<p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG /> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--></p> <p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves /> <w:TrackFormatting /> <w:PunctuationKerning /> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas /> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF /> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-ZA</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables /> <w:SnapToGridInCell /> <w:WrapTextWithPunct /> <w:UseAsianBreakRules /> <w:DontGrowAutofit /> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark /> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning /> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents /> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps /> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math" /> <m:brkBin m:val="before" /> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45 / -" /> <m:smallFrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispDef /> <m:lMargin m:val="0" /> <m:rMargin m:val="0" /> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup" /> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440" /> <m:intLim m:val="subSup" /> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr" /> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true" DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="267"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading" /> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal" / mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0 / mso-tstyle-colband-size:0 / mso-style-noshow:yes / mso-style-priority:99 / mso-style-parent:"" / mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt / mso-para-margin-top:0cm / mso-para-margin-right:0cm / mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt / mso-para-margin-left:0cm / line-height:115% / mso-pagination:widow-orphan / font-size:11.0pt / font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif" / mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri / mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin / mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri / mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin / mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman" / mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi / mso-fareast-language:EN-US / } </style> <![endif]--> <p style="margin-bottom:0cm / margin-bottom:.0001pt / line-height: normal / mso-layout-grid-align:none / text-autospace:none" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11.5pt / font-family:&quot / TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot / ,&quot / serif&quot / mso-bidi-font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT">Behaviour problems have been on the rise in Kenyan schools for some time now. Various maladaptive behaviours found among school children include bullying, vandalism, stealing, alcohol and drug abuse, truancy, not completing homework assignments and other forms of problem behaviours. These problem behaviours impact negatively on the teaching and learning enterprises of schools as well as on the safety and security of the school environment. As consequence, schools have to develop student behaviour management practices aimed at addressing student problem behaviours. Corporal punishment was a major means by which schools dealt with students&rsquo / problem behaviours. However, because of the human rights abuses associated with corporal punishment, the Kenyan Ministry of Education had to abolish corporal punishment in 2001 and instructed schools to evolve more effective student behaviour management practices with strong emphasis on positive student behaviour development. Schools&rsquo / student behaviour management practices including policies on student behaviour expectations, school rules and regulations as well as counselling services are all to be coordinated by each School Disciplinary Panel. A School Disciplinary Panel is to be composed of small group of teachers as a way of emphasizing the latter&rsquo / s roles in student behaviour development and not just student academic or educational development. The central concern of this study was to investigate the Kenyan schools&rsquo / behaviour management practices as being implemented by School Disciplinary Panels especially in the latter&rsquo / s responses to students&rsquo / problem behaviours. The study investigated processes of decision making by Kenyan secondary school disciplinary panels for the management of student behaviours and the contribution of this to student behaviour development. Mixed methods research design was adopted for the study. The adoption of both quantitative and qualitative approaches was to ensure the collection of comprehensive information for better understanding of the behaviour management practices of Kenyan schools. The population for the study comprised all Kenyan schools with behaviour management practices and School Disciplinary Panels. Rongo District, one of the largest education districts in Kenya was chosen for the study. Ten of the schools in this district were actually involved in the study. The selection of the schools took into consideration the three different types of schools in Kenya (Girls&rsquo / Only, Boys&rsquo / Only and Co-educational schools) as well as other variables of particular interest to the study. Seventy-eight (78) disciplinary panel members from the ten selected schools were the participants of the study. Data collection was by use of questionnaire method (the Modified Choice Dilemma Questionnaire, MCDQ) and interview protocol.</span></p> <p style="margin-bottom:0cm / margin-bottom:.0001pt / line-height: normal / mso-layout-grid-align:none / text-autospace:none" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11.5pt / font-family:&quot / TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot / ,&quot / serif&quot / mso-bidi-font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT">&nbsp / </span></p> <p style="margin-bottom:0cm / margin-bottom:.0001pt / line-height: normal / mso-layout-grid-align:none / text-autospace:none" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11.5pt / font-family:&quot / TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot / ,&quot / serif&quot / mso-bidi-font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT">The findings of the study revealed the existence of the phenomenon of group polarization in decision making processes of disciplinary hearings conducted by the School Disciplinary Panels. Study findings also revealed that the nature of information shared during disciplinary hearings, group members&rsquo / motivation for approval of others and their concern for their status in the group as well as the personality characteristics of the members of the disciplinary panels (including gender, age, teaching experiences and school affiliation) were the major influences responsible for the existence of group polarization in the disciplinary processes of the Kenyan secondary school disciplinary panels. Since group polarization is about consensus decisions with characteristics of being collective decisions as well as greater support and acceptance for the decisions the conclusion of the study is that good quality decisions of Kenyan secondary school </span><span style="font-size: 11.5pt / font-family:&quot / TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot / ,&quot / serif&quot / mso-bidi-font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT">disciplinary panels have great potentials for effective management of student behaviours and for positive behavioural development of students as an important objective of education and or the schools.</span></p> </p>

The present study firstly aimed to identify children with delayed reading who were missing the component skills of decoding fluency and who also displayed antisocial behaviour in the classroom. It also aimed to replicate with them an intervention designed by Church, Nixon, Zintl and Williams (2005). The study finally aimed to explore the question of whether children who have both a reading delay and a disruptive behaviour disorder require a reinforcement scheme to maintain their engagement in learning activities. Six participants worked with same-age peer tutors on specially-designed practice activities for approximately 20 minutes a day, four times a week, for 8-18 sessions. Improvement in decoding fluency and prose reading fluency was tracked for each child throughout the intervention. Results showed that the six participants gained, on average, sixteen months on their age-equivalent score for reading rate. Decoding fluency scores increased from a pre-test average of 16 correct graphemes per minute to 32 correct graphemes per minute at the post-test measure. Reading accuracy improved by an average of five months and reading comprehension by an average of six months. The gains in reading rate are most likely due to the practice opportunities afforded by the testing procedures as decoding fluency scores did not improve enough to have had a direct impact on the learners’ prose reading ability. Implications for remedial reading interventions with children with behaviour problems are discussed.

This dissertation describes a study that investigated the perceptions of foster parents and kinship caregivers (grandparents caring for their grandchildren) around contact issues between children in their care and their birth parents in Canterbury, New Zealand. The study employed a qualitative approach for data collection and analysis. The qualitative method of data collection for the study comprised of three focus groups, two with foster parents and one with grandparents. The focus groups were conducted using a modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT) where two questions posed to the participants sought to understand their views about behaviours they noticed in children in their care before and after contact with birth parents. In addition, a further question was asked to gain an understanding around their feelings on contact with birth parents. Findings of the study indicated that foster parents largely described children’s behaviour before and after contact to be distressing and stressful for them, with few positive benefits. Furthermore, foster parents mainly stated strong, negative feelings around contact with biological parents. In the discussion, implications of these results are discussed for foster children, foster parents and social welfare practices.

Research Doctorate - Doctor of Philosophy / There were two major aims in the current study. The first was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Thai Social and Emotional Skill Rating Scale (TSESRS) developed by the author. The measurement model of this material is a three factor model containing social skills, emotional skills, and social-cognitive skills. These factors were measured from eight indicators. Data were collected from 685 lower secondary school students who were studying in schools under the jurisdiction of the Phatthalung Educational Area Office, Thailand. Materials used in this phase were the trial version of the TSESRS, the Thai Emotional Skill Scale (TESS) and the Thai Social Skill Scale (TSSS). The evidence suggested that the following psychometric properties of the TSESRS are within the acceptable cut-off levels: item-validity, item-reliability, item-discrimination, test-reliability, construct validity, criterion related validity, and factorial validity. It was also found that a three factor model was the best fitting model. These results suggest that the TSESRS measures three distinct latent constructs, that is, social skills, emotional skills, and social-cognitive skills. The second aim was to examine the structural relationship of three exogenous variables, that is, social skills, emotional skills, and social-cognitive skills with two types of behaviour problems, that is, internalizing and externalizing problems. Data for this phase were collected from 951 students drawn from the same population as the first phase. Materials used for data collection were the TSESRS and the Thai version of the Youth Self-Report (YSR). The results revealed that among the three exogenous variables, social-cognitive skills was the only significant predictor of both internalizing and externalizing problems. The relationship between social-cognitive skills and two types of behaviour problems was negative. This means that the higher a students’ social-cognitive skills, the lower their level of internalizing and externalizing problems. The indicators of social cognitive skills were emotion control, problem solving, and decision making skills. This finding has important implications for dealing with behaviour problems in Thai students. Thai teachers or educators may use these findings for selecting from available programs or for developing new programs.

Research Doctorate - Doctor of Philosophy / There were two major aims in the current study. The first was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Thai Social and Emotional Skill Rating Scale (TSESRS) developed by the author. The measurement model of this material is a three factor model containing social skills, emotional skills, and social-cognitive skills. These factors were measured from eight indicators. Data were collected from 685 lower secondary school students who were studying in schools under the jurisdiction of the Phatthalung Educational Area Office, Thailand. Materials used in this phase were the trial version of the TSESRS, the Thai Emotional Skill Scale (TESS) and the Thai Social Skill Scale (TSSS). The evidence suggested that the following psychometric properties of the TSESRS are within the acceptable cut-off levels: item-validity, item-reliability, item-discrimination, test-reliability, construct validity, criterion related validity, and factorial validity. It was also found that a three factor model was the best fitting model. These results suggest that the TSESRS measures three distinct latent constructs, that is, social skills, emotional skills, and social-cognitive skills. The second aim was to examine the structural relationship of three exogenous variables, that is, social skills, emotional skills, and social-cognitive skills with two types of behaviour problems, that is, internalizing and externalizing problems. Data for this phase were collected from 951 students drawn from the same population as the first phase. Materials used for data collection were the TSESRS and the Thai version of the Youth Self-Report (YSR). The results revealed that among the three exogenous variables, social-cognitive skills was the only significant predictor of both internalizing and externalizing problems. The relationship between social-cognitive skills and two types of behaviour problems was negative. This means that the higher a students’ social-cognitive skills, the lower their level of internalizing and externalizing problems. The indicators of social cognitive skills were emotion control, problem solving, and decision making skills. This finding has important implications for dealing with behaviour problems in Thai students. Thai teachers or educators may use these findings for selecting from available programs or for developing new programs.

The purpose of this research was to utilise attachment theory in understanding the experience of bereavement in childhood. Research objectives were addressed by using a mixed method design. Study One explored how experience of bereavement in childhood relates to current attachment style in adulthood. This was a qualitative interview-based study utilising thematic analysis and a quantitative assessment of attachment styles. Twenty-four participants were employed. The established Experience in Close Relationships (ECR) questionnaire was used. The results through the thematic analysis indicated that people with different attachment styles provide different narratives about their childhood bereavement. This study provides evidence that this was so. Study Two was a co-relational study employing 121 participants who experienced loss of caregiver in childhood. Four established questionnaires were used: Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG; Prigerson et al., 1995), Experience in Close Relationships Questionnaire-Revised (ECR; Fraley, Waller, & Brennan, 2000), Separation Anxiety Symptom Inventory (SASI; Silove, Manicavasagar, O’Connell, Blaszczynski, Wagner, & Henry, 1993) and Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI; Parker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979). The results showed that complicated grief was related to parental care and overprotection, separation anxiety, and adult attachment style. Anxious attachment style fully mediated the effects of parental bonding on complicated grief. Study Three was a quantitative co-relational study to compare two groups of parents (with and without a bereaved child) on child behavioural differences and links between child behavioural problems and parental characteristics. Two hundred and forty participants were employed: 139 parents of children with bereavement experience and 101 without bereavement experience. Five established questionnaires were used: Child Stress Questionnaire (CSQ), Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), The Parenting Scale (PS), Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG), and Experience in Close Relationships Questionnaire-Revised (ECR-R). The results showed that child problems were closely associated to parental qualities. It is proposed that this research can make a contribution towards utilising attachment theory in understanding the experience of bereavement in children.

Doctor Educationis / Behaviour problems have been on the rise in Kenyan schools for some time now. Various maladaptive behaviours found among school children include bullying, vandalism, stealing, alcohol and drug abuse, truancy, not completing homework assignments and other forms of problem behaviours. These problem behaviours impact negatively on the teaching and learning enterprises of schools as well as on the safety and security of the school environment. As consequence, schools have to develop student behaviour management practices aimed at addressing student problem behaviours. Corporal punishment was a major means by which schools dealt with students’ problem behaviours. However, because of the human rights abuses associated with corporal punishment, the Kenyan Ministry of Education had to abolish corporal punishment in 2001 and instructed schools to evolve more effective student behaviour management practices with strong emphasis on positive student behaviour development. Schools’ student behaviour management practices including policies on student behaviour expectations, school rules and regulations as well as counselling services are all to be coordinated by each School Disciplinary Panel. A School Disciplinary Panel is to be composed of small group of teachers as a way of emphasizing the latter’s roles in student behaviour development and not just student academic or educational development. The central concern of this study was to investigate the Kenyan schools’ behaviour management practices as being implemented by School Disciplinary Panels especially in the latter’s responses to students’ problem behaviours. The study investigated processes of decision making by Kenyan secondary school disciplinary panels for the management of student behaviours and the contribution of this to student behaviour development. Mixed methods research design was adopted for the study. The adoption of both quantitative and qualitative approaches was to ensure the collection of comprehensive information for better understanding of the behaviour management practices of Kenyan schools. The population for the study comprised all Kenyan schools with behaviour management practices and School Disciplinary Panels. Rongo District, one of the largest education districts in Kenya was chosen for the study. Ten of the schools in this district were actually involved in the study. The selection of the schools took into consideration the three different types of schools in Kenya (Girls’ Only, Boys’ Only and Co-educational schools) as well as other variables of particular interest to the study. Seventy-eight (78) disciplinary panel members from the ten selected schools were the participants of the study. Data collection was by use of questionnaire method (the Modified Choice Dilemma Questionnaire, MCDQ) and interview protocol. The findings of the study revealed the existence of the phenomenon of group polarization in decision making processes of disciplinary hearings conducted by the School Disciplinary Panels. Study findings also revealed that the nature of information shared during disciplinary hearings, group members’ motivation for approval of others and their concern for their status in the group as well as the personality characteristics of the members of the disciplinary panels (including gender, age, teaching experiences and school affiliation) were the major influences responsible for the existence of group polarization in the disciplinary processes of the Kenyan secondary school disciplinary panels. Since group polarization is about consensus decisions with characteristics of being collective decisions as well as greater support and acceptance for the decisions the conclusion of the study is that good quality decisions of Kenyan secondary school disciplinary panels have great potentials for effective management of student behaviours and for positive behavioural development of students as an important objective of education and or the schools.

Background: Conduct problems (CPs), a persistent pattern of challenging, oppositional, defiant or aggressive behaviour are a significant concern to educators, families and other professionals. CPs in preschool children are related to poorer educational and social outcomes in addition to a range of behavioural and emotional difficulties. Although there is evidence for hereditary and temperamental influences, parental factors are widely considered to be significant in the development of CPs. Parents experiencing psychological or social distress are considered to be at risk for challenging behaviour in their children. Psychologists and other theorists have suggested several possible reasons for this association. Firstly, it is possible that parents in distress have difficulty managing stress and as a result use harsh, inconsistent or coercive approaches to parenting. Secondly, parents with children who have CPs may be low in parental self efficacy, a consistent belief in their capacity to parent, which leads them to parent ineffectively and inconsistently. A third possibility is that parents in distress struggle to form stable attachments with their children which can lead to later behavioural difficulties. Finally, it is possible that parent’s distress is influenced by external contextual factors which also influence children such as family or social conflict. Studies suggest that training programmes for the parents of preschool children are effective in reducing child behaviour problems. Training approaches are influenced by a combination of psychological theories including behaviourist, social-cognitive, attachment and ecosystemic approaches. There have been many quantitative evaluations supporting the use of parent training programmes (PTPs). However, there has been limited inquiry into the process of PTPs from the perspective of those who attend them. Aims: The first part of this study was designed to evaluate vulnerability factors related to conduct problems; parental self efficacy, stress and child behaviour problems over the course of a community parent training programme designed to help participants to understand and manage the behaviour of young children. The overall research aim was to evaluate the outcomes and process, using different methodologies to address several questions. A realist methodology was applied to evaluating: 1. was there an association between parental stress, parental self efficacy and child behaviour problems at the start of the programme consistent with the established theory? 2. Did the parents attending the course experience higher than expected levels of stress and child behaviour problems? 3. Did quantitative and qualitative data indicate that these vulnerability factors changed over the duration of the course? Finally, an interpretivist methodology was used to explore how parents of young children evaluated as at risk of challenging behaviour described the experience of learning in the programme. Methods: The study utilised a pragmatic approach to evaluation with mixed methods and differing methodologies. At the start of the programme, a cohort of 38 parents agreed to participate in the study prior to the programme and completed self report measures related to parental stress and parental self efficacy. Parents with concerns about the behaviour of a child aged over three also completed a questionnaire relating to child behaviour problems. Of the original cohort, 27 completed self report measures at the end of the programme. 17 parents completed the same measures at a follow up meeting at the Children’s Centre, five to six weeks after the programme was completed. At this meeting 16 parents were interviewed to discuss their experience of the programme and any subsequent changes which had occurred. Results The results of the first part of the evaluation suggested a significant relationship between parental self-efficacy and stress and between stress and child behaviour problems. However, there was no statistical association between self-efficacy and child behaviour problems, as expected. This tentatively indicates that parental self-efficacy is less important in the development of child behaviour problems than has been previously suggested. The analysis of stress data at the start of the programme indicated that the frequency of parents reporting moderate to extremely severe stress was 4.42 times that which would be expected in a typical British cohort. At the start of the programme, frequency of child behaviour problems in the cohort were 5.9 times higher with conduct problems being 9 times what would be expected based on British norms. This suggests that the programme is being accessed by parents whose children are evidencing behaviour problems and, in particular, conduct problems. However, methodological issues are likely to have led to a slight overestimate of relative prevalence of child CPs in the cohort. Results indicated that parents reported significantly increased self efficacy, significantly reduced stress and child behaviour problems, including conduct problems, between the start and end of the programme. Thematic analysis and subsequent content analysis of outcome themes from interviews suggested that the majority of parents interviewed identified changes in parenting behaviour, knowledge, confidence, reduced stress and improved child behaviour as outcomes from the programme. However, changes in the quantitative data were not observed as frequently, reliably or to the same extent in the interview subgroup as they were in the main cohort, suggesting a sampling bias or a discrepancy in findings between methods. The self report data and interviews for all interviewees were then reviewed and interviews with six parents evaluated as having moderate to high stress, social or psychological difficulties and possible child behaviour problems were sampled. These were then re-analysed using a rigorous inductive approach to Thematic Analysis to identify emergent themes relating to the experience of participating and learning through the programme. Six themes emerged from analysis including; Understanding Difficulties, Identifying and Connecting, New Knowledge, Stopping and Thinking, Approach and Interaction and Reconstructing. The Understanding Difficulties theme described the different ways in which parents understood of their difficulties relating to themselves, their children and others which motivated them to attend the programme. The Identifying and Connecting theme described the importance to parents of personal identification with several aspects of the programme in terms of “being understood” in addition to identifying connections with established support, learning objectives and personal development goals. New Knowledge was categorised into three sub-themes of theoretical, practical and contextual. Contextual knowledge was constructed as understanding the experience of other parents, for example, identifying that other parents had similar difficulties. Theoretical knowledge about child behaviour and development encouraged parents to “stop and think” about the reasons for their children’s behaviour. Practical knowledge was constructed as parenting strategies which, when used, helped parents to feel more confident in themselves, more relaxed and more in control. The Stopping and Thinking theme described parents withholding action and considering the motivations for their children’s behaviour or the best approach to interacting with them. Approach and Interaction described changes to the way parents interacted with their children. The parents in question described changed or reconstructed understandings of their children, themselves and their difficulties as a result of participating in the programme. The theoretical implications of analysing the learning experience are that it highlights the importance of personal identification with the course objectives and experience.

Studiens syfte är att undersöka och förstå hur ett antal lärare resonerar kring sina möten med elever i behov av särskilt stöd. Fokus på studien ligger på undervisning i helklass och inte i mindre undervisningsgrupper. Mina frågeställningar utgår ifrån hur lärare beskriver pedagogiska situationer när de blir som bäst och när de känner att de lyckas i sina möten med elever i behov av särskilt stöd. Vad lärare upplever som utmaningar i möten inom klassrumsmiljön och vad inkludering av elever i behov av särskilt stöd betyder för lärare. Metoden för studien är en kvalitativ innehållsanalys med sex genomförda semistrukturerade intervjuer på två olika låg-och mellanstadieskolor. Resultatet presenteras i form av rubriker som skapats i analysen av intervjuer genom kodord och kategorier: Lärares syn på inkludering, Pedagogiska metoder och Samverkan och nätverk. Resultatet lyfter fram att lärarna i studien beskriver vikten av att kunna stödja enskilda elever så att de blir en del av gruppen. Lärarna anser att det är avgörande att lära känna eleven och skapa en relation. Resurspersoner är även en viktig förutsättning för elevers inkludering. Ett hinder kan vara tidsbrist för att klara av att ge både enskilda och övriga elever tillräckligt med stöd. Självreflektion är en gynnande pedagogisk metod och även samarbete med framför allt föräldrar och övriga professioner. Att skapa struktur och tydlighet genom förhållningssätt, anpassat material och miljö är mycket betydelsefullt för barn i behov av särskilt stöd. Min studie har visat att det behövs en medvetenhet om vad som påverkar inkludering. Att möta elever med ett utmanande beteende är någonting som ger upphov till olika uppfattningar och förhållningssätt hos lärare. Går det som lärare att skapa ett förtroende hos föräldrar ökas inkluderingsmöjligheterna stort.

Background/Aims: Understanding predictors, moderators and mediators of child externalising behaviour problems could lead to improvements in engagement and outcomes for children and their families. Parental cognitions, including self-efficacy and attributions, have been proposed as mediators in the relationship between parenting and child behaviour problems. Although mediation is increasingly recognised as an effective way of examining relationships between variables, only a small proportion of studies that identify potential mediators actually conduct a mediation analysis. This thesis consists of two studies: a systematic review (Journal Article 1) and an empirical study (Journal Article 2). The systematic review investigated the ways in which mediation analysis has been used to examine the role of parental cognitions in studies of child behavioural problems, and to assess the methodological quality of these studies. The empirical study investigated the role of parental cognitions and characteristics in relation to pre-school child externalising behaviour problems. Methods: In Journal Article 1, a systematic search of three electronic databases, a quality assessment of included studies, and a subsequent narrative synthesis were conducted. In Journal Article 2, 125 parents of children aged 3-6 years old attending a community-based parent management training programme, across three local authorities, completed a battery of self-report questionnaires before and after the intervention. Correlational and mediation analyses were conducted to investigate relationships between child behaviour and parental attachment style, metacognition, dysfunctional attributions and parental stress. We also tested the possibility that parents' reported levels of stress and child behaviour problems, and their demographic variables, played a role in whether they completed the intervention. Results: In Journal Article 1, after screening, 14 studies were reviewed using an adapted quality criteria tool. The most commonly studied parental cognition was parental self-efficacy, with a small number of studies investigating parental attributions. A variety of approaches to mediation analysis had been used and caution should be exercised when interpreting the results of many of the reviewed studies. Despite a growing recognition of the limitations of some traditional methods (e.g. causal steps approach), research into mediators of child externalising behaviour could be improved by a wider adoption of more appropriate tools, in line appropriate theoretical frameworks. In Journal Article 2, as hypothesised, the results indicated significant relationships between parents' attachment insecurity and baseline levels of parental stress, parental attributions and child behaviour problems. Support was found for the hypothesis that parental attributions mediated the relationship between attachment insecurity and child externalising behaviour problems. We did not find significant that any demographic variables other than parent age predicted whether parents completed the programme. Conclusions: Taken together, the two studies provide evidence of a complex relationship between parental factors, particularly parental cognitions, and externalising child behaviour problems. The systematic review found some evidence that parental cognitions mediate how aspects of parenting (e.g. behaviour and affect) and child externalising behaviour problems are associated, and the empirical study also showed that parental attributions are important in relation to child behaviour problems. Of particular interest was the finding that they mediate the relationship between child behaviour problems and attachment insecurity. However, to advance the field both theoretically and clinically, future studies should endeavour to ensure adequate sample size and power, using optimal study designs, in conjunction with strong theoretical grounding. Exploring cognitive mediators beyond self-efficacy, such as parental attributions, will allow us to further develop our understanding of the relationship between child behaviour and parenting.