rev. psicogente; 21 (40), 2018
Publication year: 2018
Resumen Objetivo:
Analizar y comparar factores de resiliencia en docentes de nivel primario de la provincia de Mendoza, Argentina, quienes se desempeñaban en contextos con características de vulnerabilidad social y sin ella. A partir de los aportes teóricos de Henderson y Milstein, se consideraron las variables: participación significativa, conducta prosocial, autoestima-aprendizaje y percepción de apoyo. Método:
Se realizó un estudio mixto, descriptivo-comparativo, con diseño no experimental, y transversal. La muestra contó con 66 docentes, de los cuales 34 trabajaban en contextos socialmente vulnerables, y 32 en contextos sin vulnerabilidad. Los instrumentos utilizados fueron:
la Escala de Resiliencia Docente y una Entrevista ad hoc. Resultados:
Indicaron diferencias significativas en el factor conducta prosocial, presentando puntajes más altos los docentes de contextos vulnerables, y una tendencia a la significación en los factores percepción de apoyo y participación significativa, a favor del mismo grupo. Esto señala la importancia del apoyo mutuo, el trabajo en equipo y el respaldo institucional como factores protectores. Conclusiones:
Las características adversas del contexto pueden generar riesgos y dificultades en el quehacer; simultáneamente, funcionan como potenciadoras de procesos de resiliencia.
Abstract Objective:
This paper aims to analyze and compare factors of resilience in primary level teachers who perform in context with and without social vulnerability features, from Provincia de Mendoza, Argentina. This study is based on theoretical contributions of Henderson and Milstein, the variables considered were as follows: meaningful involvement, pro-social behavior, self-steem, learning and support perception. Method:
This study was conducted based on a quantitative, descriptive and comparative method, and non-experimental and transverse design. 66 teachers were sampled, as follow: 34 of them were working in socially vulnerable contexts and 32 teachers were working on contexts without vulnerability. Teacher Resilience Scale and a Semi-structured Interview were used as instruments. Result:
Significant differences in pro-social behavior factors were evident, where teachers in vulnerable contexts show higher scores and a trend towards significance on perceived support and meaningful participation factor, in favor of their own group. These results show the importance of mutual support, teamwork and institutional support as protective factors. Conclusions:
The adverse context features can generate risks and difficulties on teachers' daily work simultaneously; these features function as enhancing resilience processes.