There is no minimum word count for these questions; they just have to be answered thoroughly. This assignment is due 09/19/2021 at 11:59 PM EST. Please reach out if there are any additional questions that you have regarding this assignment. I can best be reached at 270-970-8225. You can call or text. Thank You!
Urban County High School has hired you to develop an evaluation of a pilot program designed to teach its faculty and staff how to better recognize, respond to, and defuse violent or potentially violent situations arising among students Group Design Exercise Short answers Part I: Scenario from Harris, M.B., & Franklin, C. (2009). Helping adolescent mothers to achieve in school: An evaluation of the Taking Charge group intervention. Children & Schools, 31(1): 27-34. From the abstract: A school social worker and her practicum students in a semirural alternative high school with a predominant Hispanic student enrollment evaluated the Taking Charge group intervention. The group is an evidence-based life skills intervention for adolescent mothers and it was evaluated on its efficacy for improving participants’ school achievement. The evaluation used a quasi-experimental design with a pretest and a posttest. Nineteen young mothers participated in the Taking Charge group or the comparison group. Seventeen participants self-identified as Hispanic and two self-identified as white. Data from school records measured outcomes of school attendance and grade average. At posttest, the group that participated in the Taking Charge group had significantly better attendance and grade averages than did those in the comparison group. Additional information from the article: The Taking Charge group was offered to all pregnant and parenting mothers in the school. They were invited to an orientation where consent forms were distributed and assent forms were distributed to those who lived with their parents or guardians. There were 13 young mothers who accepted the invitation to participate in the Taking Charge group and 11 others who agreed to serve as the comparison group. During the 8 weeks of the Taking Charge program, one student in the treatment group transferred to another school. Four participants in the comparison group dropped out of school. At posttest, there were 12 students in the Taking Charge group and 7 in the comparison group. Pretest data for the two groups were school attendance and grade average for the first six-week grading period of spring semester. Posttest data were the same measures from the six-week grading period ending the week after the last Taking Charge group session. Data were obtained from the school’s student records. Attendance was defined as the percentage of days that participants attended school for at least half of the day: calculated as a ratio between the number of days attended and the number of days enrolled at the school. Grade average was the average of numerical grades recorded in the school’s six-week grade reporting system. The results of the study indicated that the two groups had no significant differences at the pretest. At posttest, the analysis showed a significant differences between the two groups in both school attendance and grade average with the Taking Charge members showing increased attendance and grade average and the comparison group showing decreases in both measures. 1. What is the main research question or hypothesis being investigated by the study? 2. What is the main independent variable in this study? 3. What are two (2) dependent variables in this study and how are they operationally defined? 4. What is the research design being used to evaluate the intervention (classic experimental, one-group pre-test post-test design, etc.)? Draw the design you have identified (type it using the group design notation—O1, O2, X, etc.). 5. What is a threat to internal validity (maturation, history, testing, instrumentation, statistical regression, selection, mortality) that might be an issue with this design and why do you think so? (Name one threat and explain why you think it is a problem with this design). Part 2--the following case scenario is similar to the type of question you will encounter in Exam 1. Suicide Hotline, Inc., has hired you to develop an evaluation of a pilot program designed to provide callers to the hotline with brief in-house psychotherapeutic assistance via telephone. The psychotherapeutic assistance is based on Solution Focused Brief Therapy and will be provided by MSW level therapists trained in supportive psychotherapy and hotline crisis counseling. It will include: 1) a pre-therapy assessment interview; 2) weekly telephone therapy sessions, each lasting between 45 and 60 minutes; and 3) a post-therapy assessment interview after 6 weeks of therapy. The Program Director says that callers who have chosen not to carry out their threats are typically referred to therapists or agencies dealing with emotional distress. The Director believes that some callers will be more likely to accept and to benefit from telephone therapies offered by the Suicide Hotline, Inc. Study participants will be callers invited to participate in the pilot program because they meet the following criteria: 1) not currently in therapy; 2) at no or low risk for suicide; 3) no indications for psychiatric referral, hospitalization, or police intervention; and 4) expressed interest in beginning psychotherapy. The Director proposes the following design: O1 XO2 The X in the design refers to the telephone therapy provided by the Suicide Hotline, Inc., O1 and O2 are the pre-and-post therapy assessments of the participants’ depression level, psychiatric symptomatology, and overall satisfaction of life. 1. What is the independent variable in this scenario? 2. What are the dependent variables (there are 3 listed) and how are they operationally defined? 3. What is the group design proposed by the Program Director? Be specific in your answer. Hint: it is a pre-experimental design. 4. What are at least two (2) threats to internal validity (maturation, history, testing, instrumentation, statistical regression, selection, mortality) that might be a problem with this group design? Give an example of how these two threats might offer an alternative explanation for any decrease in depression level and psychiatric symptomatology or an increase in overall satisfaction of life. 5. You propose adding a control group so that callers who were eligible for the study would be randomly assigned to either the Solution Focused Brief telephone therapy or to a waiting list. The Director agrees to randomly assign callers who meet the study inclusion criteria to either the telephone therapy or to a wait list. Participants assigned to the wait list will complete the O1 assessments. They will be told that there is a 6 week wait for the therapy but they will be able to get it then. During the waiting period, they will have access to all the regular hotline services. After 6 weeks on the wait list, they will complete the O2 assessments and have access to the therapy if they choose to enter the psychotherapy program at that time. The new design looks like this: R O1 XO2 R O3O4 What type of design are you proposing and how would it better control for the threats to internal validity you identified in your answer to question 4?