienced by school-age international students may include a confused sense of their own identity, transient friendships with peers, and lack of connection with a national culture…Such students may be prone to loneliness because of regular changes in their friendship networks. They may be inclined to avoid solving social or personal problems because they know that the problem or conflict will ‘go away’. (p. 71)
Anyone working in international schools will recognise the ‘identity issues’ which can readily emerge in students. Indeed, they can readily emerge in the staff. So any academic research into this issue is to be welcomed. Wellbeing may be impossible to define but maybe all we need do is accept that the individual knows when they have it and when they don’t.
So we are very much in the realm of the qualitative, interpretative, subjective. Wellbeing is not a state of being which lends itself to quantitative analysis.
At the same time, how would any researcher go about producing qualitative research into the mental state of school-age students? Not easily. The ethical and access issues would preclude it.
Which probably explains why these authors chose to go the quantitative route:
“An information session was held for students and parents of the school following ethical approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee of the university through which the research was being undertaken, and the school Headmaster. An invitation to participate in the study was distributed to 314 students in years six to eight of the school. A total of 186 students (59%) returned signed parental consent forms and student assent forms to confirm they would participate. The questionnaire was administered to students in morning form time. It was expected to take approximately 20-30 minutes to complete, and not additional time was required [all usual consent and ethics issues were in play]. “ (p. 77)
And the research questions the researchers were trying to answer?
1. What are the associations between measures of wellbeing, student engagement, and resilience in early-adolescent international school students?
2. What effect do age, gender, and mobility factors have on wellbeing, student engagement, and resilience in early adolescent international school students?
Just two core questions, but actually a host of secondary variables, making this quite a complex study.
And the findings?
“Positive significant association between wellbeing, student engagement and resilience levels in early-adolescent international school students”.
However:
1. Early-adolescent international school students who had resided in the country [Singapore] for less than 2 years reported lower levels of resilience than those who had resided over 2 years. The research showed that newly arrived students were demonstrating less resilience than students with longer residence.
2. International school mobility can negatively impact on student wellbeing. Many such students are experiencing ‘adjustment problems’.
3. Newly arrived students require additional support from the school.
4. Age and gender variables also factor into the equation, with male students aged 12-14 being the least likely to feel ‘optimistic and happy’ and engaged with their studies.
In sum, this interesting study reveals something that most teachers are probably already aware of, that pre-adolescent males tend to experience the most difficulty in school, in their engagement with their studies, and in acquiring feelings of wellbeing.
This problem is magnified many times over for such students who find themselves moving from school to school, county to country.
Using this research as evidential justification, it might be advisable for all international schools to assume that their pre-adolescent male students are experiencing problems in not only acquiring a sense of (identity) wellbeing, but if they are recent arrivals, culture shock. This would certainly be preferable to waiting for such students to present problems in more serious ways.
reference
McKeering P, Hwang Y-S, Ng C. A study into wellbeing, student engagement and resilience in early-adolescent international school students. Journal of Research in International Education. 2021;20(1):69-92
link
doi.org/10.1177%2F14752409211006650