Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Shining the Light on Research, Student Outcomes and Creating Action Plans . Karyn Holt, M.A. and Dr. Erika Joye, PhD firstname.lastname@example.org and email@example.com 208-664-8250 and 303-489-0647. Today’s Objectives. Review Current Research Upcoming WhyTry Research Goals
Karyn Holt, M.A. and Dr. Erika Joye, PhD
firstname.lastname@example.org and email@example.com
208-664-8250 and 303-489-0647
Review Current Research
Upcoming WhyTry Research Goals
How to Advocate for Your Program to Key
Stakeholders by Targeting and Reporting Outcomes
WhyTry as a Recommended Practice
General Self-Efficacy, Achenbach System
Motivation and Internal Locus of Control
GPA and reduction in Failure Rate
In a randomized control group study of 40 students, grades 9 through 12, in an alternative school, using WhyTry for 22 sessions over an 11-week period. School records and one scale from the Behavior Assessment System for Children Statistically significant results for the treatment group included decreased absences from school, improved locus of control, and improved attitude toward school and teachers (Gee, 2003).
In a 2003 longitudinal study of 192 high school students, 114 participated in the WhyTry program and 88 in the control group. Students were enrolled in a class that met once a week for one semester. Students who completed the WhyTry program showed an improved grade point average, fewer absences, and increased levels of graduation than did students in the control group (Bushnell & Card, 2003).
An evaluation of the South Los Angeles Resiliency (SOLAR) project, results in a pre/post test showed that elementary students who participated in the WhyTry? Intervention had significantly higher scores on a measure of student resiliency, a positive change in trying to succeed, a decreased desire to be mean to others, an an increase in asking for help.
Students also had significant improvement in grades.
A program evaluation in Orlando, FL of outcomes for 32 students in grades K – 5 revealed that after participating in WhyTry showed that students had significantly lower emotional and behavior problems as reported by teachers and primary caregivers as on the Behavior and Assessment System for Children - Second Edition (Mortenson, B. P. & Rush, K. S., 2007).
In a 2008 quasi-experimental study of 78 youth ages 12 to 18 receiving residentially based services, 42 participated in the WhyTry program and 36 in the control group. Students in the WhyTry group showed significant increases in scores on a self-efficacy measure.
This study also found significant decreases in internalizing problems, social problems, attention problems, rule breaking behaviors, aggressive behaviors, and externalizing problems as rated by teachers on the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment.
Students in the WhyTry group reported significant positive changes on the syndrome scale for anxious/depressed, social problems, thought problems, internalizing problems, externalzing problems, and total problems (Baker, 2008).
Graduation Rate Discipline
By Gender/ Classroom/Gender
Ethnicity/SES Types of Problems
Absences/Tardies By Gender/
Grade Level Ethnicity/SES
Retention RatesDropout Rate
By Subject Area Grade Levels
Grade Level Gender, Ethnicity…
Gender, Ethnicity… Reasons Why
Target Group selection is based upon the following criteria: some examples are grades, attendance, behavior such as referrals, suspensions, etc.
Target Group selection is based upon the following data: Selected based on performance in remedial math and reading classes and willingness to participate in the intervention class
Clover Park School District
Woodbrook Middle School Intentional Guidance Results Report
Why is the presentation being given?
Building Accountability Into Your Career Development Program, 2005, Tim Poynton, Center for School Counseling Outcome Research
5 students - increased. (4-16 more days)
4 students - No change (was not a problem area)
1 student - decreased
Data compared from Sept thru Jan/Feb thru May
7 students – increased GPA
(range .02 – 1.63 pts.)
3 students – decreased GPA
(range .33 – 1.26 pts)
2 students – improved (0 F’s)
6 students - no change (0 -1 F )
2 students – decreased (1 -3 F’s)
4 students. reduced
3 students – same (0-1 ref)
3 students – increased
3 students decreased
6 students – same (no susp. before, during, or after)
1 student suspended during program, none after.
“I think this program could help me”6-YES
“I learned more than I thought I would?” 8 – YES 1 - NO1- IDK
“I believe these skills will help me in the future” 8-YES 1- NO 1-IDK
“I believe I have the skills I need to be successful”
8 students reported HIGH CONFIDENCE
“I will use the skills I have learned”
9 students reported HIGH CONFIDENCE