Resilience Interventions for Youth in Diverse Populations

The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality

Sandra Prince-Embury

Donald H. Saklofske

Editors

Resilience

Interventions for

Youth in Diverse

Populations

Foreword by

Sam Goldstein

The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality

Series Editors

Donald H. Saklofske, Ph.D.

Department of Psychology

Western University, Canada

Moshe Zeidner, Ph.D.

Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Emotions

Department of Human Development and Counseling

Haifa University, Israel

For further volumes:

http://www.springer.com/series/6450

Sandra Prince-Embury • Donald H. Saklofske

Editors

Resilience Interventions for

Youth in Diverse Populations

ISSN 1572-5642

ISBN 978-1-4939-0541-6 ISBN 978-1-4939-0542-3 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-0542-3

Springer New York Heidelberg Dordrecht London

Library of Congress Control Number: 2014935181

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of

the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,

broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information

storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology

now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection

with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifi cally for the purpose of being entered and

executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this

publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s

location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer.

Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center. Violations

are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication

does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant

protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of

publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for

any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with

respect to the material contained herein.

Printed on acid-free paper

Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)

Editors

Sandra Prince-Embury

The Resiliency Institute of Allenhurst, LLC.

W. Allenhurst , NJ , USA

Donald H. Saklofske

Department of Psychology

University of Western Ontario

London , ON, Canada

v

Foreword

Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived

forwards.

Soren Kierkegaard

What are the risk and protective forces that buffer each of us, pushing us along on a

unique journey through childhood into our adult years? Why is it that some of us

thrive, often in the face of adversity, while others are overwhelmed? In my work

with Bob Brooks (Brooks & Goldstein, 2001, 2004, 2007; Goldstein & Brooks,

2005, 2007, 2012), we have written that “it would not be an oversimplifi cation to

conclude that realization of our parental goals requires that our children possess the

inner strength to deal competently and successfully day after day with the chal￾lenges and demands they encounter. We call this capacity to cope and feel compe￾tent resilience” (p. 1, 2001). An increasing body of scientifi c evidence suggests that

children facing great adversity in their lives can and do endure. Resilience explains

why some children overcome seemingly overwhelming obstacles while others

become victims of their early experiences and environments.

Though we now appreciate the role of families, communities, and schools in fos￾tering a resilient mindset we must continue to create opportunities in all corners of our

society to enhance and strengthen resilience in our children. No child is immune to

the pressures of our culture and society. In our fast-paced, stress-fi lled world, it

appears that the number of children facing adversity, the number of adversities they

face, and the number of challenges to good coping continue to increase. Even children

fortunate to not face signifi cant adversity or trauma or to be burdened by intense stress

or anxiety experience the pressures around them and the expectations placed upon

them. The need to develop a resilient mindset is even more critical for youth at risk.

A number of longitudinal studies over the past decades have sought to develop

an understanding of the complex qualities within individuals, families, and the envi￾ronment that interact and contribute to the processes of risk and protection.

One goal has been to develop an applied model of this knowledge in clinical

vi

practice (Donnellan, Coner, McAdams, & Neppl, 2009; Garmezy, Masten, &

Tellegren, 1984; Luthar, 1991; Rutter & Quinton, 1994; Werner & Smith, 1982,

1992, 2001). These and other studies identifi ed resources across children’s lives that

predict successful adjustment despite exposure to adversity. These longitudinal

studies have also begun the process of clarifying models of how such protective fac￾tors promote good adaptation (Wyman, Sandler, Wolchik, & Nelson, 2000).

Whether these processes can be applied to all youth regardless of the level of

adversity they experience remains to be thoroughly demonstrated (Goldstein &

Brooks, 2012; Ungar, 2008). Ann Masten suggested that positive outcome for many

children adopted from high risk areas such as Romania confi rms that resilient pro￾cesses can be applied in a clinical setting (Masten, 2001). Many of these children

made signifi cant developmental growth catching up cognitively and physically

(Rutter and the English and Romania Adoptee Study Team, 1998).

The process of creating an applied and practice-focused psychology of resilience

begins with an understanding of the relevant variables necessary to create a working

model and appreciation of the biopsychosocial nature of human development. As

Sroufe (1997) and Sameroff (1995) state, such a process must take into account a

broad range of biological, psychological, and social factors. This process must

begin with a foundation of an appreciation of wellness (Cowen, 1991). A wellness

framework assumes the development of healthy personal environmental systems

leading to the promotion of well-being and the reduction of dysfunction. A wellness

framework emphasizes the interaction of the children with their immediate and

extended environment. Meta-analytic studies of the effectiveness of preventive

intervention have generated increasing evidence that in clinical as well as

community- based samples, emotional, behavioral, and psychiatric problems can be

diminished and/or prevented. Such programs emphasize a science of prevention

(Coie et al., 1993).

The concept of resilience is straightforward if one accepts the possibility of

developing an understanding of the means by which children develop well emotion￾ally, behaviorally, academically, and interpersonally in the face of risk and adver￾sity. Such a model offers valuable insight into the qualities that likely insulate and

protect children experiencing a broad range of challenges, including medical prob￾lems (Brown & Harris, 1989), family risks (Hammen, 1997), psychological prob￾lems (Hauser, Allen, & Golden, 2006; Sandler, Tein, & West, 1994), and parental

loss (Lutzke, Ayers, Sandler, & Barr, 1999) to just name a few areas of challenge.

Competent, appropriate parenting combined with parental availability and support

serves as powerful protective factor extending a broad, positive impact in reducing

the probability that children will develop mental health problems (Dubow, Edwards,

& Ippolito, 1997; Masten, 1999). It appears to be the case that youth functioning

well in adulthood, regardless of whether they faced adversity or not in childhood,

may share many of the same characteristics of stress hardiness, communication

skills, problem solving, self-discipline, and connections to others. Though the earli￾est studies of resilience suggested the role of exceptional characteristics within the

child that led to invulnerability (Garmezy & Nuechterlin, 1972), it appears more

likely that resilience refl ects ordinary developmental processes capable of

Foreword

vii

explaining good adaptation (Masten, 2001). It is likely that there is a complex, mul￾tidimensional interaction between risk factors, biological functioning, environmen￾tal and familial issues, and protective factors that combine in a unique idiosyncratic

way in each child in the course of life transition (Kim-Cohen & Gold, 2009).

Masten and Coatsworth (1988) suggested that resilience within a clinical realm

requires two major judgments. The fi rst addresses threats. Children are not consid￾ered resilient unless they have faced and overcome adversity considered to impair

normal development. Second, a consensus needs to be determined as to how to

assess good or adequate outcome in the face of adversity. It continues to be the case

that most clinical practitioners defi ne resilience on the basis of a child meeting the

major requirements of childhood successfully, such as attending school, making

friends, and functioning well within his or her families. Yet, one must also consider

that a child facing multiple developmental adversities, who does not develop signifi -

cant psychopathology but who may not demonstrate academic or social achieve￾ment, may be resilient as well (Conrad & Hammen, 1993).

An applied and practice-focused psychology of resilience must provide an appre￾ciation of protective factors within the child, family, and community. Children’s

temperament appears to play a signifi cant role in their capacity to handle adversity.

Interactions with parents that encourage trust, autonomy, initiative, and connections

to others serve as powerful protective factors. Living in a safe community and

attending supportive school serve an important role as well. Thus, a psychology of

resilience must incorporate an understanding of the processes that drive human

development. As Lorion (2000) points out, human growth is in part driven by a need

to cope, adapt, and develop homeostasis. The complexity of this process is exempli￾fi ed in the studies of youth capable of overcoming a variety of unfavorable environ￾mental phenomena while others facing similar risks do not.

In a 1988 review of successful prevention programs, Schorr suggested that effec￾tive programs for at-risk youth were centered upon the establishment of relation￾ships with caring, respectful, and trust building adults. Ultimately, connections to

people, interests, and to life itself may represent the key components in resilience

processes (Polakow, 1993). Development, as Michael Rutter contends, is a question

of linkages that happen within you as a person and also in the environment in which

you live (Pines, 1984). Cowen (1991) argues that mental health as a discipline must

expand beyond symptom-driven treatment interventions if the tide of increasing

stress and mental health problems in children is to be averted. There must be an

increasing focus on ways of developing an understanding of those factors within

individuals, in the immediate environment and in the extended environment that

insulate and prevent emotional and behavioral disorders. Understanding these phe￾nomena is as important as developing “an understanding of the mechanisms and

processes defi ning the etiological path by which disorders evolve and a theory of the

solution, conceptual and empirically supported or supportable intervention that

alters those mechanisms and processes in ways which normalize the underlying

developmental trajectory” (Cowen, 1994, p. 172). Yet, 20 years later we continue to

struggle as a fi eld. Most mental health professionals continue to be trained to collect

assessment data focused on symptoms of psychological “diffi culty” as described in

Foreword

viii

the DSM-V (APA, 2013) or other diagnostic classifi cations. Such symptoms may be

equated with poor adaptation, inadequate adjustment, distress and life problems, or

even more signifi cant disturbance. Emphasis on the negative equates with the per￾ception that symptom relief will ultimately lead to positive, long-term outcome.

Even the recent publication of DSM-V, the accepted nosology of the mental health

system, is built on a model that refl ects assessment of symptoms and severity pack￾aged into what continues to be a weakly factor-analyzed framework. Still unavail￾able is a nosology and system to measure adaptation, stress hardiness, and the

qualities necessary to deal successfully with and overcome adversity. Yet in the

professional practice of psychology including clinical, school, and counseling, we

increasingly recognize that it is these phenomena rather than relief of symptoms or

the absence of certain risk factors that best predict adaptation, stress hardiness, and

positive adjustment into adulthood.

This volume, Resilience Interventions for Youth in Diverse Populations , continues

the important work of Sandra Prince-Embury and Don Saklofske in their efforts to

help create a psychology of resilience. This volume serves as a companion to their

2013 work, Resiliency in Children , Adolescents , and Adults : Translating Research

into Practice (Prince-Embury & Saklofske, 2013), which focuses on the defi nition

and assessment of resilience. Prince-Embury is also the author of the Resiliency Scales

for Children and Adolescents ( RSCA ) (Prince-Embury, 2006, 2007, 2013; Prince￾Embury & Courville, 2008a, 2008b) which presents a three-factor working model for

the assessment and application of resilience theory. In their current volume Prince￾Embury and Saklofske advocate further for the systematic translation of resilience

theory and research for practice by identifying programs that are already attempting

to systematically apply principles based on solid theory and related fi ndings.

As the Coeditor of one of the fi rst clinical volumes addressing resilience in chil￾dren, now in its second edition (Goldstein & Brooks, 2012), it is exciting to witness

the ground swell of interest in applying 60 years of psychological research to

develop, create, evaluate, and implement prevention and treatment programs focused

on enhancing children’s abilities to cope with and overcome adversity. The breadth

and scope of the programs discussed in this volume authored by dedicated profes￾sionals, from multiple continents throughout the world, speak to the now universal

acceptance of what up until recently was considered only an academic subject.

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “The future depends on what you do today.” Today we are

doing extraordinary and important work for the welfare and future of our children.

Salt Lake City, UT Sam Goldstein

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual—5. Washington,

DC: Author.

Brooks, R., & Goldstein, S. (2001). Raising resilient children. New York: Contemporary Books.

Foreword

ix

Brooks, R., & Goldstein, S. (2004). The power of resilience. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Brooks, R., & Goldstein, S. (2007). Raising a self-disciplined child in an undisciplined world. New

York: McGraw Hill.

Brown, G. W., & Harris, T. O. (1989). Life events and illness. New York: Guilford Press.

Coie, J. D., Watt, N. F., West, S. G., Hawkins, J. D., Asaranow, J. R., Markman, H. J., et al. (1993).

The science of prevention: A conceptual framework and some directions for a national research

program. American Psychologist, 48, 1013–1022.

Conrad, M., & Hammen, C. (1993). Protective and resource factors in high- and low-risk children:

A comparison of children with unipolar, bipolar, medically ill, and normal mothers.

Developmental and Psychopathology, 5, 593–607.

Cowen, E. L. (1991). In pursuit of wellness. American Psychologist, 46, 404–408.

Cowen, E. L. (1994). The enhancement of psychological wellness: Challenges and opportunities.

American Journal of Community Psychology, 22, 149–179.

Donnellan, M. B., Coner, K. J., McAdams, K. K., & Neppl, T. K. (2009). Personal characteristics

and resilience to economic hardship and its consequences: Conceptual issues and empirical

illustrations. Journal of Personality, 77, 1645–1676.

Dubow, E. F., Edwards, S., & Ippolito, M. F. (1997). Life stressors, neighborhood disadvantage,

and resources: A focus on inner-city children’s adjustment. Journal of Clinical Child

Psychology, 26, 130–144.

Garmezy, N., Masten, A.S., & Tellegen, A. (1984). The study of stress and competence in children:

A building block for developmental psychopathology. Child Development, 55, 97–111.

Garmezy, N., & Nuechterlein, K. (1972). Invulnerable children: The fact and fi ction of competence

and disadvantage. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 42, 328–329.

Goldstein, S., & Brooks, R. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of resilience in children. New York: Kluwer/

Academic Press.

Goldstein, S., & Brooks, R. (2007). Understanding and managing children’s classroom behavior

(2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

Goldstein, S., & Brooks, R. (2012). Handbook of resilience (2nd ed.) . New York: Springer.

Hammen, C. (1997). Children of depressed parents: The stress context. In S. A. Wolchik & I. N.

Sandler (Eds.), Handbook of children’s coping: Linking theory and intervention (pp. 131–159) .

New York: Plenum Press.

Hauser, S., Allen, J., & Golden, E. (2006). Out of the woods: Tales of resilient teens. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Kim-Cohen, J., & Gold, A. L. (2009). Measured gene-environment interactions and mechanisms

promoting resilient development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 138–142.

Lorion, R. P. (2000). Theoretical and evaluation issues in the promotion of wellness and the protec￾tion of “well enough.” In D. Cicchetti, J. Rappaport, I. Sandler, & R. Weissberg (Eds.), The

promotion of wellness in children and adolescents. Washington, DC: CWLA Press.

Luthar, S. S. (1991). Vulnerability and resilience: A study of high-risk adolescents. Child

Development, 62, 600–616.

Lutzke, J. R., Ayers, T. S., Sandler, I. N., & Barr, A. (1999). Risks and interventions for the paren￾tally bereaved child. In S. A. Wolchik & I. N. Sandler (Eds.), Handbook of children’s coping:

Linking theory and intervention (pp. 215–245). New York: Plenum Press.

Masten, A. S. (1999). Resilience comes of age: Refl ections on the past and outlook for the next

generation of research. In M. D. Glantz, J. Johnson, & L. Huffman (Eds.), Resilience and devel￾opment: Positive life adaptations (pp. 282–296). New York: Plenum.

Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes and development. American

Psychologist, 56, 227–238.

Masten, A. S., & Coatsworth, J. D. (1998). The development of competence in favorable and unfa￾vorable environments: Lessons from research on successful children. American Psychologist,

53, 205–220.

Pines, M. (1984). Resilient children: Interview with Michael Rutter. Psychology Today, 18, 56–57.

Polakow, V. (1993). Lives on the edge: Single mothers and their children in the other America.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Foreword

x

Prince-Embury, S. (2013). Resiliency scales for children and adolescents; theory, research and

clinical application. In S. Prince-Embury & D. Saklofske, (Eds.), Translating resilience theory

for assessment and application with children, adolescents and adults . New York: Springer .

Prince-Embury, S., & Courville, T. (2008a). Comparison of a one, two and three factor models of

the resiliency scales for children and adolescents. The Canadian Journal of School Psychology,

23 (1), 11–25.

Prince-Embury, S., Courville, T. (2008b). Measurement Invariance of the Resiliency Scales for

Children and Adolescents across gender and age cohorts. The Canadian Journal of School

Psychology, 23 (1), 26–40.

Prince-Embury, S. (2006). Resiliency scales for adolescents: Profi les of personal strength. San

Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.

Prince-Embury, S. (2007). Resiliency scales for children and adolescents: Profi les of personal

strength. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.

Prince-Embury, S., & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.). (2013). Resilience in children, adolescents and

adults: Translating Research for practice . New York: Springer.

Rutter, M., & The English and Romanian Adoptees (ERA) Study Team. (1998). Developmental

catch-up and defi cit, following adoption after severe global early privation. Journal of Child

Psychology and Psychiatry, 39, 465–476.

Rutter, M., & Quinton, D. (1984). Long-term follow-up of women institutionalized in childhood:

Factors promoting good functioning in adult life. British Journal of Developmental Psychology,

18, 225–234.

Sameroff, A. J. (1995). General systems theories and developmental psychopathology. In D.

Cicchetti & D. Cohens (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 1. Theory and methods

(pp. 659–695). New York: Wiley.

Sandler, I. N., Tein, J., & West, S. G. (1994). Coping, stress and psychological symptoms of children

of divorce: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Child Development, 65, 1744–1763.

Schorr, L. (1988). Within our reach: Breaking the cycle of disadvantage. New York: Doubleday.

Sroufe, L. A. (1997). Psychopathology as an outcome of development. Development and

Psychopathology, 9, 251–268.

Ungar, M. (2008). Resilience across cultures. British Journal of Social Work, 38, 218–235.

Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1982). Vulnerable but invincible: A study of resilient children. New

York: McGraw Hill.

Werner, E. E., & Smith, R.S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to adult￾hood. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (2001). Journeys from childhood to mid-life: Risk, resilience and

recovery. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Wyman, P. A., Sandler, I., Wolchik, S., & Nelson, K. (2000). Resilience as cumulative competence

promotion and stress protection: Theory and intervention. In D. Cicchetti, J. Rappaport,

I. Sandler, & R. Weissberg (Eds.), The promotion of wellness in children and adolescents.

Washington, DC: CWLA Press.

Foreword

xi

Contents

Part I Introduction and General Issues

1 Building a Science of Resilience Intervention for Youth ..................... 3

Sandra Prince-Embury and Donald H. Saklofske

2 Review of Resilience Conceptual and Assessment Issues .................... 13

Sandra Prince-Embury

3 Three-Factor Model of Personal Resiliency

and Related Interventions ...................................................................... 25

Sandra Prince-Embury

4 Creating Resilient Mindsets in Children

and Adolescents: A Strength-Based Approach

for Clinical and Nonclinical Populations .............................................. 59

Robert Brooks and Suzanne Brooks

Part II Interventions for Schools and Non-Clinical Populations

5 Using the FRIENDS Programs to Promote Resilience

in Cross-Cultural Populations ............................................................... 85

Paula M. Barrett, Marita Cooper, and Julia Gallegos Guajardo

6 Girls Leading Outward (GLO): A School- Based

Leadership Intervention to Promote Resilience

for At-Risk Middle School Girls ............................................................ 109

Cesalie T. Stepney, Gwyne W. White, Kristin Far,

and Maurice J. Elias

xii

7 Promoting Resilience Through Executive Function

Training for Homeless and Highly Mobile Preschoolers ..................... 133

Erin C. Casey, Megan Finsaas, Stephanie M. Carlson,

Philip David Zelazo, Barbara Murphy, Frances Durkin,

Marie Lister, and Ann S. Masten

8 Bringing a Resilience Perspective to Children

in the Child Welfare System: A Curriculum for Caregivers ............... 159

Gabriel Tobin Smith , Paul A. LeBuffe, Deborah Alleyne,

Mary Mackrain, and Linda Likins

9 Building Resilience in Young Children the Sesame Street Way .......... 181

Geraldine V. Oades-Sese, David Cohen, Jedediah W. P. Allen,

and Michael Lewis

10 Enhancing Classroom Resilience with ClassMaps Consultation ........ 203

Samuel Y. Song, Jonathon Sikorski, Beth Doll,

and Meredith Sikorski

11 Building Resilience in Three Australian High Schools,

Using the Resilience Doughnut Framework ......................................... 217

Lyn Worsley

12 Resiliency Differences Between Youth

in Community-Based and Residential Treatment Programs:

An Exploratory Analysis ........................................................................ 259

Linda S. Butler and Ellen Francis

13 Resiliency in Youth Who Have Been Exposed to Violence .................. 279

Nancy Ghali

14 A Multilevel Approach of Promoting Resilience

and Positive School Climate in the School Community

During Unsettling Times ........................................................................ 299

Chryse Hatzichristou, Eirini Adamopoulou,

and Aikaterini Lampropoulou

Part III Interventions for Clinical Populations

15 Developing Social Competence Through a Resilience Model ............. 329

Mary K. Alvord, Brendan A. Rich, and Lisa H. Berghorst

16 Promoting Resilience in Children with Intellectual Disability:

A Randomized Controlled Trial in Australian Schools ....................... 353

Linda Gilmore, Marilyn Campbell, Ian Shochet,

Robyn Garland, Tanya Smyth, Clare Roberts, and Damian West

17 Resilience-Based Perspectives for Autism Spectrum Disorder ........... 375

Adam W. McCrimmon and Janine M. Montgomery

Contents

xiii

18 “SPARK for Learning”: Using School-Based Interventions

to Build Resilience in At-Risk Youth ..................................................... 397

Emma A. Climie and Michelle Deen

19 Resiliency in Pediatric Chronic Illness:

Assisting Youth at School and Home ..................................................... 423

Michelle M. Perfect and Sara S. Frye

20 Resilience-Building Interventions with Children,

Adolescents, and Their Families ............................................................ 447

Robert Allan and Michael Ungar

Index ................................................................................................................. 463

Contents