(An item from the ISHN Member information service)  Asset based youth development approaches are well-recognized in the research and program literature. More recently, attention has been paid to the accumulation of adverse life experiences in childhood and adolescence. It looks like the weight of negative experiences is as powerful as the support of multiple positive factors or assets. An article in Volume 43, 2015 of Journal of Adolescence discusses cumulative experiences with life adversity with a view to iIdentifying critical levels for targeting prevention efforts. The authors note that "This paper aims to assess the role of individual types and cumulative life adversity for understanding depressive symptomatology and aggressive behavior. Data were collected in 2011 as part of the Teen Life Online and in Schools Study from 916 ethnically-diverse students from 12 middle, K–8, 6–12 and high schools in the Midwest United States. Youth reported an average of 4.1 non-victimization adversities and chronic stressors in their lifetimes. There was a linear relationship between number of adversities and depression and aggression scores. Youth reporting the highest number of adversities (7 or more) had significantly higher depression and aggression scores than youth reporting any other number of adversities suggesting exposure at this level is a critical tipping point for mental health concerns. Findings underscore an urgent need to support youth as they attempt to negotiate, manage, and cope with adversity in their social worlds. Read more>>

(An item from the ISHN Member information service)  An article in Issue #5, 2015 of Journal of Developmental And Behavioural Pediatrics describes the impact of one student's disruptive behaviour on another student in the class. "Marcus is a 10-year-old boy who was followed by his pediatrician for several years. She knows him as a socially engaged, active athlete, playing soccer and baseball, out-going, and a good student. He has been in good health. At the beginning of this year, a new student was placed in Marcus's fourth grade class. This student is disruptive, impulsive, and abusive. He has frequent violent outbursts, yelling, kicking, and throwing objects, including recently throwing a desk across the room. The school has made efforts to manage this student. The teacher sets up behavior contracts, and the school has temporarily suspended the child; however, the school is unable to remove the child from the classroom. Many students, including Marcus, have been significantly affected by this disruption. Marcus describes the classroom environment as “tense.” He reports he is never sure what is going to make the student “so mad.” Over the last 3–4 months, Marcus developed nightmares, enuresis, and trichotillomania." Here is the dilemma confronting the teacher and the school. Do they continue to accept the disruptive student or do they suspend the student for the good of the others? Who is responsible for providing the support, both to the disruptive student and to other students affected by the situation? Read more>>
Note: This dilemma is one of the topics on the agenda of the ISHN-ASCD-EI dialogue on integrating health and social programs within the core mandates, constraints and concerns of education systems. For more on that dialogue, go to this web page.

(An item from the ISHN Member information service)   An article in June 2015 Issue of Journal of School Health examines school staff perspectives on the challenges and solutions to working with court-involved students. The article begins by noting that " Over 25% of children experience trauma, including physical, sexual, emotional abuse, and witnessing substance abuse or violence within their household.[2] Among court-involved students, exposure to trauma is even more substantial,". The background is not surprising "Not surprisingly, court-involved youth may encounter more academic challenges than other students. For example, foster youth are assigned to special education services more often than non-foster youth,and almost 50% demonstrate behavioral or emotional problems. Youth in the juvenile justice system exhibit much higher rates of behavioral and emotional disorders and are more likely to experience school discipline, suspensions, and expulsions,requiring teachers to focus on socioemotional and behavioral issues in the classroom that impede learning.Although schools should acknowledge student capabilities and needs,targeted school services and resources are lacking." The authors suggest that teacher perceptions may be critical. " Teacher perception of student behavior can impact student success. Cox et al[28] reported that teachers who worked in a juvenile residential school facility perceived students as apathetic about class work. However, court-involved students may be too distracted by previous trauma to be attentive in the classroom, and school personnel can misinterpret this behavior as oppositional or reflecting mental health disorders.This may contribute to higher rates of school suspensions and expulsions...Exploring perceptions of teachers and school staff, addressing training gaps, and providing needed resources to school personnel may be key to making this happen." Read more>>

(From the ISHN Member information service)  An systematic review in Issue #1, 2015 of Journal of Quantitative Criminology concludes that Restorative Justice Conferencing is effective in preventing repeat offending. The reviewers note that "an exhaustive search strategy that examined 519 studies that could have been eligible for our rigorous inclusion criteria, we found ten that did. Included studies measured recidivism by 2 years of convictions after random assignment of 1,880 accused or convicted offenders who had consented to meet their consenting victims prior to random assignment, based on “intention-to-treat” analysis. Results Our meta-analysis found that, on average, RJCs cause a modest but highly cost-effective reduction in the frequency of repeat offending by the consenting offenders randomly assigned to participate in such a conference. A cost-effectiveness estimate for the seven United Kingdom experiments found a ratio of 3.7–8.1 times more benefit in cost of crimes prevented than the cost of delivering RJCs. Read more>>

(From UCLA School Mental Health Project) A new book in January 2015 by the UCLA School Mental Health Project makes a cogent argument for transforming the fragmented delivery of various support services so that they truly support student learning and equitable educational opportunity. The authors begin with this " external and internal barriers to learning and teaching have continued to pose some of the most pervasive and entrenched challenges to educators across the country, particularly in chronically low performing schools. Failure to directly address these barriers ensures that (a) too many children and youth will continue to struggle in school, and (b) teachers will continue to divert precious instructional time to dealing with behavior and other problems...Transforming student and learning supports is key to school improvement. To this end, this book incorporates years of research and prototype development and a variety of examples from trailblazing efforts"  They go on to say "Mapping a school district’s existing efforts to address problems yields a consistent picture of many practices and fragmented, piecemeal, and usually disorganized activity (as illustrated below). The range of such learning and student supports generally is extensive and expensive".  They also go on to describe the cause and this is where we might disagree: "Underlying the fragmentation is a fundamental policy problem, namely the long-standing marginalization of student and learning supports in school improvement policy and practice. Thus, most efforts to directly use student and learning supports to address barriers to learning and teaching and re-engage disconnected students are not a primary focus in school improvement planning. " In our view, a major cause of the fragmentation is that the mandates and funding of the various health, social and other services is done in a sporadic, competitive and disjointed manner. Part of the transformation will require that health and other ministries re-organize their work so that they are accountable for providing consistent support for students most at risk, rather than always worrying about the optimal health of all students in universal programs. There have often been attempts to insert health outputs and outcomes into school system accountability. In our view, this should be a two-way street, with health and other systems being accountable for a reasonable number of educational outputs, particularly for more vulnerable students. Read more>>

(From the ISHN Member information service)  As we learn more about the sustainability of multi-intervention approaches and programs, we are seeing the development of various techniques to measure and monitor such sustainability. An article in Issue #2, 2014 of School Psychology Quarterly reports o the development of "the School-Wide Universal Behavior Sustainability Index: School Teams (SUBSIST; McIntosh, Doolittle, Vincent, Horner, & Ervin, 2009) a measure of school and district contextual factors that promote the sustainability of school practices, demonstrated measurement invariance across groups of schools that differed in length of time implementing school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS; Sugai & Horner, 2009), student ethnic composition, and student socioeconomic status (SES). School PBIS team members and district coaches representing 860 schools in 14 U.S. states completed the SUBSIST. Findings supported strong measurement invariance, for all items except 1, of a model with two school-level factors (School Priority and Team Use of Data) and 2 district-level factors (District Priority and Capacity Building) across groups of schools at initial implementation, institutionalization, and sustainability phases of PBIS implementation. Schools in the sustainability phase were rated significantly higher on School Priority and Team Use of Data than schools in initial implementation." Read more>>

(From the ISHN Member information service)  An article in Issue #12, 2014 of the Journal of Interpersonal Violence uses "General Strain" theory to explain and understand interpersonal aggression at school. "Using data from a sample of 296 middle school students in a southwestern state of the United States, this article examined whether different types of strain and negative emotions are positively associated with psychological, physical, and general bullying. Overall findings of negative binomial regression analyses tended to be consistent with our expectations, while some aspects of GST received more empirical support than others. Strains and negative emotions were mostly related positively either to psychological or physical bullying, with negative emotions, anger and depression, partly mediating the strain-bullying relationship." This being the first encounter with strain theories for us, our quick look on the Internet found an excellent Canadian government report examining the roots of violence in response to a school shooting in Ontario. The Appendix on Literature reviews in that report has discussed several such strain theories in relation to school violence. Other sections of that report review school-based and school-linked violence prevention. Read more>>

(An item from the ISHN Member information service) A recent review published by the Sutton Trust in the UK has underlined the urgent need to re-introduce or improve the family studies/home economics education provided to students so that they have the necessary parenting skills and knowledge. In a time when an ever-increasing number of children are being raised by parents who themselves have not been parented adequately, where children are bombarded by advertising aimed at increasing their purchases, where their basic cooking skills are minimal,where young adults make poor decisions about mortgage loans because of low financial literacy, where we discard more and more consumer goods rather than repair them, there is a need to focus on the third core subject: family studies/home economics. Health/Personal-Social Development and Physical Education are important but so is this strand of basic literacy for life. 
The research has found that "   Four in 10 babies don’t develop the strong emotional bonds – what psychologists call ‘secure attachment’ – with their parents that are crucial to success later in life. Disadvantaged children are more likely to face educational and behavioural problems when they grow older as a result". The review of international studies of attachment, Baby Bonds, by Sophie Moullin (Princeton University), Professor Jane Waldfogel (Colombia University and the London School of Economics) and Dr Elizabeth Washbrook (University of Bristol), finds infants aged under three who do not form strong bonds with their mother or father are more likely to suffer from aggression, defiance and hyperactivity when they get older.  Read more>>

(From the UCLA School Mental Health Center) One of the themes being developed in our discussions is how to integrate health and social programs within education systems. A recent report from the US-based Child Trends organization has described how an integrated set of student services is how the health, social services, mental health and other sectors can and should contribute to student success. If these various services can cooperate and deliver such support in a concerted manner, it would assure educators of their ongoing commitment to working with and within schools. A summary of the Child Trend report and the full research review are available from Child trends. These documents define ISS “representing an emerging field of practice that aims to address persistent disparities in educational achievement and attainment. ISS is a school-based approach to promoting students’ academic achievement and educational attainment by coordinating a seamless system of wraparound supports for the child, the family, and schools, to target student’s academic and non-academic barriers to learning." That report focuses on nine programs:Beacon Initiative, Children’s Aid Society Community Schools, City Connects, Comer School Development Program, Communities In Schools, CoZi Initiative, Say Yes to Education, School of the 21st Century and University‑Assisted Community Schools.. However, the UCLA Center on School Mental Health, a long-time advocate for comprehensive approaches to removing barriers to learning, strongly suggests that integrated student supports (ISS) alone "do not effectively address the fundamental policy and practice concerns about the consequences of pursuing the limited approach that the concept of integrated student supports engenders with respect to enhancing equity of opportunity for students to succeed at school and beyond". The UCLA analysis suggests that "the Child Trends report "doesn’t consider the implications of the fact that in most schools student support is primarily provided by school and district-based student support personnel (e.g., school psychologists, school counselors, school social workers, school nurses, school dropout/graduation support, special educators, and many more school personnel who play a role in prevention, early intervention, and treatment of students with severe and chronic problems. The UCLA "emphasis continues to be on moving toward policy and practice for addressing a wide range barriers to student development and learning and to teachers teaching. Making this a reality involves much more than integrating already over-committed community services into schools. It requires transforming the role schools play and weaving together the broadest range of school and community resources for enhancing student and learning supports. In other words, the support services that must be provided by other agencies, which are vital as a long term commitment from those sectors, must be fully integrated within the goals and priorities of the school systems. Further, school systems must be committed to ensuring that all children are well-served by their schooling.

(From Drug & Alcohol Findings) The featured review brought together the findings of three reviews conducted for the Cochrane collaboration, each concerned with the effectiveness of ‘universal’ programmes aiming to prevent the development of drinking or drink-related problems in young people aged 18 or younger. As opposed to programmes for high-risk groups, universal programmes target large groups such as an entire age range, whether or not they are known to be specially prone to substance use or problems.The reviewed evidence supports the effectiveness of some but not all universal programmes for alcohol misuse prevention among young people. Given the variability in the results, particular attention should be paid to the content of programmes and the context in which they are delivered, including the setting, key personnel and target age. A programme may for example be effective where adolescent alcohol drinking is rare, but ineffective where it is the norm and reflects powerful social and cultural pressures to drink. Specifically in the school setting, some studies found no effects of preventive programmes, others statistically significant effects. Most commonly observed positive effects were for drunkenness and binge drinking, and it seems that certain generic psychosocial and developmental prevention programmes can be effective and could be considered as policy and practice options.

Main findings School-based programmes Of the 53 trials, 41 were conducted in North America. Relative to a standard curriculum, six of the 11 trials of alcohol-specific interventions found some statistically significant reductions in drinking. Another 39 studies tested more generic programmes. Of these, 14 found some statistically significant reductions in drink-related outcomes relative to a standard curriculum. Some apparently positive results may have been due to inadequate adjustment for ‘clustering’ effects (eg, of children in a class and of classes in schools), and in some studies results were confined to certain subgroups and/or some measures of drinking but not others. Most commonly, significant effects related to drunkenness and binge drinking. Impacts tended to last longer after generic than after alcohol-specific or other programmes. Overall, the evidence is more convincing for certain generic rather than alcohol-specific programmes. Among generic programmes, those based on psychosocial or developmental approaches (life skills in Life Skills Training; social skills and norms in Unplugged; behaviour norms and peer affiliation in the Good Behaviour Game) were most likely to report statistically significant effects over several years when compared to standard school curricula or other types of interventions.

Family-based programmes All but one of the 12 trials were conducted in North America. Nine recorded statistically significant reductions in drinking, in some cases over longer as well as shorter term follow-ups. One study recorded apparently negative effects which may have arisen by chance or due to methodological issues. In another, though ineffective on its own, the family-based intervention was effective when combined with a school-based intervention. There is some evidence for the short to medium-term success of gender-specific interventions for daughters, typically involving their mothers. Some trials found impacts only among children already using substances at the start of the trial.

Multi-component programmes All but three of the 20 trials were conducted in the USA. Relative to comparison conditions, 12 trials reported statistically significant reductions in drinking lasting up to three years among children allocated to multi-component programmes. Six of the 20 trials found no statistically significant differences, and in another significant reductions were confined to children already drinking at the start of the trial. It was unclear whether in general adding further prevention components to an existing programme improved outcomes; reports on four trials indicated some possible benefits, but another three trials found no such indications.  Read More>>

(An item from the ISHN Member information service) A randomized controlled trial of the impact of a teacher classroom management program on the classroom behavior of children with and without behavior problems, reported in Issue #5, 2013 of Journal of School Psychology, indicates that such training can improve teacher practices and reduce behavior problems among students. The researchers report that " Six intervention and six control classrooms comprising 12 teachers and 107 children (aged 3 to 7 years) were recruited. Children were screened for high or low behavior problems using the cut-off points of the teacher-rated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (Goodman, 1997). The primary outcome measure was independent classroom observations using the Teacher–Pupil Observation Tool (Martin et al., 2010). Multilevel modeling analyses were conducted to examine the effect of the intervention on teacher, classroom, and child behavior. Results showed a significant reduction in classroom off-task behavior (d = 0.53), teacher negatives to target children (d = 0.36), target child negatives towards the teacher (d = 0.42), and target child off-task behavior (d = 0.48)."  Read more>>