Are Substance Use Prevention Programs More Effective in Schools Making Adequate Yearly Progress? A Study of Project Alert

Abstract

This exploratory study sought to determine if a popular school-based drug prevention program might be effective in schools that are making adequate yearly progress (AYP). Thirty-four schools with grades 6 through 8 in 11 states were randomly assigned either to receive Project ALERT (n = 17) or to a control group (n = 17); of these, 10 intervention and nine control schools failed to make AYP. Students completed three self-report surveys. For lifetime cigarette use and 30-day alcohol use, Project ALERT was more effective in schools that made AYP. However, in these schools, Project ALERT negatively affected students' lifetime marijuana use. This study provided some preliminary evidence that prevention programming may not work as well in poorer performing schools; however, further exploration is needed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Botvin

G. J.

Baker

Dusenbury

Botvin

E. M.

Diaz

(1995). Long-term follow-up results of a randomized drug abuse prevention trial in a white middle-class population. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 1106–1112.

Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science at the University of Colorado at Boulder. (2009). Blueprints for violence prevention. Retrieved November 6, 2009, from http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/index.html

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Crocco

M. S.

Costigan

A. T.

(2007). The narrowing of curriculum and pedagogy in the age of accountability: Urban educators speak out. Urban Education, 42, 512–535.

Dusenbury

Brannigan

Falco

Hansen

W. B.

(2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18, 237–256.

Ellickson

P. L.

Bell

R. M.

(1990). Drug prevention in junior high: A multi-site longitudinal test. Science, 247, 1299–1305.

Ellickson

P. L.

McCaffrey

D. F.

Ghosh-Dastidar

Longshore

D. L.

(2003). New inroads in preventing adolescent drug use: Results from a large-scale trial of Project ALERT in middle schools. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1830–1836.

Ellickson

P. L.

Miller

Robyn

Wildflower

L. Z.

Zellman

G. L.

(2004). Project ALERT: A drug prevention program for middle grades. Los Angeles: BEST Foundation for a Drug-Free Tomorrow.

Elliott

D. S.

Mihalic

(2004). Issues in disseminating and replicating effective prevention programs. Prevention Science, 5, 47–53.

10.

Gandhi

A. G.

Murphy-Graham

Petrosino

Chrismer

S. S.

Weiss

C. H.

(2007). The devil is in the details: Examining the evidence for “proven” school-based drug abuse prevention programs. Evaluation Review, 31, 43–74.

11.

Gerstein

D. R.

Green

L. W.

(1993). Preventing drug abuse: What do we know? Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

12.

Gorman

D. M.

Conde

(2010). The making of evidence-based practice: The case of Project ALERT. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 214–222.

13.

Gottfredson

Kumpfer

Polizzi-Fox

Wilson

Puryear

Beatty

(2006). The Strengthening Washington D.C. Families Project: A randomized effectiveness trial of family-based prevention. Prevention Science, 7, 57–74.

14.

Hawkins

J. D.

Catalano

R. F.

Miller

J. Y.

(1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 64–105.

15.

Heckman

J. J.

(1976). The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5, 475–492.

16.

Heckman

J. J.

(1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47, 153–161.

17.

Hoerandner

C. M.

Lemke

R. J.

(2006). Can No Child Left Behind close the gaps in pass rates on standardized tests? Contemporary Economic Policy, 24, 1–17.

18.

Jerald

C. D.

(2006). The hidden costs of curriculum narrowing. (Issue brief). Washington, DC: The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement.

19.

Johnston

L. D.

O'Malley

P. M.

Bachman

J. G.

Schulenberg

J. E.

(2004). Monitoring the Future national results on adolescent drug use: Overview of key findings, 2003 (No. NIH Publication No. 04-5506). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.

20.

Kim

J. S.

Sunderman

G. L.

(2005). Measuring academic proficiency under the No Child Left Behind Act: Implications for educational equity. Educational Researcher, 34, 3–13.

21.

Musgrave-Marquart

Bromley

S. P.

Dalley

M. B.

(1997). Personality, academic attribution, and substance use as predictors of academic achievement in college students. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 12, 501–511.

22.

National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University. (1998). Back to School 1998: National Survey of American Attitudes on Substance Abuse IV: Teens, Teachers and Principals. New York: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

23.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. (2002). Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat 1425.

24.

Ogawa

R. T.

Sandholtz

J. H.

Martinez-Flores

Scribner

S. P.

(2003). The substantive and symbolic consequences of a district's standards-based curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 147–176.

25.

Pinheiro

J. C.

Bates

D. M.

(2000). Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. New York: Springer-Verlag.

26.

Porter

A. C.

Linn

R. L.

Trimble

C. S.

(2005). The effects of state decisions about NCLB adequate yearly progress targets. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24, 32–39.

27.

Raudenbush

S. W.

Bryk

(2002). Hierarchical linear models (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

28.

Richardson

J. L.

Radziszewska

Dent

C. W.

Flay

B. R.

(1993). Relationship between after-school care of adolescents and substance use, risk taking, depressed mood, and academic achievement. Pediatrics, 92, 32–38.

29.

Ringwalt

C. L.

Clark

H. K.

Hanley

Shamblen

S. R.

Flewelling

R. L.

(2009). Project ALERT: A cluster randomized trial. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 163, 625–632.

30.

Ringwalt

C. L.

Clark

H. K.

Hanley

Shamblen

S. R.

Flewelling

R. L.

(2010). The effects of Project ALERT one year past curriculum completion. Prevention Science, 11, 172–184.

31.

Ringwalt

C. L.

Ennett

S. T.

Vincus

A. A.

Thorne

Rohrbach

L. A.

Simons-Rudolph

(2002). The prevalence of effective substance use prevention curricula in U.S. middle schools. Prevention Science, 3, 257–265.

32.

Ringwalt

C. L.

Hanley

Ennett

S. T.

Vincus

A. A.

Bowling

J. M.

Haws

S. W.

(2009). The effects of No Child Left Behind on the prevalence of evidence-based drug prevention curricula in the nation's middle schools. Manuscript submitted for publication.

33.

Ringwalt

C. L.

Vincus

A. A.

Hanley

Ennett

S. T.

Bowling

J. M.

Rohrbach

L. A.

(2009). The prevalence of evidence-based drug use prevention curricula in U.S. middle schools in 2005. Prevention Science, 10, 33–40.

34.

Rose

L. C.

Gallup

A. M.

(2007). The 39th Annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll of the Public's Attitudes Toward the Public Schools. Phi Delta Kappa, 89, 33–48.

35.

St. Pierre

T. L.

Osgood

D. W.

Mincemoyer

C. C.

Kaltreider

D. L.

Kauh

T. J.

(2005). Results of an independent evaluation of Project ALERT delivered in schools by Cooperative Extension. Prevention Science, 6, 305–317.

36.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2009). NREPP: SAMHSA's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices. Retrieved November 6, 2009, from http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/index.asp

37.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). United States Census 2000: Questionnaires. Retrieved May 11, 2009, from http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/2000quest.html

38.

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Elementary and secondary education: Key policy letters signed by the Education Secretary or Deputy Secretary. Retrieved June 3, 2010, from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/secletter/020724.html

39.

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. (n.d.). Common Core of Data (CCD): Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey Data [Data file]. Retrieved August 11, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubschuniv.asp

40.

Valli

Buese

(2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 519–558.

41.

Williams

J. H.

Van Dorn

R. A.

Ayers

C. D.

Bright

C. L.

Abbott

R. D.

Hawkins

J. D.

(2007). Understanding race and gender differences in delinquent acts and alcohol and marijuana use: A developmental analysis of initiation. Social Work Research, 31, 71–81.

42.

Zvoch

Stevens

J. J.

(2008). Measuring and evaluating school performance: An investigation of status and growth-based achievement indicators. Evaluation Review, 32, 569–595.