What do Support Professionals do in Schools? Construction and Validation of an Instrument for Assessing Whole-School Prevention and Promotion Strategies

Verónica López, Dayana Olavarría, Karen Cárdenas, Sebastián Ortíz, N. Alfaro, Boris Villalobos-Parada
{"title":"What do Support Professionals do in Schools? Construction and Validation of an Instrument for Assessing Whole-School Prevention and Promotion Strategies","authors":"Verónica López, Dayana Olavarría, Karen Cárdenas, Sebastián Ortíz, N. Alfaro, Boris Villalobos-Parada","doi":"10.1177/26320770211051965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Education policies worldwide have encouraged the entry and permanence of nonteaching support professionals in schools. During the last decade, Chilean regulations have allowed a massive incorporation of these professionals—mostly school psychologists and social workers—in publicly funded schools. However, there is scarce evidence regarding the actions of these professionals, including whether and how they align with whole-school approaches. In this study, we constructed and validated scales to assess professional practices aligned with universal prevention and whole-school approaches deployed by nonteaching professionals in schools. Participants were 329 professionals from municipal, private subsidized, and private Chilean schools. Psychometric properties were analyzed through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses for construct validation and with Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency. The results show that the instruments had adequate psychometric properties in terms of validity and reliability, allowing the assessment of four types of practices: individual socioemotional and academic support, group socioemotional and academic support, leadership practices, and interdisciplinary collaborative practices. We argue that these practices can be theoretically organized based on whole-school prevention and promotion strategies. Preliminary mean comparisons show that the most prevalent practice is through individual supports. We highlight the need to provide sound instruments that may allow comprehensive assessments of the actions deployed by nonteaching support professionals in whole-school improvement efforts.","PeriodicalId":73906,"journal":{"name":"Journal of prevention and health promotion","volume":"1 1","pages":"329 - 357"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of prevention and health promotion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26320770211051965","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Education policies worldwide have encouraged the entry and permanence of nonteaching support professionals in schools. During the last decade, Chilean regulations have allowed a massive incorporation of these professionals—mostly school psychologists and social workers—in publicly funded schools. However, there is scarce evidence regarding the actions of these professionals, including whether and how they align with whole-school approaches. In this study, we constructed and validated scales to assess professional practices aligned with universal prevention and whole-school approaches deployed by nonteaching professionals in schools. Participants were 329 professionals from municipal, private subsidized, and private Chilean schools. Psychometric properties were analyzed through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses for construct validation and with Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency. The results show that the instruments had adequate psychometric properties in terms of validity and reliability, allowing the assessment of four types of practices: individual socioemotional and academic support, group socioemotional and academic support, leadership practices, and interdisciplinary collaborative practices. We argue that these practices can be theoretically organized based on whole-school prevention and promotion strategies. Preliminary mean comparisons show that the most prevalent practice is through individual supports. We highlight the need to provide sound instruments that may allow comprehensive assessments of the actions deployed by nonteaching support professionals in whole-school improvement efforts.
支持专业人员在学校做什么?全校预防与促进策略评估工具的建构与验证
世界各地的教育政策都鼓励非教学支持专业人员进入学校并长期任职。在过去的十年里,智利的法规允许这些专业人士——主要是学校心理学家和社会工作者——在公立学校大规模合并。然而,很少有证据表明这些专业人员的行动,包括他们是否以及如何与全校的方法相一致。在本研究中,我们构建并验证了量表,以评估与学校非教学专业人员部署的普遍预防和全校方法相一致的专业实践。参与者是329名来自智利市政学校、私立补贴学校和私立学校的专业人士。心理测量特性通过探索性和验证性因素分析进行结构验证,并使用Cronbach 's alpha进行内部一致性分析。结果表明,这些工具在效度和信度方面具有足够的心理测量特性,可以评估四种类型的实践:个人社会情感和学术支持、群体社会情感和学术支持、领导实践和跨学科合作实践。我们认为,这些实践可以在理论上组织基于全校预防和促进策略。初步的平均数比较表明,最普遍的做法是通过个人支持。我们强调需要提供健全的工具,以便对非教学支持专业人员在全校改进工作中所采取的行动进行全面评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信