Supplementary notes further explaining my presentation on A Cross-Cultural Perspective of Resilience It also compares and contrast how mindsets, social support and school involvement influence resilience development in Chinese and Western students.

1. Page 1 of 11
How Resilience is Developed in Chinese and Western Students: A
Comparison and Reflection of Implications for Teachers in Their Teaching
Practice.
Introduction
In the 21st century, students face intense academic and job competition. In order to
alleviate stress and thrive in this environment, children require resilience – the capacity for
and the ability to effectively manage and adapt to adversity (Windle, 2011). Resilience is
linked to greater academic performance (Mwangi et al., 2015) and better mental health
(Rajabi et al., 2014). Once widely understood to be an innate characteristic (Cohler, 1987),
views have changed since the development of the socio-ecological theory of resilience
(Ungar, Ghazinour and Richter, 2013). This theory suggests that resilience is an
amalgamation of the individual’s access to environmental resources, such as social
support, and the individual’s willingness and ability to utilise these resources (Ungar,
Ghazinour and Richter, 2013). Therefore, resilience is currently understood to be
influenced by both the individual and the sociocultural environment (Jefferis and Theron,
2017). Great emphasis therefore has been placed on identifying protective factors and risk
factors within individuals and their environments (Ni, Li and Zhao, 2014). Protective factors
are resources that help students cope with challenging situations (Rutter, 2012) and risk
factors are characteristics that increase students’ probability of experiencing adverse
outcomes (Diehl, Hay and Chui, 2012). However, most studies are based on Western
samples (Theron, 2016) and the generalisability of these findings to students of other
cultures is questionable.
Hence, my focus in this paper is to firstly, compare and contrast how mindsets, social
support and school involvement influence resilience development in Chinese and Western
students. Secondly, in this paper, there will also be recommendations on how teachers
can change their teaching style accordingly to help develop Chinese students’ resilience.
How Mindsets Influences Chinese and Western Students’ Resilience
Students who perceive obstacles and adversities as positive learning opportunities instead
of insurmountable challenges are likely to show greater resilience and excel academically
(Sorich and Dweck, 1999). Thus, teachers and parents worldwide are encouraged to
cultivate this mindset in their students. In Western culture, this mindset is known as the
‘growth mindset’ – the perception that abilities can develop over time (Yeager and Dweck,
2012). The opposing mindset is known as the ‘fixed mindset’ – the viewpoint that abilities
are innate and unchangeable (Yeager and Dweck, 2012). The equivalent to a ‘growth
mindset’, in Chinese culture, is the ‘virtue orientation’ – the understanding that learning is
the never-ending journey of developing and perfecting oneself holistically (Li, 2002). The
contrasting viewpoint is known as the ‘mind orientation’ – the perception that learning is a
finite journey of acquiring skills and developing mental functions (Li, 2002). Although the
labels may vary, the underlying premise is similar across cultures. Individuals who
perceive that abilities can be improved and learning is a continuous process of
development are more likely to demonstrate greater resilience than individuals who view
learning to be futile or a means to an end (Yeager and Dweck, 2012). This finding applies
to both Chinese (Zeng, Hou and Peng, 2016) and Western students (Blackwell,
Trzesniewski and Dweck, 2007). Therefore, there is strong evidence that nurturing a
‘growth mindset’ or ‘virtue orientation’ will promote resilience in students cross-culturally.
However, students with a ‘growth mindset’ or ‘virtue orientation’ still may not display
resilience in all contexts, as individuals from different cultures have varying understandings

2. Page 2 of 11
of ‘resilience’. Westerners are likely to perceive resilience as the ability to embrace risk-
taking in learning (Brumby, 2016) whilst Chinese individuals are likely to interpret the term
as the ability to remain diligent throughout the arduous process of learning (Li, 2005). This
difference in perception may explain why Chinese students are more reluctant to
contribute to class discussions and are therefore, often viewed by Westerners as students
who fear failure (Zhao, 2016). Similarly, Western students are less likely to dedicate as
much time and effort into memorising content and practising questions (Wang and Byram,
2011) and are therefore perceived by Chinese individuals as lacking self-discipline (Wang
and Greenwood, 2013) – a characteristic often linked to resilience (Artuch-Garde et al.,
2017). These behaviours suggest that different cultures instill different learning beliefs and
as a result, different types of resilience. Chinese students perceive ‘learning’ as an
individual and effortful process of memorising, revising and regurgitating of information (Li,
2005). Therefore, ‘resilience’ is understood as the ability to persist through the lengthy
journey. Alternatively, Western students are nurtured to view ‘learning’ as an interactive
process of understanding, analysing and synthesising information to produce novel ideas
(Wang and Byram, 2011) Therefore, resilience is interpreted as the ability to consistently
take risks. Thus, Western and Chinese students with a ‘growth mindset’ or ‘virtue
orientation’ may not be able to display resilience in all contexts, as what it means to be
resilient varies between learning environments.
How Social Support Influences Chinese and Western Students’ Resilience
Social support refers to the positive relationships pupils have with parents, teachers or
peers. This protective factor promotes resilience in both Chinese and Western students,
albeit in different ways. For Chinese students, the cultural value of filial piety plays a huge
role in resilience development (Chen and Wong, 2014). Filial piety refers to children’s duty
to pay parents back by fulfilling their material and emotional needs (Yeh, 2003). Chinese
students may be more motivated to perform well academically in spite of the competitive
and stressful environment, as academic success is perceived as a way of paying their
parents back (Chen and Wong, 2014). For example, Chen and Wong (2014) found that
Chinese children who believe in reciprocal affection between parent and child are more
likely to have an incremental view of intelligence – the perception that intelligence can be
improved with effort (Dweck and Leggett, 1988) – and are therefore more academically
resilient (Sorich and Dweck, 1999). This may be because such children are raised to
believe that effort is crucial to succeed in all aspects of life, such as maintaining good
parent-child relationships and excelling academically (Chen and Wong, 2014).
Alternatively, in Western cultures, children are less obliged to care for their parents (Qi,
2014). Thus, Bowlby’s (1969) Attachment Theory may better explain how social support
helps develop resilience in Western students. According to Bowlby (1969), the type of
relationship children form with their primary caregiver in early life stages influences their
future emotional development and coping style. Students with secure attachment styles
reportedly display greater resilience than students with avoidant attachment styles
(Jenkins, 2016). This may be because students with secure attachment styles know they
have people around them who they can rely upon and therefore develop more positive
coping strategies such as help-seeking behaviour to manage their stress (Moran, 2007).
Alternatively, students with avoidant attachment styles are accustomed to the absence of
their caregiver and therefore, do not seek help and are less able to cope with stress
(Moran, 2007). Hence, social support promotes resilience in Chinese and Western
students, but in different ways. Whilst parents act as a motivator for Chinese students to
overcome adversities, primary caregivers influence Western students’ future coping
strategies.
However, social support promotes resilience to a lesser extent for Chinese students than
for Western students. Whilst caring relationships with teachers (Theron, 2016), parents

3. Page 3 of 11
(Dawson and Pooley, 2013) and peers (Graber, Turner and Madill, 2016) are oft-cited
protective factors in developing Western students’ resilience, the extent to which these
support sources bolster resilience in Chinese students is less clear. For example, it has
been found that supportive relationships with teachers have no effect on Chinese students’
depression (Zhang et al., 2013) and parental involvement increases Chinese children’s
likelihood of experiencing internalising problems like anxiety (Liu, 2003). In a study where
Chinese students self-reported the factors that influence their resilience, relationship with
peers was not identified as a protective factor (Li, Bottrell and Armstrong, 2018). However,
there have also been studies that suggest that Chinese students with positive parental and
peer relationships are less likely to experience depression (Zhang et al., 2013) and that
Chinese students identified teachers as key influences in their development of resilience
(Li, Bottrell and Armstrong, 2018). The extent to which social support promotes resilience
in Chinese students arguably depends on whether Chinese students perceive these
relationships as sources of stress or assistance. When relationships with parents, teachers
or peers are too academically oriented, Chinese students are likely to perceive teachers
and parents as instigators of academic stress and peers as competition (Ni, Li, and Zhao,
2014). In such cases, social support becomes a risk factor rather than a protective factor.
However, if these relationships consist of socio-emotional as well as academic elements,
Chinese students are likely to perceive teachers and parents as motivators and peers as
individuals to learn from (Li, Bottrell and Armstrong, 2018). In these cases, social support
facilitates resilience development. Therefore, social support plays a more complex role in
resilience development in Chinese students than in Western students.
How School Involvement Influences Chinese and Western Students’
Resilience
School Involvement, the extent to which students take up leadership positions or
participate in extra non-academic school activities (Li, Bottrell and Armstrong, 2018),
reportedly promotes resilience in Chinese and Western students. Through analysing
Chinese teenagers’ questionnaire responses, Li (2017) found that school involvement
positively correlated with school commitment, which predicts academic resilience.
Similarly, Theron (2016) reviewed predominantly North American studies and found that
one of the main ways schools develop students’ resilience is through offering non-
academic extracurricular activities. According to the Social Development Strategy
(Hawkins and Weis, 2017), having opportunities to participate in extracurricular activities,
develop skills and earn recognition for these achievements increases students’ attachment
to the school and motivation to adhere to the school ethos. Therefore, if the students’
school values academic achievement, the students are theoretically more motivated and
more likely to develop resilience in order to attain this goal. Hence, there is robust
evidence to suggest that Chinese and Western students’ resilience increases, if their
schools offer extracurricular activities and they are involved in these programmes.
However, many studies (Lea, 2017; Zarobe and Bungay, 2017) suggest that another
reason why school involvement promotes resilience in students is because developing
extra non-academic skills increases students’ self-efficacy. Self-efficacy, the perception of
one’s own ability to execute a task (Bandura, 1997), positively correlates with resilience
(Cassidy, 2015). This is because people with high self-efficacy are less likely to believe
they will fail and are therefore, more motivated to accomplish their goal (Bandura, 1997).
However, most of these studies were investigated in Western contexts (Lea, 2017; Zarobe
and Bungay, 2017). Self-efficacy reportedly has different effects on Chinese students’
motivation and resilience (Shu and Lam, 2016). For example, Chinese students
consistently report lower self-efficacy scores compared to Western students, despite
attaining high academic scores and having great learning motivation (Hau and Ho, 2010;
Ni, Li and Wang, 2016). Another study by Shu and Lam (2016) found that Western

4. Page 4 of 11
students are more motivated to persist with a task after receiving positive feedback that
enhanced their self-efficacy whereas Chinese students are more determined to complete a
task after receiving negative feedback that presumably had little or detrimental effect to
their self-efficacy. Self-efficacy may have little influence over Chinese students’ motivation
and consequently resilience, because Chinese students are raised to view learning as a
continuous process of self-improvement (Li, 2005). Negative feedback increases Chinese
students’ awareness of their shortcomings and sets targets for improvement, which
increases their learning motivation (Shu and Lam, 2016). Alternatively, positive feedback is
perceived as futile by Chinese individuals (Ran, 2001) and therefore has little effect on
their learning motivation. Hence, attempts to enhance students’ self-efficacy have reduced
effect on resilience development in Chinese students than Western students.
Methodology
I observed a class of 8-12 Chinese
students (15 to 17 years old) with low
English language ability in English,
Science, Business, Humanities and
Pastoral Lessons. I paid attention to
every time a student showed lack of
resilience and how the teachers
responded to this particular pupil
behaviour.
I used a semi-structured coding sheet
to guide my observations. Using this
resource, I was able to look out for
resilience-promoting techniques that
have been commonly reported in
existing literature, but also have the
opportunity to identify other novel
resilience-promoting strategies as
well.
As a week of observations may not
be a fair assessment of all the
resilience-promoting techniques the
teachers use on a day-to-day basis, I
also sent all the teachers I observed
a SurveyMonkey questionnaire,
asking questions such as “What
techniques do you use to promote resilience in Chinese/Western students?” and “How do
Chinese/Western students usually respond in the short-term/long-term?” For the purpose
of my research, I was mainly interested in the short-term responses of students to these
resilience-promoting techniques.
I tested the following two questions:
1. What techniques do Western teachers use to promote resilience in Chinese students?
2. How effective are these strategies in developing Chinese students’ resilience in the
short term?

5. Page 5 of 11
Findings
1. Western teachers were observed to use a total of 38 techniques to
promote resilience (See Appendix 1). The most widely used techniques
were general praise (praise that was not specific, such as “Fantastic”),
instruction, encouragements of determination and persistence (such as
“Try again”), modelling (such as encouraging students to repeat the
behaviour or language used by the teacher), scaffolding and peer support.
However, based on the questionnaire responses, teachers only identified
using 13 resilience-promoting techniques in total (See Appendix 2). There
were a few strategies that teachers reported using that I did not manage
to observe in the short one week of research, including cognitive
reframing, locus of control awareness and differentiated learning
objectives. However, scaffolding, general praise and encouragement of
determination and persistence are common strategies that were observed
and reported by teachers in their questionnaire responses as well. Hence,
it may be assumed that these 3 techniques are very commonly used to
promote resilience in Chinese students.
2. All 5 teachers reported using similar resilience-promoting techniques for
Chinese and Western students. However, in their questionnaire
responses, 60% reported thinking that these techniques had positive
effects on Western students’ resilience and 80% reported thinking that the
same techniques have mixed effects on Chinese students’ resilience (See
Appendix 3). Based on observations, it was found that modelling,
scaffolding and corrective feedback evoked more positive responses
(increase in resilience) than negative or no response (decrease or no
change in resilience) from Chinese students (See Appendix 4). Therefore,
these techniques are highly effective in developing Chinese students’
resilience. Alternatively, general praise, although used very often,
produced more negative or no responses than positive responses from
Chinese students (See Appendix 4). Hence, out of all the techniques, it
may be deduced that general praise is a highly ineffective technique to
promote resilience in Chinese students.
Issues for teaching practice
I observed many support techniques in the international school, but mainly praise,
scaffolding and encouraging of determination and persistence, to promote resilience in
Chinese students. However, whilst some techniques such as modelling, scaffolding and
corrective feedback are highly effective with Chinese students, others such as general
praise had minimal effectiveness. Teachers also self-reported perceiving the techniques
they use to be more effective for Western students than for Chinese students. Hence, it
may be concluded that although the techniques used to develop resilience in Chinese
students were varied, they had mixed effectiveness in achieving their intended goal.

6. Page 6 of 11
These findings fit in with existing literature (Shu and Lam, 2016), as self-efficacy has been
found to play an important role in developing Western students’ resilience, but has
negligible effects on Chinese students’ resilience. Therefore, this explains why praise that
aims to improve students’ self-efficacy has great positive impact on Western students’
resilience, but little effect on Chinese students. Furthermore, many Chinese students are
raised to view learning as a continuous process of “self-perfecting” (Li, 2005, pp.191).
Thus, modelling, scaffolding and corrective feedback may be more effective resilience-
promoting techniques, as these pedagogical strategies communicate to students how to
achieve the quixotic ideal of “self-perfection”.
Therefore, it seems that Western students tend to be motivated to bounce back from
failure, if they understand that they can and will be able to succeed in the task.
Alternatively, Chinese students tend to be impelled to attempt a failed task again, if they
understand how to succeed in the task. Therefore, whilst praise has immense potential to
help develop Western students’ resilience, strategies such as modelling, scaffolding and
corrective feedback may be more beneficial for Chinese students.
Chinese and Western students develop resilience in ways that are similar but also
dissimilar. For example, possessing the mindset that abilities can be developed and
learning is never-ending, having social support and increasing school involvement are key
protective factors that promote resilience in students cross-culturally. However, Chinese
and Western students may develop different types of resilience, as each culture has a
different understanding of resilience. Furthermore, social support may have greater
positive impact on Western students’ resilience compared to Chinese students, as
Chinese students may perceive parents, teachers and peers as sources of pressure rather
than support. Lastly, self-efficacy plays an important role in developing Western students’
resilience, but has negligible effects on Chinese students’ resilience.

7. Page 7 of 11
References
Artuch-Garde, R., González-Torres, M.D.C., de la Fuente, J., Vera, M.M., Fernández-Cabezas, M. and López-García,
M. (2017) ‘Relationship between resilience and self-regulation: A study of Spanish youth at risk of social exclusion’,
Frontiers in Psychology, 8(612), pp. 1-11.
Bandura, A. (1997) Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman.
Blackwell, L.S., Trzesniewski, K.H. and Dweck, C.S. (2007) ‘Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement
across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention’, Child Development, 78(1), pp. 246-263.
Bowlby, J. (1969) Attachment: Attachment and Loss. Volume 1. New York: Basic Books.
Brumby, A. (2016) A guide to resilience in learning: Tools and support for developing effective practice. Available at:
https://cdn.oxfordowl.co.uk/2016/05/04/09/40/32/671/bp_resilience_guide.pdf (Accessed: 3 March 2019)
Cassidy, S. (2015) ‘Resilience building in students: The role of academic self-efficacy’, Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1781),
pp. 1-14.
Chen, W. W. and Wong, Y. L. (2014) ‘What my parents make me believe in learning: The role of filial piety in Hong
Kong students' motivation and academic achievement’, International Journal of Psychology, 49(4), pp. 249-256.
Cohler, B. J. (1987) ‘Adversity, resilience, and the study of our lives’, in Anthony, E. J. and Cohler, B. (eds.) The
invulnerable child. New York: Guilford, pp. 363-424.
Dawson, M. and Pooley, J. A. (2013) ‘Resilience: The role of optimism, perceived parental autonomy support and
perceived social support in first year university students’, Journey of Education and Training Studies, 1(2), pp. 38-49.
Diehl, M., Hay, E. L. and Chui, H. (2012) ‘Personal risk and resilience factors in the context of daily stress’, Annual
Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 32(1), pp. 251-274.
Dweck, C. S. and Leggett, E. L. (1988) ‘A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality’, Psychological
Review, 95(2), pp. 256–273.
Graber, R., Turner, R. and Madill, A. (2016) ‘Best friends and better coping: Facilitating psychological resilience
through boys’ and girls’ closest friendships’, British Journal of Psychology, 107(2), pp. 338-358.
Hau, K. and Ho, I. (2010) ‘Chinese students’ motivation and achievement’, in Bond, M. H. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of
Chinese Psychology. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, pp. 187–204.
Hawkins, J.D. and Weis, J.G. (2017) ‘The social development model: An integrated approach to delinquency
prevention.’ in McGee, T. R. and Mazerolle, P. (eds.) Developmental and Life-course Criminological Theories. London:
Routledge, pp. 3-27.
Jefferis, T.C. and Theron, L.C. (2017) ‘Promoting resilience among Sesotho-speaking adolescent girls: Lessons for
South African teachers’, South African Journal of Education, 37(3), pp. 1-11.
Jenkins, J.K. (2016) The Relationship Between Resilience, Attachment, and Emotional Coping Styles. Master’s Thesis.
Old Dominion University. Available at:
https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://scholar.google.co.uk/&httpsredir=1&article=1027&con
text=psychology_etds (Accessed: 3 March 2019)
Lea, C. H. (2017) Post-Incarceration schooling: An examination of how educational resilience is fostered and cultivated
in an alternative school for formerly incarcerated young adults. Doctoral Dissertation. UCLA. Available
at: https://cloudfront.escholarship.org/dist/prd/content/qt3105t7j8/qt3105t7j8.pdf (Accessed: 21 February 2019)
Li, H. (2017) ‘The ‘secrets’ of Chinese students’ academic success: Academic resilience among students from highly
competitive academic environments’, Educational Psychology, 37(8), pp. 1001-1014.
Li, H., Bottrell, D. and Armstrong, D. (2018) ‘Understanding the pathways to resilience: Voices from Chinese
adolescents’,Young, 26(2), pp. 126-144.
Li, J. (2002) ‘A cultural model of learning: Chinese “heart and mind for wanting to learn”’, Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 33(3), pp. 248-269.
Li, J. (2005) ‘Mind or virtue: Western and Chinese beliefs about learning’, Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 14(4), pp. 190-194.

8. Page 8 of 11
Liu, X. (2003) Parenting practices and the psychological adjustment of children in rural China. Gansu Survey of Children
and Families Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Available at:
https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=gansu_dissertations (Accessed: 21 February
2019)
Moran, P. (2007) ‘Attachment style, ethnicity and help-seeking attitudes among adolescent pupils’, British Journal of
Guidance & Counselling, 35(2), pp. 205-218.
Mwangi, C.N., Okatcha, F.M., Kinai, T.K. and Ireri, A.M. (2015) ‘Relationship between academic resilience and
academic achievement among secondary school students in Kiambu County, Kenya’, International Journal of School and
Cognitive Psychology, 2(3), pp. 345-367.
Ni, H., Li, C. and Wang, C. (2016) ‘Students’ perceptions of resilience promoting factors in Chinese and American
middle schools’, School Psychology International, 37(5), pp. 435-455.
Ni, H., Li, C. and Zhao, J. (2014) ‘Cultural consideration of resilience for Chinese immigrant children and adolescents’,
North American Journal of Medicine and Science, 7(3), pp. 112-117.
Qi, X. (2014) ‘Filial obligation in contemporary China: Evolution of the culture‐system’, Journal for the Theory of Social
Behaviour, 45(1), pp. 141-161.
Rajabi, S., Assareh, M., Shiri, E., Keshvari, F., Mikaieli, F. and Nikdast, S. P. (2014) ‘Evaluation of Students’ Mental
Health and Relation to Resilience and Coping Styles’, International Journal of School Health, 1(1), pp. 1-5.
Ran, A. (2001) ‘Traveling on parallel tracks: Chinese parents and English teachers’, Educational Research, 43(3), pp.
311–328.
Rutter, M. (2012) ‘Resilience as a dynamic concept’, Development and Psychopathology, 24(2), pp. 335-344.
Shu, T.M. and Lam, S.F. (2016) ‘Is it always good to provide positive feedback to students? The moderating effects of
culture and regulatory focus’, Learning and Individual Differences, 49, pp.171-177.
Sorich, L. and Dweck, C. S. (1999) ‘Mastery-oriented thinking’, in Snyder, C. R. (ed.) Coping: The psychology of what
works. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 232-251.
Theron, L.C. (2016) ‘The everyday ways that school ecologies facilitate resilience: Implications for school psychologists’,
School Psychology International, 37(2), pp. 87-103.
Ungar, M., Ghazinour, M. and Richter, J. (2013) ‘Annual research review: What is resilience within the social ecology of
human development?’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(4), pp. 348-366.
Wang, B. and Greenwood, K.M. (2013) ‘Chinese students’ perceptions of their creativity and their perceptions of
Western students’ creativity’, Educational Psychology, 33(5), pp. 628-643.
Wang, L. and Byram, M. (2011) ‘‘But when you are doing your exams it is the same as in China’–Chinese students
adjusting to western approaches to teaching and learning’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(4), pp. 407-424.
Windle, G. (2011) ‘What is resilience? A review and concept analysis’, Reviews in Clinical Gerontology, 21(2), pp.152-
169.
Yeager, D.S. and Dweck, C.S. (2012) ‘Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal
characteristics can be developed’, Educational Psychologist, 47(4), pp. 302-314.
Yeh, K. H. (2003) ‘The beneficial and harmful effects of filial piety: An integrative analysis’, in K. S. Yang, K. K. Hwang,
P. B. Pederson. and I. Daibo. (eds.) Progress in Asian social psychology: Conceptual and empirical contributions. Santa
Barbara, CA: Praeger, pp. 67-82
Zarobe, L. and Bungay, H. (2017) ‘The role of arts activities in developing resilience and mental wellbeing in children
and young people a rapid review of the literature’, Perspectives in Public Health, 137(6), pp. 337-347.
Zeng, G., Hou, H. and Peng, K. (2016) ‘Effect of growth mindset on school engagement and psychological well-being of
Chinese primary and middle school students: The mediating role of resilience’, Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1873), pp. 1-8.
Zhang, W., Li, H., Gong, Y. and Ungar, M. (2013) ‘Stressful events and depression among Chinese adolescents: The
mitigating role of protective factors’, School Psychology International, 34(5), pp. 501-513.
Zhao, Y. (2016) ‘A narrative inquiry into foreign teachers’ perplexes in mixed-cultural classes’, Cogent
Education, 3(1244027), pp. 1-15.

9. Page 9 of 11
Graphical Responses
Appendix 1
Appendix 2

10. Page 10 of 11
Appendix 3
Appendix 4

11. Page 11 of 11