Search

In the past 20 years, the landscape of Higher Education in the United Kingdom has changed considerably. With the prospect of tuition fees spiralling above £9,000 per year, per student, it is important to explore the impact this has upon the student experience. In spite of the vast financial investment current students make towards their education, student attendance and engagement remain low. The present study therefore adopted a qualitative approach using focus groups to explore reasons for non-attendance at university teaching sessions. Four key themes emerged; these surrounded issues about a sense of belonging to university, views of the teaching (material taught and the personality and method of the tutor), perceptions of being a consumer and external pressures. This research suggests that universities should pay particular attention to the reasons why students do not attend and possibly change practice, providing more support where appropriate.

Absenteeism from university teaching sessions is increasingly becoming a common phenomenon and remains a major concern to universities. Poor attendance has significant and detrimental effects on students themselves, their peers and teaching staff. There is, however, a lack of previous research investigating demographic and psychological predictors of non-attendance alongside salient reasons students offer for their absence; it is this 'gap' that the present study attempts to fill. We approached 618 undergraduate university students from a single UK university studying various courses to complete a bespoke questionnaire assessing their estimated percentage attendance at lectures and seminars over the academic year. Students answered demographic questions, completed psychometric tests of perceived confidence (Perceived Confidence for Learning) and university belongingness (Psychological Sense of School Membership), and rated the degree to which possible reasons for non-attendance applied to themselves. Multiple regression analyses were carried out separately for estimated attendance at lectures and seminars. Results demonstrated that significant predictors of poorer attendance for both scenarios were experiencing a lower sense of belongingness to university; working more hours in paid employment; having more social life commitments; facing coursework deadlines; and experiencing mental health issues. Improving a sense of belonging to university and targeting interventions at students working in paid employment may be effective means of increasing attendance. Providing support for students with mental health issues, structuring courses around coursework deadlines and helping students to organise their attendance around social activities could also be advantageous.

The prevalence, etiology, and consequences of adolescent risk behavior have stimulated much research. The current study examined relationships among anger and depressive symptomatology (DS), risk perception, self-restraint, and adolescent risk behavior. Telephone surveys were conducted with 290 14- to 20-year-olds (173 females; M = 15.98 years). Anger and perceptions of risk directly predicted risk behavior. An indirect effect of depressive symptomatology on risk behavior through perceptions of risk was revealed. Anger predicted risk behavior, particularly for adolescents with low self-restraint. The association between risk perception and risk behavior was stronger for older than for younger adolescents. Findings offer insight into the affective influences of risk behavior and may be used to inform prevention and intervention programs aimed at adolescents.

OBJECTIVE. Emerging evidence about optimal youth development highlights the importance of both reducing negative behavior and promoting positive behavior. In our study we tested a contextual model derived from positive youth-development theory by examining the association of family, school, and community risk and promotive factors, with several outcome indices of both positive and negative adolescent development. METHODS: A sample of 42 305 adolescents aged 11 to 17 (51% girls) was drawn from the 2003 National Survey of Children's Health. Survey item composites were formed representing promotive and risk factors in the family (eg, closeness, aggression) and school and community (eg, community connectedness, school violence). Outcome composites reflected positive (social competence, health-promoting behavior, self-esteem) and negative (externalizing, internalizing, academic problems) developmental outcomes. Ordinary least squares regression was used to test the overall model. RESULTS, Between 0.10 and 0.50 of the variance in each outcome was explained by the contextual model. Multiple positive family characteristics were related to adolescent social competence and self-esteem, as well as lowered levels of internalizing and externalizing behavior and academic problems. Family communication, rules about television, and parents' own healthy behavior were related to adolescent health-promoting behavior. School and community safety were associated with increased social competence and decreased externalizing behavior. School violence was related to adolescent internalizing and externalizing behavior, as well as academic problems and lower self-esteem. CONCLUSIONS. Our results support the proposition that healthy adolescent development has roots in multiple contexts, Youth who were involved in contexts that provided positive resources from important others (ie, parents, schools, and communities) not only were less likely to exhibit negative outcomes, but also were more likely to show evidence of positive development. These findings provide important implications for intervention and prevention efforts and, more generally, for the promotion of positive, competent, and healthy youth development. Key Words positive youth development, National Survey of Children's Health, COMPREHENSIVE THEORETICAL MODELS of adolescent problem behavior propose risk and promotive factors at multiple levels of the social environment, including the family, peer, school, and neighborhood contexts. (1-3) In addition, [...]

The article discusses the right related to cross-examination of individuals presenting victim impact statements in capital sentencing proceedings of Arizona. Topics discussed include Arizona's death penalty statute that denies defendants their Sixth Amendment rights, the U.S Supreme Court's treatment of victim impact testimony in cases such as Booth v. Maryland and Payne v. Tennesse and the general Confrontation Clause rights.