• A longitudinal study of adolescents from 8th to 12th grade that examined the links among academic achievement, school bonding, school misbehavior, and cigarette use found that school misbehavior and low academic achievement contribute to increased use of cigarettes over time. These findings support the perspective that students with school misbehaviors and poor academic achievement are more at risk for cigarette use during adolescence and that prevention programs that decrease these risk factors are more likely to be effective in lowering cigarette use. ¹ , ²

• Most studies agree that school failure, represented by low grade point average, is one of the most consistent risk factors for and a major predictor of substance use. Research also indicates that academic success can reduce involvement in a variety of risky behaviors that compromise students' health.³

• "Failure to support the academic achievement of students is related to students' disengagement from school and increased risk-taking behavior. National longitudinal data show that, regardless of ethnic background or social class, youth who have problems with schoolwork are more likely than others to be involved in every health risk studied, including alcohol, sexual intercourse, and weapon-related violence." ⁴

• When compared with a control group, students participating in the Behavioral Monitoring and Reinforcement Program had better grades and attendance immediately following the intervention, displayed fewer problem behaviors at school the year after the intervention ended, reported less substance abuse and criminal behavior one year after the intervention ended, and were less likely to have a juvenile record five years after the program ended. ⁵ , ⁶ , ⁷

• Evaluation results from STATUS (a school within a school program involving youth at high risk in junior and senior high schools) demonstrated that intervention students reported reduced delinquent behavior, had reduced levels of negative peer influences, earned higher grade point averages, perceived school to be significantly less punishing and more rewarding, were significantly more attached to school, had more positive self concepts, and persisted in school longer. ⁸ , ⁹

• Compared to the control group, students in the Social Skills Training (a social skills program for upper elementary school youth that uses drama simulation games to help students improve interpersonal problem-solving abilities) group demonstrated the following: more assertive responses directly after program participation, fewer passive and aggressive problem-solving responses directly after program participation, increased popularity directly after program participation (and one year later), and increased grade-point averages one year after participating in the program.¹⁰

• Children involved in the Seattle Social Development Program (a school-based program for grades 1-6 that seeks to reduce childhood risks for delinquency and drug abuse by improving parent-child communication and changing teachers' classroom management practices) study were followed through the sixth grade. Fifth grade students in the intervention group showed the following changes: reduced antisocial behavior, particularly aggressiveness (for males); reduced self-destructive behavior (for females); improved academic skills; greater commitment to school; reduced levels of alienation; better social bonding to others; less misbehavior in school; and fewer incidents of drug use in school. ¹¹ , ¹²

• Students who participated in STEP (a high-school-based program that aims to streamline school transitions by establishing stable groups of students whose schedules overlap, and restructuring the homeroom teacher so that he or she is the primary administrative/counseling link between the students, their parents, and the rest of the school) demonstrated the following effects: fewer absences than control group students; higher GPAs; stable self-concept scores; higher levels of teacher support, affiliation, and involvement; more positive ratings of the school environment, specifically in terms of personal growth, organization, innovation, and clarity of rules; and lower drop-out rates. ¹³ , ¹⁴

• Key findings from the Atlanta pilot sites of the Resolving Conflict Creatively Program (a K-12 school program that cultivates the social, emotional, and ethical development of children through teaching conflict resolution and intercultural understanding) include the following: 64% of teachers reported less physical violence; 75% of teachers reported an increase in student cooperation; 92% of the students reported feeling better about themselves; more than 90% of the parents reported an increase in their own communication and problem-solving skills; student attendance rates improved; rates of course failure decreased; in- and out-of school suspension rates at middle school decreased; and drop-out rates decreased. ¹⁵

• Five months after the intervention, Reconnecting Youth (a school-based peer group program that builds life skills among adolescents at high risk for behavioral problems in general and drug involvement specifically) program participants, in contrast to controls, showed the following: a tendency to curb their progression of drug use (i.e., from cigarettes and alcohol to illicit drugs); decreases in drug control problems and consequences; increases in grade point average; increases in self-esteem; and more positive, connected relationships with teachers, friends, and family. ¹⁶ , ¹⁷

• An evaluation that compared Quantum Opportunities Program (a four-year youth development program designed to serve disadvantaged adolescents by providing education, service, and development activities) participants to a control group demonstrated that QOP participants were more likely to be high school graduates, more likely to go on to post-secondary schools, less likely to be high school dropouts, more likely to have received an honor in the past year, and less likely to become teen parents. ¹⁸

• An evaluation that compared PATHE (a school-based delinquency prevention program that combines an environmental change approach with a direct intervention for youth at risk) students (some of whom were middle school students) to a control group demonstrated a decrease in delinquency and drug use; a reduction in suspension rates; significant decreases in alienation for both middle and high school students; increased attachment to school; higher graduation rates; higher promotion rates; higher grades during the first year of the program; higher attendance; and improvements in staff morale, school safety, teacher-administration cooperation, and clarity and fairness of school rules. ¹⁹ , ²⁰

Footnotes

¹ Bryant, A. L., Schulenberg, J., Bachman, J. G., O'Malley, P. M., & Johnston, L. D. (2000). Understanding the links among school misbehavior, academic achievement and cigarette use: A national panel study of adolescents. Prevention Science, 1, 71-87.

² Bryant, A. L., Schulenberg, J., Bachman, J. G., O'Malley, P. M., & Johnston, L. D. (2000). Acting out and lighting up: Understanding the links among school misbehavior, academic achievement, and cigarette use. Monitoring the Future Occasional Paper No. 46. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.

³ Dryfoos, J. (1990). Adolescents at risk: Prevalence and prevention. NY: Oxford University Press.

⁴ Blum, R. W., Beuhring, T., & Rinehard, P. M. (2000). Protecting teens: Beyond race, income and family structure. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Adolescent Health, University of Minnesota. From Learning First Alliance, Every Child Learning: Safe and Supportive Schools, November, 2001.

⁵ Bry, B. H. (1982). Reducing the incidence of adolescent problems through preventive intervention: One- and five-year follow-up. American Journal of Community Psychology, 10, 265-276.

⁶ Bry, B. H. & George, F. E. (1979). Evaluating and improving prevention programs: A strategy from drug abuse. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2, 127-136.

⁷ Bry, B. H. & George, F. E. (1980). The preventive effects of early intervention on the attendance and grades of urban adolescents. Professional Psychology, 11, 252-260.

⁸ Gottfredson, D. (1990). Changing school structures to benefit high-risk youth. In P.E. Leone (Ed.), Understanding troubled and troubling youth. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

⁹ Gottfredson, D. C. (1997). School-based crime prevention. In preventing crime: What works, what doesn't, what's promising. A report to the United States Congress. Prepared for the National Institute of Justice by L.W. Sherman, D. Gottfredson, D. MacKenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter, and S. Bushway. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Available online at www.preventingcrime.org.

¹⁰ Rotheram, M. J. (1982). Social skills training with underachievers, disruptive, and exceptional children. Psychology in Schools, 19, 532-539.

¹¹ Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., Morrison, D. M., O'Donnell, J., Abbott, R. D., Day, L. E. (1992). The Seattle Social Development Project: Effects of the first four years on protective factors and problem behaviors. In J. McCord and R. Tremblay (Eds.), The prevention of antisocial behavior in children (139-161). New York: Guilford Publications.

¹² Hawkins, J. D., Von Cleve, E., & Catalano, R. F. (1991). Reducing early childhood aggression: Results of a primary prevention program. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 30, 208-217.

¹³ Felner, R. D., & Adan, A. M. (1988). The School Transition Environmental Project: An ecological intervention and evaluation. In R. H. Price , E. L. Cowen, R. P. Lorian, & J. Ramos-McKay (Eds.) Fourteen ounces of prevention: A casebook for practitioners. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

¹⁴ Flener, R. D., Ginter, M., & Pirmavera, J. (1982). Primary prevention during school transitions: Social support and environmental structure. American Journal of Community Psychology, 10, 277-290.

¹⁵ Aber, J. L., Brown, J. L., Chaudry, N., Jones, S. M., & Smaples, F. (1996). The evaluation of the Resolving Conflict Creatively Program: An overview. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 12, 82-90; and Atlanta Public Schools (1998 April). The Resolving Conflict Creatively Program: Summary of the final evaluation report, 1996-1997. NY: Metis Associates, Inc.

¹⁶ Eggert, L. L., Thompson, E. A., Herting, J. R., Nicholas, L. J., & Dicker, B. G. (1994 Jan/Feb). Preventing adolescent drug abuse and high school dropout through an intensive school-based social network development program. American Journal of Health Promotion, 8, 202-215.

¹⁷ Eggert, L. L., Thomson, E. A., Herting, J. R., & Nicholas, L. J. (1995). Reducing suicide potential among high-risk youth: Tests of a school-based prevention program. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 25, 276-296.

¹⁸ Hahn, A., with T. Leavitt & P. Aaron (1994). Evaluation of the Quantum Opportunities Program: Did the program work? A report on the post-secondary outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the QOP program (1989-1993). Waltham, MA: Brandeis University, Heller Graduate School, Center for Human Resources. A program description is available online at www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints.

¹⁹ Gottfredson, G. D. (1984). A theory-ridden approach to program evaluation: A method for stimulating researcher-implementer collaboration. American Psychologist, 39, 1101-1112.

²⁰ Hahn, A., with T. Leavitt, and P. Aaron (1994). Evaluation of the Quantum Opportunities Program: Did the program work? A report on the post secondary outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the QOP program (1989-1993). Waltham, MA: Brandeis University, Heller Graduate School, Center for Human Resources.