Category: Resilience

This report is to critically analyse the dynamics that contributes to how resilient organizations remain resilient during disruptive times. The first part of this report will define and explain the conceptualization of organizational resilience whereas the second part will focus on providing critical discussions of the features of resilient organizations. According to the BSI group, Organizational Resilience is defined as “the ability of an organization to anticipate, prepare for, respond and adapt to incremental change and sudden disruptions in order to survive and prosper.” (Bsigroup.com, 2019).

In this ever-changing world, things change fast and so do workers in various sectors and requires internal changes to cope with external changes and demand. These internal changes therefore represent only part of the challenge as external changes are increasingly felt by employees who now have more responsibilities dealing directly with the outside world (Dess & Picken,2000). As workers become more energized, more independent decisions are often made considering the pressure of the times (Mallak,1998).

MAIN BODY

The conceptualisation of organizational resilience has been applied in different fields to mean different things but in management science has been applied to mean the adaptability and responsiveness of an organization to shock and unforeseen circumstances (Pęciłło, 2016). According to Barasa et al 2018, there are two dimensions of resilience; planned resilience, and adaptive resilience. Organizations show planned resilience when they employ pre-existing plans to avoid or minimize an impact of a crisis. These include business continuity and risk management plans that outline pre-disaster activities required to keep organizations running during and after a period of disruptions such as natural (earthquakes, floods, disease outbreaks) and man-made disasters (terrorist attacks, fires) (Barasa et al., 2018). According to Longstaff, et al, 2010, Adaptive resilience on the other hand occurs during the post-disaster (natural and/or man-made) period as new functions are developed by organizations in order to respond to emergent situations. It was further asserted that while planned resilience is important, adaptive resilience is more important since it is more feasible and efficient in looking at uncertainty in the future (Carlson et al., 2012)

On the issue of conceptualization of this model, there have been several other views on this matter. According to Denyer, 2017, Organizational Resilience has been studied for the past 40 years and have been put into five distinct phases with five contrasting viewpoints. The five viewpoints are preventative control, mindful action, performance optimization, adaptive innovation and paradoxical thinking. The two perspective which are the preventative control and adaptive innovation action are conceptually similar to the planned and the adaptive resilience models (Beermann, 2011). These models are put into a quadrant that are split between defensive behaviours (stopping bad things from happening) and progressive (making good things happen), as well as between behaviours that are reliable and those that are flexible (Mullins, 2007).

Some features of a resilient organization will be discussed to see how such organizations are able to cope with changing needs both internally and externally. One feature of resilient organizations is an access to external resources (resources other than ones that are immediately available for use) in the conduct of one’s work. Such external resources include but not limited to financial resources, information, emotional support, advice, practical help etc. If these external resources are needed in problem solving, not only does the adequacy and availability influence primary and secondary appraisal but it reinforces coping behaviours. The classic example of this resilience principle in action is Ritz-Carlton Hotels. Each employee, from housekeeping staff to CEO, has the discretion to spend up to $2,000 (each time) to ensure the guest has a quality stay at their hotel. This can mean bringing tea to a guest with a cold or sending a tie left behind to the guest’s next destination, all without seeking approval. (Mallak,1998).

One of the most important features of resilient organizations is the ability to expand the boundaries of decision making not only for top management executives but also employees too as this brings along element of empowerment, ability to take initiatives in preventing and dealing with problems that may arise (Lengnick et al, 2002). This principle works together with ensure adequate external resources. Resilient individuals need the ability and authority to make decisions on the spot in a variety of situations. (Lengnick-Hall et al, 2011). However, the difficulty of this feature was how inconsistency in terms of the application of certain decisions and the problems this can bring but this is another feature that makes organizations resilient in difficult times as many decisions referred up to the management chain merely serve to reduce service to the customer, frustrate employees, and needlessly occupy management time that could be spent on issues more relevant to their level of responsibility (Mallak, 1998). For example, at Virgin Atlantic, senior executives work in a corner of an open-plan office on the second floor. Thoughts of associates are welcome and of vital importance, there is a no-blame culture. In quoting the head of internal audit who happened to have been on secondment, “There is an executive team who do not really have egos. They are happy for you to go and have an honest conversation with them.” As a result, vital risk and security information travels around the company and the board make well-informed decisions (The Mackenzie Institute, 2019).

One other factor that contributes to resilient organizations is for organizations to develop tolerance towards uncertainty. According to Jay Galbraith’s concept of uncertainty is a case where the amount of information an organization needs is greater than the information it holds. (Tushman & Nadler, 1978). This gap in information available to people to make informed decisions about their work poses a frustration whenever they want to make good decisions as they do not have the bigger picture and the strategic importance of the information (Mallark, 1998). The open-book management practice was to reduce these uncertainties in making information available to workers for them to make certain decision in periods of uncertainty and risk of business decline. This was to help workers reduce indecision by making financial and product information available to all employees. However, in times of decision making, there is a fixed amount of information available regardless of what interventions are put in place (Singh et al., 2012). Resilient organizations can build capacity to make good decisions under these conditions, there stand a higher chance of surviving disruptive times as compared to organizations that do not bridge the gap between the information needed and the information provided (Weick & Sutcliffe, 2011). For instance, JP Morgan Chase & Co, a successful global bank, has applied a ‘Global Resiliency’ program designed to provide resiliency aligned to its business strategy and principles. It does this by engaging senior management on all aspects of the program, including determining the resiliency risk appetite, strategy, leadership (The Mackenzie Institute, 2019).

CONCLUSION

To conclude, for organizations to be dynamic and resilient during disruptive times, such organizations are mainly dependent on some of the factors that have been discussed in this essay. The concept of resilience in organizations have been explained to be able to understand how that can be taken into account before, during and after disruption in any business. Although Planned resilience is important, Adaptive resilience is more important since it is more viable and effective in looking at unforeseen circumstance. For businesses to be resilient, it should be able to cope with changes both internally and externally, the boundaries of decision making should be expanded to go beyond just management to include the general team for some decisions to be made during difficult times of any business life. Information provision should also be structured in a way whereby workers do not lack information on certain issues to not be able to act upon it during challenging times.

REFERENCE

1. Bsigroup.com. (2019). Organizational Resilience | BSI Group. [online] Available at: https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/our-services/Organizational-Resilience/ [Accessed 17 Oct. 2019].
2. Mallak, Larry. ‘Putting organizational resilience to work.’ INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT-CHICAGO THEN ATLANTA- (1998): 8-13.
3. Barasa, E., Mbau, R. and Gilson, L., 2018. What is resilience and how can it be nurtured? A systematic review of empirical literature on organizational resilience. International journal of health policy and management, 7(6), p.491.
4. Denyer, D., 2017. Organizational Resilience: A summary of academic evidence, business insights and new thinking. BSI and Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield.
5. Pęciłło, M., 2016. The concept of resilience in OSH management: a review of approaches. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 22(2), pp.291-300.
6. Beermann, M., 2011. Linking corporate climate adaptation strategies with resilience thinking. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(8), pp.836-842.
7. Dess, G.G. and Picken, J.C., 2000. Changing roles: Leadership in the 21st century. Organizational dynamics, 28(3), pp.18-34
8. Lengnick-Hall, M. and Lengnick-Hall, C., 2002. Human resource management in the knowledge economy: New challenges, new roles, new capabilities. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
9. Lengnick-Hall, C.A., Beck, T.E. and Lengnick-Hall, M.L., 2011. Developing a capacity for organizational resilience through strategic human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 21(3), pp.243-255.
10. Barasa, E., Mbau, R. and Gilson, L., 2018. What is resilience and how can it be nurtured? A systematic review of empirical literature on organizational resilience. International journal of health policy and management, 7(6), p.491.

This essay will summarise the definition of resilience and how it develops as humans progress through life. This essay will argue that a large majority of individuals will positively adapt in the face of adversity with a minority of individuals developing genuine emotional and/or behavioural problems. This essay will argue that protective factors such as high self-esteem, social support networks and coping methods promote resilience within individuals. This essay will also describe the concepts of coping, mindfulness and resilience in relation to theory and practice in social work. This essay will argue that mindfulness meditation increases awareness, promoting resilience within social workers and in turn increases their quality of service to their clients. Furthermore, this essay will also discuss the skills and qualities a resilient social work practitioner should display. Additionally, this essay will highlight how resilience relates to birth, childhood, adulthood and later life. Furthermore, this essay will explore the concept of post-traumatic growth and how it relates to resilience. A number of case studies will be used to explore the concept of resilience through different developmental stages to support these findings.

Resilience is an ever-changing concept, however, is mostly defined as the ability to adapt positively despite adversity (Rutter 2012). Rutter (2012) argues that resilience should be perceived as a process and not a set characteristic an individual acquires. Mental health professionals have been inclined to emphasise the negative impacts traumatic events have on individuals rather than focusing on the positive outcomes that come as a result of exposure to these situations (Werner, 2005). However, resilience is a concept that mental health professionals, specifically social workers are starting to focus on more, which draws attention to the positive effects a stressful situation can provide to an individual. Collins (2008) recognises that it is important to note that resilient individuals still experience stressful circumstances and feel negative emotions, however they balance these negative emotions with positive emotions. Rutter (2012) challenges the assumption that individuals will respond to threats in a similar manner to each other. Rutter (2012) argues that when an individual encounters a stressful event this, in turn, can result in better coping with later stress. Protective factors refer to the characteristics of an individual that are protective in cases of adversity which decrease the risk of a negative outcome. Protective factors may include higher intelligence, good education, nurturing parents, social support networks, high self-esteem and coping methods. Collins (2008) argues that resilience is not a fixed concept but is influenced by the situation, the number and severity of stressors, individual attributes and the individual’s environment. Collins (2008) argues that resilience is not an unusual attribute in individuals which challenges the assumption that resilience is rare. Werner (2005) describes the ingrained assumption that if a child is exposed to a negative situation such as domestic violence, substance abuse or poverty that it is inescapable that the child will encounter difficulties with their development. Mental health practitioners have had the habit of focusing on the negative impacts that individuals experience as a result of these traumatic events rather than the positive outcomes of the individual. Werner (2005) argues that only a small number of individuals develop significant emotional disruptions or continuous behavioural issues after exposure to a number of stressors.

Werner (2005) discusses the Kauai Longitudinal Study which explored development from birth to midlife. The study looks into how a number of biological and psychosocial risk factors, traumatic events and protective factors impact a sample of 698 children from Kauai in 1955. The children were observed by a group of mental health workers, social workers, paediatricians and nurses at ages 1, 2, 10, 18, 32 and 40. Werner (2005) refers to those who positively adapt in spite of their adversities as ‘survivors’ and those who don’t as ‘casualties’. Werner (2005) found that 30% of the sample were ‘survivors’ and some of these children came from poor backgrounds, experienced family dysfunction, had parents with psychiatric disorders, encountered complications with birth or were raised by mothers with significantly low levels of education. These are all considered risk factors that increase the chance of a child developing serious emotional or behavioural problems. Werner (2005) found that 20% of the children who had encountered a majority of these risk factors by age 2 developed behaviour or learning difficulties by age 10 or had run into trouble with the law or mental health issues by 18. However, a third of these children turned out to be capable adults with no indication of any behaviour or learning problems throughout childhood or adolescence, flourishing in school and their social life. Werner (2005) argues that the achievements of these individuals challenged the assumption that children recognised as ‘high risk’ are destined to do poorly in life. Werner (2005) describes that children with ‘easy going’ personalities, nurturing parents and access to social support networks such as family, friends or community acted as protective factors, promoting resilience in children. Werner (2005) found that those who were resilient in adulthood despite difficult circumstances turned to the assistance of their family and community that increased their ability to achieve their goals and decrease the number of stressors they encounter and in turn allowed new opportunities to arise. Furthermore, children described as having ‘easy going’ personalities had higher levels of problem-solving skills which in turn increased their likelihood of overcoming their problems independently (Werner 2005). Additionally, Werner (2005) found that the ‘survivors’ were those who had formed a strong connection with at least one stable parental figure who was empathetic to their needs at a young age.

Durmont and Provost (1999) explore the concept of resilience in those transitioning from childhood to adulthood. Adolescence is a phase where individuals undergo a number of changes physically, cognitively and socially, in which some individuals will adapt positively and others will encounter issues adjusting (Durmont & Provost, 1999). Durmont and Provost, (1999) explore the protective factors that assist individuals in positively adapting to these changes. Durmont and Provost (1999) argue that protective factors such as high self-esteem, social support networks and coping methods promote resilience within individuals during their transition from childhood to adulthood. Durmast and Provost (1999) demonstrate this by examining the levels of young adolescents, stress and depression and how protective factors influence them. Hassani, Izadi-Avanji, Rakhshan and Majd (2017) explore resilience in later life. Hassani, et al. (2017) argue that resilience improves physical and mental health in later life. Although, older people experience a number of health problems most tend to adapt to their situation. The promotion of resilience is significant in later life as older people are more inclined to lose physical and cognitive functioning as well as face chronic diseases. Older people are at an increased risk of developing mental illnesses due to increased feelings of loneliness, insecurity and helplessness due to lack of mobility and independence (Hassani et al., 2017). Increased resilience in older people assists them in managing the negative changes in their health and increases their feelings of independence (Hassani et al., 2017). However, Hassani et al. (2017) mention that resilience does not decrease with age, recognising that older people have similar and sometimes higher scores of resilience than younger people. Hassani et al. (2017) describe that older people suffering from cancer believed that factors such as social support and spirituality enhanced their resilience. Alongside struggles of chronic diseases, older people are more likely to experience traumatic events such as losing their spouse, thus resilience in later life is significant.

Resilience relates enormously to social work as the concept surrounds the idea that every individual has the ability to rebuild themselves positively and recognises the individual’s strengths (Hernández & García-Moreno, 2014). Collins (2008) describes how the social work profession can be demanding resulting in high levels of stress for social workers. Collins (2008) argues that emotional resilience is important for social workers to help them overcome the stress of their demanding profession. Stress outcomes such as burnout and compassion fatigue are common consequences of working in mental health professions such as social work (Crowder and Sears, 2014). Compassion fatigue describes the process by which a practitioner becomes emotionally exhausted from working with distressed clients (Crowder and Sears, 2014). Burnout refers to a continuous response to severe emotional and interpersonal stressors in work, resulting in exhaustion (Crowder and Sears, 2014). Because the social work profession requires practitioners to support people through difficult situations, it is important that social workers practice self-care. Self-care is a critical component of social work practice and mindfulness can be used to decrease the effects of stress and increase awareness (Kelly & Okolo, 2016). Kelly and Okolo (2016) describes that as a mental health worker it is important to be aware of our own levels of stress and how our body reacts to stress. Kelly and Okolo (2016) argue that mindfulness meditation can promote awareness and as a result increase the quality of services social workers provide to their clients. Mindfulness relates to a process that allows an individual to become fully emerged and aware of what they are feeling and thinking in the present moment (Kelly & Okolo, 2016). The National Association of Social Workers code of ethics describes that a social workers personal problems should not interfere with their professional practice (NASW, 2008) which suggests that self-care is an essential practice for social workers. Collins (2008) argues that in the social work profession, it is important that socials workers receive support from their co-workers where they can share their negative emotions, in order to promote resilience. Social workers are exposed to an array of negative emotions as they frequently work with individuals that are coping with stressful situations, thus it is important that social workers are resilient so they don’t burn out (Collins, 2008). Collins (2008) supports the idea that good self-esteem and a sense of control are key factors that promote resilience in individuals. Collins (2008) describes that social workers who display qualities such as being optimistic are beneficial to promoting their client’s resilience. Social workers encourage their clients to look at new opportunities and emphasise their strengths of their client’s display, encouraging them to recognise the resources around them (Collins, 2008). This encourages self-determination in clients and allows them to solve their problems on their own. Social workers focus on not only the problem but on the outcome. As a social worker, it is important to have confidence in your client and set goals. For example, if a social worker expects their client to be resilient this encourages their client to develop a plan (Collins, 2008).

Grant and Kinman (2014) describe qualities and skills such as emotional intelligence, reflective ability, empathy, social skills and support are important to possess to be considered a resilient social worker. Emotional intelligence refers to an individuals ability to drive oneself to persist in cases of frustration, to think even when stressed and display characteristics such as hope and empathy (Grant & Kinman, 2014). Grant and Kinman (2014) argue that those with emotional intelligence are described as confident, responsible, and adaptable who utilise coping methods to solve problems and make decisions. Grant and Kinman (2014) also argue that the ability to reflect on one’s emotions and attitudes and the perspectives of others promotes resilience. Social workers who show empathetic feelings such as compassion towards their clients report feelings of personal achievement and mental wellbeing, however, it is important to lay out boundaries in order to prevent burnout and compassion fatigue (Grant & Kinman, 2014). Grant and Kinman (2014) also support the significance of social support in the social work profession in an effort to promote resilience. Social skills such as good communication and confidence are essential to developing effective social support networks with co-workers, family and friends (Grant & Kinman, 2014). Collins (2008) argues that resilient individuals often display characteristics such as optimism, good sense of humour and being open-minded. Collins (2008) supports the idea that an individual who reflects and responds positively to unfamiliar and continuous situations are more likely to positively adapt. Hernández and García-Moreno (2014) argue that social workers who display high levels of extrovert and conscientiousness are more likely to develop resilience within themselves and with their clients.

Although many people believe post-traumatic growth and resilience are the same, the two are distinct concepts, however, both compliment each other, both referring to a positive outcome from adversity (Anderson, 2018). Post-traumatic growth refers to an individual’s personal growth as a result of enduring a traumatic event, resulting in positive changes (Anderson, 2018). Tedeschi and Calhoun (1996) argue that these positive changes can include an increase in personal strength, spiritual change, a new found appreciation of life, new opportunities in life and an increase in relationships with others. These positive changes highlight an individuals ability to heal even after the most unfavourable situations (Anderson, 2018). Anderson (2018) describes that many individuals report personal growth after experiencing a traumatic event. Ben-Porat (2015) describes how adversity can lead to either a positive change of negative change denying on the context of the situation and the resources available to the individual at the time. For example, an individual who is exposed to a natural disaster such as a tornado is more likely to engage in post-traumatic growth if a good social support network is available to them (Anderson, 2018). Anderson (2018) challenges the assumption that those who are exposed to traumatic events will remain wounded and not positively grow. Anderson (2018) supports the concept that social support is a significant factor in promoting post-traumatic growth and in turn promoting resilience within individuals.

To conclude, resilience is an important factor in all stages of human development and defined as the ability to positively adapt even when faced with stressful circumstances. This essay outlines that protective factors such as high self-esteem, good social support networks and coping methods promote resilience within individuals from all stages of development. This essay argues that resilient social workers should display skills and qualities such as emotional intelligence, reflective ability, empathy, social and support skills, optimism and confidence. This essay concludes that post-traumatic growth and resilience are distinct concepts, however, are closely connected with one promoting the other. This essay recognises that self-care is a critical aspect of social work in order to prevent stress-related outcomes such as burnout and compassion fatigue. This essay explores coping methods such as mindfulness meditation that increases awareness, in turn, promoting resilience in social workers.

References

1. Anderson, K. M. (2018). Post-traumatic growth and resilience despite experiencing trauma and oppression. Journal of Family Social Work, 21(1), 1-4. doi: 10.1080/10522158.2017.1402540
2. Ben-Porat, A. (2015). Vicarious post-traumatic growth: Domestic violence therapists versus social service department therapists in Israel. Journal of Family Violence, 30(7), 923-933. doi: 10.1007/s10896-015-9714-x
3. Collins, S. (2008). Social workers, resilience, positive emotions and optimism. Social Work in Action, 19(4), 255-269. doi: 10.1080/09503150701728186
4. Crowder, R., & Sears, A. (2017). Building Resilience in Social Workers: An Exploratory Study on the Impacts of a Mindfulness-based Intervention. Australian Social Work, 70(1), 17-29. doi: 10.1080/0312407X.2016.1203965
5. Grant, L., & Kinman, G. (2014). Emotional Resilience in the Helping Professions and how it can be Enhanced. Health and Social Care Education, 3(1), 23-34. doi: 10.11120/hsce.2014.0004
6. Hassani, P., Izadi-Avanji, F., Rakhshan, M., & Majd, H. (2017). A phenomenological study on resilience of the elderly suffering from chronic disease: a qualitative study. Psychology Research and Behaviour Management, 10, 59-67. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S121336
7. Hernández, C., & García-Moreno, C. (2014). Migration, Resilience and Social Work: Latin Americans in Tarragona. The British Journal of Social Work, 44(1), 88-104. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcu045
8. Kelly, A., & Okolo, I. (2016). Mindfulness Meditation as a Self-Care Practice in Social Work. Retrieved from https://sophia.stkate.edu/msw_papers/617
9. National Association of Social Workers. (2008). Code of Ethics. Retrieved from https://www.socialworkers.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=KZmmbz15evc%3D&portalid=0
10. Rutter, M. (2012). Resilience as a dynamic concept. Development and Psychopathology, 24(2), 335-344. doi:10.1017/S0954579412000028
11. Tedeschi, R., & Calhoun, L. (1996). The posttraumatic growth inventory: Measuring the positive legacy of trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 9(3), 455-471. doi: 10.1002/jts.2490090305
12. Werner, E. (2005). Resilience and Recovery: Findings from the Kauai Longitudinal Study. Research, Policy, and Practice in Children’s Mental Health, 19(1), 11-14.

“Mom frowned at me. ‘You’d be destroying what makes it special,’ she said, ‘It’s the Joshua tree’s struggle that gives it its beauty’.”

When Jeannette devises a plan to right the Joshua tree which has grown sideways in the direction of the constant wind that passes over it, Rosemary does not like the idea. Rose Mary claims that the tree is beautiful not because it grows straight like the other trees, but rather because its struggle defines it and makes it unique. I believe that during this moment between Jeanette and Rosemary, Rosemary is explaining to Jeanette that it’s not beautiful for how it looks but because of its story, hoping that Rosemary will convey a message of symbolic meaning that the Wells family isn’t special for how they look but because of their journey and how hard they work to be like the average family. Rose Mary is typically unwilling to tamper with nature and she is particularly drawn to the unique form of the Joshua Tree. Through the figure of the tree, a young Jeannette learns an important lesson about non-conformity. The author in this passage and this scene reveals a beautiful moment between Mrs. Wells and Jeanette because Rosemary is explaining that beauty is from within not from what the eye sees, and the writer reveals that symbolism for the Wells family.

“After dinner, the whole family stretched out on the benches and the floor of the depot and read, with the dictionary in the middle of the room so we kids could look up words we don’t know…Occasionally, on those nights when we were all reading together, a train would thunder by, shaking the house and rattling the windows. The noise was thunderous, but after we’d been there a while, we didn’t even hear it.”

Resilience is the ability to cope during adverse situations and to move forward in a positive way. Pre-service teachers are faced with challenging situations that can be stressful, isolating, and can create negative well-being but learning to be resilient and possessing the skills and strategies to deal with challenging and adverse situations can ensure longevity in a teaching career. Through building and maintaining support networks, ensuring positive well-being and work-life balance, and maintaining motivation through ongoing professional development, a pre-service teacher will learn the skills and strategies of resilience. Resilience is a skill that is beneficial for teachers as it can have a positive impact on their students. Resilience can directly impact the job satisfaction, engagement, self-efficacy, and motivation of a teacher (Day, 2008, p. 259-260) so it is essential for the profession considering that between 25 to 40 percent of new teachers leave the profession within the first five years (Milburn, 2011). Resilience is not a characteristic that a person is born with but can be learned and developed over time through awareness of thoughts, behaviours, and responses which act as protective factors in adverse situations (American Psychology Association, 2014). The BRiTE program (Mansfield, Beltman, Broadley, Weatherby-Fell & MacNish, 2018) is a resource for pre-service teachers to build and learn to be resilient through expert findings, activities, experienced teachers’ opinions, and resources.

Building relationships and maintaining support networks are essential for a pre-service teacher to ensure they feel support, can build confidence and resilience. Papatrajanou and Le Cornu (2014, p.100-106) stressed the importance of relationships with more experienced peers, which can offer guidance, support, collaboration, and strategies that pre-service teachers can rely on. Through these support networks, pre-service teachers to reflect on their own practices, deal with adverse situations and build on their confidence and resilience. These support networks also enable teachers to be confident in making challenging professional decisions to meet the needs of their students (Churchill et al., 2018, p. 70-71). Factors such as policies and practices, and school culture can affect how a pre-service teacher views on their own skills and abilities, which can influence retention rates and as a result, supporting and mentoring new teachers should be viewed as a joint responsibility within the school community to create a positive culture (Caspersen & Raaen, 2014, p. 189-211). The BRiTE (Mansfield et al., 2018) module relating to Relationships emphasised the importance of building and maintaining relationships to build and maintain resilience.

Well-being is our overall opinion of how we think and feel about ourselves and how we use strategies to deal with daily situations to live a fulfilling life (Kidsmatter, 2012, p. 29). Well-being includes mental health, maintaining motivation and a healthy work-life balance. When a teacher does not have a positive opinion of themselves they can feel incompetent within the classroom which can lead to stress. This is particularly evident for pre-service teachers who lack experience and strategies in dealing with challenging situations in the classroom (Capan, 2012). One important factor of positive mental health is emotional resilience, which is an attribute that enables a teacher to enhance their coping skills and persist through negative teaching situations and environments (Cohen, 2009). Maintaining motivation to persist in a teaching career is based on three factors; intrinsic, extrinsic, and altruistic which inspire people to enter the industry (Watt and Richardson, 2008). Teachers who value their students and are motivated by intrinsic rewards are more inclined to be persistent and implement coping strategies to overcome stress (Doney, 2013). Dworkin (2009) stated that health professionals believe teaching is a highly vulnerable occupation where teachers can become stressed and burn out. It is imperative that teachers implementing self-care habits into their schedule by making time for themselves, family, and friends as well as a healthy diet and sleep which was evident in the BRiTE (Mansfield et al., 2018) module for wellbeing.

Ongoing professional development can create opportunities for pre-service teachers to build on their communication and problem-solving skills and maintain motivation, which results in strengthening resilience (www.brite.edu.au). To build resilience, teachers should always be striving to meet personal goals for themselves and their students. Tsouloupas et al., (2010) explained how teachers, who doubt their abilities, are unable to effectively communicate and problem-solve effectively which often results in emotional exhaustion. By learning to set goals, pre-service teachers are able to monitor their own progress, seek advice and reflect effectively. Marland (2007) explained how goal setting is aligned with technical, practical, and critical reflection, which directly affects self-regulation. Students, like teachers, can become self-regulated learners who are resourceful, self-motivated, and persistent which Tait (2008) explained were able to move forward positively and set new goals after dealing with a difficult situation.

A resilient teacher can implement supportive strategies when a student is dealing with an adverse situation such as learning a new task, dealing with a learning disability or difficult home life (Churchill et al., 2018, p. 316). Teachers must be able to build the student’s skills to cope with adverse situations and focus on their learning. The Declaration of Educational Goals for Young Australians (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 4) cites resilience as a goal individuals should strive to achieve. It is a capability embedded within the Australian Curriculum, which teachers should foster into their teaching (Churchill et al., 2018, p. 237) to enable students to not only cope with adverse situations at school but in life.

A resilient teacher is motivated and persistent, flexible and adaptable, can manage their emotions, and cope with stress with the support of relationships and support networks. Setting goals enables reflective practices, which strengthen confidence and builds resilience. When a teacher is resilient, their ability to cope with diverse and challenging situations will not only benefit themselves but their students. The BRiTE (Mansfield et al., 2018) modules raise awareness of strategies to implement during challenging situations and highlights the skills needed to ensure the pre-service teacher and students in their care can build resilience.

This assignment is going to critically evaluate the self-help provided in excerpt one based on trauma and stress. It will highlight the positive and negative advice it provides whilst suggesting why this self-help advice is either useful or why these points suggested can be harmful to people suffering from traumatic experiences. It will evaluate these points by using psychological terms which will discuss whether the advice given is effective and how these suggestions can be provided by psychological evidence if not already proven so that they can be successful for the recovery of trauma patients in the future. Examples of psychological terms will include positive psychology and how focusing on resilience may be more effective than trauma psychology (Wager, 2015, p. 149). Contrarily, it will evaluate how functional impairment may become an issue in PTSD patients when looking at creating new social contacts (Wager, 2015, p. 152).

Firstly, as the term resilience is used frequently in excerpt one, resilience can be categorized as positive psychology as resilience focuses on positive thinking (Wager, 2015, p.45). Another alternative used to target trauma sufferers is trauma psychology, however as trauma psychology targets the negative elements of traumatic experiences it may not be as effective as positive psychology (Wager, 2015, p.45). One of the points listed was practicing optimism and controlling your thoughts by switching to positive ones which are one-way excerpt one highlights positive psychology possibly being more effective. Therefore, by focusing on positive thoughts resilience can be exercised and can transform someone’s thought patterns. Nevertheless, even though positive thinking can have a positive outcome for stress and trauma patients, there needs to be more scientific evidence to ensure this can work for most of the population.

One way this can be psychologically tested for effectiveness is to carry out a pre-test and post-test study on two different groups (The Open University, 2021a). Therefore, qualitative evidence such as interviews can be held before and after the treatments of both patient groups, one practicing resilience, and the other participating in trauma psychology, this will allow room for comparisons on who recovers faster and more successfully. A comparison group can be used for the resilience group so that it can be compared to trauma psychology therapy (The Open University, 2021a). The good thing about collecting the effectiveness of practicing optimism from using qualitative interviews is that they provide plenty of detail about the participant and the interviewer can observe how they respond, whether they appear happier after the treatment or no effect afterwards. Whereas with quantitative evidence like questionnaires, it can be limited and harder to uncover the emotional state of participants.

Moreover, another effective self-help point to consider suggested in point two of excerpt one is the acknowledgment of coping resources. As it suggests that creating new coping mechanisms will create a positive impact on a person’s life, putting adaptive coping into practice when building resilience, this will not only welcome positivity, but it will distract the trauma patient from any stressful situations in present circumstances (Wager, 2015, p.149). Therefore, participating in more hobbies like music and meditation, as suggested in excerpt one, will help trauma patients cope with stressful environments and benefit them by focusing on positive commitments as a distraction mechanism during difficult situations.

In contrast, evaluating the non-effective suggestions on building resilience, excerpt one suggests four points that help build resilience. According to Rolbeiki (2017) cited in The Open University (2021b), one point suggested is that creating new social contacts can build resilience. Nevertheless, according to the DSM 5 criteria (2013), cited in Wager (2015) p. 151-152, the PTSD diagnosis suggests that PTSD sufferers can develop functional impairment. This suggests that functional impairment being present may make it difficult for trauma patients to socially interact with new groups of people. The issue with excerpt one is that although meeting new contacts may help gain the confidence of trauma victims, it does not state any advice on how trauma victims can break out of that cycle, and may not be as easy as just creating a new social group.

Moving onto another non-effective suggestion from excerpt one is that it does not touch upon acute reactions. Acute reactions are when limited responses occur during a traumatic experience, due to the shock of a trauma victim preventing a reaction at that present time (The Open University, 2021c). Therefore, the issue with excerpt one is that even though it focuses on gaining resilience by using positive psychology, as everyone’s responses differ it is complicated to apply some basic simple steps so that one shoe fits all sizes. With acute responses to trauma, some traumas may be more challenging to overcome as with acute reactions, the side effects of trauma may not be noticed until a long period after the event, making it more challenging to overcome.

Looking at the suggestion excerpt one gives on taking advantage of the support, according to McElheran cited in The Open University (2021d), having a good bond with the therapist improves the recovery of trauma in patients compared to the skills used to combat trauma. This is because when trauma patient feels comfortable exposing their issues to their therapist, this allows traumatic issues to be solved quickly. Therefore, the suggestion is that seeking extra help will allow a trauma patient to form a good relationship with a suitable therapist that can lead them in the right direction of getting the appropriate help they are required. On the contrary, an improvement in making this advice in excerpt one more effective could be suggesting what type of support is available, as someone new to attending therapy may not know what support to look for.

Evaluating further into excerpt one and an issue that arises is that it suggests how anyone is capable of practicing resilience. According to the American Psychological Association (2020), cited in The Open University,2020b), they state that anyone can practice resilience. This is non-effective because many factors can influence certain therapies negatively. Some of these issues include Iatrogenic disorders where therapies may decrease the recovery of trauma instead and resilience may not be the best therapy for everyone (Wager, 2015, p. 164). Issues to consider may be disabilities or the lack of consent for patients to be involved which make it more challenging for resilience to be practiced (The Open University, 2021e).

Furthermore, in excerpt one, there is advice on how being flexible with life achievements can enhance resilience. According to Meichenbaum (2012), p. 16, flexibility with achievements and being able to accept certain circumstances can lead to strengthening resilience. As excerpt one suggests that being flexible and accepting temporary pain can bring successful recovery after trauma, it has also been suggested by Meichenbaum that these are important requirements for a speedy recovery from the aftereffects of stress and trauma. The book also suggests like excerpt one that being spiritual can help lead resilience in the right direction (Meichenbaum, 2012, p. 18). To elaborate, both suggest that being spiritual can give someone a purpose and an authority to look up to.

On the contrary to becoming spiritual, however, some may not believe in following a religion as it is not scientifically backed up by evidence. Therefore, in the sense of a distraction becoming spiritual may work in helping stress and trauma sufferers, yet as religion is not scientifically backed up, it is difficult to say whether following a higher authority like a religious God will be effective. Therefore, testing the effectiveness of the spirituality suggestion in excerpt one will be a challenge. The only thing that could be tested is whether being involved in a new religion helps the improvement of the gaining resilience as mentioned previously, by using a pre-test-post-test study to compare the results of two groups (The Open University, 2021a). One comparison group could include trauma patients where the first group can focus on strengthening resilience without spirituality using dependant variables and the other group experiment with spirituality as the independent variable. Therefore, the independent variable can be compared alongside the results of the experiment using dependent variables (Sani, et.al, 2006, pp. 10-12).

In conclusion, it seems that excerpt one suggests many effective ways in which trauma and stress patients can build resilience. Many good points to consider were the positive psychology aim and how optimism can provide positive thinking to overcome difficult obstacles, also the mention of coping recourses as it has been proven that adaptive coping accelerates recovery as mentioned in the DSM 5. Evaluating the issues with excerpt one, however, is that not everyone may benefit from the same treatment. This is down to Iatrogenic disorders and disabilities that may differ when practicing resilience. Also touching on the issues of functional impairment, some trauma patients may be not able to socialize the same way as others due to not being able to socialize the same way prior to experiencing trauma. The best way these can be tested for effectiveness is to use pre-test and post-test studies so comparisons can be applied.

This assignment is going to critically evaluate the self-help provided in excerpt one based on trauma and stress. It will highlight the positive and negative advice it provides whilst suggesting why this self-help advice is either useful or why these points suggested can be harmful to people suffering from traumatic experiences. It will evaluate these points by using psychological terms which will discuss whether the advice given is effective and how these suggestions can be provided by psychological evidence if not already proven so that they can be successful for the recovery of trauma patients in the future. Examples of psychological terms will include positive psychology and how focusing on resilience may be more effective than trauma psychology (Wager, 2015, p. 149). Contrarily, it will evaluate how functional impairment may become an issue in PTSD patients when looking at creating new social contacts (Wager, 2015, p. 152).

Firstly, as the term resilience is used frequently in excerpt one, resilience can be categorized as positive psychology as resilience focuses on positive thinking (Wager, 2015, p.45). Another alternative used to target trauma sufferers is trauma psychology, however as trauma psychology targets the negative elements of traumatic experiences it may not be as effective as positive psychology (Wager, 2015, p.45). One of the points listed was practicing optimism and controlling your thoughts by switching to positive ones which are one-way excerpt one highlights positive psychology possibly being more effective. Therefore, by focusing on positive thoughts resilience can be exercised and can transform someone’s thought patterns. Nevertheless, even though positive thinking can have a positive outcome for stress and trauma patients, there needs to be more scientific evidence to ensure this can work for most of the population.

One way this can be psychologically tested for effectiveness is to carry out a pre-test and post-test study on two different groups (The Open University, 2021a). Therefore, qualitative evidence such as interviews can be held before and after the treatments of both patient groups, one practicing resilience, and the other participating in trauma psychology, this will allow room for comparisons on who recovers faster and more successfully. A comparison group can be used for the resilience group so that it can be compared to trauma psychology therapy (The Open University, 2021a). The good thing about collecting the effectiveness of practicing optimism from using qualitative interviews is that they provide plenty of detail about the participant and the interviewer can observe how they respond, whether they appear happier after the treatment or no effect afterwards. Whereas with quantitative evidence like questionnaires, it can be limited and harder to uncover the emotional state of participants.

Moreover, another effective self-help point to consider suggested in point two of excerpt one is the acknowledgment of coping resources. As it suggests that creating new coping mechanisms will create a positive impact on a person’s life, putting adaptive coping into practice when building resilience, this will not only welcome positivity, but it will distract the trauma patient from any stressful situations in present circumstances (Wager, 2015, p.149). Therefore, participating in more hobbies like music and meditation, as suggested in excerpt one, will help trauma patients cope with stressful environments and benefit them by focusing on positive commitments as a distraction mechanism during difficult situations.

In contrast, evaluating the non-effective suggestions on building resilience, excerpt one suggests four points that help build resilience. According to Rolbeiki (2017) cited in The Open University (2021b), one point suggested is that creating new social contacts can build resilience. Nevertheless, according to the DSM 5 criteria (2013), cited in Wager (2015) p. 151-152, the PTSD diagnosis suggests that PTSD sufferers can develop functional impairment. This suggests that functional impairment being present may make it difficult for trauma patients to socially interact with new groups of people. The issue with excerpt one is that although meeting new contacts may help gain the confidence of trauma victims, it does not state any advice on how trauma victims can break out of that cycle, and may not be as easy as just creating a new social group.

Moving onto another non-effective suggestion from excerpt one is that it does not touch upon acute reactions. Acute reactions are when limited responses occur during a traumatic experience, due to the shock of a trauma victim preventing a reaction at that present time (The Open University, 2021c). Therefore, the issue with excerpt one is that even though it focuses on gaining resilience by using positive psychology, as everyone’s responses differ it is complicated to apply some basic simple steps so that one shoe fits all sizes. With acute responses to trauma, some traumas may be more challenging to overcome as with acute reactions, the side effects of trauma may not be noticed until a long period after the event, making it more challenging to overcome.

Looking at the suggestion excerpt one gives on taking advantage of the support, according to McElheran cited in The Open University (2021d), having a good bond with the therapist improves the recovery of trauma in patients compared to the skills used to combat trauma. This is because when trauma patient feels comfortable exposing their issues to their therapist, this allows traumatic issues to be solved quickly. Therefore, the suggestion is that seeking extra help will allow a trauma patient to form a good relationship with a suitable therapist that can lead them in the right direction of getting the appropriate help they are required. On the contrary, an improvement in making this advice in excerpt one more effective could be suggesting what type of support is available, as someone new to attending therapy may not know what support to look for.

Evaluating further into excerpt one and an issue that arises is that it suggests how anyone is capable of practicing resilience. According to the American Psychological Association (2020), cited in The Open University,2020b), they state that anyone can practice resilience. This is non-effective because many factors can influence certain therapies negatively. Some of these issues include Iatrogenic disorders where therapies may decrease the recovery of trauma instead and resilience may not be the best therapy for everyone (Wager, 2015, p. 164). Issues to consider may be disabilities or the lack of consent for patients to be involved which make it more challenging for resilience to be practiced (The Open University, 2021e).

Furthermore, in excerpt one, there is advice on how being flexible with life achievements can enhance resilience. According to Meichenbaum (2012), p. 16, flexibility with achievements and being able to accept certain circumstances can lead to strengthening resilience. As excerpt one suggests that being flexible and accepting temporary pain can bring successful recovery after trauma, it has also been suggested by Meichenbaum that these are important requirements for a speedy recovery from the aftereffects of stress and trauma. The book also suggests like excerpt one that being spiritual can help lead resilience in the right direction (Meichenbaum, 2012, p. 18). To elaborate, both suggest that being spiritual can give someone a purpose and an authority to look up to.

On the contrary to becoming spiritual, however, some may not believe in following a religion as it is not scientifically backed up by evidence. Therefore, in the sense of a distraction becoming spiritual may work in helping stress and trauma sufferers, yet as religion is not scientifically backed up, it is difficult to say whether following a higher authority like a religious God will be effective. Therefore, testing the effectiveness of the spirituality suggestion in excerpt one will be a challenge. The only thing that could be tested is whether being involved in a new religion helps the improvement of the gaining resilience as mentioned previously, by using a pre-test-post-test study to compare the results of two groups (The Open University, 2021a). One comparison group could include trauma patients where the first group can focus on strengthening resilience without spirituality using dependant variables and the other group experiment with spirituality as the independent variable. Therefore, the independent variable can be compared alongside the results of the experiment using dependent variables (Sani, et.al, 2006, pp. 10-12).

In conclusion, it seems that excerpt one suggests many effective ways in which trauma and stress patients can build resilience. Many good points to consider were the positive psychology aim and how optimism can provide positive thinking to overcome difficult obstacles, also the mention of coping recourses as it has been proven that adaptive coping accelerates recovery as mentioned in the DSM 5. Evaluating the issues with excerpt one, however, is that not everyone may benefit from the same treatment. This is down to Iatrogenic disorders and disabilities that may differ when practicing resilience. Also touching on the issues of functional impairment, some trauma patients may be not able to socialize the same way as others due to not being able to socialize the same way prior to experiencing trauma. The best way these can be tested for effectiveness is to use pre-test and post-test studies so comparisons can be applied.

Introduction

Resilience and the ‘at risk’ paradigm are both widely used frameworks that help address health issues in youth. Both have been used to help youth with addressing the issues found in sexual health. Therefore, the purpose of this essay will be to define the two paradigms, explain how they link to health, compare the main ideas, explain the shift towards resilience, focus on a health promotion program and trend and how it uses the resilience paradigm.

Define the paradigms

The ‘at risk’ paradigm Is referred to as the risk and protective framework (Hanewald, 2011). This paradigm uses risk factors as the main source to make prevention strategies (France, Freiberg & Homel, 2010). Therefore, the paradigm aims to reduce the risks and future problems in youth as barriers to achievement of good health (France, Freiberg & Homel, 2010). At risk students can have poor school performance which can cause disadvantaged students to not receive the proper education regarding health (Schonert-Reichl, 2000). Hanewald (2011) study found that failing boys in school had risk factors such as coming from low income homes, larger families, and having criminal parents. This study meant that to address issues they needed to find intervention to limit the risks the boys were having on their academic success. The risk factors of having poor academic success and higher dropout rates can influence youth’s future employment. Poor education can lead to unattainable employment which then influences socioeconomic status, knowledge of health issue, and access to services Furthermore, resulting in disadvantages towards their health due to having higher risk factors in comparison to their peers. Resilience in youth means they can bounce back and recover from disruptive change and misfortune (Hanewald, 2011). Resilience uses strengths and skill to provide individuals with the strategies to adapt from risk factors. The difference between the two paradigms are that instead of focusing on the risk and limiting them, the resilience paradigm uses those factors to promote resilience outcomes to promote positive development (Lee, Kwong Cheung, Ungar & Cheung, 2010 as cited in Hanewald, 2011). Moreover, identifying those risk factors and using them as means to create resiliency rather than trying to limit those factors can be more effective. For example, a positive teacher who can help with academic success for those who come from disadvantaged homes can promote resiliency instead of using their poor home life as barrier to better academics. Using interventions to promote resilience can help manage youth exposure to risks through coping strategies and skills. Both paradigms main ideas are to promote health in youth by identifying the risk factors that cause youth to be disadvantaged. The ‘at-risk’ paradigm does this by reducing these risk and placing interventions in too limit the risk factors, while the resilience paradigm instead uses the risk factors to give the students the skill to become resilient so they can bounce back and continue having positive development.

The shift towards the resilience paradigm

Over the years, the ‘at risk’ paradigm was the popular framework used to improve health in youth. Farringtion, (2002); Hawkins et al., (2002) as cited in France, Freiberg & Homel (2010) study found that during the 1990’s that youth have multiple risk factors which influence health which led to new prevention research being completed. The ‘at risk’ paradigms uses early intervention has its key policy, in comparison to the resilience framework which is adapted off the ‘at risk’ paradigm and uses risk factors to promote resilience and strengthen youth by providing knowledge and skill (Schonert-Reichl, 2000). The shift from the ‘at risk’ paradigm is seen through the risk factors and protective factors of youth health. The resilience framework aims to use risk factors as way to develop health in youth. Therefore, risk factors influence how youth adapt and become resilient to adversity rather than limiting the risk (Schonert-Reichl, 2000). This framework also allows for all youth to be focused on instead of just the youth who are considered ‘at risk’. This shifts the focus from the ‘at risk’ paradigm which focuses on disadvantaged youth to the resilience paradigm which indicates that all youth experience risk factors but can be used to positively influence their health (Schonert-Reichl, 2000). Resilience builds on individuals’ strengths and is an essential feature to address risks. This can be done through multiple ways such as through the individual, school, and family context. The individual can get resilience through life skills and self-efficacy (Zollkoski, & Bullock, 2012). They are multiple programs that help foster resilience at an individual level by promoting life skills through training programs (Botvin & griffin 2002 as cited in Zollkoski & Bullock, 2012). School based environments help to reduce the risk factors with academic success. Youth spend a lot of time at school; therefore, teachers should promote resilience strategies by having supportive peers, positive teacher influences and opportunities for success (Zollkoski, & Bullock, 2012). Finally, family situations can also influence youth resilience such as poverty, teenage pregnancies, and single parent homes (France, Freiberg & Homel, 2010). Therefore, families need to create positive parent and child attachment that promotes warmth and encouragement to face these risk factors and help foster resilience in youth. There are many programs that help youth and parents develop communication skills so they can adapt to risk factors that may influence their health negatively and create resilience to these issues.

Analysing the chosen youth health program

The positive adolescent sexual health conference known as PASH is a conference held in North Coast of NSW. Sex education is the primary strategy used to teach youth about sexual health but 50% of students found to be dissatisfied with the curriculum. Therefore, PASH was introduced to close the gap in sexual health education. PASH program is to addresses the gaps to increase sexual knowledge and providing skills to youth will help foster resilience. This health program is annual conference help to improve sexual health in youth based on health promotion models and the positive youth development model (Crocker, Pit, Hansen, John-Leader, & Wright, 2019). Its aim is to help youth over the age of 15 to adopt resilience strategies that promote and build their confidence, skills, and knowledge for sex, sexuality, and sexual health services (Crocker et al., 2019). The conference helps youth gain these skills by having young people involved along with parents, teachers, community, and sexual health professionals. Crocker et al. (2019) found that 13% of youth reported using no protection during sex, 15% using the withdrawal method and over half of the students who reported being sexually active using a condom. Therefore, this means education in sex needs to be more in depth to promote positive sexual health behaviours and foster resilience. PASH incorporates this through promoting supportive environments, strengthen school and family relationships, building skills and empowering youth. They apply this by using a positive approach that will strengthen youth’s sexual health literacy and allow for open discussions about sexually transmitted infections and contraception (Crocker et al., 2019). The program applies this through workshops, open discussion, information, and practical activities. Crocker et al. (2019) states that workshops and open discussions were done through peer and youth led groups and sexual health professional which provided normalisation of the topic of sex and breaking down the barriers and risks. The involvement of teachers and parents was included in workshops so they could gain an understanding of youth experiences of sexual health to gain a better understanding and knowledge on the poor health issues youth face (Crocker et al., 2019).The success of this health promotion can be seen through an increase of sexual health literacy in different ways. The program providing supportive and open environments improved youth engagement by receiving information through sexual health professionals (Crocker et al., 2019). Empowering youth can be seen in multiple studies as effective way to improve sexual health literacy, build awareness, confidence, and skills (Crocker et al., 2019). Furthermore, having support systems to help foster resilience through providing workshops for not only youth but for the teacher and parents promotes increased knowledge of the outcomes in sexual health. The health promotion program has shown success but has stated that it is too early on to determine how effective the program is long term.

The ‘at risk’ paradigm health program.

Shafii (2019) conducted a study on 14-24-year-old ‘s who had unprotected vaginal sex in the last 2 months. This study used the ‘at risk’ paradigm through an interactive computer intervention to reduce the risk of unprotected sex, sexually transmitted infections, and unwanted pregnancy. The program aims to target protective interventions such as condom use, sexually transmitted infections prevention, birth control and pregnancy prevention (Shafii, 2019). The program is to identify the risk factors and provide interventions to limit the risks for the individual. The computer program used risk and protective factors that were influenced off the individual’s response to the question. This then influenced the feedback that was provided to the individual such as suggesting the use of condoms when having unprotected sex. Furthermore, this program only focused on providing youth with interventions strategies to limit the risk instead of educating them on the risks to adapt and become resilient. The program ran for 3 month and had found to be little significant difference in unprotected sex, number of partners, sexually transmitted infections, and unintended pregnancy (Shafii, 2019). The program had also found to have engagement levels drop with some individuals not returning for follow up session (Shafii, 2019).

Comparing the success

The use of resilience helps youth increase their sexual health knowledge and skills when it comes to the risks. Rather then focusing on the risk factors and how to limit them. Educating youth and providing them with the skills to bounce back from these risk events can help positively improve their health. Youth being educated on the risks such as sexually transmitted infections and by providing them with tools and skills to use in their future will prevent them from becoming at risk of these issues. An example of this is providing them with resources to seek help and educate them to get tested and the symptoms of sexually transmitted infections as seen in the PASH conference. The program that adapted resilience had shown to increase knowledge and awareness around sexual health (Crocker et al., 2019) In comparison to the ‘at risk’ program which showed little change to the risk behaviours and only gave the interventions to the risk rather then educating them on why they should adopt these interventions.

Conclusion

To conclude, 50% of students expressed dissatisfaction in the sex education curriculum (Crocker et al., 2019). The resilience program has shown that to increase sexual health knowledge it should be provided through engaging supportive environments that empower youth through community involvement. PASH address this through workshops, discussion and activities that are held by youth groups and sexual health professional that have sessions for school youth, teachers, and parents (Crocker et al., 2019). Therefore, addressing the gaps in sex education that schools or parents are unable to provide to promote resilience rather than just limiting the risks. Crocker et al. (2019) study found there had been increase in sexual health literacy among youth through the program. Furthermore, resilience has shown to be a more effective framework that positively influences and strengths youth knowledge and health. Resilience paradigm Is important to ensure youth across all stages of life are given the right strategies too protect and allow for them to adapt to disadvantages in life. Moreover, the resilience paradigm should be adopted in more health promotion programs as an effective strategy to engage and promote health in youth to provide them with the skills to bounce back from risks rather then limiting their risks. Therefore, proving that the resilience paradigm is a better framework to assess and promote good sexual health in youth but instead of eliminating risk factors use them to become resilient adults.

References

1. Crocker, B.C.S, Pit, S.W., Hansen, V., John-Leader, F., & Wright, M.L. (2019). A positive approach to adolescent sexual health promotion: a qualitative evaluation of key stake holder perceptions of the Australian positive adolescent sexual health (PASH) conference. BMC Public Health, 19(1).
2. France, A., Freiberg, K., & Homel, R. (2010). Beyond Risk Factors: Towards a Holistic Prevention Paradigm for Children and Young People. British Journal of Social Work, 1–19.
3. Hanewald, R. (2011). Reviewing the literature on “At- Risk” and resilient children and young people. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2).
4. Schonert-Reichl, K.A. (2000). Children and youth at risk: Some conceptual considerations. In Children and Youth at Risk. Ottawa, Canada: Pan-Canadian Education Research Agenda Symposium.
5. Shafii, T., Benson S.K., Morrison D.M., Hughes J.P., Golden M.R., & Holmes K.K. (2019) Results from e-KISS: electronic-KIOSK Intervention for Safer Sex: A pilot randomized controlled trial of an interactive computer-based intervention for sexual health in adolescents and young adults. PLoS ONE, 14(1).
6. Zollkoski, S, M., & Bullock, L.M. (2012). Resilience in children and youth: a review. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(12), 2295-2303.