This issue of the journal witnesses the continuing rise in the strength of submissions.
In the first paper, Ella Maria Cosmovici Idsoe draws her readers’ attention to the importance of social learning environment factors for affective well-being among students. This is a matter which has been intuitively understood, but at the same time under-researched, namely that of the importance of creating a learning environment that promotes inclusion and caring and supportive interpersonal relationships.
In the second paper, Poppy Nash, Annette Schlosser and Tanya Scarr draw our attention to psychological perspectives on teacher’s perceptions of disruptive behaviour in schools. This is an interdisciplinary study which bridges understanding between educational and psychological perspectives on disruptive behaviour. They echo the findings of paper one in arguing that, for the most troubled pupils, effective behaviour management at school necessitates a more nurturing and collaborative approach alongside current disciplinary policy. The authors report on two studies which examined teachers’ perceptions of disruptive behaviour at school. One involved a postal questionnaire sent to primary and secondary schools across England, and another used the web-based Survey Monkey to elicit teachers’ perceptions on the extent to which pupils can control their disruptive behaviour.
In the third paper, Stacy L. Bender and Gregory J. Privitera discuss the influence of feedback of diagnosis and executive function skills on rates of false positive and false negative outcomes for ADHD. This study should be read alongside Eva Kikas and Inge Timostsuk’s report of student teachers’ knowledge about children with ADHD and depression and its relations to emotions. Both these studies could be taken as research-based support for the development of strategies for enhancing knowledge about mental health within the teaching community.
In the next paper, Christopher Bagley reports on a study which aimed to increase understanding of the experiences of young people and their parents of managed moves, what contributed to success and the nature of the challenges experienced. Although based on a small sample size, this report provides invaluable insight into the impact of an increasingly common phenomenon.
In the sixth paper, Anastasia Liasidou discusses the ways in which social, emotional and behavioural difficulties are ‘produced’ and ‘managed’ within current schooling. She notes the increased ‘psychopathologisation’ of children’s difficulties alongside the deployment of zero tolerance policies and punitive interventions. She argues for a human rights approach to difference and diversity which requires that ‘challenging behaviour’ and ‘SEBD’ are understood and managed on the basis of an intersectionality-based policy analysis framework. She further argues that such an analysis should inform development of policies which take a holistic and socially just approach to understanding and managing students’ problem behaviour.
In the next and last paper in this issue, Patrick McFarland, James Sanders and Bradley Hagen examine perspectives on the aetiology of Oppositional Defiant Disorder and Conduct Disorder. Their work was designed to gain insight into how theoretical orientations influence the understanding of antisocial disorders and subsequent clinical approaches.
The papers in this issue speak to a common theme. The human relations, assumptions and perceptions which underpin identification and intervention in the lives of troubled children are of fundamental significance for the consequences for all those involved.