Introduction
Background
School climate
Conceptualising and assessing school climate
-
The community domain, which aligns with Moos’ (1974) relationship dimension, refers to the quality of the relationships within a school. These relationships are reflected in the interactions between members, including those between students and between students and teachers and other staff members. Although Wang and Degol (2016) included elements related to the degree to which school members feel included in this domain, in our study of psychosocial school climates, we moved these institutional-level norms into the institutional environment domain.
-
The academic atmosphere domain is related to the support provided at the school and, although this domain includes leadership and the professional development of teachers, for the development of the survey, a focus on teaching and learning was taken. This domain considers factors that impact students’ learning experiences, including instructional practices and expectations of the teacher (Deemer, 2004). Drawing on research in which students, despite being socially disadvantaged, perform well at school (Modin & Östberg, 2009), our focus was on characteristics that promote positive outcomes such as teachers’ expectations (Wang & Degol, 2016).
-
The safety domain overlaps with Moos’ system maintenance and system change dimensions, which involve the structures within the school that encourage either system maintenance, such as the rules of a school, or system change, such as the mechanisms to report and seek help. In our study, this domain masures the quality of the physical and emotional safety of a school, such as the clarity of the rules and the disciplinary practices.
-
The institutional environment domain in many studies (e.g. Wang & Degol, 2016) refers to the physical structure of the school. However, because our study examined the psychosocial school climate, it was meaningful to include constructs related to Moos’ (1974) personal development dimensions. Therefore, this domain was reconceptualised to include elements influenced by institutional-level norms related to inclusion, such as respect and acceptance.
Theoretical framework
Methods
Development of the survey
Sample
Stage 4: Expert panel review
Stage 5: Multiple trials
Stage 6: Pilot test
Stage 7: Large-scale administration
Instruments
Assessing the school climate
Area | Scale | Child-friendly header | Scale description | Sample item |
---|---|---|---|---|
Community | Teacher Support | My teachers | The extent to which students perceive that teachers at the school are supportive and helpful. | The teachers at this school listen to me. |
Peer Connectedness | Getting along with others | The extent to which students feel that there is contact and friendship between students | The children at school like me. | |
Safety | Rule Clarity | Clear rules | The extent to which students perceive the school rules to be clear and promote a safe and orderly environment | I know the school rules. |
Reporting and Seeking Help | Finding help | The extent to which students are aware of procedures and feel safe reporting incidents | I can tell a teacher when bad things happen. | |
Academic support | Support for Learning | My learning | The extent to which students perceive that their teachers support their learning | My teachers know when I don’t understand something. |
High Expectations | Doing well | The extent to which students perceive that teachers expect them to succeed and challenge them to learn | My teachers expect me to do well. | |
Institutional environment (inclusiveness) | School Connectedness | Belonging | The extent to which students at the school perceive that they are a valued part of the school community | I feel welcome at this school. |
Affirming Diversity* | Understanding difference | The extent to which students perceive that their culture and diversity are acknowledged and valued at the school | Special days in my culture are talked about at this school. |
Assessing student wellbeing
Analyses
Results
Translational validity
Content validity
Face validity
Criterion validity
Convergent validity
Item | Factor loadings | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Community | Safety | Academic atmosphere | Institutional environment | |||||||||||
Teacher Support | Peer Connectedness | Reporting and Seeking Help | Rule Clarity | Support for Learning | High Expectations | School Connectedness | ||||||||
Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | |
2 | .767 | .837 | ||||||||||||
3 | .694 | .659 | ||||||||||||
4 | .644 | .753 | ||||||||||||
5 | .764 | .651 | ||||||||||||
6 | .693 | .614 | ||||||||||||
7 | .832 | .819 | ||||||||||||
9 | .798 | .737 | ||||||||||||
10 | .791 | .850 | ||||||||||||
11 | .817 | .735 | ||||||||||||
14 | .883 | .762 | ||||||||||||
15 | .846 | .757 | ||||||||||||
16 | .583 | .667 | ||||||||||||
18 | .705 | .743 | ||||||||||||
19 | .854 | .843 | ||||||||||||
20 | .849 | .882 | ||||||||||||
22 | .805 | .788 | ||||||||||||
23 | .722 | .703 | ||||||||||||
24 | .589 | .747 | ||||||||||||
25 | .853 | .858 | ||||||||||||
26 | .892 | .837 | ||||||||||||
27 | .473 | – | ||||||||||||
% Variance | 4.191 | 3.590 | 7.640 | 38.871 | 5.338 | 5.252 | 1.239 | 4.182 | 34.294 | 6.687 | 6.458 | 6.369 | 4.708 | 4.777 |
Cronbach alpha coefficient | .809 | .772 | .748 | .734 | .706 | .806 | .705 | .810 | .762 | .772 | .513 | .608 | .783 | .769 |
Scale | Component correlation matrix | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Teacher Support | Peer Connectedness | Reporting and Seeking Help | Rule Clarity | Support for Learning | High Expectations | School Connectedness | |
Teacher Support | – | .308 | .315 | .366 | .286 | .101 | .363 |
Peer Connectedness | .437 | – | .306 | .268 | .220 | .185 | .366 |
Reporting and Seeking Help | .383 | .296 | – | .413 | .416 | .229 | .361 |
Rule Clarity | .459 | .328 | .448 | – | .337 | .213 | .361 |
Support for Learning | .412 | .318 | .454 | .361 | – | .252 | .334 |
High Expectations | .269 | .267 | .311 | .306 | .327 | – | .177 |
School Connectedness | .375 | .286 | .333 | .335 | .305 | .360 | – |
Discriminant validity
Concurrent validity
Scale | Concurrent validity | Predictive validity | |
---|---|---|---|
ANOVA (eta2) | Simple correlations with reports of wellbeing (actual) | ||
Actual | Preferred | r | |
Teacher Support | 0.024** | 0.037** | .435* |
Peer Connectedness | 0.036** | 0.038** | .447* |
Reporting/Seeking Help | 0.009 | 0.015* | .374* |
Rule Clarity | 0.019** | 0.026** | .323* |
Support for Learning | 0.015* | 0.015* | .394* |
School Connectedness | 0.016* | 0.016* | .279* |
High Expectations | 0.026** | 0.028** | .633* |
Predictive validity
Confirming an upper primary version with Affirming Diversity
Item | Factor loadings | |||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Teacher Support | Peer Connectedness | Reporting and Seeking Help | Rule Clarity | Support for Learning | High Expectations | School Connectedness | Affirming Cultural Diversity | |||||||||
Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | Act | Pref | |
1 | .571 | .781 | ||||||||||||||
2 | .844 | .692 | ||||||||||||||
3 | .740 | .598 | ||||||||||||||
4 | .699 | .697 | ||||||||||||||
5 | .740 | .627 | ||||||||||||||
6 | .634 | .554 | ||||||||||||||
7 | .789 | .720 | ||||||||||||||
8 | .738 | .687 | ||||||||||||||
9 | .793 | .728 | ||||||||||||||
10 | .738 | .783 | ||||||||||||||
11 | .818 | .812 | ||||||||||||||
12 | .753 | .742 | ||||||||||||||
13 | .856 | .673 | ||||||||||||||
14 | .474 | .533 | ||||||||||||||
15 | .800 | .715 | ||||||||||||||
16 | .581 | .673 | ||||||||||||||
17 | .715 | .725 | ||||||||||||||
18 | .888 | .870 | ||||||||||||||
19 | .860 | .864 | ||||||||||||||
20 | .631 | .621 | ||||||||||||||
21 | .783 | .775 | ||||||||||||||
22 | .703 | .703 | ||||||||||||||
23 | .613 | .717 | ||||||||||||||
24 | .820 | .834 | ||||||||||||||
26 | .877 | .812 | ||||||||||||||
27 | .441 | – | ||||||||||||||
28 | .545 | .528 | ||||||||||||||
29 | .882 | .853 | ||||||||||||||
30 | .824 | .792 | ||||||||||||||
% Variance | 33.177 | 3.092 | 6.470 | 5.580 | 4.110 | 3.354 | 4.860 | 36.886 | 3.183 | 4.177 | 4.617 | 4.829 | 3.559 | 3.527 | 5.844 | 4.705 |