TY - JOUR A1 - Kulawiak, Pawel R. A1 - Urton, Karolina A1 - Krull, Johanna A1 - Hennemann, Thomas A1 - Wilbert, Jürgen T1 - Internalizing Behavior of Sociometrically Neglected Students in Inclusive Primary Classrooms BT - A Methodological Issue? JF - frontiers in Education N2 - 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. KW - special educational needs KW - inclusive education KW - social inclusion KW - sociometric status KW - sociometric neglect KW - internalizing behavior KW - broadband and narrowband dimensions of behavior Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00032 SN - 2504-284X VL - 5 PB - Frontiers Media CY - Lausanne ER - TY - GEN A1 - Kulawiak, Pawel R. A1 - Urton, Karolina A1 - Krull, Johanna A1 - Hennemann, Thomas A1 - Wilbert, Jürgen T1 - Internalizing Behavior of Sociometrically Neglected Students in Inclusive Primary Classrooms BT - A Methodological Issue? T2 - Postprints der Universität Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe N2 - 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. T3 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe - 652 KW - special educational needs KW - inclusive education KW - social inclusion KW - sociometric status KW - sociometric neglect KW - internalizing behavior KW - broadband and narrowband dimensions of behavior Y1 - 2020 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-474525 SN - 1866-8364 IS - 652 ER - TY - GEN A1 - Kulawiak, Pawel R. A1 - Wilbert, Jürgen A1 - Schlack, Robert A1 - Börnert-Ringleb, Moritz T1 - 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 T2 - Postprints der Universität Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe N2 - 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. T3 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe - 669 KW - psychometric properties KW - developmental trajectories KW - emotional difficulties KW - academic-achievement KW - conduct problems KW - parent KW - sdq KW - hyperactivity KW - comorbidity KW - validation Y1 - 2020 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-485156 SN - 1866-8364 IS - 669 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kulawiak, Pawel R. A1 - Wilbert, Jürgen A1 - Schlack, Robert A1 - Börnert-Ringleb, Moritz T1 - 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 JF - PLOS ONE N2 - 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. KW - psychometric properties KW - developmental trajectories KW - emotional difficulties KW - academic-achievement KW - conduct problems KW - parent KW - sdq KW - hyperactivity KW - comorbidity KW - validation Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240312 SN - 1932-6203 VL - 15 IS - 10 PB - PLOS CY - San Francisco, California ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Wilbert, Jürgen A1 - Urton, Karolina A1 - Krull, Johanna A1 - Kulawiak, Pawel R. A1 - Schwalbe, Anja A1 - Hennemann, Thomas T1 - Teachers' accuracy in estimating social inclusion of students with and without special educational needs JF - Frontiers in education N2 - 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. KW - judgement accuracy KW - social inclusion KW - special educational needs KW - teacher KW - inclusive education KW - sociometry Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.598330 SN - 2504-284X VL - 5 PB - Frontiers Media CY - Lausanne ER -