Quality of Research
Documents Reviewed
The documents below were reviewed for Quality of Research. The research point of
contact can provide information regarding the studies reviewed and the availability
of additional materials, including those from more recent studies that may have been conducted.
Study 1Bacon, T. P. (2003). Technical report: The effects of the Too Good for Violence prevention program on student behaviors and protective factors. A project funded by the C. E. Mendez Foundation, Inc., Tampa, FL.
Hall, B. W., & Bacon, T. P. (2005). Building a foundation against violence: Impact of a school-based prevention program on elementary students. Journal of School Violence, 4(4), 63-83.
Supplementary Materials Bacon, T. P. (2001). Evaluation of the Too Good for Drugs and Violence--High School prevention program. A report produced for a project funded by the Florida Department of Education, Department of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Tallahassee, FL.
Bacon, T. P. (2001). Impact on high school students' behaviors and protective factors: A pilot study of the Too Good for Drugs and Violence prevention program. Florida Educational Research Council, Inc., Research Bulletin, 32(3 & 4), 1-40.
Bacon, T. P. (2004). Technical report: Pilot study of the Too Good for Drugs and Violence after-school activities program. A project funded by the C. E. Mendez Foundation, Inc., Tampa, FL.
Outcomes
| Outcome 1: Personal and prosocial behaviors |
|
Description of Measures
|
Personal and prosocial behaviors were measured using the Teacher Checklist of Student Behaviors. Teachers responded to 21 items using a 5-point scale from "never" to "almost always." Teacher responses to items were grouped into three protective subscales associated with a student's adaptability: personal and social skills, positive social behaviors, and inappropriate social behaviors. Higher scores indicated positive levels of student behaviors.
|
|
Key Findings
|
At posttest and the 20-week follow-up, 3rd-grade students participating in TGFV were perceived by teachers as showing more frequent use of personal and social skills and more frequent engagement in prosocial behaviors than 3rd-grade students from the assessment-only control group (all p values < .001). The teachers' perceptions of inappropriate social behaviors did not differ significantly between the two groups.
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
2.9
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 2: Protective factors related to conflict and violence |
|
Description of Measures
|
Protective factors related to conflict and violence were measured using the Student Protective Factor Survey Questionnaire. Students responded to 32 items on a Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Responses were grouped into four protective subscales associated with children's resiliency to social challenges: emotional competency skills, prosocial behaviors and resistance skills, communication skills, and perceptions of interactions with others. Higher scores indicated positive levels of attitudes, perceptions, or skills.
|
|
Key Findings
|
At posttest and the 20-week follow-up, 3rd-grade students in the TGFV program had significantly higher scores in their perceptions of emotional competency skills, prosocial behaviors and resistance skills, and communication skills than 3rd-grade students in the assessment-only control group (all p values < .001). The two groups did not differ significantly on perceptions of interactions with others.
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
2.9
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
Study Populations
The following populations were identified in the studies reviewed for Quality of
Research.
|
Study
|
Age
|
Gender
|
Race/Ethnicity
|
|
Study 1
|
6-12 (Childhood)
|
52% Male
48% Female
|
44% White
36% Hispanic or Latino
12% Black or African American
5% Race/ethnicity unspecified
2% Asian
1% American Indian or Alaska Native
|
Quality of Research Ratings by Criteria (0.0-4.0 scale)
External reviewers independently evaluate the Quality of Research for an intervention's
reported results using six criteria:
For more information about these criteria and the meaning of the ratings, see Quality of Research.
|
Outcome
|
Reliability
of Measures
|
Validity
of Measures
|
Fidelity
|
Missing
Data/Attrition
|
Confounding
Variables
|
Data
Analysis
|
Overall
Rating
|
|
1: Personal and prosocial behaviors
|
3.0
|
2.7
|
2.8
|
3.3
|
3.0
|
2.5
|
2.9
|
|
2: Protective factors related to conflict and violence
|
3.0
|
2.5
|
2.8
|
3.3
|
3.0
|
2.7
|
2.9
|
Study Strengths The instruments used in the study have good reliability. Attrition was monitored and was not significantly different between the intervention and control group. Appropriate statistical methods were used to analyze the data. The study randomized matched schools, which decreased the potential for confounding variables. The intervention effects were supported by consistent results across gender, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups.
Study Weaknesses Because the Student Protective Factor Survey Questionnaire was pilot-tested with middle and high school students, it is possible that the study participants, who were in 3rd grade, did not fully understand the language in the questionnaire. There is lack of evidence demonstrating that the instrument is sufficiently sensitive to consistently detect desirable effects among this age group after only a 20-week follow-up period. Teachers who rated program implementation were the same as those who completed the Teacher Checklist of Student Behaviors, which may have introduced bias since the teachers were aware of program objectives.
|
|
Readiness for Dissemination
Materials Reviewed
The materials below were reviewed for Readiness for Dissemination. The implementation
point of contact can provide information regarding implementation of the intervention
and the availability of additional, updated, or new materials.
Mendez Foundation. (n.d.). Too Good Programs catalog. Tampa, FL: Author.
Mendez Foundation kits:
- Too Good for Violence Grade 2 Kit
- Too Good for Violence Grade 5 Kit
- Too Good for Violence Grade 8 Kit
Mendez Foundation training materials:
- Too Good for Drugs & Violence After-School Activities curriculum training packet
- Too Good for Drugs & Violence High School curriculum training packet
- Too Good for Violence K-8 curriculum training packet
- Too Good Programs Regional Trainings [brochure]
- Too Good Programs Training of Trainers Manual
Program Web site, http://www.mendezfoundation.org
Readiness for Dissemination Ratings by Criteria (0.0-4.0 scale)
External reviewers independently evaluate the intervention's Readiness for Dissemination
using three criteria:
- Availability of implementation materials
- Availability of training and support resources
- Availability of quality assurance procedures
For more information about these criteria and the meaning of the ratings, see Readiness for Dissemination.
Implementation
Materials
|
Training and Support
Resources
|
Quality Assurance
Procedures
|
Overall
Rating
|
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
Dissemination Strengths Implementation materials are comprehensive, well organized, and ready for classroom integration. Each curriculum kit is tailored to grade level and includes age-appropriate multimedia materials to supplement scripted lessons. Multiple levels of training are available on site, at the developer's site, and at regional training events. The developer also offers ongoing support and consultation to implementers. An array of evaluation tools, including fidelity assessment and outcome measurement protocols, is provided to support quality assurance.
Dissemination Weaknesses No weaknesses were identified by reviewers.
|
|
Costs
The cost information below was provided by the developer. Although this cost information
may have been updated by the developer since the time of review, it may not reflect
the current costs or availability of items (including newly developed or discontinued
items). The implementation point of contact can provide current information and
discuss implementation requirements.
|
Item Description
|
Cost
|
Required by Developer
|
|
K-8 grade-specific kits
|
$100-$130 each
|
Yes
|
|
1-day, on-site curriculum training
|
$2,000 for 10-50 participants, plus travel expenses
|
No
|
|
1-day, off-site curriculum training
|
$295 per person
|
No
|
|
Train-the-trainer session
|
$400 per person
|
No
|
|
Implementation design and technical assistance before, during, and following program implementation
|
Free
|
No
|
|
Student behavior checklist, student outcome survey, student knowledge test, teacher implementation instrument, and classroom observation checklist
|
Included with kits
|
No
|
Additional Information Kit components may be purchased individually.
|
Replications
Selected citations are presented below. An asterisk indicates that the document
was reviewed for Quality of Research.
Bacon, T. P. (2001). Evaluation of the Too Good for Drugs and Violence--High School prevention program. A report produced for a project funded by the Florida Department of Education, Department of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Tallahassee, FL.
Bacon, T. P. (2001). Impact on high school students' behaviors and protective factors: A pilot study of the Too Good for Drugs and Violence prevention program. Florida Educational Research Council, Inc., Research Bulletin, 32(3 & 4), 1-40.
Bacon, T. P. (2004). Technical report: Pilot study of the Too Good for Drugs and Violence after-school activities program. A project funded by the C. E. Mendez Foundation, Inc., Tampa, FL.
|
|
|
