Indonesian StudentsSocial-Emotional Intelligence

Evaluation Program

Haykal Hafizul2015

This paper is presented for Prof. Renny

Foreword

• I have certain limitation that I can’t operationalizespirituality in one week

• I’ve studied more than 20 research articles and I decide I can’t take a risk to propose a study about religiosity/spirituality in context of educational system

• So I conclude that I will present you recent paradigm, critical-view, and my personal idea about social-emotional curricula in Indonesia only

Social Intelligence

• Social intelligence is perceived as a personality feature, and one of the possible approaches to its examination and determination is the behavioral situational concept

– (Frankovský, Štefko, Baumgartner, 2006; Baumgartner, Frankovský, 2004)

Emotional Intelligence

• According to Porvazník (2007) emotional intelligence is connected with qualities of the person, their character, temperament, perceptive, creative and physical (somatic) dispositions.

• Social interactions in everyday life and relationships are based mainly on social and emotional intelligence – their improvement can prevent from existence of many conflicts (Vavrová, 2009).

Well-developed socio-psychological competences, according to

Jurková, Ferencová (2010), accelerate adaptation to concrete environment and

enable active working.

The Social-EmotionalIntelligence

• Holková, Gyurák Babeľová, Vaňová (2008) agree with opinion that development of these competences depend on level of ability to absorb new knowledge and put them into practice.

• According to Droppa (2008) development of an individual requires careful study of the surroundings; interpersonal qualities and study of opinions of others, effort to understand them, support for mutual bonds, teambuilding, orientation to further development and helping others in their development consists mainly in education, as well as development of other

social-emotional competence.

Measuring SE-I

• TSIS- Tromso Social Intelligence Scale (Silvera, Martinussen, & Dahl, 2001) consists of 21 self-evaluation items to which the respondents respond on a 7-point scale of the agreement degree (1-describes me very poorly 7-describes me very well). The questionnaire is divided into 3 subscales which enable specification of 3 factors:– 1) SP-social information processing (e.g. I can easily understand social

situations.)– 2) SS-social skills (e.g. I am successful in establishing new

relationships.)– 3) SA-social awareness (e.g. I am often surprised how other people

react to my actions.)

• The internal validity of these factors is given as follows: SP-0.79, SS-0.85 and SA-0.72 (Silvera, Martinussen, Dahl, 2001). The factors of the scale statistically significantly intercorrelate

The New Dimension ofSE-I

• The factor analysis extracted 3 social intelligence factors (Figure 1, Table 2) which were labeled:– 1) Manipulation: People who have higher scores in this factor are able

to persuade others to do almost anything. They can use others for their own benefit and persuade them to take their side. They use the lives of others for their own advantage.

– 2) Empathy: Individuals with higher scores in this factor are able to recognize the intentions, feelings, and weaknesses of other people. They can adapt to new people, guess their wishes as well as fulfill them. Empathy is characterized in the context of definitions as stated by Chen (2008).

– 3) Social irritability: Persons characterized by higher scores in this factor are nervous in contact with other people. Feelings of others baffle them, adapting to other people is a problem for them. Weaknesses and wishes of others confuse them. They become nervous around people who are willing to do anything for them.

Measurement of Projected SE-I

Factor Analysis

The Problem• We can’t trust subjective-judgment of

teachers nowadays!!

• We live in a country where the people are constantly faking their responses!!

• We can’t trust reliable and valid instrument in Indonesia. Every test can be manipulated here!

The Problem

1. We need an objective assessment tools that can standardize teachers evaluation towards Indonesian students Social-Emotional domain of Intelligence across provinces

2. We need direct-observational data to conclude such emotional intelligence of students provided by their teacher.

3. By providing the guide, we can reduce the error of evaluating students performance due to teacher’s bias of intuitive judgment

So How can Teacher Evaluate His Students?

We use a systematic observation!

Determine each students Social-Competence!– The Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire

(ICQ; Buhrmester, Furman, Wittenberg, & Reis, 1988) is a 40-item measure which assesses five separate domains of social competence

– This Inventory can be used as your baseline!

Social CompetenceStandardized Content

(Buhrmester, Furman, Wittenberg, & Reis, 1988)

• Initiation – Finding and suggesting things to do with new people whom, you find interesting and attractive.– Introducing yourself to someone you might like to get to know.– Calling (on the phone) a new acquaintance to set up a time to get together and do something.

• Negative assertion – Confronting your close companion when he/she has broken a promise.– Telling a companion that he/she has done something to hurt your feelings.– Telling a date/acquaintance that he/she has done something that made you angry.

• Emotional support– Helping a close companion get to the heart of the problem he/she is experiencing.– Being able to say and do things to support a close companion when she/he is feeling down.– When a close companion needs help and support, being able to give advice in ways that are well received.

• Disclosure– Confiding in a new friend/date and letting him/her see your softer, more sensitive side.– Letting a new companion get to know the ‘‘real’’ you. – Letting down your productive ‘‘outer shell’’ and trusting a close companion.

• Conflict management – Being able to admit that you might be wrong when a disagreement with a close companion begins to build

into a serious fight.– Being able to take a companion’s perspective in a fight and really understand his or her point of view.– Not exploding at a close companion (even when it’s justified) in order to avoid a damaging conflict.

A systematic ways to assess this competence:

Make students Involved in Project!A WORK CONTEXT!

Make students work as a team!

Hafizul SynthesesThe Classroom Projects

1st Quartile

• Create a class project for a semester

• Conduct a brainstorming phase. Involve all students in the class

Middle Term

• Create a communication chain and clear Job-desc for each students based on the project

• Provide an emotional evaluation milestones in the middle of project

End of Term

• Provide final evaluation in the end of project, let them assess each other via peer evaluations. Asses their responses towards the evaluation.

Summary of Teacher’s Role

Social Competence

1st Evaluation

Create

1. Classroom Organizational Structure

2. Brain-Storming

3. Project Timeline

2nd Evaluation

Create

1. Students project progress

2. Students Communication-Satisfaction

3. Open Appreciation and Critique phase for each students

3rd Evaluation

Create

1. Students Final Product

2. Students Peer Evaluation

(Make students evaluate each others)

Teacher should..

1. Mediate each evaluation phases using Social-Competence scale for each students

2. Rate each students social-emotional performance in evaluation phases only

3. Make sure that all students involved and commit until the end term of project

4. Make an objective inter-rater analysis (at least with wali-kelas 2)

Teacher’s Job on the project!

1st Quartile• Rate their Initiation!

Middle Term

• Rate their Conflict management and Negative Assertions!

End of Term

• Rate their Emotional Support and Disclosure!

The Social CompetenceInventory

This is the sample Inventory for Initiation in 1st Evaluation

Conclusion

• By evaluating students social competence, we can objectively judge students social-emotional intelligence (high/low)

• By coding the presence of behavior for each phase, we can rationalize and compare the ability of each students social-emotional ability (above average/under average)

• By Inter-rater analysis, we can measure the average of rater evaluation towards each students

Shall we?

Reference

• Bar-On, R. (2003). How important is it to educate people to be emotionally and socially intelligent, and can it be done? Perspectives in Education, 21(4), 3-13.

• Baumgartner, F., Frankovský, M. (2004). Possibilities of a situational approach to social intelligence research. Studia Psychologica, 46, 4, 273-277.• Birknerová, Z. (2010). Aspekty sociálnej a emocionálnej inteligencie v praxi. In Manažment podnikania a vecí verejných – dialógy. Bratislava: Slovenská

akadémia manažmentu, o.z., č.12/2010, V. ročník, s.7-18.• Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (2000). Social Intelligence – Empathy = Aggression? Aggresion and Violent Behavior, 5, 2, 191-200.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(98)00029-9• Droppa, M. (2008). Riadenie ľudských zdrojov 1. Ružomberok: Katolícka univerzita v Ružomberku, Pedagogická fakulta, 130 s.• Ford, M. E., & Tisak, M. S. (1983). A further search for social intelligence. Journal of Education psychology, 75, 196-206

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.75.2.196• Frankovský, M., Štefko, R., & Baumgartner, F. (2006). Behavioral-situational approach to examinig social inteligence. Studia Psychologica, 48, 3, 251-

258.• Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books, 440 s.• Goleman, D. (1997). Emoční inteligence: Proč muže být emoční inteligence duležitejší než IQ. Praha: Columbus, 348 s.• Holková, A., Gyurák Babeľová, Z., Vaňová, J. (2008). Manažérske kompetencie. Research papers Faculty of Materials Science and Technology Slovak

University of Technology in Trnava. č. 25, s. 57-61.• Jurková, J., Ferencová, M. (2010). The opportunities for increasing the marketing communication efficiency on the university education market. In

Management 2010. (Part I.) Prešov: University of Prešov in Prešov, p. 435-443.• Kaukiainen, A., Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., Lagerspetz, K, & Forsblom, S. (1995). Peer-Estimated Social Intelligence (PESI). Turku, Finland: Department

of Psychology, University of Turku.• Kihlstrom, J. F., & Cantor, N. (2000). Social Intelligence. [Online] Available: http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/social_ intelligence.htm.• Makovská, Z., & Kentoš, M. (2006). Correlates of social and abstract intelligence. Studia Psychologica: an International Journal for Research and Theory

in Psychological Sciences, vol. 48, no. 3, p. 259-264.• Orosová, O., et al. (2004). Sociálna inteligencia, sociálna kompetencia– definície a prístupy v ich skúmaní. Československá psychologie 2004, ročník

XLVIII, číslo 4, s.306-315. Petrides, K. V., Furnham, A. (2006). The role of trait emotional intelligence in a gender-specific model of organizational variables. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 552-569. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00019.x

• Porvazník, J. (2007). Celostný manažment, 3. prepracované a doplnené vydanie. Žilina: Poradca podnikateľa, 540 s.• Račková, M. (2010). Vybrané kapitoly zo psychológie. Abeceda psychológie pre technikov. Košice: TUKE, Katedra spoločenských vied, 123 s.• Ruisel, I. (1999). Inteligencia a osobnosť. Bratislava: Veda, 239 s.• Schulze, R., & Roberts, R. D. (2007). Emoční inteligence. Přehled základních přístupu a aplikací. Praha: Portál.• Silvera, D. H., Martinussen, M., & Dahl, T. (2001). The Thomso Social Intelligence Scale, a self-report measure of Social Intelligence. Scandinavian

Journal of Psychology, 42, 313-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9450.00242• Vávrová, S. (2009). Význam emoční inteligence pro rozvoj kompetencí sociálního pedagóga. Sociálnípedagogika ve střední Europě, současný stav a

perspektívy. Brno: IMS, s. 600-608.