Perfil de los escolares que más se benefician de un programa de educación en valores

Resumen

Después de varias aplicaciones del Programa Instruccional Emotivo para el Crecimiento y la Autorrealización Personal PIECAP (Hernández y Aciego de Mendoza, 1990), se analizan las características de los escolares que más se benefician de él. Se emplea el Análisis de la Función Discriminante sobre dos muestras de alumnos (último curso de primaria y secundaria) que han recibido el Programa. Como variables predictoras, se han considerado las capacidades intelectivas, el rendimiento académico y la adaptación personal, escolar, socialy familiar. Y como variablecriterio, el cambio producido en la adaptación personal, escolar y social. Las funciones discriminantes resultantes caracterizan a los alumnos que más se benefician como aquellos que, antes de iniciar la intervención, expresaban una mayor tendencia al sufrimiento personal y a la depresión, mayor insatisfacción y desinteré por la escuelay mayor tendencia a la introversión, si bien con menor agresividad social‥

Abstract

The Instructional-Emotional Programme for Personal Growth and Fulfilment PIECAP (Hernández and Aciego de Mendoza, 1990) was applied several times, and the characteristics of students who derived most benefit from it were analysed. A discriminant analysis was carried out on two samples of students (aged 11 and 16 years) who participated in the programme. Predictor variables were: intellectual capacity, academic performance, personal adjustment, and adjustment to the school, social and family environments. The resulting discriminant functions provided a profile of the students who most benefited from the programme. These were those who prior to the programme expressed a greater tendency towards personal suffering and depression, greater dissatisfaction and apathy with regard to the school, and a greater tendency towards introversion, albeit with less social aggressiveness.

Extended Summary

The study analysed the profile of students who derived greatest benefit from the “Instructional-Emotional Programme for Personal Growth and Self-Fulfilment” (Spanish acronym PIECAP; Hernández and Aciego de Mendoza, 1990).

The programme requires between 8 to 12 sessions involving group dynamics to work on issues such as: views on life, thinking about affective and sexual relations, views on work, getting the most out of leisure time, social concerns and the dangers inherent in evading reality. The material used included: notebooks to write down main ideas and activities involved in developing them, and an individual answer sheet. It is recommended that psychodramas are carried out and that the student establishes the firm commitment to change. A cassette taped with an illustrative story is also available as additional material.

Previous applications of the programme in different experimental situations with students aged between 11 and 18 years (Hernández, Aciego de Mendoza, and Domínguez, 1994), revealed students high valuation of their experience in the programme. Likewise, although the purpose of the programme is to provide an education in personal and social values, statistically significant improvements were also obtained, as indirect effects, in the students levels of adjustment.

As reported in other programmes, there is nevertheless a percentage of students who do not seem to experience the improvement in adjustment reported by most students who have participated in the PIECAP. Do students who experience improvements differ in some way from those who do not? If so, Are these differential characteristics also observed in other programmes? These are the questions the present paper aims to answer.

The data were obtained from the participation in the programme of eight classrooms of students aged between 11 and 16 years. The programme was carried out by final-year psychology students, teachers, or postgraduate students.

Predictor variables for the sample of 11-year-old students (82 students) included: intellectual aptitudes; academic performance; adjustment and adaptation (both from self-assessment and peer-assessment); and parents style of education (as seen by the student). The 14–16 years old sample (73 students) included data on: adjustment and adaptation, and parents style of education. Criteria variables for the whole sample were: changes produced in personal adjustment, school adjustment, and social adjustment.

Discriminant analysis confirms that students who improved their personal and school adjustment through the programme show certain well-defined characteristics. However, a less clear profile is obtained for students who improved in social adjustment, especially for older students.

Overall, results show that students from the two age-groups who derived greatest benefit from the programme, both in personal adjustment and in school adjustment, share a similar profile. Prior to initiating the treatment, these students appeared dissatisfied and lacking motivation at school. At a personal level, they showed greater sadness and self-disdain, less defensive attitudes, moderate self-appraisal, and did not lay the blame on others. Finally, at a social level, they expressed more respect and tolerance towards others. From a qualitative point of view, these students with greater maladjustment had greater expectations towards the programme, feeling their presence was valued positively and they were accepted.

The opposite profile was shown by students whose degree of personal and/or school maladjustment increased after treatment. Before taking part in the programme these students expressed, comparatively, a greater satisfaction or motivation towards school; a greater tendency to over-value themselves, to be on the defense, and to lay the blame on others; and a higher degree of conflict with others. From a qualitative point of view, these students with greater self-defence mechanisms and feelings of being above punishment, after treatment they showed a lack of interest, negativism or disruptive behaviour.

Finally, students whose levels of personal and school adjustment did not alter substantially during the programme tended to share a more moderate profile (of greater normality), appearing in in an intermediate position, though closer to the above group whose behaviour worsened.

Overall, these results are in line with those obtained in a previous study (Aciego de Mendoza, 1988; Hernández, Aciego de Mendoza and García, 1991). Some important criteria which explains what we have labeled: “Personality Change Potential” are:

Difference between the starting point and final goal: People who start out with a greater deficit in the areas of adjustment enjoy a greater potential for change, as they have a greater margin for improvement and also greater need. However, those with a higher level of adjustment have less potential for change, because they have a lesser margin and less need.

Facilitating Variables: For those who start out with a greater deficit, being self-critical and not directing the conflict to the outside will be important variables facilitating change, because they focus the analysis for change in themselves.

Obstructor Variables: Those who initially seem to be more adjusted, associated with an over-appraisal of themselves, poor self-criticism and laying the blame on others, show greater difficulty towards change. When this change takes place, it is accompanied by a greater capacity for criticism that allows the person to show his/her deficiencies. This may be interpreted as lack of improvement or worsening, but in reality what is occurring is that the persons self-defense mechanisms are “collapsing”.

Palabras claves:

• Diferencias individuales
• programas de salud mental
• educación en valores
• niños en edad escolar
• adolescencia

Keywords:

• Individual differences
• mental health programmes
• education on values
• school age children
• adolescence