Table 2 - Diagnostic results at the beginning of the experiment according to the test of R. Tamml, M. Dorki, V Amen
Test R. Tammle, M. Dorki, V Amena
Experimental group, %
Control group, %
The study involved 55 schoolchildren of 5 classes. The experiment is carried out in two groups: formative (30 pupils) and control (25 pupils). The duration of the experiment was one quarter (3 months). At the first stage, a diagnostic conversation is conducted with each student. At the second stage, 7 trainings are held (group work in class). In the third stage, 2 conversations are held. The following diagnostic tools were selected for diagnosis:
R.Tamml, M. Dorki, V. Amen anxiety test (Dermanova, 2002);
Test for anxiety of a child (G.P. Lavrentieva, T. M. Titarenko, 2017);
Diagnosing School Anxiety: Phillips Questionnaire;
Methodics “Ladder”, V.G. Schur (Schur, 2017).
Consider each test and its features, analyze the results of schoolchildren. Anxiety test, developed by R. Tammlem, M. Dorki, V. Amen, is a set of drawings that describe a typical situation in the life of a primary school schoolchild. The set consists of 14 drawings 8.5 * 11 cm in size. The drawings differ by gender: for girls, girls are depicted, on the cards for boys - boys. Each figure also depicts two heads: one funny, the other sad. The test is carried out individually with each student. The student is shown a picture and asked to choose a suitable facial expression and comment on their choice. The schoolchild’s answers are recorded in a special protocol (Dermanova, 2002). The test results for this technique throughout the sample are presented in table 2. As can be seen from table 2, in the first group 36.60% of children showed a high level of anxiety; 40% of children showed an average level; 23.40% of children showed a low level of anxiety. Thus, the majority of students are prone to anxiety syndrome of a high or medium level (76.6%). Only 23.40% of students have a low level of anxiety. In the second group - 16.6%, 46,6%, 36,8% respectively. Therefore, it was precisely this group that we took for the experimental one. The next test for checking anxiety was the child’s anxiety test developed by G.P. Lavrentieva, T. M. Titarenko. The test is a questionnaire or questionnaire consisting of 20 statements to which the child must answer “yes” or “no”. For each positive answer, 1 point is assigned, points are summed up and the level of anxiety is determined on a special scale (Lavretieva, 2017). According to the scale of the questionnaire, scores from 20 to 15 characterize a high level of anxiety, scores 14-7 - an average level and scores from 6 to 0 - a low level. In other words, the less a child gives positive answers, the lower his level of anxiety (Lavretieva2, 2017).
As a result, we received the following data (table 3): in experimental group - 33.3% showed a high level of anxiety, 40.0% - medium and 26.7 - low; in control group - 8%, 36%, 56% respectively. Fluctuations in data are insignificant, the difference is explained by a different approach to data analysis. Analyzing the statements with the greatest number of positive answers, we can conclude that anxious children with similar symptoms are anxious and externally. As a rule, children with a symptom of increased anxiety are shy, impatient, restless, often complain of nightmares, etc. If parents and teachers pay attention to the behavior of schoolchildren and their complaints, then anxiety can be detected earlier and its treatment will be more successful. We highlighted a number of statements, to which the majority of respondents answered positively: “there are terrible dreams”; “Usually anxious, easily upset”; “Not sure of himself, his strength”; “I’m afraid to encounter difficulties”; “I can’t stand the expectations”; “Often I can’t hold back my tears.” The next tool for diagnosing anxiety in students was a test on the Phillips questionnaire. The test is a list of 58 questions that students must answer “yes” or “no” (Questionnaire, 2016). Testing can also be carried out in a group, which greatly simplifies testing and saves the time of a social educator or psychologist Significantly different way of analyzing the data. If in the previous tests the number of positive and negative answers was calculated, then this technique offers a table with codes. To determine the level of anxiety of the student, it is necessary to calculate the number of discrepancies between the answers of the respondents and the code table. The more mismatches, the higher the level of anxiety (Questionnaire2, 2016). The results of the analysis of schoolchild responses are shown in Figure 2.