Dokumentationsprojektet: Kommunernes omstilling til øget inklusion pr. marts 2014

Denne rapport udgør en redegørelse for status på inklusionsprocessen i tolv danske kommuner pr. marts 2014. Den samlede undersøgelse, der går under navnet ’Dokumentationsprojektet’, løber i tre år og blev givet til et konsortium bestående af Aarhus Universitet og SFI den 16. januar 2013

Dokumentationsprojektet: Kommunernes omstilling til øget inklusion pr. marts 2015

Denne rapport er den afsluttende redegørelse for status på inklusionsprocessen i tolv danske kommuner pr. marts 2015. Den samlede undersøgelse, der går under navnet ’Dokumentationsprojektet’, har løbet over årene 2013-2015 og blev givet til et konsortium bestående af Aarhus Universitet og SFI den 16. januar 2013

Dokumentationsprojektet: Kommunernes omstilling til øget inklusion pr. marts 2013

Denne rapport udgør en redegørelse for status for inklusionsprocessen i tolv danske kommuner pr. marts 2013. Den samlede undersøgelse, der går under navnet ’Dokumentationsprojektet’, løber i tre år og blev givet til et konsortium bestående af Aarhus Universitet og SFI den 16. januar 2013, og der har derfor været meget kort tid til at få indsamlet og behandlet de nødvendige data, bl.a. fordi der i den korte periode indgik både en vinterferie, en påskeferie og en influenzaepidemi. De udvalgte kommuner har ikke desto mindre alle stillet positivt op til et samarbejde, men det viste sig, at indsamlingen af data fra skoleledere, skolebestyrelsesformænd, lærere og elever blev påvirket af en meget kort tidsramme for indtastning, forhandlinger om overenskomst, og besvarelsesprocenterne er derfor under det, der kunne ønskes

How Can Social Workers Assess Clinically Meaningful Change in Their Clients? An Example from Children in Care

Social workers use interventions in the expectation that they will make a positive difference for their clients. However, research about the effectiveness of interventions is typically presented at the group level, which places great demands on social workers’ ability to apply such results to the needs of individual clients. Further, the content and effects of “service as usual” (SAU) interventions that social workers typically offer are often not known, making it difficult for social workers to identify what aspects of the intervention any client change can be attributed to. Using indicators of clinically meaningful change (CMC) strengthens social workers’ ability to identify what, if anything, works in any given intervention for their individual clients, and also motivates their curiosity to identify the efficacious components of SAU. CMC refers to changes in an individual’s outcome measures that are reliable or are large enough to be considered “important.” We present five indicators to analyze CMC in a child’s psychological well-being measured with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and illustrate their use with two empirical examples from the project Me and My Foster Family. The examples demonstrated that conclusions regarding CMC can vary depending on the indicator used, the baseline assessment, and the magnitude of raw-score change on the measured outcome. To assess change at the individual level it is important to address questions of measurement reliability and the yardstick for judging when a change is large enough to be considered “important.” Implications for research and practice are discussed

A Systematic Review of Some Reliability and Validity Issues regarding the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Focusing on Its Use in Out-of-Home Care

Purpose: A systematic review was conducted to analyze the inter-rater reliability, cross-informant consistency, test-retest reliability, and temporal stability of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and its ability to discriminate. Method: We searched three databases for articles about the SDQ (parent, teacher, and self-report version), used samples of children up to age 18 and reported inter-rater reliability, cross-informant reliability, test-retest reliability, temporal stability, specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results: Focusing on the TDS, inter-rater, and cross-informant reliability showed acceptable values, but respondent types (e.g., mothers and fathers) are not interchangeable. Test-retest reliability and temporal stability were also acceptable, and not excessively high. Specificity and NPV were acceptable but not sensitivity and PPV. Discussion and Conclusion: Greater transparency is needed about who the respondent is when the term “parents” is used. The SDQ is an important supplement to service-as-usual assessments by social care professionals

What democracy means to citizens – and why it matters.” Revista Europea de Estudios Latinoamericanos y del Caribe 76

What do citizens think of when they hear the word 'democracy'? Recent studies have focused on precisely this question and its implications for survey research. In particular, several scholars have critiqued traditional survey measures of citizens' support for democracy, arguing that these measures are ambiguous and lead respondents to evaluate democracy according to very different criteria 2 While recent work indicates that individuals conceptualize democracy in a variety of ways Our data are uniquely suited to examine these issues. From May through August 2001, we administered written questionnaires to several samples in Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Guatemala. The core of these questionnaires consisted of openended questions, asking respondents to list the things they liked and did not like about democracy in their countries. As these countries vary dramatically in their levels of income, education, urbanization, and ethnic composition, the resulting sample provides a diverse cross-section of citizens in Latin America. 5 Our survey questionnaire is useful for examining citizens' attitudes in greater depth, particularly since it included open-ended questions that gave respondents the opportunity to discuss democracy in their own words. While our data do not allow us to make inferences to the respective populations of each country, they do permit an in-depth examination of how various people think about the functioning of democracy in their countries. Such an examination sheds light on the ways in which people conceive of democracy, and can greatly improve the future construction and implementation of representative, national probability surveys of Latin America in the future. Our analysis has three main parts. First, we identify the various attributes citi

What Democracy Means to Citizens – and Why It Matters

Recent survey research indicates that democracy  means different things to different people. For  some, democracy is a method of selecting leaders,  protecting civil liberties and political rights, and  upholding the rule of law. Other citizens have  more expansive views of democracy, viewing it as  a mechanism for promoting social equality and  economic growth, for example. While such studies provide strong evidence that the concept ‘democracy’ is multidimensional, to date scholars  have not explained why citizens think of democracy in myriad ways, and whether such differences matter. We aim to address these issues  using data gathered from field research in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Guatemala in 2001.  Through open-ended questions, we asked diverse groups of respondents what democracy meant to  them. Relying upon answers to these questions,  we attempt to explain why respondents had such  varying views of democracy, and examine the  implications these conceptualizations of democracy have for regime stability.  Resumen: Qué significa la  democracia para los ciudadanos y por qué es importanteRecientes investigaciones basadas en encuestas de  opinión pública revelan que la democracia significa diferentes cosas según de quién se trate. Para  algunos, la democracia es un método para elegir  líderes, proteger las libertades civiles y los derechos políticos, y mantener el estado de derecho.  Otros ciudadanos tienen visiones más amplias de  la democracia, y la ven, por ejemplo, como un  mecanismo para promover la igualdad social y el  crecimiento económico. Aunque estos estudios  ofrecen pruebas fuertes de que el concepto ‘democracia’ es multi-dimensional, hasta ahora los investigadores no han explicado por qué los ciudadanos piensan de maneras tan variadas, y si  estas diferencias importan. En este estudio, nuestra meta es abordar este tema utilizando datos  recogidos en el trabajo de campo realizado en  Argentina, Brasil, Chile y Guatemala en 2001. A  través de preguntas abiertas, preguntamos a diversos grupos de entrevistados qué significa la democracia para ellos. Basándonos en las respuestas  obtenidas, intentamos explicar por qué los entrevistados tenían visiones tan distintas de la democracia, y examinamos las implicancias de estas  diversas conceptualizaciones de la democracia  para la estabilidad del régimen democrático

What Democracy Means to Citizens – and Why It Matters

Recent survey research indicates that democracy  means different things to different people. For  some, democracy is a method of selecting leaders,  protecting civil liberties and political rights, and  upholding the rule of law. Other citizens have  more expansive views of democracy, viewing it as  a mechanism for promoting social equality and  economic growth, for example. While such studies provide strong evidence that the concept ‘democracy’ is multidimensional, to date scholars  have not explained why citizens think of democracy in myriad ways, and whether such differences matter. We aim to address these issues  using data gathered from field research in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Guatemala in 2001.  Through open-ended questions, we asked diverse groups of respondents what democracy meant to  them. Relying upon answers to these questions,  we attempt to explain why respondents had such  varying views of democracy, and examine the  implications these conceptualizations of democracy have for regime stability.  Resumen: Qué significa la  democracia para los ciudadanos y por qué es importanteRecientes investigaciones basadas en encuestas de  opinión pública revelan que la democracia significa diferentes cosas según de quién se trate. Para  algunos, la democracia es un método para elegir  líderes, proteger las libertades civiles y los derechos políticos, y mantener el estado de derecho.  Otros ciudadanos tienen visiones más amplias de  la democracia, y la ven, por ejemplo, como un  mecanismo para promover la igualdad social y el  crecimiento económico. Aunque estos estudios  ofrecen pruebas fuertes de que el concepto ‘democracia’ es multi-dimensional, hasta ahora los investigadores no han explicado por qué los ciudadanos piensan de maneras tan variadas, y si  estas diferencias importan. En este estudio, nuestra meta es abordar este tema utilizando datos  recogidos en el trabajo de campo realizado en  Argentina, Brasil, Chile y Guatemala en 2001. A  través de preguntas abiertas, preguntamos a diversos grupos de entrevistados qué significa la democracia para ellos. Basándonos en las respuestas  obtenidas, intentamos explicar por qué los entrevistados tenían visiones tan distintas de la democracia, y examinamos las implicancias de estas  diversas conceptualizaciones de la democracia  para la estabilidad del régimen democrático