First Step to Success: An Early Intervention Approach for Preventing School Antisocial Behavior.
Walker, Hill M.; Kavanagh, Kate; Stiller, Bruce; Golly, Annemieke; Severson, Herbert H.; Feil, Edward G. (1998). Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, v6 n2 p66-80. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ567432
-
examining46Students, gradeK
First Step to Success Intervention Report - Children Identified With Or At Risk For An Emotional Disturbance
Review Details
Reviewed: March 2012
- 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.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for First Step to Success.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Child Behavior Checklist- Teacher Report Form (CBCL-TRF): Withdrawn subscale |
First Step to Success vs. None |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
3.08 |
4.09 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Early Screening Project (ESP): Adaptive Behavior |
First Step to Success vs. None |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
28.80 |
22.24 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Child Behavior Checklist- Teacher Report Form (CBCL-TRF): Agression subscale |
First Step to Success vs. None |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
13.08 |
23.71 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Academic engaged time (AET): Kindergarten |
First Step to Success vs. None |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
87.32 |
69.05 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Early Screening Project (ESP): Maladpative Behavior |
First Step to Success vs. None |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
23.52 |
31.86 |
Yes |
|
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: 26%
Male: 74% -
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
Oregon
-
Race Other or unknown 7% White 93%
Study Details
Setting
Study schools were located in the Eugene, Oregon school district.
Study sample
Forty-six kindergarten children were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n = 25) or to a wait-list control condition (n = 21). A table of random numbers was used to assign each pool of participants comprising Cohorts 1 and 2 to either an intervention or wait-list control condition. The study included two cohorts of students; Cohort 1 included 24 students who were in kindergarten during the 1993–94 academic year, and Cohort 2 included 22 students who were in kindergarten during the 1994–95 academic year. Participants were 26% female, 7% were of racial/ ethnic minorities, and 37% were classified as low income. Students were described as exhibiting antisocial behaviors, including victimizing others, severe tantrums, and aggression.
Intervention Group
Intervention students were exposed to both the CLASS and HomeBase components of the program. The intervention was delivered by eight trained consultants, in conjunction with the classroom teachers and parents or primary caregivers. HomeBase consisted of six lessons for parents or caregivers to help increase their child’s performance. The consultant visited the home weekly after the 10th day of the CLASS program to conduct the one-hour lesson, which also included parent-child games. All children received the First Step to Success intervention over a course of three months.
Comparison Group
The control condition did not utilize First Step to Success. Students assigned to the control group were put on a waiting list and received First Step to Success following its termination for participants in the treatment group.
Outcome descriptions
Four measures of external behavior were assessed immediately following completion of First Step to Success in kindergarten. These measures included teacher ratings on the Early Screening Project (ESP) Adaptive and Maladaptive Behavior scales, which are adaptations of the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD), as well as the Child Behavior Checklist–Teacher Report Form (CBCL-TRF) Aggression Subscale, and a measure of academic engaged time (AET). This study also included the Child Behavior Checklist–Teacher Report Form (CBCL-TRF) Withdrawn Subscale as a measure of emotional/internal behavior. For a more detailed description of these outcome measures, see Appendix B.
Support for implementation
Eight program consultants (graduate students, teachers, school counselors, and teacher aides) were recruited and trained by First Step to Success developers to implement the intervention. Each consultant was assigned to two or three children. Training procedures included lectures, videotaped demonstrations, role playing, feedback, and self-evaluation. In the second year, those consultants who chose to participate again were given a refresher training course. New second-year consultants were given intensive training that included using the returning consultants as peer coaches.
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).