Youth Leadership Development Training Delivers Significant EQ Results
Assessment Results – The Baron EQ-I Emotional Intelligence Assessment
One of the goals of the leadership program was to promote and develop emotional intelligence in the youth participating in the program. We used emotional intelligence as the framework and evaluative tool in the process of delivering youth leadership training for approximately 25 youth participants near Sheridan, Wyoming.
The leadership training was comprised of two days of content presentation, experiential initiatives, group discussions and rock climbing, all framed to promote the understanding and development of emotional intelligence (EQ).
The coaching of EQ competencies was further reinforced through a half-day mentor training during which we trained the adult mentors of the youth about EQ competencies and how to support youth leadership competency development.
Prior to training, all youth completed the Baron EQ-I – youth version. The EQ-I is an industry recognized, valid, reliable, and well-established psychological assessment tool that measures an overall emotional intelligence score, as well as five major scale scores and fifteen distinct factors that comprise emotional intelligence. After the program was completed, we retested the participants to see if scores had improved.
To evaluate the program effectiveness statistically, we compared pre-test scores from the participants to post-test scores using a standard T-test. We set our alpha score to .05 (a 95% confidence level), with the number of participants, n, equal to 24.
Overall, as a result of the training there was a statistically significant overall improvement in the emotional intelligence competencies of the participants.
Of the five major sub-scales, adaptability and general mood improved significantly.
Of the fifteen EQ competencies, assertiveness, empathy, stress tolerance, flexibility, problem solving and optimism improved significantly in the participants as a result of the training.
The results are really outstanding. Six of the sub scales, two of the overall areas and the EQ overall got better.
The students showed a significant improvement in Emotional Intelligence as a result of the program.
Competency Stand Dev t-stat Decision Conclusion
Total EQ 7.08 2.50 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Major Factor 8.35 1.63 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Self Regard 18.15 -0.42 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Emotional Self-Awareness 13.06 0.57 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Assertiveness 8.67 3.30 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Independence 13.37 0.45 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Self-Actualization 10.28 0.87 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Major Factor 7.49 1.65 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Empathy 10.67 2.48 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Social Responsibility 7.09 0.90 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Interpersonal Relationship 9.71 1.49 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Major Factor 10.81 3.47 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Stress Management 6.74 1.46 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Impulse Control 11.70 -1.75 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Major Factor 7.47 3.34 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Reality Testing 8.77 1.65 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Flexibility 11.06 2.10 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Problem Solving 11.06 2.26 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Major Factor 7.25 2.68 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Optimism 8.97 2.57 Reject Ho The class improved the scores in this area.
Happiness 9.15 1.63 Fail to reject Ho The class failed to improve the scores in this area.
Table 1: T-test of pre-test / post-test scores of emotional intelligence of 24 program participants
A quick explanation of the statistical analysis: To evaluate pre-test and post-test scores, psychologists typically use a T-test. The hypothesis tested is that there is no difference between pre-test and post-test scores, and therefore there should be no significant difference between the variance in those scores. We reject that hypothesis when the t-test shows variance (standard deviation) that is greater than what could be explained by chance. So we analyzed our data with the T-test to indicate whether or not there was a significant improvement in the Emotional Intelligence competencies after the training.
What the T test shows, which is essentially a change in the standard deviation, is that there was a statistically significant difference between the pre and post tests in a number of areas (in bold, where we indicate to reject Ho. Anywhere that t was greater than 1.721, we rejected the null.
Sheridan Youth Summit: Participant Evaluations
Included below are the direct comments from the program participants. We have organized them into three categories, called Constructive Criticisms, Positive Comments, and Breakthrough Statements
• Less standing in a circle
• Less standing
• “Less standing in a circle on the first day”
• Talk more about the things that we need to work on (applications/strategies?)
• “I liked everything about the program except how long we had to stand in ready circles”
• More information about climbing prior to getting to the climbing site
• Got sunburnt
• “It would have been nice to mix up inside and outside activities more”
• Maybe a tad more interaction between participants
• I liked it
• I liked the positivity
• Improved confidence and self-esteem
• Gained empathy building skills
• “I liked the rock climbing because it got me over my fear of heights”
• “We should have both days outside in the canyon”
• Enjoyed the rock climbing and hiking
• Enjoyed getting to know others in the program
• Activities were great
• Learned to put faith in others hands
• “I learned what I can do to control my emotions”
• “I learned how instant gratification could lead problems later in life”
• “I wasn’t happy about the program at first but now I am glad that I did it”
• “I liked the problem because there was a lot of symbolism in the activities”
• Trust activities and climbing were great
• The challenges placed in front of participants were age appropriate
• “I learned to trust myself more and meet new people”
• “The trust activities were easier to get into than many of the others”
• “I learned that there are different ways to become more proficient in an area”
• Informative, easy to follow and fun.
• “Program improved my knowledge and thinking”
• “Continue to inspire the young adults to achieve greatness”
• “The mouse trap thing was awesome”
• “Change nothing”
• “This is going to help many of us in the real world”
• “The communication and teamwork activities will help me to be more social and independent”
• “Today this program really helped me get rid of stress and also helped me block out troubles I have.”
• “It was a good experience to climb a real rockface”
• “It was a good lesson to ask what I’ve learned at the end of a activity”
• “I liked how the mouse traps were used to build trust”
• “I was really touched that those of us from the Girl’s School were able to participate”
• The exposure to outdoor activities for the youth was awesome
• “I believe in the short time you had with them they have grown in self-awareness and confidence.”
• “You guys are fantastic”
• “I learned I can be a positive leader – not a negative one”
• “There was a lot of information that is useful for getting and keeping a job.”
• “When you are unsure about something – always give it a chance”
• “This experience helped me with self-confidence to show that we can actually do something if we try”
• “This is going to help many of us in the real world”