All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Clark University Institutional Review Board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. In turn, they are also less likely to graduate high school and to attend/graduate from college. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. We are also aware that the number of studies is small and participants are also small in number and want to highlight the overall limitations of the evidence-base.
By doing so, researchers can be aware of the various intersecting sexual orientation and gender identities that LGBTQ youth manage and to be inclusive of programs, interventions, and strategies that are intended to support LGBTQ youth as a whole. For example, there were different perceptions of safety and struggles between sexual orientation minority youth and gender identity minority youth. Second, there were differences in perceived support and outcomes depending on the subpopulation of LGBTQ youth, highlighting the issues of generalizing the LGBTQ youth population as a homogenous population. Notwithstanding, a collaborative, whole school approach may be overly idealistic and an unrealistic approach for schools embedded in a larger, more conservative environment. It is therefore important to have teachers be comfortable and open to teach LGBTQ-inclusive curriculum to increase LGBTQ youths’ sense of safety. Effective actions students have mentioned include consistent intervention against LGBTQ-specific harassment, and opening dialogue on the importance of inclusion and acceptance (i.e., through a LGBTQ-inclusive curriculum).
Participation of Children and Youth in Learning and Community Development
For example, Kurth and Zagona (2018) investigated the accessibility of Tier 1 supports and activities (e.g. school-wide expectations and reward systems) for students with ESN from the perspectives of SWPBIS coaches. Researchers from all six studies explored the availability and accessibility of Tier 1 support for students with ESN. Additionally, Kurth and Zagona (2018) examined whether SWPBIS coaches (i.e. general education teachers, special education teachers, administrators, related service providers) felt it was possible to include students with ESN across all SWPBIS tiers. For example, Shuster et al. (2017) examined the extent of participation among students with ESN in SWPBIS from https://www.thenationalcouncil.org/event/southeast-ccbhc-learning-community/ the perspectives of special education teachers. First, as described earlier in Stage 2, we contacted first authors of studies that were included in the review to solicit recommendations for additional research related to the involvement of students with ESN in SWPBIS. At that time, the authors reported there remained insufficient empirical evidence to determine the extent to which SWPBIS is appropriate for and available and accessible to students with ESN and concluded more data were needed to evaluate whether SWPBIS enhances or engenders inclusive education.
- None of the studies in the systematic review included any qualitative data on young people’s perceptions of what a ‘peer’ is, although this would provide essential insight into what would be acceptable to pupils.
- Like scholars adopting a social psychological perspective, researchers who employ a sociological perspective are concerned with adolescents’ group membership, the evaluation thereof, and the extent to which adolescents identify with these groups.
- Moreover, researchers agree that engagement is a multidimensional construct, or a meta-construct, whose dimensions typically include behavioral, emotional, cognitive (e.g., Fredricks et al., 2004; Estell and Perdue, 2013), and more recently social engagement (Wang et al., 2019).
- This involves tailoring a MTSS approach to better fit students and schools of various developmental levels, performance challenges, or ecological domains, among other clusters.
- Others are more concerned with adolescents’ perceptions of the attributes other people (e.g., society in general) assign to adolescents in different high school tracks (e.g., Knigge and Hannover 2011) or in schools with a low- or high-status reputation (Marcouyeux and Fleury-Bahi 2011).
Communications may be more efficient because team members often assume multiple roles, meaning less need for frequent data collection and fewer scheduled meetings, and can align MTSS approaches more readily across a smaller and more compact K-12 system (Bailey, 2014). In addition, children in rural communities often have greater access to extended family and kinship that frequently intersects with school officials at multigenerational levels (Vernon-Feagans and Swingler, 2020). Indeed, multi-tiered approaches are often abandoned by school districts due to excessive expense, complexity, and burden (Kittelman et al., 2020). At the same time, MTSS approaches carry significant logistical, instructional, structural, and financial challenges for many school districts (Durrance, 2023).
1.3 School-based teams
It requires committed coordination among students and faculty to ensure the groups function effectively and inclusively. Schools implementing these groups have reported noticeable improvements in student motivation and engagement, ultimately leading to better academic outcomes. Emotional stability and confidence in their abilities allow students to focus better in class and tackle academic challenges head-on. By fostering an environment of understanding and empathy, students find solace in knowing they are not alone in their challenges.
This special issue draws on diverse conceptual and empirical approaches to interrogate the notion of ‘vulnerable youth’. In constructing young people simultaneously as the problem and the source of solutions, policy responses frequently look to the portals of education and training to minimise risk, manage uncertainty and protect the future. Concurrently, there are widespread and growing social, political, economic and environmental uncertainties, coinciding with intensified efforts to regulate young people’s conduct and aspirations through an array of policies and programs (Spohrer et al. 2018). Only someone who knows a student well and cares deeply about his or her well-being will be able to help that student form reachable goals.
Their analysis, as well as the other articles, suggests that, by acquiring new skills through hands-on activities, these students were able to adjust their self-understandings in a positive way in relation to previously unavailable identity positions. Bruin and Ohna (2013), who do not explicitly mention a particular perspective on identity development, studied alternative educational courses involving increased workplace-practice for adolescents who could not flourish in Norwegian’s regular and more theoretically oriented education. Finally, one theoretical (Brickhouse 2001) and various empirical studies in this group of literature (Barrett and Baker 2012; Bruin and Ohna 2013; Johnson et al. 2011; Van Sluys 2010) that differ in the perspectives on identity development they adopt examined the role in-breadth explorative learning experiences may play in the identity development of adolescents with a higher risk of marginalization. Interestingly, these three studies were concerned with the role of peer norms in adolescents’ identity development in the same way as some of the studies that are grounded in a sociocultural perspective, despite their different understandings of how identities develop. Fields and Enyedy (2013) found that, even though the teacher of the programming class made the identity position of an attentive expert available to one of the students in this class, his peers refused to regard this student as such. Three studies in which sociocultural perspectives are adopted and that are based on various ethnographic research methods (Fields and Enyedy 2013; Ideland and Malmberg 2012; Volman and Ten Dam 2007) were concerned with and found that peers may deny each other access to certain identity positions through peer norms.