Introduction

Self-image and self-concept refer to a person’s ideas about his or her own physical and mental skills, personality, and other characteristics.  Self-esteem is the part of self-concept or self-image that deals with positive or negative feelings about one’s competence and value as a person (Berndt, 1997; Harter, 1985).  Adults wish to promote good self-image or high self-esteem in children because these qualities tend to be associated with the basic confidence and motivation needed to learn, achieve, and get along with others.  Self-esteem has thus become an enormously popular outcome objective in community and educational programs for children.  However, research suggests that simply trying to increase positive feelings without providing children a realistic basis for those feelings may not be successful, and may have the unintended result of encouraging children to be self-centered (Katz, 1993; Harter, 1985).  A brief review of what we know about the development of self-concept and self-esteem suggests ways to include positive self-image as a meaningful outcome for community-based programs. 

Self-concept and self-esteem vary considerably with age (Berndt, 1997; Harter, 1985).  Young children from about 2-5 years old are very concrete in their thinking.  They show little awareness of how they compare to others, and their self-descriptions are typically based on their physical appearance (“I’m THIS big!”), possessions (“I have a puppy”), typical activities (“I go to preschool”), or skills (“I can jump THIS high, and I can tie my own shoe”).  The self-esteem of children this age is often charmingly inflated, which may give them the energy and enthusiasm they need to explore and try new things.  However, their self-evaluations are not especially accurate or stable.  As children move into middle childhood, their self-descriptions expand to include more social comparisons, likes and dislikes.  Their overall self-evaluations are less globally positive than they were in preschool, but they are also more thoughtful and differentiated.  An elementary school child can compare himself to peers and say, for example, that he is the best boy in the class in sports, good at reading but not so good in math, and about average in popularity.  Through the elementary school years and into adolescence, as children gain life experience and cognitive skills, their self-perceptions in these areas become increasingly accurate and realistic.  Adolescent self-descriptions become even more complex, incorporating their beliefs, personality traits, and future plans (Marsh, Craven, & Debus, 1998; Harter, 1985; Berndt, 1997).

Researchers now tend to look at how children evaluate themselves in specific domains, such as physical ability and appearance, academic skill, and social acceptance.  Some feel that overall self-worth combines how competent the child feels in particular domains with how important those domains are either to the child, or to parents and peers (Harter, 1993).  Most researchers agree that children over the age of 8 years can differentiate their competence in different domains (Harter, 1985; Marsh & Gouvernet, 1989), but some have recently argued that even younger children can do this if measures are designed appropriately for their cognitive skills (Marsh, Craven, & Debus, 1998). 
 

Suggested Indicators

The following are some appropriate indicators of positive program outcomes for children in the area of positive self-image, based on the NCEO model (Ysseldyke & Thurlow, 1993), as adapted for community-based programs by the Children’s Outcome Workgroup.  The appropriateness of measuring any given indicator on the list for your program evaluation depends on the ages of the children you serve, the setting, and the goals and activities of your particular program. 
 

• Percent of children who demonstrate or acknowledge a positive sense of self-worth
• Percent of children who perceive themselves as capable of learning
• Percent of children who demonstrate an appropriate range of affect and emotions
• Percent of children (Grade 4 and older) who can accurately identify their areas of strength, skill, and need for improvement

Summary

Managers of State Strengthening projects have the opportunity to make positive self-image a meaningful outcome in community-based programs for at-risk children.  In designing and evaluating programs, Harter (1982) emphasizes that the goal should be to foster a realistic sense of competence rather than just an increase in self-esteem or perceived competence.  Meaningful self-esteem is most likely to be developed when children are provided with opportunities to develop self-confidence through effort, persistence, cooperation, and building genuine skills, rather than just giving uncritical praise (Katz, 1993).  Instead of only offering activities that are so simple that any child can accomplish them with little effort, programs should offer age-appropriate activities that provide enough challenge that children can truly take pride in their accomplishments.  Of course, adults should offer encouragement and model the necessary skills. 
Katz (1993) also suggests that programs offer a balance between activities that focus on the  individual and those that require group cooperation.  Even young children can take pride in being part of a group effort that helps others (such as making greeting cards for elderly nursing home residents).  Finally, especially as children move into the middle grades, program staff can encourage them to base their overall self-image on their areas of strength rather than becoming discouraged that they don’t excel in all areas.  For example, the child who is shy and not good in sports can be encouraged to value herself instead for her sensitivity to others and her skill and persistence in playing the piano (Berndt, 1997; Harter, 1993). 
 

References

 Berndt, T. J. (1997).  Child Development.  Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark Publishers.

 Harter, S. (1993). Causes and consequences of low self-esteem in children and adolescents. In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard (pp. 87-116). New York: Plenum Press.

 Harter, S. (1985).  Competence as a dimension of self-evaluation: Toward a comprehensive model of self-worth.  In R. E. Leahy (Ed.), The development of the self (pp. 55-121).  Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

 Katz, L. G. (1993). All about self-esteem:  Are we developing our children's self-esteem or their narcissism? American Educator, 17 (2), 18-23.

 Marsh, H. W., Craven, R., & Debus, R. (1998).  Structure, stability, and development of young children’s self-concepts: A multicohort-multioccasion study.  Child Development, 69 (4), 1030-1053.

 Marsh, H. W., & Gouvernet, P. J. (1989).  Multidimensional self-concepts and perceptions of control: Construct validation of responses by children.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 81 (1), 57-69.

 Ysseldyke, J. E., & Thurlow, M. (1993, October). Developing a model of educational outcomes (NCEO Report No. 1). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, College of Education, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
 
 

MEASURES: Self-Image

The following standardized assessments are provided as examples of measures that may be useful for evaluation of community-based programs.  This listing is not comprehensive and is not intended as an endorsement of any particular measure.  Some of the assessment instruments that follow are copyrighted and require specific levels of training to administer.  Prices of measures are subject to change.  In deciding to use any standardized measures or checklists, it is important to review specific items and subscales to decide how well they fit your program. 

It is also important to recognize that standardized measures, such as the ones listed below, are not the only appropriate ways to assess outcomes for children.  In fact, it is highly recommended that standardized measures be used in conjunction with other methods, including qualitative assessments, and other indicators which may be obtainable from existing records for some school-aged programs [see other sections of the CYFAR Evaluation website for more information on qualitative methods including Using Existing Data and Qualitative Interviewing].  Data sources that are particularly relevant for the indicators of possessing a good self-image (see Suggested Indicators above) might include interviews, surveys, rating scales, or checklists conducted with parents, teachers, program staff, or children themselves.
 

1.  Child Observation Record (COR)  High/Scope Educational Research Foundation
Date:   1992

Subtests: 

   Academic Achievement
   Coping Strategies
   Self-Esteem
   Social Skills
   Problem Solving Skills

High/Scope Educational Research Foundation
600 North River Street
Ypsilanti, MI  48198
(313) 485-2000

Target Audience:  Ages 2 ½ to 6 years 

Description/Comments: 

COR is a teacher checklist developed by the High Scope Educational Research Foundation for assessment of preschoolers. This measure is behaviorally focused, can be used in parts (subscales), and is not excessively time-consuming to administer, so it tends to be well accepted by preschool teachers and program staff.  The COR has been successfully used with low-income and ethnic minority populations.  Self-Esteem subscale would appear to measure global self-esteem rather than specific domains. 

2.  Culture-Free Self-Esteem Inventories   (CF/SEI-2, Forms A & B)  James Battle
Date:  1992 (2nd edition)

Subtests: 

Four Self-Esteem scales:  General, Social, Academic, and Parent Self-Esteem 

Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
P.O.Box 998
Odessa, FL 33556
1-800-331-8378     OR     http://www.parinc.com

Full introductory kit (manual and 50 forms), $139.00
Target Audience:  Grades 2-9 (children and early adolescents)

Can be used with groups or individuals, and is available in English, French, and Spanish, in either a long or short form.  Easily administered by most adults, using a written or oral forced-choice response format, taking approximately 10-15 minutes.  Results can be computer scored, but should be professionally interpreted.  The measure has been standardized on nearly 5,000 subjects,  with high reported reliability and validity (see Zalaquett & Woods, 1997).  May be most useful as a clinical screening tool.  However, it is reported to be appropriate as a pre- and post-test for research, educational, and community interventions. 

3.  Perceived Competence Scale for Children  S. Harter
Date:   1982

Subtests:  

Four empirically-derived subscales.  Includes 3 domains of Perceived Competence: 1) Cognitive (doing well in school), 2) Social (having friends), and 3) Physical (competence in sports), and a fourth domain of General Self-Worth (liking the kind of person one is).

Harter, S. (1982). The Perceived Competence Scale for Children. Child Development, 53, 87-97.

Target Audience:  

Children 8 years and older (3rd through 9th Grade)

Well-validated and widely used self-report measure of one theoretically-important aspect of self-esteem or self-concept (children's perceptions of their competence in several specific age-appropriate domains).  It is expected that through the elementary school years, children's self-perceptions in these areas will become increasingly realistic.  In program evaluations, Harter suggests that a goal should be to foster a realistic sense of competence rather than just an increase in self-esteem or perceived competence.  A "structured alternative" question format is designed to minimize social desirability response tendencies.  A teacher report form is also available.

4.  Pictorial Scale of Perceived Competence & Social Acceptance for Young Children (PSPCSA)   S. Harter & R. Pike
Date:   1984 

Subtests: 

Perceived General Competence (cognitive and physical items), and Perceived Social Acceptance (maternal and peer acceptance items).  These refer to the child's perception that he/she is competent, and is accepted by mother and peers.

Harter, S., & Pike, R. (1984). The Pictorial Scale of Perceived  Competence and Social Acceptance for Young Children. Child Development, 55, 1969-1982.

Target Audience:  

Preschool and primary-age children (two versions)

A picture-based assessment administered in individual interviews with children in either home or school/program setting.  A unique picture/verbal response format is designed for young children, but some report that it is more confusing for some children than verbal presentation alone (Marsh, Craven, & Debus, 1998).  A downward extension of the Perceived Competence Scale for Children (see above), this measure has been considered a reliable, valid, and theoretically sound measure of social self-perceptions of preschool and early elementary children.  However, the original psychometric work was based on a small sample of middle-class white children.  Subsequent work with low-income samples of younger (preschool-aged) Hispanic and African-American children has not fully supported the reliability and factor structures of the scales for use with these populations.  Modified versions for these populations have been piloted (Taylor, Callor, Machida, &  Marx, 1995). 

5.  Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ-I)   Herbert W. Marsh
Date:  1988

Subtests: 

Eight self-concept scales include: Physical Ability, Physical Appearance, Peer Relationships, Parent Relationships, Reading, Math, School, and Esteem.

Marsh, H. W. (1988). Self Description Questionnaire: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self-concept: A test manual and research monograph.  San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.

Target Audience: 

Designed for preadolescents (age 8-10 or older), but has been adapted for use with children as young as kindergarten age.

Appears to be a well-validated measure based theoretically on a multidimensional approach to self-concept (Marsh & Gouvernet, 1989; Marsh, Craven, & Debus, 1998).  The SDQ-I has been adapted successfully for very young children by eliminating negatively-worded items and using an individualized interview format. 

Personal and Social Adjustment	Bibliography
| Program Outcomes for Children | | NOWG Home |