Every day problems come up in a typical family. When families have emotional and social difficulties, it is hard for them to find a way to grow into teenagers and then adults. Rebelliousness, along with peer pressure, can be destructive. For this reason, parents need to offer their teens support, involvement, and guidance. Because children at this age are experiencing struggles with identity, it is a time when many of them experiment with unhealthy choices. In one of their pamphlets, the Partnership for a Drug Free America (1998) states that although teens may not show they appreciate it, parents profoundly shape the choices their children make. Probably one of the reasons why children do not listen when told what to do is because they are not allowed to sort through their own thoughts about things. Adults always feel they have the right answers for the children. If children felt more respected, perhaps this in turn, this will increase the level of respect the children will give, especially to the parents.

In this class, I experienced what I always knew, that everyone has a different perspective on things. I learned that the way I feel about myself is not necessarily the same view point others have about me. This is also important when leading groups with children. It is important to ask the child what happened so that you know what the actual situation is and not your interpretation. Making assumptions can only hinder the relationship with a child, just like it can in any other situation. I have discovered this in the group process of our group in this class. In addition, I learned that when leading a group, the members are more prone to follow your lead and are less resistant in appreciating your views if you are not degrading and involve each member in the decision making process.

This is the point I want to make to these parents about their parenting styles. If they want to control their children’s behavior then they might get the results they want because their children fear them. This is compared to the authoritative leading style. Is it not healthier to teach children how to deal with their own problems rather than mandating certain behaviors of them? Children who think through their problems care about themselves and others and are more successful at making friends, and at making responsible decisions in light of their potential consequences (Shure, 2000).

This program will hopefully fill the gap of communication between children and their parents so that the children can feel empowered to make wise decisions. This will decrease the number of children residing in Paterson who will eventually be labeled “juvenile delinquents” and decrease the number of children who end up losing their lives to unhealthy lifestyles. A strong family foundation is the key to achieving this goal.

REFRENCES

Stout, Bruce D., (2003). Community Re-Entry of Adolescents from New Jersey’s Juvenile Justice System. New Jersey: The New Jersey Institute for Social Justice and the New Jersey Public Policy Research Institute’s Re-Entry Roundtable.

Office of National Drug Control Policy, Drug Policy Information Clearinghouse (2004). State of New Jersey Profile of Drug Indicators. New Jersey: ONDCP

Molgaard, Virginia. & Spoth, Richard. The Strengthening Families Program: For Parents and Youth Retrieved November 23, 2004, from http://www.strenghteningfamilies.org

U.S. Department of Education (1998). Growing Up Drug Free: A Parent’s Guide to Prevention.

New York: The Whit House Office of National Drug Control Policy & Partnership for a Drug-Free America.

Shure, Myrna B., (1992) I Can Problem Solve: An Interpersonal Cognitive Problem-Solving Program. Champaign: Research Press.

Israeloff, R., Shure, Myrna B., (2000) Raising a Thinking Preteen. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.

The families in Paterson are so transient and will not all be able to complete the entire program because they are constantly moving around. The challenge will be in reaching out to those parents and convincing them to continue the program even though they will no longer live in the area. The program will provide transportation for families that do not have a means of transportation. This will in turn increase participation and continuation of the program to completion.

Another challenging factor will be in how well the teachers and staff will buy-in to the effectiveness of this program and whether or not they care about the work they do. The teachers might see this as added work to their already busy schedules. There might be some resistance in identifying children since this might cause and unpleasant reaction from the parent. The program will attempt to decrease the work load of the teacher by minimizing any paperwork and/or establishing a strong rapport with each teacher and staff member.

Recruiting the parents might also pose a challenge. Based on my experience in working with children in the schools, the parent turn-out to any school function is low. For example, School 15 in Paterson implemented a Family appreciation day one month ago in which they offered prizes and other incentives. Fifty parents out of 1100 students attended. This figure, according to the Vice Principal of the School, is actually high compared to other recent functions the school has held. Continuous invitations will go out in the mail, as well as, reaching out through phone calls, teachers and staff.

Evaluation

The evaluation process will be a systematic attempt to assess the program and see if the goals were met. The Prevention Counselor who will collect the data by performing interviews with parents and score the behavioral rating scale will do this. The program will evaluate the impact, outcomes and process of the program in a quantitative and qualitative way. Questions to be answered through interviewing and surveys are:

Did the program provide the number and types of services that were stated in the goals?
Did the program meet the objectives?
Were our methods successful?
Did the children and parents improve their problem solving skills and decrease family management problems?
Did the parents increase their level of comfort with various aspects of parenting?
All forms can be found in the appendices. The surveys and questionnaires are designed to measure the process, outcome and impact of the program. These consist of the following:

Behavior Rating Scale (Appendix A: Shure’s ICPS book)
The Parenting Style Interview (pg. 214-225, Raising a Thinking Preteen)
The Parent’s Evaluation (observational)
The Behavior Rating Scale will help teachers and staff identifies problem behaviors and at-risk children. It can also be used to determine the appropriateness of a child’s behavior.

The Childrearing styles of parents should also show improvement after completion of the program and a pre and post survey about childrearing skills and styles will be conducted for each family.

CHILDREN’S GROUP

Weekly Sessions (40 minutes each)

Mondays 4:30 p.m. -5:10 p.m.

Sessions 16, 17, 18 will be family training sessions from 4:30 p.m. -6:00 p.m.

Locations: School 21 during after-school care in boys’ locker room; School 30 during after-school care in teacher’s conference room; Boys and Girls Club in room 111; Barnett Kids Corner in room 444

Materials: The ICPS Red book: Intermediate Grades by Myrna Shure (1999), easel, and paper

Session: 1 Who and I What am I thinking Of?

Purpose: To encourage children to think about the characteristics of others as the first step toward thinking outside oneself when interpersonal problems arise.

Session: 2 What Makes People Feel the Way They Do?

Purpose: To sensitize children to people’s feelings and presences by helping them see that different people feel different ways about the same thing and that people can feel the same way about the same things.

Session: 3 Negation, Multiple Possibilities, Feelings, Two Things at the Same Time

Purpose: Awareness of various solutions and how to cope when things do not go the way we want them to.

Session: 4 Feelings: Frustrated, Impatient, Disappointed, Embarrassed

Purpose: To help children increase awareness of their own and other people’s feelings and how to identify how other people feel and cope with these feelings for later problem-solving.

Session: 5 What Else Can I Do?

Purpose: To encourage children to think of as many solutions to different problems.

Session 6: So What is the Problem Here?

Purpose: To illustrate to children that sometimes one assumes what the problem is but sometimes it is not the actual problem.

Session 7: Do I Remember?

Purpose: To show children how important it is to pay attention to what other people say and to practice those skills.

Session 8: Problems with My Siblings or Friends.

Purpose: To expand on perspective taking and understand reasons of a particular event such as interpersonal problems.

Session 9: Problems with my Parent(s).

Purpose: To increase awareness of how different behaviors affect the way the parent feels and might react. To practice more complex problem solving skills and coping.

Session 10: Problems with Three People at the Same Time.

Purpose: To expand on more complex problem solving and consequential thinking.

Session 11: Can I Tell You What Happened?

Purpose: To suggest why finding out why things happen before reacting and venting emotions is important.

Session 12: What do They Know?

Purpose: To extend on perspective taking and thinking about simultaneous coordination of more than one viewpoint, the base on differential knowledge about a situation.

Session 13: Remembering a Time When………

Purpose: To reminisce on actual problem situations in other to review and practice problem solving skills and identifying alternative solutions to each problem.

Session 14: Finding the Right Solution Takes Time Sometimes

Purpose: To help the children recognize that sometimes it takes you cannot solve a problem quickly and that the first thing that comes to mind is not always the best solution.

Session 15: Let’s Write Some Alternative Solutions

Purpose: To illustrate real life interpersonal problems and encourage them to think of solutions and consequences.

Session 16: Let’s Practice Communicating Mom/Dad? (session with parents)

Purpose: To illustrate the importance of active listening and practice with parents.

Session 17: Let’s talk some more (session with parents)

Purpose: To greater emphasize why it is important to actively listen to parents in order to encourage later sensitivity to their thoughts and feelings.

Session 18: Wrap – Up. What I Learned About You (session with parents)

Purpose: To express empathy and appreciating the parent role for the children and children’s perspectives for the parents.

PARENT’S/FAMILY TRAINING

Weekly Sessions (90 minutes each)

Tuesdays at 5:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Sessions 4, 5 and 6 will be held Mondays with their children.

Location: Boys and Girls Club of Paterson, room 111

Materials: Handouts, video, easel

Session 1: What do I want from this Experience?

Purpose: To increase awareness of the importance of building a relationship with children. A discussion and video will delineate the positives and negative of interacting with children in different ways.

Session 2: Basic Principles of Communication with Children

Purpose: Step-by-step outline of different communication strategies

Session 3: Parenting Styles

Purpose: Discussion and practice of different parenting styles..

Sessions 4, 5, and 6: In conjunction with children’s last three sessions.

The focus of this program will be on developing a set of interpersonal problem-solving skills that relate to overt behaviors. Adding to behavioral outcomes, the parent interventions are designed to help parents use an effective and healthy style of communication that guides their children to make their own choices and be responsible for those choices. The parent component will help reduce family management problems and strengthen the flowing factors: clear norms, clear household rules, and a significant relationship with parent/guardian

The program will offer two series for the year 2005. The first series for the children’s group will consist of eighteen sessions running from February 2005 to June 2005. The parent and family component will consist of six sessions running form April 2005 to June 2005. Each series will consist of fifteen families.

The second series will incorporate the same systematic method of implementation but will run form August 2005 to December 2005. The months of January and July 2005 will be utilized for logistics and evaluation pu The Curriculum which will include components of the research based cognitive and interpersonal program by Myrna Shure (1992), I Can Problem Solve (ICPS), and The Strengthening Families Program by Virginia Molgaard and Richard Spoth (1999), will teach these teens how to resolve interpersonal problems that will prevent them from behaving in non-productive ways. These behaviors are indicators to substance abuse and/or delinquency.

The identified population for this program is children ages 11-14 who exhibit dysfunctional behavioral problems such as antisocial behaviors and rebelliousness, and/or lack of problem solving and life skills.

Conclusion

The funding available is not meeting increasing number of children that need to get referred due to these types of behavioral issues. The solution, therefore, has been for many of these schools, particular in Paterson, to meet the demand by simply by making the child leave temporarily and sometimes, permanently. Nevertheless, one must be aware that the problem is not only the child. It does take a village to raise a child and in that village are included parents, teachers, and other school personnel that work with the children.

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The overall goal for the program is to teach children and parents the process of critical thinking to help them think more clearly to situations presented. By enhancing these skills, it will increase the probability of preventing more serious problems by addressing the behavioral predictors or risk factors. This program will decrease impulsivity, enhance relationships and make both the parent and child more confident by enhancing the communication between them. The parents are the most influential in the children’s life; therefore, the enhancement in the communication will strengthen the family support for the child and will guide the child to make more positive choices in life.

GOAL ONE:

Thirty at risk children ages 11-14, who exhibit behavioral dysfunctions, will increase problem solving life skills by 25%. This will decrease dysfunctional behaviors such as, poor socialization, rebelliousness, oppositional behavior and aggression.

OBJECTIVES

By December 2005, after completing the eighteen prevention education sessions of 40 minutes each in the Effective Family Problem Solving, thirty identified children ages 11-14 will show a 25% improvement in the behavioral rating scores and problem solving skills which will measure the new skills acquired or strengthen positive behavioral skills and knowledge. The children will be able to:
Increase assertiveness/decrease dominance and threats by identifying four consequences and alternative positive solutions to various situations presented regarding the matter.
Be less physically aggressive by demonstrating through role-play three anger management skills.
Improve patience and delay gratification by identifying five alternatives when presented with situations that might evoke an impulsive reaction such as, wanting a video game when the parent is unable to purchase it.
Display empathy learned through role-playing active listening, respect, and compromise.
Display appropriate social skills by verbally stating a minimum of three positive qualities of two of their peers and identifying how their behaviors affect how other people feel.
By December 2005, after completing 12 hours of the parent component of Effective Family Problem Solving, 30 parents will exhibit a 25% improvement in their post test scores on childrearing styles. Parents will report an improvement in:
Increase in positive alternatives to disciplining and simple explanations and interventions by listing or verbalizing a minimum of three alternative parenting approaches and role playing appropriate verbal and nonverbal communication.
Increase in problem-solving and reasoning, in both modeling for child and instruction by verbally describing three positive behaviors that will enhance the self-esteem of their children and provide them with a display healthy behaviors.
Increase parent-child relationships by demonstrating by role-play he initiation and continuation of family counseling and meetings.
GOAL TWO:

Thirty families, after completing three 90-minute sessions in the family skills training will exhibit a 25% improvement in their communication skills measured through the display of positive child-parent interactions during the family skills sessions and written posttests.

OBJECTIVES:

Parents will decrease the use of power to control their children’s behavior by demonstrating by role-play the use of “I” statements, active listening, respect, and compromising.
Children will decrease rebellious behaviors by demonstrating with their parents by role-play the use of “I” statements, active listening, respect and compromise.
STAFF

A Certified Prevention Specialist (CPS) will supervise the program. The CPS has a Masters Degree in Counseling and 5 years of combined experience in substance abuse treatment and prevention. She will work 35 hours per week and will spend one hour a week on supervision with a prevention counselor. The Certified Prevention Specialist, along with the Prevention Counselor will work on the program development and coordinate the on-site operation of the program. The Certified Prevention Specialist will serve as the liaison to the community and the schools. She will organize and present the program, do the public relations and press releases. The program will be marketed through press releases and direct contact with key personnel of the Paterson school district and community agencies. The Girls and Boys club has already committed to work in partnership with us.

The CPS who will meet with school personnel and conduct the classes for the children and their parents will run the program. The Program Counselor will assist the CPS in the above stated activities.

The Prevention Counselor will do the outreach, evaluation and data collection for the programs running in the community and schools. The Prevention Counselor will have minimum qualifications of a BA in the human service field or 4 years experience in substance abuse prevention. He/she will spend 2 hours per week in parent interviewing (for evaluation purposes) and data entry. He/she will also spend 2 hours per week on additional evaluation surveys and questionnaires. Recruitment will start immediately by placing a help wanted advertisement in the Herald News, submitting flyers with job descriptions to the Education in Human Services Department at William Patterson University and Montclair State University, and informing the agencies that agree to collaborate about the position opening. Volunteers will also be hired for logistics purposes.

Prevention encompasses a comprehensively set of strategies to reduce the individual and environmental risk factors and increase resiliency factors in high risk populations. The concepts of prevention and treatment for young people emerged as the concept of youth mental illness took shape, in the late 19th century (Weisz, Sandler, Duralak, & Anton, 2005).

Historically, prevention was classified on three different levels which included primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention. Primary prevention consisted of activity implementation to decrease the number of incidents; secondary consisted of identification of a problem and early intervention; and tertiary involved the actual rehabilitation of an existing condition to either improve or reduce the significance of a condition.

Increasing amount of research had proven the effectiveness of research and therefore has developed a niche that can be focused. Because prevention encompasses a multidisciplinary science, which includes but is not limited to psychology, social work, nursing, political science, and education, multiple theoretical frameworks have arisen.

One of the most common frameworks involves an intervention spectrum that includes treatment and maintenance and can be divided into three subcategories: universal preventive interventions that target the general public or a whole population group hat has not been identified on the basis of individual risk; selective preventive interventions that focus on individuals or population subgroups who have biological, psychological. Or social risk factors, placing them at higher that average likelihood of developing a mental disorder; and indicated preventive interventions that target high-risk individuals with detectable symptoms or biological markers predivtive of mental disorders but do not meet diagnostic criteria for disorder at the present time (Weissberg et al.2003, Munoz, Mrazek, & Haggerty, 1996).

According to the 1999 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, 14.2% of students reported being in a physical fight on schools grounds in the year prior to the survey (Wilson & Lipsey, 2003). For 1995 and 1997, respectively, 15.5% and 14.8% of students reported being in physical fights (Wilson & Lipsey, 2003; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2002).

Prevention can be administered on several different levels including universal and selected. The universal type of prevention focuses on a general population such as all students in a school. The selective type targets specific groups that are considered at-risk due to various factors including, individual, family, school, and community. This study will focus on selected prevention and intervention in the schools.

Risk Factors

The risk domains described above includes individual factors such any health problems associated with the child; favorable attitudes toward drug use; display of anti-social behaviors; greater influence by and reliance of peers; and isolation and loss. The family domain includes those factors such as family management problems including inconsistent or excessively severe discipline; lack of monitoring; marital conflicts and family history of substance use; and involvement with the Criminal Justice System. The school domain would include those factors such as lack or clear school/class policies, classroom management problems; school transitions, limited student involvement; and academic failure. While the community domain focuses on areas such as economic and social deprivation; low neighborhood attachment including community disorganization; and availability of substances.

Among a variety of individual, family, school, and neighborhood factors related to poor child developmental outcomes, early aggressive behaviors and poor peer relationships have been implicated as major precursors of fighting, delinquency, and drug involvement (Dodge & Pitt, 2003; Fraser, Maeda, Galinsky, Smokowaski, Day, Terzian, Rose, & Guo, 2005).

Assessing Prevention Programs

Many studies have been implemented and findings presented on the impact of prevention and early intervention programs in the schools. In particular, a research study presented by Wilson and Lipsey (2003) describes how there is limited research on intervention programs that are routine programs that already exist in the schools but there is plenty of research done about programs that are demonstration based or those implemented or evaluated by a researcher. Significant findings have been found in terms of the impact it has on children on those demonstratin groups. One may suggest that perhaps the factor is that the demonstration group is somehow directed by the researcher and therefore produce positive outcomes. A recent survey of schools programs (D. C. Gottfredson & Gottfredson, 2002; G.D Gottfredson et al., 2000) found that adequate training of service delivery personnel, supervision, and principal support were key to implementing programs successfully (Wilson et al, 2003). Perhaps significant effects reported on the changed behaviors of these participants is due to the extensive training and supervision that these researchers sustain during the course of the study.

Cognitive Behavioral and Social Skills Programs

This study plans to utilize a cognitive-behavioral social skills program which includes an individual mentoring component. . Research sustains that intensity as well as multimodal approaches including one-to-one formats were more effective in intervention programs in the schools. Wilson and Lipsey’s meta-analysis (2003) found a modest, but positive, overall mean effect size, with programs using cognitive-behavioral instructional techniques or behavioral modeling/modification showing the largest effects. Since cognitive- behavioral approaches will be facilitated in this study, the focus will be on teaching children, and their parents, and teachers the importance of learning how to evaluate interpersonal problems and therefore; making decisions to solve them. Also implemented will be the demonstration and practice of these skills in actual real-life situations through role-plays.

According to Shure (1999) research has shown that when children learn to use problem solving thinking, their social adjustment improves, with significant reductions in demanding, aggression, emotional upset and social withdrawal.

Click Here for the Next Section

A selected prevention based group program for identified children with poor social skills is described. Two hundred fifty children and their parents who reside in inner city neighborhoods and their classroom teachers will be assigned to a prevention intervention program in the Paterson, New Jersey elementary schools. The I Can Problem Solve Program aims to modify the behaviors of these children through weekly group prevention education groups, individual counseling sessions, and education and collaboration of their parents and teachers for one school year. The proposed study also seeks to demonstrate that participation in this intervention with trainings and a full collaborative effort of their parents and teachers will improve the emotional- social competence of the identified children. This study will also analyze the impact of the I Can Problem Solve Program on children with no parent or teacher participation and a control group will also be assigned. The findings for all trajectories will be analyzed and compared.

Problem Statement

Extreme violent events such as the “Columbine Massacre” have drawn attention to the prevention and remediation of violence and aggression in schools. Some may wonder if we have been focusing too much on academics and not enough on people. Every day children experience some type of interpersonal problem with authority figures or peers. In Paterson New Jersey for instance, children report that the “norm” is to fight with others whether it be physically or verbally to get “respect.” When asked why this is so, many respond, “that’s the way everyone handles things around here.” Others have a more interesting response, “ My parents said to hit them back.” In thinking of an argument to build a case around those responses, one cannot help but to empathize with the idea that these children are truly surrounded by violence an aggression every day and mostly everywhere, including their homes. How do you tell a child, or do you tell a child that such solution produced by the parent, may not necessarily be the best? Or how easy would it be to intervene on such behaviors when everyone is doing it. These behaviors, even when not overtly violent, may inhibit learning and create interpersonal problems for those involved (Wilson & Lipsey, 2003). If it were the case where children were deterred from applying such a solution by simply “telling” the children that it may not be a good idea to hit others after all, will that make them stop? Probably not. For these reasons, many school based intervention programs have been designed and implemented in an effort to combat the violence and aggression that has arisen amongst children in the schools.

Many studies attest that these programs have been successful in altering children behaviors, A sufficient number of school-based intervention programs have been evaluated to support systematic review of their effectiveness (Wilson & Lipsey, 2003). However, limited research studies have examined the effects of the interactions among multiple ecologies on social

competence in children. My hypothesis is that school based intervention programs will work best when there is a collaborative effort between the parents, teachers, and the counselors working with the identified children

The purpose of this quasi-experimental study is to assess the impact of early intervention and prevention on emotional-social competence as a collaborative effort between the counselors, teachers and parents in the elementary schools in Paterson, New Jersey. This research proposal is not intended to target aggression directly as a means to emotional-social competence but the processes that may be associated with this type of behavior such as social skills, academic functioning, substance abuse, conduct problems and the like. Therefore, the proposed study will explore the following questions:

How successful is an early intervention and prevention education program in increasing social competence in children in the Paterson elementary schools?
Or, how successful is the use of the I Can Problem Solve Prevention Education program on increasing social competence in children in the Paterson elementary schools?
What is the impact of routine collaboration with parents and teachers in implementing early intervention and prevention education programs on the children’s social competence?
How does the program impact the children whose parents and teachers are not active participants?
According to the Children’s Bureau Fact sheet (2002), through the US Department of Health and Human Services, an estimated 1,800,000 referrals alleging child abuse or neglect were accepted by state and local child protective services (CPS) agencies for investigation or assessment. The referrals included more than 3 million children, and of those, approximately 896,000 children were determined to be victims of child abuse or neglect by the CPS agencies. Their parents neglected more than 60 % of these victims.

The NJ State Department of Human Services (1996), reported 10,537 cases substantiated abuse and neglect and 17,902 cases presented a risk. Of those, 20 children died from abuse in the state of New Jersey. In 80% of the reported cases, the parent was the abuser.

The Child Abuse Statistical Report (2002), stated DYFS received a total of 37, 424 child abuse and neglect referrals. DYFS field staff substantiated 7,918 referrals (2002). Of those, approximately 61% involved neglect, 8.6% involved sexual abuse, and 2.7% involved emotional abuse (Abuse/Neglect Statistical Report, 2002). Demographically, 43.3% of abused/neglected children were black, 34.7% were white, and 15.5% were Hispanic. A natural parent or guardian was the perpetrator in 76.8% of substantiated abuse/neglect cases (Abuse/Neglect Statistical Report, 2002).

The truth of the matter is that many children are engaging in nonproductive behaviors such as drugs, violence, and other criminal acts. Additionally, many parents and caregivers, some who may have children labeled as “delinquents” mistreat their children. Does poor parenting contribute significantly to inadequate social functioning or is the “bad behavior” causing parents to lose their grips and violently punish their children? Some may argue that lack of parenting skills is the “cause” producing delinquent children or children display nonproductive behaviors. Others believe this is so, but also empathizing with the idea that these abusive parents were abused themselves, therefore, may be ignorant to any other way of parenting.

Child maltreatment in general is viewed as a contributing factor for poor adult adjustment. But very often, we see such indicators in children through their interactions in school whether it be with authority figures or peers. Lack of socials skills is one reason , perhaps one of the bigger reasons, why many children end up in detention facilities, inpatient psychiatry units and the like. Many children, especially in inner cities such as Paterson, are raised with “gangster smarts.” In other words, when it comes to dealing with people they do whatever they have to do to get the “respect” of others. Often times that means solving an interpersonal problem with a physical altercations and other violent and aggressive acts. This is the way most of these children are taught at home so when they come to schools, they handle “people issue” in the same manner.

Living in Paterson may be rough, but it is a lifestyle that most people who live there are adapted to.

The teachers on the other hand, have a whole set of issues. Because the schools in Paterson are so focused on academics and test scores, teachers are often burnt out and stressed and have classrooms as big as thirty children or even bigger. Many have already given up on an idea that the Paterson children can change and therefore support power assertions and punitive measures in order to “control” the children. However, are these teachers really in control? What’s happening is that most teachers, perhaps the ones that are burnt out, are not realizing that they are probably creating more work for themselves. Teachers often have preconceived notions about certain children and therefore label these children directly or indirectly where those specific children act as the label states “bad.” If there is continuous cycle of these “bad” behaviors and teachers continue to try alter behavior through punitive measures over and over again, something must be clear. Those measures are simply not working, unless the teacher believes that engaging in constant power struggles is a solid solution.

Dryfoos highlighted three significant conclusions in assessing children and their families. According to Dryfoss (1994) a significant proportion of children will fail to grow into contributing successful adults unless there are major changes in the ways they are taught and nurtured; although families and schools have traditionally carried out the responsibilities for raising and education children, they require transformations to fulfill these obligations more effectively; and new kinds of community resources and arrangements are needed to support the development of young people into responsible, healthy, productive workers and citizens (Weissberg, Kumpfer, Seligman, 2003).

All in all, parents as well as teachers have the greatest influence on children because they are who spend the greatest part of the day with them. Intervention strategies such having the children meet with a counselor or having them attend a program may be effective, but these children then go home and to classroom and often times aren’t given the opportunity to practice “good” behavior. Hence, a routine collaborative effort where parents as well as teachers would be trained in the prevention education program and implement it both in their classrooms and at home, can increase the impact this intervention will have on a child.

Review of Literature