Annotated+Bibliography+for+Resilience

Annotated Bibliography for Resilience Mary A Klinger Drexel University August 2, 2011

** Abstract ** The purpose of this annotated bibliography is to gather recent research related to the potential of teachers to foster resilience in students. Ten scholarly, peer-reviewed articles and three websites were selected that satisfied a need to understand trends in resilience research and to bring new findings to light.The resources reveal a longitudinal framework of four waves of resilience research and provide suggested starting points for future research. Current research in this field has moved beyond studies of risk factors, protective factors and interventions to focus on developments such as genetic research and developmental cascades, the process of change which moves across domains or levels in a system. The working definition of resilience has been modified to reflect more of a dynamic interaction between an individual or a system and its unique environment. Research in resilience should not repeat the processes of earlier frameworks, but should synthesize what is known into practice. This important collection of resources situates future studies in resilience toward new frontiers.

The overarching goal of this program of research is to promote the potential of K-12 teachers in helping children develop resilience. Resilience is considered in simple terms as the self-righting nature of human development, but this dynamic process is highly individualized based on the unique characteristics of the child and the capacity of the environment to support the child’s needs. A long-term practical goal for this study is to elevate a school’s capacity to help students who are dealing with adversity on a daily basis. Students who are resilient are able to adapt to change and are ultimately more successful in life. They are able to transition to adulthood and become responsible citizens and productive members of the community. Masten (2007, 2008,2011) pointed out that research in resilience is now in the fourth wave. Resilience has been accepted as an ongoing process between the individual or other entity, and the environment. During the first wave, a variety of risk factors and protective factors were identified and studied. The second wave closely examined the process of developing resilience. Interventions were evaluated during the third wave seeking to find ways to compensate for adversity. Now, in the fourth wave, a system-wide approach has led to important findings. By combining research across disciplines and around the world, researchers have come so far as to identify one single allele that appears to have an effect on an individual’s ability to adapt and move on (Sapienza & Masten, 2011). Studies have emphasized the enormous influence of factors in the environment; including cultural expectations, timing of interventions, and the effect of accumulating risks (Vanderbilt-Adriance & Shaw, 2008). Educational settings have great potential to make a difference for children, but teachers do not commonly receive training in building resilience. Adults in schools need to be able to recognize signs of stress in students and to intervene effectively, providing support and encouragement. It is critical for teachers and administrators to be concerned with positive development of the whole child; academically, socially, physically, and emotionally. Teachers should be asking:What does a resilient student look like? What protective factors are most important for my students? How can our school system promote a climate that helps to support students through the harsh realities of life? How can I embed high academic expectations within an environment of positive self-efficacy? One well researched protective factor is the concept of competence. Cicchetti et al. (cited inVanderbilt-Adriance & Shaw, 2008) quantified competence as measuring within the top third of adaptive functioning on four out of seven domains. Even when the child developed a sense of competence, if the external supports were not strong, the child remained at risk. It is critical to investigate the role of educators in the process of building resilience and to explore teachers’perceptions of how to develop resilience. Any assumptions that teachers have specific skills in this area, one that is critical for students, may be putting students at risk. In a time when schools are under extreme pressure, the necessity of helping students build and solidify a resilient character may be lost in the drive to high stakes testing. Recent studies of the perceptions of teachers about resilience have shown misunderstandings as well as a lack of confidence in ability to foster resilience in students. Research has not yet shown how much training or what kind of training teachers need in order to cultivate a supportive environment to high risk, diverse students. There is a need for more research in resilience to learn how protective factors interact with children who are both resilient and non-resilient. This research is directed toward these needs.

Beutel, D. (2010). The nature of pedagogic teacher-student interactions:A phenomenographic study. //The Australian Educational Researcher, 37//(2),77-91. doi:10.1007/BF03216923

This qualitative study aimed to describe the range of pedagogical experiences present in a small sample of 20 Australian teachers. The use of direct quotes from the teachers enriched and clarified the five different classifications of teacher-student interactions – information providing, instructing, facilitating, guided participation, and mentoring. Each category was described clearly and variations between categories were illuminated. The article paid particular attention to explaining phenomenographic studies and creating validity for these studies.

Four of the journal articles in this Annotated Bibliography were connected in analmost linear progression. Masten (2008) addressed the concept of fostering resilience from a broad systems-wide approach, stressing multilevel dynamics reaching far beyond school systems. The research of Rowe, Stewart, and Patterson (2007) limited the discussion to the local school, family and community. Downey (2008) narrowed the focus to attributes of teacher-student rapport, classroom climate, instructional strategies, and student skills. The recommendations by Beutel (2010) concentrated on one of Downey’s (2008) categories – teacher-student interactions. The benefits of the teacher as a mentor, acting as “partners in learning” were evident. This classification system and the characteristics of each category will be helpful for future researchers.

Block, J. & Block, J. H. (2006). Venturing a 30-year longitudinalstudy. //American Psychologist, 61//(4). 315-327. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.315

In this landmark study, the authors summarized 30 years of studying two constructs of personality. //Ego-control// was defined as an individual’s response to stimuli and was evaluated on a continuum of undercontrol to overcontrol. //Ego-resiliency// involved a person’s adaptability throughout the challenges of life. The study, conducted in Berkeley, California, followed 128 children (94 with attrition)from the age of 3 to age 32, collecting a large set of data. The study found evidence that boys internalized the effects of divorce years before the actual occurrence, signs in early childhood of factors commonly seen in drug users, gender specific relationships between ego-control and future symptoms of depression, correlations for resilience in boys between early childhood and young adulthood, and an inverse relationship for girls between overcontrol and resiliency.

This study was chosen because of the encompassing 30-year data set and because of the focus on ego-resiliency. The study developed strong psychological groundwork for understanding resilience, especially when considering gender differences. The implication of the study for future research in resilience is to be aware of how teachers might vary their perceptions of boys and girls in school settings.

Brooks, R., (n.d.). Resilience, motivation and family relationships. [Website]. Retrieved July 19, 2011from http:www.drrobertbrooks.com/index.html

This author is an expert in fostering resilience in schools. His website features lectures as well as a collection of links that are particularly relevant for school administrators. Brooks identified three components of a motivating environment - the need to belong, feel connected, and feel welcome, the need for self-determination and autonomy, and the need to feel competent (Brooks, 2011). Brooks emphasized the practice of building from what students can do, their individual “islands of competence” instead of focusing on their challenges. This confirms Beutels (2010) focus on teacher-student interactions as a factor in fostering resilience.

This website has been included in the annotated bibliography because of Dr. Brooks’ attention to the influence of teachers in fostering resilience. The experiences Dr. Brooks speaks of are realistic and teachers would be able to relate to these situations. Dr. Brooks’suggested that schools include a focus on resilience in the school’s vision statement. Although the basics of Dr. Brooks’ website and speech corroborate the writing of other authors, some go beyond his work in envisioning larger systems (Masten, 2008), and including communities in a more active way (Rowe et al., 2007).

Downey, J. A. (2008). Recommendations for fostering educational resilience in the classroom. //Preventing School Failure//, //53//(1), 56-64.doi:10.3200/PSFL.53.1.56-64

The author studied research of fostering educational resilience at the classroom level for K-12 students in the United States. Four clusters of recommendations were developed for schools – teacher-student rapport, classroom climate, instructional strategies, and student skills. The author then asked 32 practicing teachers to comment on the suggested practices. The teachers in this study validated the recommendations and connected them to sound teaching practices.Teachers did not see a need for commercial programs or in-depth teacher training to foster resilience in students.

A critical connection has been well established between academic success and social/emotional well-being (Sapienza & Masten, 2011, Vanderbilt-Adriance,2008). Additionally, for some students lack of success in school is in itself an adversity, beginning a series of difficulties. This article provided 12 recommendations for improving the school environment to more effectively foster resilience. Since this study addressed only educational resilience, the information presented will be generally applicable, but will not be as useful for researchers interested in a more comprehensive view of resilience.

Early Childhood and Parenting Collaborative (EPAC), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (2010).Resilience Net: Information for helping children and families overcome adversity. [Website] Retrieved from http://resilnet.uiuc.edu/abtrnet.html

This website provided links to worldwide resilience projects and websites including the International Resilience Project and the Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At-Risk (CRESPAR). One feature of the website was the Virtual Library, an expansive resource linking to 53 journal articles and websites,several of which were in languages other than English and written about resilience studies in many countries. These resources were directed to a variety of audiences – parents, caregivers, educators, policy makers, and counselors. Different topics of resilience were assembled including youth violence, urban schools, wartime stress, rural hardships, fear, tragedy, adoption, and mental health.

The website was well laid out and easy to maneuver. Many well-known names and organizations were listed such as National Child Traumatic Stress Network, Resiliency in Action, Project Resilience, and the California Healthy Kids Survey. The resources on this website allow for more detailed investigation in regard to research in resilience worldwide.

Maddi, S.R. (2002). The story of hardiness: Twenty years of theorizing, research, and practice. //Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research//, //54//(3), 175-185. doi:10.1037/1061- 4087.54.3.175

The author discussed multiple studies in the theory of “hardiness”, a concept which mitigates the effect of risk factors leading to less stress-related symptoms. When measured alongside social support and physical exercise, hardiness appeared to be the most effective factor. Maddi reported studies showing that those with high levels of hardiness had experienced “disruptive, stressful early family life” coupled with a parental expectation of success, perpetuating a compelling belief that opportunity can arise from adversity. In order to be free of the barriers of anxiety, Maddi proposed that we need “existential courage”, a combination of three factors identified as commitment, control and challenge. The author has developed a complex hardiness model to show the interconnectedness of beliefs, social supports, inherited vulnerabilities, and stress. The most recent 65-item Personal Views Survey III-R measures individual strength and needs in vulnerability and resistance to develop a wellness ratio. Training in hardiness developed into what the author called “five fingers in one hand” – coping, social support,relaxation, nutrition, and physical activity.

This study is an important parallel study to the identification of factors ofresilience. The implications of this line of study can guide the development of teacher training sessions.

Masten, A. S. (2007). Resilience in developing systems: Progress and promise as the fourth wave rises. //Development and Psychopathology, 19//, 921-930. doi: 10.1017/S0954579407000442

The author described four waves of research in resilience. The goal of the first wave was to describe resilience in different instances and to identify important factors. The second wave included many longitudinal studies of the processes of resilience within complex environments. More scientific, randomized experiments formed the third wave of research, particularly investigating the effects of various interventions. The fourth wave of research in this field is influenced by new understandings of imaging, molecular genetics, statistics and computer science allowing for more in depth studies of the dynamics of resilience. Masten suggested studies on neural and psychobiological systems, genetic-environment interaction, and multilevel research based on adaptive processes. The author’s list of “hotspots” for fourth wave research include systems of information processing, problem solving, mastery and reward, spiritual/religious, peer systems, schools, and attachment relationships, among others. The author encouraged those who work in the field to think of resilience broadly – across multiplesystems.

The author’s list of scholars in the different stages of resilience studies is a comprehensive resource for researchers. The complex layers of resilience noted in this article show how the field has advanced when viewed from a global perspective.

Masten, A. S. (2011). Resilience in children threatened by extreme adversity: Frameworks for research, practice,and translational synergy. //Development and Psychopathology, 23//(2), 493-506. doi: 10.1017/S0954579411000198

This author summarized research in resilience and built a framework (based on meaning, mission, models, measures, and multilevel dynamics) with specific suggestions for future studies. The author called attention to the alliance of resilience in ecology and in behavioural sciences. Discussion about changes in mission and models included a clear graphic of adaptive and maladaptive pathways from crisis phase to recovery phase. Descriptions of measures of resilience followed the progression of recent resilience research, moving from adaptive behaviour to competence to developmental cascades. Researchers are asked to consider study of adaptive systems as the “most ambitious form of intervention” and to draw upon leverage point opportunities in the timing of interventions.Furthermore, there is a need to focus on specialized topics such as counteracting specific threats, uncovering the functions of self-efficacy, and enhancing relationships. The concept of translational synergy is introduced as a partnership between researchers and practitioners to try out and refine interventions in context.

This article proposed research programs of the future, integrating and applying findings of the research thus far. It is easy to see why it is so important to stay current in the research because in this 2011 article, Masten modified her own earlier (2007) suggestions for system wide approaches and emphasized the need to also focus on an appropriate scope in topic.

Mental Health Foundation of Australia. (2005). Embrace the future: Resiliency resource center. [Website] Retrieved from http://www.embracethefuture.org.au/resiliency/index.htm

Embrace the Future is an Australian initiative committed to promoting resilience in students. The website is well organized with resources for teachers, parents, and mentors. The approach is focused on development of strengths within an ecological model, which puts responsibility on the social and physical community to provide the resources needed. This is congruent with the current definition of resilience as a dynamic interaction between the child and the environment (Vanderbilt-Adriance,2008, Ungar, 2008).

The philosophies of this website reflect many of the thoughts of the current researchers in resilience. The website acknowledges the seminal works by Masten and Powell by following a strength-based approach. The authors recognize the critical factor of the environment, as did Rowe et al. (2007) and followed the direction of the inside-out view patterned in Masten’s (2011) and Ungar et al.’s (2008) view of research. The framework follows Masten’s (2011) structure of mission, models, measures, and methods. There are many references to experts in the field such as Garmezy, Rutter, Benard, Grotberg, Werner& Smith, Rutter, Sanchez, and others. This website is worthwhile as a model of a resilience-focused website for a variety of audiences and for its particular attention to elementary age students.

Rowe, F., Stewart, D., & Patterson, C. (2007). Promoting school connectedness through whole school approaches. //Health Education, 107//(6), 524-542. doi:10.1108/09654280710827920

These authors focused on the importance of school connectedness in building students’ well-being. The Health Promoting School (HPS) model, designed by the World Health Organization, encompasses three overlapping circles – partnerships and services, school organization, ethos and environment, and curriculum, teaching and learning. The theory behind the HPS model is the interwoven nature of school, family, and community. Several excellent graphics illustrate further aspects of school connectedness, including a concentric organization of broad school environment, classroom environment, and core concepts of equal partnerships, participation, and value of diversity. Social capital and agency were central ideas in developing the HPS model in schools. Many suggestions for the physical, social and emotional environment were given.

This article took a different approach to building social and emotional well-being in students. The whole environment is critical, not just the classroom or the teacher-student interactions. The systems approach in this study added credence to Masten’s work. As the momentum continues to push toward world-wide academic achievement and educational reform, it seems that schools cannot take this task on alone. It must become a family, community, national, and global mission to ensure that children receive the best education possible.

Sapienza, J. K. & Masten, A. S. (2011). Understanding and promoting resilience in children and youth. //Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 24//(4),267-273. doi:10.1097/YCO.0b013e32834776a8

The authors encapsulated the detailed information Masten (2007) provided about the four waves of resilience research in the first three paragraphs of this article, directing attention to the interaction of genes with environment and multilevel dynamics. They referred to recent research in developmental cascades, “cumulative consequences for development of interactions across systems”. The authors stressed the potential effects of interventions which shield or reprogram insufficient adaptive systems through careful attention to genetics and environment (G x E). Research has identified the “short allele for the 5-HTTLPR gene” as a genetic marker for probable vulnerability. The study used a systems-wide, multiple dynamics approach to bring together findings from neurobiology, psychology, and psychiatry to reach understandings never envisioned before.

The fourth wave of resilience research has made progress that is more neurological and biological in nature. The study highlighted the interaction of genetics and environment, acknowledging that even when an individual is lacking in resilience, a supportive environment can lead to a favorable response.

Ungar, M., Liebenberg, L., Boothroyd, R., Kwong, W. M., Lee, T.Y.,Leblanc, J., Duque, L., & Makhnach,A. (2008). The study of youth resilience across cultures: Lessons from a pilot study of measurement development. //Research in Human Development, 5//(3),166-180. doi: 10.1080/154276008022274019

The International Resilience Project (IRP), involving researchers in 14 sites in 11 countries aimed to evaluate the soundness of the Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM) in diverse cultures.The authors stressed an environmentally inclusive definition of resilience moving beyond an individual’s capacity, or internal ability to adapt. In this frame of mind, the theme changes from beating the odds to changing the odds, requiring processes of both navigation and negotiation. Negotiation puts part of the responsibility on the community to provide resources and for those who serve in public roles to be prepared for working with diverse groups. Researchers found variability in the values measured depending on the culture. In some cases, self-esteem was meaningful while in other cultures it was not. In a debate of etic vs. emic research stances, the authors advocated for research to be conducted by those within a community to encourage culturally sensitive interventions.

This global view of resilience is an important reminder that each culture is unique.The tendency to base modern thought on western societies can create biased measurement tools, and practitioners may not interpret research results appropriately. This article shows how Masten’s (2007) advice to look at resilience with a wider lens can be interpreted in a different way. In addition to looking for commonalities between disciplines, it makes sense to look for differences between cultures. The caution for researchers is to take the time to understand the values of the ecological context before using an inherentlybiased universal measure for analysis and interpretation.

Vanderbilt-Adriance, E. & Shaw, D. S. (2008). Conceptualizing and re-evaluating resilience across levels of risk, time, and domains of competence. //Clinical Child and Family Psychological Review,// 11(1-2),30-58. doi:10.1007/s10567-008-0031-2

These authors examined research in resiliencein light of variations in time, risk and outcomes. Concerns with the generalizations of resilience studies were articulated in regard to the tendency for most studies to involve White, middle-class, low risk populations.The generalizations from these studies may not be applicable in cases of high risk or with those from other cultures. The study revealed that resilience is not stable over time, especially over life transition periods. Most disappointing of the findings of this study was that those who achieved resilience in one domain (e.g. academic achievement) suffered significantly with resilience in other areas (such as social competence); seeming to crush one’s hopes that adversity can ever be moderated. These authors provided compelling lessons for the future including the potential for environmental factors to overpower intervention, the need for attention to the target group when focusing on risk or protective factors, and a call for reducing the risks children are exposed to in the first place.

This article was thorough, far-reaching, and critical. The focus on future directions for research is important to note. These authors called for a shift from understanding //what// works in fostering resilience to //where, when,// and //how// both prevention and intervention can make a difference.

References Beutel, D. (2010). The nature of pedagogic teacher-student interactions:A phenomenographic study. //The Australian Educational Researcher, 37//(2).77-91. doi:10.1007/BF03216923

Block, J. & Block, J. H. (2006). Venturing a 30-year longitudinal study. //American Psychologist, 61//(4). 315-327. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.315

Brooks, R., (n.d.). Resilience,motivation and family relationships. [Website]. Retrieved July 19, 2011from http//://www.drrobertbrooks.com/index.html //﻿// Downey, J. A. (2008). Recommendations for fostering educationalresilience in the classroom. Preventing School Failure, 53//(1). 56-64.doi:10.3200/PSFL.53.1.56-64//

Early Childhood and Parenting Collaborative (EPAC), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Resilience Net: Information for helping children and families overcome adversity. [Website] Retrieved fromhttp // : //resilnet.uiuc.edu/abtrnet.html

Garmezy, N., Masten, A. S., & Tellegen, A. (1984). The study of stress and competence in children: A building block fordevelopmental psychopathology//.// //Child Development//, //55//(1),97-111. doi:10.2307/1129837

Maddi, S.R. (2002). The story of hardiness: Twenty years of theorizing,research, and practice. //Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,54//(3). 175-185. doi 10.1037///1061-4087.54.3.175.// //﻿//

Masten, A. S. (2007). Resilience in developing systems: Progress and promise as the fourth wave rises. //Development and Psychopathology, 19,// 921-930. doi: 10.1017/S0954579407000442 //﻿//

Masten, A. S. (2011). Resilience in children threatened by extreme adversity: Frameworks for research, practice,and translational synergy. //Development and Psychopathology, 23//(2), 493-506. doi: 10.1017/S0954579411000198 //﻿//

Mental Health Foundation of Australia. (2005). Embrace the future: Resiliency resource center.[Website}. Retrieved from [] //﻿//

Rowe, F., Stewart, D., & Patterson, C. (2007). Promoting school connectednessthrough whole school approaches. //Health Education, 107//(6), 524-542. doi:10.1108/09654280710827920 //﻿//

Sapienza, J. K. & Masten, A. S. (2011). Understanding and promoting resilience in children and youth. //Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 24//(4).267-273. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e32834776a8 //﻿//

Ungar, M., Liebenberg, L., Boothroyd, R., Kwong, W. M., Lee, T.Y., Leblanc, J., Duque, L., Makhnach,A.(2008). The study of youth resilience across cultures: Lessons from a pilot study of measurement development. //Research in Human Development, 5//(3),166-180. doi:10.1080/154276008022274019

Vanderbilt-Adriance, E. & Shaw, D. S. (2008). Conceptualizing and re-evaluating resilience across levels ofrisk, time, and domains of competence. //Clinical Child and Family Psychological Review,11//(1-2),30-58. doi:10.1007/s10567-008-0031-2