Prevention




Prevention in school psychology encompasses a myriad of strategies aimed at preemptively addressing academic, behavioral, and emotional challenges faced by students. Rooted in the proactive approach, these strategies are designed not only to tackle present issues but also to inhibit potential future problems, thereby fostering an environment conducive to learning and overall well-being. Noteworthy among these preventative approaches are initiatives such as the DARE Program, Positive Behavior Support, and methodologies that cultivate resilience and protective factors in students. This article delves into the history, contemporary practices, and anticipated future trends related to prevention in school psychology. It underscores the pivotal role of prevention in promoting positive student outcomes and highlights the integral role of school psychologists in orchestrating these efforts.

Introduction

Prevention, often deemed as the proverbial “ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” holds a pivotal position in the vast landscape of school psychology. Within the microcosm of a school environment, prevention goes beyond mere crisis aversion—it represents a proactive and systemic approach to fostering an environment where students are equipped to not only face current challenges but also to preempt potential issues that may impede their academic and socio-emotional journey (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger, 2011).

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% OFF with 24START discount code


The intrinsic value of prevention strategies within the school system is underscored by their profound impact on students’ academic, emotional, and behavioral outcomes. At the academic level, effective preventive measures can be instrumental in reducing drop-out rates, enhancing academic performance, and instilling a proactive learning attitude among students (Greenberg et al., 2003). Emotionally, these strategies contribute to the enhancement of students’ self-esteem, resilience, and overall psychological well-being. On the behavioral front, prevention efforts have shown potential in reducing incidences of aggression, substance abuse, and other maladaptive behaviors, thereby promoting a harmonious and conducive learning environment (Ttofi & Farrington, 2011).

As we delve deeper into this article, we’ll explore the various facets of prevention in school psychology, highlighting both its historical roots and contemporary manifestations. By emphasizing the significance and efficacy of notable programs and strategies like the DARE Program and Positive Behavior Support, this exploration offers a comprehensive view of how prevention plays an indispensable role in shaping the trajectories of countless students.

Historical Context of Prevention in Schools

The conceptualization of prevention within schools has its origins intertwined with the broader evolution of psychology and educational theories. Historically, the early 20th century witnessed an educational system that was largely reactive, often addressing problems after they surfaced rather than pre-emptively. The primary focus was on remediation, with schools and educational psychologists largely attending to manifest issues rather than probing into their root causes (Tyack, 1974).

Early theories of prevention were heavily influenced by the behavioral models of the 1930s and 1940s. Theorists like John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner emphasized the potential to modify behavior through systematic reinforcement, and while their work was primarily experimental, the ripple effects were felt in school settings (Skinner, 1953). Consequently, the initial forays into prevention in schools were behaviorally oriented, focusing on controlling and modifying overt problematic behaviors.

The 1960s and 1970s saw a significant paradigm shift. Influenced by the civil rights movement and a general societal shift towards inclusivity, there was an increased recognition of the diverse needs of students. This period marked the inception of socio-emotional learning (SEL) as a critical component of the educational milieu. Prevention strategies evolved to address not just overt behaviors but also the socio-emotional needs of students, recognizing that emotional well-being was inextricably linked to academic success (Elias & Zins, 2003).

The late 20th century saw the burgeoning of resilience theory, with researchers like Werner and Smith (1992) exploring how certain children, despite adversities, managed to thrive. Such research underscored the importance of resilience and protective factors in the prevention paradigm. Schools began to integrate programs that promoted resilience, focusing on both individual strengths and fostering supportive environmental structures.

In recent decades, with the surge of technological advancements and increasing globalization, prevention strategies have further diversified, integrating digital tools and embracing a more holistic, community-centered approach. Schools now not only focus on individual preventive measures but also emphasize creating a culture of prevention, recognizing the interconnectedness of students, educators, parents, and the broader community (Adelman & Taylor, 2002).

In retrospect, the journey of prevention in school psychology mirrors the broader shifts in societal values, pedagogical theories, and the evolving understanding of child development. From behaviorally anchored interventions to socio-emotionally rich, technology-integrated, community-focused approaches, the tapestry of prevention in schools is rich, varied, and ever-evolving.

The DARE Program

The Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program is one of the most widely recognized prevention initiatives within the school system, particularly in the United States. Introduced in 1983, DARE emerged as a collaborative initiative between the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles Unified School District to address rising concerns about substance abuse among youth (Rosenbaum, 2007). The program’s fundamental objective was to equip students with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to resist drug use and other high-risk behaviors.

Program Structure and Curriculum

DARE’s curriculum is primarily delivered by law enforcement officers who undergo specialized training to become DARE educators. The sessions, typically embedded within the school’s regular schedule, encompass a series of lessons that progressively build upon one another. Central to the DARE pedagogical approach is the emphasis on interactive, participatory learning. Activities include role-playing, group discussions, and problem-solving exercises designed to bolster students’ self-esteem, interpersonal skills, and decision-making capabilities (Lynam et al., 1999).

The curriculum itself has evolved over the years, with newer versions integrating current research findings and addressing a broader spectrum of high-risk behaviors, beyond just substance abuse. Modern DARE iterations encompass topics like internet safety, bullying, and peer pressure, reflecting the multifaceted challenges that today’s students face.

Efficacy and Critiques

The effectiveness of the DARE program has been a topic of substantial debate among researchers and educators. While early evaluations were mostly positive, lauding the program for its wide reach and potential for fostering positive police-community relations, subsequent studies have painted a more nuanced picture. Some research suggests that while DARE might be successful in raising awareness about drug abuse, its long-term impact on actual drug use prevention is modest at best (West & O’Neal, 2004).

Critics often point to the program’s didactic structure, suggesting that it may not sufficiently address the underlying psychosocial factors that contribute to drug abuse. Others argue that the program’s “zero-tolerance” stance may not resonate with all students, especially those from communities disproportionately affected by stringent drug policies (Perry et al., 2003).

Future Directions and Adaptations

In response to these critiques and evolving societal needs, the DARE program has undertaken several revisions. Recognizing the importance of evidence-based practices, newer versions of the program incorporate components backed by empirical research, such as social-emotional learning strategies and resilience-building exercises (DARE, 2018). There’s also a heightened emphasis on fostering a positive school climate, reflecting the broader trend within school psychology towards holistic, community-centric prevention approaches.

In conclusion, the DARE program serves as a testament to the challenges and complexities inherent in school-based prevention. While its journey has been marked by both accolades and criticisms, its enduring presence underscores the collective societal commitment to safeguarding the well-being of our youth.

Positive Behavior Support (PBS)

Positive Behavior Support (PBS) is a systemic approach to proactive, school-wide behavior based on a Response to Intervention (RtI) model. PBS was developed out of concerns over traditional school disciplinary practices, which often emphasized punishment rather than education and prevention (Horner, Sugai, & Anderson, 2010). PBS prioritizes a positive and collaborative environment that reinforces desired behaviors while minimizing undesirable ones.

Core Principles and Framework

PBS is grounded in several core principles, including the belief that behaviors can be changed, and that by altering the school environment, structures, and routines, one can influence student behavior. The framework uses a multi-tiered approach:

  1. Universal Prevention (Tier 1): This foundational level involves the establishment of clear behavioral expectations, taught, modeled, and reinforced across all settings for all students. Effective school-wide systems like regular behavioral expectations, direct teaching of these expectations, and positive reinforcement are essential components.
  2. Targeted Intervention (Tier 2): At this level, schools provide interventions to students who might be at risk of more severe behavioral problems. These might include group interventions or more frequent reinforcement strategies.
  3. Intensive Intervention (Tier 3): Here, personalized interventions are developed for students who exhibit chronic, severe behavioral challenges. This might involve individualized support plans and more intensive, individualized interventions (Sugai & Horner, 2006).

Benefits and Impacts

PBS has been linked to numerous positive outcomes. Research suggests that schools implementing PBS experience reduced office discipline referrals, improved school climate, and even enhanced academic achievement (Bradshaw, Koth, Bevans, Ialongo, & Leaf, 2008). Moreover, students in schools adopting PBS report a higher sense of safety and a greater connection to staff.

Integration with Curriculum and Teaching

An integral part of PBS’s success is its seamless integration with curriculum and teaching. Teachers embed behavioral expectations within their lessons, ensuring that both academic and behavioral success are celebrated and reinforced. This holistic approach ensures that PBS is not a standalone initiative but is woven into the very fabric of the school’s culture.

Future Considerations and Adaptations

With the rapid changes in educational landscapes, PBS models have also seen adaptations. The increased emphasis on socio-emotional learning (SEL) has further strengthened the PBS framework, focusing not just on behaviors but also on underlying emotions and coping mechanisms (McIntosh, Mercer, Nese, & Ghemraoui, 2016). Additionally, given the rise of technology in classrooms, digital platforms are now being used to track, reward, and support positive behaviors more effectively.

In summary, Positive Behavior Support offers a comprehensive and preventive approach to student behavior, addressing root causes, and embedding support within the school system. Its adaptability and proven efficacy make it a staple in contemporary school psychology.

Resilience and Protective Factors

The concept of resilience has garnered significant attention within educational and psychological literature, largely due to its implications for children and adolescents’ adaptive functioning in the face of adversity. Resilience can be conceptualized as a dynamic system, comprising a series of interactions between an individual and their environmental contexts, enabling them to bounce back from challenges and stressors (Masten, 2001). Within school psychology, the fostering of resilience becomes paramount, as school settings frequently serve as the primary context wherein children encounter academic, social, and personal challenges. Hence, embedding resilience-enhancing strategies and identifying protective factors can provide a robust foundation for students to navigate these challenges with efficacy and poise.

Deep Dive into the Concept of Resilience

It is essential to understand that resilience is not merely the absence of vulnerability or distress. Instead, it encapsulates an individual’s ability to harness internal strengths and external resources to rebound from setbacks (Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000). This capacity for adaptive recovery varies among individuals and is often molded by a combination of biological, psychological, and environmental influences.

Comprehensive Overview of Protective Factors

Protective factors act as buffers, mitigating the adverse effects of risk factors and facilitating positive outcomes. They can be categorized broadly into:

  1. Individual Factors: Self-regulation, self-efficacy, problem-solving abilities, and a growth mindset are intrinsic factors that arm students against adversities. Moreover, cognitive flexibility, which allows individuals to adapt their thinking based on new information, is crucial (Rutter, 1987).
  2. Family Dynamics: Positive parenting practices, cohesiveness, open communication, and mutual respect within the family serve as pivotal anchors. Parents and guardians who demonstrate adaptive coping mechanisms inadvertently model resilience for their children (Werner & Smith, 1992).
  3. School and Broader Community: The school environment’s quality, characterized by positive teacher-student relationships, structured routines, and an inclusive culture, can promote resilience. Access to supportive community networks, including clubs, religious organizations, and sports teams, further augment resilience (Benard, 2004).

Resilience in Action: Real-world Implications in Schools

Promoting resilience can have cascading benefits:

  1. Mitigating Academic Struggles: Resilient students are more likely to persist in the face of academic difficulties, leading to consistent progress and achievement (Wang, Haertel, & Walberg, 1994).
  2. Bolstering Emotional Health: Emotional intelligence, closely intertwined with resilience, aids in emotion regulation, preventing episodes of acute stress, depression, or anxiety (Zolkoski & Bullock, 2012).
  3. Enriching Social Relationships: Resilient students tend to form more robust and more fulfilling interpersonal relationships, fostering a sense of belonging and communal support.

The School’s Proactive Role

Schools, being at the forefront of children’s developmental journey, must take proactive measures:

  1. Curriculum Integration: Embedding resilience-building activities and discussions within the curriculum can provide students with practical tools.
  2. Creating Supportive Infrastructures: Establishing counseling centers, peer mentorship programs, and safe spaces where students can discuss their concerns can be instrumental.
  3. Professional Training: Empowering educators through regular training sessions on resilience enhancement can ensure a consistent, school-wide approach.

To conclude, resilience and protective factors serve not merely as abstract concepts but as tangible tools in the hands of educators. Recognizing their importance, understanding their intricacies, and implementing them strategically can set the stage for holistic student development.

Universal, Selected, and Indicated Prevention

Prevention strategies in school psychology can be classified into three primary tiers based on the Institute of Medicine’s framework: Universal, Selected, and Indicated prevention. Each tier targets a specific group of students based on their risk level and offers tailored interventions to mitigate potential challenges. Together, these levels form an integrated, holistic prevention approach aimed at promoting optimal student outcomes and overall well-being.

Universal Prevention

Definition and Scope: Universal prevention programs are proactive interventions designed for all students, irrespective of their risk levels. Their primary goal is to forestall the development of academic, behavioral, and emotional challenges before they materialize (Greenberg, Domitrovich, & Bumbarger, 2001).

  1. Examples: Implementing school-wide behavioral expectations, anti-bullying campaigns, and socio-emotional curricula are typical instances of universal prevention strategies.
  2. Effectiveness: Universal interventions establish a foundational, positive school climate conducive to learning and healthy development. By reaching every student, they have the potential to produce broad-scale improvements in academic and behavioral outcomes (O’Connell, Boat, & Warner, 2009).

Selected Prevention

Definition and Scope: Selected prevention initiatives target a sub-group of students deemed at a heightened risk for developing specific challenges. These are students who exhibit early signs of concern but don’t have well-established patterns of adverse behaviors or outcomes (Walker, Shinn, & O’Neill, 2010).

  1. Examples: Small group interventions focusing on anger management, social skills training, or academic remediation cater to specific needs of selected groups.
  2. Effectiveness: These interventions can nip emerging challenges in the bud, ensuring that minor issues don’t escalate into major concerns.

Indicated Prevention

Definition and Scope: Indicated prevention is geared towards students who already show marked symptoms of a given issue but may not meet diagnostic criteria. These are intensive, often individualized interventions aimed at reducing the severity and impact of the identified problem (Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994).

  1. Examples: One-on-one counseling sessions, targeted behavioral interventions, and individualized academic support plans fall under this category.
  2. Effectiveness: While more resource-intensive, indicated prevention can circumvent long-term consequences, including academic failure or severe emotional disturbances, by offering timely and specific support.

The Importance of Multi-Tiered Systems

Incorporating universal, selected, and indicated prevention within a cohesive multi-tiered system ensures that schools are well-equipped to address the diverse needs of their student population. This system allows for:

  1. Comprehensive Coverage: Addressing students’ needs across the risk spectrum.
  2. Efficient Resource Allocation: Channeling resources where they’re needed most, ensuring optimal outcomes with cost-effective strategies.
  3. Ongoing Monitoring: Regular assessments ensure that students receive timely interventions and transition between tiers as needed.

In conclusion, the three-tiered prevention framework provides a comprehensive approach to student well-being. By understanding and implementing these strategies, school psychologists can play a pivotal role in fostering student success and well-being.

The Role of School Psychologists in Prevention

The role of school psychologists extends far beyond the traditional perception of individualized assessments and therapeutic interventions. As the educational landscape evolves, so does the multifaceted role of school psychologists, particularly in the realm of prevention. Their expertise in human behavior, assessment, and systems-level interventions places them in a pivotal position to lead and support prevention initiatives in schools. This section delves into the intricate and indispensable role these professionals play in fostering an environment conducive to student well-being, academic success, and holistic development.

Advocacy and Policy Formulation

School psychologists are often at the forefront of advocating for evidence-based prevention practices at the school, district, and even state levels. Their insights into student needs, paired with knowledge of contemporary research, enable them to shape policies that prioritize preventive measures (Doll & Cummings, 2008).

Designing and Implementing Prevention Programs

Their training in research and program evaluation equips school psychologists to not only select appropriate evidence-based prevention interventions but also adapt them to fit the unique socio-cultural context of their schools. Moreover, they play a key role in training educators and other school staff in the implementation of these programs (Sheridan & Gutkin, 2000).

Data Collection and Analysis

A cornerstone of effective prevention is the systematic collection, analysis, and interpretation of data. School psychologists utilize various tools, from universal screenings to surveys, to gauge the effectiveness of prevention measures and to identify emerging or unmet student needs (Kratochwill & Shernoff, 2004).

Collaboration and Consultation

Effective prevention requires the collaboration of various stakeholders, from teachers and administrators to parents and community organizations. School psychologists serve as consultants, facilitating team-based approaches, ensuring consistent communication, and building bridges between different entities for cohesive preventive strategies (Christenson & Sheridan, 2001).

Direct Intervention

While much of the work in prevention focuses on system-level strategies, school psychologists also engage in direct preventive work with students. This can encompass group-based interventions, socio-emotional learning sessions, or early individual counseling aimed at mitigating risk factors before they escalate.

Continuous Professional Development

The dynamic nature of education necessitates that school psychologists remain abreast of the latest research, trends, and best practices in prevention. Engaging in ongoing professional development allows them to refine their skills, ensuring they offer the most effective and contemporary support to their school communities (Gutkin & Conoley, 1990).

Fostering a Positive School Climate

Beyond specific programs, school psychologists play an instrumental role in nurturing a positive school climate. Their interventions promote respect, inclusivity, and student engagement, all of which are foundational to prevention and overall student success.

In summation, school psychologists serve as the linchpins of preventive initiatives in educational settings. Their multifaceted roles, encompassing everything from policy advocacy to direct student support, position them as invaluable assets in the quest for holistic student well-being, academic success, and positive school environments.

Challenges and Contemporary Issues

Understanding the landscape of prevention in school psychology necessitates acknowledging the myriad challenges that professionals face in today’s diverse and ever-evolving educational settings. These challenges, coupled with contemporary issues, impact the efficacy of prevention strategies and highlight areas in need of further exploration, research, and action.

Shifting Sociocultural Dynamics

In an increasingly globalized world, schools have become melting pots of cultures, languages, and traditions. While this diversity enriches the educational experience, it also brings forth challenges in implementing one-size-fits-all prevention strategies. Understanding the unique socio-cultural contexts and adapting interventions to be culturally sensitive and inclusive is paramount (Klingner et al., 2005).

Resource Constraints

Many schools, especially in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, face significant resource constraints. Limited budgets often mean that essential preventive services, like counselor positions or training programs, are inadequately funded or entirely overlooked, impacting the quality and reach of prevention (Bor, 2002).

Evolving Digital Landscape

The advent of technology and the rise of social media have significantly altered the dynamics of student interaction and peer relationships. Cyberbullying, online peer pressure, and the potential for internet addiction present new challenges that school psychologists must address in their preventive efforts (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010).

Measurement and Evaluation Challenges

Quantifying the success of preventive strategies, especially those targeting socio-emotional or behavioral outcomes, can be elusive. The lack of standardized tools or metrics that cater to diverse student populations complicates program evaluation and continuous improvement efforts (Merrell, 2008).

Balancing Academic and Well-being Goals

There’s an ever-present push for academic excellence, often driving schools to prioritize test scores and academic outcomes over socio-emotional well-being. This skewed focus can undermine prevention efforts aimed at holistic student development (Zins et al., 2007).

Addressing Emerging Mental Health Concerns

Recent times have seen a surge in mental health issues among students, including anxiety, depression, and self-harm tendencies. Early prevention in these areas is crucial, yet school psychologists grapple with stigma, lack of awareness, and sometimes inadequate training in these realms (Mazzer & Rickwood, 2015).

Collaborative Challenges

While interdisciplinary collaboration is essential for effective prevention, challenges often arise in aligning different stakeholders—parents, teachers, administrators, and external agencies—towards common prevention goals. Differing perspectives, priorities, and lack of understanding of roles can hinder collective efforts (Adelman & Taylor, 2006).

In light of these challenges, it’s clear that the path to effective prevention in school psychology is multifaceted. Addressing these contemporary issues requires innovative thinking, interdisciplinary collaboration, continuous research, and a commitment to placing students’ holistic well-being at the center of all efforts.

Future Directions

As the educational environment continually evolves, the field of school psychology must adapt its prevention strategies to align with emerging challenges and the changing needs of students. With advancements in research, technology, and socio-cultural dynamics, several promising directions are anticipated in the realm of prevention within school psychology.

Personalized Prevention Plans

Drawing from advancements in personalized learning and the increasing push for individualized student support, the future may witness a shift towards personalized prevention plans. These plans will incorporate students’ unique backgrounds, strengths, challenges, and individual histories to tailor interventions and support strategies, ensuring higher efficacy and better student outcomes (Connor et al., 2018).

Integration of Technology and Data Analytics

The digital age brings an array of tools that can revolutionize prevention. Utilizing data analytics can help in early identification of students at risk, facilitating timely interventions. Additionally, apps and digital platforms may be designed to offer instant socio-emotional support, skill-building exercises, and resources for students in need (Farmer & Ma, 2017).

Expanding the Role of Peer-led Initiatives

Recognizing the influence peers wield in the school environment, future preventive initiatives may increasingly harness the power of peer-led programs. Such initiatives can address areas ranging from bullying prevention to mental health awareness, leveraging the credibility and relatability of peers in effecting positive change (Smith et al., 2019).

Multidisciplinary Collaborative Efforts

The complexities of modern-day challenges require a holistic approach. The future may see a rise in collaborative efforts between school psychologists, teachers, parents, social workers, community agencies, and even medical professionals to offer comprehensive preventive care to students (Doll & Cummings, 2017).

Enhanced Training and Continuous Professional Development

With the ever-evolving nature of challenges faced by students, school psychologists will need to engage in continuous professional development. Emphasis will likely be on interdisciplinary training, equipping professionals with a range of tools and strategies from varied domains to address diverse student needs (Glover & Albers, 2018).

Global Collaborations and Learnings

Given the universal nature of several challenges, global collaborations will become pivotal. Sharing research, insights, strategies, and learnings across countries can enrich the pool of preventive measures available, ensuring that best practices from around the world are accessible and adaptable to different contexts (Lee & Olenik-Shemesh, 2020).

As we gaze into the future, it is evident that prevention in school psychology will remain a dynamic field, calling for innovative, adaptable, and comprehensive strategies. With the well-being of students at its heart, the field is poised to leverage every available tool and insight to foster environments where students not only learn but thrive holistically.

Conclusion

The realm of prevention in school psychology plays an indispensable role in ensuring that students have a conducive environment for both academic and personal growth. The strategies and programs outlined in this article, ranging from the well-established DARE Program to the intricacies of resilience and protective factors, reflect the comprehensive approach school psychologists employ to foster positive student outcomes. As we have journeyed through the historical context, specific programs, and the invaluable role of school psychologists, it becomes clear that prevention is not a standalone concept but is woven intricately into the very fabric of school psychology.

The challenges presented by modern society, characterized by technological advancements, socio-cultural shifts, and an ever-evolving educational landscape, emphasize the importance of preemptive measures. By focusing on prevention, schools can mitigate potential pitfalls before they escalate into larger issues, ensuring the well-being and success of students. This approach, rooted in empirical research and evidence-based practices, reflects the commitment of educators and psychologists alike to create a nurturing, safe, and enriching environment for students.

Furthermore, the future directions discussed offer a promising glimpse into what lies ahead for the field. The integration of technology, personalized prevention plans, and global collaborations holds immense potential. It represents the ever-adaptive nature of school psychology, ready to meet challenges head-on and always striving for the holistic development of students.

In closing, prevention in school psychology is more than just a set of strategies or programs. It represents a proactive, student-centric approach to education—one that values the mental, emotional, and academic well-being of students equally. As research continues and the world around us changes, the essence of prevention remains steadfast: to equip students with the tools, resources, and environment they need to succeed in school and beyond (Merrell & Gueldner, 2010; Suldo & Shaffer, 2008).

References:

  1. Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (2002). Building comprehensive, multifaceted, and integrated approaches to address barriers to student learning. Childhood Education, 78(5), 261-268.
  2. Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (2006). School and community collaboration to promote a safe learning environment. School Psychology International, 27(3), 333-346.
  3. Benard, B. (2004). Resiliency: What we have learned. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
  4. Bor, W. (2002). The challenge of practice. School Psychology International, 23(4), 475-490.
  5. Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462.
  6. Christenson, S. L., & Sheridan, S. M. (2001). Schools and families: Creating essential connections for learning. Guilford Press.
  7. Connor, C. M., Spencer, M., Day, S. L., Giuliani, S., Ingebrand, S. W., McLean, L., & Morrison, F. J. (2018). Capturing the complexity: Content, type, and amount of instruction and quality of the classroom learning environment synergistically predict third graders’ vocabulary and reading comprehension outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(7), 897.
  8. DARE (2018). D.A.R.E. America/International continues to adapt and improve its curriculum. Retrieved from https://dare.org/.
  9. Doll, B., & Cummings, J. A. (2008). Transforming school mental health services: Population-based approaches to promoting the competency and wellness of children. Corwin Press.
  10. Doll, B., & Cummings, J. A. (2017). Best practices in population-based school mental health services. Best practices in school psychology: Systems-level services, 31-42.
  11. Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta‐analysis of school‐based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.
  12. Elias, M. J., & Zins, J. E. (2003). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for educators. ASCD.
  13. Farmer, T. W., & Ma, X. (2017). Chronic victimization, concentration of disadvantage, and proactive school security: A multilevel examination of contextual factors associated with middle school students’ perceptions of school climate. Journal of School Psychology, 65, 63-74.
  14. Glover, T. A., & Albers, C. A. (2018). Considerations for evaluating universal screening assessments. Journal of School Psychology, 67, 45-57.
  15. Greenberg, M. T., Domitrovich, C., & Bumbarger, B. (2001). The prevention of mental disorders in school-aged children: Current state of the field. Prevention & Treatment, 4(1), 1a.
  16. Greenberg, M. T., Domitrovich, C., & Bumbarger, B. (2003). Preventing mental disorders in school-age children: A review of the effectiveness of prevention programs. Prevention & Treatment, 5(1), 1-62.
  17. Gutkin, T. B., & Conoley, J. C. (Eds.). (1990). Reconceptualizing school psychology from a service delivery to a psychoeducational model: Implications for practice and training. Professional School Psychology, 5(3), 119-129.
  18. Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of suicide research, 14(3), 206-221.
  19. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42(8), 1-14.
  20. Klingner, J. K., Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E., Harry, B., Zion, S., Tate, W., … & Riley, D. (2005). Addressing the disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education through culturally responsive educational systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13, 38.
  21. Kratochwill, T. R., & Shernoff, E. S. (2004). Evidence-based practice: Promoting evidence-based interventions in school psychology. School Psychology Review, 33(1), 34-48.
  22. Lee, C., & Olenik-Shemesh, D. (2020). The effects of the KiVa antibullying program on cyberbullying and cybervictimization frequency among Finnish youth. Journal of School Psychology, 78, 76-88.
  23. Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543-562.
  24. Lynam, D. R., Milich, R., Zimmerman, R., Novak, S. P., Logan, T. K., Martin, C., … & Clayton, R. (1999). Project DARE: No effects at 10-year follow-up. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 67(4), 590.
  25. Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56(3), 227.
  26. Mazzer, K. R., & Rickwood, D. J. (2015). Teachers’ role breadth and perceived efficacy in supporting student mental health. Advances in School Mental Health Promotion, 8(1), 29-41.
  27. McIntosh, K., Mercer, S. H., Nese, R. N., & Ghemraoui, A. (2016). Identifying and predicting distinct patterns of implementation in a school-wide behavior support framework. Prevention Science, 17(8), 992-1001.
  28. Merrell, K. W. (2008). Behavioral, social, and emotional assessment of children and adolescents. Routledge.
  29. Merrell, K. W., & Gueldner, B. A. (2010). Social and emotional learning in the classroom: Promoting mental health and academic success. Guilford Press.
  30. Mrazek, P. J., & Haggerty, R. J. (Eds.). (1994). Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive intervention research. National Academies Press.
  31. O’Connell, M. E., Boat, T., & Warner, K. E. (Eds.). (2009). Preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people: Progress and possibilities. National Academies Press.
  32. Perry, C. L., Komro, K. A., Veblen-Mortenson, S., Bosma, L. M., Farbakhsh, K., Munson, K. A., … & Lytle, L. A. (2003). A randomized controlled trial of the middle and junior high school D.A.R.E. and D.A.R.E. Plus programs. Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine, 157(2), 178-184.
  33. Rosenbaum, D. P. (2007). Just say no to DARE. Criminology & Public Policy, 6(4), 815-824.
  34. Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57(3), 316-331.
  35. Sheridan, S. M., & Gutkin, T. B. (2000). The ecology of school psychology: Examining and changing our paradigm for the 21st century. School Psychology Review, 29(4), 485-502.
  36. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Simon and Schuster.
  37. Smith, P. K., Blake, P., & O’Moore, M. (2019). Bullying in schools: Lessons from two decades of research. Aggressive Behavior, 45(1), 3-12.
  38. Suldo, S. M., & Shaffer, E. J. (2008). Looking beyond psychopathology: The dual-factor model of mental health in youth. School Psychology Review, 37(1), 52-68.
  39. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245-259.
  40. Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2011). Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7(1), 27-56.
  41. Tyack, D. (1974). The one best system: A history of American urban education. Harvard University Press.
  42. Walker, H. M., Shinn, M. R., & O’Neill, R. E. (2010). Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches. National Association of School Psychologists.
  43. Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1994). Educational resilience in inner cities. In M. C. Wang & E. W. Gordon (Eds.), Educational resilience in inner-city America: Challenges and prospects (pp. 45-72). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  44. Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Cornell University Press.
  45. West, S. L., & O’Neal, K. K. (2004). Project DARE outcome effectiveness revisited. American Journal of Public Health, 94(6), 1027-1029.
  46. Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (2007). The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17(2-3), 191-210.
  47. Zolkoski, S. M., & Bullock, L. M. (2012). Resilience in children and youth: A review. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(12), 2295-2303.