1 / 20

Developing a Wellbeing measure for College Students

Developing a Wellbeing measure for College Students. Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. ( 2014). Introduction. Teacher for 18 years Director of Wellbeing ESTYN Peer Inspector Started PhD in January 2011. Aims & Objectives. Aim

wyatt
Download Presentation

Developing a Wellbeing measure for College Students

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Developing a Wellbeing measure for College Students Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. (2014)

  2. Introduction • Teacher for 18 years • Director of Wellbeing • ESTYN Peer Inspector • Started PhD in January 2011

  3. Aims & Objectives • Aim • To investigate the impact of a pastoral intervention programme on levels of wellbeing in Further Education (F.E.) students. • Objectives • To devise a workable definition as to what constitutes wellbeing based on existing theory. • To develop a measure of wellbeing suitable for use in F.E. • To develop and evaluate a pastoral intervention programme on levels of wellbeing in F.E. students.

  4. Wellbeing

  5. Defining Wellbeing • Research has grown (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Kahneman, Diener, & Schwarz, 1999; Keyes, Scmoptkin, & Ryff, 2002) however, “the absence of theory-based formulations of wellbeing is puzzling” (Ryff & Keyes, 1995, p.719-20). • Unresolved definition: “has given rise to blurred and overly broad definitions of wellbeing” (Forgeard et al., 2011, p.81). • Wellbeing is “intangible, difficult to define and even harder to measure” (Thomas 2009, p.11).

  6. Defining Wellbeing -Theoretical Foundations • Set Point Theory (Headey & Wearing, 1989, Brickman & Campbell, 1971) • Equilibrium (Herzlich, 1973) • Homeostasis (Cummins, 2010) • The Lifespan Model of Development (Hendry & Kloep, 2002)

  7. New Definition Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. (2012). The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(3), 222-235

  8. Developing a measure – Focus Groups

  9. Challenges facing FE Students • Exams/college assignments • Other issues relating to college • Future employment/Higher Education • Confidence • Personal Safety • Friends/social relationships • Dating/personal relationships • Family & Relatives • Health • Finances

  10. Developing a measure – Focus Groups ‘Yeah I think it could work because most of the things we’ve looked at, like mental health and things, fit under either one of the challenges or resources, which makes it easier to explain. ‘ Participant 2b ‘I think it is about weighing it up. You are definitely balancing the resources that you have with what you’re faced with.’ – Participant 4b ‘I think it’s good because if you get a challenge you can use your resources… It could be things like physical, or anything, but you could find out what the problem is and help each other out.’ – Participant 3c

  11. Developing a wellbeing measure for college students • ‘An operational measurement model of student well-being will consist of an overarching definition of student well-being that is manifest in a set of interrelated but discrete dimensions.’ (Frallion , 2005, p.6) • Distinct measures for discrete groups (Thompson and Marcs, 2008) . • Wellbeing measures not devised for young people (Qvortrup, 1990; Fattore et al 2007; Watson et al 2012)

  12. Survey Design • The Strengths & Difficulties Scale (Goodman, 1997) and the Personal Concerns Inventory (Cox & Klinger, 2004) • A score for challenges and a score for resources.

  13. Design Stages

  14. Stage 1 - Pilot • Pilot study was undertaken with 36 students. • Students chose three areas of challenge. • Feedback.

  15. Stage 2 - September 2012 Data • 614 students completed the questionnaire and 43 abstained. • Students answered questions on all life areas that they found challenging.

  16. Validity Checks • Validity checks were undertaken using the Perceived Stress Scale - PSS (Cohen et. al, 1983) & The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire – OHQ (Hills & Argyle, 2002). Happiness Stress Happiness 1.000 - .541** Stress - .541** 1.000 Mean Resource Score .293** - .311** Mean Challenge Score - .355** .417** - of challenges No. .502** .345** completed N = 614 P<0001

  17. Stage 3 - January 2013 Data • 483 students completed, 53 abstained. • Students answered all life areas. • Feedback. • Shortened version.

  18. What’s happened since? • Pastoral Intervention • Website www.resource-fullwellbeing.co.uk • Short measure completed in January 2014 (n.900) • Repeated in July 2014

  19. Reliability

More Related