Preventing Adolescent Drug Abuse and High School Dropout through an Intensive School-Based Social Network Development Program

Abstract

Purpose. The hypothesis tested was that experimental subjects, relative to controls, would demonstrate significant increases in school performance and decreases in drug involvement at program exit (5 months) and at follow-up (10 months). Design. A two-group, repeated-measures, intervention trial was the design used. Setting. The study involved four urban Northwest high schools. Subjects. Participants included 259 youth at high risk of potential school dropout, 101 in the experimental group and 158 in the control group. Intervention. The Personal Growth Class experimental condition was a one-semester, five-month elective course taken as one of five or six regular classes. It had a 1:12 teacher-student ratio, and integrated group support and life-skills training interventions. The control condition included a regular school schedule. Measures. School performance measures (semester GPA, class absences) came from school records. Drug use progression, drug control, and adverse consequences were measured by the Drug Involvement Scale for Adolescents. Self-esteem, school bonding, and deviant peer bonding were measured using the High School Questionnaire: Inventory of Experiences. All multi-item scales had acceptable reliability and validity. Results. As predicted, trend analyses revealed significantly different patterns of change over time between groups in drug control problems and consequences; in GPA (but not attendance); and in self-esteem, deviant peer bonding, and school bonding. The program appeared to stem the progression of drug use, but group differences only approached significance. Conclusion. Program efficacy was demonstrated particularly for decreasing drug control problems and consequences; increasing GPA and school bonding; and desired changes in self-esteem and deviant peer bonding. Program effects on progression of drug use were less definitive.

Project Towards No Drug Abuse: A Review of the Findings and Future Directions

“…Future studies shou ld continue to examine extra-curricular events as a means of programm ing. 16 Third, the evidence suggests that, to be successful, the TND program should be hea lth educator led. The se lf-instruction version of TND-2 CHS provided no apparent impact on problem behaviors.…”

“…6 · 14 -18 This perspective is compatible with the social-network development model of Eggert and colleagues. 16 Finally, if one does not have the cognitive processing skills necessary to make a rational decision, above and beyond motivation information and social skills, then one is more likely to use drugs. 16 Correcting deficits in this triad of variables is the goal of TND prevention programming.…”

In Pursuit of Excellence: The Past as Prologue to a Brighter Future for Special Education

“…Iatrogenic effects also have been reported for residential placement of youth referred for treatment of antisocial behavior (Powell & Lochman, 2004 ). These iatrogenic effects are more pronounced for groups of younger adolescents (aged 10 through 16), and older adolescents seem to be less effected (Eggert, Thompson, Herting, Nicholas, & Dicker, 1994). These findings may hold significance for schools that typically employ discipline practices that cluster high-risk youth together (e.g., detention and in-school suspension programs).…”

Evaluating Group-Based Interventions When Control Participants Are Ungrouped

“…This RY trial involved a large sample of adolescents from five high schools in an urban school district in the Southwest and four high schools in an urban school district on the Pacific coast. The goals, methods, and recruitment procedures for the RY program have been described in Eggert, Thompson, Herting, Nicholas, and Dicker (1994), and prior analyses of the current sample may be found in Hallfors et al (2006), Cho, Hallfors, and Sanchez (2005), and Sanchez et al (2007). Briefly, an initial screened sample was stratified on risk status (based on criteria including highest 25% for truancy and bottom 50% for grade point average (GPA), or referred for treatment by a schoolteacher or counselor).…”