The impact of the Canterbury earthquakes on ... - Wiley Online Library

30 downloads 175 Views 294KB Size Report
morbidity following Hurricane Andrew. J Trauma Stress. 1996;9:607-12. 2. Kuo CJ, Tang HS, Tsay CJ, et al. Prevalence of psychiatric disorders among bereaved ...
YOUTH

The impact of the Canterbury earthquakes on successful school leaving for adolescents Ben Beaglehole,1 Caroline Bell,1 Christopher Frampton,1 Stephanie Moor1

T

here is substantial literature on the negative sequelae of disasters on mental health. In general, increased rates of depression, anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder are observed,1-5 but the extent of the increases varies significantly. The reason is likely to be multi-factorial. In addition to unique disaster and local environmental factors, study design is also likely to be important. For example, exposure and temporal gradients have typically been seen with more pronounced adverse effects for those with greatest exposure to the disaster and for those in closer temporal proximity,6-11 although some authors have also highlighted delayed effects without an improvement in symptoms over time.12-15 Studies with the ability to make comparisons with pre-disaster rates of mental illness are rare as most studies are designed opportunistically following disasters. Those studies that could make those comparisons tend to show lesser or non-significant impacts as a result of the disaster,16-18 indicating the importance of longitudinal study design in evaluating disaster effects. The impact of disasters on critical periods of development has received less attention.19 One such developmental phase relates to school leaving. This is a period of increasing independence and can be an important step in adolescents ‘launching’ from the family towards adult independent living. Conversely, leaving school early or without qualifications is associated with adverse psychosocial outcomes such as increased rates of later substance use, crime, unemployment and welfare dependency.20 An assessment of this critical period following a disaster has the potential to provide a signal to health and social services if there are likely to be adverse ramifications over the following decades for

Abstract Objective: To examine the impact of the Canterbury earthquakes on the important adolescent transition period of school leaving. Method: Local and national data on school leaving age, attainment of National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) standards, and school rolls (total registered students for schools) were examined to clarify long-term trends and delineate these from any impacts of the Canterbury earthquakes.  Results: Despite concerns about negative impacts, there was no evidence for increased school disengagement or poorer academic performance by students as a consequence of the earthquakes. Conclusion: Although there may have been negative effects for a minority, the possibility of post-disaster growth and resilience being the norm for the majority meant that negative effects on school leaving were not observed following the earthquakes. A range of postdisaster responses may have mitigated adverse effects on the adolescent population. Implications for Public Health: Overall long-term negative effects are unlikely for the affected adolescent population. The results also indicate that similar populations exposed to disasters in other settings are likely to do well in the presence of a comprehensive post-disaster response. Key words: earthquakes, disasters, education, adolescent development the young person, their families and society. The Canterbury earthquakes adversely affected the delivery of education for most high school students in the area. The earthquakes started with a 7.1 magnitude earthquake on 4 September 2010, with further major earthquakes in February, June and December 2011 and an unusual and protracted aftershock sequence lasting more than two years. The February 2011 earthquake was the most devastating. It resulted in significant loss of life and multiple injuries (182 people died and 6,659 were injured in the initial 24 hours), and widespread damage to property and infrastructure.21 Most high schools had damage to their buildings and grounds, and some schools in the most affected areas were required to co-locate with a less-damaged secondary school for a number of months. For the co-located schools, all lessons for one high school were held in the first half of

the day necessitating early starts, disruption of family routines and bussing of students across town, with similar disruption and late finishing for the other sharing school. Class teachers had to amend their lessons and alter their teaching style to fit into the compressed daily timetable with fewer breaks. In addition, it is likely that the prolonged sequence of large and frequent aftershocks for months after the main seismic events caused hyper-arousal and disturbed sleep for some students. The effects of disordered arousal on concentration and the laying down of new memories could be expected to negatively affect academic learning and examination performance.22 In NZ, the main high school qualifications for students in their senior years (years 11, 12 and 13) are the NCEA levels 1, 2 and 3. Attaining these levels requires students to have met a range of internally and externally assessed standards at increasing levels of difficulty.

1. Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago, New Zealand Correspondence to: Dr Ben Beaglehole, Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago, PO Box 4345, Christchurch, New Zealand; e-mail: [email protected] Submitted: March 2016; Revision requested: June 2016; Accepted: September 2016 The authors have stated they have no conflict of interest. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Aust NZ J Public Health. 2017; 41:70-3; doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12625

70

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health © 2016 The Authors

2017 vol. 41 no. 1

Youth

The impact of the Canterbury earthquakes on school leaving

Standards are designed to be clear, nationally consistent, and quality assured23 meaning NCEA data can provide useful information for assessing performance across time and between different localities. The NZ Ministry of Education provides information on NCEA performance and other measures including school leaving age and school rolls.24 These databases provided the opportunity to examine the impact of the earthquakes through a longitudinal assessment of school leaving age and NCEA qualifications in Canterbury students compared with local and national trends.

Methods School disengagement School disengagement was examined by scrutinising the percentage of early school leavers (before age 17 years) during the years 2009-13. This information is provided at the level of general electorates rather than specific schools.25 This government data source collects information on all school leavers and allows the percentage of students leaving before the age of 17 to be compared to all school leavers for each school year (1 March to the end of Februrary the following year). There are 64 general electorates (voting districts) in NZ with greater density in urban areas meaning that an examination of data from the Canterbury electorates could provide a focused view of the impact of the earthquakes. Four general electorates (Christchurch Central, Christchurch East, Port Hills, and Waimakariri) had catchments in zones that were seriously damaged, whereas three general electorates (Ilam, Selwyn, and Wigram) were situated in less-affected zones (designated high- and low-impact zones respectively) (see http://www.elections.org. nz/events/electorate-boundary-review/ final-electorate-boundaries for details). These designations are based on local knowledge, but are supported by mapping of the earthquakes’ locations26 and damage from rockfall and liquefaction,27,28 all of which cluster in the high-impact zone areas. Data was extracted to examine trends for highimpact zones compared with low-impact zones and with national trends.

Academic failure Academic failure was assessed by examining the percentage of students leaving school without formal school qualifications (NCEA level 1 or greater) compared to all school leavers nationally for the school year. This data was accessed from available pivot tables.25

2017 vol. 41 no. 1

Achievement data is reported as a percentage of participating students. Data on specific school performance was available (unlike the school leaving data, which was only available for electorates) but only for 201113 on educationcounts.govt.nz. Additional data dating back to 2009 was provided via email correspondence in order to scrutinise data prior to the earthquakes and consider long-term trends. State high schools in highly earthquake-affected areas26 were designated high-impact schools (Aranui High School, Cashmere High School, Shirley Boys’ High School, Avonside Girls’ High School, and Linwood College) and those in less-affected areas were designated low-impact schools (Christchurch Boys’ High School, Christchurch Girls’ High School, and Hornby, Papanui, Riccarton, Hillmorton and Burnside High Schools). Results are reported for high- and low-impact schools, and nationally in order to consider and compare the effects of different levels of earthquake exposure. State-funded high schools were chosen to best reflect the schools’ population and catchment area.

School rolls School roll data based on a 1 July yearly census was extracted from http://www. educationcounts.govt.nz/statistics/schooling/ student-numbers. Results are provided for the high- and low- impact schools over the study period as well as nationally for secondary schools. To present data of different magnitudes, results are reported as a percentage of 2009 rolls.

Earthquake impaired derived grades For the year of 2011, the New Zealand Qualification Authority (NZQA) gave schools discretion to apply on behalf of students for an ‘earthquake impaired derived grade’. These grades were allowed if a student attended their external examinations and made a realistic attempt at answering the questions. The student would then receive the better of their exam result and the derived grade submitted by the school on the basis of performance through the year. In 2011, NZQA also allowed an additional six unspecified credits for Level 3 NCEA (of a required 80 credits) in order to prevent disadvantage at school leaving or entering tertiary education as a result of the earthquakes. The frequency of earthquake impaired derived grades and the use of the six unspecified credits for NCEA Level 3 were requested from the NZQA to assist interpretation of the 2011 data.

Results School disengagement For the high-impact zone, the percentage of students leaving school before the age of 17 varied between 20% and 23% over the study period. No trends developed following the onset of the earthquake sequence in 2011. For the low-impact zone, 13-15% of students left school before the age of 17. Again, there were no trends that could be attributed to the onset of the earthquake sequence. The lower rate of overall leaving in the high-impact zone predated the onset of the earthquake sequence. Canterbury school leaving can be compared with national data that varied from 17% to 21% over the study period and appeared to show a small trend for decreased early school leaving (see Figure 1).

Academic failure For high-impact schools and national comparison schools, there was a trend for fewer students to leave school without NCEA 1 or greater qualification for the years 200911. However, for 2011 and subsequent years the percentage of students leaving school without NCEA 1 or greater qualification was stable for the high-impact schools and the national comparison, meaning there were no observable effects that could be attributed to the earthquakes. In addition, no trends were apparent for low-impact schools over the study period. Similarly to the school disengagement outcome measure, performance was poorer overall for high-impact schools than lowimpact schools, but this finding predated the earthquakes. (See Figure 2).

School rolls High-impact schools showed a significant loss of roll for the years 2011-13 to a low-point of 82% of 2009 rolls in 2013. No observable trends were apparent for low-impact schools and national secondary schools over the study period. The average rolls for the highand low-impact schools over the study period were 4,931 and 8,829 respectively. Figure 3 provides longitudinal data on school rolls for these samples as a percentage of 2009 rolls.

Earthquake impaired derived grades The NZQA advised that the use of earthquake impaired derived grades and six unspecified credits for NCEA Level 3 in 2011 was not recorded in a consistent and recoverable form and as a consequence the extent these tools were used is unknown.

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health © 2016 The Authors

71

Beaglehole et al.

Article

Discussion

Figure 1: Percentage of school leavers before the age of 17.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the series of Canterbury earthquakes on the adolescent transitional period of school leaving. The principal outcomes of early school leaving and academic failure were chosen because they represent important measures of overall functioning in an adolescent population that might be vulnerable to the acute and chronic effects of a disaster. If adverse effects were detected, this would provide a signal of pending unemployment, reduced income and later social and health difficulties for an important subset of the population. Early school leaving (before age 17 years) did not show trends that could be attributed to the earthquakes for electorates in the high-and low-impact zones. This suggests that the earthquakes did not affect this outcome or that any effects were not of sufficient magnitude to be measurable at population level. Similarly, academic failure or leaving of secondary school without NCEA 1 qualification or greater did not show observable trends as a result of the earthquakes. High-impact schools had poorer performance overall as judged by school disengagement and academic failure, but these findings predated the onset of the earthquake sequence and are likely to be explained by other factors such as socio-demographic variables. The decile rating for the high-impact schools, weighted for their school rolls, was 5.9 compared to 7.4 for the low-impact schools with the lower decile rating indicating a greater proportion of students drawn from low-socio-economic communities. In NZ, there is a clear relationship between NCEA performance and decile rating with students from low-decile rated schools having a lower average performance.29 Impaired derived grades were not recorded in a consistent or recoverable form meaning their impact could not be measured. However, these were only available for schools to use in the 2011 year so did not affect longer-term trends. The study showed that rolls dropped in areas most affected by the earthquakes. The drop in school roll is consistent with information from Statistics New Zealand, which showed that the earthquakes resulted in the total population of Christchurch dropping by 8,900 (2.4%) in the June 2011 year.30 The large loss of roll for the highimpact schools is probably because these were in areas with the most significant property and land damage, some of which were ‘red zoned’, with all residents being required to leave. It is important to consider the impact of the loss of students from high-impact areas on the study results. It is likely that some of these students moved to other schools within Christchurch and are therefore reflected in data for the low-impact schools. However, the total roll for the low-impact schools did not increase significantly over the period of the earthquakes. It is also likely that some of the students from high-impact schools shifted outside the local region and are therefore represented in the national comparisons provided. The data does not show an increase in students leaving under the age of 17, indicating that early leaving has not contributed to the drop in school rolls observed for the high-impact schools. The school roll dataset did not provide information as to whether or not any particular sub-groups contributed more to the drops in roll, meaning it is feasible that families most negatively affected by the earthquakes were more likely to leave Christchurch. As a consequence, it is possible that if any overall negative effects of the earthquakes have occurred, their presence has been diluted by

72

30 25 20

2009 2010

15

2011

10

2012 2013

5 0 High impact zzone

Low w impact zonee

Nattionally

 Perccentage schoo ol leavers und er the age of 17

 

Figure 2: Percentage of students leaving school with NCEA 1 or greater qualifications. 25

20

15

2009 2010

10

2011 2012 2013

5

0 high impactt schools

low impact schoools

nationally

Percen ntage studentss leaving with out NCEA 1 or greater qualificationn

 

Figure 3: School rolls expressed as a percentage of 2009 for high- and low-impact schools, and national secondary schools. 120 100 80

2009

60

2010 2011

40

2012

20

2013

0 high impact sschools

low w impact schoools

nattionally

Scchool roll data a (percentagee of 2009 rolls)

the much larger numbers in the national comparison groups and are therefore not readily observable. The study design allowed for an assessment of earthquake effects over an extended time period. This provided the opportunity to delineate earthquake effects from other longitudinal local and national trends. It also meant we could consider whether or not there was a temporal gradient with greatest effects immediately following the earthquakes and decreasing impacts in the years following the earthquake. The study design also allowed us to examine for effects according to greater or lesser degrees of earthquake exposure as greater effects have

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health © 2016 The Authors

2017 vol. 41 no. 1

 

Youth

The impact of the Canterbury earthquakes on school leaving

typically been seen in more exposed groups.7 Although the largely negative findings are unexpected when the severity of the earthquakes is considered, they are consistent with other local studies17,31-34 examining the mental health of the Christchurch population. These local studies share similar strengths in that they provide long-term data that can delineate earthquake-specific trends from pre-existing trends and examine populations that have not been selected opportunistically in the aftermath of a disaster. In keeping with these other studies, they do not provide explanations as to why small or no impacts are recorded but it is possible to speculate on a number of factors in addition to the methodological factors alluded to above. As stated previously, it is feasible that those most affected by a disaster may have left the area and so not be recorded by subsequent measures examining disaster effects. However, it seems unlikely that only those with negative effects from the earthquakes left the study areas; other explanations are required. Other relevant factors for the absence of negative effects include resilience being the norm35 when a population is exposed to a disaster, with detrimental effects only being found in for a minority of the population coupled with the possibility that post-traumatic growth36 improves the mental health of some. It may also be that higher levels of stress as a result of the earthquakes increased attention and focus on education by students, teachers, and schools to compensate for any detrimental effects. There may also be other relevant protective factors following the Canterbury earthquakes that have minimised or countered any negative effects. These include the range of health-promoting initiatives put in place by government agencies in the aftermath of the disaster that have been protective through mechanisms such as increasing community cohesiveness and managing stress. In summary, measures of early school leaving and educational failure in secondary school students did not demonstrate negative effects as a result of the earthquakes. In addition, we did not demonstrate a temporal or exposure gradient showing poorer performance for the years closer to the disaster or for those in more exposed areas. These negative results may be because the disaster did not have an overall negative impact on secondary school students, or because any negative effects were only present in a sub-population of those

2017 vol. 41 no. 1

exposed to the disaster and could not be detected by this study design. The protective mechanisms put in place in the aftermath of the earthquakes may also have served to mitigate any detrimental effects. These findings can therefore provide reassurance that the adolescent transitional period of school leaving has largely been unaffected by the Canterbury earthquakes.

References 1. David D, Mellman TA, Mendoza LM, et al. Psychiatric morbidity following Hurricane Andrew. J Trauma Stress. 1996;9:607-12. 2. Kuo CJ, Tang HS, Tsay CJ, et al. Prevalence of psychiatric disorders among bereaved survivors of a disastrous earthquake in Taiwan. Psychiatr Serv. 2003;54:249-51. 3. Salcioglu E, Basoglu M, Livanou M. Long-term psychological outcome for non-treatment-seeking earthquake survivors in Turkey. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2003;191:154-60. 4. Bryant RA, Waters E, Gibbs L, et al. Psychological outcomes following the Victorian Black Saturday bushfires. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2014;48:634-43. 5. Wang CW, Chan CL, Ho RT. Prevalence and trajectory of psychopathology among child and adolescent survivors of disasters: A systematic review of epidemiological studies across 1987-2011. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2013;48:1697-720. 6. Carr VJ, Lewin TJ, Webster RA, et al. Psychosocial sequelae of the 1989 Newcastle earthquake: II. Exposure and morbidity profiles during the first 2 years post-disaster. Psychol Med. 1997;27:167-78. 7. Fergusson DM, Boden JM, Horwood LJ, et al. Perceptions of distress and positive consequences following exposure to a major disaster amongst a wellstudied cohort. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2015;49:351-9. 8. Kessler RC, Galea S, Gruber MJ, et al. Trends in mental illness and suicidality after Hurricane Katrina. Mol Psychiatry. 2008;13:374-84. 9. North CS, Kawasaki A, Spitznagel EL, et al. The course of PTSD, major depression, substance abuse, and somatization after a natural disaster. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2004;192:823-9. 10. Usami M, Iwadare Y, Kodaira M, et al. Relationships between traumatic symptoms and environmental damage conditions among children 8 months after the 2011 Japan earthquake and tsunami. PloS One. 2012;7:e50721. 11. Bodvarsdottir I, Elklit A, Gudmundsdottir DB. Posttraumatic stress reactions in children after two large earthquakes in Iceland. Nord Psychol. 2006;58:91-107. 12. Catani C, Gewirtz AH, Wieling E, et al. Tsunami, war, and cumulative risk in the lives of Sri Lankan school children. Child Dev. 2010;81:1176-91. 13. McFarlane AC. The longitudinal course of posttraumatic morbidity. The range of outcomes and their predictors. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1988;176:30-9. 14. Kronenberg ME, Hansel TC, Brennan AM, et al. Children of Katrina: Lessons learned about postdisaster symptoms and recovery patterns. Child Dev. 2010;81:1241-59. 15. Liu MX, Wang L, Shi ZBA, et al. Mental Health Problems among Children One-Year after Sichuan Earthquake in China: A Follow-up Study. PloS One. 2011;6:e14706. 16. Canino G, Bravo M, Rubio-Stipec M, et al. The impact of disaster on mental health: Prospective and retrospective analyses. Int J Ment Health. 1990;19:51-69. 17. Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Boden JM, et al. Impact of a major disaster on the mental health of a well-studied cohort. JAMA Psychiatry. 2014;71:1025-31. 18. Knudsen HK, Roman PM, Johnson JA, et al. A changed America? The effects of September 11th on depressive symptoms and alcohol consumption. J Health Soc Behav. 2005;46:260-73.

19. Masten AS, Narayan AJ. Child development in the context of disaster, war, and terrorism: Pathways of risk and resilience. Annu Rev Psychol. 2012;63:227-57. 20. Fergusson DM, Swain-Campbell N, Horwood LJ. Outcomes of leaving school without formal educational qualifications. N Z J Educ Stud. 2002;37:39-55. 21. Ardagh MW, Richardson SK, Robinson V, et al. The initial health-system response to the earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, in February, 2011. Lancet. 2012;379:2109-15. 22. Carrion VG, Wong SS. Can traumatic stress alter the brain? Understanding the implications of early trauma on brain development and learning. J Adolesc Health. 2012;51:S23-8. 23. New Zealand Qualifications Authority. Standards [Internet]. Wellington (NZ): Government of New Zealand; 2013 [cited 2016 Nov 8]. Available from: http:// www.nzqa.govt.nz/qualifications-standards/standards 24. Ministry of Education. Education Counts [Internet]. Wellington (NZ): Government of New Zealand; 2013 [cited 2016 Nov 8]. Available from: http://www. educationcounts.govt.nz 25. Ministry of Education. Education Counts. data/ assets/excel_doc/0003/89373/School-Leavers-PivotTable-2009-2013.xlsx [Internet]. Wellington (NZ): Government of New Zealand; 2013 [cited 2016 Nov 8]. Available from: https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/ statistics/schooling/senior-student-attainment/schoolleavers2 26. Potter SH, Becker JS, Johnston DM, et al. An overview of the impacts of the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 2015;14:6-14. 27. Geonet. M 6.3 Christchurch 22 February 2011 [Internet]. Wellington (NZ): GNS Science; 2011 [cited 2016 Nov 8]. Available from: http://info.geonet.org.nz/display/ quake/M+6.3%2C+Christchurch%2C+22+Februa ry+2011 28. Cubrinovski M, Bradley B, Wotherspoon L, et al. Geotechnical aspects of the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Bull N Z Society for Earthq Eng. 2011;44:205-26. 29. New Zealand Qualifications Authority. Annual Report on NCEA and New Zealand Scholarship Data and Statistics (2013). Wellington (NZ): NZQA; 2014. 30. Statistics New Zealand. Subnational Population Estimates [Internet]. (NZ): Government of New Zealand; 2011 [cited 2016 Nov 8]. Available from: http://www. stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/estimates_ and_projections/SubnationalPopulationEstimates_ MRJun11.aspx 31. Beaglehole B, Bell C, Beveridge J, et al. Psychiatric admissions fall following the Christchurch earthquakes: An audit of inpatient data. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2015;49:346-50. 32. Beaglehole B, Bell C, Frampton C, et al. The impact of the Canterbury earthquakes on prescribing for mental health. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2015;49:742-50. 33. Thomson J, Seers K, Frampton C, et al. Sequential population study of the impact of earthquakes on the emotional and behavioural well-being of 4-year-olds in Canterbury, New Zealand. J Paediatr Child Health. 2015;52:18-24. 34. Spittlehouse JK, Joyce PR, Vierck E, et al. Ongoing adverse mental health impact of the earthquake sequence in Christchurch, New Zealand. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2014;48:756-63. 35. Bonanno GA, Galea S, Bucciarelli A, et al. Psychological resilience after disaster: New York City in the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attack. Psychol Sci. 2006;17:181-6. 36. Linley PA, Joseph S. Positive change following trauma and adversity: A review. J Trauma Stress. 2004;17:11-21.

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health © 2016 The Authors

73