Evaluation of violence prevention approaches among early adolescents: Moderating effects of disability status and gender
Sullivan, T. N., Sutherland, K. S., Farrell, A. D., Taylor, K. A., & Doyle, S. T. (2016). Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(4) 1151-1163.
-
examining203Students, grades6-8
IES Performance Measure
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2018
- IES Performance Measure (findings for IES Funded Studies )
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Bullying |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
6.97 |
7.27 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Externalizing Problems |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
20.42 |
21.46 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- student reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
21.57 |
21.90 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
15.31 |
16.73 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
16.01 |
17.81 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- student reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
15.20 |
14.38 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Children's Anger Management Scale: Anger Regulation Subscale |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
10.20 |
9.94 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- student reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- student reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- student reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students without disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students with disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Overt Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students without disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- student reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- student reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- student reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students without disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students with disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Problem Behavior Frequency Scales: Relational Aggression- teacher reported |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students without disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Externalizing Problems |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Externalizing Problems |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Externalizing Problems |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students without disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Bullying |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Bullying |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Bullying |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students with disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement System: Bullying |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students without disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Children's Anger Management Scale: Anger Regulation Subscale |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Children's Anger Management Scale: Anger Regulation Subscale |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Children's Anger Management Scale: Anger Regulation Subscale |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students without disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Social Skills Improvement Scale (SSiS): Social Skills |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
129.31 |
131.78 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Social Skills Improvement Scale (SSiS): Social Skills |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Male;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement Scale (SSiS): Social Skills |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Female;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement Scale (SSiS): Social Skills |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students with disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills Improvement Scale (SSiS): Social Skills |
IES Funded Studies vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students without disabilities;
|
N/A |
N/A |
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.
-
Female: 52%
Male: 48% -
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
South
-
Race Black 67% Other or unknown 33% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 7% Not Hispanic or Latino 93%
Study Details
Setting
The study was set in sixth, seventh, and eighth grade classrooms of an urban public middle school in the Southeast U.S. A total of 14 classes participated in the study of which 10 were included general and special education students and 4 were general education.
Study sample
Students were in sixth, seventh, and eighth grades. Forty-eight percent of students were male, 67% were African-American, 7% were Hispanic/Latino, 17% were multiracial, and 9% were another race. Students had an average age of 12.6 years, ranging from 11 to 15 years old. Forty-eight of the 231 students received special education services. Of these 48 students, 8% had a speech language impairment, 63% had learning disabilities, 21% had another health impairment, and 8% had emotional disturbance.
Intervention Group
Students in the intervention condition received the Second Step program in addition to OBPP (described below). Second Step is a set of supplementary lessons delivered by middle school teachers that cover bullying prevention topics, empathy and communication, emotional management, and problem solving. Seventh and eighth grade students also received lessons on sexual harassment and bullying in dating relationships.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition received only OBPP. OBPP is a school-wide program that includes (1) student-level “on the spot” and follow-up interventions to address specific bullying incidents with specific students; (2) weekly 30- to 40-minute classroom discussions and experiential activities related to bullying; and (3) the creation of a school-wide Bullying Prevention Coordinating Committee made up of school staff to monitor behavior expectations, the school environment, and school safety. Members of the committee attended a 2-day training on bullying behaviors and strategies to intervene in bullying, and then they conducted a full-day training for teachers and other school staff on bullying prevention.
Support for implementation
Teachers delivering the implementation received training on the Second Step curriculum from graduate students on an individual basis. Graduate students and study staff provided consultation as needed during the intervention. School staff received ongoing consultation on OBPP implementation from a certified OBPP trainer and study staff.
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).