背景:关于学校作为保护因素方法的概念框架在本期杂志的一篇配套文章中提出。本文介绍了学校作为保护因子简报(SPF简报)的验证,一项13项调查,测量了该框架的3个核心结构和13个定义特征。
方法:通过2项研究验证了SPF简报。这项发展研究采用了纵向设计,包括1349名参与者,他们完成了5个学期的调查,而验证研究使用了2775名参与者的横断面设计。两项研究都包括初中和高中学生。因子分析,增长模型分析,与标准相关的验证,并采用结果分析。
结果:分析提供了有力的证据支持工具和概念框架的可靠性和有效性。较高的SPF-简短分数与较高的数学成绩相关,英语成绩,和生活质量,以及较低的焦虑率,抑郁症,行为障碍,酒精,电子烟,烟草,使用大麻。效应大小估计范围从中等到强。
结论:这些发现表明了SPF-Brief工具和学校作为保护因素框架的实用性。一起,它们可能为传统的学校氛围方法提供优势。
BACKGROUND: The conceptual framework for School as a Protective Factor approach was presented in a companion article in this issue of the journal. The current article describes the validation of the School as a Protective Factor-Brief (SPF-Brief), a 13-item survey measuring the 3 core constructs and 13 defining characteristics of this framework.
METHODS: The SPF-Brief was validated through 2 studies. The developmental study used a longitudinal design including 1349 participants who completed surveys over 5 semesters, while the validation study used a cross-sectional design with 2775 participants. Both studies included middle and high school students. Factor analysis, growth model analysis, criterion-related validation, and outcome analysis were employed.
RESULTS: Analyses provided strong evidence supporting the reliability and validity of the instrument and conceptual framework. Higher SPF-Brief scores were associated with higher math grades, English grades, and quality of life, as well as lower rates of anxiety, depression, conduct disorder, alcohol, e-cigarette, tobacco, and cannabis use. Effect size estimates ranged from moderate to strong.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest the utility of the SPF-Brief instrument and the School as a Protective Factor framework. Together, they may offer advantages to the traditional school climate approach.