Study on the socio-affective climate of adolescent students

The problem under research is of particular importance for the family and society because we can say, without fear of being subjective, that the socialization of children, i.e. their preparation to live in society, is a very topical problem precisely by ignoring its systematic and conscious approach at the level of society , especially in the context where puberty is the period when sports activities are of vital importance for socialization. At this stage of life, the child is sensitive to cognitive and moral development, he assumes different roles, learns that he is different from others and, above all, learns to build relationships with others. The purpose of the research. Establishing the socio-affective climate of the groups of students subject to research aims to identify the level of socialization and relationship among students, existing relationships at the group level, socialization, communication and relationship. The group interaction took place during swimming training, through the school curriculum Research method: sociometric test Sociometric testing reveals relevant aspects regarding the relationship of the student and the group as a whole. In order to know the level of socialization, empathy and mutual relations between adolescent students who practice swimming, the sociometric test was applied to the experimental group and the control group (50 students from the I.C. Vissarion Titu Theoretical High School, age level 13 , 14 years). The sociometric study has a triple orientation in the present research: 1. The teacher-coach's knowledge of the relationships within the group; 2. Students' identification of their own positions within the group; 3. Improving relationships and the psychosocial climate of the group through specific actions (socialization program in school camps The sociometric test was applied to students in the period 01.02-01.03.2023. the test was applied to both research groups. The results of the sociometric test were transposed into the sociometric matrices. For each group of pubertal age students (from the 8th grade of the I.C. Vissarion Titu Theoretical High School, age level 13-14), a matrix was created. This allowed the creation of a table with double entry, in which the subjects were numbered on the first line and column, in order to preserve the confidentiality of the data, respectively the names of the students, each student received a code name, the experimental group no. I-A1 - A25 and control group no. II- B1 - B30 (Appendices no. 4 and 5), and the data from the tests were recorded one by one in the sociometric matrix, thus reflecting the place of each member within the group. The resulting matrix shows that the highest score of positive attractions, namely 13, is obtained by A5 which has only 2 rejections, followed by A 16 and A24 with an attraction score of 12 and 2 rejections. Then, A8 and A11 stand out, each with a score of 9 in the election chapter. As I mentioned, in the center of the group is A5, chosen by 6 members of the group: A1, A2, A9, A12, A14 and A18, followed by A2, with 5 choices: A3, A10, A12, A16, A5. The following group members A 4, A10, A1, A19 have 4 choices each, followed by those with three choices: A1, A13, A14, A17, A 20. In the "chapter" rejections, the situation is as follows: A3 and A23 are each rejected by 6 members of the group, A 3 by A2, A5, A8, A14, A 21, A23 and A23 is rejected by A2, A3, A15, A18, A20, A24. We have also identified that A3 did not register any choice and so did A23. At the opposite pole, the fewest rejections were recorded by A4, A13, A16, one rejection each. From the analysis of the existing data, it appears that there are a number of 9 mutual choices: A1 with A19, A1 with A21, A4 with A24, A8 with A17, A8 with A20, A11 with A14, A13 with A 22, A14 with A21, A15 with A19 . At the same time, 4 mutual rejections were also identified: A3 with A23, A3 with A5, A6 with A25, A14 with A8. According to the matrix of the experimental group, within this group there are 2 subjects who did not register any attraction from the other members of the group, only registered rejections, they are A3, 0 choices and 6 rejections and A 23 0 choices and 6 rejections. The recorded results and the sociometric matrix show us that the subjects in the experimental group is not cohesive, there is no close relationship and communication between the group members. Lack of cohesion can lead to difficulties in communication, collaboration and achieving common goals. In the case of the second group subject to research, group no. II B (B1-B25), the results highlight the subjects with the highest score in positive choices are B5 and B15 registering an ISP index of 0.33, but those who have recorded the most positive choices are, B5 preferred by 8 members of the group: B1, B2, B7, B9, B12, B14, B19, B22, followed by B8 with 6 positive choices from the following members: B3, B5, B6, B10, B17, B21, and B16 registered 5 positive choices: B4, B7, B14, B15, B24. There were also 9 mutual positive choices, distributed as follows: B1-B2, B2-B12, B1-B5, B8-B10, B8-B17, B10-B13, B16-B24, B15-B19, B21-B1 . We note that B1 has reciprocal relationships with B2 and B5, and B8 with B10 and B17. In the case of group II B, the control group, all group members received choices and rejections. For example, there were subjects who chose but were rejected by the chosen: B2-B3, B-B3, B4-B25, B11-B4, B15-B4, B5-B12, B5-B19, B9-B24, B12-B20, B1-B19, B5-B19, B18-B20. In the rejection chapter, the highest negative score of 0.25 was recorded by A3 and A16, the most rejections are recorded by B3 with 5 rejections from the subjects: B2, B4, B5, B8, B25, followed by B15 all with 5 rejections obtained from: B1, B9, B12, B21, B23, then B25 also with 5 rejections from the following subjects: B4, B7, B16, B17, B19. The fewest rejections, respectively 1 each, were recorded by the following subjects: B1, B7, B9, B16, B24. The analysis of the results of the sociometric test applied to the two groups of adolescent students who practice swimming, groups I A and II B, brings to the fore a low degree of cohesion among the group members. Studying the indices of preferential status for group I, we find that the psychological value of preferential time "popular" registered three members, who were preferred by a certain subject. The preferential status index for the psychosocial value of the "popular" type fell within the value of 0.50 - 0.45. For the second group the psychological value of preferential time "popular" recorded two members, who were preferred by a certain subject. The preferential status index for the psychosocial value of the "popular" type fell to the value of 0.33. Within the "accept" preferential type psychosocial value, the first group, I, recorded 9 members, and the second group recorded 10 members, "accept" preferential status indices in group I A ranged from 0.25 -0 .04, compared to group II B where the preferential status index is between 0.25 and 0.08. The psychosocial value of the "marginalized" preferential type highlights the fact that the subjects of group I fall within the range of -0.45 and -0.08, and those of group II within the range of -0.33 and -0.04. Group I registered 11 "marginalized" subjects and group II 10 marginalized. The results of the initial testing show that the two research groups are relatively homogeneous. Studying the sociograms below, we notice that subjects A5, A16, A24 and B5, B15 are "popular" in the group of subjects, being placed in the center of the sociogram. Less integrated, registered under the chapter "accepted" are subjects A2, A4, A6, A7, A8, A10, A13, A22 and B1, B4, B6, B7, B8, B10, B11, B12, B21, B24. At the same time, the "marginalized" are highlighted A1, A3, A9, A11, A12, A14, A15, A18, A21, A23, A25 and in group II B2, B3, B9, B14, B16, B17 B18, B19, B20, B23 , B25, Indifferences are: A17, A19, A20 and B11, B13 B18.imageFigure 1. Sociogram of group I AimageFigure 2. Sociogram of group II BConclusions. By examining the sociogram, we gained useful information about how group members interact, who are the leaders, and who are the more socially isolated. This information is useful for us to develop strategies to strengthen relationships and improve group dynamics. According to the research results we recommend the following: - The coach can offer the children exercises and games to help them improve their verbal and non-verbal communication skills. - Encouraging children to participate in team games and cooperative activities.