Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T20:29:39.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Demonstrating the effectiveness of a residential education programme for disengaged young people: a preliminary report

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2020

Paul Mastronardi ,
Frank Ainsworth Open the ORCID record for Frank Ainsworth [Opens in a new window]  and
Jonathan C. Huefner
Paul Mastronardi
Affiliation:
Dunlea Centre (the original Australian Boys Town), Engadine, Australia
Frank Ainsworth*
Affiliation:
School of Social Work and Human Services, James Cook University, Townsville Campus, Australia
Jonathan C. Huefner
Affiliation:
Boys Town Child and Family Translational Research Center, Omaha, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Frank Ainsworth, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article reports on the early results of using behavioural and educational data to evaluate a residential education programme. The programme serves male and female students between 12 and 16 years of age who have been suspended or expelled from school due to behavioural issues or who refused to attend school. Using measures of behavioural and educational progress during care and reporting these changes over time provided empirical evidence that the programme was achieving its primary aims of ‘behaviour change and educational gains.’ Collecting and reporting this data has empowered the programme to increase programme effectiveness through both data-informed decision-making and ongoing programme evaluation.

Keywords

residential educationprogramme evaluationstrengths and difficultiesdata-informed decision-makingeffectiveness
Type
Articles
Information
Children Australia , Volume 45 , Special Issue 4: Special Issue: Poverty and Child Abuse , December 2020 , pp. 312 - 316
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bergström, M., & Baviskar, S. (2020). A systematic review of some reliability and validity issues regarding the strengths and difficulties questionnaire focusing on its use in out-of-home care. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2020.1788477 Google ScholarPubMed
Blythe, B. J., Sulley, M. P., & Jayaratne, S. (1994). A review of intensive family preservation services research. Social Work Research, 18(4), 213–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, D. (2011). Harnessing the power of the electronic health record data for use in program evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 131, 117–121. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.388 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courtney, M. E. (2000). Research needed to improve the prospects for children in out-of-home placement. Children and Youth Services Review, 22(9–10), 743–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fixsen, D. L., & Blase, K. A. (2019). The teaching-family model: The first 50 years. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(2), 189-211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-018-0168-3 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Timbers, G. D., & Wolf, M. M. (2007). In search of program implementation: 792 replications of the Teaching-Family Model. The Behavior Analyst Today, 8(1), 96–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogarty, G. (2007). Research on the Progressive Achievement Tests and academic achievement in secondary schools. Australian Council For Educational Research.Google Scholar
Friman, P. C., Osgood, D. W., Smith, G. L., Shanahan, D., Thompson, R. W., Larzelere, R. E., & Daly, D. L. (1996). A longitudinal evaluation of prevalent negative beliefs about residential placement for troubled adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 24(3), 299-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01441633 Google ScholarPubMed
Goodman, R., Ford, T., Corbin, T., & Meltzer, H. (2004). Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) multi-informant algorithm to screen looked-after children for psychiatric disorders. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13(Suppl2), II25–II31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-004-2005-3 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halliday, D., & Darmody, J. P. (1999). Partners with families in crisis : Parent responses to a system of care. Spectrum.Google Scholar
Huefner, J. C., Ringle, J. L., Chmelka, M. B., & Ingram, S. D. (2007). Breaking the cycle of intergenerational abuse: The long-term impact of a residential care program. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(2), 187-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.09.003 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Humphreys, S., Urquhart, R., & Sydes, C. (2018). Dunlea Centre: Review. Engadine, NSW: Dunlea Centre.Google Scholar
James, S. (2011). What works in group care? A structured review of treatment models for group homes and residential care. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(2), 308–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.09.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsley, D. E., Ringle, J. L., Thompson, R. W., Chmelka, M. B., & Ingram, S. D. (2008). Cox proportional hazards regression analysis as a modeling technique for informing program improvement: Predicting recidivism in a Girls and Boys Town five-year follow-up study. The Journal of Behavior Analysis of Offender and Victim Treatment and Prevention, 1(1), 82–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. J., Bright, C. L., & Berlin, L. J. (2013). Organizational influences on data use among child welfare workers. Child Welfare, 92(3), 97–118.Google ScholarPubMed
Mark, M. M., & Pines, E. (1995). Implications of continuous quality improvement for program evaluation and evaluators. Evaluation Practice, 16(2), 131-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409501600203 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathai, J., Anderson, J., & Bourne, A. (2002). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) as a screening measure prior to admission to a Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS). Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health, 1(3), 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Means, B., Padilla, C., DeBarger, A., & Bakia, M. (2009). Implementing data-informed decision making in schools: Teacher access, supports and use. U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
Murray, J. (2014). Critical issues facing school leaders concerning data-informed decision-making. The Professional Educator, 38(1), n1.Google Scholar
The California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare. (2012). Teaching family model (TFM). http://www.cebc4cw.org/program/teaching-family-model/ Google Scholar
Thompson, R. W., & Daly, D. L. (2015). The Family Home Program: An adaptation of the Teaching Family Model at Boys Town. In Whittaker, J. K., del Valle, J. F., & Holmes, L. (Eds.), Therapeutic residential care with children and youth: Developing evidence-based international practice (pp. 113–123). Kingsley.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. W., Smith, G. L., Osgood, D. W., Dowd, T. P., Friman, P. C., & Daly, D. L. (1996). Residential care: a study of short- and long-term educational effects. Children and Youth Services Review, 18(3), 221–242.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. W., & Way, M. L. (2000). How to prepare and present effective outcome reports for external payers and regulators. Education & Treatment of Children, 23(1), 60–74.Google Scholar
Winship, K. (2012). Data mining in children and family services: The Contra Costa county experience. Journal of evidence-informed social work, 9(1–2), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15433714.2012.636306 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed