Proximal impact of two first-grade preventive interventions on the early risk behaviors for later substance abuse, depression, and anti-social behavior.
Ialongo, N., Wethamer, L., Kellam, S., Brown, C., Wang, S., & Lin, Y. (1999). American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(5), 599–641. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1023/A:1022137920532.
-
examining597Students, grade1
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: November 2021
- Grant Competition (findings for Classroom-Centered Intervention)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a compromised randomized controlled trial, but the analytic intervention and comparison groups satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS): Reading Comprehension subtest |
Classroom-Centered Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Aggregated by WWC;
|
49.45 |
48.18 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS): Reading Comprehension subtest |
Classroom-Centered Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
48.29 |
43.87 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS): Reading Comprehension subtest |
Classroom-Centered Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
50.77 |
53.19 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS): Mathematics Computations and Concepts and Applications subscales |
Classroom-Centered Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Aggregated by WWC;
|
52.67 |
50.97 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS): Mathematics Computations and Concepts and Applications subscales |
Classroom-Centered Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
51.07 |
49.75 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Male: 53% -
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Maryland
-
Race Black 87% White 13%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted with first grade children and their families in nine Baltimore city public elementary schools.
Study sample
Student demographics are based on 678 children who were eligible to participate in the study, prior to receiving parental consent. Over half were male (53%), 87 percent were Black, and 13 percent were White. The average student was 6 years old. Almost two-thirds (62%) received free or reduced-price lunch.
Intervention Group
This review focuses on the Classroom-Centered intervention, which consisted of three components. The first component included enhancements to the English/language arts and mathematics curricula. New and supplementary curricular materials were added to increase critical thinking, composition, listening skills, and comprehension skills. The existing mathematics curriculum was replaced with the Mimosa mathematics program. The second intervention component consisted of enhancing the classrooms' behavior management practices. Students and their teachers participated in a weekly classroom meeting to promote child social problem solving within a group context. Also, the Good Behavior Game, a whole-class strategy designed to decrease aggressive or disruptive behavior and increase time on task, was implemented. Children were assigned to small teams and each team received points for exhibiting good behavior and lost points for off-task and shy or aggressive behavior. Points were exchanged for tangible rewards, which were gradually phased out and replaced with social reinforcers. The third intervention component included backup strategies for children who did not respond well to the intervention.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition included students from classrooms that conducted business as usual.
Support for implementation
No support for implementation was described in the report.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Ialongo, Nick; Poduska, Jeanne; Werthamer, Lisa; Kellam, Sheppard. (2001). The Distal Impact of Two First-Grade Preventive Interventions on Conduct Problems and Disorder in Early Adolescence. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, v9 n3 p146-60.
Reducing Behavior Problems in the Elementary School Classroom
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2008
Reducing Behavior Problems in the Elementary School Classroom Practice Guide- Reducing Behavior Problems in the Elementary School Classroom Practice Guide Review Protocol 1.0
- Review Standards 1.0
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 47%
Male: 53% -
Urban
-
Race Black 87% White 13%
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).