I am delighted to be able to introduce another strong and challenging issue of The Journal. I am delighted to introduce such a strong set of papers to the readership.
In the first paper Hannah Margraf and Martin Pinquart consider whether bullying/victimisation and related social support vary by emotional (ED) and behavioural disturbances (BD) as well as school-type amongst German adolescents. They point to the pressing need for robust implementation and evaluation of bullying interventions for adolescents with EBD and students from special schools. I would argue that this is particularly pertinent in the context of a rise in the promulgation of commercial adventures in intervention. In the second paper, Nadia Desbiens, Caroline Levasseur and Normand Roy announce a similar plea for rigour when they argue that deviant peer influence during workgroup activities has not been thoroughly investigated through systematic observation of deviant interactions. Their findings have significance in relation to the role of group composition and workgroup training in fostering effective cooperative learning environments.
In what appears to be an emerging theme Johan Malmqvist and Claes Nilholm raise concerns about the processes by which categories are deployed and intervention is provided. They sent a questionnaire to all Swedish municipalities (290, response rate 76%) regarding schooling for pupils with ADHD. Forty Swedish municipalities were found to have classes specifically designed for pupils with ADHD. However they also noted a lack of adequate and appropriate scrutiny of the composition of these classes.
Deborah Flitcroft and Catherine Kelly draw readers’ attention to the often vexatious issue of managed moves. They conducted an appreciative inquiry in order to explore how schools in one local authority create a sense of belonging to facilitate a fresh start for pupils involved in a managed move to a new school. They emphasise the importance of the potential challenges of changing school and of forming and maintaining new relationships for pupils engaging in a managed move. They go on to suggest how transition, induction and ongoing support plans can take this into account.
In the penultimate paper Mahmoud Mohamed Emam, Ali Mahdi Kazem and Abdulqawi Salim Alzubaidi provide an indication of the extent to which some of the inequalities in practice and provision persists across national cultures. The interesting question is at whether these in equalities are in any way justifiable.
Finally, Jennifer L. Allen, Amy Morris, and Celine Y. Chhoa report an investigation of the relationship between callous-unemotional (CU) traits and response to rewards and discipline in adolescent boys using a mixed methods approach. They argue that their findings emphasise the need to carefully select, modify and implement existing evidence-based classroom behaviour management strategies.
There is a strong message running across these papers concerning the need for rigorous and sensitive scrutiny of what are often take as the everyday common sense of particular practices.