Wirkungsnachweis aus der Literatur
increasing opportunities for student choice, involvement and creativity
Mitsprache und Mitgestaltung
Effectiveness results indicated a modest but significant impact of the intervention on a few domains. Significant time by condition interaction for over-control (i.e., activities are staff-directed with little opportunity for student choice, involvement, or creativity) in the predicted direction, F2,28 = 3.47, p\.05, such that programs in the comparison condition were rated more controlling at posttest compared to baseline (p = .0004) and mid-year (p = .008) ratings. Comparison programs also were rated more controlling at post-test than intervention programs (p = .0009), which showed no change in ratings across time, suggesting that the intervention interrupted a naturally occurring increase in over-control.
Beschreibung der Aktivität
Project "Nurturing all Families through After School Improvement"
Model for mental health consultation, training and support for after school program staff designed to enhance the mental health promoting benefits of program participation for children living in urban poverty. The project proceeded in two phases both of which emphasized consultation to staff rather than direct service to children.
children ranged in age from 5 to 14 years old (M = 8.94, SD = 2.19)
teilnehmende Kinder und Jugendliche
Evaluierung der Aktivität
Quantitative Fragebogenerhebung (schriftlich/offline), Sekundäranalyse von Daten, Dokumenten, audiovisuellen Materialien etc.
The study authors assessed children’s mental health needs and examined the feasibility and impact of intervention on program quality and children’s psychosocial outcomes in three after-school sites (n = 15 staff, 89 children), compared to three demographically-matched sites that received no intervention (n = 12 staff, 38 children). Independent samples t tests were used to compare parent reported mental health needs of children in this study (N = 107) with youth ages 4–17 in a nation-wide, epidemiological sample (N = 10,367; Bourdon et al., 2005; Note: This is a secondary source. For more information, please check the bibliography of Frazier et al 2012). Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Staff Satisfaction Survey Promising Practices Rating System (PPRS) Staff–Student Report
Strenghts and Difficulties Questionnaire: This 25-item parent-report measure was designed as a brief screening tool for emotional and behavioral disorders in children and adolescents aged 4–17 and was used to assess children’s mental health needs (separate scales used for ages 4–11 and ages 12–17). Staff Satisfaction Survey: After school staff, including full-time directors, physical instructors and part-time recreation leaders completed surveys designed for this study related to feasibility, in particular their use of and satisfaction with program consultation and with the primary, recommended strategies. The PPRS observation tool was designed to assess afterschool program quality. Time interval observations capture program activities along eight domains: supportive relations with adults, supportive relations with peers, level of engagement, opportunities for cognitive growth , appropriate structure, over-control, chaos, and mastery orientation.
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: The measure includes five clinical scales - hyperactivity/inattention, emotional symptoms, conduct problems, peer relationship problems, and prosocial behavior. Staff Satisfaction Survey: Seven questions (and their response options) included (1) How productive were large group meetings with the intervention team , (2) How many changes resulted from large group meetings, (3) How often did you use each intervention strategy, (4) How useful was each intervention strategy, (5) How likely are you to use each strategy again , (6) How effective do you expect each strategy to be and (7) What kinds of changes did you experience or observe in interactions between children and staff? PPRS: Eight domains, namely supportive relations with adults (e.g., staff communicate high expectations, respond to youth with warmth), supportive relations with peers (e.g., youth interact positively, share, appear relaxed and involved), level of engagement (e.g., youth appear interested, concentrated on activity), opportunities for cognitive growth (e.g., activities promote higher-order thinking, planning, problem-solving), appropriate structure (e.g., activities are organized, smooth transitions), over-control (e.g., students have few opportunities for choice), chaos (e.g., high rates of disruptive behavior), and mastery orientation (e.g., emphasis on skills-building).
The response scale has three anchors (0 = Not true, 1 = Somewhat true, and 2 = Certainly true). Staff-Student Report: 7 items on a 5-point scale and 17 items on a 3-point scale.
Children (N = 89 intervention and N = 38 comparison) and staff (N = 15 intervention and N = 12 comparison)