百家乐怎么玩-澳门百家乐官网娱乐城网址_网上百家乐是不是真的_全讯网888 (中国)·官方网站

 

Research Results (2006-07)

A total of 5,071 students from 10 secondary schools completed the screening questionnaires. Among them, 149 students were classified as reactive aggressors, 62 as proactive aggressors, 89 as aggressive victims and 355 as pure victims.

Quantitative Research Results

1. Reactive Aggressor Group

Results of Student Questionnaires
Questionnaire

Valid Sample Size

Mean Difference

F-value
Aggressive behaviour
(CBCL-YSR: Aggressive behaviour)
47 -4.83 10.52**
Reactive aggression
(RPQ: Reactive aggression)
41 -2.65 26.67**
**p<.01

The results show that both aggressive behaviour and reactive aggression were significantly reduced after the intervention.

2. Passive Victim Group

Results of Student Questionnaire
Questionnaire

Valid Sample Size

Mean Difference

F-value
Anxious/Depressed
(CBCL-YSR: Anxious/Depressed)
69 -4.09 22.33**
Physical Victimisation
(PVQ: Physical Victimisation)
71 -1.30 53.95**
Verbal Victimisation
(PVQ: Verbal Victimisation)
70 -3.18 53.95**
Social Exclusion
(PVQ: Social Exclusion)
71 -3.18 111.30**
**p<.01

Compared with the results of the pre-test, there was a considerable decline in anxious/depressed, physical victimisation, verbal victimisation and social exclusion in the post-test results.

Qualitative research results

1. Reactive Aggressor Group

a. Students

Using content analysis, and generalising and comparing the students’ pre-test and post-test interview answers, we found that group intervention could help students think from multiple perspectives. When faced with social problems, they could consider more possible ways to solve such problems after the intervention.

During the post-test interviews, the students tended to use more words such as ‘maybe’, ‘or’ and ‘possible’ than they did during the pre-test interview, when they were more likely to use absolute words like ‘must’. This reflected their acceptance of more possibilities in their cognition. When talking about their post-test responses, the idea that ‘violence is the only way to solve a problem’ significantly declined. Further, the students were more concerned with other’s feelings, showed more empathy and had more understanding of other’s difficulties when considering the solutions.

b. Teachers

Using content analysis, and generalising and comparing the teachers’ pre-test and post-test interview answers, we learned that the teachers saw significant positive improvement in both the students’ emotions and behaviours after group intervention. For instance, they were more able to control their irritable emotions. The teachers also reported great improvement in the students’ personal relationships with their peers in the classroom. For example, the students made more friends than before. When facing interpersonal conflicts and difficulties, the students showed a greater tendency to ask the teachers for help and solve problems through rational and responsible thinking and methods.

2. Pure Victim Group

a. Students

Using content analysis, and generalising and comparing the students’ pre-test and post-test interview answers, we found that the group intervention helped pure victims rebuild their self-confidence and self-image. Their communication and self-expression skills showed significant improvement. As a result, they were more willing to express their own ideas and learn to rationally analyse others’ requirements. They were more confident in their ability to problem solve, and they solved the problems through practical actions.

b. Teachers

Using content analysis, and generalising and comparing the teachers’ pre-test and post-test interview answers, we learned that the teachers viewed the passive victims as having more positive attitudes and enjoying school life more. The students had built a better relationship with their teachers and classmates and were more willing to take part in class activities. The teachers also reported significant improvement in the students’ emotions and behaviours, observing that they smiled more and were more optimistic. The students could express their feelings and expectations more easily, and they showed a greater tendency to ask the teachers for help when they were facing problems.

Back to Top

© 2019 City University of Hong Kong          Project on Children and Adolescents at Risk Education (Project C.A.R.E.)
大发888无数| 百家乐官网直杀| 威尼斯人娱乐城评价| 鹤峰县| 百家乐电子路单破解| 百家乐如何买大小| 总统娱乐城能赢钱吗| 澳门百家乐官网玩法心得技巧 | bet365娱乐平台| 百家乐官网黏土筹码| 大发足球| 百家乐最好的投注方法| 彝良县| 路单百家乐的玩法技巧和规则| 六合投注系统| 百家乐百姓话题| 赌百家乐官网的高手| 大玩家百家乐的玩法技巧和规则| 百家乐官网国际娱乐场开户注册| 新皇冠现金网怎么样| 玩百家乐保时捷娱乐城| 百家乐代理| 百家乐双峰县| 百家乐官网一年诈骗多少钱| 德州扑克高牌| 澳门百家乐打法精华| 真人百家乐官网好不好玩| 大发888游戏是真的吗| 网上百家乐开户送现金| 澳门百家乐官网怎么| 走地皇娱乐城| 大发888娱乐城 真钱| 机械手百家乐的玩法技巧和规则| 国美百家乐官网的玩法技巧和规则 | 百家乐官网开户送百元| 大发888下载不了| 凤凰百家乐娱乐城| 百家乐官网赌博代理荐| 大发888手机版亚洲城| 澳门百家乐小| 百家乐赌博策略大全|