- Email: [email protected]
Preventing high school maladjustment: Effectiveness of professional and cross-age behavioral group counseling
BEHAVIOR THERAPY 13, 259--270 (1982)
Preventing High School Maladjustment: Effectiveness of Professional and Cross-Age Behavioral Group Counseling CHARLES A . M A H E R
CHRISTOPHER R.
BARBRACK
Rutgers University The effectiveness of behavioral group counseling in preventing and remediating maladjustment of ninth grade students was studied in a public high school. Behavioral group counseling was provided to ninth graders by experienced school counselors and by twelfth grade students. Results suggested that behavioral group counseling may be a cost-effective approach. When compared to a group of ninth graders who received the school's routine counseling services, students receiving group counseling improved their school attendance and grade point average, while reducing their number of disciplinary referrals and referrals for special education. These results reflected no differences between groups receiving counseling from professionals and from older students, and were maintained during a 10-week follow-up period. Qualitative data also are provided reflecting judgments of teachers, counselors, and vice-principal that the behavioral group counseling intervention was a socially worthwhile and practical approach.
Preventing the maladjustment of public high school pupils, particularly pupil problems of truancy, interpersonal functioning, and academic failure, is a priority of educators (Deyoung, 1978) and is a fundamental aspect of Public Law 94-142 (USDHEW, 1979a). When the task is preventing school-related behavioral difficulties from beginning as well as preventing them from increasing in severity, effective behavioral programs need to be documented (Bry & George, 1980; Maher, in press). Within this context, group-oriented behavioral programs have been described as a potentially useful addition to a public high school's educational delivery system (USDHEW, 1979b). To date, however, little empirical evidence has been reported which supports the efficacy of such programs in public high schools (Marholin & Mclnnis, 1978; Snyder & White, 1979; Strain & Kerr, 1981). A more detailed version of this study can be obtained from the first author. Requests for reprints should be sent to Charles A. Maher, Department of School Psychology, Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, Rutgers University, Box 819, Piscataway, NJ 08854. 259 0005-7894/82/0259-027051.00/0 Copyright 1982by Associationfor Advancementof BehaviorTherapy All rightsof reproductionin any form reserved.
260
M A H E R A N D BARBRACK
This study compared the effectiveness of two behavioral group counseling approaches: (1) professional behavioral group counseling, conducted by experienced public school counselors. (2) cross-age behavioral group counseling, conducted by two twelfth grade students. These two approaches were contrasted with each other and to a comparison group who received routine school counseling services. Subjects for the study were ninth grade pupils who had been identified as in need of intervention designed to prevent school maladjustment from occurring or from increasing in severity.
METHOD Participants Four school counselors in a New Jersey urban-suburban high school each were asked to nominate 10 ninth grade counselees who were beginning to experience school maladjustment in terms of academic failure, school truancy and absenteeism, and interpersonal difficulties with peers and teachers. Counselors were requested to select students who appeared at risk for more severe school maladjustment, including possible special education, if not provided a preventative behavioral program. Selections were made at the end of the second marking period, with the behavioral group counseling approach implemented during the third marking period. From a pool of 40 nominated pupils (n = 10 per counselor), 24 were randomly selected as subjects (n = 6 per counselor). Of the 24 subjects, 16 were randomly assigned to one of four counseling groups, being told by the high school guidance director that the counseling was to assist them in "succeeding at school." The other eight pupils were used as a comparison group, being involved in the school's routine counseling services. The 16 pupils involved in group counseling did not receive these routine services. The average age of the 24 subjects was 15.4 years (range 14.8-16.9 years). Subjects were enrolled in the high school's regular education program. Based upon a review of official school records, all subjects were of average intelligence and grade-level achievement in language arts, mathematics, and reading; none had any record of neurological or perceptual deficits. Subjects were unaware of their participation in a study but were debriefed following it.
Procedures Two school counselors, considered as the professional counselor type for the investigation, were randomly selected to each lead a counseling group of four pupils. These counselors had three and four years experience as school counselors; had several years experience as high school teachers prior to counseling; possessed master's degrees in school counseling. Neither had formal training in or previous experiences with group counseling. Two twelfth grade pupils, considered as the cross-age counselor type for the study, were randomly selected from a volunteer group
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
261
of seven students also to each lead a counseling group of four pupils. The two cross-age counselors were enrolled in a college preparatory program, had average to above average grades in their coursework, and had previously served as peer tutors and cross-age tutors. Neither had any group counseling experience as a leader or member. For the study, the four counseling groups were labeled as: Group A (professional counselor), Group B (professional counselor), Group C (cross-age counselor), Group D (cross-age counselor). The school year was divided into four marking or grading periods of 10 weeks each. The first two periods (20 weeks), served as a baseline phase, the third as the intervention phase (10 weeks), and the fourth as a follow-up phase (10 weeks). During the second period, the two professional and two cross-age counselors received individualized training from the first author in the group counseling approach. The training program consisted of an initial half-hour orientation session per counselor that included a didactic presentation of the behavioral group counseling program and discussion of what to expect in the sessions. Subsequently, the author led four, 30-min weekly counseling groups, over a 6-week period, with 9th grade conduct problem adolescents (n = 4 in each group), using the group behavioral counseling program. Each counselor was designated a co-leader of one of these four groups for the training period, i~ollowing each session, the author met with each counselor for review of the session. During the third marking period, each counselor conducted a counseling group twice a week for the 10-week marking period (20 counseling sessions). On a weekly basis, the first author conducted a half-hour supervisory session with each counselor to discuss progress of pupils in the group, to discuss problems with group process, and to provide suggestions for subsequent sessions.
The Behavioral Group Counseling Program The behavioral group counseling program was derived from the problem-solving framework of D'Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) and the behavioral group counseling principles of Rose (1977). The program was intended to help pupils develop problem-solving skills so they could improve their school attendance, grades, and classroom behavior? During initial counseling sessions, pupils were assisted by the group counselor and each other to identify behaviors thought to be impeding school progress. Pupils were encouraged to "think about" those "behaviors" that seemed to result in their doing " p o o r l y " in school which they could correct, and to consider the consequences of their not changing those behaviors. For example, in terms of classroom/academic problems, pupils were encouraged to identify difficulties such as refusing to complete class assignments and to focus on the possible consequences
1 The program procedure manual is available from the first author.
262
MAHER AND BARBRACK
related to that action (e.g., teacher annoyance, failure in school grades) which would follow from the pupil's failure to resolve the problem. Following problem identification, pupils were assisted by the counselor, and each other, to develop a plan to "solve" the problem by considering a range of solution alternatives and by considering the feasibility of success for any given plan. For example, for problems having to do with not completing academic assignments, some pupils designed a plan which included peer tutoring to catch up on previously missed assignments, while others designed a plan that called for daily study time in the school library. Once a plan was implemented, the counselor and pupils discussed difficulties in following through on the plan and made modifications, as necessary, at subsequent sessions. At each session, the counselor provided positive social reinforcement to pupils for active participation in terms of attending the sessions, identifying problems, designing plans to address the problems, and following through on plan implementation. The counseling sessions were structured by the counselor by means of a 5-step approach which was presented to pupils as a series of questions: (1) What are my problems in school with respect to succeeding in school? (2) What alternatives are available to me to eliminate these problems? (3) What is my plan for eliminating them? (4) Am I following through on my plan and should it be changed? (5) Is my plan working and do I need another one? Routine School Counseling Services The eight comparison group pupils received the routine school counseling services available to all high school pupils who were seen by counselors or school staff as experiencing social and emotional problems. As per school policy, the normal routine involved referral of this kind of pupil by a teacher, administrator, or parent to a school counselor for weekly individual behavioral counseling over the course of a marking period. Following counselor acceptance of the referral, the counselor, or school psychologist, depending upon the problem and extent of professional caseloads at the time of referral, engaged the pupil in weekly counseling sessions that were directed at enhancing the pupil's positive school experiences. Counseling usually focused on particular pupil problems (e.g., school failure), especially how that problem might be remediated. As part of the weekly sessions, the counselor could consult with classroom teachers about the pupil's progress and/or obtain written teacher reports. Pupil Outcome Measures Four pupil outcome measures were used: (1) Percentage of school attendance, measured by comparing number of days of school attendance with total possible days, and then calculating a percentage. (2) Gradepoint average, measured by grades obtained in the subjects of Mathematics, English, Social Studies, Career Education, and Physical Educa-
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
263
tion (1 = A; 2 = B; 3 = C; 4 = D; 5 = F). (3) Disciplinary referrals to school vice-principal, measured as the frequency o f " p i n k slips" received by the vice-principal from classroom teachers relative to a pupil's classroom misconduct. (4) Referrals to child study team, measured as the frequency of referrals for possible special education programming submitted by high school staff to the district's director of special services. For each measure, data were obtained from official school records.
Process Measures Process data were obtained on four aspects of the investigation as it proceeded over time: (1) Attendance at counseling sessions of all 24 subjects. (2) Content of the group counseling sessions in terms of counseling methods used, as well as pupil problems and solutions discussed at each session. These data were reviewed by the authors from weekly counseling summary logs that group counselors were asked to keep. (3) Problems that counselors encountered in conducting the group counseling which the counselors also recorded on the weekly logs. (4) Costs of the overall group counseling intervention were calculated in terms of consultant and counselor financial costs.
Measures of Social and Management Validity Qualitative judgments about effects of the group counseling program were obtained by means of a series of interviews with a random sample of teachers, the four counselors, and the school vice-principal. These interviews, conducted by the high school director of guidance following completion of the study, but prior to debriefing, attempted to assess the program's social validity and management validity. Social validity was seen as a process of subjective evaluation where information was obtained from teachers and participants about qualitative aspects of counseling group participants' school behavior (see Kazdin, 1977). The social validation interview consisted of asking each interviewee: (a) whether they had noticed behavior change in selected participants, (b) if change was noticed, was it seen as positive or negative, and (c) if change was noticed, to describe the change. Management validity was considered as an evaluation by counselors and vice-principal of the extent to which the group counseling program could be incorporated into the school operating routine, on an ongoing basis, in a way that was practical and manageable (see Maher, 1980). The management validation interview consisted of asking each interviewee: (a) to describe the perceived program benefits, both positive and negative, (b) to indicate the extent to which the program could be incorporated into the school's routine, and (c) to indicate if the program should be used routinely.
RESULTS Pupil Outcome Data Outcome data reflecting percentage of school attendance, grade point average, and disciplinary referrals were analyzed initially by means of
264
M A H E R A N D BARBRACK
ANOVA with repeated measures (Winer, 1971). This procedure was used initially to determine if differences existed within the professional counselor condition (A & B) or within the cross-age counselor condition (C & D) over the baseline, treatment, and follow-up phases. The results, seen in Table 1, failed to reveal any statistically significant differences within each group of two counselors. This finding is important inasmuch as it strengthens two fundamental contentions: (1) that observed experimental effects are the result of the behavioral treatment and not of the particular professional or pupil who delivered the behavioral treatment (2) that the data produced within each treatment condition can be aggregated, analyzed, and discussed in relation to the behavioral treatment delivered by different types of counselors (e.g., professional and peers) rather than bY individual professionals and peers. Attendance data, expressed as percentages of the total number of school days per marking period, were analyzed by means of ANOVA with repeated measures. Analysis yielded a significant main effect for marking period, F(2,42) = 49.89, p < .01. Posthoc analysis of the interaction, using the Newman-Keuls procedure (Winer, 1971), indicated that levels of school attendance for the treatment and comparison groups were equivalent during the baseline period. Contrasts of the treatment phase means showed that pupils in the comparison group attended school significantly less (£ = 77%) than either of the treatment groups (professional counseling group £ = 89%, cross-age counseling group £ = 91%). While the cross-age counseling group achieved a higher rate of attendance than the professional counseling group, this difference was not statistically significant. Also, the treatment groups' superiority was maintained during the follow-up phase, when both counseling groups achieved an attendance rating of 87%, while the comparison group's level of attendance was only 71%. Grades were combined to produce an overall grade point average (GPA) for each pupil for each marking period. A baseline index was developed by averaging GPA scores for the first two marking periods since these were completed prior to treatment. Overall, the entire sample of pupils in this study achieved a baseline GPA of 3.58 ( C - ) . This level of academic achievement indicates the subject selection procedure was successful in identifying pupils who were at risk for academic failure but who were not failing at the time the treatments were initiated. Repeated measures ANOVA of GPA data revealed significant main effects for treatments, F(2,21) = 15.03, p < .01, marking periods, F(2,42) = 26.38, p < .01, and their interaction, F(4,42) = 27.38, p < .01. Newman-Keuls tests revealed that the groups were virtually the same for GPA during the baseline phase. As an exception, the professional counseling group was lower in GPA than the comparison group. For the treatment phase, groups receiving counseling from professionals and from cross-age student counselors achieved significantly better GPA scores than the comparison group. The treatment groups obtained a 2.60 grade
265
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
TABLE I MEAN PERCENTAGE OF SCHOOL ATTENDANCE, MEAN GRADE POINT AVERAGE, AND MEAN NUMBER OF DISCIPLINARY REFERRALS DURING BASELINE (B), INTERVENTION (I), AND FOLLOW-UP (]7) PHASES FOR INDIVIDUAL COUNSELOR GROUPS AND COMPARISON GROUP.
Grade point average
Attendance Groups
B
Professional counselor 1 69 Professional counselor 2 67 Cross-age counselor 1 60 Cross-age counselor 2 76 Comparison Group 73
Disciplinary referrals
I
F
B
I
F
B
I
F
92 86 87 95 77
93 80 84 90 71
3.8 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.4
2.6 2.8 2.6 2.4 3.8
2.9 3.0 2.6 2.4 4.0
3.5 4.0 5.0 2.4 2.8
0.5 1.2 2.0 1.0 3.2
1.0 0.2 1.8 1.5 4.8
level ( B - ) , while the c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p ' s m e a n G P A was at 3.80 (D). F o r follow-up, m e a n s revealed a significant G P A decline for the c o m p a r i s o n group from a baseline level of 3.38 to a follow-up level of 4.05. This significant decline highlights the potential c o n s e q u e n c e s of not intervening with pupils who are at-risk academically, since this decline was not evidenced by either treatment group. H o w e v e r , in follow-up, the G P A of the group receiving cross-age counseling was significantly better than the G P A of the professional counseling group, indicating that t r e a t m e n t effect was m o r e durable for the cross-age counseling group. A baseline index for disciplinary referrals was d e v e l o p e d by averaging the n u m b e r of referrals for the first two marking periods. Disciplinary referral data were analyzed by means of A N O V A with repeated m e a s u r e s which revealed significant main effects for t r e a t m e n t s , F(2,21) = il.56, p < .01 and marking periods, F(2,42) = 10.68, p < .01. A significant interaction, F(4,42) = 5.28, p < .01 was also found and analyzed post hoc by means of the N e w m a n - K e u i s procedure. This analysis revealed no significant differences between groups during the baseline phase. Contrasts of treatment phase means showed that pupils in the c o m p a r i s o n group received a significantly greater n u m b e r of referrals (~f = 3.25) than the pupils in either of the treatment groups (professional counseling group = .88, cross-age counseling group ~? = 1.50), and that the difference b e t w e e n the two treatment groups, while numerically favoring the professional counseling group, was not statistically significant. Contrasts of follow-up means revealed significant differences in f a v o r of the t r e a t m e n t groups but no difference between the t r e a t m e n t groups. During followup, the c o m p a r i s o n group received the overall highest n u m b e r of disciplinary referrals, perhaps indicating one of the possible c o n s e q u e n c e s of not intervening with such an at-risk group. F u r t h e r m o r e , the t r e a t m e n t effect did not decrease during the follow-up phase, indicating that the treatment effect in terms of disciplinary referrals was durable o v e r time.
266
MAHER A N D BARBRACK
Data on referrals to the child study team (CST) for assessment for special education were relatively low in frequency and, consequently, could not be appropriately analyzed by means of ANOVA. CST referral was scored for either an initial referral to the CST or for continuing referral (contact) between the pupil and the CST subsequent to the initial referral. During baseline, frequency of CST referrals was as follows: Comparison Group (n = 2); Group A--professional group counseling (n = 2); Group B--professional group counseling (n = 4); Group C - cross-age group counseling (n = 3); Group D---cross-age counseling (n = 1). During intervention, CST referrals declined in all counseling groups, but increased in the comparison group: Group A (n = 1); Group B (n = 0); Group C (n = 0); Group D (n = 0); Comparison (n = 5). These levels were maintained at follow-up: Group A (11 = 1); Group B (n = 0): Group C (n = 0); Group D (n = 0); Comparison (n = 6). CST referral results indicate relatively extensive CST contact in the comparison group (75%) by the fourth marking period and relatively little CST contact in the counseling groups (13%). These data dovetail with those describing GPA and disciplinary referrals and underscore the preventive aspect of the behavioral group counseling intervention. Likewise, data on CST referrals failed to distinguish between the effectiveness of behavioral counseling provided by professionals and that provided by cross-age counselors. Process Data
High rates of attendance at group counseling sessions prevailed for the pupils involved in the group counseling programs during the ]0-week intervention phase, as well as pupils in the comparison group receiving routine counseling services. Mean percentages of counseling attendance were: Group A--professional group counseling (98%); Group B--professional group counseling (100%); Group C--cross-age group counseling (95%); Group D--cross-age group counseling (94%); Comparison Group (98%). Content reviews of the counselors' weekly logs indicated general compliance by the four counselors with the 5-step behavioral group counseling approach. Within and across most sessions, group counseling activities proceeded from a focus on pupil problems, to consideration of alternative solutions, to determination of the extent to which problems were being reduced or eliminated. Content analyses also revealed a list of similar problems and solutions discussed by pupils across the four groups, with the most frequently occurring ones listed in Table 2. As reported in the counseling summary logs and supervisory sessions, no major problems or difficulties ensued during the sessions, with all four counselors indicating that group sessions proceeded more smoothly when sessions started on time, and that a brief review of the previous session's activities helped focus the new session. Financial costs of the overall intervention can be considered minimal, especially when seen in relation to the pupil outcome data reported
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
267
TABLE2 MOST FREQUENTLY OCCURRING PROBLEMSAND SOLUTIONS OF PUPILSIN COUNSELING GROUP~ Problem 1. (a) Getting to school on time (b) Getting to class on time
Solution 1, (a) Early morning "wakeup'" phone call from another student (b) Walking to school regularly with another student
2. Being able to say " n o " to friends who want to skip classes or school
2. (a) Avoiding particular students (b) Being assertive, by saying no in a firm but polite manner
3. Paying attention to the teacher when presenting new material
3. (a) Sitting in front of the classroom (b) Asking teacher to call on student for opinions and answers to questions
4. Undertaking and completing homework assignments
4. (a) Signing up for study hall (b) Keeping a written weekly study schedule
5. Talking inappropriately (e.g., cursing) to teachers when asked to pay attention or complete classwork
5. (a) Learning to "'count to 10'" before answering a teacher back
6. Smoking on school grounds
(a) Filling up school day with study halls and other extra-curricular activities (b) Remaining in the school building during the school day
a Problems and solutions are summarized in terms of those most frequently stated by students. More detailed information on problems discussed and solutions generated is available from first author.
above, and in light of the social and management data to be reported below. In terms of the consulting school psychologist's (first author) expenses, the total cost was $675.00. This cost involved 4½ days of consultant time at $150 per day which covered the individualized training of the four counselors (14 hours) and counselor supervision following training (20 hours). This cost, however, can be eliminated, or reduced further, if an internal consultant (e.g., director of guidance, school psychologist) acquired necessary training and supervisory skills. In terms of staff costs, the training, supervision, and counseling interventions in which the two school counselors were involved occurred during the school day, as part of their regular job responsibilities, and did not involve additional financial expenditures. Likewise, there were no financial costs for the involvement of the two cross-age counselors. Data on Social and Management Validity For each group counseling participant (n = 16), two regular classroom teachers were randomly selected (n = 32), being interviewed by the di-
268
MAHER
AND BARBRACK
rector of guidance. In terms of the interview questions (see previous section), 29 teachers, or 91% of them, verbally reported that they had noticed positive behavior changes in the selected pupils during the marking period; 3 teachers indicated seeing no change, but no negative changes. Positive behavior change descriptions described were ones such as (a) "attends class regularly," (b) "stays in seat more often," (c) "produces higher quality classwork," (d) "seems more friendly towards me and classmates." The four counselors and vice-principal also were interviewed by the director of guidance in terms of the program's management validity. All five professionals indicated that the program could, and should, be incorporated into the school's routine on a regular basis. Moreover, all saw positive benefits to the program such as its preventive nature, innovativeness, student involvement, cost-effectiveness, and usefulness to counseling staff as an additional counseling method.
DISCUSSION The unit of analysis employed in the study was the individual subject. Inasmuch as those receiving a group counseling program were treated as a group, use of a single subject as the unit of analysis tends to increase the probability of a Type I error (i.e., of falsely rejecting a true null hypothesis). This risk may be justified because the study covers a new and important area of inquiry, and replications of it, to verify the results, are necessary. Obtained results should be viewed as formative data, suggesting the potential utility of behavioral group counseling for preventing high school maladjustment. Results suggest that behavioral group counseling provided by professionals or students can facilitate development of positive school behaviors (e.g., increased attendance, grades), in a relatively short period of time (10 weeks), with these behaviors being maintained during a 10-week follow-up period. Results also suggest that behavioral group counseling has some degree of management and social validity. In terms of management validity, the professional and cross-age programs were carried out during the course of a school year, without any apparent negative side-effects (e.g., no teacher complaints about pupils being out of class for group counseling). Also, the principal, vice-principal, and counselors indicated that professional and cross-age counselor programs should be expanded during the next school year. In terms of social validity, teachers and school viceprincipal indicated that the behavioral changes that occurred following the group counseling were substantial, positive improvements for the pupils. Although behavioral group counseling may be a cost-effective, practical intervention with high school populations, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn from the current study due to several limitations. First, the lack of a placebo control group does not make it possible to know exactly
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
269
to what the behavioral changes may be attributed. In this regard, for example, the weekly meetings between a counselor and a group of fellow students may have accounted for the change. Thus, one cannot conclude from the current study that a behavioral group counseling treatment was the effective ingredient. Future investigations must include a placebo control. Second, the nature of disciplinary data and child study team data in terms of nontreatment related effects may have been somewhat reactive. Although these kinds of data can be seen as unobtrusive in terms of evaluation research, it is possible that the data were influenced by changes in teacher disposition and/or teacher awareness of which pupils were involved, or not involved, in the counseling groups. This reactivity possibility was not assessed directly in the current study, since recording of disciplinary and child study team data was a routine practice of all teachers in the school, and although teachers were unaware of the study, it is possible that they may have learned of this fact, which may have had a positive reactive effect. Likewise, it is possible that those pupils who received the routine counseling services may have become aware of their not being included in the problem-solving group of some kind, resulting in possible deterioration in their daily school behaviors. Although these possibilities were not assessed directly in the present investigation, comments from counselors, teachers, and the pupils themselves following the study indicated that they were not so aware.
REFERENCES Bry, B. H., & George, E.H. The preventive effects of early intervention on the attendance and grades of urban adolescents. Professional Psychology, 1980, 11, 252-260. Deyoung, E . J . Organizational patterns to schools: Impact on teachers and students. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 1978, 62, 34--41. D'Zurilla, T. J., & Goldfried, M . R . Problem solving and behavior modification. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1971, 78, 107-126. Kazdin, A. E. Assessing the clinical or applied importance of behavior change through social validation. Behavior Modification, 1977, 1,427-452. Maher, C. A. Evaluating organizational effectiveness of special service departments: Comparison of two models. School Psychology Review, 1980, 9, 259-266. Maher, C . A . Implementation of public law 94-142: Challenges and opportunities for behavior modification. Child Behavior Therapy, in press. Marholin, D., & Mclnnis, E . T . Treating children in group settings: Techniques for individualizing behavioral programs. In D. Marholin (Ed.), Child behavior therapy. N e w York: Garden Press, 1978. Rose, S. D, Group therapy: A behavioral approach. Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice-Hall, 1977. Snyder, J. J., & White, M, J. The use of cognitive self-instruction in the treatment of behaviorally disturbed adolescents. Behavior Therapy, 1979, 10, 227-235. Strain, P. S., & Kerr, M. M. Mainstreaming of children in schools: Research and programmatic issues. New York: Academic Press, 1981. United States Department of Health, Education, & Welfare (USDHEW). Semi-annual update of the implementation of PL 94-142: The education for all handicapped children act. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education, August, 1979. (a)
270
MAHER AND BARBRACK
United States Department of Health, Education, & Welfare (USDHEW). The urban high school reform initiative final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education, September, 1979. (b) Winer, B.J. Statisticalprinciples in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971. RECEIVED" July 8, 1981 FINAL ACCEPTANCE; November 18, 1981
Preventing High School Maladjustment: Effectiveness of Professional and Cross-Age Behavioral Group Counseling CHARLES A . M A H E R
CHRISTOPHER R.
BARBRACK
Rutgers University The effectiveness of behavioral group counseling in preventing and remediating maladjustment of ninth grade students was studied in a public high school. Behavioral group counseling was provided to ninth graders by experienced school counselors and by twelfth grade students. Results suggested that behavioral group counseling may be a cost-effective approach. When compared to a group of ninth graders who received the school's routine counseling services, students receiving group counseling improved their school attendance and grade point average, while reducing their number of disciplinary referrals and referrals for special education. These results reflected no differences between groups receiving counseling from professionals and from older students, and were maintained during a 10-week follow-up period. Qualitative data also are provided reflecting judgments of teachers, counselors, and vice-principal that the behavioral group counseling intervention was a socially worthwhile and practical approach.
Preventing the maladjustment of public high school pupils, particularly pupil problems of truancy, interpersonal functioning, and academic failure, is a priority of educators (Deyoung, 1978) and is a fundamental aspect of Public Law 94-142 (USDHEW, 1979a). When the task is preventing school-related behavioral difficulties from beginning as well as preventing them from increasing in severity, effective behavioral programs need to be documented (Bry & George, 1980; Maher, in press). Within this context, group-oriented behavioral programs have been described as a potentially useful addition to a public high school's educational delivery system (USDHEW, 1979b). To date, however, little empirical evidence has been reported which supports the efficacy of such programs in public high schools (Marholin & Mclnnis, 1978; Snyder & White, 1979; Strain & Kerr, 1981). A more detailed version of this study can be obtained from the first author. Requests for reprints should be sent to Charles A. Maher, Department of School Psychology, Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, Rutgers University, Box 819, Piscataway, NJ 08854. 259 0005-7894/82/0259-027051.00/0 Copyright 1982by Associationfor Advancementof BehaviorTherapy All rightsof reproductionin any form reserved.
260
M A H E R A N D BARBRACK
This study compared the effectiveness of two behavioral group counseling approaches: (1) professional behavioral group counseling, conducted by experienced public school counselors. (2) cross-age behavioral group counseling, conducted by two twelfth grade students. These two approaches were contrasted with each other and to a comparison group who received routine school counseling services. Subjects for the study were ninth grade pupils who had been identified as in need of intervention designed to prevent school maladjustment from occurring or from increasing in severity.
METHOD Participants Four school counselors in a New Jersey urban-suburban high school each were asked to nominate 10 ninth grade counselees who were beginning to experience school maladjustment in terms of academic failure, school truancy and absenteeism, and interpersonal difficulties with peers and teachers. Counselors were requested to select students who appeared at risk for more severe school maladjustment, including possible special education, if not provided a preventative behavioral program. Selections were made at the end of the second marking period, with the behavioral group counseling approach implemented during the third marking period. From a pool of 40 nominated pupils (n = 10 per counselor), 24 were randomly selected as subjects (n = 6 per counselor). Of the 24 subjects, 16 were randomly assigned to one of four counseling groups, being told by the high school guidance director that the counseling was to assist them in "succeeding at school." The other eight pupils were used as a comparison group, being involved in the school's routine counseling services. The 16 pupils involved in group counseling did not receive these routine services. The average age of the 24 subjects was 15.4 years (range 14.8-16.9 years). Subjects were enrolled in the high school's regular education program. Based upon a review of official school records, all subjects were of average intelligence and grade-level achievement in language arts, mathematics, and reading; none had any record of neurological or perceptual deficits. Subjects were unaware of their participation in a study but were debriefed following it.
Procedures Two school counselors, considered as the professional counselor type for the investigation, were randomly selected to each lead a counseling group of four pupils. These counselors had three and four years experience as school counselors; had several years experience as high school teachers prior to counseling; possessed master's degrees in school counseling. Neither had formal training in or previous experiences with group counseling. Two twelfth grade pupils, considered as the cross-age counselor type for the study, were randomly selected from a volunteer group
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
261
of seven students also to each lead a counseling group of four pupils. The two cross-age counselors were enrolled in a college preparatory program, had average to above average grades in their coursework, and had previously served as peer tutors and cross-age tutors. Neither had any group counseling experience as a leader or member. For the study, the four counseling groups were labeled as: Group A (professional counselor), Group B (professional counselor), Group C (cross-age counselor), Group D (cross-age counselor). The school year was divided into four marking or grading periods of 10 weeks each. The first two periods (20 weeks), served as a baseline phase, the third as the intervention phase (10 weeks), and the fourth as a follow-up phase (10 weeks). During the second period, the two professional and two cross-age counselors received individualized training from the first author in the group counseling approach. The training program consisted of an initial half-hour orientation session per counselor that included a didactic presentation of the behavioral group counseling program and discussion of what to expect in the sessions. Subsequently, the author led four, 30-min weekly counseling groups, over a 6-week period, with 9th grade conduct problem adolescents (n = 4 in each group), using the group behavioral counseling program. Each counselor was designated a co-leader of one of these four groups for the training period, i~ollowing each session, the author met with each counselor for review of the session. During the third marking period, each counselor conducted a counseling group twice a week for the 10-week marking period (20 counseling sessions). On a weekly basis, the first author conducted a half-hour supervisory session with each counselor to discuss progress of pupils in the group, to discuss problems with group process, and to provide suggestions for subsequent sessions.
The Behavioral Group Counseling Program The behavioral group counseling program was derived from the problem-solving framework of D'Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) and the behavioral group counseling principles of Rose (1977). The program was intended to help pupils develop problem-solving skills so they could improve their school attendance, grades, and classroom behavior? During initial counseling sessions, pupils were assisted by the group counselor and each other to identify behaviors thought to be impeding school progress. Pupils were encouraged to "think about" those "behaviors" that seemed to result in their doing " p o o r l y " in school which they could correct, and to consider the consequences of their not changing those behaviors. For example, in terms of classroom/academic problems, pupils were encouraged to identify difficulties such as refusing to complete class assignments and to focus on the possible consequences
1 The program procedure manual is available from the first author.
262
MAHER AND BARBRACK
related to that action (e.g., teacher annoyance, failure in school grades) which would follow from the pupil's failure to resolve the problem. Following problem identification, pupils were assisted by the counselor, and each other, to develop a plan to "solve" the problem by considering a range of solution alternatives and by considering the feasibility of success for any given plan. For example, for problems having to do with not completing academic assignments, some pupils designed a plan which included peer tutoring to catch up on previously missed assignments, while others designed a plan that called for daily study time in the school library. Once a plan was implemented, the counselor and pupils discussed difficulties in following through on the plan and made modifications, as necessary, at subsequent sessions. At each session, the counselor provided positive social reinforcement to pupils for active participation in terms of attending the sessions, identifying problems, designing plans to address the problems, and following through on plan implementation. The counseling sessions were structured by the counselor by means of a 5-step approach which was presented to pupils as a series of questions: (1) What are my problems in school with respect to succeeding in school? (2) What alternatives are available to me to eliminate these problems? (3) What is my plan for eliminating them? (4) Am I following through on my plan and should it be changed? (5) Is my plan working and do I need another one? Routine School Counseling Services The eight comparison group pupils received the routine school counseling services available to all high school pupils who were seen by counselors or school staff as experiencing social and emotional problems. As per school policy, the normal routine involved referral of this kind of pupil by a teacher, administrator, or parent to a school counselor for weekly individual behavioral counseling over the course of a marking period. Following counselor acceptance of the referral, the counselor, or school psychologist, depending upon the problem and extent of professional caseloads at the time of referral, engaged the pupil in weekly counseling sessions that were directed at enhancing the pupil's positive school experiences. Counseling usually focused on particular pupil problems (e.g., school failure), especially how that problem might be remediated. As part of the weekly sessions, the counselor could consult with classroom teachers about the pupil's progress and/or obtain written teacher reports. Pupil Outcome Measures Four pupil outcome measures were used: (1) Percentage of school attendance, measured by comparing number of days of school attendance with total possible days, and then calculating a percentage. (2) Gradepoint average, measured by grades obtained in the subjects of Mathematics, English, Social Studies, Career Education, and Physical Educa-
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
263
tion (1 = A; 2 = B; 3 = C; 4 = D; 5 = F). (3) Disciplinary referrals to school vice-principal, measured as the frequency o f " p i n k slips" received by the vice-principal from classroom teachers relative to a pupil's classroom misconduct. (4) Referrals to child study team, measured as the frequency of referrals for possible special education programming submitted by high school staff to the district's director of special services. For each measure, data were obtained from official school records.
Process Measures Process data were obtained on four aspects of the investigation as it proceeded over time: (1) Attendance at counseling sessions of all 24 subjects. (2) Content of the group counseling sessions in terms of counseling methods used, as well as pupil problems and solutions discussed at each session. These data were reviewed by the authors from weekly counseling summary logs that group counselors were asked to keep. (3) Problems that counselors encountered in conducting the group counseling which the counselors also recorded on the weekly logs. (4) Costs of the overall group counseling intervention were calculated in terms of consultant and counselor financial costs.
Measures of Social and Management Validity Qualitative judgments about effects of the group counseling program were obtained by means of a series of interviews with a random sample of teachers, the four counselors, and the school vice-principal. These interviews, conducted by the high school director of guidance following completion of the study, but prior to debriefing, attempted to assess the program's social validity and management validity. Social validity was seen as a process of subjective evaluation where information was obtained from teachers and participants about qualitative aspects of counseling group participants' school behavior (see Kazdin, 1977). The social validation interview consisted of asking each interviewee: (a) whether they had noticed behavior change in selected participants, (b) if change was noticed, was it seen as positive or negative, and (c) if change was noticed, to describe the change. Management validity was considered as an evaluation by counselors and vice-principal of the extent to which the group counseling program could be incorporated into the school operating routine, on an ongoing basis, in a way that was practical and manageable (see Maher, 1980). The management validation interview consisted of asking each interviewee: (a) to describe the perceived program benefits, both positive and negative, (b) to indicate the extent to which the program could be incorporated into the school's routine, and (c) to indicate if the program should be used routinely.
RESULTS Pupil Outcome Data Outcome data reflecting percentage of school attendance, grade point average, and disciplinary referrals were analyzed initially by means of
264
M A H E R A N D BARBRACK
ANOVA with repeated measures (Winer, 1971). This procedure was used initially to determine if differences existed within the professional counselor condition (A & B) or within the cross-age counselor condition (C & D) over the baseline, treatment, and follow-up phases. The results, seen in Table 1, failed to reveal any statistically significant differences within each group of two counselors. This finding is important inasmuch as it strengthens two fundamental contentions: (1) that observed experimental effects are the result of the behavioral treatment and not of the particular professional or pupil who delivered the behavioral treatment (2) that the data produced within each treatment condition can be aggregated, analyzed, and discussed in relation to the behavioral treatment delivered by different types of counselors (e.g., professional and peers) rather than bY individual professionals and peers. Attendance data, expressed as percentages of the total number of school days per marking period, were analyzed by means of ANOVA with repeated measures. Analysis yielded a significant main effect for marking period, F(2,42) = 49.89, p < .01. Posthoc analysis of the interaction, using the Newman-Keuls procedure (Winer, 1971), indicated that levels of school attendance for the treatment and comparison groups were equivalent during the baseline period. Contrasts of the treatment phase means showed that pupils in the comparison group attended school significantly less (£ = 77%) than either of the treatment groups (professional counseling group £ = 89%, cross-age counseling group £ = 91%). While the cross-age counseling group achieved a higher rate of attendance than the professional counseling group, this difference was not statistically significant. Also, the treatment groups' superiority was maintained during the follow-up phase, when both counseling groups achieved an attendance rating of 87%, while the comparison group's level of attendance was only 71%. Grades were combined to produce an overall grade point average (GPA) for each pupil for each marking period. A baseline index was developed by averaging GPA scores for the first two marking periods since these were completed prior to treatment. Overall, the entire sample of pupils in this study achieved a baseline GPA of 3.58 ( C - ) . This level of academic achievement indicates the subject selection procedure was successful in identifying pupils who were at risk for academic failure but who were not failing at the time the treatments were initiated. Repeated measures ANOVA of GPA data revealed significant main effects for treatments, F(2,21) = 15.03, p < .01, marking periods, F(2,42) = 26.38, p < .01, and their interaction, F(4,42) = 27.38, p < .01. Newman-Keuls tests revealed that the groups were virtually the same for GPA during the baseline phase. As an exception, the professional counseling group was lower in GPA than the comparison group. For the treatment phase, groups receiving counseling from professionals and from cross-age student counselors achieved significantly better GPA scores than the comparison group. The treatment groups obtained a 2.60 grade
265
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
TABLE I MEAN PERCENTAGE OF SCHOOL ATTENDANCE, MEAN GRADE POINT AVERAGE, AND MEAN NUMBER OF DISCIPLINARY REFERRALS DURING BASELINE (B), INTERVENTION (I), AND FOLLOW-UP (]7) PHASES FOR INDIVIDUAL COUNSELOR GROUPS AND COMPARISON GROUP.
Grade point average
Attendance Groups
B
Professional counselor 1 69 Professional counselor 2 67 Cross-age counselor 1 60 Cross-age counselor 2 76 Comparison Group 73
Disciplinary referrals
I
F
B
I
F
B
I
F
92 86 87 95 77
93 80 84 90 71
3.8 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.4
2.6 2.8 2.6 2.4 3.8
2.9 3.0 2.6 2.4 4.0
3.5 4.0 5.0 2.4 2.8
0.5 1.2 2.0 1.0 3.2
1.0 0.2 1.8 1.5 4.8
level ( B - ) , while the c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p ' s m e a n G P A was at 3.80 (D). F o r follow-up, m e a n s revealed a significant G P A decline for the c o m p a r i s o n group from a baseline level of 3.38 to a follow-up level of 4.05. This significant decline highlights the potential c o n s e q u e n c e s of not intervening with pupils who are at-risk academically, since this decline was not evidenced by either treatment group. H o w e v e r , in follow-up, the G P A of the group receiving cross-age counseling was significantly better than the G P A of the professional counseling group, indicating that t r e a t m e n t effect was m o r e durable for the cross-age counseling group. A baseline index for disciplinary referrals was d e v e l o p e d by averaging the n u m b e r of referrals for the first two marking periods. Disciplinary referral data were analyzed by means of A N O V A with repeated m e a s u r e s which revealed significant main effects for t r e a t m e n t s , F(2,21) = il.56, p < .01 and marking periods, F(2,42) = 10.68, p < .01. A significant interaction, F(4,42) = 5.28, p < .01 was also found and analyzed post hoc by means of the N e w m a n - K e u i s procedure. This analysis revealed no significant differences between groups during the baseline phase. Contrasts of treatment phase means showed that pupils in the c o m p a r i s o n group received a significantly greater n u m b e r of referrals (~f = 3.25) than the pupils in either of the treatment groups (professional counseling group = .88, cross-age counseling group ~? = 1.50), and that the difference b e t w e e n the two treatment groups, while numerically favoring the professional counseling group, was not statistically significant. Contrasts of follow-up means revealed significant differences in f a v o r of the t r e a t m e n t groups but no difference between the t r e a t m e n t groups. During followup, the c o m p a r i s o n group received the overall highest n u m b e r of disciplinary referrals, perhaps indicating one of the possible c o n s e q u e n c e s of not intervening with such an at-risk group. F u r t h e r m o r e , the t r e a t m e n t effect did not decrease during the follow-up phase, indicating that the treatment effect in terms of disciplinary referrals was durable o v e r time.
266
MAHER A N D BARBRACK
Data on referrals to the child study team (CST) for assessment for special education were relatively low in frequency and, consequently, could not be appropriately analyzed by means of ANOVA. CST referral was scored for either an initial referral to the CST or for continuing referral (contact) between the pupil and the CST subsequent to the initial referral. During baseline, frequency of CST referrals was as follows: Comparison Group (n = 2); Group A--professional group counseling (n = 2); Group B--professional group counseling (n = 4); Group C - cross-age group counseling (n = 3); Group D---cross-age counseling (n = 1). During intervention, CST referrals declined in all counseling groups, but increased in the comparison group: Group A (n = 1); Group B (n = 0); Group C (n = 0); Group D (n = 0); Comparison (n = 5). These levels were maintained at follow-up: Group A (11 = 1); Group B (n = 0): Group C (n = 0); Group D (n = 0); Comparison (n = 6). CST referral results indicate relatively extensive CST contact in the comparison group (75%) by the fourth marking period and relatively little CST contact in the counseling groups (13%). These data dovetail with those describing GPA and disciplinary referrals and underscore the preventive aspect of the behavioral group counseling intervention. Likewise, data on CST referrals failed to distinguish between the effectiveness of behavioral counseling provided by professionals and that provided by cross-age counselors. Process Data
High rates of attendance at group counseling sessions prevailed for the pupils involved in the group counseling programs during the ]0-week intervention phase, as well as pupils in the comparison group receiving routine counseling services. Mean percentages of counseling attendance were: Group A--professional group counseling (98%); Group B--professional group counseling (100%); Group C--cross-age group counseling (95%); Group D--cross-age group counseling (94%); Comparison Group (98%). Content reviews of the counselors' weekly logs indicated general compliance by the four counselors with the 5-step behavioral group counseling approach. Within and across most sessions, group counseling activities proceeded from a focus on pupil problems, to consideration of alternative solutions, to determination of the extent to which problems were being reduced or eliminated. Content analyses also revealed a list of similar problems and solutions discussed by pupils across the four groups, with the most frequently occurring ones listed in Table 2. As reported in the counseling summary logs and supervisory sessions, no major problems or difficulties ensued during the sessions, with all four counselors indicating that group sessions proceeded more smoothly when sessions started on time, and that a brief review of the previous session's activities helped focus the new session. Financial costs of the overall intervention can be considered minimal, especially when seen in relation to the pupil outcome data reported
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
267
TABLE2 MOST FREQUENTLY OCCURRING PROBLEMSAND SOLUTIONS OF PUPILSIN COUNSELING GROUP~ Problem 1. (a) Getting to school on time (b) Getting to class on time
Solution 1, (a) Early morning "wakeup'" phone call from another student (b) Walking to school regularly with another student
2. Being able to say " n o " to friends who want to skip classes or school
2. (a) Avoiding particular students (b) Being assertive, by saying no in a firm but polite manner
3. Paying attention to the teacher when presenting new material
3. (a) Sitting in front of the classroom (b) Asking teacher to call on student for opinions and answers to questions
4. Undertaking and completing homework assignments
4. (a) Signing up for study hall (b) Keeping a written weekly study schedule
5. Talking inappropriately (e.g., cursing) to teachers when asked to pay attention or complete classwork
5. (a) Learning to "'count to 10'" before answering a teacher back
6. Smoking on school grounds
(a) Filling up school day with study halls and other extra-curricular activities (b) Remaining in the school building during the school day
a Problems and solutions are summarized in terms of those most frequently stated by students. More detailed information on problems discussed and solutions generated is available from first author.
above, and in light of the social and management data to be reported below. In terms of the consulting school psychologist's (first author) expenses, the total cost was $675.00. This cost involved 4½ days of consultant time at $150 per day which covered the individualized training of the four counselors (14 hours) and counselor supervision following training (20 hours). This cost, however, can be eliminated, or reduced further, if an internal consultant (e.g., director of guidance, school psychologist) acquired necessary training and supervisory skills. In terms of staff costs, the training, supervision, and counseling interventions in which the two school counselors were involved occurred during the school day, as part of their regular job responsibilities, and did not involve additional financial expenditures. Likewise, there were no financial costs for the involvement of the two cross-age counselors. Data on Social and Management Validity For each group counseling participant (n = 16), two regular classroom teachers were randomly selected (n = 32), being interviewed by the di-
268
MAHER
AND BARBRACK
rector of guidance. In terms of the interview questions (see previous section), 29 teachers, or 91% of them, verbally reported that they had noticed positive behavior changes in the selected pupils during the marking period; 3 teachers indicated seeing no change, but no negative changes. Positive behavior change descriptions described were ones such as (a) "attends class regularly," (b) "stays in seat more often," (c) "produces higher quality classwork," (d) "seems more friendly towards me and classmates." The four counselors and vice-principal also were interviewed by the director of guidance in terms of the program's management validity. All five professionals indicated that the program could, and should, be incorporated into the school's routine on a regular basis. Moreover, all saw positive benefits to the program such as its preventive nature, innovativeness, student involvement, cost-effectiveness, and usefulness to counseling staff as an additional counseling method.
DISCUSSION The unit of analysis employed in the study was the individual subject. Inasmuch as those receiving a group counseling program were treated as a group, use of a single subject as the unit of analysis tends to increase the probability of a Type I error (i.e., of falsely rejecting a true null hypothesis). This risk may be justified because the study covers a new and important area of inquiry, and replications of it, to verify the results, are necessary. Obtained results should be viewed as formative data, suggesting the potential utility of behavioral group counseling for preventing high school maladjustment. Results suggest that behavioral group counseling provided by professionals or students can facilitate development of positive school behaviors (e.g., increased attendance, grades), in a relatively short period of time (10 weeks), with these behaviors being maintained during a 10-week follow-up period. Results also suggest that behavioral group counseling has some degree of management and social validity. In terms of management validity, the professional and cross-age programs were carried out during the course of a school year, without any apparent negative side-effects (e.g., no teacher complaints about pupils being out of class for group counseling). Also, the principal, vice-principal, and counselors indicated that professional and cross-age counselor programs should be expanded during the next school year. In terms of social validity, teachers and school viceprincipal indicated that the behavioral changes that occurred following the group counseling were substantial, positive improvements for the pupils. Although behavioral group counseling may be a cost-effective, practical intervention with high school populations, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn from the current study due to several limitations. First, the lack of a placebo control group does not make it possible to know exactly
HIGH SCHOOL MALADJUSTMENT
269
to what the behavioral changes may be attributed. In this regard, for example, the weekly meetings between a counselor and a group of fellow students may have accounted for the change. Thus, one cannot conclude from the current study that a behavioral group counseling treatment was the effective ingredient. Future investigations must include a placebo control. Second, the nature of disciplinary data and child study team data in terms of nontreatment related effects may have been somewhat reactive. Although these kinds of data can be seen as unobtrusive in terms of evaluation research, it is possible that the data were influenced by changes in teacher disposition and/or teacher awareness of which pupils were involved, or not involved, in the counseling groups. This reactivity possibility was not assessed directly in the current study, since recording of disciplinary and child study team data was a routine practice of all teachers in the school, and although teachers were unaware of the study, it is possible that they may have learned of this fact, which may have had a positive reactive effect. Likewise, it is possible that those pupils who received the routine counseling services may have become aware of their not being included in the problem-solving group of some kind, resulting in possible deterioration in their daily school behaviors. Although these possibilities were not assessed directly in the present investigation, comments from counselors, teachers, and the pupils themselves following the study indicated that they were not so aware.
REFERENCES Bry, B. H., & George, E.H. The preventive effects of early intervention on the attendance and grades of urban adolescents. Professional Psychology, 1980, 11, 252-260. Deyoung, E . J . Organizational patterns to schools: Impact on teachers and students. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 1978, 62, 34--41. D'Zurilla, T. J., & Goldfried, M . R . Problem solving and behavior modification. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1971, 78, 107-126. Kazdin, A. E. Assessing the clinical or applied importance of behavior change through social validation. Behavior Modification, 1977, 1,427-452. Maher, C. A. Evaluating organizational effectiveness of special service departments: Comparison of two models. School Psychology Review, 1980, 9, 259-266. Maher, C . A . Implementation of public law 94-142: Challenges and opportunities for behavior modification. Child Behavior Therapy, in press. Marholin, D., & Mclnnis, E . T . Treating children in group settings: Techniques for individualizing behavioral programs. In D. Marholin (Ed.), Child behavior therapy. N e w York: Garden Press, 1978. Rose, S. D, Group therapy: A behavioral approach. Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice-Hall, 1977. Snyder, J. J., & White, M, J. The use of cognitive self-instruction in the treatment of behaviorally disturbed adolescents. Behavior Therapy, 1979, 10, 227-235. Strain, P. S., & Kerr, M. M. Mainstreaming of children in schools: Research and programmatic issues. New York: Academic Press, 1981. United States Department of Health, Education, & Welfare (USDHEW). Semi-annual update of the implementation of PL 94-142: The education for all handicapped children act. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education, August, 1979. (a)
270
MAHER AND BARBRACK
United States Department of Health, Education, & Welfare (USDHEW). The urban high school reform initiative final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education, September, 1979. (b) Winer, B.J. Statisticalprinciples in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971. RECEIVED" July 8, 1981 FINAL ACCEPTANCE; November 18, 1981