A study published in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity looks at the results of an intervention aimed at improving the activity levels of adolescent girls.
controlled trial by Deirdre Harrington and colleagues took place in 20
secondary schools in Leicester. Ten schools received Girls Active and ten
schools continued with usual practice. Developed by the Youth Sport Trust,
Girls Active is focused on providing a support framework to schools to review
their physical activity, sport, and PE teaching to ensure they are relevant and
attractive to all adolescent girls, but with a particular focus on 11–14 year
olds. The programme includes a range of resources for schools, including
self-evaluation, training, mentoring, and funding for developing school
In total, 1,752 girls aged 11-14 participated. The primary outcome measure (at baseline, 7 months, and 14 months) was moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), as recorded on wrist-worn accelerometers. Secondary outcomes included overall physical activity, light physical activity, sedentary time, body composition, and psychosocial outcomes. The results showed small improvements in MVPA in comparison with control schools after 7 months, but none after 14 months. Subgroup analysis showed that the intervention was effective at 14 months in larger schools, but caused an MVPA decrease in smaller schools. There was no pattern in the secondary outcomes, and any differences were slight.
Source: Effectiveness of the ‘Girls Active’ school-based physical activity programme: A cluster randomised controlled trial (April 2018) International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
The MindOut programme is a social-emotional learning programme, developed in Ireland, and based on CASEL’s five core competencies for social-emotional learning: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship management and responsible decision-making. A new article by Katherine Dowling and colleagues in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence reports the results of a cluster-randomised controlled trial of the programme.
The study took place in 34 secondary schools in Ireland (17
intervention, 17 control) with high levels of disadvantage (at least 70% of pupils
classified as educationally disadvantaged). Teachers from the intervention
schools took part in a one-day training session, and then delivered the MindOut
programme over 13 weekly sessions. A total of 675 pupils (ages 15-18) completed
a baseline assessment, with 497 pupils remaining in the study
post-intervention. A range of measures were used to evaluate the impact on social-emotional
skills, mental health and well-being and academic outcomes.
Results showed that for some social and emotional skills,
there were significant improvements for intervention pupils, including the use
of more positive coping strategies and increased social support coping. On
mental health and well-being, the intervention significantly reduced levels of
stress and depressive symptoms. However, there was no effect on academic
outcomes (pupils’ achievement motivation as rated by teachers, and attitudes
Source: A cluster
randomized-controlled trial of the MindOut social and emotional learning program
for disadvantaged post-primary school students (April 2019), Journal of Youth and Adolescence
An evaluation of a pilot of Teensleep, a sleep education programme that aims to improve outcomes for pupils by improving the quality of their sleep, found no evidence that the programme led to improvements in pupils’ sleep.
The Teensleep programme
trains teachers to promote good ‘sleep hygiene’ as part of pupils’ Personal,
Social and Health Education (PSHE) lessons. Teachers deliver a series of 10
half-hour lessons highlighting the importance of sleep for effective learning,
as well as providing practical advice for better sleep, such as avoiding
caffeine in the evening.
Ten UK secondary schools took part in the pilot funded by the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) and the Wellcome Trust. All Year 10 pupils received the intervention as delivered by their teachers and completed a sleep quiz and sleep survey pre- and post-intervention. Parents and pupils were informed about the pilot study and parents could opt out of schools sharing pupils’ data with the research team, but not out of pupil participation in the intervention.
Overall, the evaluation
found there was no evidence that Teensleep improved pupils’ sleep as measured
using a wrist-worn activity monitor before and after the intervention. However,
the evaluation did find some evidence of improvements to sleep-related behaviour
as reported by pupils, such as napping less during the daytime.
Source: Teensleep: Pilot report and executive summary (February
2019) Education Endowment Foundation
Mentoring programmes that pair young people with non-parental adults are a popular strategy for early intervention with at-risk youth. To examine the extent to which these types of interventions improve outcomes for young people, Elizabeth B Raposa and colleagues conducted a meta-analysis of outcome studies of one-to-one youth mentoring programmes written in English between 1975 and 2017.
Their analysis included 70 studies with a sample size of
25,286 children and young people (average age = 12 years), and considered five
broad outcome categories: school, social, health, cognitive and psychological
The findings from their meta-analysis suggest no significant
difference in effect sizes across these five types of outcomes. Overall, they
found an average effect size of +0.21 across all studies and outcomes, which is
consistent with past meta-analyses that have shown overall effect sizes ranging
from +0.18 to +0.21.
Programmes that had a larger proportion of young males who
were being mentored in the sample, a greater percentage of male mentors, or
mentors who worked within the helping profession showed larger effect sizes, as
did evaluations that relied on questionnaires and youth self-report.
Source: The effects
of youth mentoring programs: A meta-analysis of outcome studies (January 2019),
Journal of Youth and Adolescence
Megan Millenky and colleagues from MDRC have released a new reporton an evaluation of PACE Center for Girls. PACE, a Florida-based organisation, provides academic and social services to at-risk middle and high school girls. According to the report, PACE operates daily, year-round; on a typical day, girls attend academic classes and receive additional support such as individual counselling, academic advice, and referrals to other services.
The research team used a random
assignment design to evaluate the impact of PACE. From August 2013 to November
2015, a sample of 1,125 girls were enrolled in the study (673 in the programme
group, and 452 in the control group). Data sources included administrative
records, a survey, and interviews.
Key findings from the study were as follows:
The programme group received more academic and social services — and received them more often from a professional source — than the control group.
Over a one-year period, PACE increased school enrolment and attendance for the girls it served, compared with the control group. Girls in the programme group were also more likely to be “on track” academically than those in the control group.
Girls in both the programme and control groups appeared goal-orientated and hopeful about their futures and reported relatively low levels of risky behaviour one year after study enrolment.
The cost of PACE’s holistic package of services is, on average, $10,400 per pupil more than the cost of the services received by control group members through academic and social services provided in the community. The additional cost is largely driven by PACE’s extensive social services; the cost of academic services is similar to those of Florida public schools.
The authors note that further follow-up research would be
necessary to see whether PACE affects longer-term academic and delinquency
outcomes and to complete a full benefit-cost analysis.
on girls’ futures: Results from the evaluation of PACE Center for Girls
(January 2019), MDRC
A study published in the Journal of School Health examines how two behaviours – aggression and poor study skills – may be a factor in why some pupils do not finish high school.
Pamela Orpinas and colleagues randomly selected 620 sixth-grade (Year 7) pupils from northeast Georgia schools. Teachers completed a behaviour rating scale for these pupils every year from grades six to twelve (Year 7 to Year 13). Based on teacher ratings, the pupils were categorised into low, medium and high aggression trajectories from middle to high school and into five study skills groups (low, average-low, decreasing, increasing and high). Examples of behaviours considered to be aggressive were threatening to hurt, hitting, bullying and teasing others. Examples of study skills were doing extra credit work, being well organised, completing homework, working hard and reading assigned chapters. Participants in the study were classed as a dropout if they were not enrolled in school and had not obtained a high school diploma by the end of the spring term in grade 12 (Year 13).
Pupils who were identified in the high-aggression/low-study-skills group had a 50% dropout rate compared to pupils with low aggression and high study skills who had a dropout rate of less than 2%. The results highlight the importance of early interventions that combine academic enhancement and behavioural management for reducing school dropout rates.
Source: Longitudinal examination of aggression and study skills From middle to high school: Implications for dropout prevention (February 2018), Journal of School HealthVolume 88, issue 3