UNICEF China Country OfficeSeptember 2010

SEL in China

UNICEF China Country OfficeSeptember 2010

Social & Emotional Learning (SEL) A

students survey in China

ContextNational Social and Emotional Learning

Survey In 2009, Ministry of Education(MOE) together

with UNICEF built a research team to jointly carry out Social and Emotional Leaning(SEL) Survey among students of primary and secondary schools, to understand the SEL status of students at primary and secondary schools

This survey was integrated into the national school safety survey conducted into September 2009, supported by MOE ad UNICEF

ContextScale of the survey

Considering the geographic location and disparities amongst rural and urban areas, eight provinces selected from Eastern, Mid and Western region of China.

Developed: Guangdong and Shandong;Mid-level: Liaoning, Jiangxi and Hebei;Less developed: Sichuan, Yunnan and Guizhou.

Survey toolsThe original tools developed by AIR were

adapted in 2008In order to ensure greater relevance for the

wide-range of schools in China, officers from UNICEF and MOE along with national experts again updated questionnaires based on China’s National Standards of Child Friendly Schools in June 2009.

The adapted questionnaires used a four-point bipolar scale, including 5 components and a total of 74 items.

Survey tools

Questionnaires for students

Questionnaires for teachers SELSurvey Tools

Interview guideline for students

Interview guideline for teachers

Supports

Components of tools on SEL

Challenge

Social & Emotional Learning

School safety

School leadership and students’ participation

Students questionnaire4 Score Likert scale adapted74 items for five components

Example of student questionnaire

Sampling

Primary School Junior Secondary School

Senior Secondary School

1 Big/middle City

2 schools •School A: one class in Grade IV•School B: one class Grade V

1 school •School A: one class in Grade VIII

1 County/small city

1 school•School A: one class in Grade IV

1 school •School A: one class in Grade VIII

1 school•School A: one class in Grade XI

2 Townships

2 schools •School A: one class in Grade V•School B: one class Grade VI

1 school •School A: one class in Grade VIII

In each province, 12 schools were randomly selected from 1 big/middle city; 1 County/small city, and 2 Townships.

Survey implementation The questionnaire survey were conducted by

the provincial education authorities in eight province, with the instruction on sampling of schools/students and distribution of questionnaires issued by MOE.5,438 students’ questionnaires distributed to eight

provinces, covering students from primary, junior secondary and senior secondary schools located at city, county and township areas, of which 5, 336 (98.12%) identified as valid questionnaires;

4,269 teachers’ questionnaires distributed to eight provinces, covering the same schools as the students’ survey above, of which 4, 269 (100%) identified as valid questionnaires;

96 schools from 8 provinces were covered.

Survey implementation The field survey were conducted by four

expert groups in the four provinces, namely: Hebei, Liaoning, Jiangxi, and Hunan provinces. The major activities during the field survey

included focus group meeting with students, teachers and principals, based on the interview guidelines.

Data AnalysisData analysis

General information and status for each dimensions;

Means and SD. for each items;Differences amongst groups(geographic

location, gender, type of schools, family background)

Correlations of each component with three key factors (academic performance, parents relationship, geographic location of schools)

Data AnalysisTool for data analysis: SPSS

16.0(Statistics Product and Service solutions)

Method for data analysisFrequency analysis(Means, Std. maximum

and minimum score, percentage);

X2 (Chi-square) test for differences;

Kendall W correlation analysis.

Dimensions of SELComponents used to describe the SEL

status for students based on theory on Social Emotional Conditions for Development. Children are supportedChildren are socially capable

Children are safe Children are challengedChildren participate and lead

Initial findings of SEL survey

Initial findings of SEL survey

Schools scored high on providing a challenging environment as well as providing opportunities for school leadership and students’ participation >3;

School scored relatively lower on school safety and social support scored low, respectively <3

Initial findings of SEL survey

Differences analysisType of school, there are statistically

significant differences amongst different type of schools, with primary school students scored the highest and senior secondary school students scoring the lowest.

Initial findings of SEL surveyDifferences analysis

School location, it has statistically significant difference amongst school location, in terms of city, county and townships, while urban students score highest, followed with students in rural and county-level schools.

Initial findings of SEL surveyDifferences analysis

Gender, there are statistically significant differences amongst girls and boys, with girls scoring higher than boys.

Initial findings of SEL surveyDifferences analysis

Family background, it has statistically significant difference amongst different family background, young students with “the same family background with most of other students” have much higher scores than those of with “different family background with most of other students”

What influences higher SEL status –implications School location, gender, grade and family

background have significant influence on the SEL for students; what does this mean for poor / ethnic minority children?

Learning: the higher the achievement, the higher the SEL status that students display; what does this mean for low achieving children , children with linguistic differences

The more frequent communication with parents, the higher the SEL status that students have: what does this mean for children of migrant parents and left behind children and children in boarding schools

How can the results fees into the national monitoring system which plans to weight students’ academic performance along with their social emotional well-being status