Newson, Lisa and Ashworth, Emma and Gibson, Benjamin
(2023).
Community by Nature: Outdoor Intervention Evaluation, 2021.
[Data Collection]. Colchester, Essex:
UK Data Service.
10.5255/UKDA-SN-856211
A mixed-methods examination of the feasibility, mechanisms, and effectiveness of an outdoor learning intervention for young people (aged 11-16) at-risk of school exclusion.
Abstract
Outdoor learning programmes across the UK have been shown to support the health, development, and academic achievement of young children from various backgrounds. However, they are underutilised as an intervention to support the needs of particularly vulnerable adolescents, including those at risk of exclusion from schools and wider society. This study explored the feasibility of a specially-tailored outdoor learning intervention for improving young people's social and emotional well-being and reducing the risk of future involvement in anti-social behaviour and criminal activity. Using mixed-methods, we quantitatively assessed intervention outcomes pre-and post-engagement and qualitatively explored current and previous cohorts and stakeholders experiences of the programme. Post intervention results showed statistically significant reductions in perceived stress levels and improvements in perceived goals and future aspirations, whilst constructed themes highlighted possible intervention mechanisms and suggested long-term benefits to wellbeing, pro-social behaviours, and individual life and career prospects. Overall, we found the intervention showed promise in supporting this unique, vulnerable group of young people's various social, emotional, and behavioural needs. A detailed discussion of intervention features, as well as recommendations for future implementation are presented.
Data description (abstract)
Outdoor learning programmes across the UK have been shown to support the health, development, and academic achievement of young children from various backgrounds. However, they are underutilised as an intervention to support the needs of particularly vulnerable adolescents, including those at risk of exclusion from schools and wider society. This study explored the feasibility of a specially-tailored outdoor learning intervention for improving young people's social and emotional well-being and reducing the risk of future involvement in anti-social behaviour and criminal activity. Using mixed-methods, we quantitatively assessed intervention outcomes pre-and post-engagement and qualitatively explored current and previous cohorts and stakeholders experiences of the programme.
quantitative data: N8 participants. The two surveys (pre- and post-intervention) were conducted online via a survey platform (Qualtrics) in school, consistent with the way these measures have been administered in previous studies (Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Boehnke, et al., 2019). The survey consisted of several measures, all of which have been psychometrically validated for the present age group (Ashworth, Humphrey, Lendrum, & Hennessey, 2019; Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Boehnke, et al., 2019; Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Moltrecht, et al., 2019).
Short Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS)(NHS Health Scotland, University of Warwick, & University of Edinburgh, 2008); Student Resilience Survey: goals and aspirations subscale (SRS) (Lereya et al., 2016); Perceived Stress Scale, 10-item version (PSS-10) (Cohen, 1994);Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: conduct problems and pro-social behaviour subscales (SDQ) (Goodman, 2001); Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire – Adolescent Short Form: self-regulation subscale (TEIQUE-ASF) (Petrides, 2009); Delinquent Behaviours – Rochester Youth Development Study measure (Dahlberg, Toal, Swahn, & Behrens, 2005)
Qualitative data was collected via 1-1 interviews, with sample of current students, previous students, teacher, intervention deliverer and intervention developer. interviews transcribed verbatim.
Post intervention results showed statistically significant reductions in perceived stress levels and improvements in perceived goals and future aspirations, whilst constructed themes highlighted possible intervention mechanisms and suggested long-term benefits to wellbeing, pro-social behaviours, and individual life and career prospects. Overall, we found the intervention showed promise in supporting this unique, vulnerable group of young people's various social, emotional, and behavioural needs. A detailed discussion of intervention features, as well as recommendations for future implementation are presented.
| Data creators: |
|
| Sponsors: |
Community by Nature
|
| Topic classification: |
Education
Psychology
|
| Keywords: |
CHILD DEVELOPMENT, MENTAL HEALTH, PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING, EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, ADOLESCENTS
|
| Project title: |
Community by Nature-LJMU Evaluation.
|
| Grant holders: |
Lisa Newson, Emma Ashworth, Ben Gibson
|
| Project dates: |
| From | To |
|---|
| January 2021 | December 2022 |
|
| Date published: |
23 Jan 2023 12:05
|
| Last modified: |
23 Jan 2023 12:06
|
| Collection period: |
| Date from: | Date to: |
|---|
| 1 February 2021 | 30 September 2021 |
|
| Geographical area: |
Northwest England |
| Country: |
United Kingdom |
| Spatial unit: |
Electoral > Wards (Electoral) |
| Data collection method: |
Using mixed-methods, we quantitatively assessed intervention outcomes pre-and post-engagement and qualitatively explored current and previous cohorts and stakeholders experiences of the programme. quantitative data: N8 participants. The two surveys (pre- and post-intervention) were conducted online via a survey platform (Qualtrics) in school, consistent with the way these measures have been administered in previous studies (Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Boehnke, et al., 2019). The survey consisted of several measures, all of which have been psychometrically validated for the present age group (Ashworth, Humphrey, Lendrum, & Hennessey, 2019; Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Boehnke, et al., 2019; Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Moltrecht, et al., 2019).
Short Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS)(NHS Health Scotland, University of Warwick, & University of Edinburgh, 2008); Student Resilience Survey: goals and aspirations subscale (SRS) (Lereya et al., 2016); Perceived Stress Scale, 10-item version (PSS-10) (Cohen, 1994);Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: conduct problems and pro-social behaviour subscales (SDQ) (Goodman, 2001); Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire – Adolescent Short Form: self-regulation subscale (TEIQUE-ASF) (Petrides, 2009); Delinquent Behaviours – Rochester Youth Development Study measure (Dahlberg, Toal, Swahn, & Behrens, 2005) Qualitative data was collected via 1-1 interviews, with sample of current students, previous students, teacher, intervention deliverer and intervention developer. interviews transcribed verbatim. |
| Observation unit: |
Individual |
| Kind of data: |
Numeric, Text, Audio |
| Type of data: |
Qualitative and mixed methods data |
| Resource language: |
English |
|
| Data sourcing, processing and preparation: |
Quantitative data:
A one-way repeated measures design assessed the intervention's impact on students' wellbeing, goals and aspirations for the future, perceived stress and coping, conduct problems, pro-social behaviours, self-regulation, and beliefs about delinquency. Participants took part in a survey administered at two-time points: pre and post-intervention.
The two surveys (pre- and post-intervention) were conducted online via a survey platform (Qualtrics) in school, consistent with the way these measures have been administered in previous studies (Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Boehnke, et al., 2019). The survey consisted of several measures, all of which have been psychometrically validated for the present age group (Ashworth, Humphrey, Lendrum, & Hennessey, 2019; Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Boehnke, et al., 2019; Hayes, Moore, Stapley, Humphrey, Mansfield, Santos, Ashworth, Patalay, Bonin, Moltrecht, et al., 2019).
Short Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS)(NHS Health Scotland, University of Warwick, & University of Edinburgh, 2008): A 7-item validated measure of positive well-being in the general population, including with young people aged 11-16 (Ng Fat, Scholes, Boniface, Mindell, & Stewart-Brown, 2017) and those aged 15-21 years (McKay & Andretta, 2017). Participants answered statements about thoughts and feelings, which they then endorsed using a five-point Likert scale to indicate how often they had experienced these over the previous two weeks. For example, statements include "I've been feeling optimistic about the future" and "I've been dealing with problems well". Higher scores are indicative of greater well-being.
Student Resilience Survey: goals and aspirations subscale (SRS) (Lereya et al., 2016): A 2-item measure of goals and aspirations (subscale from the student resilience survey) was utilised. SRS subscale is a validated measure of goals and aspirations designed for use with young people as young as nine years old. The two questions ask participants to indicate if they had "goals and plans for the future" and whether they think they "will be successful when [they] grow up" using a five-point Likert scale. Higher scores are indicative of more positive goals and aspirations.
Perceived Stress Scale, 10-item version (PSS-10) (Cohen, 1994): A 10-item validated measure of stress and coping, validated for use with young people aged 11-16. Participants indicated how often they had felt a certain way in the past month using a five-point Likert scale. For example, questions include "in the last month, how often have you been upset about something that happened unexpectedly?" and "in the last month, how often have you felt nervous and 'stressed'?". Higher scores are indicative of greater levels of perceived stress.
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: conduct problems and pro-social behaviour subscales (SDQ) (Goodman, 2001): 2 subscales of the SDQ measuring conduct problems and pro-social behaviour, designed for use with 11-17-year-olds (10 items). Participants indicated if statements were not true, somewhat true or certainly true of them. For example, statements included "I usually do as I am told" and "I am helpful if someone is hurt, upset or feeling ill". Higher scores are indicative of fewer conduct problems and greater pro-social behaviour.
Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire – Adolescent Short Form: self-regulation subscale (TEIQUE-ASF) (Petrides, 2009): A 6-item subscale of the TEIQUE-ASF designed to measure self-regulation for use with adolescents aged 11-17. Using a 7-point Likert scale, participants indicated the extent to which they agreed with statements, including "I find it hard to control my feelings" and "sometimes I get involved in things later I wish I could get out of". Higher scores are indicative of greater self-regulation.
Delinquent Behaviours – Rochester Youth Development Study measure (Dahlberg, Toal, Swahn, & Behrens, 2005): An 8-item measure of beliefs about delinquency validated for use with young people in Grades 7 and 8 (11-13-year-olds). This tool measured the extent to which participants have favourable beliefs/attitudes towards delinquent behaviours, as opposed to the young people's actual engagement in crime. Participants were asked to indicate how wrong they felt certain behaviours were, using a 5-point Likert scale. For example, behaviours included "steal something worth £100?" and "hit someone with the idea of hurting them?". Higher scores are indicative of beliefs and attitudes more supportive of delinquent behaviours.
Descriptive and inferential statistics were conducted on the data. Given the small size of the sample, the plan was to conduct t-tests to establish if there were any significant differences in young people's outcomes pre-and post-intervention.
Qualitative
A series of one-to-one semi-structured interviews were utilised to gain insight into how the CbN intervention influenced young people's outcomes and to help explore quantitative findings.
Interviews were conducted with several young people (i.e., current students) who also participated in the quantitative phase of this study (n = 3); key stakeholders, including a school teacher (n = 1), the CbN intervention developer (n = 1), and intervention delivery staff (n = 1); as well as young adults aged 16-19 (n = 3) who had completed the CbN intervention in years prior (i.e., previous students)
Semi-structured interview schedules explored how and why participants felt the intervention had impacted their lives. The interview schedules followed a semi-structured format to ensure that specific topics were covered whilst providing the flexibility that would allow participants to lead the direction of the interview. Questions were open-ended, and used prompts and probes where necessary to elicit more detailed responses. Questions covered topics such as experiences of participating, perceived impacts, barriers, facilitators; likes and dislikes; and perceived strengths and weaknesses of the intervention
Qualitative data were analysed using reflexive TA (Braun & Clarke, 2019), which involved six analysis phases. Phases were sequential, and each built on the previous one. However, the analysis was also recursive, so there was often movement back and forth across phases to better understand the data.
|
| Rights owners: |
|
| Contact: |
|
| Notes on access: |
The Data Collection is available for download to users registered with the UK Data Service.
|
| Publisher: |
UK Data Service
|
| Last modified: |
23 Jan 2023 12:06
|
|
Available Files
Data
Documentation
Read me
Edit item (login required)
 |
Edit Item |
