This article was downloaded by: [University of Birmingham]On: 16 November 2014, At: 14:11Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rere20

Social anxiety at elementary school:the effects of a curriculumKoos Bokhorst a , Frits A. Goossens a & Piet A. de Ruyter aa Department of Child Psychology and Education , FreeUniversity of Amsterdam , van der Boechorststraat 1, 1081,BT Amsterdam, The NetherlandsPublished online: 09 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: Koos Bokhorst , Frits A. Goossens & Piet A. de Ruyter (1995) Socialanxiety at elementary school: the effects of a curriculum, Educational Research, 37:1, 87-94,DOI: 10.1080/0013188950370108

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0013188950370108

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. Theaccuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liablefor any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Educational Research Volume 37 Number 1 Spring 1995 87

Short report

Social anxiety at elementary school: the effects of a curriculumKoos Bokhorst, Frits A. Goossens and Piet A. de RuyterDepartment of Child Psychology and EducationFree University of Amsterdam, van der Boechorststraat 1, 1081, BT Amsterdam,The Netherlands

Summary

In order to study and thereby reduce social anxiety among elementary schoolchildren, a curriculum was designed which was to be delivered by the teacher in theclassroom; 177 children, aged between nine and 12 years took part. The level ofsocial anxiety of the subjects was assessed by way of both a self-report and a teacherreport measure. Girls perceived themselves as more socially anxious than boys, bothbefore and after the curriculum. A moderate effect was found, using children's ownassessment of their social anxiety as a criterion, but the teachers were moreenthusiastic about the effects. Those children who were initially particularly high onsocial anxiety had, by their own account, made a large and significant progression.

Introduction

Social anxiety involves feelings of apprehension, self-consciousness and emotionaldistress in anticipated or actual self-evaluative situations. Such anxiety occurs whenpeople want to make a favourable impression, but doubt that they will succeed(Schlenker and Leary, 1982). About 30 to 50 per cent of Americans label themselvesas situationally shy persons (Gough and Heilbrun, 1983; Lazarus, 1982; Pilkonis,Heape and Klein, 1980; Zimbrado, Pilkonis and Norwood, 1975). Similarpercentages (42 per cent) are mentioned by Zimbardo (1977) for elementary schoolchildren. A Dutch study (Meijers, 1978) mentioned that at least 10 per cent of thechildren suffered from severe problems of social anxiety. The difference between thepercentages is presumably due to differences in the criteria used.

Apart from an affective component of shyness, one usually distinguishes both acognitive and a social competence component (Cheek and Melchior, 1990).Cognitive and skills training approaches have dominated in interventions withchildren (Prinz, 1990; van der Molen, 1990; van Lier and Hoeben, 1991). However,interventions have evolved from quite simple to more complicated attempts, inwhich in addition to the children's cognitions and skills, their feelings and values

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Dr Mark Meerum Terwogt for his comments on an earlier draft of this shortreport.

Requests for reprints: to F. A. Goossens, van der Boechorststraat 1, 1081 BT Amsterdam,The Netherlands; E-mail: V73ugoos @ Hasara 11.NL.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

4:11

16

Nov

embe

r 20

14

88 Educational Research Volume 37 Number 1 Spring 1995

have become the target behaviours (Furman and Robbins, 1985; Ladd and Mize,1983). While the more practically oriented (cf. van Lier and Hoeben, 1991) claim ahigher success ratio of the later approaches, the more theoretically oriented (Furmanand Gavin, 1989) regret that using combinations of various techniques andapproaches makes teasing apart the relative influence of each very difficult.

Apart from differences in the target variables, interventions also differ in settings,procedures and outcome measures. The setting most often used is the classroom, butsometimes a smaller group is selected for treatment (Quartel, 1984; Schuurman,Hendriks and Boonstra, 1986). The use of smaller groups is usually recommended inorder to enlarge the homogeneity of the group (Prinz, 1990). Alternatively, it can betheoretically valuable not to homogenize the sample, but to establish beforehand thedegree of social anxiety of the children sampled (Furman and Gavin, 1989). As foroutcome measures, several authors (Prinz, 1990; Van Lier and Hoeben, 1991)recommend using teachers as informants because they have been exposed tofrequent samples of a child's social behaviour. Other recommended informants arethe target children themselves, who can indicate their own social anxiety (Hymel andFranke, 1985; Ladd and Mize, 1983; van der Molen, 1990).

In this study we were interested in the effect of a new curriculum aimed atreducing social anxiety in a sample of elementary school children. The reason forthe development of this curriculum was the renewed interest of the Dutchgovernment in guiding the social-emotional development of elementary school-agechildren and in containing the numbers of children referred to special education(van Lieshout and Haselager, 1993; cf. Elton, 1989). The curriculum not onlyconsisted of both cognitive and skills training, but also aimed at making childrenmore aware of their own feelings and sense of value. Both hypothetical andconcrete classroom situations were used to improve pupils' insight into thebehaviours of others, and to respond effectively, while feelings of variousinteractants were discussed, and a prosocial approach was stressed. Following therecommendations of the various authors mentioned in the previous paragraph, weused outcome measures supplied by the children themselves and by their teachers.All the children in a particular classroom served as subjects rather than a morehomogeneous subsample, because it would be instructive to find out whichchildren would profit from the curriculum. We only expected to find a moderatelypositive effect, as not all subjects would be socially anxious, and therefore are notlikely to profit from the curriculum.

Method

Sample and design

A total of 177 children (83 boys; 94 girls) from four different small town elementaryschools in the Dutch provinces of North and South Holland took part in the study.These schools were comparable, in that they were of average size (200-300 pupils),Protestant in affiliation and they served a predominantly middle-class population. Atthe pre-test, the average age of the children was 11 years 7 months (SD = 8 months).The post-test took place four months later.

The design used was a Solomon four group design (Campbell and Stanley, 1963),without randomization or matching. The two teachers who taught the curriculumwere volunteers. Such a design offers the best protection against the occurrence ofinternally invalidating factors, provided the groups are homogeneous. The first

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

4:11

16

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Short report 89

group (pre-test, treatment and post-test) consisted of 51 pupils (19 boys and 32 girls)from the fifth and sixth forms. The second group (pre-test, no treatment, post-test)consisted of 45 pupils (23 boys and 22 girls) from the sixth form. The third group (nopre-test, treatment, post-test) consisted of 25 pupils (10 boys and 15 girls) from thefifth and sixth forms, while the fourth group (post-test only) consisted of 56 children(31 boys and 25 girls) from the fifth and sixth forms.

Measures

The children's social anxiety was measured with the Social Anxiety Scale forChildren, SAS-K (Dekking, 1983). The SAS-K is a self-report measure and consistsof 46 items (range of scores: 0-46; high scores denote social anxiety), plus 10 extraitems to measure social desirability. The SAS-K has been especially designed tomeasure social anxiety in children aged between nine and 12 years. The SAS-K wasselected because national norms have been developed, and because it has highreliability and validity (Dekking, 1983; Visser et al., 1992). The test-retestreliability in this study (group 2; pre-test, no treatment, post-test) was 0.80(p = 0.001) over a period of four months. The test-retest correlation for socialdesirability was considerably lower (0.33; p<0.02). Social desirability did notcorrelate significantly with the total social anxiety score at either the pre-test or thepost-test. Since the social desirability score was also low at both times, it seemsunlikely that it has influenced the results of our study. Dekking (1983) reported sexdifferences. Girls were found to be more socially anxious than boys. This was also thecase in our sample, both at the pre- and post-test (p < 0.05).

In addition to the SAS-K, we made use of a teacher report questionnaire, designedby the first author and consisting of 10 questions. This Likert-type questionnairehad a high internal consistency of 0.92 and 0.91 at the pre- and the post-test(N = 175; 2 missing) respectively. The test-retest correlation was 0.72 (p < 0.001;group 2). The correlation of the teacher report questionnaire with the SAS-K wasmoderately significant-i.e. 0.19 (p < 0.05; pre-test) and 0.34 (p = 0.001; post-test).The higher correlation at the post-test may be due to an improved knowledge of theteachers about their pupils.

Treatment

The curriculum consisted of 12 lessons, each lasting an hour. The first lesson focusedon physical appearance and the children's reaction to it. The" second and thirdlessons dealt with feelings. The subject of the fourth lesson was how to relate toothers. Other lessons (5 and 6) focused on the influence of the environment onbehaviour and feelings, social rules (lesson 7), relating to unknown others (lesson 8),working in cooperation with others (lesson 9), showing your own feelings (lesson10), making mistakes (lesson 11) and being happy with yourself (lesson 12). Alllessons were given by the pupils' own teacher. The curriculum aimed at improvingthe children's self-esteem, their self-confidence and their competence in socialinteractions. Throughout the lessons the teacher had to take an active part, beencouraging and make sure the more socially anxious children would also have theopportunity to take part and express themselves.An example In the first lesson a photograph was shown depicting a group of happychildren. The teacher asked a number of questions, such as: 'Do all children look thesame?' and 'How do they differ from each other?' The pupils' answers were collectedand used for a general discussion on appearances, like what physical attributes (body

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

4:11

16

Nov

embe

r 20

14

90 Educational Research Volume 37 Number 1 Spring 1995

length, colour of eyes) one uses to describe appearances (cognitions). Thediscussion then moved on to appreciation of appearances, and what the childrenliked or disliked about their own appearances. Question and answer games ofthe following type were played: 'How would you like it if you had . . . curlyhair?' (feelings and values). The children were asked to describe themselves to astranger who came to pick them up from the station, and to complete sentencesdescribing aspects of their own appearances: 'One thing in which I am verysimilar to others is . . .' They were also asked how they would respond, if theperson who came to pick them up looked extremely odd (skills). Theimportance of 'looking good', wearing the right clothes and being fashionablewas discussed. Children were shown pictures of peers from earlier periods inhistory to show how styles can change. Finally, they were confronted withhypothetical situations in which they had to relate to someone who wasembarrassingly unattractive or ugly (values).

Each lesson started with a brief introduction to the main theme, either byway of audio tapes, slides, photographs or an oral presentation by the teacher.This was followed by an instruction part. The instructions were intended toimprove children's awareness of their feelings, to teach them how to changetheir feelings, to analyse social situations in terms of reciprocal influences, to beaware of other participants' values and their own, and to improve their socialskills by coming up with an appropriate behavioural response. This wasfollowed by an exchange of experiences, either in the form of a classroomdiscussion or by a discussion in smaller groups. Each lesson ended with a taskin which the lesson's main theme was elaborated in some form (a theatricalplay, a drawing, a story or some other group game). A full description of thecurriculum is available on request.

Procedure

The pre-test took place in the first half of October. We chose this time because theteachers would by then already have had some opportunity to get to know then-pupils. School starts in August, so the teachers had already had two months ofexperience with the children in order to form an opinion on their social anxiety.The teachers who gave the curriculum were given additional information about'social anxiety', as well as practical suggestions about the implementation of thecurriculum. The first author kept in contact with them throughout, both by way ofregular team meetings and by phone. By the middle of February of the followingyear, the curriculum had been completed. The post-test took place between oneand two weeks after the completion of the curriculum.

Statistical analysis

Because randomization had not taken place, we checked whether the four groupsdiffered from one another in the number of boys and girls, in age and (for groups 1and 2) in the scores at the pre-test. The children in group 2 appeared to be older(p = <0.05) than the children in the other groups. Age, however, was not found tobe correlated to the dependent variables. This is to be expected, as the SAS-K wasespecially designed for children aged between nine and 12. No differences werefound between the groups 1 and 2 on the pre-test scores of the two dependentvariables.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

4:11

16

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Short report 91

TABLE 1 Means and standard deviations of SAS-K scores and teacher reportscores at pre- and post-test by sex

Group

1

2

3

4

Sex

GirlsBoysBothGirlsBoysBothGirlsBoysBothGirlsBoysBoth

N

321951222345151025253156

SAS-K

Pre-test

Mean

11.138.68

10.2214.5910.5212.51

SD

8.278.378.318.596.567.81

Post-test

Mean

9.978.269.33

14.007.65

10.7613.676.40

10.6714.689.71

11.93

SD

8.326.727.74

10.106.168.838.343.507.648.818.178.75

Teacher report scores

Pre-test

Mean

27.2522.6325.5326.4128.6127.53

SD

8.847.428.564.975.385.25

Post-test

Mean

23.6320.6322.5127.1626.9127.0327.1323.6025.7225.7324.3224.95

SD

8.486.817.974.184.694.406.845.936.615.355.345.35

Results

In Table 1 we present the means and standard deviations of both the subjects'summated scores on the SAS-K and the teacher report measures by sex. Both pre-and post-test scores are given. First, the teacher report measures were analysed byway of a 2 (pre-test) by 2 (treatment) by 2 (sex) analysis of variance. The effect of thepre-test was not found to be significant, but both the effect of the treatment(F(l,169) = 5.322; p < 0.05) and the effect of sex (F(l,169) = 4.225; p < 0.05), aswell as the interaction effect between treatment and sex (F(l,169) = 7.026; p < 0.05)were significant. None of the other two-way effects were significant, nor was the onlythree-way interaction effect significant. Thus the teachers believed the curriculum tobe effective, the more so with girls, who had made more progress than the boys, eventhough the girls were still more socially anxious.

The self-report measures of the children were subjected to exactly the same 2(pre-test) by 2 (treatment) by 2 (sex) analysis of variance. The effect of the pre-test wasnot significant. The effect of the treatment was marginally significant(F(l,169) = 2.259; p<0.10), and the effect of sex was significant too(F(l,169)= 15.539; p<0.01). None of the interaction effects were found to besignificant. In the children's own view, the curriculum had a moderate effect, and thegirls still perceived themselves as more socially anxious than the boys. Note that bothchildren and teachers seemed to agree to a large extent on the effects of the curriculum.

Post hoc inspection of the raw data suggested that those who had been high onsocial anxiety at the pre-test had made the most progress. In order to check this, wecompared the highly socially anxious children (the top 33.3 per cent, based on theirown pre-test self-report scores; N = 32) in the first two experimental conditionswith the others (who had about intermediate or low scores on social anxiety) on thepost-test scores by way of a 2 (experimental condition) by 2 (initially high orintermediate/low) Anova with the pre-test scores as a covariate. Sex was left out,because the highly socially anxious children were almost all females. The effect of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

4:11

16

Nov

embe

r 20

14

92 Educational Research Volume 37 Number 1 Spring 1995

the covariate was significant (F(l,91) = 131.79 (p = 0.000); the effects of theexperimental condition (F(l,91) = 0.405; n.s.) and the initial score(F(l,91) = 0.271; n.s.) were not significant, but the interaction between experimen-tal condition and initial score was significant (F(l,91) = 4.472; p<0.04). Thosechildren in the treatment group who considered themselves high on social anxietyreported the most progress. Their social anxiety scores had decreased by an averageof 4.94. In sum, the treatment effect was limited to those children, who by their ownreport, saw themselves as high on social anxiety.

Discussion

Both in the opinion of the children and in the opinion of the teachers, the curriculumhad an effect. The teachers were, however, more positive about the effect of thecurriculum than were the children. There may be two reasons for this discrepancy.First, as the teachers were the ones who delivered the curriculum, they may have beentempted to overrate the effect as a kind of reward for their own efforts. Secondly, in thecase of the children's own opinion, the overall effect may have been suppressed eitherbecause of a 'bottom' effect or because the curriculum did not offer any new insights orbehavioural options to those children who were only moderately or hardly sociallyanxious. The bottom effect explanation may have worked especially for those childrenwho did not suffer from social anxiety, but the absence of any effect for those who wereintermediate on social anxiety is more likely to be the result of a lack of effectiveness ofthe treatment. This need not be serious, however, as some form of social anxiety isprobably better than none at all. What is more, children do not always experience theirsocial anxiety as problematic. Alternatively, it is possible that the curriculum mayhave had an effect on those children who took an intermediate position on socialanxiety, but this effect may have been countered by a higher awareness of their ownsocial anxiety. The latter is not unlikely, as Dekking (1983) reported that the simpleadministration of the SAS-K made children more aware of their own functioning insocial situations. We may need to use other outcome measures in order to get a betterinsight into the effectiveness of the curriculum.

We also found sex differences. Both before and after the curriculum, girlsperceived themselves as more socially anxious than boys, and the subgroup ofchildren who were high on social anxiety contained considerably more girls thanboys. Sex effects were also reported by the teachers, but not as strongly as by thepupils themselves. Girls may either be more willing than boys to report their ownsocial anxiety or be more aware of them, or both. Sex differences were also reportedby Dekking (1983). The teachers too reported a stronger effect of the curriculum ongirls than on boys, but this was not supported by the children themselves. The datado not clarify who is right. We do speculate, however, that the contents of thecurriculum may have appealed more to girls than to boys, and this may be what theteachers noticed and interpreted as a selective form of progress.

The curriculum was delivered to all pupils in a certain classroom, and not just tosome, who were high on social anxiety. While it could be argued that such a selectiveimplementation would have greatly enlarged the effect of the curriculum, we do notfavour such an approach for reasons of ecological validity. Implementation of thecurriculum in the classroom with all pupils present has the advantage of making useof such social situations as occur in the daily routine of pupils. Setting them apartwould create a situation which differs from everyday reality, and might stigmatize inthe eyes of the other pupils, those who were selected for the curriculum. Such a

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

4:11

16

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Short report 93

procedure might have an adverse effect once these selected pupils are back in theclassroom. Our study seems to show that those who were high initially on socialanxiety profited the most from the curriculum, at least in the short run. In afollowing experiment, we will try to assess the effect of the curriculum with adifferent sample of special education children, and use additional outcome measuresover a longer period following the delivery of the curriculum.

References

CAMPBELL, D. T. and STANLEY, J. C. (1963). Experimental and Quasi-experimentalDesigns for Research. Chicago: Rand-McNally; reprinted 1981.

CHEEK, J. M. and MELCHIOR, L. A. (1990). 'Shyness, self-esteem and self-conscious-ness.' In: LEITENBERG, H. (Ed) Handbook of Social and Evaluation Anxiety. NewYork: Plenum, pp. 47-82.

DEKKING, Y. M. (1983). SAS-K Sociale Angst Schaal voor Kinderen (The Social AnxietyScale for Children). Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.

ELTON REPORT (1989). Discipline in Schools. London: HMSO.FURMAN, W. and GAVIN, L. A. (1989). 'Peers' influence on adjustment and development:

a view from the intervention literature.' In: BERNDT, T. J. and LADD, G. W. (Eds)Peer Relationships in Child Development. New York: Wiley, pp. 319-40.

FURMAN, W. and ROBBINS, P. (1985). 'What's the point? Issues in the selection oftreatment objectives.' In: SCHNEIDER, B. H., RUBIN, K. H. and LEDINGHAM, J.E. (Eds) Children's Peer Relations: Issues in Assessment and Intervention. New York:Springer-Verlag, pp. 41-54.

GOUGH, H. G. and HEILBRUN, A. B. (1983). The Adjective Check ListManual: 1983. PaloAlto, Calif.: Consulting Psychologists' Press.

HYMEL, S. and FRANKE, S. (1985). 'Children's peer relations: assessing self-perceptions.'In: SCHNEIDER, B. H., RUBIN, K. H. and LEDINGHAM, J. E. (Eds) Children's PeerRelations: Issues in Assessment and Intervention. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 75-91.

LADD, G. W. and MIZE, J. (1983). 'A cognitive-social learning model of social-skilltraining', Psychology Review, 90, 127-57.

LAZARUS, P. J. (1982). 'Incidence of shyness in elementary school age children',Psychological Reports, 51, 904-6.

VAN LIER, P. A. and HOEBEN, S. M. (1991). 'Begeleiding op school van kinderen metrelatieproblemen: het belang van afstemming en inbedding' ('Guiding children withrelational problems at school: the importance of fine tuning between school and thehome'), Pedagogische Studiën, 68, 86-100.

VAN LIESHOUT, C. F. M. and HASELAGER, G. J. T. (1993). 'De Structuur enorganisatie van de begeleiding van de sociaal-emotionele ontwikkeling van leerlingen'('The structure and organization of guiding the social-emotional development of pupils'),Tijdschrift voor Orthopedagogiek, 32, 87-102.

MEIJERS, J. J. (1978). Problem-solving Therapy with Socially Anxious Children. Lisse: Swetsand Zeitlinger.

VAN DER MOLEN, H. T. (1990). 'A definition of shyness and its implications for clinicalpractice.' In: CROZIER, W. R. (Ed) Shyness and Embarrassment: Perspectives from SocialPsychology. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 255-285.

VAN OOST, P., BRAEM, M., DE RUYCK, H. and MOMMERENCY, G. (1989).Bevorderen van sociale competentie bij kinderen. Van onderzoek naar de praktijk van de klas(Improving Children's Social Competence: from research to the reality of the classroom).Leuven: Acco.

PILKONIS, P.A., HEAPE, C. A. and KLEIN, R. H. (1980). 'Treating shyness and otherpsychiatric difficulties in psychiatric outpatients', Communication Education, 29, 250-5.

PRINZ, R. J. (1990). 'Socially withdrawn and isolated children.' In: LEITENBERG, H.(Ed) Handbook of Social and Evaluation Anxiety. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 161-78.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

4:11

16

Nov

embe

r 20

14

94 Educational Research Volume 37 Number 1 Spring 1995

QUARTEL, F . G. (1984). Eigen Gevoelens en Omgang: thematisch geordende lesstofsociaal-emotionele vorming (Feelings and Relating: thematically ordered lessons for social-emotional education). Amsterdam: Meulenhoff-Educatief.

SCHLENKER, B. R. and LEARY, M. R. (1982). 'Social anxiety and self-presentation: aconceptualization and a model', Psychological Bulletin, 92, 641-69.

SCHUURMAN, C , HENDRIKS, G. and BOONSTRA, H. (1986). Focus op jezelf en deander. Een programma voor de sociaal-emotionele ontwikkeling van kinderen (Focusing atYourself and the Other. A Programme for the Social-Emotional Development of Children).Amsterdam: Uitgave PI Rotterdam.

VISSER, R. S. H., VAN VLIET-MULDER, J. C., EVERS, A. and TER LAAK, J. (1982).Documentatie van tests en testresearch in Nederland - 1982 (Documentation of Tests and TestResearch in the Netherlands). Amsterdam: NIP.

ZIMBARDO, P. G. (1977). Shyness: What it Is and What to Do about It. Reading, Mass.:Addison-Wesley.

ZIMBARDO, P.G., PILKONIS, P. and NORWOOD, R. (1975). 'The social disease calledshyness', Psychology Today, 8, May, 69-72.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

4:11

16

Nov

embe

r 20

14