School Interventions

Academic failure is often associated with the beginning of delinquency and the escalation of serious offending, and interventions that improve a child's academic performance have been shown to reduce delinquency (Maguin and Loeber, 1996). To assess the effectiveness of schoolwide interventions, the Study Group examined five types of school interventions, which targeted a variety of risk factors (including academic failure, social alienation, low commitment to school, association with violent and delinquent peers, and aggressive behavior) and introduced a number of protective factors (such as bonding to school, social and cognitive competencies, recognition of positive behavior, and positive norms regarding behavior).

Structured Playground Activities

A school playground program for boys and girls in kindergarten through second grade in Tallahassee, FL, significantly reduced aggressive behavior on the playground (Murphy, Hutchinson, and Bailey, 1983). The program offered organized games, such as jump rope and races, to 344 children who arrived at the playground before school began. Three aides supervised the activities and used a timeout procedure for students who were particularly unruly. Most of the disruptive incidents involved aggression, and the program showed a 53-percent reduction in aggression as a result of the structured activities.

Behavioral Consultation

Two comprehensive school intervention programs designed to reduce school vandalism illustrated that changing student behavior is one way to prevent delinquent behavior. In a 1-year program, graduate students trained in applied behavioral analysis and behavioral consultation helped Los Angeles County elementary schools develop classroom and schoolwide antivandalism programs (Mayer and Butterworth, 1979). Interventions included matching academic materials to students' skill levels, increasing positive reinforcement for appropriate classroom behavior and academic progress, reducing the use of punishment, applying learning and behavioral management principles, and educating school counselors and psychologists about behavioral consultation methods. Vandalism costs and disruptive behavior at the elementary schools where the program was implemented decreased, and on-task classroom behavior increased following implementation of the program.

A similar multiyear behavioral consultation program for elementary and junior high school students in Los Angeles County was found effective at reducing vandalism (Mayer et al.,1983). Vandalism costs and disruptive behavior decreased significantly in participating schools, and the effects were maintained for several years following the project (Mayer et al., 1983).

Behavioral Monitoring

Closely supervising student behavior and rewarding positive conduct also appear to be effective interventions, according to an evaluation of a behavioral intervention program that focused on low-achieving, disruptive seventh-grade students who had trouble bonding with their families (Bry, 1982). As part of the 2-year program, intervention staff and teachers met weekly to discuss students' tardiness, class preparedness, performance, and behavior. Staff also met with students in small group sessions and reviewed their school behavior. Students earned points (later redeemed for a special trip) for positive ratings from the teacher interviews, good attendance, lack of disciplinary referrals, and lack of inappropriate behavior during the weekly meetings. As part of the program, staff also routinely informed parents of their children's progress and continued to interview teachers and hold small "booster" review sessions for the students every 2 weeks for 1 year after the intervention.

Monitored students had significantly higher grades, better attendance, and far fewer problem behaviors at school than students in a nonintervention comparison group (Bry and George, 1980). The behavior changes continued after the program ended. One-and-a-half years later, students who had participated in the program were found to report less illegal drug use and criminal behavior than youth who did not receive the intervention. The impact on delinquency was long-term: 5 years after the program ended, youth in the program were 66 percent less likely to have a juvenile record with the county probation office than youth who had not been in the program (Bry, 1982).

Metal Detectors in Schools

Many schools use metal detectors to reduce violence by making firearms unavailable within school buildings. One survey of a representative sample of New York City high school students found that juveniles who attended schools with metal detectors were half as likely to carry a gun, knife, or other weapon to or from school or inside a school building, as students who attended schools without metal detectors (Ginsberg and Loffredo, 1993). Both groups of students, however, reported similar experiences in terms of being threatened or involved in fights at or away from school, and both were equally likely to report carrying a gun, knife, or other weapon during the 30-day period prior to the survey. Although these results imply that metal detector programs may have an impact on specific sites (especially with respect to the number of weapons brought to school), the Study Group cautions that metal detectors do not appear to reduce the number of weapons carried outside school.

Schoolwide Reorganization

School organization interventions (i.e., those that change or improve the way that schools operate) are noteworthy for their comprehensive and systematic prevention approach. The Study Group's review of many such programs found that several appear to reduce risk factors—including academic failure, dropping out of school, and rebelliousness—and increase protective factors—such as commitment to school and good attendance. Certain school reorganization programs also have significantly reduced violence and delinquent behavior. However, the fact that none of the programs reviewed by the Study Group used a true experimental design and that several evaluations did not completely analyze outcome data prevents a clear interpretation of evaluation results. Individual programs are described below.

• School development program, New Haven, CT. One intervention program in New Haven, CT, which included parental involvement and a multidisciplinary mental health team, helped students in two inner-city public elementary schools improve academically (Cauce, Comer, and Schwartz, 1987; Comer, 1988). Ninety-nine percent of the students receiving the intervention were African American, and most came from low-income families. The program included a social calendar that integrated arts and athletic programs into school activities; a parent program that supported academic and extracurricular activities; a multidisciplinary mental health team that helped staff manage student behavior problems; and a team of school administrators, teachers, support staff, and parents who oversaw program implementation.

  Students from the two schools receiving the intervention performed significantly better in middle school than a comparison group of students from nonintervention elementary schools. Students receiving the intervention had significantly higher grades, academic achievement test scores, and self-perceived social competence.

• Norwegian intervention targeting bullying. A large-scale school intervention program that targeted bullying in Norwegian schools appears to have prevented violence by reducing aggressive behavior and general delinquency (Olweus, 1991). The program provided an information and advice packet about bullying and ways to combat it to all families in Norway with school-age children. In addition, it distributed a booklet for school personnel to all Norwegian comprehensive schools (grades 1 through 9). The booklet described bullying problems, provided suggestions on what teachers and schools could do to counteract and prevent bullying problems, and dispelled myths about the nature and causes of bullying. The program also made a video about bullying available at a highly subsidized price.

  Results of this program were encouraging. Significantly fewer students—almost 50 percent less—reported being victims of bullies when surveyed 8 and 20 months after the program began. Students also reported significant decreases in their own delinquent behavior (vandalism, theft, and truancy) 8 and 20 months after the program started. Because bullying often involves repeated assaults on victimized students, this program appears to have directly reduced the risk factors of early and persistent antisocial behavior and violent, assaultive behavior.

• PATHE program. A comprehensive school organization intervention for secondary school students in Charleston County, SC, the Positive Action Through Holistic Education (PATHE) program, similarly resulted in significant decreases in delinquent behavior (Gottfredson, 1986). The PATHE program included six components: (1) teams of teachers, school staff, students, and community members who planned and implemented school improvement programs; (2) curriculum and discipline policies that were continually reviewed and revised, involved students, and provided ongoing inservice teacher training in instructional and classroom management practices; (3) academic innovations, such as study skills programs and cooperative learning; (4) school climate innovations, such as expanded extracurricular activities and peer counseling; (5) career-oriented innovations, including job skills and career exploration programs; and (6) special academic and counseling services for low-achieving and disruptive students.

  High school students in the PATHE program reported significant decreases in delinquency and drug involvement and fewer school suspensions and punishment than the control group. Students in the program who received special academic and counseling services reported significantly higher grades and were less likely to repeat a grade than students who did not receive these services. High school seniors who received these services were also more likely to graduate than those who did not receive the services. For middle school students in the intervention, there were declines in suspensions.

• Project CARE. Project CARE, a school intervention program in Baltimore, MD, used classroom management techniques and cooperative learning to decrease delinquent behavior among junior high school students (Gottfredson, 1987). The program, planned and implemented by a team of teachers, administrators, and other school staff, also included a parent volunteer component and a community support and advocacy program. Over the course of the 2-year program, students' self-reports of delinquency decreased significantly. Teachers also reported significant improvement in classroom orderliness.

• Charleston, SC, middle school program. Two evaluations of a program to improve the classroom environment and student behavior in several middle schools with high levels of student misbehavior in Charleston County, SC, showed mixed results. The intervention included a revised school discipline policy, a behavior tracking system, consistent classroom organization and management, and behavior modification techniques. The first evaluation of this program found that students in participating schools perceived significant increases in classroom order, organization, and rule clarity (Gottfredson, Karweit, and Gottfredson, 1989). The second evaluation—which examined the program's impact on the classroom environment and student behavior—found that the program generally had a positive effect on student behavior only in schools where the intervention had been fully implemented (Gottfredson, Gottfredson, and Hybl, 1993). Rule clarity, however, improved in high- and medium-implementation schools. Teachers in high-implementation schools reported that on-task behavior increased significantly and disruptive behavior decreased significantly. Teachers in schools with medium and low implementation, on the other hand, noted little or negative change in students' on-task behavior.

• Multimodal School-Based Prevention Demonstration program. Another Charleston, SC, middle school intervention, the Multimodal School-Based Prevention Demonstration program, was designed to reduce problem behaviors by improving academic achievement, social competency, and social bonding (Gottfredson, Gottfredson, and Skroban, 1996). Academic interventions included cooperative learning techniques, a career and educational decision skills program, and one-on-one tutoring. The program addressed social competency with a life skills training course for sixth graders, a cognitive self-management course for seventh graders, and a cognitive self-instruction course and a violence prevention curriculum for all students. The program tried to increase social bonding through a mentoring program and through adult models who taught appropriate skills and behaviors. It also included organizational development strategies designed to strengthen the quality of program implementation. Evaluation results indicate that the program improved students' grade point averages and decreased their susceptibility to peer pressure to use drugs.

School and Community Interventions To Prevent Serious and Violent Offending	Juvenile Justice Bulletin   ·  September 1999