@article{GrubertKulawiakSchwalbeetal.2018,
  author    = {Grubert, Jana and Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Schwalbe, Anja and Scherreiks, Lynn and B{\"o}rnert-Ringleb, Moritz and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Fragebogen zur Erfassung diagnostischer Kompetenzen hinsichtlich psychischer Auff{\"a}lligkeiten von Sch{\"u}ler_innen},
  series = {Potsdamer Beitr{\"a}ge zur Lehrerbildung und Bildungsforschung},
  journal   = {Potsdamer Beitr{\"a}ge zur Lehrerbildung und Bildungsforschung},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-442-5},
  issn      = {2626-4722},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-420167},
  pages     = {17 -- 27},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Die Diagnostik lernrelevanter Eigenschaften von Sch{\"u}ler_innen ist eine zentrale Kompetenz angehender und aktiver Lehrkr{\"a}fte. Auch psychische Auff{\"a}lligkeiten, also emotional-soziale Schwierigkeiten wie internalisierende und externalisierende Verhaltensweisen, k{\"o}nnen die betroffenen Sch{\"u}ler_innen belasten und somit deren akademische sowie emotional-soziale Entwicklung beeintr{\"a}chtigen. Grundlage einer angemessenen p{\"a}dagogischen und/oder psychotherapeutischen Intervention ist das fr{\"u}hzeitige und sachgerechte Erkennen von psychischen Auff{\"a}lligkeiten. Der vorliegende Beitrag thematisiert daher die diagnostischen Kompetenzen von Lehrkr{\"a}ften hinsichtlich psychischer Auff{\"a}lligkeiten von Sch{\"u}ler_innen sowie fachliche Gelingensbedingungen f{\"u}r diese diagnostischen Kompetenzen (Wissen, Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung, Verantwortungsempfinden). Darauf aufbauend wird ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung der diagnostischen Kompetenzen hinsichtlich psychischer Auff{\"a}lligkeiten vorgestellt und Einsatzm{\"o}glichkeiten des Fragebogenverfahrens diskutiert.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{GrubertSchwalbeKulawiaketal.2018,
  author    = {Grubert, Jana and Schwalbe, Anja and Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Seminarkonzept zur F{\"o}rderung inklusionsrelevanter Kompetenzen},
  series = {Potsdamer Beitr{\"a}ge zur Lehrerbildung und Bildungsforschung},
  journal   = {Potsdamer Beitr{\"a}ge zur Lehrerbildung und Bildungsforschung},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-442-5},
  issn      = {2626-3556},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-420265},
  pages     = {125 -- 134},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Der Beitrag stellt das im Rahmen der Qualit{\"a}tsoffensive Lehrerbildung entwickelte Seminarkonzept zur Vermittlung diagnostischer Lehrkr{\"a}ftekompetenzen mit Fokus auf internalisierende Verhaltensauff{\"a}lligkeiten von Sch{\"u}ler_innen vor, das bereits in Form des Psychodiagnostischen Praktikums im Studium des Grundschullehramts mit dem Schwerpunkt Inklusionsp{\"a}dagogik an der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam umgesetzt wird. Dabei wird das Konzept zun{\"a}chst hinsichtlich der Relevanz f{\"u}r die Ausbildung diagnostischer Kompetenzen angehender Lehrkr{\"a}fte betrachtet, bevor auf den Aufbau und Ablauf der Lehrveranstaltung eingegangen wird. Die Lehrveranstaltung umfasst neben der Vermittlung und Vertiefung von Wissen zur p{\"a}dagogischen Diagnostik die Umsetzung praktischer Aufgaben im Kontext Schule und deren anschließende Analyse und Reflexion, orientiert an wissenschaftlichen Reflexionsmodellen. Abschließend werden bisherige Erfahrungen hinsichtlich der Umsetzung des Seminarkonzepts im Rahmen des Psychodiagnostischen Praktikums berichtet und daraus Gelingensbedingungen f{\"u}r die Lehrveranstaltung formuliert.},
  language  = {de}
}
@book{AckermannAhlgrimmApelojgetal.2018,
  author    = {Ackermann, Peter and Ahlgrimm, Frederik and Apelojg, Benjamin and B{\"o}rnert-Ringleb, Moritz and Borowski, Andreas and Ehlert, Antje and Eichler, Constanze and Frohn, Julia and Gehrmann, Marie-Luise and Gerlach, Erin and Goetz, Ilka and Goral, Johanna and Gronostaj, Anna and Grubert, Jana and G{\"u}lery{\"u}z, Burak and Hacke, Alexander and Heck, Sebastian and Hermanns, Jolanda and Hochmuth, J{\"o}rg and Jennek, Julia and Jostes, Brigitte and Jurczok, Anne and Kleemann, Katrin and Kortenkamp, Ulrich and Krauskopf, Karsten and K{\"u}choll, Denise and Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Lauterbach, Wolfgang and Lazarides, Rebecca and Linka, Tim and L{\"o}weke, Sebastian and Lohse-Bossenz, Hendrik and Maar, Verena and Nowak, Anna and Ratzlaff, Olaf and Reitz-Koncebovski, Karen and Rother, Stefanie and Scherreiks, Lynn and Schroeder, Christoph and Schwalbe, Anja and Schwill, Andreas and Tosch, Frank and Vock, Miriam and Wagner, Luisa and Westphal, Andrea and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {PSI-Potsdam},
  series = {Potsdamer Beitr{\"a}ge zur Lehrerbildung und Bildungsforschung},
  journal   = {Potsdamer Beitr{\"a}ge zur Lehrerbildung und Bildungsforschung},
  number    = {1},
  editor    = {Borowski, Andreas and Ehlert, Antje and Prechtl, Helmut},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-442-5},
  issn      = {2626-3556},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-414542},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {354},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {In Brandenburg kommt der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam eine besondere Rolle zu: Sie ist die einzige, an der zuk{\"u}nftige Lehrerinnen und Lehrer die erste Phase ihres Werdegangs - das Lehramtsstudium - absolvieren k{\"o}nnen. Vor diesem Hintergrund wurde bereits kurz nach der Gr{\"u}ndung im Jahr 1991 das „Potsdamer Modell der Lehrerbildung" entwickelt. Dieses Modell strebt fortlaufend eine enge Verzahnung von Theorie und Praxis {\"u}ber das gesamte Studium hinweg an und bindet hierf{\"u}r die schulpraktischen Studienanteile in besonderer Weise ein. Eine erneute St{\"a}rkung erfuhr die Lehrerbildung im Dezember 2014 mit der Gr{\"u}ndung des Zentrums f{\"u}r Lehrerbildung und Bildungsforschung (ZeLB). Aus der koordinierenden Arbeit des Zentrums entstand das fakult{\"a}ts{\"u}bergreifende Projekt „Professionalisierung - Schulpraktische Studien - Inklusion" (PSI-Potsdam) das im Rahmen der Qualit{\"a}tsoffensive Lehrerbildung des Bundesministeriums f{\"u}r Bildung und Forschung erfolgreich gef{\"o}rdert wurde (2015-2018) und dessen Verl{\"a}ngerung (2019-2023) bewilligt ist. Der vorliegende Band vermittelt in den drei großen Kapiteln „Erhebungsinstrumente", „Seminarkonzepte" und „Vernetzungen" einen {\"U}berblick {\"u}ber einige der praxisnahen Forschungszug{\"a}nge, hochschuldidaktischen Ans{\"a}tze und Strategien zur Vernetzung innerhalb der Lehrerbildung, die im Rahmen von PSI-Potsdam entwickelt und umgesetzt wurden. Die Beitr{\"a}ge wurden mit dem Ziel verfasst, Kolleginnen und Kollegen an Universit{\"a}ten und Hochschulen, Akteur_innen des Vorbereitungsdiensts sowie der Fort- und Weiterbildung von Lehrkr{\"a}ften m{\"o}glichst konkrete Einblicke zu gew{\"a}hren. Unter der Herausgeberschaft von Prof. Dr. Andreas Borowski (Fachdidaktik Physik), Prof. Dr. Antje Ehlert (Inklusionsp{\"a}dagogik mit dem F{\"o}rderschwerpunkt Lernen) und Prof. Dr. Helmut Prechtl (Fachdidaktik Biologie) vereinen sich Autor_innen mit breit gestreuter fachdidaktischer und bildungswissenschaftlicher Expertise.},
  language  = {de}
}
@misc{KulawiakWilbert2019,
  author    = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Introduction of a new method for representing the sociometric status within the peer group},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {570},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-43413},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-434137},
  pages     = {20},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Sociometrically neglected children are not often liked and not often disliked by their peers. This kind of social information is known as social status. Evidence concerning internalizing behaviour of neglected children is as yet equivocal. Contradictory research results could possibly be attributed to methodological issues of social status classification methods. Therefore, we will paradigmatically emphasize insufficiencies of one social status classification method. Since arbitrary cutoffs (sociometric data) provide the basis for the categorical classification of social status groups, the classification approach lacks precision and consistency. Furthermore, social status classification discounts the multidimensional nature of a child's social status (social status group affiliation is mutually exclusive), disregards between-peer-group differences in the sociometric data, and offers a peer-group-norm-referenced interpretation. By contrast, we will highlight some advantages of the newly introduced social status extreme points procedure, which describes a child's social status in terms of the child's adaptation to sociometric extreme points. The continuous social status extreme points variables offer a criterion-referenced interpretation (multidimensionality: degree of adaptation to each and every sociometric extreme point). The performance and agreement of both methods will be demonstrated using empirical data (N = 316 children within 22 school classes).},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Kulawiak2019,
  author    = {Kulawiak, Pawel R.},
  title     = {Soziale Inklusion von Schulkindern mit sonderp{\"a}dagogischem F{\"o}rderbedarf},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Zwei grundlegende Herausforderungen der sozialen Inklusionsforschung werden im vorliegenden Beitrag erl{\"a}utert: Die Operationalisierung sozialer Inklusion sowie sonderp{\"a}dagogischer F{\"o}rderbedarfe. Anhand der dargelegten Forschung wird untersucht, ob die beiden methodischen Aspekte zu fehlerhaften Schl{\"u}ssen und widerspr{\"u}chlichen Forschungsergebnissen {\"u}ber die soziale Inklusion von Kindern mit sonderp{\"a}dagogischem F{\"o}rderbedarf f{\"u}hren. Dementsprechend wird die Vermeidung fehlerhafter Schl{\"u}sse und widerspr{\"u}chlicher Forschungsergebnisse mittels einer Optimierung der Operationalisierung sozialer Inklusion sowie sonderp{\"a}dagogischer F{\"o}rderbedarfe thematisiert. Die vorliegende Forschung fokussiert sich hierbei vorrangig auf die soziometrischen Methoden zur Erfassung sozialer Inklusion sowie auf schulisches Problemverhalten im Sinne des F{\"o}rderbedarfs emotional-soziale Entwicklung (insbesondere internalisierende aber auch externalisierende Verhaltensprobleme).},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{KulawiakUrtonKrulletal.2020,
  author    = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Urton, Karolina and Krull, Johanna and Hennemann, Thomas and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Internalizing Behavior of Sociometrically Neglected Students in Inclusive Primary Classrooms},
  series = {frontiers in Education},
  volume    = {5},
  journal   = {frontiers in Education},
  publisher = {Frontiers Media},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {2504-284X},
  doi       = {10.3389/feduc.2020.00032},
  pages     = {12},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Internalizing problems in children belong to the category of special educational needs called emotional and behavioral difficulties. Recent decades have witnessed a critical discussion about whether children and adolescents experiencing internalizing problems are at risk of being sociometrically neglected (neither liked nor disliked by their peers). Previous studies have shown evidence both for and against the association between internalizing problems and neglected sociometric status. These contradictory results may be due to the following methodological aspects: (1) shortcomings of sociometric status classification methods (arbitrariness of the sociometric classification rules) and (2) different operationalizations of internalizing problems (broadband and narrowband dimensions of behavior). The aim of the present study is to investigate empirically whether and to what extent these methodological aspects lead to contradictory results on the internalizing behavior of neglected students. This question is investigated using a sample of students (N = 2334) in German inclusive primary schools. The systematic investigation presented here provides initial indications that the various methodological approaches can lead to conflicting results. The contradictory results are not only due to the application of different sociometric classification methods, but also to different operationalizations of internalizing behavior (narrowband and broadband scales). Earlier contradictory evidence on the internalizing behavior of neglected students must therefore be seen in a different light: the reasons for previously conflicting results may actually be methodological. Based on the results, conclusions are drawn as to how methodological aspects can be given more consideration in sociometric research on internalizing behavior.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{KulawiakWilbertSchlacketal.2020,
  author    = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen and Schlack, Robert and B{\"o}rnert-Ringleb, Moritz},
  title     = {Prediction of child and adolescent outcomes with broadband and narrowband dimensions of internalizing and externalizing behavior using the child and adolescent version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {669},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-48515},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-485156},
  pages     = {19},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a frequently used screening instrument for behavioral problems in children and adolescents. There is an ongoing controversy—not only in educational research—regarding the factor structure of the SDQ. Research results speak for a 3-factor as well as a 5-factor structure. The narrowband scales (5-factor structure) can be combined into broadband scales (3-factor structure). The question remains: Which factors (narrowband vs. broadband) are better predictors? With the prediction of child and adolescent outcomes (academic grades, well-being, and self-belief), we evaluated whether the broadband scales of internalizing and externalizing behavior (3-factor structure) or narrowband scales of behavior (5-factor structure) are better suited for predictive purposes in a cross-sectional study setting. The sample includes students in grades 5 to 9 (N = 4642) from the representative German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS study). The results of model comparisons (broadband scale vs. narrowband scales) did not support the superiority of the broadband scales with regard to the prediction of child and adolescent outcomes. There is no benefit from subsuming narrowband scales (5-factor structure) into broadband scales (3-factor structure). The application of narrowband scales, providing a more differentiated picture of students' academic and social situation, was more appropriate for predictive purposes. For the purpose of identifying students at risk of struggling in educational contexts, using the set of narrowband dimensions of behavior seems to be more suitable.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{KulawiakUrtonKrulletal.2020,
  author    = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Urton, Karolina and Krull, Johanna and Hennemann, Thomas and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Internalizing Behavior of Sociometrically Neglected Students in Inclusive Primary Classrooms},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {652},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-47452},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-474525},
  pages     = {14},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Internalizing problems in children belong to the category of special educational needs called emotional and behavioral difficulties. Recent decades have witnessed a critical discussion about whether children and adolescents experiencing internalizing problems are at risk of being sociometrically neglected (neither liked nor disliked by their peers). Previous studies have shown evidence both for and against the association between internalizing problems and neglected sociometric status. These contradictory results may be due to the following methodological aspects: (1) shortcomings of sociometric status classification methods (arbitrariness of the sociometric classification rules) and (2) different operationalizations of internalizing problems (broadband and narrowband dimensions of behavior). The aim of the present study is to investigate empirically whether and to what extent these methodological aspects lead to contradictory results on the internalizing behavior of neglected students. This question is investigated using a sample of students (N = 2334) in German inclusive primary schools. The systematic investigation presented here provides initial indications that the various methodological approaches can lead to conflicting results. The contradictory results are not only due to the application of different sociometric classification methods, but also to different operationalizations of internalizing behavior (narrowband and broadband scales). Earlier contradictory evidence on the internalizing behavior of neglected students must therefore be seen in a different light: the reasons for previously conflicting results may actually be methodological. Based on the results, conclusions are drawn as to how methodological aspects can be given more consideration in sociometric research on internalizing behavior.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KulawiakWilbertSchlacketal.2020,
  author    = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen and Schlack, Robert and B{\"o}rnert-Ringleb, Moritz},
  title     = {Prediction of child and adolescent outcomes with broadband and narrowband dimensions of internalizing and externalizing behavior using the child and adolescent version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire},
  series = {PLOS ONE},
  volume    = {15},
  journal   = {PLOS ONE},
  number    = {10},
  publisher = {PLOS},
  address   = {San Francisco, California},
  issn      = {1932-6203},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0240312},
  pages     = {17},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a frequently used screening instrument for behavioral problems in children and adolescents. There is an ongoing controversy—not only in educational research—regarding the factor structure of the SDQ. Research results speak for a 3-factor as well as a 5-factor structure. The narrowband scales (5-factor structure) can be combined into broadband scales (3-factor structure). The question remains: Which factors (narrowband vs. broadband) are better predictors? With the prediction of child and adolescent outcomes (academic grades, well-being, and self-belief), we evaluated whether the broadband scales of internalizing and externalizing behavior (3-factor structure) or narrowband scales of behavior (5-factor structure) are better suited for predictive purposes in a cross-sectional study setting. The sample includes students in grades 5 to 9 (N = 4642) from the representative German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS study). The results of model comparisons (broadband scale vs. narrowband scales) did not support the superiority of the broadband scales with regard to the prediction of child and adolescent outcomes. There is no benefit from subsuming narrowband scales (5-factor structure) into broadband scales (3-factor structure). The application of narrowband scales, providing a more differentiated picture of students' academic and social situation, was more appropriate for predictive purposes. For the purpose of identifying students at risk of struggling in educational contexts, using the set of narrowband dimensions of behavior seems to be more suitable.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WilbertUrtonKrulletal.2020,
  author    = {Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen and Urton, Karolina and Krull, Johanna and Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Schwalbe, Anja and Hennemann, Thomas},
  title     = {Teachers' accuracy in estimating social inclusion of students with and without special educational needs},
  series = {Frontiers in education},
  volume    = {5},
  journal   = {Frontiers in education},
  publisher = {Frontiers Media},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {2504-284X},
  doi       = {10.3389/feduc.2020.598330},
  pages     = {11},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {It is unclear to what extent teachers can accurately assess the social inclusion of their students with and without SEN. The study aims to shed light on these desiderata. Students (N = 1.644) with SEN (learning, behavior, and language problems) and without SEN and their teachers (N = 79) participated in the study. Sociometric peer nominations, students' self-perceived social inclusion, and teachers' assessments regarding students' social inclusion and self-perceived social inclusion were administered. The results suggest that teachers are moderately accurate in identifying social acceptance and social rejection, while accuracy is low when assessing students' self-perceived social inclusion. That said, rating accuracy varied strongly between teachers, ranging from no agreement to a perfect concordance. Teachers seem to be more accurate in estimating the social acceptance of students with learning problems. The results emphasize the importance of differentiating between various social inclusion criteria (i.e., students' self-report vs. peer nominations) and accounting for inter-individual differences in teachers' rating accuracy.},
  language  = {en}
}