Shut the Door on Me

¶ … Shut the Door on Me" (2006) is a research study conducted by Barbara Flom, an associate professor in the school of education at the University of Wisconsin. The purpose of the study is to gain a better understanding of the future aspirations and goals of 15 youth with emotional disturbances.

According to the Flom (2006), a number of studies have previously been conducted showing that troubled youths can be resilient. Many adults talk about how they were able to overcome their problems and succeed in life. However, states Flom, "The need for a clear picture of the aspirations of young people in significant legal, educational, or emotional difficulty demands further investigation" (p. 88). In other words, additional research is needed on the specific aspirations and goals embraced by such students.

Several times in her research, Flom stresses the importance of the counselors in helping these troubled students reach their personal goals. The hidden message appears to be that counselors are not doing enough for this population and need to be particularly cognizant that even the highest risk students can work toward their dreams. Counselors should not give up on them.

The main argument is that these students need to have similar direction and support as those in the high-achievement group. These high-risk students need 1) a better understanding of their personal strengths and how they can be applied; 2) broad-based school programs that nourish the their aspirations; 3) warm personal relationships with the counselors.

As noted by the author (Flom, 2006, p.90), the main limitation of the study is that it is about a "group of youth who shared commonalities of geography, enrollment in a particular treatment program, and voluntary involvement in the study. Therefore, the study's findings apply only to its participants and cannot be generalized without further research" (2006, p. 89) Also, rather than a quantitative study, this research is based on a phenomenological approach, which has both its strengths and weaknesses. The advantages include depth and detail about the topic, attempts to be nonjudgmental, and having a wide global perspective. The disadvantages consist of the environment impacting the comments; not empirical so difficult to make systemic comparisons.