Validity of the Middle Years Development Instrument for Population Monitoring of Student Wellbeing in Australian School Children

The importance of social and emotional wellbeing has long been recognised by education systems but the measurement of wellbeing still receives far less attention than the measurement of academic achievement. This paper reports on a five-year project to measure student wellbeing across an education s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Child indicators research 2019-06, Vol.12 (3), p.873-899
Hauptverfasser: Gregory, Tess, Engelhardt, David, Lewkowicz, Anna, Luddy, Samuel, Guhn, Martin, Gadermann, Anne, Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly, Brinkman, Sally
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 899
container_issue 3
container_start_page 873
container_title Child indicators research
container_volume 12
creator Gregory, Tess
Engelhardt, David
Lewkowicz, Anna
Luddy, Samuel
Guhn, Martin
Gadermann, Anne
Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly
Brinkman, Sally
description The importance of social and emotional wellbeing has long been recognised by education systems but the measurement of wellbeing still receives far less attention than the measurement of academic achievement. This paper reports on a five-year project to measure student wellbeing across an education system within the state of South Australia using the Middle Years Development Instrument (MDI). All schools (Government, Catholic, and Independent) were invited to participate in the collection at no cost and aggregated school reports provided an incentive to participate. A total of 51,574 students completed the MDI between 2013 and 2015, with higher participation rates in Government schools than Catholic or Independent schools (65%, 18 and 13% respectively in 2015). Validity and reliability analyses confirmed that the MDI scales had good psychometric properties (i.e., favourable model fit in confirmatory factor analyses, high internal consistency, and correlations between scales were consistent with theoretical expectations). Test-retest reliability (based on a sub-sample of 82 children) was acceptable for most scales except for the connectedness to adults at school ( r  = .50) and friendship intimacy scales ( r  = .40), where test-retest reliability was low. However, several of the MDI scales had ceiling effects, particularly for girls and younger students (10–11 years old), which may present challenges when using these scales for population monitoring, program and policy evaluations. Pragmatic factors for education systems and governments to consider in selecting social and emotional wellbeing tools are discussed.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s12187-018-9562-3
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2041962400</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2041962400</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-c502c105857aa467901d3340423c17f28a8606a6b6908793ae8b6716250ee8c23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LwzAYx4soOKcfwFvAc_VJ2qbpccy3wYbCfD2FrE1dRpbUJBV286PbWtGTp-fPw_8FflF0iuEcA-QXHhPM8hgwi4uMkjjZi0bdI41Zwdj-r85fDqMj7zcAFAMho-jzSWhVqbBDtkZhLdFCVZWW6FUK59Gl_JDaNltpApoZH1z7LWvr0L1tWi2CsgYtrFHBOmXe-pJlaKve9Cy1Xsn-qQyatF24WxIGLcu1tRpN10pXTprj6KAW2suTnzuOHq-vHqa38fzuZjadzOMywTTEZQakxJCxLBcipXkBuEqSFFKSlDivCROMAhV0RQtgeZEIyVY0x5RkICUrSTKOzobextn3VvrAN7Z1ppvkBFJcUJICdC48uEpnvXey5o1TW-F2HAPvQfMBNO9A8x40T7oMGTK-6RlI99f8f-gLRnuBJA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2041962400</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Validity of the Middle Years Development Instrument for Population Monitoring of Student Wellbeing in Australian School Children</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Gregory, Tess ; Engelhardt, David ; Lewkowicz, Anna ; Luddy, Samuel ; Guhn, Martin ; Gadermann, Anne ; Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly ; Brinkman, Sally</creator><creatorcontrib>Gregory, Tess ; Engelhardt, David ; Lewkowicz, Anna ; Luddy, Samuel ; Guhn, Martin ; Gadermann, Anne ; Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly ; Brinkman, Sally</creatorcontrib><description>The importance of social and emotional wellbeing has long been recognised by education systems but the measurement of wellbeing still receives far less attention than the measurement of academic achievement. This paper reports on a five-year project to measure student wellbeing across an education system within the state of South Australia using the Middle Years Development Instrument (MDI). All schools (Government, Catholic, and Independent) were invited to participate in the collection at no cost and aggregated school reports provided an incentive to participate. A total of 51,574 students completed the MDI between 2013 and 2015, with higher participation rates in Government schools than Catholic or Independent schools (65%, 18 and 13% respectively in 2015). Validity and reliability analyses confirmed that the MDI scales had good psychometric properties (i.e., favourable model fit in confirmatory factor analyses, high internal consistency, and correlations between scales were consistent with theoretical expectations). Test-retest reliability (based on a sub-sample of 82 children) was acceptable for most scales except for the connectedness to adults at school ( r  = .50) and friendship intimacy scales ( r  = .40), where test-retest reliability was low. However, several of the MDI scales had ceiling effects, particularly for girls and younger students (10–11 years old), which may present challenges when using these scales for population monitoring, program and policy evaluations. Pragmatic factors for education systems and governments to consider in selecting social and emotional wellbeing tools are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1874-897X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1874-8988</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12187-018-9562-3</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Academic achievement ; Catholic schools ; Child and School Psychology ; Child development ; Child psychology ; Confirmatory factor analysis ; Early Childhood Education ; Educational psychology ; Emotional well being ; Intimacy ; Measurement ; Private schools ; Psychometrics ; Quality of Life Research ; Quantitative psychology ; School reports ; Schools ; Social Sciences ; Social Work ; Test-Retest reliability ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Child indicators research, 2019-06, Vol.12 (3), p.873-899</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018</rights><rights>Child Indicators Research is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-c502c105857aa467901d3340423c17f28a8606a6b6908793ae8b6716250ee8c23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-c502c105857aa467901d3340423c17f28a8606a6b6908793ae8b6716250ee8c23</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4799-6258</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12187-018-9562-3$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12187-018-9562-3$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,12846,27924,27925,30999,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gregory, Tess</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Engelhardt, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewkowicz, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Luddy, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guhn, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gadermann, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brinkman, Sally</creatorcontrib><title>Validity of the Middle Years Development Instrument for Population Monitoring of Student Wellbeing in Australian School Children</title><title>Child indicators research</title><addtitle>Child Ind Res</addtitle><description>The importance of social and emotional wellbeing has long been recognised by education systems but the measurement of wellbeing still receives far less attention than the measurement of academic achievement. This paper reports on a five-year project to measure student wellbeing across an education system within the state of South Australia using the Middle Years Development Instrument (MDI). All schools (Government, Catholic, and Independent) were invited to participate in the collection at no cost and aggregated school reports provided an incentive to participate. A total of 51,574 students completed the MDI between 2013 and 2015, with higher participation rates in Government schools than Catholic or Independent schools (65%, 18 and 13% respectively in 2015). Validity and reliability analyses confirmed that the MDI scales had good psychometric properties (i.e., favourable model fit in confirmatory factor analyses, high internal consistency, and correlations between scales were consistent with theoretical expectations). Test-retest reliability (based on a sub-sample of 82 children) was acceptable for most scales except for the connectedness to adults at school ( r  = .50) and friendship intimacy scales ( r  = .40), where test-retest reliability was low. However, several of the MDI scales had ceiling effects, particularly for girls and younger students (10–11 years old), which may present challenges when using these scales for population monitoring, program and policy evaluations. Pragmatic factors for education systems and governments to consider in selecting social and emotional wellbeing tools are discussed.</description><subject>Academic achievement</subject><subject>Catholic schools</subject><subject>Child and School Psychology</subject><subject>Child development</subject><subject>Child psychology</subject><subject>Confirmatory factor analysis</subject><subject>Early Childhood Education</subject><subject>Educational psychology</subject><subject>Emotional well being</subject><subject>Intimacy</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Private schools</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Quality of Life Research</subject><subject>Quantitative psychology</subject><subject>School reports</subject><subject>Schools</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Social Work</subject><subject>Test-Retest reliability</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>1874-897X</issn><issn>1874-8988</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LwzAYx4soOKcfwFvAc_VJ2qbpccy3wYbCfD2FrE1dRpbUJBV286PbWtGTp-fPw_8FflF0iuEcA-QXHhPM8hgwi4uMkjjZi0bdI41Zwdj-r85fDqMj7zcAFAMho-jzSWhVqbBDtkZhLdFCVZWW6FUK59Gl_JDaNltpApoZH1z7LWvr0L1tWi2CsgYtrFHBOmXe-pJlaKve9Cy1Xsn-qQyatF24WxIGLcu1tRpN10pXTprj6KAW2suTnzuOHq-vHqa38fzuZjadzOMywTTEZQakxJCxLBcipXkBuEqSFFKSlDivCROMAhV0RQtgeZEIyVY0x5RkICUrSTKOzobextn3VvrAN7Z1ppvkBFJcUJICdC48uEpnvXey5o1TW-F2HAPvQfMBNO9A8x40T7oMGTK-6RlI99f8f-gLRnuBJA</recordid><startdate>20190601</startdate><enddate>20190601</enddate><creator>Gregory, Tess</creator><creator>Engelhardt, David</creator><creator>Lewkowicz, Anna</creator><creator>Luddy, Samuel</creator><creator>Guhn, Martin</creator><creator>Gadermann, Anne</creator><creator>Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly</creator><creator>Brinkman, Sally</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4799-6258</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190601</creationdate><title>Validity of the Middle Years Development Instrument for Population Monitoring of Student Wellbeing in Australian School Children</title><author>Gregory, Tess ; Engelhardt, David ; Lewkowicz, Anna ; Luddy, Samuel ; Guhn, Martin ; Gadermann, Anne ; Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly ; Brinkman, Sally</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-c502c105857aa467901d3340423c17f28a8606a6b6908793ae8b6716250ee8c23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Academic achievement</topic><topic>Catholic schools</topic><topic>Child and School Psychology</topic><topic>Child development</topic><topic>Child psychology</topic><topic>Confirmatory factor analysis</topic><topic>Early Childhood Education</topic><topic>Educational psychology</topic><topic>Emotional well being</topic><topic>Intimacy</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Private schools</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Quality of Life Research</topic><topic>Quantitative psychology</topic><topic>School reports</topic><topic>Schools</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Social Work</topic><topic>Test-Retest reliability</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gregory, Tess</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Engelhardt, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewkowicz, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Luddy, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guhn, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gadermann, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brinkman, Sally</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Education Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Child indicators research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gregory, Tess</au><au>Engelhardt, David</au><au>Lewkowicz, Anna</au><au>Luddy, Samuel</au><au>Guhn, Martin</au><au>Gadermann, Anne</au><au>Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly</au><au>Brinkman, Sally</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Validity of the Middle Years Development Instrument for Population Monitoring of Student Wellbeing in Australian School Children</atitle><jtitle>Child indicators research</jtitle><stitle>Child Ind Res</stitle><date>2019-06-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>873</spage><epage>899</epage><pages>873-899</pages><issn>1874-897X</issn><eissn>1874-8988</eissn><abstract>The importance of social and emotional wellbeing has long been recognised by education systems but the measurement of wellbeing still receives far less attention than the measurement of academic achievement. This paper reports on a five-year project to measure student wellbeing across an education system within the state of South Australia using the Middle Years Development Instrument (MDI). All schools (Government, Catholic, and Independent) were invited to participate in the collection at no cost and aggregated school reports provided an incentive to participate. A total of 51,574 students completed the MDI between 2013 and 2015, with higher participation rates in Government schools than Catholic or Independent schools (65%, 18 and 13% respectively in 2015). Validity and reliability analyses confirmed that the MDI scales had good psychometric properties (i.e., favourable model fit in confirmatory factor analyses, high internal consistency, and correlations between scales were consistent with theoretical expectations). Test-retest reliability (based on a sub-sample of 82 children) was acceptable for most scales except for the connectedness to adults at school ( r  = .50) and friendship intimacy scales ( r  = .40), where test-retest reliability was low. However, several of the MDI scales had ceiling effects, particularly for girls and younger students (10–11 years old), which may present challenges when using these scales for population monitoring, program and policy evaluations. Pragmatic factors for education systems and governments to consider in selecting social and emotional wellbeing tools are discussed.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s12187-018-9562-3</doi><tpages>27</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4799-6258</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1874-897X
ispartof Child indicators research, 2019-06, Vol.12 (3), p.873-899
issn 1874-897X
1874-8988
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2041962400
source Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); SpringerNature Journals
subjects Academic achievement
Catholic schools
Child and School Psychology
Child development
Child psychology
Confirmatory factor analysis
Early Childhood Education
Educational psychology
Emotional well being
Intimacy
Measurement
Private schools
Psychometrics
Quality of Life Research
Quantitative psychology
School reports
Schools
Social Sciences
Social Work
Test-Retest reliability
Validity
title Validity of the Middle Years Development Instrument for Population Monitoring of Student Wellbeing in Australian School Children
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T06%3A53%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Validity%20of%20the%20Middle%20Years%20Development%20Instrument%20for%20Population%20Monitoring%20of%20Student%20Wellbeing%20in%20Australian%20School%20Children&rft.jtitle=Child%20indicators%20research&rft.au=Gregory,%20Tess&rft.date=2019-06-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=873&rft.epage=899&rft.pages=873-899&rft.issn=1874-897X&rft.eissn=1874-8988&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12187-018-9562-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2041962400%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2041962400&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true