A Paper Presented in Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for
HD501 Survey on Research on Human Development
Capella University, December, 2000
By Diane L. Jackson
Self-Esteem In Adolescents
General Adolescent Development.
To an educator, the stages of human development are critical to educational reform. To a secondary educator, the stages of adolescent development are especially important. Certainly, at the very least, adolescence (Baer, 1999) is a time of considerable biological, cognitive, and emotional growth. "It is generally asserted that . . . there is an increasing capacity for abstract reasoning, . . . from premises that are not true, systematic reasoning, and a growing capacity for probabilistic reasoning. These abilities are all relevant to decision making." (Adolescent Decision Making, online version, p. 2).
Vygotsky (in Biopsychosocial Model of Mental Development, online) discussed the zone of proximal development in which he described learning as taking place only when objects and interactional experiences within an individual's actual developmental level were present. Piaget described the Concrete Operational Stage which occurred between the ages of 7-12. Sushkin (online) stated that current estimates are that from 30 to 60% of adults are in the concrete operational stage, including college freshmen. Perry (in Sushkin, online) developed a model pertaining to college students in which he described the move from a dualistic view of the universe to a more relativistic view (p. 2). What was particularly important about this theory is the strong learning connection as students are unable to understand or even answer questions too far above them in a developmental sense. Yurgelun-Todd (in Adolescent Decision Making, online) suggests that adolescents may process emotions in that part of the brain responsible for instinct and gut reactions, the amygdala, whereas adults process emotions in the frontal section. This would certainly suggest that a physiological maturation of the brain must continue during adolescence.
There may be other differences between adolescents and adults that may also influence the way they make decisions. Emotions affect how people think and behave.
When people are experiencing positive emotions, they tend to underestimate the likelihood of negative consequences to their actions. When they are experiencing negative emotions, they tend to focus on the near term and lose sight of the big picture ... adolescents experience more emotions, in general, than do adults. About one quarter to one third of adolescents' strong emotions both positive and negative are tied in some way to real or fantasized romantic emotions (Adolescent Decision Making, online, p. 3)
According to Konopka (1973), adolescent development involves moving out from the family toward interdependence in three areas: 1) peers; 2) elders and 3) with younger children. This process of moving away from dependency "creates tension and emotional conflicts" (p. 6). Additionally, adolescents appear to have strong peer group needs where the subgroup and/or cliques formed are very often tightly knit. To gain group acceptance, the individual seems to relegate his/her personal competitive drives to second place, at least temporarily.
In the attempt to define the self, the adolescent considers hypothetical versions of the self and evaluates how desired and how probable they are for him or her. Frequent experimentation with a wide variety of behaviors, from delinquency to involvement in multiple clubs or sports to membership in diverse peer groups, is typical of adolescence. "This experimentation reflects the rehearsal of possible selves or the trying out of the self the adolescent could become" (Knox, p. 290). Adolescents will generate a large variety of hoped-for and feared possible selves. The types of possible selves generated by adolescents differ by gender. "Female adolescents will rate their hoped-for possible selves as less likely and their feared possible selves as more likely than will male adolescents" (Knox, p. 292).
Konopka (1973) argues that the prevailing view that adolescence is only a time of preparation for adulthood is harmful because it places youth in an ambivalent situation where they are neither children nor adults. Instead, she emphasizes that adolescence must not be seen as purely preparation for adulthood but as one part of a total developmental process distinguished by specific characteristics. As an important stage in and of itself, the earlier traditional reliance on "separation and individuation as primary tasks of adolescents" (Perez, p. 3) ignores ethnic and general diversity as the majority of theories used male Anglo-American subjects.
Traditional theories for development view separation and individuation as primary tasks of adolescents. The self-in-relation framework, however, argues that the autonomous and separate self-paradigm does not describe female development. Male self-definition is characterized by themes of separation and autonomy. Females, on the other hand, define self primarily in relationships and connectedness to others. Current research suggests that self-esteem arises from subscribing to separate self-definitions for males and connected self-definitions for females. (Perez, p. 3)
Eccles (in Baer, 1999) believed that it was these particular characteristics of adolescence that made the transition from elementary into a high school and/or middle school environment particularly important. Eccles and Midgley (in Baer, 1999) discussed a "stage-environment fit". In other words, there must be a balance between the needs of the individual and the opportunities afforded by his/her learning environment.
An optimal environment is one that stimulates positive growth and is responsive to the individual's developmental phase. In contrast, when synchrony does not exist, the individual's development is impeded. (Baer, p. 239)
This new research is indicating, more than ever, that a school environment emphasizing competition, social comparison, and ability self-assessment is not appropriate for the adolescents' developmental needs and does not take into account the differences between different ethnic groups and genders. Although this paper is addressing the role of self-esteem in adolescent development, Kagan (1999) strongly argues that self-esteem is only one part of the equation and that, as we will see in the next section, there are many other factors that must be considered for a more complete understanding of adolescent development as it relates to education.
Most students of human development agree that the most important determinants of the different profiles include: 1) the inherited physiologic patterns that are called temperamental qualities; 2) parental practices and personality; 3) quality of schools attended; 4) relationships with peers; 5) ordinal position in the family and, finally, 6) the historical era in which late childhood and early adolescence was spent. (Kagan, p. 164)
General Self-Esteem Development.
As a term, many authors have defined self-esteem of which four are presented for consideration.
Coopersmith (in Staley et al, 1996) states, "The term 'self-esteem' refers to the evaluation a person makes and customarily maintains with regard to him or herself." (p. 8)
Self-esteem, the manner in which an individual evaluates self-characteristics relative to the perceived characteristics of peers, is a crucial variable for understanding identity development, and underpins the development of mental health adjustment. (Bagley, et al., p. 82)
Global self-esteem refers to the level of general, comprehensive regard that one has for the self. Scores on such measures are closely associated with constructs such as positive and negative affect and hopelessness. . . . Self-esteem scores represent quantitative evaluations of one's overall level of positive or negative self. (Knox, et al., p. 288)
Self-esteem is the evaluative component of self-image, the positive or negative manner in which a person judges herself or himself. The degree to which one evaluates oneself as competent, belonging, and worthwhile determines self-esteem, which, in turn, forms the foundation of emotional well being. Society's values, standards, and attitudes which are shaped by perceptions of beauty, intelligence, strength, and wealth serve as major influences on how we and others evaluate ourselves. As a developmental period, adolescence brings with it conflicts, issues, and events that both young people and their families must confront for the first time. (Guinn, et al., p. 517)
Guinn's definition appears to be the most comprehensive as it includes the influence of society on one's self-esteem as does Boyd (1997) who states, "Self-esteem is influenced by social interaction and the individual's experience with the environment" (p. 693).
Once defined, a scale for determining self-esteem ratings must be found. According to Bagley, et al., (1997) there are several popular scales that have good evidence of reliability and validity. "The most frequently used of these measures are the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), the Coopersmith Self-Concept Inventory, the Piers-Harris Scale and the Tennessee Scale. The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in its brevity and its easy to understand format is, in American research, the instrument of choice for use with adolescent populations" (p. 83). In fact, Bagley further states that a computerized literature search indicated that over 1,000 American studies have used the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale with high school and junior college populations (p. 84).
One of the difficulties with the self-esteem scales, however, is that many of them are self-administered and as such it is sometimes difficult to determine whether the subject has answered questions honestly or as he/she thinks they should be answered. This is a particularly difficult problem with adolescents as there may be many reasons for any given answer and truth may or may not be one of the options as determined by the subject.
Putting aside for a moment the questions of what statements are included and how they are scored, the point to be emphasized here is that self-esteem ratings are almost always based on what subjects say about themselves, and self-report measures are rather problematic. They may tell us more about how someone wishes to appear than about his or her "true" state. In fact, some of the most respected researchers . . . have argued that people designated as having high self-esteem are simply those who demonstrate willingness to endorse favorable statements about the self as a result of an ambitious, aggressive, self-aggrandizing style of presenting themselves. (Kohn, p. 272)
With so many self-esteem studies abounding, it would be wrong to conclude that there is no difference in the findings. However, there is basic agreement that students with high self-esteem have clearer and more definitive conceptions of themselves relative to career decision making. Staley, et al., (1996) also determined that students with high self-esteem could be differentiated from those with low self-esteem in the areas of greater participation in school and home and family. Dollison (online) posited that according to a number of researchers, female students are more likely than males to internalize societal expectations and actually change to fit the expectations of others. "Female students are also more likely to attribute success to luck or external factors, while internalizing failure" (p. 11).
Bagley, et al., (1997) also found that females are more likely to be self-critical than males. However, as was discussed, this may reflect a feminine response style of being less self-declaratory and placing more emphasis on interpersonal aspects of self-appraisal. Kernis, et al., (2000) found that having a poorly developed self-concept may lead individuals to rely on, and be more affected by, specific evaluative information, thereby contributing to unstable self-esteem. In other words, the less confident and internally consistent one's self-knowledge, the less well-anchored one's feeling of self-worth are likely to be.
A realistic conception of self has been identified as an important educational objective for able learners and crucial for the actualization of potential for high achieving students according to Williams (1998). Feldhusen (in Williams), 1986 noted that high academic potential is not necessarily related to high self-concept. Accordingly, there is evidence to suggest that the self-concept of high achievers is actually similar to that of their average ability peers.
Another vocal critic of the importance of self-esteem in determining academic achievement was Kohn (1994) who argued that, at best, even if good studies did find a significant correlation between global self-esteem and academic performance, this offers absolutely no reason to think that higher self-esteem causes academic performance to go up. "Statistical concepts don't get much more elementary than this correlation doesn't prove causation but the number of people, including trained researchers, who fail to grasp this principle's relevance here fairly boggles the mind" (p. 274). Kohn reported that even in cases where the correlation was positive, it was dependent on other variables such as gender.
Knox (2000) found that gender differences were based on the adolescents' understanding of "possible selves". Females and males alike both feared possible selves. However, females feared possible selves related to relationships whereas boys generated more feared possible selves related to occupation and inferiority.
Rosenberg (in Kohn, 1994) wrote in 1989 that "global self-esteem appears to have little or no effect in enhancing academic performance" (p. 274). Later research showed that students who were encouraged to focus on their ability or lack of ability would become preoccupied with their performance whereas those who explained their success and/or failure in terms of their effort were more likely to become absorbed in the task itself. These students showed they were less likely to be thrown by failure and more likely to be intrinsically motivated to keep working at something until successful.
Kohn (1994) argues that although most research has confirmed a positive association between self-esteem and achievement, the "actual differences amount to only about 4% to 7% of variation in academic performance" (p. 273). In addition, the larger, more representational national samples appeared to find even less significant connections and, finally, there is no "global" measure of self-esteem other than the more general sense of self which, as Kohn (1994) indicates, "can hardly expect . . . to have very much to do with his or her success on a mathematics test" (p. 274).
With respect to performance within particular subject areas including mathematics and the hard sciences, there is more evidence the "difference in achievement level is due more to a competitive male learning style and to curriculum materials that ignore the roles of women in history and science" (Dollison, p. 19) and the levels will remain that way until schools become more sensitive to the needs of female students.
The problems of researching a definitive causal link between self-esteem and academic achievement negates the importance of other areas, in particular, the importance of the family, the type of school, the family's income level, etc. However, another area to consider would be to study the literature on different ethnic groups to see whether or not differences in self-esteem indicate academic success and/or failure. According to Chapman et al., (2000), findings on gender differences in self-esteem are rather inconsistent. In fact, African American adolescents either do not differ from or score higher than Caucasian adolescents. It has been suggested that adolescents who hold positive attitudes about their minority identity may be partially protected against negative stereotypes and may be better prepared to withstand internal/external pressures.
Rather than a relationship between academic achievement and high self-esteem, Chapman et al., (2000) found that coping strategies were different between African American and Caucasian adolescents. In particular, African American adolescents reported using diversions, self-reliance, spiritual support, close friends, demanding activities, and relaxation on a more regular basis than did corresponding Caucasian adolescents. It appeared that to cope with stressors, "African American youth brought up in their families learn to rely on and maintain a certain degree of group autonomy. This group autonomy promotes positive identity formation and self-esteem of its members" (p. 153).
Although there is limited research on gender and age differences within ethnic groups, the current literature suggests that female adolescents tend to use more peaceful, less violent methods of coping with stress such as social support networks, in lieu of ventilation strategies.
A different conclusion was reached when working with Mexican American adolescents. Traditional theories of development describe adolescence as a time of separation, individuation, and autonomy seeking. This focus on the individual achievement of the self has been criticized for lack of emphasis on connection and relationships. Current thinking suggests that the detachment/separation paradigm may not accurately reflect the development of women, adolescents, and infants. Perez et al., (1998) suggests that an emphasis on strong interpersonal relationships characterizes the self-development of girls and women.
Contrary to what had been found in several Caucasian and African American self-esteem studies, results of a Mexican American study suggest that both male and female adolescents define self by connections and relatedness. In other words, instead of the males defining themselves in terms of separation, independence, and autonomy, they are more likely to define self through relationships with others. While this result was expected for females, it was not for the males.
A closer look at the Mexican American culture might provide a few clues as to why this happened.
There are several customs and social characteristics that have been associated with Mexican Americans which may explain the higher scores on connected self and the significant correlation between connected self and positive self-esteem: a) familisimo, b) personalismo, c) compadrazgo, and d) gregarismo. Familisimo is an enduring and powerful tradition in the Mexican American culture. Personalismo is also a prominent cultural value among Mexican Americans. Closeness, trust, and warmth in interpersonal relationships are prized and cultivated. Compadrazo is an extension of relationships established by godparents involving connections between families and extended family ties to a larger sector of the community. Traditionally, Mexican origin parents do not teach their children to develop toward independence and autonomy, but rather to think and act communally for the good of the family and the community. This gregarismo is reflected in the cultural definition of individualismo. Individualismo emphasizes the uniqueness of each individual in light of how this uniqueness may be shared and offered to the community. (Perez, et al., p. 12)
The literature is inconsistent with respect to whether or not Mexican American females have significantly lower levels of self-esteem as compared to their male counterparts. The American Association of University Women reported that Hispanic female adolescents have significantly lower levels of self-esteem than their Anglo-American counterparts while other studies have found that adolescent females have higher self-esteem than males. Dukes and Martinez (in Perez, et al., 1998) suggest that these inconsistencies may be the result of differences in theoretical frameworks, as well as the self-esteem measures employed in the empirical investigations. The Mexican American value system dictates that an individual remain strongly identified with his or her family throughout most of the life cycle, and as a consequence, a great deal of a person's self-esteem is derived from such family identification. "In terms of reflected evaluation of the self, adolescents receive most feedback from the family and this information is weighed more heavily than that received from a generalized other or stranger" (Guinn, et al., p. 521).
Self-Esteem Gender Differences.
Recent research suggests that upon entering adolescence, females experience significant disruption in self-esteem and self-concept. For example, gender differences in pre-adolescent and adolescent self-esteem have been found by several researchers using various self-esteem measures. "Many studies pinpoint pre-adolescence and adolescence as periods when females' self-esteem decreases relative to previous levels. . . Furthermore, self-concept formation may be a particularly arduous process of females compared to males in part because females at this developmental level construct self views in more life domains than do males" (Knox, et al., p. 288).
Block and Robins (in Knox, et al., 2000) demonstrated that adolescent females' self-esteem is interpersonally oriented whereas males' self-esteem is more self-oriented. These findings appear to support the self in relation theory which depicts female self-concept as developed through girls' and women's relations with others.
Supportive parenting has also been found to be associated with higher levels of adolescent self-esteem. This sense of overall self-worth may serve as a buffer against depression and suppression of voice as children and adolescents come to view themselves as loved and competent people in the world.
Results of analyses addressing gender differences in possible selves categories suggest that female and male adolescents generate different patterns of both hoped for and feared possible selves. Whereas for hoped for possible selves, these differences are not primarily manifested in a few identifiable categories, results of analyses of feared selves demonstrate significant differences within three categories: occupation, relationship and/or interpersonal functioning, and general failure and/or inferiority. These differences were highly consistent with past research indicating that male self-views appear to be closely associated with asserting oneself or getting ahead of others, whereas female self views are more closely associated with connecting with or helping others.
Although the research results have been inconsistent in terms of showing a distinct difference between males and females, what is consistent is the "different selves" as perceived by males and females. Knox et al., (2000) found that differences in self-evaluations in different domains indicates that compared with females, males tend to have higher self-evaluations in masculinity, achievement, physical ability, and appearance whereas females have higher self-evaluations in congeniality, sociability, verbal and/or reading ability, school performance, and English.
The lower achievement results in Mathematics have not always been found among females in single-sex schools. However, when family background variables are factored, the effect is barely significant. In fact, Dollison (online) reports that the analysis of self-report data found no evidence that the single sex environment improved self-esteem or the locus of control in female students.
It would appear that perhaps the school and home environments are more responsible for the success and/or failure of academic achievement. One rationale for the junior high school structure is that departmentalized teaching supposedly is conducive to learning of higher order cognitive processes. However, in an observational study of 11 junior high school classes, Baer (1999) found only a small proportion of education tasks requiring higher order skills. Other studies reported similar findings (Walberg et al., in Baer, 1999) found that cognitive demands made on students decrease rather than increase during junior high school.
Because the capacity of abstract cognitive reasoning increases during adolescence, students require an academically challenging environment to facilitate these changes. This need often is not met. (Baer, p. 243).
Implications for Education.
As Kohn (1994) indicated it appears intuitive that self-esteem will naturally lead to higher academic achievement which is what the author had expected when beginning this report. However, there does not seem to be any clear cut evidence that this is necessarily true. Basically, self-esteem proponents have isolated self-esteem from other factors in an attempt to identify a feature that will form the basis of improved educational programs designed to offset the more negative stereotypical qualities of adolescence.
No one has shown that self-esteem doesn't matter. This is quite true, but it is generally impossible to prove the negative. Moreover, the burden of proof would seem to rest with those arguing that our education system ought to be attending to a given factor. . . . Self-esteem is related to things other than academic performance and social behavior. . . . For example, depression and other psychological problems are highly correlated with low self-esteem. Once again, though, there is some disagreement about which causes which. . . . Self-esteem may not be sufficient to produce achievement or to serve as a social vaccine, but it may be a necessary component. (Kohn, p. 275)
Arguably, self-esteem programs designed exclusively to help students feel better about themselves may be of questionable value. Those educators in favor of promoting self-esteem will not believe that others would deny the importance of improving children's perceptions of themselves whereas critics will point out that continued emphasis on self-esteem will provide a distraction from the more essential components of education, specifically, academics. As several educators point out, low self-esteem is not necessarily an indicator of delinquent behavior and/or low academic performance. "If being part of an armed gang can help someone to feel better about himself, then feeling better about oneself is not the last word in social vaccine. . . . A re-analysis of some older data . . . did not support the premise that delinquency is caused by an absence of self-esteem" (Kohn, p. 273).
On the other hand, (Dollison, online) reports that family income and parental eduational attainment are positively correlated with academic achievement of children. Low income and ethnic status are cited as significant risk factors for lowered achievement in mathematics and reading. In fact, there is some evidence to indicate that although female students enhanced performance in single-sex schools in certain subject areas is probably due more to increased family income rather than a direct relationship between the individual and the school itself.
Some have even argued that schools are structured to satisfy the needs of male students (Shakeshaft in Dollison, online). James Beane (in Kohn, 1994) said, "A debilitating environment is likely to squash fledgling self-confidence no matter how much we exhort the individual to persist" (p. 275). The problem of low academic achievement might be interpreted then as not so much a problem of low self-esteem among various ethnic groups regardless of gender but more of a problem related to the type of drill and skill curriculum offered in many schools largely in response to the demand for higher scores on standardized tests.
Baer (1999) argues that there is definite evidence of a mismatch between early adolescents' developmental needs and aspects of the junior high school classroom environment.
The lack of synchronicity between the developing adolescent and the school environment is implicated in the etiology of a number of psychosocial problems such as poor self-esteem, drops in academic performance, truancy, and school attrition rates. (p. 238)
Baer (1999) identifies six patterns indicative of a poor adolscent/eduational fit: (1) less teacher effectiveness and less teaching efficacy at a time when adolescents are experiencing increasing cognitive ability and the onset of abstract reasoning; (2) problematic evaluation methods and standards when the adolescent is undergoing increased self-awareness, a changing self-concept, and greater peer orientation; (3) whole class task organization when the adolescent has more individualized needs; (4) less personal and less positive teacher student relationships when the adolescent is searching for positive adult relationships; (5) greater emphasis on teacher control and discipline when the adolescent desires more autonomy, and (6) school assignments requiring lower level cognitive skills when the adolescent requires more challenge.
However, lest the blame fall entirely on the secondary educator, it should be clarified that their own situation is unique and distinct as contrasted with that of the elementary educator. Specifically, three areas need to be identified: (1) the increased demand of coordinating the activities of a larger number of students; (2) the possible implication of the adolescent's trial of various "selves" that might come into conflict with the teacher's own notion of self; (3) the self-fulfilling prophecy of stereotypical beliefs related to lower expectations for particular ethnic and gender groups.
That there is a difference between the way in which educators grade secondary and elementary students is supported by the work of Simmons and Blyth (in Baer, 1999) who report a significant decline in grade performance for as many as 54% of adolescent students who make the transition to secondary school. Interestingly, however, this decline in grades is not, apparently, accompanied by a comparable decline on standardized achievement tests.
Of course, there is evidence that some school districts are looking to make a better fit between their educational environments and the needs of adolescents. Recently, there have been several articles relating to the bio-physical rhythms of adolescents which state they are not being "lazy" by not getting up early, their natural body rhythm indicates a later waking up time in order to perform at an ultimate level. Several schools have piloted programs with a later start to the school day to address this physical trait.
As reported in Baer, (1999), a middle school in Detroit has adopted a pilot program that has adapted to the adolescents' needs for increased freedom, self-responsibility, and self-determination by offering a modified five day week schedule in which normal class schedules are dropped on Fridays so that students may select their own classes. To date, the students interviewed reported a much higher tolerance of the activities and classes scheduled Monday through Thursday because of the freedom the Friday schedule allowed.
Although there does not appear to have been a direct link between self-esteem and increased academic performance, the studies have shown a discrepancy between the traditional secondary structure and the developmental needs of the adolescent. This discrepancy has been taken to heart by various schools who have modified their system. The same research has also identified different coping strategies used by many adolescents in problem-solving as compared to those used by adults. Different coping strategies and research studies indicating heavier use of the amygdala as compared to adults provides more evidence that adolescent development is not necessarily a step towards adult development as traditionally reported but a unique developmental phase in and of itself. In other words, telling adolescents to "grow up and think like an adult" might not be a practical and/or helpful suggestion.
Moreoever, these findings have important implications for parents and professionals working with racially diverse adolescents. First, most of the coping strategies used by the adolescents in this study are emotion-focused strategies. Because emotion focused coping strategies are not solution oriented, we suggest that parents and professionals teach adolescents problem focused coping strategies that directly address the problem. (Chapman, p. 156)
According to Bagley et al., (1997), the strongest predictors of poor self-esteem, depression, and suicidality were family physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, family disruption, and parental alcoholism.
Conclusion.
Self-esteem has been identified as a critical factor in determining the self-concept of an individual, in particular of adolescents. However, the traditional self-administered evaluation exercises have not been able to distinguish between "hope-to-be" versus "as-I-am" responses. Although 60% of the journal cited self-esteem studies use either the Coopersmith, Rosenberg, Piers-Harris, or the Tennessee scales, the expected evidence of a significant correlation between low self-esteem and low academic performance is not consistent.
The evidence does, however, show a causal relationship between coping strategies and adolescents as compared to adults and coping strategies in that adolescents tend to use a more emotional based coping strategy whether or not they intuitively thought another decision to be better.
The studies do indicate, as well, a distinct problem with the school environment experienced by most adolescents and the ideal one that would best allow them to successfully experience opportunities for personal and social development. Some studies found that the cognitive skills espoused by secondary teachers as necessary for continued development were, in fact, utilized to a far less degree as compared to elementary school environments.
Others argued that the importance of self-esteem negated the effects of other variables including family income, social environment, and parental involvement. To these critics, the emphasis on creating self-esteem programs was detrimental to the academic process as a whole.
Baer (1999) offers some suggestions for those working with adolescents. By following these recommendations, there will be a better match between developing adolescents' needs and desires and ultimately help to achieve a situation where students work together in a well-designed cooperative learning group in which they are more likely to learn more effectively.
Advocacy strategies involve changing the characteristics of middle schools as follows:
Based on this literature search, it seemed apparent that perhaps self-esteem, although certainly an important component of adolescent development, should not be used as a basis for further reform programs without considerable attention being paid as well to other variables including parental education, income level, and the social ethos of the school environment itself.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adolescent Decision Making: Implications for Prevention Programs. Retrieved on November 2, 2000 from http://aspe.os/dhhs.ogv/HSP/adolescent99/decision.htm. 1-4.
Baer, J., (October, 1999). Adolescent Development and the Junior High School Environment, Social Work in Education, 21(4), 238-149.
Bagley, C., Bolitho, F., Bertrand, L., (1997), Norms and Construct Validity of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in Canadian High School Populations: Implications for Counselling, Canadian Journal of Counselling, 31(1), 82-92.
Biopsychosocial Model of Mental Development. Retrieved on November 2, 2000 from http://www.appi/org/books/gemelli/rg02.html 1-24.
Boyd, K.R., Hrycaiko, D.W., (Fall, 1997). The Effect of a Physical Activity Intervention Package on the Self-Esteem of Pre-Adolescent and Adolescent Females, Adolescence, 32(127), 693-709.
Chapman, P.L., Mullis, R.L., (June, 2000). Racial Differences in Adolescent Coping and Self-Esteem, Journal of Genetic Psychology, 161(2), 152-161.
Dollison, R.A., (online). A Comparison of the Effect of Single Sex and coeducational Schooling Arrangements on the Self-Esteem and Mathematics Achievement of Adolescent Females. Published in partial requirement for SED560 Graduate Research Seminar, University of South Alabama, 1-34.
Guinn, B. and Semper, T., (November, 1997). Mexican American Female Adolescent Self-Esteem: The Effect of Body image, Exercise Behavior, and Body Fatness, Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 19(4), 517-527.
Kagan, J., (July, 1999). The Role of Parents in Children's Psychological Development, Pediatrics, 104(1), 164-168.
Kernis, M.H., Paradise, A.W., Whitaker, D.J., Wheatman, S.R., and Goldman, B.N., (October, 2000). Master of One's Psychological Domain? Not Likely if One's Self-esteem is Unstable, Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(10), 1297-1307.
Knox, M., Funk, J., Elliott, R., Bush, E.G., (March, 2000). Gender Differences in Adolescents' Possible Selves, Youth & Society, 31(3), 287-310.
Kohn, A., (December, 1994). The Truth About Self-Esteem, Phi Delta Kappan, 76(4), 272-284.
Konopka, Gisela, D.S.W., (Fall, 1973), Requirements for Healthy Development of Adolescent Youth, Adolescence, Vol. VIII(31), 1-26.
Perez, G.L. and Russell, T.T., (1998). Self-Esteem and Self-in-Relation Identity Among Mexican American Adolescents, Submitted as a research project., 1-21.
Staley, W., (November, 1996). The Relationship Between Fear of Success, Self-Concept, and Career Decision Making, Presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, 1-22.
Sushkin, N., Development Theories. Retrieved on November 2, 2000 from http://www.wpi/edu/~isg_501/nsushkin.html, 1-6.
Williams, J., (1998). Self-Concept -- Performance Congruence: An Exploration of Patterns Among High-Achieving Adolescents, Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21(4), 415-422.