The SMU The SMU PALS PALS

ProgramProgram

The SMU The SMU PALS PALS

ProgramProgram

PPositive Role Models and Mentors

AAcademic Tutoring

LLeisure & Physical Activity

SSocial and Life Skills Development

Theoretical Foundations

PALS is premised on etiological theories of criminality (the causes of criminal behaviour)

Crime does not have a

single cause, nor can it be explained through a single theory; its roots are complex, multi-layered, & highly individualized

Theoretical FoundationsDifferential Association Theory

Children/youth are at risk of future delinquency/criminality if their socialization emphasizes contempt for accepted societal norms & values

Criminal & delinquent behaviour is observed, learned & emulated through associations with intimate group members who are poor role models

Risk is heightened when observed behaviours favourable to law-breaking exceed observed behaviours unfavourable to law-breaking Edwin Sutherland

Theoretical Foundations

Social Learning Theory

Aggression & violence is influenced by social environment: family members, the peer groups, the media, etc.

Aggression is learned through “behaviour modeling”; children are “trained” to act aggressively and use violence by modeling their behaviour upon that of adults

Children are apt to use the same aggressive tactics their parents use especially if it appears to solve a problem (“positive reinforcement”)

Theoretical Assumptions

Control Theory:

Concerned with why people do not commit crime; Answer lies in positive socialization through strong social bonds

People vary, not in motivation, but in self-control, which, internalized early in life, determines one’s ability to resist criminal behaviour

Through social bonds, society encourages individuals to forego their selfish motivations and conform to rules

Without social bonds, people are at a higher risk of pursuing their selfish interests, which may lead to criminal behaviour

Low self-control, anti-social behaviour, delinquency, and criminality arises from defective socialization (weak bonds in childhood)

Most important social bonds: family, school, & local community

Theoretical Assumptions

Social Disorganization Theory

Focused on social or group pathology behind criminality & crime: “social disorganization” fosters crime, criminality, & disorder

Delinquents lived in “zones of transition” where poverty, physical deterioration, & rapid population turnover undermines social cohesion, informal social control, and local institutions

Children are ineffectually socialized and controlled.

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/040916/d040916c.htm

Theoretical Foundations

Conclusion: Root causes of criminality are primarily found in the social environment

Chronic offenders are not

intrinsically pathological

It is their social environment (esp. during childhood & youth) that is pathological

Developmental Criminology Identifies factors that put children & youth at risk of

future delinquency & criminality

Offending is part of a larger syndrome of antisocial behaviour that arises in childhood and tends to persist into adulthood

Factors that put children & youth at risk of future offending also put them at risk of a wide range of negative behaviours, circumstances, mental health problems, etc.

Empirical Foundations

Criminogenic risk factors can be grouped into two broad categories:

1. Individual – psychological, intellectual, cognitive, behavioural & physiological factors ( “indirect” risk factors” because they do not directly cause criminal behaviour)

2. Environment – risk factors produced by the social environment that surrounds an individual or group

Criminality is not due to individual pathology, but often the interaction between high risk individual characteristics and high risk social environmental characteristics

Developmental Criminology

CRIMINOGENIC RISK FACTORS

Individual factors – Early anti-social & aggressive behaviour; anger management problems; hyperactivity (ADHD); low educational achievement & and cognitive development, learning disabilities; lack of bonding to school; impulsiveness; poor cognitive behavioural skills (esp. critical thinking & problem-solving skills); prenatal and perinatal factors (e.g., fetal alcohol syndrome, low birth-weight baby)

CRIMIOGENIC RISK FACTORS

Family influences - Criminal and anti-social parents; poor child-rearing methods (poor supervision, no rule-setting, poor discipline, coldness and rejection, low parental involvement with the child); child maltreatment, abuse (physical or sexual) or neglect; family violence; disrupted families (e.g., divorce); teenage parenthood; large family size; lone parenting; sibling influences; social class (poverty)

CRIMINOGENIC RISK FACTORS

School influences – Poor schooling, high truancy rate, exclusion from school; low academic aspirations

Community influences – Disadvantaged neighbourhoods, concentrated poverty, poor housing, exposure to bad role models; lack of leisure and recreational opportunities; high rate of local crime & violence; easy access to weapons & drugs; presence of gangs; lack of local jobs, training, or economic opportunities; lack of local integration (esp. among immigrant youth)

Peer group pressure – Association with deviant peers; lacking in suitable friends; peer rejection

Other high risk factors - Substance abuse

CRIMINOGENIC RISK FACTORS

Conclusion: Children and youth most at risk suffer from a number of individual & social environmental problems that go untended

Children most at risk are those living in poverty

Crime & criminogenic conditions are concentrated spatially: in impoverished communities (inner-city and First Nations communities)

CRIMIOGENIC RISK FACTORS

Exercise: Identify the factors that put young Henry Hill at risk of future criminal behaviour

Crime Prevention Through Social Development

a.k.a. “crime prevention through social-problem-solving” or “criminality prevention”

Interventions that attempt to address the root causes of criminality, particularly among “at-risk” children and youth

Geared toward preventing criminal predispositions from developing in the first place

Remove criminogenic “risk factors” by replacing or countering them with “protective factors” (positive influences & interventions that counteract risk factors)

Factors Influencing Child/Youth Development

Individual Family School Community Peer Relationships

Physical and mental health Status Impulse control and sensation-seeking traits Cognitive and language development Ethnic identity and acculturation Leisure-time activities Self-perception, attitude and values

Family structure Parent-child relationships Parent disciplinary practices Parent characteristics Family mental health Family history of criminal behavior and substance abuse

Academic achievement expectations School policies regarding social control School conflict Teacher-student relationships Strengths and weaknesses of the school environment

Social, economic & demographic structure Organizational / political structure Community standards & norms Informal social control Crime, victimization & arrests Social cohesion Residential turnover Level of involvement in drug and gang networks

Composition and size of social network Peer acceptance or rejection Substance abuse & delinquency by peers Deviant or prosocial attitudes of peers Changes in peer relationships over time

Crime Prevention Through Social Development

Resilience

The protective factors delivered through CPSD are meant to promote resiliency within an at-risk child

A set of qualities that foster a process of successful adaptation & development despite risk and adversity

Increased resiliency can help at-risk children withstand negative (social environmental) forces in their lives

Can help remove (or offset) risk factors (e.g. criminogenic propensities) while promoting a healthy pro-social development

ResilienceCertain positive influences and institutions can mitigate

risk factors and high-risk behaviours during childhood that can be sustained into adolescence and adulthood

Important Protective Factors Essential to Promoting Resiliency

Family Assets School Assets Community Assets Individual Assets

Positive adult role models Positive communication within

the family Parental involvement in the

youth’s life Clear rules and consequences

within the family and the school

Strong bond with pro-social, caring, loving, nurturing family (parents)

Connectedness to school Supportive school

environment Participation in after school

activities Effective involvement in the

school

Connectedness to community Positive and clear community

norms and values Effective prevention policies Absence of weapons and

firearms

Education Positive peer group Problem solving skills Communication skills Positive conflict resolution

skills A positive sense of self Takes responsibility for own

behaviours Empathy and sensitivity

CPSD Theories and Strategies

CPSD interventions are contingent on three major considerations:

1. The developmental stage of the individual: Infants (0 to 4) Children (5 to 12) Youth (13 to 19) Adult (over 19)

2. Institution(s) through which interventions are made: Family Schools Community Labour markets

3. Overall Approach: Indirect: Change social environment of child/youth Direct: Increase resiliency of child/youth

Family-based Programs

John Graham (1995) identifies the 7 most important forms of social problem-solving interventions:

1) preventing teenage pregnancies

2) providing support and advisory services for mothers during pregnancy and infancy

3) providing guidance for improving the quality of parenting

4) providing pre-school education for children living in deprived families or experiencing specific difficulties

5) offering support to parents at specific times of stress

6) developing strategies for preventing child abuse and keeping families intact

7) preventing youth homelessness

Family-based Programs

Basic objectives:

Strengthen the family as a nurturing environment for children.

Develop and support good parenting that provides basic practices of healthy child development.

Home Visitation Programs:

A professional who visits a home with parent & child to help develop and support good parenting practices.

Can be nurses, social workers, preschool teachers, psychologists or paraprofessionals.

Can provide cognitive information, emotional support, training, practical support, etc.

Family-based Programs

Recommendations for family-based CPSD (Canadian Criminal Justice Association, 1989):

Help disadvantaged families obtain child care, employment training programs.

Family support and crisis intervention services

Positive parenting programs aimed at parents at risk of abusing or neglecting their children.

High quality early childhood education programs, especially those that can be implemented at home.

Prevent unwanted pregnancies, particularly among teenagers.

School-based CPSD Next to the family, most important institution in CPSD

Teaching children to read, write, compute, & think may be the most important crime prevention practice schools can offer.

Specific CPSD programs in schools are unrelated to academic learning

Schools used to reduce non-academic crime risk factors, including drug abuse, aggression and violence, sexual awareness, lack of socialization, alienation, gang membership

School-based CPSDRecommendations for school-based CPSD (Canadian

Criminal Justice Association, 1989):

Remedial support programs should be directed at disadvantaged children and youth

Develop curricula focusing on life skills, including parenting, sexual behaviour, self-esteem, and other areas of social development

Programs which focus on peer pressure

Increasing children’s chances of successfully finishing school by promoting parental involvement in home and school learning.

School-based CPSD

Perry Pre-School Project

Provided disadvantaged children with two years of preschool education & weekly home visits

Teams of teachers were employed on very high pupil-teacher ratios for 2.5 hours per day for 30 weeks in each year

An active learning approach: learning through active and direct child-initiated experiences rather than directed teaching

Children are involved in planning classroom activities and encouraged to engage in play activities that involve making choices and problem-solving

Goal of home visits: to involve the mother in the educational process, help her to provide her child with education support & implement home-based curriculum

Summary: What Works …

Preschool and after-school programs to increase the cognitive and social abilities of underprivileged children.

Home visits for at-risk families to improve parenting skills (young, single, low-income mothers with limited schooling).

Increasing support and assistance for parents.

Improving cognitive & social skills through at-home visits by teachers and structured recreational and cultural activities.

Providing incentives to complete secondary studies by offering educational and financial assistance.

Summary: What Works …

Improving self-esteem & social integration through programs like Big Brothers/Sisters, Boys & Girls Clubs.

Organizing school and after-school activities to decrease violent behavior.

Working with families of first time youthful offenders to decrease domestic dysfunction.

Source: Irvin Waller and Daniel Sansfaçon. 2000. Investing Wisely in Crime Prevention. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, p. 6

PPositive Role Models and Mentors

AAcademic Tutoring

LLeisure & Physical Activity

SSocial and Life Skills Development

Social developmental program for children (ages 5 to 13) who live in disadvantaged environments

Comprehensively addresses factors that put children at risk of future criminal & other anti-social behaviour by enhancing their “resiliency”

Program Components

• Education (Academic development)• Life and social skills (Behavioural development)• Critical thinking and problem-solving skills

(Cognitive behavioural development)• Physical activity (Health development)• Mentors (Positive role models)

Research Hypotheses

1. that resiliency can be promoted within at-risk children through interventions targeted directly at the child (e.g., tutoring, mentorship, cognitive-behavioural development) without any changes to that child’s social environment (e.g., the family, the community, schools, peer groups, etc.); and

2. the promotion of resiliency within at-risk children can ameliorate a wide range of future negative behaviours that fall outside the realm of delinquency and criminality.

Short-term goals:

Cognitive/Academic Variables:• grade achievement in public school by the end of the third project

year• Oxford test scores• consistent school attendance• enjoyment of learning & bonding to school

(Cognitive-)Behavioural Variables:• self-esteem and self-confidence• ability to work cooperatively in teams and groups• empathy for others• strong communication skills• strong self-control (impulse control) • no unnecessary risk-taking • strong critical thinking skills• strong problem-solving skills (choosing positive solutions to problems)• ability to envision consequences of actions• personal responsibility for his/her actions• no aggressive or violent behaviour (including bullying)• appropriate expression of feelings and emotions

Long-term goals:

To help prevent criminal and other anti-social or negative behaviours by children participating in the PALS program during their teen and adult years:

– No criminal record by the age of 21– No other evidence of chronic offending– No involvement in gangs – No involvement in vandalism or graffiti– No involvement in violent altercations– No chronic abuse of legal or illegal substances

To promote the following “protective factors” during children’s teenage and adult years:

– High rate of attendance at school (minimal truancy)– A high school degree– Attendance at a post-secondary institution or trade school after completion of high school– Stable social relationships, a high level of positive social interaction, a large, positive, pro-

social peer network– Civic engagement, including voluntary involvement in community work– No unwanted pregnancies– Socio-economic prosperity (above the poverty line)– Graduation of at least 10 percent of parents from SMU

Program Implementation:– Tutoring

• Coordinated with Oxford Learning Centre• Each child undergoes diagnostic

assessment• Curriculum individually developed based on

assessment – emphasizes reading & literacy• Tutoring 2 hours a week by trained SMU

student (at SMU)• Innovative classroom management &

incentives

Program Implementation:– Structured Activities

• Follows tutoring one night a week• Promotes a range of positive behaviours &

social competency:– Self-esteem and self-confidence– Empathy– Team work & cooperation– Leadership & communication– Appropriate expression of emotions– Critical thinking and problem-solving– Self-control and impulse control– Negotiation, mediation and conflict resolution – Anger management

Program Implementation:– Sports Mentorship

• Follows tutoring one night a week• Kids work out with varsity teams

– Physical exercise– Promotes interest & proficiency in sports– Exposes kids to positive role models– Promotes positive behaviours & social

competency (inherent in team sports)

Program Implementation:– Original Parents’

Component• Parental Development• Personal Development• Community Development

– Future Parents Component• Encourage parents to take

classes at SMU towards a degree or diploma

Implications for preventing future mental health problems:

– Addressing factors that put kids at risk of criminality also addresses factors that put kids at risk of a wide range of future negative behaviours and circumstances (inter-personal violence, homelessness, substance abuse, etc.)

– Program can also potentially be geared towards preventing future mental health problems

• PALS will be integrating “cognitive behavioural” (social competency) curriculum developed to prevent future mental health problems by promoting resiliency

Collaboration with Dalhousie/IWK:1. Fully develop “mental health”

prevention curriculum2. Help implement curriculum3. Assess curriculum’s impact (as part of

program evaluation)4. Clinically assess and help treat

(highest risk) children (part of comprehensive assessment)

Elementary School Drug Education Programs

Programs that target specific risky behaviour

Goal: to dissuade children & youth from engaging in risky behaviour (i.e., substance abuse)

Includes providing students with information that:

educates them on drugs & substance abuse

increases their awareness of social influences to engage in misbehaviour

expands their repertoires for recognizing and appropriately responding to risky or potentially harmful situation

improves their social competency & self-control

Elementary School Drug Education Programs

DARE: Originally developed in 1983 by the Los Angeles Police

Department & the L.A. School District

Taught by a uniformed law enforcement officer

17-lesson curriculum (fifth or sixth graders) focuses on teaching pupils the skills needed to recognize and resist social pressures to use drugs

Contains lessons about drugs & their consequences, decision-making skills, self-esteem, alternatives to drugs

Teaching techniques: lectures, group discussions, question and answer sessions, audiovisual materials, workbook exercises, and role-playing

Elementary School Drug Education Programs

DARE Curriculum:

1. Provides accurate information about drugs, alcohol and tobacco (some argue it is modern day “Reefer Madness”)

2. Teaches students good decision-making skills

3. Shows students how to recognize and resist peer pressure

4. Gives students ideas for positive alternatives to drug use

Elementary School Drug Education Programs

DARE:

Several evaluations of the original 17-lesson core have been conducted

A meta-analysis of these findings failed to find positive effects for D.A.R.E.

In particular, the short-term effects on drug use are, except for tobacco use, nonsignificant

The effects on known risk factors for substance use targeted by the program are also small

Elementary School Drug Education Programs

Ineffective approaches for reducing drug use:

• information dissemination approaches regarding drugs and their effects

• fear arousal• approaches that emphasize the risks associated with

tobacco, alcohol, or drug use • moral appeal• approaches that teach students about the evils of use,

and affective education • programs that focus on building self-esteem, responsible

decision-making, and interpersonal growth• “just say no”

Elementary School Drug Education Programs

Cognitive-Behavioural (“Social Competency”; “Life Skills”) programs:

Appear to be more effective than DARE when targeting the same age group

Reduce attitudes favorable to drug use & reduces drug use that are at least three times as large as DARE

Why are these approaches more effective? address fundamental risk factors that lead to chronic

substance abuse provide broader & deeper coverage of & more practice

for students in developing social competency skills are more effective at promoting resiliency! innovative instructional methods - role-playing, skills

rehearsal, behavioral modeling - are more effective than lecturing

Elementary School Drug Education Programs

Incorporates more social competency principles & curriculum

More effective, innovative pedagogy (less lecturing)

Question: Should social competency principles and curriculum be integrated into a drug prevention program or should drug prevention principles and curriculum be integrated into a social competency program