Options
Coping with school : personality of at-risk students
Author
Lim, Tze Mien
Supervisor
Tay-Koay, Siew Luan
Abstract
This research study came about with the need to examine individual differences that influences to the risk of school failure in students with lower academic ability, with the hope that the findings could contribute to efforts to help these students cope with the demands of the knowledge-based economy. This study was a preliminary investigation on the use of coping strategies, and the differences in personality traits between students of high and low risk in academic failure. The study also explored the differences in the use of coping strategies and in the personality traits of Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) students in Singapore schools. Attempts were made to examine whether there were any relationships between coping strategies and demographic variables.
The sample of students (N = 147) was chosen from the Normal (Academic) Course and the Normal (Technical) Course in a typical neighbourhood school. The choice was made with the assumption that the students who qualified for those courses would have performed relatively poorly in the Primary School Leaving Examination, as students from both Normal courses constitute approximately the bottom 11% of each cohort that enters secondary school in Singapore. The outcome of effective coping is defined as the ability to perform academically in school, as measured by school achievement scores. Coping strategies were operationalised as self-reported coping attitudes and behaviours and assessed through a survey instrument named the Student Survey of Coping with Learning in School. Personality traits were measured by the 5th Edition of the 16PF by Cattell, Cattell and Cattell (1993). This study assumes that there would be more students who are at-risk of academic failure in this chosen sample than a normative group of students.
This study found that there were significant differences in the use of coping strategies between students of high and low risk of academic failure. High-risk students were found to have significantly lower scores on adaptive coping strategies than students of low risk of academic failure, particularly in adaptive beliefs like perceived academic competency, positive self-esteem and having a learning goal orientation. There was basically little significance between Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) students with the Normal (Academic) students having significantly higher mean scores in adaptive learning strategies.
Results also showed that there was little significant difference in personality traits between the risk groups with only slight differences in reasoning ability and sensitivity. High-risk group have significantly lower scores on reasoning ability. Both groups are also characterised by having a lower than average level of general intelligence. Normal (Academic) students were found to be slightly more extraverted, tensed and have a slightly higher intelligence score than Normal (Technical) who were slightly more rule-consciousness. Both groups have below average levels of general intelligence as compared to the American normative groups of around the same age and level of education.
In general, adaptive coping strategies seem to be positively related with personality traits that are in essence positive affective states like emotional stability, self-control and self-discipline and low anxiety. High scores in maladaptive coping strategies may be linked to high scores in personality traits that are in essence negative affective states like anxiety, apprehension, and emotional instability. Maladaptive coping tends to be also positively related to imagination and privateness. Anova statistics showed that there were no relationships between the use of coping strategies and demographic variables.
The results pointed to implications for early risk identification, curriculum re-design, counselling support, the development of positive affect and adaptive coping strategies in at-risk students.
The sample of students (N = 147) was chosen from the Normal (Academic) Course and the Normal (Technical) Course in a typical neighbourhood school. The choice was made with the assumption that the students who qualified for those courses would have performed relatively poorly in the Primary School Leaving Examination, as students from both Normal courses constitute approximately the bottom 11% of each cohort that enters secondary school in Singapore. The outcome of effective coping is defined as the ability to perform academically in school, as measured by school achievement scores. Coping strategies were operationalised as self-reported coping attitudes and behaviours and assessed through a survey instrument named the Student Survey of Coping with Learning in School. Personality traits were measured by the 5th Edition of the 16PF by Cattell, Cattell and Cattell (1993). This study assumes that there would be more students who are at-risk of academic failure in this chosen sample than a normative group of students.
This study found that there were significant differences in the use of coping strategies between students of high and low risk of academic failure. High-risk students were found to have significantly lower scores on adaptive coping strategies than students of low risk of academic failure, particularly in adaptive beliefs like perceived academic competency, positive self-esteem and having a learning goal orientation. There was basically little significance between Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) students with the Normal (Academic) students having significantly higher mean scores in adaptive learning strategies.
Results also showed that there was little significant difference in personality traits between the risk groups with only slight differences in reasoning ability and sensitivity. High-risk group have significantly lower scores on reasoning ability. Both groups are also characterised by having a lower than average level of general intelligence. Normal (Academic) students were found to be slightly more extraverted, tensed and have a slightly higher intelligence score than Normal (Technical) who were slightly more rule-consciousness. Both groups have below average levels of general intelligence as compared to the American normative groups of around the same age and level of education.
In general, adaptive coping strategies seem to be positively related with personality traits that are in essence positive affective states like emotional stability, self-control and self-discipline and low anxiety. High scores in maladaptive coping strategies may be linked to high scores in personality traits that are in essence negative affective states like anxiety, apprehension, and emotional instability. Maladaptive coping tends to be also positively related to imagination and privateness. Anova statistics showed that there were no relationships between the use of coping strategies and demographic variables.
The results pointed to implications for early risk identification, curriculum re-design, counselling support, the development of positive affect and adaptive coping strategies in at-risk students.
Date Issued
2002
Call Number
LC4803.S55 Lim
Date Submitted
2002