Abstract: The Unintended Consequences of Targeting: Young People's Lived Experiences of Targeted Social and Emotional Learning Interventions (Society for Prevention Research 23rd Annual Meeting)

427 The Unintended Consequences of Targeting: Young People's Lived Experiences of Targeted Social and Emotional Learning Interventions

Schedule:
Friday, May 29, 2015
Lexington (Hyatt Regency Washington)
* noted as presenting author
Rhiannon E Evans, PhD, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales
Introduction/Background: In recent years there has been a proliferation of targeted, school-based social and emotional learning (SEL) interventions. However, the lived experience of young people’s participation is often elided, whilst the potential for interventions to confer unintended and even adverse effects remains under-theorised and empirically under-explored. This paper reports finding from a qualitative case-study of students’ participation in a targeted SEL intervention, the Student Assistance Programme. 

Methods: Data was generated with four socio-economically and academically contrasting secondary schools in Wales, UK, with 41 students (age 12-14) taking part in participation observation (n=32 sessions) and focus groups (n=6). 

Findings: Students’ identification for participation in the intervention, combined with their reaction to the group composition, may lead to harmful effects. Four iatrogenic processes were identified: 1) identification may be experienced as negative labelling, resulting in rejection of the school; 2) the label of SEL failure may serve as a powerful form of intervention capital, being employed to enhance students’ status amongst peers. Possession of this capital is contingent on continued resistance of the intervention; 3) targeting of discrete friendship groups may lead to the construction of intervention ‘outsiders’ as students seek safety through the reification of pre-existing relationships; 4) students may seek to renegotiate positioning within targeted friendship groups by ‘bragging’ about and reinforcing anti-school activities, leading to deviancy amplification. 

Conclusions: These iatrogenic processes are not intended to suggest the complete abandonment of targeted interventions per se, but rather that intervention referral and composition needs to be carefully considered and crafted.