Research Roundup 17, 1 (Fall 2000)
Early Intervention to Prevent Violence
By Linda Lumsden
With most social problems it makes sense—both practically
and financially—to be proactive and provide intervention at
the earliest possible moment rather than waiting to respond until
issues escalate further or become more deeply entrenched. The problem
of youth violence is no exception. If children who show early signs
of antisocial behavior are provided with support and services at a
young age, they may be able to be diverted from a course that will
ultimately end in violence or delinquency.
Although schools should not be expected to shoulder the full
weight of dealing with students who demonstrate evidence of emotional
or behavioral disturbance, they do have a key role to play.
In fact, there is evidence that teachers of young children are
able to predict with a high degree of accuracy which of their
students will engage in delinquent behavior as they grow older. FBI
agent Terry Royster notes that teachers, who observe and interact
with students on a daily basis over time, are more reliable sources
of information about which students are most troubled and in need of
help than are the numerous "warning sign" lists that have been
crafted by a variety of education-related organizations.
Royster says, "What I stress is to really forget the school
shooter behavioral assessments and go into the classroom. Every
teacher can tell you who's likely to cause trouble"
(LaFee 2000).
When teachers notice a student who appears troubled and in need
of help, how can schools respond in a way that meets the needs of
both the student and the entire school community? The works reviewed
below offer educators a sampling of possible avenues for intervening
to assist troubled children and youth.
Myrna Shure discusses two primary-prevention programs
designed to teach interpersonal problem-solving skills to young
children.
Hill M. Walker, Bruce Stiller, and Annemieke
Golly provide an overview of First Step, a program being used by
schools with young children who exhibit "soft" signs of antisocial
behavior such as aggression, bullying, and defiance.
Robert H. Horner, George Sugai, and Howard F. Horner
approach violence prevention from the perspective of schoolwide
discipline policy.
Anne Wescott Dodd emphasizes the necessity for schools
to focus not only on the 3 R's but to teach and model the 3
C's—care, concern, and connection.
Dewey G. Cornell offers an overview of a variety of
research-validated community, family, and school-based
violence-prevention approaches and programs.
Shure, Myrna B. Preventing Violence the Problem-Solving
Way. Juvenile Justice Bulletin (April 1999): 12 pages.
Available from: Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse, Publication
Reprint/Feedback, P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000.
800-638-8736.
Several studies over the past twenty years have found that
delinquent and predelinquent adolescents tend to differ from their
nondelinquent peers in terms of their interpersonal cognitive
problem-solving (ICPS) skills. This finding is the foundation on
which two early intervention programs are built. Both focus on
changing students' thinking processes instead of the problematic
behaviors themselves.
I Can Problem Solve is designed for use in school settings with
four- to eight-year-old children. Both this program and Raising a
Thinking Child, a related program that trains parents to teach
problem-solving skills to their children at home, have been
recognized as exemplary juvenile delinquency prevention programs.
The ultimate goal of both programs is to prevent later, more
serious behavioral problems and to help children "grow into thinking,
feeling human beings who will be able to make good decisions when
they reach adolescence and adulthood."
Specific ICPS skills emphasized include means-end thinking,
weighing pros and cons, alternative solution thinking, and
consequential thinking. Studies have found that students who are able
to both think of alternative solutions and formulate means-ends plans
tend to be rated high on prosocial behavior and low on impulsive or
inhibited behavior.
On the other hand, children with less developed ICPS skills, in
particular deficient means-ends thinking, are more likely to display
"impulsive antisocial behaviors such as physical and verbal
aggression, inability to delay gratification, overemotionality in the
face of frustration, inability to make friends, and less tendency to
show empathy or sympathy to others in distress." Deficiencies in two
other ICPS skills—alternative solution thinking and
consequential thinking—are strongly associated with
impulsiveness, withdrawn behavior, and lack of prosocial skills.
Both programs focus on helping children develop a habit of
generating and evaluating multiple possible ways of getting their
needs met. There is evidence that children exposed to the training
improve their problem-solving abilities. Academic improvement,
though not a stated objective of the programs, also tends to occur
among children who receive the training at home and/or at school. A
followup study found that positive effects of training had been
largely maintained.
Walker, Hill M.; Bruce Stiller; and Annemieke Golly. "First
Step to Success: A Collaborative Home-School Intervention for
Preventing Antisocial Behavior at the Point of School Entry."
Young Exceptional Children 1, 2 (Winter 1998): 2-6. Available
from: Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior, University of
Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403. 541-346-3592. $5.00.
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~ivdb/index.html
If children show signs of antisocial behavior, the earlier an
intervention can be initiated, the greater the likelihood they can
learn more appropriate ways of responding to others and thereby be
diverted from forming deeply embedded, and ever escalating, patterns
of antisocial behavior.
One intervention program being used with young children who
exhibit "soft" signs of antisocial behavior, such as aggression,
bullying, and defiance, is called First Step to Success. The two- to
three-month program strives to increase students' adaptive behavior
and time engaged in teacher-assigned tasks while decreasing
aggressive and other forms of maladaptive behavior.
The program consists of three modules: early detection, school
intervention, and home intervention. The early detection module
employs a universal screening process that ranges from teacher
nomination to use of rank ordering, teacher ratings, and direct
observations.
The school intervention component is based on a modified
version of CLASS: Contingencies for Learning Academic and Social
Skills. It initially involves a program consultant who works with the
students; later the student's classroom teacher assumes
responsibility for administering the intervention program. A
green/red card used by the consultant, and later on by the teacher,
gives the student behavioral feedback and is also tied to a point
system in which students can earn access to special activities and
privileges.
Finally, the home-intervention module of the program, called
homeBase, enlists the support of the child's parents, who receive
instruction from the program consultant in six skills critical to
school success: (1) communication and sharing at school, (2)
cooperation, (3) limit setting, (4) problem-solving, (5) friendship
making, and (6) developing confidence. Parents, after receiving
training themselves, teach their children these skills, provide them
with opportunities for practicing the skills, and reward their
children for using the skills.
Followup studies have shown positive effects persisting for up
to two years following a child's exposure to First Step.
Horner, Robert H.; George Sugai, and Howard F. Horner. "A
Schoolwide Approach to Student Discipline." The School
Administrator (February 2000): 20-23. Available from: AASA
Distribution Center, PO Box 411, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
888-782-2272. $7.70 for complete issue.
Few would argue that a goal of school leaders should be to
reduce dangerous and disruptive behavior by students. According to
Horner and colleagues, principals can take three steps to reduce
disruptive behavior.
First, schools should identify, define, teach, and support a
small set of expected behaviors rather than presenting students with
a laundry list of unacceptable behaviors. When the emphasis is on
affirming desired student behavior instead of on what students are
not supposed to do, a more positive tone is set for establishing and
maintaining schoolwide discipline. Having a limited number of
positively framed, overarching rules for conduct (such as be safe, be
respectful, be responsible, be kind) can assist students in
cultivating socially appropriate norms.
Second, it is important for schools to develop a distinct
discipline system to deal with students who consistently violate
behavioral expectations. To increase adult supervision and monitoring
of these students, some schools use check-in and check-out
procedures. These procedures can be implemented with only minimal
staff time and commitment and have the potential to improve
educational and social success among students at risk.
Finally, for the 1 to 7 percent of students with entrenched,
high-intensity problem behaviors that have been unresponsive to
traditional intervention, individualized behavioral support based on
a functional assessment of the student is often the best way to
proceed, say the authors.
Horner and colleagues identify six "traps," or faulty
assumptions about school discipline, administrators can get caught
in: (1) Getting tough is enough; (2) focusing on the difficult; (3)
looking for the quick fix; (4) finding one powerful trick; (5)
believing someone else has the solution; and (6) believing more is
better.
If administrators make schoolwide discipline a high priority and
embrace practices that are research-validated, schools can do much to
reach troubled children and youth and perhaps prevent another school
shooting.
Dodd, Anne Wescott. "Making Schools Safe for All Students: Why
Schools Need To Teach More Than the 3 R's." NASSP Bulletin
(March 2000): 24-31. Available from: National Association of
Secondary School Principals, 1904 Association Drive, Reston, VA
20191. 703-860-0200. $15.00.
Driven by a desire to prevent violent outbursts in the nation's
schools, many administrators have stepped up physical security in
their buildings by installing metal detectors and video cameras,
requiring students and staff to wear ID badges, and hiring police
officers and security guards. Dodd questions whether adopting
practices common in prisons will make schools safer or just more
secure.
The body of the article explores the concept of the schoolhome
(as opposed to schoolhouse) and the necessity for schools to focus
not only on the 3 R's but to teach and model the 3 C's—care,
concern, and connection. A schoolhome is a place where all students
feel valued and respected by both adults and peers, and, in turn,
value and respect those with whom and from whom they learn.
According to Dodd, teachers interested in creating a classroom
climate characterized by respect and collaboration should do the
following:
- Examine what they teach and what they ask students to do while
attempting to assume the students' perspective.
- Listen to students and give them opportunities to share their
concerns.
- Give students choices and responsibilities within the class.
- Think in terms of collaborative problem-solving rather than
punishment when responding to particularly challenging students.
- Find ways to connect learning to the world outside the
classroom.
- Make student learning public and/or connected to the larger
community in some way.
Dodd also notes that revising the curriculum "to be more
interdisciplinary and inclusive of all cultures, races, and genders"
can provide substance to schools' stated interest in making all
students feel welcome and valued. All students must become convinced
that "I have value as a person, I can learn, and I have a future
worth working for."
Acknowledging that none of these recommendations will eliminate
the problem of youth violence, Dodd stresses that usually the
difference between an ultimately successful at-risk youth and his
less successful counterpart is the presence of at least one caring
adult. Not infrequently, that pivotal person is a teacher. Dodd
suggests that if every faculty member were to "adopt" as a "secret
pal" a student who was "on the edge," the resulting impact on
teachers' and students' lives and their attitudes toward one another
would be substantial.
Cornell, Dewey G. "What Works in Youth Violence
Prevention." In Youth Violence Prevention in Virginia: A Needs
Assessment, edited by D. Cornell, A. Loper, Al Atkinson, and P.
Sheras. Available from: Virginia Youth Violence Project, University
of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22093-2495. 804-924.8929. Full text
online:
http://curry.edschool.virginia.edu/curry/centers/youthvio/subpages/current/special/truewhatworks.html
This report describes a variety of community-wide,
family-focused, and school-based violence-prevention strategies.
Three community-based prevention strategies are mentoring,
supervised recreation, and community policing. The family-focused
strategies are parent education, family therapy, and preschool
programs.
Conflict-resolution training, violence-prevention counseling,
social-competence development, bullying-reduction efforts, and drug
education are featured in the section on school-based prevention
strategies.
Conflict-resolution training teaches students "to listen
carefully and respectfully to another person's point of view, accept
that there are meaningful differences, and develop creative, mutually
satisfactory solutions." Peers may also be trained to help mediate
disputes between students. There is evidence that peer mediation and
other conflict-management strategies are effective, particularly when
the programs are implemented schoolwide using a "peacemaker"
approach. Controlled-outcome studies found that students can learn to
use conflict-resolution skills in both school and family settings.
In schools studied, overall school problems declined and there were
beneficial effects on student achievement.
Violence-prevention counseling programs, such as Coping Power,
provide youth with constructive ways of managing their anger and
resolving conflicts without fighting. These programs also strengthen
students' decision-making skills. Considerable research indicates
such cognitive-behavioral approaches to violence prevention reduce
aggressive behavior. Some studies have also found improved school
attendance and grades and lower substance-abuse rates following
implementation of such a program.
Although sometimes ignored or passively accepted as the "norm"
in schools, bullying can be devastating for those being picked on and
victimized by their peers. Bully-Proofing Your School, one prevention
program, seeks to create and maintain a school environment that is
both physically and psychologically safe. This program involves
"staff training, student instruction, intervention with bullies, and
collaboration with victims and parents." Besides directly lowering
incidents between bullies and victims, programs to stop bullying also
often reduce vandalism, truancy, and fighting.
Efforts are also being made to provide social competence
training for students identified as being at risk for emotional and
behavioral problems. Programs such as I Can Problem Solve and the
Primary Mental Health Prevention project teach recognition of others'
feelings, brainstorming alternative ways of solving a problem, and
consequences of choices.
Finally, drug-education programs that emphasize the
interpersonal skills needed to resist negative peer pressure, as well
as other programs that teach social-resistance skills, have been
found effective in helping students steer clear of behavior that is
destructive to themselves or others.
Linda Lumsden is associate editor and writer for the ERIC
Clearinghouse on Educational Management at the University of
Oregon.
|
