Abstract ‘This study examines the association between firstly, student resiliency and their perceptions of social support from parentsicaregivers, teachers, and peers, and secondly, between student's perception of their general health status and their social support. A cross-sectional research project was designed and conducted in 2003 in an urban and remote area of Queensland, Australia, The study population comprised of 2580 students (Years three, five, and seven) across 20 primary schools. The main outcome ‘measures were self-reported health status and resiliency behaviours. Independent variables included student perceptions of support from parents/caregivers, teachers, school peers, and prosocial groups. Students who pereeived parents, teachers, and peers as supportive were more likely 0 have higher resiliency behaviour in communication and cooperation, self-esteem, empathy, help-seeking goals and aspirations. Students who considered that their parents, peers atschool and prosocial groups were supportive, were more likely to feel healthy. Findings suggest that providing adult and peer support to students at primary school age is a vital strategy in promoting student resilieney and general health for children of primary school age. Asia-Pac J Public Health 2004: 16(Supp): $37-S41, ‘Keywords: Primary school students, resiliency, social support, health status Ares far ourespondnc Aso Pro Don teva Cons fo Heath Reset ~ Public Heth, Sehool of Pub Heal, ‘Queenan Univerty of Tecnology Kelvin Grove Caps, Vitra Pak Rd, Brite, Ques! 408, Acsralia Email dest How can we Build Resilience in Primary School Aged Children? The Importance of Social Support from Adults and Peers in Family, School and Community Settings D Stewart, MPH, PhD. Sun, MEd, PRD Conte for Heath Reses University of Technology Introduction “Resiliency” is defined of individuals, school, famities and communities cope successilly with everyday challenges includ transitions, times of cumuative stress and significant adversity or risk tne capacity internal locus of cont clear aspiration carientation, reflectivene lem solving capacity the autonomy of themselves and others, healthy communication pallems, and the capacity to seek out ‘mentoring adult relationships Social support as a protective factor has boon found to have direct effects on childhood resiliency Fecling supported and having the emotional and tangible resources that derive from caring socal relationships have been found to promote child mental heelih and physical health Supportive, collaborativerelatonships with others are said to provide webs Public Health, School of Public Healin, Queensland ‘afresourees or is that strengthen the chil’s ability to positively attach 10 thers, appraise the support, and respond t0 others in the provision of support, which in tum provides the to resist risk behaviours such quency, substance abuse, and ther soetal and health problems The presence of at least one cating adult or poer who offerssupport and connectedness has been consistently identified as a determinant factor oThealth”, A caring person can be parent, a grandparent or other relatives in an extended family, a teacher, a human service worker ora peer from school, clubs, ‘or interest groups, A suppostive adult at home may promote the child's resiliency by providing «role model and reinforcement for skills that improve problem solving, motivation, academe achievement, and later soeio-economic opportnities®. Atthe community level, the mechanisms whereby relationships with caring adults and mentors promote children’s sxresiliency appear to include modelling prosocial skills and behaviour, providing yuidanee, and offering a source of protection against environmental stressors ". Peers, contacts and prosoeial groups play an important role in building social support and connections for children. These peers and groups promote the accumulation of bonding and help 10 bridge the networks that assist children to participate actively in a way that has an impact on the development of feelings of self efficacy and wellbe! For children, this social connection in the school has been found to significantly foster their health and wellbeing ", If'this isthe cease, building social support and teonneetion at home and atthe local community level may also significanily promote children’s health and wellbeing at primary school age. This. may offer ‘opportunities to promote mental health at an early age and prevent elated health problemsin adulthood Given the inereasing significanee of the burden of mental ill-health, this, area requires additional systematic ‘examination, tis hypothesised for the eurrent study that Social support from adults and peers in family, school and ‘community settings Will significantly influence student resiliency and perceptions of general health in children of primary schoolage. This paper usesa research design hased on 4 comprehensive, whole school approach, fo examine the assoviation between Social support from adults and peers and student resiliency, as ‘well as support from adults and pesrs ang student's general health Methods Research design A. cross-sectional design was employed to study cohorts of children in 20 govemment and Catholic school ‘communities, as part ofa three-year multi-strategy health promotion project, The project is oriented around a whole-school (holistic) approach to promoting resiliency in children of primary school age in school, family and community settings ‘Subjects and procedures “The student population was drawn from Years three, five, and seven (ages 8, 10, 12 years) in low socio- ‘economic catchment area in an urban (Brisbane) and a remote (Charleville) location in Queensland, Australia The selected areas included higher than average proportions of single parent families and families with above-average unemployment, transient populations, a relatively high Indigenous (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island) population, and @ substantial culturally ‘and linguistically diverse population, The target sample size was 3146 students Baseline data collection for students was carried out in November and December in 2003. Data from the student sample were collected in the school classrooms by teachers Measurements Student resiliency was measured using 1a modified version of the California Healthy Kids Questionnaire (the Student Resiliency Survey). Students ‘asked to respond to statements ding various aspects of their feelings about adults, peers, and ‘general health usinga five point likert scale ranging fom ‘never to ‘always’ ‘The parents caregivers support scale comprised the statements: AL home, there is an adult who (1) is interested in my schoo! work: (2) believes that | will be a success; (3) wants me to da ‘my best: (4) listens to me when [have something 10 say. Similar questions regarding adult supportat school, and aul support outside the school were asked The Peer Support Seale comprised 13 statements, including, for ‘example, questions such as: Are there students af your school who (1) would ‘choose you on their team at school? (2) help you if you hurt yoursef in the playground? (3) make you feel beter ifsomething is bothering you? (4)help you if other students are being mean io you? (5) tell you you' ether fiend? ete, The general health question comprised the statement: how would you describe your health? Socio- ‘economic factors were obtained from the students’ parentscaregivers, in a Parents/Caregivers Survey. Dara analysis: Aldata were analysed using the SPSS package version I1.0. The dependent variables were combined to form a resiliency scale, This included the following variables: (1) ‘communication and cooperation; (2) self-esteem; (3) empathy: (4) help- seeking; and (5) goals and aspirations. ‘The independent variable was formed from the scales for (i) parents) caregivers support; (ii) teacher Suppor (i support from adults inthe ‘community; (1) peer support at school (¥) prosocial peer support and (i) suppor of prosoeal groups. Thus, the dependent variable isa resiliency seale which was derived from items related 10 communication and cooperation, self-esteem, empathy, help-seeking, personal goals and aspirations. The independent variables were parent support, peet support, teacher support, community adult suppor, prosocial peer support, and prosocial group support from the Student Survey. As all the subscales were ‘modified from other studies principal ‘component analysis Was used to assess the variances explained by each subscale and Cronbacha’s Alpha was used to examine the internal consistency of each subscale ‘A series of multiple regression analyses was conducted on student resiliency and general health, usingthe ‘nwo sels of independent variables: 1) adult suppor including parent support, teacher support, and adult support in the community; 2) peer support including peer support at school, prosocial peers support, and prosocial ‘groups. These two ses of independent variables were firstly entered in regression model one and model to; secondly, dese two sets of independent variables were entered together in ‘model three; and finally, together with these two sts of independent variables, student age, gender, family ineome, ‘maternal education and employment, asconfounding variables, were entered ‘nmodel four of the muliple regression analysis, Results ‘The final sample inthe first phase of the project comprised of 2580 studentsfrom Years three five, and seven (ages eight, 10, 12 years), with 1277 boys (49.5%) and 1303 girls (50.5%). The tnean age of this student sample was 842 years (S,D, = 1,24) for Year three students, 10,04 years (S.D.= 0.39) for Year five students, and 12.05 years (SD.~0 Al) for Year seven students There were no differences inthe mean ages of boys and girls, or in the response rates across the school years (Yearthree: 314%: Year five: 33.7%, ‘Year seven: 34.9%). Most of the students (86.5%) were born in Australia. Most of the parents ‘caregiver sample was female (88.8%). Fewer than half of the Parents caregivers (43.2%) had received secondary level education, overs third ‘was engaged in full-time home duties, ind 28.6% had less than AUS30,000 family annual income. “The data for the esilieney scales ‘Asia-Pacitic Jounal of Public Health 2004 Vol. 16 Supp and social suppor seales are presented in Table 1. Table 1 also shows the results of the principal component analysis and reliability analysis of these subscales for the student resiliency survey. Table | shows that the internal consistency of subscales of the Student Survey achieved 2 Cronbach's @ range from 0.54 to (0.91, The variance explained for each subscule ranges Tram 45.86% 10 61.1%. The effects of adull and peer support on student resiliency and seeneral health are presented in Table 2and Table 3. In relation to student resiliency, both adult and peer support from hhome, schoo! and community have significant effects on student resiliency, This remained the case when all the variables were entered into the regression model (model 3). ‘Those ees, excep he variable of prosocil pee support also remained the same Whe al adult suppont and peer support variables were entered Tito the model. after adjustment for student gender, age, and socie- eomomie satus varia With regards to student general health status, adult support from home, schoo! and community, peer Support from school and peosecial {groups were significantly associated ‘vith stent general heath status. When ail the adult and peor suppor variables were entered into the model nd when the student age gender, SES factors were adjusted, the association between student acnetal health and adets nd peers Support remained the same in the following variables: parent apport home, peer suppert and prosacial sroup suppor ‘Table 1. Reliability analysis and principle component analysis for Resiliency, Adult and Peer Support Seales Resiliency. Subsales Student Resiliency Jems inthe scale 2 Scale Cronbach's 083 4 variance explained bs Wemess SPIES 5.86 Seale range ofscores. 133-5 Scale mean scores (SD) 4.11 (0.56) Higher scotes (values) Positive orientation Positive perceptions of connectedness Adults Support Peer Support Parent Teacher Adult support Peer Prosocial Prosocial support support ateommunity support peers groups 4 4 4 1B 3 3 0.69 078 on 091 0.63) oa 5197642. S.ST 5045 S812 52.63, 1s Ls be 1s 15 1s 4.38(0.65) 4.07 (0.82) 4.51 (0.67) 3.9(0.82) 3.79(0.82) 4.03(0.89) Positive perceptions of connectedness towanls resiliency ‘of adult support ‘of peer support ‘Table 2. BMfects of adult and peers support on student resiliency: Model | Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Coefficients tratio Coefficients t-ratio Coefficients tratio Coefficients tratio Parents support ose 135 O17 663 OTE 5.93 Teacher support oaze 1769 0.20%" 8.00 O16 ##* 5.83 Adults support at community ores 1133 ose 3.12 ole 3.85 Peet support at school ose 2, 3st 1340 034+ 1237 Prosocial peer support 007"? = 10.92 004 00 Ls3 Prosocial groups 028" 1945 0.2098 "867 Total R square 4 046 oss * adjusting for xudout age, gender, family income, maternal education and eraployment status +p $0001; * pS 001; *p Stas