Psychological and educational needs of children in Asia

KEYWORDS:

• Asia
• education
• psychology
• schools

Massive changes are taking place in Asia that are intensifying the debate over the implications and consequences of these changes on school-age children and youth. In this special issue, the focus is on exploring the needs of these children and youth in six Asian countries, some of which have received little, if any, attention in the psychological and educational literature: India, China, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, and Malaysia. A key question arises as to the availability of school and educational psychologists to function within school settings and ensuring the best interest of the school-age populations in these Asian countries, particularly given their unique cultural sensitivities and the diversity of psychological and educational needs.

An Asian country that has experienced perhaps the most extensive demographic, social, economic, and educational changes over the past 30 years is China, particularly with the extensive internal migration from rural areas to urban hubs. In their paper, “Floating childhoods: Psychological and educational adaptations of migrant children in China,” Zhou, Xin, and Du (2019) address the discriminations, economic insecurities, educational inequalities, and lack of access to mental health care of migrant children in Mainland China and their families. Due to the Hukou system for controlling geographic mobility in China, migrant children face poor living conditions and inferior educational options despite living in Chinese cities where public schools are supposedly mandated to provide education to all students living within their jurisdiction. Poor living conditions also have adverse consequences for cognitive development and psychological well-being, leading to a large portion of Chinese migrant youth in need of social and emotional support in the context of educational institutions. There is also still a dearth of specifically trained school psychologists who could provide the services needed to help migrant children to thrive within the educational contexts in China.

“Japanese educational reforms and initiatives as they relate to school psychological practice” (Yoshikawa, deLeyer-Tiarks, Kehle, & Bray, 2019) focuses on the practice of school psychology in Japan as well as critical reforms and societal demands. Due to a number of changes and reforms in Japanese education laws and psychoeducational needs in special education and school mental health, schools are now more open to school-based psychological services. Focusing more on the sociohistorical issues pertaining to special education, the authors review a range of reforms that lead to the establishment of a support framework for people with disabilities. Although most school-based psychological services are provided by teachers, school counselors, nurses, and consulting clinical psychologists, the authors also note that there is a rise in recognition that school and educational psychology in schools should particularly deal with the various categories of disabilities. There is a push for school psychology to become a clearly defined and accepted profession that will enhance the quality of student mental services. The authors also propose that school psychologists adopt the role of “broker of family-school partnerships” (p. 90), assisting with breaking down the barriers preventing parents from having constructive communication with a school regarding their child’s special education needs.

“Roles for school psychologists in the challenging Indian education landscape” (Patwa, Peverly, Maykel, & Kapoor, 2019) is an overview of the potential role school psychologists could play in India’s growing educational system. The educational system in India faces many challenges, among them multiple languages, a large population of youth under the age of 14 years, and the needs of those living in slums, who constitute almost one third of the overall population. Economic challenges result in varied educational experiences, while legislative initiatives in recent years, such as the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), have improved the need for universal education, quality, and access to education for youth all around the country. School psychology as a discipline is still in its infancy, although awareness has been growing with the creation of the Indian School Psychology Association (InSPA), which has advocated for school-based psychological services through legislation. Despite the growing need for school psychologists and mental health interventions across the country—including dealing with academic stress—there are still many regions that lack qualified professionals, while assessment tools that are culturally and linguistically appropriate are few and far between. The authors conclude with a future perspective on the prospective tasks of school psychologists in India, including development of intensive programs to educate volunteers and teachers about educational and mental health services.

In Malaysia, there is growing awareness of mental health services for children and youth provided in schools and the community. Kok and Low (2019), in their paper “Risk factors contributing to vulnerability of mental health disorders and the protective factors among Malaysian youth,” conducted an extensive search examining the reasons why Malaysian youth are experiencing mental health issues. They identified four major themes related to academic stress, relationship issues, social and economic stressors, and rapid social change as risk factors rendering the youth vulnerable to poor developmental and scholastic outcomes. On the other hand, the cultural richness of Malaysians, their indigenous healing practices, and strong connectedness to family and friends serve as protective factors for youth otherwise left isolated or stigmatized when mental health issues arise. The authors discuss the implications of their metasynthesis for school and educational psychology in Malaysia, establishing that culturally sensitive, nondiscriminatory, and contextually responsive interventions that follow a school-based family counseling approach are needed to protect the young people of this country against mental ill health.

“Educational and psychological risk factors for South Korean children and adolescents” (Phosaly, Olympia, & Goldman, 2019) also examines the risk factors that render the youth vulnerable to mental ill health. In particular, a rather rigidly employed school curriculum, high educational expectations from both family and institutions, and an emphasis on exams and competition are identified as specifically related to mental ill health among South Korean youth, including depression, anxiety, and suicide. As with many Asian contexts, the cultural obligation toward filial piety and obedience to one’s parents regarding educational success can lead to high levels of student burnout. Having little or no time for nonacademic extramural activities combined with puberty and adolescence can further exacerbate the psychological and social challenges experienced by Korean adolescents and add to their increased suicidality risk. It seems that the emphasis on academics takes precedence over the social and emotional well-being of students. Despite an increase in community-based mental-health services, measures taken for attending to population-specific needs—that is, the psychosocial needs of the school-going youth of South Korea—are still far from satisfactory. Although teachers have been certified as school counselors, there are not nearly enough specifically trained school psychologists with an understanding of the unique behaviors and issues faced by South Korea’s vulnerable youth. Furthermore, cultural barriers such as stigmatization of mental health services and somatization of emotional distress seem to hinder the development of professional services. The authors conclude by saying that “school-based mental health prevention and responsive services in South Korea face significant new challenges in implementation” (p. 119), and advocate for school-based mental health specialists to establish “competency-based training and clearly defined roles and working conditions” (p. 119) if they are to support the youth in the Korean educational system.

The last two papers in this special issue deal with a specific population and their needs. “Autism in Vietnam: Knowledge, training, and communication barriers among professionals, educators, and caregivers” (Ritter, Terjesen, & Khuc, 2019) and “Autism in China: Progress and challenges in addressing the needs of children and families” (Clark, Zhou, & Du, 2019) both address the lack of trained school psychologists to attend to the needs of this group of children. Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are increasingly diagnosed among Asian children, although exact prevalence and incidence are still unknown. Asian countries do have a history of accommodating people with disabilities, yet the drive for academic excellence and emphasis on educational attainment in these countries has since led to increasing exclusion of students with ASD. Ritter et al. (2019) note that the special education needs of Vietnamese children are still guided by cultural beliefs, although education laws and practices have changed following the Vietnam War to specifically “address access to special schools and rehabilitative services for students with disabilities” (p. 125). Nonetheless, diagnostic evaluations for ASD are still not well understood and interventions often not appropriately implemented by the various parties involved in the child’s caretaking—that is, parents, educators, and professionals. The authors surveyed professionals, educators, and caregivers, concluding that significant differences exist among the three groups pertaining to knowledge of autism, experiences with autism, and potential barriers to services for individuals with autism. The implications of these differences are specifically evident in the inconsistent implementation of interventions, and the need for improved communication among the various professionals, educators, and caregivers, particularly linking professionals and parents.

In China, Clark et al. (2019) note that parental knowledge constitutes the primary source of information for identifying symptoms of autism, and that many parents wait too long before obtaining a formal diagnosis and starting potential interventions. The authors also noted the insufficient involvement of China’s national health care system for autism treatment and the lack of services for children with disabilities throughout the country. Despite a drive toward inclusive education in the mainstream public-school system, there is still very little government support for children with different types of disabilities and ASD in particular, with school and educational psychology and general mental health care services still only available in larger cities and sparse in rural areas. The authors conclude that “efforts by parents, parent advocacy groups, and disability organizations in China have helped to increase public awareness of autism” (p. 142), but much still needs to be done in order to assist families and children with disabilities in rural regions of the country, specifically pertaining to “the educational rights of all children with a disability” (p. 143).

In summary, it seems that children, youth, and families in the six Asian countries featured in this special issue are facing numerous educational and psychological needs that could be met with adequately trained school or educational psychologists and government involvement, placing professionals in settings where they can best serve the needy populations. Although some progress has been made in places like Malaysia and Japan, there is still much to be done in China, Vietnam, India, and South Korea to address the psychosocial and emotional needs of the school-going populations in all of Asia. School and educational psychologists and researchers are encouraged to develop culturally sensitive models and interventions that give recognition to the diversities within these Asian countries. Given the importance that Asian parents attach to their children, home–school partnerships should be also encouraged to overcome perceived inequities currently still prevalent in many of these regions. It might also be necessary to access and engage all members of the communities in which the youth of today are educated, and to develop psychological openness and generate positive attitudes toward help-seeking behavior that will be advantageous to the child, the family, and the community as a whole.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Zheng Zhou

Dr. Zheng Zhou is a Professor in the Psychology Department at St. John’s University in New York. Her research interests include children’s mathematical reasoning, basic relational concepts acquisition, and school adjustment.

Stephen T. Peverly

Stephen T. Peverly, Ph.D. is a Professor of Psychology and Education and Director of the Programs in School Psychology at Teachers College, Columbia University. He is a Fellow of Division 16 of the American Psychological Association (School Psychology).

Melissa A. Bray

Melissa A. Bray is a Professor and the Director of the School Psychology program within the Neag School of Education at the University of Connecticut.  She is a Fellow of both the American Psychological Association and the American Psychological Society. Her research interests are in the area of interventions for communication disorders mainly stuttering, classroom disruptive behavior, and physical health and wellness, especially asthma and cancer.

Gertina J. Van Schalkwyk

Gertina J. van Schalkwyk, DPhil, is Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Macau in Macau (SAR), China. She trained and has worked at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. She has published several book chapters, encyclopaediaentries and journal articles in refereed international resources. Her interests are focused in developmental psychology, education, school psychology, family counselling, and qualitative methods. Gertina is an Associate Fellow of the Oxford Symposium for School-Based Family Counseling and an active member of ISPA.