Belgium

Last updated : 18.06.2024
Country of origin
USA
Last reviewed:
Age group
11-14 years
15-18/19 years
20-25 years
Target group
Antisocial youth and juvenile delinquents aged between 12 and 22 years
Programme setting(s)
Juvenile justice setting
Level(s) of intervention
Indicated prevention

EQUIP is a multi-component cognitive-behavioural programme designed to reduce antisocial behaviour in juvenile delinquents. It is intended to stimulate youth to think and act responsibly using a peer-helping approach. EQUIP focuses on three areas of limitations relating to moral judgment and egocentric bias delay or immaturity, deficits and distortions in social information processing, and deficiencies in social skills. It comprises of three 90-minute meetings per week for ten weeks.

Links to this programme in other registries
No link
Contact details

Dr. John Gibbs
Department of Psychology
Ohio State University
43210
USA
Email: Gibbs.1[a]osu.edu

Evidence rating
Likely to be beneficial
Studies overview

The programme has been evaluated in five quasi-experimental studies, two studies in the Netherlands and one across the Netherlands and Belgium evaluated the programme with delinquent adolescents, while one study from Netherlands and one from Spain evaluated the programme implemented as universal prevention in schools.

In two Dutch studies, delinquent male adolescents aged 12 to 21 years recruited from three/four similar high-security juvenile correctional facilities participated, intervention group participants came from one facility while the control group from the remaining. In one study, 7/20 outcomes (measuring moral development, social information processing and social skills) showed a significant positive intervention effect. In the other study, there a significant positive intervention effect on cognitive distortions. The study also measured recidivism: the more participants from intervention group reoffended (53% v 29% at 12 months, and 86% v 65% at 24 months), but the difference was not significant.

234 incarcerated youth from high-security juvenile correctional facilities participated in the study, conducted across the Netherlands and Belgium. Intervention and control group participants came from different facilities. The majority (69%) were males, and the mean age was approximately 15.5 years. Significant differences were found between the experimental and control groups in the development of social skills and moral value evaluation both of which had a small to moderate effect size as the intervention group remained stable while the control group’s scores decreased. No significant differences were found between the experimental and control groups in the development of cognitive distortions and moral judgment.

Another Dutch study takes a universal preventive approach and was implemented in schools with students with a mean age of 14 years. 9 schools were assigned to groups according to their ability to implement the programme. There was a significant positive effect on self-serving cognitive distortions and attitudes towards antisocial behaviour in the experimental group compared to the control group, but the effect on prevalence of antisocial behaviour and moral judgement was not significantly different between groups.

The Spanish study was also conducted in schools with 89 participants aged approximately 14-16 years, and evaluated an adaption called EQUIPAR, the Spanish version of EQUIP for Educators. The study had mixed effects on thinking errors and no significant effects on victimisation.

References of studies

*Brugman, D., & Bink, M. (2011). Effects of the EQUIP peer intervention programme on self-serving cognitive distortions and recidivism among delinquent male adolescents. Psychology, Crime & Law, 17 (4), 345-358.

*Helmond, P., Overbeek, G., & Brugman, D. (2012). Programme integrity and effectiveness of a cognitive behavioural intervention for incarcerated youth on cognitive distortions, social skills and moral development. Children and Youth Services Review, 34. 1720-1728

Leeman, L., Gibbs, J., & Fuller, D. (1993). Evaluation of a Multi-Component Group Treatment Programme for Juvenile Delinquents. Aggressive Behavior, 19. 281-292.

*Nas, C., Brugman, D., & Koops, W. (2005). Effects of the EQUIP programme on the moral judgment, cognitive distortions and social skills of juvenile delinquents. Psychology, Crime & Law, 11 (4), 421-434.

*Van der Meulen, K., Granizo, L., and del Barrio, C., (2010). Using EQUIP for Educators to Prevent Peer Victimization in Secondary School. Journal of Research in character Education, 8 (1), 61-76.

*Van Der Velden, F., Brugman, D., Boom, J., and Koops, W. (2010). Effects of EQUIP for Educators on students’ self-serving cognitive distortions, moral judgment, and antisocial behaviour. Journal of Research in Character Education, 8 (1). 77-95.

* Van Stam, M. A., Van der Schuur, W. A., Tserkezis, S., Van Vugt, E. S., Asscher, J. J., Gibbs, J. C., & Stams, G. J. J. M. (2014). The effectiveness of EQUIP on sociomoral development and recidivism reduction: A meta-analytic study. Children and Youth Services Review, 38, 44-51.

Countries where evaluated
Belgium
Netherlands
Spain
Protective factor(s) addressed
Individual and peers: clear morals and standards of behaviour
Individual and peers: individual/peers other
Individual and peers: interaction with prosocial peers
Individual and peers: skills for social interaction
Risk factor(s) addressed
Community: laws and norms favourable to substance use and antisocial behaviour
Individual and peers: anti-social behaviour
Individual and peers: favourable attitudes towards anti-social behaviour
Individual and peers: interaction with antisocial peers
Individual and peers: other
No defined risk factors
Outcomes targeted
Crime
Other behaviour outcomes
Description of programme

EQUIP is a multi-component cognitive-behavioural programme designed to reduce antisocial behaviour in juvenile delinquents. It is designed to teach youth to act responsibly and promotes helping behaviours in an intervention based on the Positive Peer Culture model. The programme is implemented within juvenile correctional facilities, with meetings occurring either during school time or in the living unit.

EQUIP focuses on three areas of limitations relating to moral judgment and egocentric bias delay or immaturity, deficits and distortions in social information processing, and deficiencies in social skills. The programme designers developed a four-category typology of self-serving cognitive distortions: self-serving thinking errors, blaming others, minimizing and mislabelling, and assuming the worst.

The programme is implemented with a number of meetings per week – a minimum of three mutual help meetings and two ‘equipment’ meetings. The equipment meetings comprise ten anger management sessions, ten social skills training sessions and ten decision-making sessions. Each meeting lasts approximately an hour and a half and the curriculum can be completed in ten weeks. The meetings aim to identify behavioural issues and distorted thinking and take steps to control and reduce the problems.

Implementation Experiences
Feedback date
Contact details

Dr JM (Jan) van Westerlaak
Psychologist and Equip trainer
westerla[a]dds.nl

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

The main obstacles are/were time, money and schedules. There are working schedules and the Equip Program has to fit somewhere into the schedule of the institution. Then we had/have to train people to work with the programme. So where in the schedule can you find time to train people as they also have to work? There is almost no time (or money) to let them go to training and so on. I think the picture is clear.

With respect to social context

I do not have a problem with the individual professionals. Mostly the problems come from the organisation, time/money problems or lack of good leadership.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Well, I think I can repeat myself here: the biggest problems are mostly the managers who did not take the Equip Program and all the implementation needs seriously. The professionals mostly were/are very positive about it. The neighbourhood and social system were also mostly positive. Sometimes we would have extra meetings for parents or the young clients’ social-care professionals.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

By talking over and over and over again about the importance of the programme, the fact that it is evidence based, that I am a highly educated, experienced and trained professional completely capable of training other professionals and so on, and by persevering like this for years and years and years.

With respect to social context

Talk and talk and talk and keep talking with the management, to convince them to provide enough time and resources for the implementation (time, money, realising people from schedules).

With respect to organisational and economic context

I held meetings for the parents and the clients’ social-care professionals and I talked continually about the programme with everybody involved.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

It is very important that an institution or company is fully aware that there will need to be enough time and money available to train the professionals to be competent in the programme. In this way the individual professional can feel supported by their organisation.

With respect to social context

Again, that management can be a more difficult obstacle than an individual professional. And that it would be easier if management would take the Equip Program and the implementation time seriously.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Lesson learned: maintain the enthusiasm of the individual professionals and maybe someday the management will see how important it is to involve the whole organisation in as good an initiative as the Equip Program.

Strengths

Equip is a great evidence-based programme. It is very practical, with handy tools for the individual professional and for the young people/clients. The skills and things they learn can be taken with them to other institutions and used throughout the rest of their lives. Every participant can learn in their own way and at their own level and this brings a positive learning atmosphere to the meetings. The programme also clearly outlines the involvement required of management.

Weaknesses

It is not very clear how to involve less willing managers in the programme when they think 'We do not have enough time' or 'The Equip Program is not about us' or 'This is a thing for the individual professional'.

Opportunities

When management can see that it really helps the individual young client and when society sees that it really can prevent criminal behaviour, the Equip Program is a great opportunity not only for the its young clients but, more importantly, also for the whole of society.

Threats

Competing programmes that are not very good but are easier for management to handle (e.g. more e-learning and pleasing things in it, such as YouTube movies, and programmes with simple requirements) and seem to be doing the same thing but are more compatible with the sometimes lazy attitude of management.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Know the evidence-based background and the fact that it makes your work easier once you know the Equip Program and have some experience with it. Furthermore, understand how it can improve your personal life!

With respect to social context

Convince the management that they have to be involved in the Equip Program, that they have to take part in the training and even that they should undertake some sessions with the young people to really understand what is so good about the programme.

With respect to organisational and economic context

First the management has to be convinced that they are a part of this programme and that they have to know the programme by heart. Then time, money and a place in the organisation’s schedules for the programme are also very important: there should be enough time to train the professionals and have follow-up days at least once a year.

Note from the authors

I should add that I also have implemented it in other European countries such as Belgium, Hungary, Ukraine and Estonia.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Netherlands
Last updated : 29.11.2024
Country of origin
Italy
Last reviewed:
Age group
11-14 years
Target group
Children aged 12-14 years
Programme setting(s)
School
Level(s) of intervention
Universal prevention

Unplugged is a school-based programme that incorporates components focusing on critical thinking, decision making, problem solving, creative thinking, effective communication, interpersonal relationship skills, self-awareness, empathy, coping with emotions and stress, normative beliefs, and knowledge about the harmful health effects of drugs. The curriculum consists of 12 one-hour units taught once a week by class teachers who have previously attended a 2.5-day training course.

Keywords
No data
Links to this programme in other registries
Germany - Green List Prevention
UK - CAYT - mentor-adepis
Poland - Programy rekomendowane
Contact details

Professor Federica Vigna-Taglianti, PhD
University of Torino
Regione Gonzole, 10 - 10043 Orbassano (TO),
Italy
Email: federica.vignataglianti[a]unito.it

Johan Jongbloet
HOGENT university of applied sciences and arts
Valentin Vaerwyckweg 1, 9000 Gent,
Belgium
Email: Johan.jongbloet[a]hogent.be

Professor Fabrizio Faggiano, PhD
Avogadro University
Via Solaroli 1
Novara, Italy
Email: fabrizio.faggiano[a]uniupo.it

Show link
0
Evidence rating
Beneficial
Studies overview

The programme has been evaluated in a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) involving children aged 12-14 years in several European countries: Austria, Belgium, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain and Sweden (Caria et al., 2010; Faggiano et al., 2007, 2008, 2010; Giannotta et al., 2014; Vigna-Taglianti et al., 2009, 2014). There were also two cluster RCTs in the Czech Republic (Miovsky et al., 2012; Jandáč et al., 2021) involving children with a mean age of respectively 11.8 years and 15 years.

For the cross-country study at post-test, exposure to Unplugged was associated with a statistically significant lower prevalence of self-reported daily use of cigarettes, episodes of drunkenness and cannabis use in the past 30 days in the intervention condition compared with the control condition. Young people receiving the programme were less likely than those in the control condition to move from non-smoking or sporadic smoking to daily smoking. Similar patterns emerged in the use of other substances. An analysis by gender found that delayed progression and enhanced regression were higher in the intervention condition among boys, whereas no, minimal or reverse differences were observed among girls.

At 18-month follow-up (Faggiano et al., 2010; Vigna-Taglianti et al., 2014), the use of tobacco and frequency of drunkenness was lower among students in the intervention condition compared to those in the control condition. Students in the intervention condition showed higher tendencies to remain non-users of tobacco or to regress from occasional to no use. The number of students reporting no drunkenness in the past 30 days was higher among students in the intervention condition compared to those in the control condition. Intervention condition participants also reported fewer alcohol-related behaviour problems compared to controls. Further, participants who reported not drinking at baseline were more likely to retain this status at follow-up after participating in the intervention, and those who reported drinking only occasionally at baseline showed a slower progression towards frequent drinking by follow-up if they participated in the intervention. When considering cannabis use, the proportion of persistent non-users was higher among the intervention condition than the control condition. All of these differences were statistically significant.

The first Czech study (Miovsky et al., 2012) found a statistically significant effect favouring the intervention, with intervention participants less likely than those in the control condition to have smoked cigarettes in the last 30 days at 3-, 15- and 24-months post-intervention. At the other two time periods (1 and 12 months), differences between conditions in 30-day cigarette use were not statistically significant. There were no statistically significant differences between intervention and control conditions on lifetime cigarette prevalence rates.


The second Czech study (Jandáč et al., 2021) consisted of 70 schools randomly selected with stratification according to their affiliation with a region and size, assigned to one of three groups (the control group, the intervention group 1 and the intervention group 2 exposed to the Unplugged intervention and n-Prevention. The n-Prevention programme is a follow-up (12 months) programme and consists of four lessons providing a general background addressing social norms, social beliefs, refusal skills and gender-specific differences, neurological aspects and the effects of substance use.  Children from families where the mother reported using alcohol weekly or less frequently, however, reported a decrease in drunkenness in the last 30 days compared to the control group. However, the study found no statistically measurable effect on drinking among children who came from families where the mother uses alcohol more than weekly.  These results were observed at a 24-month follow-up, which implies that the Unplugged programme may not be sufficient for high-risk children. Moreover, it is unclear how randomisation took place, and what the drop-out rate and baseline equivalence was. Additionally, in this study, a universal programme was used as a targeted intervention.

Lecrique et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in France to assess the effectiveness of the intervention on drug use among adolescents. Measures were taken at baseline and 6 and 8 months follow-up. The results showed that at the 8-month follow-up, the probability of consumption of cigarettes (OR=0.36; p<0.01), being drunk (OR=0.23, p<0.01) or using cannabis (OR=0.31, p<0.05) in the last 30 days was higher in the control group compared to the intervention group. In the intervention group, there was an improvement in other outcomes including psychosocial skills, reduced peer perception of substances and increased knowledge of the effects of substances. However, the study is a non-peer-reviewed report, it is not clear how randomisation was carried out, and there is no information on the level of attrition.

The RCTs conducted in Slovakia (Orosová et al., 2020; Abrinkova et al., 2021; Curova et al., 2021; Orosova et al., 2022) were not included in the assessment as the quality of the randomisation was low. The outcome measurement took place shortly after implementation in a quite young target group (11).

References of studies

Studies Included in the Assessment: 

Caria, M. P., Faggiano, F., Bellocco, R., & Galanti, M. R., & EU-Dap Study Group. (2010). Effects of a school-based prevention programme on European adolescents’ patterns of alcohol use. Journal of Adolescent Health, 48(2), 182-188

Faggiano, F., Richardson, C., Bohrn, K., & Galanti, M. R. (2007). A cluster randomized controlled trial of school-based prevention of tobacco, alcohol and drug use: The EU-Dap design and study population. Preventive Medicine, 44(2), 170-173.

Faggiano, F., Galanti, M. R., Bohrn, K., Burkhart, G., Vigna-Taglianti, F., Cuomo, L., Fabiani, L., & EU-Dap Study Group. (2008). The effectiveness of a school-based substance abuse prevention programme: EU-Dap cluster randomized controlled trial. Preventive Medicine, 47(5-6), 537-543.

Faggiano, F., Vigna-Taglianti, F., Burkhart, G., Bohrn, K., Cuomo, L., Gregori, D., Panella, M., & EU-Dap Study Group. (2010). The effectiveness of a school-based substance abuse prevention programme: 18-month follow-up of the EU-Dap cluster randomized controlled trial. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 108(1-2), 56-64.

Giannotta, F., Vigna-Taglianti, F., Galanti, M. R., Scatigna, M., & Faggiano, F. (2014). Short-term mediating factors of a school-based intervention to prevent youth substance use in Europe. Journal of Adolescent Health, 54(5), 565-573.

Lecrique JM. Évaluation d’Unplugged dans le Loiret, programme de prévention de l’usage de substances psychoactives au collège.Saint‑Maurice : Santé publique France; mai 2019. 2 p.Rapport complet disponible à partir de l’URL: http://www.santepubliquefrance.fr/

Miovsky, M., Novak, P., Stastina, L., Gabrhelik, R., Jurystova, L., & Vopravil, J. (2012). The effect of the school-based Unplugged preventive intervention on tobacco use in the Czech Republic. Adicciones, 24(3), 211-218.

Vigna-Taglianti, F., Vadrucci, S., Faggiano, F., Burkhart, G., Siliquini, R., & Galanti, M. R. (2009). Is universal prevention against youths’ substance misuse really universal? Gender-specific effects in the EU-Dap school-based prevention trial. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 63(9), 722-728. 
 
Vigna-Taglianti, F. D., Galanti, M. R., Burkhart, G., Caria, M. P., Vadrucci, S., & Faggiano, F. (2014). “Unplugged,” a European school-based programme for substance use prevention among adolescents: Overview of results from the EU-Dap trial. New Directions for Youth Development, 2014(141), 67-82.

Studies not Included in the Assessment: 

Abrinkova, L., Orosová, O., De Jesus, S. N., Gajdošová, B., & Bacikova-Sleskova, M. (2021). Resilience Factors, the School-Based Universal Prevention Program “Unplugged” and Healthy Behavior among Early Adolescents. European Journal of Mental Health, 16(2), 55–75. https://doi.org/10.5708/ejmh.16.2021.2.3

Čurová, V., Orosová, O., Abrinková, L., & Štefaňáková, M. (2021). The Effectiveness of Drug Use Prevention Programs on Substance Use among Slovak Schoolchildren. In Psychology Developments and Applications VII. https://doi.org/10.36315/2021padvii12

Orosová, O., Gajdošová, B., Bacíková-Šléšková, M., Benka, J., & Bavol’ár, J. (2020). Alcohol Consumption among Slovak Schoolchildren: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Unplugged Programme. Adiktologie, 20, 89-96

Orosová, O., Gajdošová, B., & Benka, J. (2022). Serial Mediation Models Testing the Effect of a School-Based Prevention Program on Smoking and Alcohol Consumption.  https://doi.org/10.36315/2022padviii15
 

Countries where evaluated
Austria
Belgium
Czechia
Germany
Italy
Spain
Sweden
France
Protective factor(s) addressed
Individual and peers: Problem solving skills
Individual and peers: skills for social interaction
Risk factor(s) addressed
No defined risk factors
Outcomes targeted
Alcohol use
Use of illicit drugs
Smoking (tobacco)
Description of programme

Unplugged is a school-based programme that incorporates components focusing on critical thinking, decision-making, problem-solving, creative thinking, effective communication, interpersonal relationship skills, self-awareness, empathy, coping with emotions and stress, normative beliefs, and knowledge about the harmful health effects of drugs. Unplugged particularly emphasised correcting pupils' beliefs about the pervasiveness of substance use ('normative beliefs') by contrasting these with data from surveys of pupils of the same age which typically reveal that average use levels are lower. 

The curriculum consists of 12 one-hour units taught once a week by class teachers who have previously attended a 2.5-day training course in the lessons and materials, and in how to teach them using methods which encourage interaction between pupils and between pupils and teachers, such as role-play and giving and receiving feedback in small groups. Based on teacher feedback and barriers identified during the first implementations of Unplugged, the revised programme's lessons are: 1. Opening Unplugged, 2. To be or not to be in a group, 3. Choices – Alcohol, Risk and Protection, 4. Your beliefs, norms and information – do they reflect reality? 5. Smoking the cigarette drug – Inform yourself, 6. Express yourself, 7. Get up, stand up, 8. Party Tiger, 9. Drugs - Get informed, 10. Coping competences, 11. Problem solving and decision making, 12. Goal-setting.

Materials can be accessed for free here.

This basic curriculum is ideally supplemented either by meetings led by pupils selected by their classmates, or by workshops for the pupils' parents. While in the implementations for the first trial, the curriculum was moderately well implemented, peer-led activities were rarely conducted, few parents attended the workshops, and an important element – role-play – was generally omitted by teachers.

Implementation Experiences
Feedback date
Contact details

Maria Kyriadikou
mkyriakidou[a]pyxida.org.gr

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Unplugged is implemented by teachers after training; however, teachers are often unfamiliar with group work and interactive learning methods and may lack the motivation to consistently apply these methods in the classroom.

With respect to social context

Schools often do not provide the necessary time and space to implement prevention programmes like Unplugged. Since it is not part of the school curriculum, its implementation largely depends on teachers' willingness.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Prevention programmes should be officially a part of the school curriculum in order for them to be sustainable.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

By offering training that emphasizes interactive methods, allowing teachers to directly experience the benefits, and providing ongoing support as they implement the programme in their classrooms.

With respect to social context

By trying to motivate teachers and school directors in order to allow the programme to be implemented in their school.

With respect to organisational and economic context

By providing the necessary material to teachers and by offering the training for free.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

Prevention programmes must consider that teachers typically use conservative teaching methods and adapt the curriculum accordingly by offering alternatives to interactive methods.
Or that prevention programmes should be delivered by professionals who are familiar with group work and interactive methods.

With respect to social context

Prevention programmes should be officially a part of the school curriculum in order for them to be sustainable.

With respect organisational and context

Prevention programmes should be embedded in the organisational context of schools in order for them to have the necessary resources.

Strengths

Attractiveness of the material, effectiveness of the prevention programmes, enthusiastic trainers and teachers.

Weaknesses

Lack of contextual framework for school implementation, limited dissemination, and training materials should be updated with current information on drug abuse.

Opportunities

Prevention of drug abuse among teenagers, professional and personal development of teachers.

Threats

No maintenance of the implementation.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Put more effort into recruiting and training.

With respect to social context

Assure alliances.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Secure resources.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Greece
Feedback date
Contact details

Juan Carlos Melero
jcmelero[a]edex.es

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Limited training for secondary school teachers in programme-relevant content, group dynamics, and psychosocial skills.

With respect to social context

1. The diversity of preventive programmes in Spain at present (more than 100 according to the reports of the National Plan on Drugs).
2. A certain lack of motivation on the part of the teaching staff.
3. Difficulty participating in training sessions over several hours.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Due to the ongoing effects of the economic crisis in Spain, securing adequate funding for programmes like Unplugged is challenging.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Providing highly practical training sessions where teachers experience Unplugged’s proposed dynamics. A team of professionals from various Spanish regions meets annually to reflect on and improve the ongoing training process.

With respect to social context

1. Highlighting the available scientific evidence, although it has not been a motivating criterion either.
2. Implementing mechanisms for monitoring presence and online that facilitate the solution of doubts to teachers.
3. Dynamising formative processes of variable duration (between 3 and 10 hours) and looking for dynamics of online training.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Trying to find funding from private companies and, above all, seeking co-financing from the administrations in whose territories the programme is developed.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

It may be convenient to devise online training proposals that seek the maximum interaction that enables face-to-face training. We are launching tools of this type in our Ibero-American School of Life Skills: http://escuela.habilidadesparalavida.net/

With respect to social context

Flexibility in programme implementation is essential. Although it is ideal to follow the evaluated technical model strictly, balancing technical rigor with the schools’ capacity for long-term programme adoption is necessary, especially in the context of low societal concern around drugs today.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Although it does not seem easy to achieve, it would be advisable to look for ways in which the educational centres themselves could contribute to the financing of the project activities: training, materials, etc., even if it was a symbolic percentage.

Strengths

Scientific evidence, European value, socio-emotional skills.

Weaknesses

Duration, training, competition with other programmes.

Opportunities

Evidence, recognition by public institutions.

Threats

Sustainability in times of crisis.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Focus teacher training on developing socio-emotional skills applicable to related topics, such as sex education.

With respect to social context

Explore formative formats that facilitate the participation of teachers, seeking balance and respect for the diversity of existing motivations.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Look for ways of co-financing that contribute to making the programme sustainable without great expense to anyone.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Spain
Feedback date
Contact details

Maria Rosaria Galanti
rosaria.galanti[a]ki.se
 

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

The programme was time consuming and required more school-time than expected.

With respect to social context

None that I am aware of.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Schools in Sweden are autonomous organisations with considerable variation in programmes and pedagogy, which must be considered for successful programme implementation.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

During the experimental phase, teachers received support through reinforcement measures and a help desk. However, there was no formal dissemination phase in Sweden.

With respect to organisational and economic context

In the experimental phase, site visits were very helpful in order to "adjust" the programme to organisational constraints.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

Demanding programmes such as Unplugged, if adopted at all, have a high potential for unsurveilled modifications/adaptations that, with time, make the programme quite different from that originally developed.
In addition, the lack of specific contextual effects undermines the programme's diffusion.

With respect to organisational and economic context

A structured and manualised programme is more difficult to implement in highly variable organisational settings than an unstructured programme.

Strengths

The scientific environment in which the programme was developed and evaluated, as well as the initial interest shown by recipients.

Weaknesses

The lack of flexibility of the programme to highly variable organisations.

Opportunities

To learn in the school environment.

Threats

The lack of convincing results on many outcomes; the lack of resources for active diffusion and support to the recipients (schools).

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Care about motivation and preparedness to adopt evidence-based demanding programmes.

With respect to social context

Is the goal of the programme shared by political/professional stakeholders? Is it a priority?

With respect to organisational and economic context

Obtain central approval from school authorities whenever possible.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Sweden
Feedback date
Contact details

Martina Feric
martina.feric[a]erf.hr
 

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Professionals in the schools (social pedagogues) were highly motivated for programme implementation. There was less motivation from the teachers (seeing their involvement in programme as extra (and not paid) job).

With respect to social context

Parent participation was relatively low.

With respect to organisational and economic context

There was the problem to find one school hour extra in school day for programme implementation. Also, in original programme, there are too many activities planned for one lesson (time frame of one lesson in Croatia is 45 minutes) and it wasn't possible to do all activities in 45 minutes. The same problem applied to the parent arm.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Trainers, supervisors, and social pedagogues made special efforts to enhance teacher motivation. This included making training sessions as interactive and enjoyable as possible, addressing teachers’ anticipated concerns, and maintaining flexibility (while preserving programme fidelity) during delivery. Social pedagogues were also present in the classroom for some lessons if teachers found certain lessons challenging.

With respect to social context

Efforts were made to encourage parent participation through various methods, including sharing information at parent meetings, sending personal letters, and displaying posters at schools.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Most of the school used “class hour” to do the Unplugged.
We worked with the teachers and social pedagogues on shortening activities and, at the same time, keeping the integrity of the programme (e.g. changing the introduction game; in some cases quiz was taken in the class and not in the small groups; discussion instead of role-playing with parents).

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

Time and effort must be invested to “prepare” schools for implementation. This includes presenting the programme to all school staff and clearly communicating organisational needs for implementation. The role of the school principal is crucial, as real support is needed for effective implementation—not just verbal encouragement.

With respect to social context

There is a need for a pilot programme in order to adapt a programme originating elsewhere to this social/cultural context.

With respect to organisational and economic context

The input of participants from programme pilot phase was valuable and had important role in planning organisational aspects of implementation.

Strengths
  1. The advantage of implementing a programme that originated elsewhere is implementing the effective prevention programme with all technical support (training of the people in charge, training of teachers, handbooks, workbooks, protocol for process evaluation etc.). In Croatia there is a lack of model programmes.
  2. The professionals in the schools (social pedagogues) have competencies to deliver the programme and support the teachers in delivery.
Weaknesses

Problem of finding the “space” to deliver a programme in a school day.

Opportunities
  1. Successful implementation of an effective programme from elsewhere with high fidelity is feasible.
  2. Successful implementation of an effective programme can enhance use of quality standards in school-based prevention on national level.  
Threats

The acceptance of tobacco and alcohol use is still high in Croatia and there is a high tolerance towards alcohol use by adults (parents don’t see alcohol and tobacco use as “a big problem”; more like “part of growing up”).

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

It is important to assure quality training for programme providers (small groups to ensure maximum interactivity and sharing). If it is possible, supervision should be provided.

With respect to social context

There is a need to invest in preparing schools for programme implementation in the sense of sensitisation and motivation. Having motivated teachers and school counsellors in order to ensure programme fidelity is crucial. Also, it is important to have motivated and supportive school management.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Programme pilot implementation can help to adapt programme delivery to given context and, at the same time, to keep fidelity to the programme.

Note from the authors

Imam stav - Unplugged

Number of implementations
1
Country
Croatia
Feedback date
Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Trained school-based prevention specialists manage the intervention effectively. However, there is limited information on how class teachers are implementing the intervention.

With respect to social context

The intervention is getting old and outdated.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Length of the intervention; 12 lessons to be implemented in one academic school year in all classes in 6th grade (e.g., if one school has 3 classes in a grade this leaves us with 36 lessons to be implemented by how many teachers?)
Cost related to coloured workbook that every child should have.
For some (definitely not for all) costs of + time devoted to the training.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

A 2-day training was provided for Unplugged implementation.

With respect to social context

We tried to develop and implement other interventions.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Motivating the implementers.
Implementers were motivated and informed about the importance of maintaining fidelity, with only minor content and delivery modifications permitted.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

Emphasize training, clear explanation, motivation, and education.

With respect to social context

Interventions must be multicomponent, addressing more types of risk behaviours, involving more target groups, systematic.
Collaboration with intervention deliverers is essential.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Reducing the number of lessons and replacing coloured workbooks with black-and-white worksheets may improve feasibility.

Strengths

Used and evaluated in Europe widely, High level promotion.

Weaknesses

No successor at hand.

Opportunities

Important lessons learnt from research outcomes.

Threats

Intervention is getting old, Low control of all aspects of fidelity.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Needs to be revised/updated prior to implementation.

With respect to social context

Needs to be revised/updated prior to implementation.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Needs to be revised/updated prior to implementation.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Czechia
Feedback date
Contact details

Sanela Talić
sanela[a]institut-utrip.si

 

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

  1. If the teachers voluntarily participated in the training and implementation, the results and their commitment were on a high level.
  2. Another problem was with inclusion of the Unplugged lessons in regular curriculum. Some teachers were claiming that they don't have available lessons for Unplugged although they have flexible curriculum (which means they have many possibilites to incorporate Unplugged lessons in usual lessons). They are afraid to be autonomous so they follow their handbooks because they feel safer that way and don't want to interrupt their routine - there is no cross-curricular integration. Because of the extent of some lessons, those couldn't be implemented in one school hour (45 minutes).
  3. They also think that drug prevention is mostly providing information on drugs and as they don't have knowledge they are not competent to do preventive work.
  4. There are some cases where teachers want to use Unplugged lessons within school camps and do all lessons in a few consecutive days. That approach strongly deviates from the original plan and we don’t recommend it (this is no longer “Unplugged”) – but we don’t have control over it.

With respect to social context

  1. Opinion of some teachers was that prevention should start in early school years (even before) and that parents should be more cooperative. According to their experiences children do not have basic set of manners and values (when they enter the school). Pupils bring family problems to school and all attention is given to solving those problems. It means there is less time for education and learning or strengthening different life skills. They don't feel competent for problem solving, building authority, productive teaching etc.
  2. Low participation of parents.
  3. Prevention in general is not considered as something we do “before problems occur” and often it is connected with substance use. There is no overview over who does the prevention in schools, how it is done, the only thing that matters is that “prevention activities” in a year plan are ticked.
  4. It is very hard to find motivated teachers who are willing to do additional “prevention work”. Schools are not obliged to do “prevention”; at least, the Ministry of Education doesn’t have any expectations, rules and standards regarding prevention work in schools.
  5. In our opinion, wider implementation of quality standards (and the programme) is also hampered by incorrect relations between Ministry of Health and Ministry of Education (prevention programmes are financed by Ministry of Health without agreement or cooperation with Ministry of Education).
How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Teachers felt more confident knowing that I'm a teacher by profession and that am aware of situation mentioned above. As I am a teacher and know that there are a lot of possibilities to incorporate other content (like Unplugged), I helped them to make a plan, share ideas and experiences from other schools. After the training they realised that drug prevention is not just talking and giving information about drugs. As most of the teachers usually like to follow the instructions, the workbook with detailed instructions for every lesson helped them to feel more confident.

We decided that all training activities will be led by a teacher who has been implementing Unplugged since the very beginning. So, there is an impression that the programme is used in practice, that it can be implemented and new teachers get much practical advice and recommendations from a person who has implemented it over many years.

With respect to social context

Through all these years we have been promoting prevention science and its principles, we have been organising “Slovenian Prevention Days” and training for Unplugged. Beside “Unplugged training” we also offer some basic information on what, how and why some approaches work/don’t work/have iatrogenic effects.

This year we finally got in contact with stakeholders from the Ministry of Education and started to think how to ensure enough school hours for prevention programmes only. The main idea is to ensure at least one whole hour a week (for every single class) – from the beginning till they finish the school.

Regarding low participation of parents - Parents do not want to immediately expose themselves and participate in activities that are provided by original workshops. There is not enough time to create safe environment where parents would cooperate without any reservations. That is why we decided to implement school based prevention programme EFFEKT for parents and to take advantage of parents’ meetings for its implementation. The rate of parents who are taking part in it is around 85%. We are still in the pilot phase of it. And in the future we plan to do research on effectiveness of each individual programme and a combination of both.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

Every year (with lot of advocacy and promotion of the programme) we manage to find at least one/two teachers from each interested school who are willing to implement Unplugged and all of them are very motivated after the training. Each year we organise at least two training sessions with 15-20 teachers involved. Sometimes principals and school counsellors also come to get necessary information about the programme (before they decide to start implementing it). Then further implementation depends on whether those teachers have the needed support from the principals and other teachers – we contact schools to inform them how important the work is that their teachers are willing to do and how they can support them.

It’s important to keep the contact with all teachers who decided to implement the programme. Also to organise meetings for them (in order to share their experiences, to share with them new things and information they want to hear, etc.).

With respect to social context

One very special cultural characteristic in Slovenia, which is holding back the progress in the field of prevention, is that people who are doing prevention have a negative attitude towards programmes originating from elsewhere even though they do not know the content of the programmes. They want to reinvent the wheel again and again and have been doing that for more than two decades. The only interest of key actors in the field of prevention is how to get more money for their "unique", mostly one-off activities and they do not care about the quality of it. Work is not conducted in a professional way. They agree that prevention is long term process but they often forget that "how you do it" also matters. What we learned with implementation of Unplugged is that we need to bring good practices to our schools, kindergartens, families etc., of course with some minor changes.

Teachers who are implementing the programmes report about “side”/”secondary” effects of the programme (teachers feel more comfortable in class, relationships among teachers and students and among students are better, some even reported fewer instances of aggressive behaviour). We decided to measure also these reported effects and hopefully we will scientifically prove them which will help with promotion of the programme (it would no longer be only “drug” prevention programme).

Strengths
The program can be effectively adapted to various contexts without losing effectiveness.
If a programme from elsewhere meets the needs of a certain community then it's reasonable to implement it (with adequate minor changes or adaptations). It takes a lot of effort and time to design and to test a new programme.
Programme with an instruction manual that can be easily used.
Weaknesses
The perception of the program as solely a "drug prevention" initiative limits interest among schools.Too long (12 lessons).
Opportunities

Prevention programmes are based on theories which can explain the risk factors for drug use. For example: according to the theory of social learning, individuals learn and develop their personality by observing the behaviour and actions of other people and the consequences of their actions. If for example particular American programme is based on social learning theory, this means that for example focus of the programme (among other focuses) is also in correcting misconceptions. This social influence theory is not characteristic only for people living in U.S. but for all people (we are talking about the human psychology in general). Especially in today's age of globalisation, we (in Europe) are subject to almost the same influences, regardless of where we live. Cultural differences (especially among young people) are now no longer so large and consideration is needed on whether to pay so much attention to cultural adaptation or in other words we shouldn't be so sceptical towards those programmes.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

In every school there are some individuals who are willing to implement quality programmes. It takes time to find them, but once you “have them on board” it is more likely that programme will “live”. It is also important to take into account some other factors that influence the quality of implementation (teachers should have support whenever they need it; it is also important to organise special meetings for teachers who are implementing the programme in schools; etc.)

With respect to social context

Promote the program as a tool for improving classroom relationships rather than strictly for drug prevention.
Regular advocacy for quality prevention in order to “open the door” to a programme.
Contacting schools over and over again about Unplugged training.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  1. This programme should be supported by responsible authorities and professionals.
  2. It's important that implementers (e.g. teachers) are motivated, commited to their work and that they have professional support by National EU-Dap centre.
  3. It's necessary that all lessons are planned from the very beginning of school year, and to take into account that one lesson can be implemented in two school hours (one after another).
  4. Programme itself is relatively cheap for implementation. You only need funding for regular material printing (more you print less you pay), organisation of training, including fee for the trainer, and some coordination costs (e.g. coordinating staff, travel costs…). Comparing to some other “prevention” activities (e.g. one-off lectures or workshops) the cost for each school is much cheaper and they get structured and manualised programme for many years with no additional costs. In the case of national funding (like in our case) the cost for school is zero (free of any charge). At least on the basis of Slovenian experience with Unplugged the programme could be promoted as very cost effective intervention. And there is also no licence fee or regular (e.g. annual) licensing costs to developers etc. like in the case of some other evidence-based programmes.
Note from the authors

“Izštekani” - Unplugged

Number of implementations
1
Country
Slovenia
Feedback date
Contact details

Kelly Cathelijn
Kelly.cathelijn[a]fracarita.org
 

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Schools struggle to allocate time for the 12 lessons, as it is not part of the standard curriculum.

With respect to social context

The previous program was not tailored to specific target groups, particularly in vocational schools where students are more vulnerable to addiction. The program’s theoretical focus prompted a need for revision.

With respect to organisational and economic context

We have seen that, while schools are interested in working with ‘Unplugged’, the cost of the programme is an obstacle.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

We suggest:
1. Six lessons in the first year and six lessons in the second year.
2. Dividing the lessons among several teachers so that each teacher gives one or two lessons in their course.
3. An extracurricular day in which the lessons are implemented.

With respect to social context

We added more collaborative exercises tailored to target groups.

With respect to organisational and economic context

We sought out local community and service clubs (e.g. Rotarians) to support the schools.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

During the training we offer various implementation methods.

With respect to social context

A differentiated strategy is essential in drug prevention to effectively reach multiple target groups.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Networking is essential for engaging multiple partners in drug prevention.

Strengths
  1. We provide a lot of exercises, so that teachers can choose which exercise is most appropriate for their class.
  2. The quality of the training is appreciated by 90 % of the teachers.
  3. The brand ‘Unplugged’ is well known in Flanders.
Weaknesses
  1. The cost of the programme.
  2. Schools can’t always find the time to implement the programme in an already full curriculum.
  3. Not all teachers are allowed to attend training sessions because of practical issues in schools.
Opportunities
  1. In some regions of Flanders we haven’t reached all schools.
  2. A lot of schools struggle with digital addiction (gaming, smartphones, tablets, etc.).
  3. Local communities feel the need for an effective drug prevention programme.
Threats
  1. School budgets are continuously under pressure.
  2. Schools are expected to deal with a lot of social problems (bullying, health, etc.). However, schools can’t solve all these problems.
Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Ensure that multiple partners are engaged in drug prevention efforts.

With respect to social context

Make sure the programme is implemented following a differentiated strategy to reach different target groups.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Work together with the local networks and schools.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Belgium
Feedback date
Main obstacles

With respect individual professionals

The main obstacle was adjusting the content of the information to the specific needs of the country. Another obstacle was adapting the role-play exercises so that all the targets for each lesson could be reached within one hour.

With respect to social context

Some people are reluctant to see drug prevention programmes implemented in schools.

With respect to organisational and economic context

The costs of the materials were quite high, and since our target was to implement the programme in as many schools as possible (at least two in each of the six districts of Bucharest and in each of the 41 counties of Romania), finding resources for these materials is quite a challenge.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

All the materials were adapted based on our national drug use surveys.

With respect to social context

Since Unplugged is a programme that develops life skills in order to prevent young people starting to use drugs, it was easy to change that mentality through parents’ meetings, media activities and focus groups in schools.

With respect to organisational and economic context

We managed to secure governmental resources in order to apply our national drug prevention policies. The Romanian Government considers the fight against illicit drug trafficking and abuse a priority and as a result we were able to reach our target in implementing Unplugged.

Strengths

Content and materials are comprehensive, well-organized, adapted, and practical.

Weaknesses

The costs of printing and the challenges of selecting and developing a network of trained teachers that can implement Unplugged.

Opportunities

Selecting and developing a network of trained teachers that can implement Unplugged.

Threats

Program quality may decline as more classes aim to implement Unplugged.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Carefully select the professionals who will implement the programme.

With respect to social context

Adapt the materials to the level of knowledge of the beneficiaries.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Unplugged should be implemented with no compromises on the aspects of quality printing and materials.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Romania
Feedback date
Contact details

Serena Vadrucci
serena.vadrucci[a]aslcittaditorino.it

Main obstacles

With respect individual professionals

  • Selection of teachers to be trained and to implement the programme.
  • Involvement of only one teacher per school.
  • Teachers are generally used to working alone, and their team-working attitude can be low.
  • Skill-based units are easily skipped, or implemented with limited interactivity.
  • The programme is ten years old. There are no media activities.
  • Motivation of teachers decreasing year by year.

With respect to social context

  • Schools and teachers with a low socio-economic context can be more difficult to involve.
  • Schools can have difficulties in printing Unplugged materials.
  • Schools can have difficulties paying for the teacher training and for the travel of the teachers to the training location.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • Organisation of calendar for implementation of the 12 units.
  • Time-consuming programme.
How they overcame the obstacles

With respect individual professionals

  • Criteria for choosing teachers to be trained were shared, discussed and recommended with/to the school principals.
  • When organising the teachers’ training, the participation of at least two teachers per school was encouraged.
  • Unplugged trainers promoted a team-working attitude during the teacher training.
  • During teacher training, the importance of the implementation of skill-based units was underlined.
  • All skill-based units were implemented during teacher training.
  • An update of the original Unplugged material was organised, involving the most active teachers and trainers. Content on drug information and media activities were added, some role play stories and other specific situations were revised. New energisers were created.
  • Booster sessions for teachers were organised each year.
  • The very motivated and enthusiastic teachers were involved in teacher training and booster sessions as "testimonials".
  • Unplugged trainers were proactive in supporting and constantly supervising teachers during the school year, and engaging in a relationship based on reciprocal confidence.

With respect to social context

  • Presentations of the programme to schools with a low socio-economic context and meetings with principals and health educators were organised.
  • Unplugged materials were printed by the regional authority or by the local health office and distributed free of charge to schools.
  • Teacher training was free of charge.
  • Teacher training was organised in the city of the schools involved.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • Calendar for implementation was carefully decided at the beginning of the school year and re-evaluated at regular intervals, possibly every month.
  • Calendar was decided together with school manager and non-Unplugged teachers of the class.
  • Process monitoring tools are useful to monitor the implementation: these tools were presented and distributed to the teachers during teacher training.
  • Splitting the 12 units across two school years: 6 implemented in the first year and 6 implemented in the second year.
  • Sharing/separating the implementation of the 12 units with another Unplugged teacher.
Lessons learnt

With respect individual professionals

  • It is very important that the teacher is interested in the programme; teachers not well motivated won't implement the programme.
  • Creation of an Unplugged teachers group within the school improves implementation and motivation.
  • During teacher training, working in groups is needed.
  • The importance of implementation of skill-based units must be underlined in teacher training.
  • Booster sessions help to maintain interest. Booster sessions should include the presentation of new scientific results (learning) and sessions dedicated to exchange of experiences between teachers (exchange).
  • Trainers must be proactive in contacts with the teachers.
  • Trainers and teachers must be involved in the revision of the material.

With respect to social context

  • Individual meetings with schools are needed.
  • Specific funding for printing Unplugged materials is needed. Better organisation of teacher training is needed.
  • Location of teacher training must take into account availability of teachers to travel.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • The results of process evaluation – including implementation of the units and satisfaction of teachers and students about the programme – must be reported and given back to teachers in order for them to change organisation of implementation where needed and increase quality of implementation year by year.
  • A certain level of adaptation of the main standardised model of implementation and some flexibility in allowed changes are needed to ensure the highest implementation rate.
Strengths

Effective programme (evaluated). Standardised teacher handbook. Group of people dedicated to the dissemination (coordination centre). Network of trainers and teachers. Booster sessions for trainers and teachers. Collaboration of regional and local authority. Occasions for teachers to improve teaching. Materials and training at no cost for schools and teachers. Nice materials for pupils.

Weaknesses

Time consuming programme (12 units). Programme is ten years old. Media activities and related contents need to be updated. Dissemination is dependent on continuous funding. Lack of collaboration of local authorities. Competition with other similar programmes.

Opportunities

Networking. Group working. Involvement of teachers in the process. Interest of students. Universal programme. Wide autonomy of schools in choosing programmes. Occasion to promote evidence-based approach.

Threats

Decrease of motivation. Lack of funding. Conflicts among trainers. Slow production of scientific results.  Programme is ten years old. Wide autonomy of schools in choosing programmes: competition with other (non-evaluated) programmes.

Recommendations

With respect individual professionals

  • Special care must be applied in selecting teachers for training and implementation of the programme.
  • Booster sessions should be organised.
  • Create a network for teachers to exchange experiences and be part of the programme.
  • Be proactive in the involvement and supervision of schools and teachers.
  • Constantly promote the alliance of school and health sectors.

With respect to social context

  • Special care must be applied with low socio-economic context schools.
  • Funding for materials and training must be obtained.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • Process monitoring tools must be provided, collected, analysed and reported.
  • Some flexibility in allowing changes in the model of implementation is needed.
Number of implementations
1
Country
Italy
Feedback date
Contact details

Kathrin Schütte
Landkreis Emsland
Kathrin.schuette[a]emsland.de

Rainer Lüker
Albert-Trautmann-Schule Werlte
rainer.lueker[a]ats-werlte.de

Main obstacles

With respect individual professionals

The different occupational groups approach the topic differently; here a common path had to be found.

With respect to social context

The different schools (special school, high school, etc.) had very different levels of performance

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • From a purely organisational point of view, it has sometimes been difficult to encourage exchanges and motivate professionals. All the professionals have implemented UNPLUGGED as part of their normal job and were not hired specifically for it.
  • There were no financial barriers for the time being, as UNPLUGGED was introduced under Communities That Care and it was considered useful and necessary by the political representatives.
How they overcame the obstacles

With respect individual professionals

Joint training of different professionals and constant exchange of information.

With respect to social context

In cooperation with the specialists, the programme was adapted to the performance level of the different schools.

With respect to organisational and economic context

As a "coordinator" always be approachable and try to motivate the professionals.

Lessons learnt

With respect individual professionals

For the success of the programme "UNPLUGGED" a constant exchange of information and networking are very important.

With respect to social context

Exchanges with professionals, on such topics as understanding and patience, were particularly important, especially for the weaker students.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Provide transparency to professionals, financial donors and decision-makers.

Strengths
  • Many professionals as multipliers who work together profitably through their different approaches.
  • Secure financing.
  • A versatile programme that fully informs students, not only on addictive substances but also on the topics "strengthening your personality" and "self-esteem".
Weaknesses
  • Many professionals who need to be motivated and who work very differently.
  • Partly complicated substance or expressed in a complicated way.
Opportunities
  • Different approach and different perspectives.
  • Very versatile and extensive programme.
Threats
  • Loss of motivation of the various skilled workers, since success cannot be measured immediately with this programme
Recommendations

With respect individual professionals

Different professional groups often work together profitably. The exchange must then be promoted and demanded from the outside.

With respect to social context

Exchange between and motivation of the specialists should be in the foreground. It is only through them that the programme can be implemented effectively.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • The financing should be secure for a longer period of time (several years).
  • Regular exchange meetings must be carried out.
Number of implementations
1
Country
Germany
Last updated : 02.12.2024
Country of origin
USA
Last reviewed:
Age group
6-10 years
Target group
Children in Elementary school (6-10 years)
Programme setting(s)
School
Level(s) of intervention
Environmental prevention
Universal prevention

The Good Behaviour Game (GBG) is a classroom-based behaviour management strategy for elementary school that teachers use along with a school’s standard instructional curriculum. GBG uses a classroom-wide game format, with teams and rewards, to socialise children to the role of student and reduce aggressive, disruptive classroom behaviour, which is a risk factor for adolescent and adult illicit drug abuse, alcohol abuse, cigarette smoking, antisocial personality disorder, and violent and criminal behaviour.
In GBG classrooms, the teacher assigns all children to teams that are balanced with regard to gender; aggressive, disruptive behaviour; and shy, socially isolated behaviour. Basic rules of student behaviour in the classroom are displayed and reviewed. When GBG is played, each team is rewarded if team members commit a total of four or fewer infractions of the classroom rules during a game period.

During the first weeks of the intervention, GBG is played three times a week for 10 minutes each time, during periods of the day when the classroom environment is less structured and the students are working independently of the teacher. Game periods are increased in length and frequency at regular intervals; by mid-year, the game may be played every day. Initially, the teacher announces the start of a game period and gives rewards at the conclusion of the game. Later, the teacher defers rewards until the end of the school day or week. Over time, GBG is played at different times of the day, during different activities and in different locations; the game evolves from being highly predictable in timing and occurrence with immediate reinforcement to being unpredictable with delayed reinforcement, so that children learn that good behaviour is expected at all times and in all places.

In addition to the original classroom-based game where students are reinforced for their mutual success in withholding inappropriate behaviour, the PAX Good Behaviour Game (PAX GBG) is another manualised GBG version. In PAX GBG, evidence-based kernels (e.g., PAX Quiet, PAX Voices, Timer, PAX Stix, Granny’s Wacky Prizes, PAX Tootle Notes) are added and the game is played daily within the school curriculum. There are four categories of kernels based on their effect: antecedent, relational, physiological and reinforcement. The teachers in the PAX GBG schools received 3 days of training and are regularly supported by mentors over a 1-year period.

Keywords
No data
Links to this programme in other registries
USA - Blueprints Programs
Germany - Grüne Liste Prävention
UK - Early Intervention Foundation Guidebook
UK - CAYT - mentor-adepis
Contact details

AIR version of GBG
Kellam Sheppard
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
United States of America
Phone: +1 (410) 614-0680
Email: kellam[a]jhsph.edu
Website: www.air.org/focus-area/education/?id=127

PAX version of GBG
Dennis Embry
PAXIS Institute
United States of America
Phone: +1 (520) 299-6770
Email: dde[a]paxis.org or info[a]paxis.org
Website: goodbehaviorgame.org/

Show link
0
Evidence rating
Beneficial
Studies overview

The programme has been evaluated in one cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) in Belgium, three cluster RCTs in the Netherlands (one of which was conducted with children with psychiatric disorders), one mixed methods study in Ireland, one RCT in United Kingdom, and one RCT in Estonia.

The RCT in Belgium, involving children aged 7.4 years on average, found statistically significant positive effects at post-test on observed teacher behaviour management and some peer-rated and observed child classroom behaviours.

The Dutch RCT that involved children aged 5-13 years with psychiatric disorders found statistically significant effects favouring the intervention at post-test on teacher-reported child emotional and behavioural problems, but no effect on most measures of teacher self-reported outcomes.

One of the other Dutch RCTs, involving children with a mean age of 6 years, found a statistically significant positive effect at post-test on teacher-reported externalising behaviour and peer relations.

The final study in the Netherlands, also an RCT, involved children aged 6.9 years on average. It found a statistically significant effect favouring the intervention on teacher-reported child ADHD, bullying, victimisation and anxiety/depression, but not on anti-social or aggressive behaviours at post-test. From age 10 to 13 years, young people who had participated in the programme had a lower probability of starting to use tobacco and reduced growth in alcohol weekly use, but there was no statistically significant effect on weekly tobacco use and past year or month of alcohol use.

An Irish study (O'Donnell 2016) employed a mixed methods approach to evaluate the GBG PAX version, using both quantitative (classroom observations recording the number of SPLEEMS (i.e. disturbing, disruptive, inattentive and unengaged behaviours) and qualitative data (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire).  It was conducted among 420 pupils aged between 7 and 8 years, and 21 teachers and 2 mentors in primary schools. The results of the study showed significant improvements among pupils’ self-regulation, self-control, and self-management. Moreover, it showed significantly reduced disruptive behaviour instances, and increased attentiveness and focus.

In a British RCT, 77 schools were randomly allocated to implement the GBG AIR for two years. The target cohort was form of 3084 pupils from between 7 and 8 years old. The study found no evidence of improvement of pupils’ behaviour (specifically, concentration problems, disruptive behaviour, and pro-social behaviour) but the implementation varied considerably (frequency and duration). Higher  levels  of  pupil  engagement  with  the game were  associated  with  improved  reading,  concentration, and disruptive behaviour scores at follow. Moreover, there was tentative evidence that boys identified as at-risk of developing conduct problems at the beginning of the project benefitted from the GBG. For these children, small reductions in concentration problems and disruptive behaviour were observed.

Streimann et al. 2020: this Estonian RCT (matched-pair, cluster-randomized, waitlist controlled, open-label trial) studied child mental health rated by teachers, whether the effects of the intervention on child mental health extended to the home context, teacher self-efficacy and overall classroom behaviour. Intervention adherence and children’s exposure to the intervention were also measured. The trial included 42 Estonian elementary schools with 708 first-grade students. The intervention had positive effects on teacher-rated children’s mental health at the end of the first academic year, which lasted and strengthened during the second academic year. Moderation analysis demonstrated positive effects on mental health and prosocial behaviour for high-risk students during the first year (but not the second year). The intervention also had a positive lasting effect on teacher’s self-efficacy and overall classroom behaviour. A few intervention effects (prosocial behaviour, emotional well-being) were evident in the home environment during the second academic year (as reported by parents), but there were no effects on parent-rated child ADHD symptoms.

Humprey et al. 2021: this large cluster randomized controlled trial tested whether implementation variability and participant cumulative risk status (e.g. young relative age, begin male, identified as having a special education need, eligible for free schools meals, speaking English as an additional language etc.) were examined as predictors of disruptive behaviour. Seventy-seven English primary schools (N = 3,084 children, aged 6–7) were randomly assigned to deliver the GBG or continue their usual practice over 2 years. Intent-to-treat analysis found no discernible impact of the intervention on children’s disruptive behaviour. Subgroup analyses revealed no differential gains among children at low, moderate or high levels of cumulative risk exposure (CRE). CRE holds that individual risk factors at baseline (e.g. male, eligible for free schools meals, living in deprived neighbourhood etc.) are considered in the outcome analysis. However, dosage as a compliance marker identified a large, statistically significant intervention effect (d = −1.35) among compliers (>1,030 min of cumulative intervention exposure). Furthermore, children at high and low levels of exposure experienced significantly greater and lesser reductions in disruptive behaviour. These findings highlight the importance of optimizing implementation and demonstrate the utility of CRE as a theoretically informed approach to subgroup moderator analysis.

Troncoso et al. 2021: this cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) examined the impact of the Good Behaviour Game (GBG) on children's developmental trajectories of disruptive behaviour, concentration problems, and pro-social behaviour from middle childhood (ages 6–7 years) to early adolescence (ages 10–11 years). Seventy-seven schools in England were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. During the 2-year main trial period, teachers of this cohort in intervention schools implemented the GBG, whereas their counterparts in the control group continued their usual practice. A multivariate multilevel non-linear growth curve model indicated that the GBG reduced concentration problems over time. In addition, the model also revealed that the intervention improved prosocial behaviour among at-risk children (e.g., those with elevated symptoms of conduct problems at Time 1, n = 485). No intervention effects were unequivocally found in relation to disruptive behaviour.

Ashworth et al. 2020: this study examined the efficacy of the Good Behaviour Game (GBG) in improving children’s reading attainment, and the extent to which this varies as a function of dosage and timing of outcome measurement by means of a 2-year cluster randomized controlled trial. Seventy-seven primary schools from three regions in England were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. Children (N = 3084) aged 6-7 at baseline were the target cohort. Reading attainment was assessed via national teacher assessment scores at baseline, and the Hodder Group Reading Test at post-test and 1-year post intervention follow-up. At post-test, no effects of the GBG on children’s reading attainment were found. At 1-year follow-up, results demonstrated that GBG can produce measurable improvements in children’s academic attainment, but these effects may take time to become apparent and are contingent upon implementation dosage falling within an optimal range.

In a small exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial (O’Keeffe et al. 2021) of the PAX Good Behaviour Game in Northern Ireland a total of 15 schools (19 classes) were randomised to intervention and control groups. The analysis focused specifically on the outcome of self‐regulation with 355 elementary school pupils in year 3 (age M = 7.40, SD = 0.30). Participating schools in the trial were located in areas with socio‐economic disadvantage. After 12 weeks of implementation, the trial provided some evidence that the PAX GBG may help improve self‐regulation in participating pupils, while the findings suggest that it may offer a feasible mental health prevention and early intervention approach for Northern Ireland classrooms.

The programme has been rated as Promising by Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development based on a review of studies conducted world-wide.

References of studies

Studies Included in the Assessment

*Ashworth, E., Panayiotou, M., Humphrey, N., & Hennessey, A. (2020). Game On—Complier Average Causal Effect Estimation Reveals Sleeper Effects on Academic Attainment in a Randomized Trial of the Good Behavior Game. Prevention Science, 21(2), 222-233.

Barrish, H. H., Saunders, M. and Wolf, M. M. (1969), ‘Good behavior game: effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behaviors in a classroom’, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2, pp. 119-124.

Bradshaw, C. P., Zmuda, J. H., Kellam, S. G. and Ialongo, N. S. (2009), ‘Longitudinal impact of two universal preventive interventions in first grade on educational outcomes in high school’, Journal of Educational Psychology 101, pp. 926-937.

*Breeman, L. D., van Lier, P. A., Wubbels, T., Verhulst, F. C., van der Ende, J., Maras, A. and Tick, N. T. (2015), ‘Effects of the Good Behavior Game on the behavioral, emotional, and social problems of children with psychiatric disorders in special education settings’, Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1098300715593466.

Dolan, L., Turkkan, J., Wethamer-Larsson, L. and Kellam, S. (1989), The good behavior game manual, The Johns Hopkins Prevention Research Centre, Baltimore, MD (also available at www.bpp.jhu.edu).

Dolan, L. J., Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Werthamer-Larsson, L., Rebok, G. W., Mayer, L. S., Laudolff, J., Turkkan, J. S., Ford, C. and Wheeler, L. (1993). The short-term impact of two classroom-based preventive interventions on aggressive and shy behaviors and poor achievement. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 317-345.

Furr-Holden, C. D. M., Ialongo, N. S., Anthony, J C., Petras, H. and Kellam, S. G. (2004), ‘Developmentally inspired drug prevention: middle school outcomes in a school-based randomized prevention trial’, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 73, pp. 149-158.

Humphrey, N.; Hennessey,A.; Ashworth,E.; Frearson,K.; Black, L.; Petersen,K.; Wo,L.; Panayiotou,M.; Lendrum, A.; Wigelsworth,M.; Birchinall, L.; Squires, G. and Pampaka, M. (2018).  Good Behaviour Game Evaluation report and executive summary. The University of Manchester.

*Humphrey, N., Panayiotou, M., Hennessey, A., & Ashworth, E. (2021). Treatment effect modifiers in a randomized trial of the good behavior game during middle childhood. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 89(8), 668–681.

Kellam, S. G. and Rebok, G. W. (1992), ‘Building developmental and etiological theory through epidemiologically based prevention intervention trials’, pp. 162-195 in McCord, J. and Tremblay, R. E. (eds.), Preventing antisocial behavior, The Guilford Press, New York.

Kellam, S. G., Rebok, G. W., Ialongo, N. and Mayer, L. S. (1994), ‘The course and malleability of aggressive behavior from early first grade into middle school: results of a developmental epidemiologically-based preventive trial’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 35, pp. 259 282.

Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Poduska, J., Ialongo, N., Wang, W., Toyinbo, P., Petras, H., et al. (2008), ‘Effects of a universal classroom behavior management programme in first and second grades on young adult behavioral, psychiatric, and social outcomes’, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 95(Suppl. 1), S5-28.

Kellam, S. G., Wang, W., Mackenzie, A. C. L., Brown, C. H., Ompad, D. C., Or, F., Ialongo, N. S., Poduska, J. M., Windham, A. (2014). The impact of the Good Behavior Game, a universal classroom based preventive intervention in first and second grades, on high risk sexual behaviors and drug abuse and dependence disorders in young adulthood. Prevention Science, 15 (Suppl. 1), S6-18.

Lalongo, N., Poduska, J., Werthamer, L. and Kellam, S. (2001), ‘The distal impact of two first-grade preventive interventions on conduct problems and disorder in early adolescence’, Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 9, pp. 146-160.

*Leflot, G., van Lier, P. A., Onghena, P. and Colpin, H. (2010), ‘The role of teacher behavior management in the development of disruptive behaviors: an intervention study with the Good Behavior Game’, Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 38, pp. 869-882.

*Leflot, G., van Lier, P. A., Onghena, P. and Colpin, H. (2013), ‘The role of children’s on-task behavior in the prevention of aggressive behavior development and peer rejection: a randomized controlled study of the Good Behavior Game in Belgian elementary classrooms’, Journal of School Psychology 51, pp. 187-199.

Medland, M. B. and Stachnik, T. J. (1972), ‘Good-Behavior Game: a replication and systematic analysis,’ Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 5, pp. 45-51.

Mihalic, S., Huizinga, D. and Ladika, A. (2011), An evaluation of the Good Behavior Game intervention, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Princeton, NJ.

O’Donnell, M., Morgan, M., Embry, D. E., Kelly, N., & Owens, C. (2016). Supporting the development of pupils’ self-regulation skills: Evaluation of the PAX GBG Programme in Ireland. Irish Teachers’ Journal, 4(1), 9-29.

*O’Keeffe, J., Thurston, A., Kee, F., O’hare, L., & Lloyd, K. (2021). An exploratory, cluster randomised control trial of the pax good behaviour game. Social Inclusion, 9(4), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i4.4612

Storr, C. L., Ialongo, N. S., Kellam, S. G. and Anthony, J. C. (2002), ‘A randomized controlled trial of two primary school intervention strategies to prevent early onset tobacco smoking’, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 66, pp. 51-60.

Streimann, K., Trummal, A., Klandorf, K., Akkermann, K., Sisask, M., Toros, K., & Selart, A. (2017). Effectiveness of a universal classroom-based preventive intervention (PAX GBG): A research protocol for a matched-pair cluster-randomized controlled trial. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications. 8. 10.1016/j.conctc.2017.08.013.

*Streimann, K., Selart, A., & Trummal, A. (2020). Effectiveness of a Universal, Classroom-Based Preventive Intervention (PAX GBG) in Estonia: a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial. Prevention Science, 21(2), 234–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-019-01050-0

*Spilt, J. L., Koot, J. M. and van Lier, P. A. C. (2013), ‘For whom does it work? Subgroup differences in the effects of a school-based universal prevention programme’. 


*Troncoso, P., & Humphrey, N. (2021). Playing the long game: A multivariate multilevel non-linear growth curve model of long-term effects in a randomized trial of the Good Behavior Game. Journal of School Psychology, 88, 68-84.

*Van Lier, P., Muthen, B., van der Sar, R. and Crijnen, A. (2004), ‘Preventing disruptive behavior in elementary schoolchildren: impact of a universal classroom-based intervention’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 72, pp. 467-478.


*Van Lier, P., Vuijk, P. and Crijnen, A. (2005), ‘Understanding mechanisms of change in the development of antisocial behavior: the impact of a universal intervention’, Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 33, pp. 521-535.


*Van Lier, P., Huizink, A. and Crijnen, A. (2009), ‘Impact of a preventive intervention targeting childhood disruptive behavior problems on tobacco and alcohol initiation from age 10 to 13 years’, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 100, pp. 228-233.

*Vuijk, P., van Lier, P., Huizink, A., Verhulst, F. and Crijnen, A. (2006), ‘Prenatal smoking predicts non-responsiveness to an intervention targeting attention-deficit/hyperactivity symptoms in elementary schoolchildren’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 47, pp. 891-901. 


*Vuijk, P., van Lier, P., Crijnen, A. and Huizink, A. (2007), ‘Testing sex-specific pathways from peer victimization to anxiety and depression in early adolescents through a randomized intervention trial’, Journal of Affective Disorders 100, pp. 221-226.

Wang, Y., Browne, D. C., Petras, H., Stuart, E. A., Wagner, F. A., Lambert, S. F., Kellam, S. G., et al. (2009), ‘Depressed mood and the effect of two universal first grade preventive interventions on survival to the first tobacco cigarette smoked among urban youth’, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 100, pp. 194-203.

*Witvliet, M., van Lier, P. A. C., Cuijpers, P. and Koot, H. M. (2009), ‘Testing links between childhood positive peer relations and externalizing outcomes through a randomized controlled intervention study’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 77, pp. 905-915.

Studies not Included in the Assessment

Kiefel, M.; Reynaud_Maurupt, C. And Poidevin, E. (2018).  Le programme américain Good Behavior Game: premiers éléments de compréhension de sa transférabilité en France.  Revue Éducation, Santé, Sociétés. 99-119

Lönn, S. L., Krauland, M. G., Fagan, A. A., Sundquist, K., Roberts, M. S., & Kendler, K. S. (2023). The Impact of the Good Behavior Game on Risk for Drug Use Disorder in an Agent-Based Model of Southern Sweden. Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 84(6), 863–873. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.22-00413

Countries where evaluated
Belgium
Netherlands
Ireland
United Kingdom
Estonia
Protective factor(s) addressed
Individual and peers: clear morals and standards of behaviour
Individual and peers: interaction with prosocial peers
Individual and peers: opportunities and rewards for prosocial peers involvement
Individual and peers: prosocial behaviour
Individual and peers: academic self-efficacy
School and work: opportunities for prosocial involvement in education
School and work: rewards and disincentives in school
Risk factor(s) addressed
Individual and peers: anti-social behaviour
Individual and peers: early initiation of drug/alcohol use
Outcomes targeted
Academic performance
Depression or anxiety
Suicidal ideation
Alcohol use
Use of illicit drugs
Smoking (tobacco)
Other behaviour outcomes
Description of programme

The Good Behaviour Game (GBG) is a classroom-based behaviour management strategy for elementary school that teachers use along with a school’s standard instructional curriculum. GBG uses a classroom-wide game format, with teams and rewards, to socialise children to the role of student and reduce aggressive, disruptive classroom behaviour, which is a risk factor for adolescent and adult illicit drug abuse, alcohol abuse, cigarette smoking, antisocial personality disorder, and violent and criminal behaviour.

In GBG classrooms, the teacher assigns all children to teams, usually three, that are balanced with regard to gender; aggressive, disruptive behaviour; and shy, socially isolated behaviour. The teacher assigns a team leader, usually a shy child, to organise activities and pass out rewards. Next, the teacher explains the rules of the game, describing what behaviours will not be allowed during the period in which the GBG is played (which are usually verbal disruption, physical disruption, being out of one’s seat without permission and non-compliance), and the rules are posted on the wall of the classroom.


During the game, the teacher notes the occurrence of problem behaviours by placing ticks next to the name of a team whenever one of its members displays a targeted prohibited behaviour. The teacher neutrally states the behaviour that was displayed, identifies the child who displayed it and praises the other teams for behaving well. A team wins the game if the number of ticks does not exceed four at the end of the game period, and more than one team can win. Initially, members of the winning team receive tangible rewards (stickers, rubbers) and activities (extra break time, class privileges). In addition, any team that wins a game during the week receives a special reward on Friday (such as a party or an outdoor activity). Non-winners engage in quiet seat-work during this time, and they receive no special attention from the teacher.


During the first weeks of the intervention, GBG is played three times a week for 10 minutes each time during periods of the day when the classroom environment is less structured and the students are working independently of the teacher. Game periods are increased in length and frequency at regular intervals; by mid-year, the game may be played every day. Initially, the teacher announces the start of a game period and gives rewards at the conclusion of the game.

Later, the teacher defers rewards until the end of the school day or week. Over time, GBG is played at different times of the day, during different activities and in different locations; the game evolves from being highly predictable in timing and occurrence with immediate reinforcement to being unpredictable with delayed reinforcement, so that children learn that good behaviour is expected at all times and in all places.

GBG originates from work developed in the late 60ies in the US; and that original GBG work was not copyrighted. Therefore, two versions (with variations between them) currently exist, the one by AIR and the one by PAX (see contact information). In the implementation experiences below, we identify the version that was used. The longitudinal studies that established the evidence for the effectiveness of GBG in the US can be connected to both versions, but evaluations of the European PAX version are still in process.

 

 

 

Implementation Experiences
Feedback date
Contact details

Dr Geertje Leflot
geertje.leflot[a]thomasmore.be

This experience refers to the AIR GBG version

Main obstacles

Although the cost of the intervention was reduced in comparison to the Dutch version, many schools (especially small schools) still find the intervention quite expensive. In Flanders schools get educational guidance in terms of a fixed number of ‘staff hours’ (depending on their pupils’ population, more hours if more pupils from low SES backgrounds) from ‘pedagogical guidance centers’ (staff mainly consisting of teachers) and student counseling from ‘centres for student counseling’ (multidisciplinary staff consisting of, e.g., school psychologists and social workers). These centres, however, do not have the ‘know how’ or time and resources to provide GBG training and consultations. Thus, to implement the GBG, the schools must use the budget provided by the government for their daily operating costs or attract external funding (which is not common practice in Flanders).

Schools have three ‘pedagogical days’ each school year. During these days the school must organise educational activities for school staff. As these pedagogical days are frequently already allocated to other activities (such as seminars on new regulations regarding inclusive education in Flanders), finding sufficient time for the three half-day training sessions for the Flemish version of the GBG (the first before the start of the implementation, the second after approximately 5 months, and the last at the end of the school year) is challenging.

In Flanders schools and teachers are under a lot of pressure to follow government-based regulations and educational guidelines for pupils, leaving little time for investing in preventive programmes such as the GBG.

In schools where not all teachers and principle support the intervention, the quality and quantity of the implementation of the GBG is hampered (e.g. teachers negatively influence each other).

De Sleutel, the organisation that provides the training and consultations for the Flemish version of the GBG, is just one of the many organisations providing education and training to teachers. This makes the dissemination and distribution of the Flemish version of the GBG challenging.

How they overcame the obstacles
  1. De Sleutel helps schools search for funding to finance the implementation of the GBG. For example, de Sleutel has set up cooperation with the Rotary or the local authorities to fund the implementation of the GBG in schools
  2. When the training sessions cannot be organised during pedagogical days, de Sleutel and the school search for other opportunities to gather all of the teachers. This frequently results in training sessions being organised during staff meetings. As these meetings take place after school hours and are kept short, the quality of the training session can be impeded.
  3. As support of the whole school team is crucial to the implementation of the GBG, de Sleutel fully informs the school team about the GBG so that the team as a whole can make an informed decision before investing in the GBG.
  4. De Sleutel invests in the dissimination and distribution of the Flemish version of the GBG. Schools receive information on the GBG via seminars, mail, pamphlets, Facebook page, etc.
Lessons learnt

Based on our experience with the Flemish and Dutch version of the GBG, we leant that it is necessary to adapt the GBG to the specific educational context, without changing the core elements of the programme. Moreover, quasi-experimental research with the Flemish version showed that the adapted version has positive effects despite the adaptions (Leflot and Colpin, 2016; Leflot et al., 2017).

Furthermore, we learnt that the implementation quality and dosage of the Flemish version is higher when the intervention is embedded in the school context (e.g. the majority of the teachers implement the GBG, the GBG is visualised in the school, schools portray themselves as GBG schools, the GBG theory is part of the school’s educational vision, parents are involved). On the other hand, we have experienced that in some schools where the GBG was only implemented by a few teachers, these teachers can become GBG pioneers by showing and sharing their positive experiences and results, making other teachers curious and more open to the intervention, facilitating the implementation in the whole school.

After the training phase, we noticed that the GBG fades out of the school: the GBG becomes less prominent in the school, teachers implement the GBG less or only implement aspects of the intervention, some teachers stop completely. De Sleutel aims to sustain the implementation by publishing new game elements to motivate teachers and pupils (e.g. new ways to reward children), discussing the long-term implementation with the school team during the final training session, organising booster sessions after the implementation phase, etc. Despite these efforts, long-term implementation (after the training phase) remains a problem.

Notwithstanding the changes, the cost still remains an obstacle for many schools.

Finally, schools were very positive toward the durable GBG material (e.g. pictograms, posters, cards, instruction booklet) provided in the GBG-box

Recommendations

Based on our experience with a foreign version of the GBG and the Flemish adaption we advise other countries to make necessary changes to the non-core elements of the programme in order to fit the educational context.

Note from the authors

Flemish version of the Good Behavior Game: “TOPgame” (TOPspel)

A Dutch version of the Good Behavior Game was tested in a randomized controlled trial in Flanders (Leflot et al., 2010, 2013). Whereas the implementation integrity in this study was good, it became clear that several characteristics of this Dutch version (e.g., the cost and intensity of the teacher training) were not compatible with the organization in Flemish schools and that further implementation and dissemination of this intervention as such was not feasible. Therefore, a Flemish version of the GBG was developed. The Flemish version is based on the same theoretical principles as the American and Dutch version of the GBG and uses the same core principles. The intervention however focusses more on facilitating social skills in general via an advanced program, requires less administration and leaves more room for teachers’ adaptation of non-core program elements to the specific classroom context (e.g., progress of the intervention, pictograms…). Furthermore, the Flemish version was adapted so it could be implemented in the six grades of primary school (6 to 12 years old). Finally, the amount of classroom consultations was reduced, contributing to the decrease of the financial cost of the intervention.

Year implemented: Dutch: 09/2006 - 05/2009; Flemish: 09/2014 - 05/2015

De Sleutel organises the training sessions and classroom consultations for the implementation of the GBG. They can be contacted via https://www.desleutel.be/

Country
Belgium
Feedback date
Contact details

Karin Streimann
karin.streimann[a]tai.ee

This experience refers to the PAX GBG version

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

- Teachers were not implementing the programme with high fidelity during the first year of implementation.
- Mentors were not able to coach teachers, as they were not experienced in mentoring and did not have experience of implementing the methodology on their own.

With respect to social context

  • Teachers do not feel comfortable with mentors and observers visiting their lessons.
  • Teachers are not eager to take up new elements (kernels) in their classrooms (harmonica, timer, sticks, hand signals, OK/not OK cards, etc.); they need extra motivation from their mentors to continually use these elements.
  • Some Estonian teachers struggle with using the Tootle notes (praise notes).
  • Estonian teachers did not think that an ‘American’ programme would work and be relevant in Estonia.
  • In Estonia the educational system is inclusive, but teachers struggled with the use of the methodology for children with special needs.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • Teachers did not have enough support from their schools for the programme implementation.
  • Some teachers were not able to take part in the 3day training course because there was no substitute who could teach their classes during training days.
  • Some teachers coming to PAX GBG training were sent there by the school management and were not motivated to implement the programme.
How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

  • Mentors received booster training to develop their coaching skills and had to practice the methodology on their own with children.
  • Mentoring frequency was increased (currently mentors visit each class between 10 and 14 times per school year).
  • The training for both teachers and mentors was restructured and content was added. This improved their understanding of the methodology and increased implementation fidelity.

With respect to social context

  • Clear communication about the aim and content of classroom visits before teacher training.
  • Mentors model the use of kernels and Tootle notes when visiting classrooms. Positive attention to PAX behaviour was also constantly modelled during teacher training.
  • Practical Estonian examples from previous years and experienced mentors have reduced resistance to the ‘American’ programme.
  • Engaging special education specialists and social pedagogues to the development activities helps to find solutions for teachers who use the programme with children with special needs.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • School management and support specialists were also invited to the PAX GBG training. This resulted in teachers having more support inside the school and not feeling alone (which resulted in sustained use of the methodology and expansion within schools).
  • Both teachers and school management have to agree to participate in the programme implementation. This ensures that teachers are motivated to implement the methodology and that schools support them thoroughly with it.
Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

  • Programme implementation needs continuous support and it’s important to consider from the beginning how to make the support system sustainable in the long term. For example, how often will teachers receive booster training sessions? Will there be a mentor in each school or a mentor in each region? How often will mentors visit schools? Who will pay for the support system? These are all questions that should be thought through at the beginning.
  • Mentors need comprehensive training not only about the methodology but also about coaching, advocating and lobbying for the programme, developing teachers’ and schools’ motivation, and sustaining their motivation during the implementation.

With respect to social context

The programme is easily adaptable to different social contexts and does not need many adaptations. Children like the programme a lot, which supports its implementation. But it’s important to keep in mind that this is a universal prevention programme: it will not solve all problems and selective/indicated approaches will still be needed.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • It’s not enough to work only with teachers or only with school management.
  • It’s important to involve both, because the support and acknowledgement that teachers receive from school management motivates them to implement the programme with higher fidelity. It’s wise to involve parents also, as they are often motivated to work with the school when their children are in elementary school. Their recommendations can have a significant influence on the decisions made by schools.
  • It is important to include more than one teacher per school; the more teachers from a school implement the methodology the better is the support from and cooperation with school management.
Strengths

Content needs little adaptation, evidence-based kernels are easily implemented, teachers notice changes in the classroom quickly, the focus is on positive and prosocial behaviour.

Weaknesses

Resource consuming (intensive mentoring), difficult to evaluate rigorously and in the long term, difficult to involve school management.

Opportunities

Activities conducted with parents (i.e. parental training based on PAX GBG).

Threats

Low fidelity, difficulties in maintaining sustained use.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Start the implementation with motivated teachers who can help with the adaptation process.

With respect to social context

Involve local teachers and experts from different areas (mental health, prevention, education, special education, research) as much as you can in the adaptation process. They can help to develop the vocabulary, advise about necessary changes, suggest measures for evaluation, etc. They are also important parties in the advocacy and lobbying work.

With respect to organisational and economic context

We would recommend the use of a mentoring system, otherwise the implementation fidelity might be low. Choose your mentors carefully; they should have thorough experience of working in schools. Visit sites where PAX GBG has already been implemented and learn about the existing systems in Europe. Think in advance about the sustainability of the mentoring system: who could support the teachers if there is no extra funding for mentors?

Number of implementations
1
Country
Estonia
Feedback date
Contact details

Catherine Reynaud-Maurupt
c.reynaud.maurupt[a]gmail.com
association.grvs[a]gmail.com

This experience refers to the AIR GBG version

 

Link to the article on the transferability in France
Kiefel, M., Reynaud-Maurupt, C., & Poidevin, É. (2018). Le programme américain Good Behavior Game : Premiers éléments de compréhension de sa transférabilité en France. Revue Éducation, Santé, Sociétés,5(1), 99-119.

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

  1. Difficulty in getting the assent of the whole teaching team in the same school to set up the programme.
  2. Rejection of purely behavioural methods by the majority of teachers; positive conditioning negatively perceived, characterised by teachers as not soliciting critical thinking from pupils.
  3. Rejection of American programmes by a small but significant proportion of teachers.
  4. Rejection of positive education by a minority of teachers (a small minority that consumes a great deal of energy!).
  5. Additional workload for teachers during the first year of implementation (particularly a one-on-one conversation with a GBG coach every fortnight to analyse and go through their work practices after a session of observation in their class).

With respect to social context

Some schools have a large proportion of children in precarious economic, social and educational situations and don’t benefit from any social diversity. These schools are precisely the ones that would benefit the most from the GBG programme. However, teachers working in schools that benefit from greater social diversity, with children who are better off, tend to be more willing to be trained in the GBG.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  1. At the organisational level, gathering two school teams at the same time (2 days in September and 1 day in February) requires simultaneously mobilising lots of replacement teachers to make sure the whole school team can participate in the training.
  2. At the economic level, the implementation of the GBG programme is supported by a non-profit association that solicits funding on an annual basis to successfully carry out its projects. Therefore, it could suffer from cash flow problems if public funding were not allocated in time (consequently jeopardising the development of the programme).
How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

  1. Presentation of the programme in the school year prior to implementation followed by a vote to determine the assent or otherwise of the teaching team.
  2. Systematisation of a collective debriefing with pupils after each GBG session that enables them to work on the verbalisation of emotions and arguments, thus better acknowledging and reflecting the French approach to the development of cognitive skills; a more detailed explanation during initial training of the value of rewards, focusing on the fact that rewards quickly become intangible as the school year progresses; focusing during the initial training and the coaching of the teachers on the part of the programme that deals with group dynamics and team work (cooperation, solidarity, negotiated resolution of problems).
  3. Emphasising GBG experiences in Europe, particularly in the Netherlands (scientific references), and promoting the 2013 EMCDDA report North American drug prevention programs: are they feasible in European cultures and contexts?
  4. Demonstrating that positive education is compatible with setting clear rules. Neuroscience studies have proven that positive education is not just an ideology.
  5. Scheduling sessions for teachers and GBG coaches to analyse work practices during lunchtime breaks. During initial training, focusing on the programme’s immediate outcomes (better classroom management, better school climate).

With respect to social context

  1. First step: we choose the schools with line managers in the national education services in order to select the schools with the most disadvantaged populations.
  2. Second step: we present the programme to the teams that work in these schools and we ask them to organise a vote on participation.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  1. To obtain enough replacement teachers we have to schedule training sessions very early on with the national education services to make sure that GBG training sessions are integrated into the training plan from April of the previous year (hence the need to mobilise teaching teams during the previous school year: everything must be set up in April for the following September). The available teaching resources combine replacement teachers for teachers who are being trained and replacement teachers for teachers who are on sick leave. Consequently, the booster session scheduled for February might have to be rescheduled to March or April, because February is ‘flu season’. We must accept the need to run a training session for each school team if it’s not possible to gather both teams simultaneously.
  2. Up until now the cost of implementing the GBG programme and the cost of the transfer of skills from AIR was covered by funding dedicated to the testing of innovative actions. Co-funding from different public bodies made it possible to avoid financial issues.
Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

  1. Do not involve the minority of the teaching team that does not wish to engage in the programme despite a positive majority vote. We consider this respecting the teachers’ pedagogical freedom. Have teachers (those who have accepted GBG training) sign a contract committing to the programme for the first year of implementation.
  2. (+c. + d.) Adapt the teachers’ training to the needs expressed by the French teachers; use appropriate vocabulary adapted to their professional culture. Pay sustained attention in the GBG programme to the overall strategies that aim to develop social skills, such as cooperation and solidarity, academic skills such as concentration and autonomy, and cognitive skills such as verbalisation of emotions and arguments (help teachers to understand that the programme is not limited to the goal of ensuring that children conform to expected social behaviours).
  3. (e.) French teachers are obliged to contribute a certain number of ‘pedagogical teaching’ hours outside the classroom. The national education services will therefore offset the investment in the GBG programme by allocating 9 hours of each teacher’s pedagogical teaching time to the programme (1 hour to organising and scheduling, 6 hours to the analysis of work practices with the GBG coach and 2 hours to exploitation of data gathered in class).

With respect to social context

  1. It is advisable to start looking for the right school 8 months before starting the programme.
  2. The first GBG programme implementation in France occurred in an ideal socio-historical context, because the education and health services had realised that they had the same goal in terms of the development of children’s social skills: education services had begun to pay closer attention to the benefits of programmes enhancing life skills and to measure their performance, because they contribute to improved learning processes.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  1. We have to set up things very early on to organise the implementation of the programme in a school, beginning to prepare in January for a programme to start the following September.
  2. We must set up a development and funding plan for the coming years with public authorities, to take into account our cash flow problems throughout the year and find other sources of funding than the ones that have been allocated so far (the funding available for a particular innovative action on the basis that it is innovative inevitably becomes limited over time). To promote a project that could be developed at a larger scale, it would be interesting to see the results of economic impact studies on the GBG programmes that have been developed in Europe.
Strengths

An evidence-based programme using years of practical case studies, not adding anything to the school curriculum for the pupils.
A programme that fosters changes in teachers’ work practices, thanks to a very accurate description of expected professional gestures, and that provides the tools to enable data collection and analysis of observational data (teachers have the benefit of hindsight; unbiased approach to education).
Besides the long-term effects, teachers and pupils benefit from immediate outcomes.
A programme thoroughly cherished by children who themselves perceive the benefits, as they can fit in in groups better and work in a calmer, quieter atmosphere.

Weaknesses

French national education has a professional culture in which teachers are not used to working in teams and are totally free in terms of their pedagogical choices; how the programme is implemented may therefore be affected by differences in how individual teachers understand and conduct their jobs.

Opportunities

To implement an efficient programme rather rapidly on a large scale at a reasonable cost avoiding major disturbances for teachers or pupils, or changes in the school curriculum.
The long-term impact of the programme is not limited to a reduction in addictive behaviours but also involves delinquency prevention, suicide prevention and anti-social personality disorder prevention.

Threats

The need for sustained funding while the current funding must be renegotiated each year.
The current funding comes exclusively from public funds dedicated to health and not from education services, although education services have invested human resources.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Make sure you get the consent of all parties represented and/or accept the fact that some teachers won’t stick to the project and feel free to ‘let them go’ (you won’t achieve any significant result with people who don’t support the project).

With respect to social context

Find schools in deprived neighbourhoods with large numbers of disruptive children with learning difficulties, since these schools are those where you will get the best results from GBG implementation.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Build your own network of decision-makers prior to implementation in order to minimise difficulties in obtaining funding and to ensure the best local support possible for further organisation.

 

Note from the authors

Year the program was implemented:

School years 2015-2016 and 2016-2017: pilot study (3 schools = 35 teachers, 660 pupils, 3 trainers) with transfer of skills from AIR

Current school year: a transition before national development : first year of GBG implementation without AIR support (4 new schools = 49 new teachers and 860 new pupils) and first French experimentation of ‘Train the trainers’ (4 new trainers)

Number of implementations
1
Country
France
Feedback date
Contact details

This experience refers to the AIR GBG version

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

  • Recruitment & training of teachers
  • Teacher turnover in intervention schools
  • Teacher availability for coaching support

With respect to social context

Different teaching culture during parts of the game. It was difficult for some teachers & teaching assistants. Also, some were more uncomfortable with the use of positive reinforcement. Some felt it was too American and felt unusual in a UK classroom.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • Recruitment of schools to take part in intervention
  • Cost to schools
How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

  • Coaching support

With respect to social context

  • Coaching support & training.

With respect to organisational and economic contex

  • Extensive outreach and partnership marketing
Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

  • Flexible & accessible training
  • Online/virtual coaching support

With respect to social context

  • Take care and ensure proper resources to help teachers understand Good Behaviour Game through training and coaching support.
  • Make it as easy as possible for teachers to collect data.

With respect to organisational and economic context

  • More investment required for schools recruitment
Strengths
  • Fidelity
  • Coaching
  • Impact
Weaknesses
  • Resource-heavy
  • Staff turnover
Opportunities
  • Impact
  • Seamless with curriculum
Threats
  • Cost
Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Invest in upfront training and help teachers have a deep understanding of GBG.

With respect to social context

Training & coaching.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Build strong relationships with school leadership team along with teachers. Maintain these relationships through the programme and build new ones as staff move on. Ensure a whole school buy-in.

Number of implementations
1
Country
United Kingdom
Feedback date
Contact details

Agnieszka Sukiennik — GBG Coach
agnieszka.sukiennik[a]o2.pl

This experience refers to the AIR GBG version

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

The most difficult part was luring primary schools (i.e. head teachers and teachers) into the programme and making it look attractive from the very beginning.

With respect to social context

There was a lot of paperwork connected with legal issues and financing, caused by the money coming from different parties with nothing in common.

With respect to organisational and economic context

This does not apply to GBG at this stage.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

We relied mostly on professional and personal contacts of GBG coaches and ‘whispering’ marketing — we asked teachers to advertise the programme among their colleagues if they liked it.

With respect to social context

We hired new personnel to handle the office work.

With respect to organisational and economic context

This does not apply to GBG at this stage.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

Do not push people. Do not give too many details, especially concerning the documents to be filled in. Focus on the positive aspects. Keep in touch.

With respect to social context

Think twice before engaging people who are not really willing to participate. If a teacher is forced by their supervisor to join the programme, they will leave sooner or later.

With respect to organisational and economic context

This does not apply to GBG at this stage.

Strengths

Fun for the children; satisfaction for the adults; and social advantages.

Weaknesses

Paperwork; lack of proper communication channels; and some people dropped out.

Opportunities

It had an amazing impact on children's social behaviour in the school environment, which will continue beyond the programme.

Threats

Teachers may get bored with the method.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Hire responsible professionals that are ready to work both independently and in a team.

With respect to social context

Not applicable.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Not applicable.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Poland
Feedback date
Contact details

Jimmy Pettersson
jimmy.pettersson[a]malmo.se

This experience refers to the AIR GBG version

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Some teachers were not willing to change the way they worked and if they eventually started to make some changes, they were often selective about the changes they made, choosing to make those changes that suited them best and ignoring others.

With respect to social context

In Sweden, we are working with the AIR version of the GBG, but we are using training materials from the Netherlands: we had a Dutch version of an American programme for implementation in Sweden. Some people saw this as a problem and said that it would never work. But, as risk and protective factors are the same in all countries, we did not consider this a problem.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Getting the school to allow enough time to support the teachers properly was an obstacle. As some teachers were sceptical and in some cases unwilling to change the way they managed their classrooms, it would have been very helpful to have more access to their time, especially after lessons in which they implemented the programme, when we wanted time for coaching, but there were no substitutes available to cover the teachers’ next lessons.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

As positive reinforcement is used in the Good Behaviour Game (GBG), we chose to use that approach with teachers as well. We tried to focus on the changes they made and gave them a lot of praise for making these changes. After doing this, we gave them advice as to how to proceed with making the other changes necessary.

With respect to social context

The first thing we needed to do was to adapt the programme to fit the Swedish cultural context. We were lucky though, as the Dutch school system is a lot more similar to the Swedish system than the American system. This meant that we needed to make only minor changes, such as altering some names and adjusting it to fit with the Swedish school curriculum.

With respect to organisational and economic context

We tried to find time outside the classroom (during breaks or lunch or between classes) in order to coach teachers regarding how well they stuck to the manual, etc. We also developed a form to give teachers written feedback.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

You have to be flexible. Not everyone will be ready at the same time, so you also have to have patience. But above all you must never give up. We did see changes among the teachers who were initially unwilling to change.

With respect to social context

Evidence-based interventions work regardless of country and origin, as long as you are familiar with the relevant risk and protective factors.

With respect to organisational and economic context

We are preparing for a new study and this time we have been meticulous about pointing out what we expect from the schools that are willing to participate in the study, especially concerning time and access to teachers.

Strengths

As the programme is easy to learn and easy to use, teachers who are open-minded will see changes quickly. This will encourage them to continue.

Weaknesses

There will be children who will have problems adapting to this way of working, and teachers who lack the longer term perspective will have problems motivating themselves to continue to guide the children in the right direction.

Opportunities

The GBG offers so many opportunities. Children work more quietly so they get more done. This means that they get less homework and less homework means more time for other activities, etc.

Threats

Teachers who follow only certain parts of the package and by doing so do not get the results in the long run that we are looking for are a threat.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

Those implementing the programme must have an understanding of how the school system works in order to reach the right people and foresee what will come during the school year.

With respect to social context

It is important to take time to reflect on how the context in which you plan to apply the programme compares with the context of the original programme.

With respect to organisational and economic context

It is important to make sure that the schools know exactly what is expected of them and what you need from them in order to implement the programme properly.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Sweden
Feedback date
Contact details

Conor Owens
conor.owens[a]hse.ie

This experience refers to the PAX GBG version

Main obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Obstacles to initial implementation took two forms: (1) training and support and (2) preconceptions of some teachers and principals.

Principals were required to release teachers for two days PAX GBG training and teachers were required to invite a PAX GBG mentor into their classroom for four post-training mentoring visits.

At the start, training was dependent upon Dr Dennis Embry, a PAX GBG developer, coming over from the US.

The principals’ concerns related to the following: how much resource and teaching time the programme would take up; whether or not it would have additional effects on existing school policies and programmes; what children it would work for; if it would work for all children regardless of their abilities; and which teachers would need to be trained.

The teachers’ concerns before the take-up of PAX GBG related to the following: whether or not the children would buy into the programme, whether or not it would work, whether or not it would increase teachers’ workloads and whether or not they would have the confidence to deliver the training. A key concern was how teachers’ representative bodies would engage with PAX GBG.

With respect to social context

The number of programmes on offer to school principals the difficulty in accessing the evidence supporting them, and the implications for scalability and sustainability, were the main obstacles. The obstacles were about a crowded space rather than the programme.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Securing grant money to scale up delivery.

How they overcame the obstacles

With respect to individual professionals

Funding is an ongoing issue. Interestingly, funding and resources are currently received from a number of organisations with different focuses on child-related outcomes, e.g. health and well-being, childhood poverty, teacher education.

In collaboration with PAX GBG, we are now in a position to have our own accredited trainers; this will have significant positive implications for efficiency and scaling up.

The gathering of both quantitative and qualitative data was important for identifying obstacles and assessing our efforts to address them.

With regard to the principal and teacher preconceptions, based upon qualitative interviews, teachers reported that they felt confident and competent in terms of delivering PAX GBG following the training mentor support and school principals reported valuing the programme for its impacts on pupils self-regulation skills and teacher practice

With respect to social context

Routinely gathering local data was an important strategy for highlighting impacts both qualitatively and quantitatively. It was also important to collaborate with influential groups within the teaching profession, e.g. teacher unions and education centres.

With respect to organisational and economic context

Because of the far-reaching outcomes of PAX GBG, there are several potential routes to funding. Hence no one organisation is required to cover all the costs.

In building a funding case, it has also been our experience that teachers have continued to deliver PAX GBG for a number of years post training, which significantly reduces the cost of a child receiving the programme.

Since our first offer of training, we have had a waiting list of schools and teachers for future training.

Lessons learnt

With respect to individual professionals

The main lessons we learnt were that PAX GBG is transferable it works in Ireland, and it is accepted by pupils, teachers and principals. It is easy to implement. The model we developed was a teacher-to-teacher model; future trainers will be teachers and the mentors are teachers. The core outcome for pupils was self-regulation. Mentor support is essential. Teachers stated that the programme was easy to implement, took up little time and had positive effects on the individual pupils, the classroom and their own experiences as teachers.

Because the programme had an impact on child behaviour so quickly, it was easy for teachers to see PAX GBG as a classroom management programme rather than as a mental health/resilience programme. Based on implementation experience, we focused on the long-term effects of the programme, e.g. reduced risk of drug usage.

With respect to social context

A partnership model for implementation that involved key decision-makers helped us to design an implementation plan that makes the PAX GBG system ready to scale up. A teacher-led approach fits within current education policy and practice developments.

With respect to organisational and economic context

PAX GBG is a transferable scalable programme that is valued by pupils, teachers and school principals. Implementation requires an ordinary amount of commitment nothing exceptional om behalf on the pupils, teachers or principals. Because of the training structure and the addition of evidence-based kernels, it is easy to implement and sustain.

Strengths

Teachers view PAX GBG  as being an acceptable, valuable and impactful additon to their practice achieving significant outcomes for both them and their pupils.

Pupils want to play PAX GBG. To achive equity of access for teachers and pupils ie scaling up multiple delivery routes are required. PAX GBG can be delivered as part of teacher in service training and as part of college based teacher training.

It is not a complicated programme in terms of its delivery but it is based on significant, complex research.

Weaknesses

The need to get multiple organisations to pool resources to facilitate the scaling up of GBG is a weakness.

Opportunities

It is scalable and sustainable and achieves significant long-term outcomes. This allows for population-level change.

Threats

There is a need to move the conversation from evidence-based programmes to the more difficult and important criteria of being evidence-based, scalable and sustainable programmes.

Recommendations

With respect to individual professionals

In our experience, teachers appreciated the teacher-to-teacher delivery and that data were collected and feedback given. Equip teachers to evaluate PAX GBG in their own classroom. This helps them to own and evolve their own practice by generating their own on-going evidence and quality improvement cycle.

With respect to social context

It is important to reinforce the idea that the benefits for pupils are developmental in nature, with behaviour in the classroom being the first outcome but the most important outcomes over time being related to mental health and risk-taking behaviour. Pupils learn self-regulation skills.

With respect to organisational and economic context

A partnership approach allows for more influence, profile and access to potential funding. There are positive impacts upon the culture of the classroom and the school.

Note from the authors

The description, content and implementation of PAX and PAX GBG are quite different. Only PAX GBG use the evidence-based kernels. I can either supply that information or you could request that from Dr Dennis Embry at dde[a]paxis.org

I want to declare that I receive no benefits from and have no financial interest of any kind in PAX GBG.

Number of implementations
1
Country
Ireland
Subscribe to Belgium
Top