Introduction

Individual factors have been defined as a predictor and component of resilience for decades. These individual factors include self-awareness, problem-solving skills, self-efficacy, internal locus of control, and positive self-perception (Martins & Neto, 2016; Amitay & Gumpel, 2015; Malindi, 2014). Previously, resilience was viewed as intrinsic to the individual, dismissing the valuable contribution of the social ecologies of resilience, such as family support, culture, relationship with peers, and social services. Social support is “one of the characteristics of resilience, and developing resilience requires caring and supportive relationships” (Mampane, 2014:6). Earlier studies on resilience focused on the individual alone, without considering their context. The initial research in the field of resilience intensively investigated the traits, qualities or characteristics of individuals as factors that enhance resilience (Wright, Masten & Narayan 2013; Ungar 2011; Van Rensburg, 2014). Masten (2011) states that researchers during the first wave of resilience focused on the basic factors of resilience (such as risk factors, adversity, and protective factors), emphasising that protective factors are embedded within the individual.

The influence of individual factors on resilience has be widely accepted over the past decades and researchers (such as; Dias & Cadime 2017; Martins & Neto, 2016; Amitay & Gumpel, 2015; Wright, Masten & Narayan 2013) confirm that there are individual factors that predicts resilience. The scholarship that focusses on the individual factors alone would apply less in a country such as South Africa, where “Ubuntu” and collectiveness are emphasised and valued. “Ubuntu” is a Zulu/Xhosa word, which most directly translates into English as “humanness”. “Its sense, however, is perhaps best conveyed by the Nguni expression umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu, which means a person is a person through other people” (Bolden, 2014:1). Thus, the individual’s context influences their resilience. The context (the family, school, community at large) is responsible for providing its individuals with the necessary resources to enable their resilience.

The values of “Ubuntu” emphasise the importance of interdependence and connectedness. Accordingly, the researcher proposes that the mediation role of caregivers and context on the impact of individual factors on resilience, which has not been researched sufficiently, can shed light into the resilience of learners with SLD in South African LSEN schools. To respond to adversities faced by learners presenting with SLD in LSEN schools; researchers, psychologists, teachers and other practitioners, need to consider that resilience is not entirely predicted by individual qualities. The individual’s caregivers and factors in their context reinforces their resilience. This view is imperative because African individuals depend on and strengthen each other when dealing with adversity.

Literature Review

A definition of resilience should not only account for individual factors but also consider the role of caregivers and contextual factors in an individual’s resilience. Ungar (2015: 225) defines resilience as “the child’s ability to navigate their way to social, psychological, and physical resources that sustain their well-being during adversity and their ability to negotiate for these resources to be provided to them in culturally meaningful ways”. Ungar’s definition stipulates that both individual and contextual factors account for an individual’s resilience. Van Breda & Dickens (2017) state that while Ungar (2015:4) “does not dismiss individual agency in navigating adversity, he gives priority to the social ecologies of resilience, such as relationships, culture, and social services”.

Resilience studies have evolved to extend beyond the individual to include the context of the individual, including where they live. Scholars (Masten 2018; Ungar 2012; Cicchetti, 2013; Panter-Brick & Leckman, 2013; Van Breda, 2018) favour the notion of individuals’ resilience based on a variety of systems in their social context. Theron and Theron (2013) report that family communities form part of traditional African culture and this includes: extended family members (alive and deceased). Similarly, Theron et al., (2013) argue that spirituality and kinship ties of young people, in addition to specific nuclear relationships, nurture their resilience. In this case, social support networks and spirituality in the African context serve as cultural mechanisms and protective factors that mediate the relationship between adversity and resilience. Thus, African cultural values must be taken into consideration in enabling and developing young people’s resilience within local contexts.

The researcher argues that the earlier focus solely on the individual ignores the vital contribution of the resources that caregivers and a context such as a school can provide. Researchers needs to be aware that when the context of an individual changes, the individual (who is part of the context) is influenced. Research shows that just as individuals or environments change, the factors which result in positive developmental outcomes change correspondingly. The researcher of this study concurs with these studies (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Masten, 2014; Ungar, 2012), and with their claim that collaborative environmental and individual factors offer an understanding of resilience. Therefore, this study supports an integrated understanding of resilience, which proposes that caregivers and context mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience.

The study was conducted in four LSEN schools with learners with Specific Learning Disability (SLD). SLD is defined as a group of Neurological Developmental Disorders (NDD) caused by deficits in the central nervous system, which affects individuals’ ability to process, maintain and effectively convey information to other people (Scanlon 2013). Gorker et al. (2017) define SLD as an NDD that affects the brain in processing verbal and non-verbal information. SLD is an umbrella term used to describe a wide variety of learning problems (Kemp, Smith, & Segal 2017). These problems include reading (dyslexia), writing (dysgraphia) and maths (dyscalculia), and often do not exist in isolation (Bandla et al., 2017). These disabilities affect the learning of individuals who have average abilities critical for human’s thinking and reasoning (Orim & Ezekiel, 2017; Bandla et al., 2017) state that SLDs manifest during the foundational years of early formal schooling and cause persistent impairments and disabilities in learning foundational academic skills.

SLD is considered as an adversity because it predicts negative outcomes for learners’ academic development and these expand to their social, emotional, and psychological functioning. Researchers report that the presence of an SLD is viewed as a risk factor that, in and of itself, does not predict positive, adverse outcomes (Morrison & Gosden 2019; Haroardottir et al., 2015). From an ecological perspective, researchers identify protective factors as those associated with resilience (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Jenson & Fraser 2011; Ungar 2011). These consist of inner personal strengths, as well as external protective contexts and processes, such as support provided by families, school systems and communities. These reduce the likelihood of risk.

Mediation Model as a Conceptual Framework

A variable is a mediator when it intermediates in the process whereby an independent variable influences the dependent variable. A mediator variable is a variable that intervenes in the relationship between the dependent variable and the independent variable (Bennett 2000; Hayes 2018; Kenny, 2014). Figure 1 below illustrates the basic mediation model. It shows that that X leads to Y; however, M mediates this process.

Fig. 1
figure 1

 A basic mediation model

Full size image

Mediation studies have been conducted previously in the field of resilience. To illustrate, Van Breda (2018) proposes that resilience research comprises of three related components (Fig. 2: adversity, outcomes, and mediating factors). Probable research in resilience needs to consider all three components (Van Breda, 2018). Figure 2 portrays the components of resilience theory developed by Van Breda (2018):

Fig. 2
figure 2

Components of resilience theory (Van Breda, 2018)

Full size image

The first variable is adversity. Van Breda (2018) notes that a study of resilience considers adversity faced by the individual. “Resilience theory has its roots in the study of adversity and an interest in how adverse life experiences impact people harmfully” (Van Breda, 2018:2). As noted in the definitions of resilience, a researcher cannot study resilience in the absence of adversity. Adversity, according to Obradovic, Shaffer, and Masten (2012), refers to adverse experiences that affect an individual’s normal functioning. Secondly, Van Breda (2018:6) suggests that “resilience theory and research are interested in outcomes following adversity”. Consequences are typically considered to be positive, especially the achievement of developmentally appropriate milestones (Masten & Monn 2015), such as physical growth, intellectual development and educational attainment among children, and education, employment, and family life among adults (Van Breda, 2018). The third focus of resilience researchers and theorists, which arguably is the crux of resilience research, is protective factors (Van Breda, 2018; Masten & Monn 2015). Van Breda argues that these are the factors that intervene amid adversity and outcomes. Van Breda reports that these protective factors are, essentially, the answer to the resilience question: what enables some individuals to overcome hardships while others do not? Resilience research engages with the mediating processes (also referred to as resilience processes or protective resources), which allow people to achieve positive outcomes when facing adversity (Van Breda, 2018). In this study, the researcher hypothesised that individual factors (independent variables) influence resilience (dependent variable) through the caregivers and context (mediators). Figures 3 and 4 (below) display the basic mediation models developed for this study. Figure 4 shows that caregivers mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience, while Fig. 4 demonstrates that context mediates the impact of individual factors on resilience.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Caregivers mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Context mediates the impact of individual factors on resilience

Full size image

Caregivers and context (mediation variables) are proposed as mediating the impact of individual factors (predictor variable) on resilience (outcome). Based on recent studies of resilience, resilience is viewed as not merely a matter of individual characteristics, but rather in terms of relationship with others (such as caregivers); and contextual resources provide support for resilience. Thus, the study is in alignment with a social-ecological perspective of resilience as resilience enabling resources for individuals’ development and growth. The researcher of this study agrees with Masten (2014) and Ungar (2013) who state that social-ecological stakeholders (for example, family members, friends, teachers, practitioners, schools, cultural leaders, service providers, and policymakers) are significantly co-responsible for individuals’ affirmative life outcomes.

Research Question

Do caregivers and context mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience?

Research aim

To investigate the mediating role of caregivers and context on the impact of individual factors on resilience.

Hypotheses

H 0:

Caregivers and context do not mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience.

H 1:

Caregivers and context mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience.

Methodology

This study adopted an exploratory quantitative research design since it attempts to explore a new and less researched area. Exploratory research, as indicated by Saunders et al., (2012), allows a researcher to test and explain relationships between variables. The authors emphasise that it is essential for the instrument to collect precise data to assist the researcher in achieving the research objectives and answering research questions. This study investigates the role of caregivers and context as mediators of the impact of individual factors on resilience.

The sample of the study was purposively selected (Babbie 2008), and the study used a questionnaire to collect data over three months from March to May of 2019. Although purposive sampling is common in qualitative studies, Kumar (2011) stresses that researchers using this sampling in quantitative research select participants better suited to provide the required data for the study. As such, the researcher purposefully selected learners with SLD in LSEN Schools as participants of the study as they suited the aim of the study.

The study involved a total number of 217 respondents. The sample comprised 153 (70.5%) males and 64 (29.5%) females. Respondents were selected from four Learners in Special Educational Needs (LSEN) schools in Gauteng Province. One school was situated in Soweto, one in Johannesburg north, one on the East Rand, and the fourth school in the West Rand. These are public schools for learners from grade 1 to 12 with learning barriers (such as SLD), which hinder them from coping well in the mainstream school environment. The Gauteng Department of Education (GDE) mainstream CAPS curriculum is followed in these schools.

All 217 of the Child and Youth Resilience Measures (CYRM-28) distributed to respondents were fully completed and no information was missing. Liebenberg, Ungar, and Van de Vijver (2012:87) state that the “CRYM-28 seeks to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the processes of resilience across culture and context, accounting for the heterogeneity of culture and experiences of youth”. The CYRM-28 is “a self-report instrument validated originally with a purposive sample of 1,451 youth growing up facing diverse forms of adversity in 11 countries (Canada, USA, Colombia, China, India, Russia, Palestine, Israel, Tanzania, the Gambia, and South Africa)” (Liebenberg, Ungar, & LeBlanc 2014:131). The CYRM-28 items provide a reliable and accurate measure of resilience across cultures as it was designed by an international and multicultural research team (Ungar & Liebenberg, 2011). The study by Ungar & Liebenberg (2011) reveals that the CYRM-28 has good content-related validity, meaning that the content of the items in the questionnaire covers the relevant domains for the construct measured. In a South African study of young adolescents, the results confirmed that the CYRM-28 is a contextually and culturally valid measure of resilience (Govender et al., 2017). Permission to use the CYRM-28 questionnaire in this study was obtained from the Resilience Research Centre on htp://CYRM-28.resilienceresearch.org/.

The Software Program for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25 was used to analyse data in this study. Regression analysis was used to investigate the role of caregivers and context on the impact of individual factors on resilience. Pallant (2014) defined regression analysis as a group of statistical techniques used to explore the relationship between one continuous dependent variable and several independent variables.

Ethical clearance for the study was gained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Education (Sem 2 2018-007) at the University of Johannesburg and the Gauteng Department of Education (GDE) before data collection. All participants (school, parents, and learners) in the four LSEN schools in Gauteng province of South Africa duly signed informed consent forms.

Limitations

The results of the study could not be generalised to similar schools in other provinces in South Africa due to the sample size and the fact that data was limited to only four schools. However, the results could be valuable and applicable to similar contexts. As the participants of the study are learners with SLD; in two LSEN schools, some of the learners struggled to read, and research assistants read for them. Items of the measure were translated to the participant’s home language, and this was to ensure accurate comprehension of the items. The researcher acknowledges that translation could have compromised the reliability of data.

Results

As evident on Table 1 (below), most of the respondents were between the ages of 12 and 14 years, representing a total of 77 (35.5%) respondents. There were 76 (35%) respondents aged between 9 and 11 years and the least number of respondents 16 (7.4%) were aged between 18 and 19. Most of the respondents reside in a peri-urban area, representing 118 (54.4%) of the total sample, followed by 87 (40.1%) in the urban area and 12 (5.5%) in the rural area. Lastly, majority of the participants in this study were from a school in West Rand area, represented by a total of 96 (42.2%), followed by a total of 69 (31.8%) in Elspark and 42 (19.4%) in Soweto. A school in Johannesburg North had the least number of participants 10 (4.6%).

Table 1 Frequency distributions of the demographics of the learners with SLD
Full size table

Mediation Analysis

SPSS Macro, developed by Andrew Hayes (Hayes & Rockwood, 2017), was used to test the hypotheses formulated for this study. Figure 5 illustrates the graphical representation of the mediating effect of context on individual factors and resilience and Fig. 6 shows the mediating effect of caregivers on individual factors and resilience, respectively.

Fig. 5
figure 5

The mediating effect of the context on the impact individual factors on resilience

Full size image

PROCESS macro results indicated that individual factors were a significant predictor of context (p-value < 0.05) and that context was a significant predictor of resilience (p-value < 0.05). These results support the mediational hypothesis. Individual factors were also found to significantly predict resilience (p-value < 0.05) after controlling for the mediator, suggesting that a partial mediation was present. The indirect effect was tested using a percentile bootstrap estimation approach with 5000 samples. The indirect effect was statistically significant at 95% confidence interval (0.4821, 0.6715).

Fig. 6
figure 6

The mediating effect of caregivers on the impact of individual factors on resilience

Full size image

PROCESS macro results indicated that individual factors were a significant predictor of caregivers (p-value < 0.05) and that caregivers were a significant predictor of resilience (p-value < 0.05). These results support the mediational hypothesis. Individual factors were also found to significantly predict resilience (p-value < 0.05) after controlling for the mediator, suggesting that a partial mediation was present. The indirect effect was tested using a percentile bootstrap estimation approach with 5000 samples. The indirect effect was statistically significant at 95% confidence interval (0.3794, 0.5870).

Therefore, the resilience of learners presenting with SLD in LSEN schools embeds in many interacting systems, which includes individual factors, caregivers, and context. The study hypothesised that caregivers and context mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience. This hypothesis was tested and the result was significant, confirming that context and caregivers mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience.

Discussion and Implications

The current study confirmed that caregivers and context mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience. This study produced results that could corroborate the results of previous studies in the field of resilience. While many studies examine individual characteristics that enable resilience, some of the most critical factors that enable resilience appear to be external to the individual, such as caregivers and family support and cultural and community environments (Bellis et al., 2017; Masten, 2014). These critical factors are explained by Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological model, which argues that an individual’s development depends on the immediate environment (i.e. relationship with caregivers, culture, spirituality, and community). This highlights the significance of collaboration between individuals and their context to enable growth that is positive despite hardship (Van Rensburg, 2014). In other words, the context is imperative for functional outcomes in individuals facing adversities.

Additionally, researchers (including Piers & Duquette 2016; Ungar 2012) studied resilience in various contexts; they investigated how children, adolescents and adults overcome adversity in their lives. The authors reported that the environment plays a critical role in the individual’s resilience. The environment must capacitate an individual with resources to combat the adversity as factors (such as family support, friends and peer relationships, school systems and communities) diminish the probability of risk. Resilience studies stress that researchers need to understand that resilience is a combination of individuals and contextual factors; and the context needs to be able to provide resilience resources (Haroardottir et al., 2015). This study, as demonstrated in previous studies, shows that resilience does not only describe individuals’ extraordinary capabilities. It is evident as part of daily life and manifests itself in various contexts in the face of adversity (Ogtem-Young 2018). Therefore, a combination of factors is involved in the development of resilience of learners with SLD.

Conclusion

The aim of this study was to investigate the mediating role of caregivers and context on the impact of individual factors on resilience of learners with SLD in LSEN schools, in South Africa. For decades, individual factors (such as; problem-solving skills, self-efficacy, self-awareness…) were initially viewed as the predictor of resilience. The researcher argued that the focus of resilience in terms on individual factors only, might not necessarily be applicable to Africans, because individuals assist each other in the face of hardships. Thus, the researcher proposed that caregivers and contextual factors mediates the influence of individual factors on resilience. The results of the study confirmed, through regression analysis, that caregivers and context factors mediate the impact of individual factors on resilience.

The approach of viewing resilience from a multiple contributors offer insightful understanding of resilience of learners with SLD in LSEN schools. Practitioners working with learners with SLD in LSEN schools should consider a combination of individual factors, caregivers and context factors to enhance the resilience of learners. There needs to be a shift from individual qualities to a holistic perspective when working with learners facing adversities. LSEN schools need to be capacitated with resilience resources to enable learners with SLD to cope with the disabilities they face. School practitioners need to consider the critical role of caregivers and context factors as resilience enablers for learners with SLD. Thus, the school, home and community should collaborate and offer learners resilience resources in an accessible and meaningful to individuals to aid their development of resilience. Multidisciplinary teams (parents, teachers, schools, community, and professionals) are urged to champion further individual and contextual resources to enable resilience for learners with SLD in LSEN schools.