By the way, I don't even read your posts and I don't think anyone else does either.
Oh, you hurt my feelings. You did a ton of responding for someone who doesn't read my posts. Is this another lie? Hmmmm. Well anyway ..
so lets recap.
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study
Canyon Research & Consulting: Independent research company that conducted the study.
** Western Institutional Review Board: Independent board that approved research and audited the study.
The above study was presented at the American Psychological Association (APA) conference 2006. ** Dysfunction Junction of fornits was mistaken the first time when he said WIRB never heard of the study. What he meant was he called WIRB and they did hear of the study but said they only approved the Questionnaire. So we need to consider DJs' input/opinion against the published facts.
Whooter, could you possibly quote exactly where it says that the Western Institutional Review Board "approved research and audited the study?"
Perhaps I'm missing something, which is certainly possible, but the only reference I was able to find in all 21 pages of this presentation ("Report of Findings from a Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes in Private Residential Treatment," by Ellen Behrens and Kristin Satterfield; 114th Annual APA Convention; August 12, 2006) as uploaded onto Scribd.com was ... the following emphasized sentence in the Methods section (page 3):
METHOD
Participants.
The sample consisted of 993 adolescents, admitted to one of 9 programs located in the Eastern and Western United States, between August 2003 and August 2005, who, along with their parents or guardians (hereafter referred to as “parentsâ€) agreed to participate in the study and who completed measures at admission and/or discharge. The Western Institutional Review Board approved consent/assent forms and issued Certificates of Approval for the study.
The contribution of each of the 9 residential programs to the sample was relatively equal and ranged from 9% to 16%. This sample consisted of a mean of 55% (range 37-75%) of the adolescents admitted to the residential programs during the time period. Demographic information (i.e., gender, age) from admission data provided by the residential programs indicated the sample was roughly representative of students enrolled in the programs during the same time period.[/list][/list]
To tell you the truth, it isn't even clear (to *me*) whether they even had anything to do with the questionnaire, just with the participant consent/assent forms.
Again, I may be missing something. If so, I'd appreciate anyone's clarification/insight. Thanks.
Here's an interesting fact about the Certificate of Approval: it only refers to the consent/assent forms
prior to the study start and has nothing to do whatsoever with the results of the study, which appear never to have been submitted to WIRB, as they have no record of the study.
The Certificate of Approval will indicate approval of a consent form.
So, there's the extent of the WIRB involvement - they approved the consent/assent forms and nothing more.I've been asking for the same thing for a couple of days, Ursus. Obviously, it isn't there and Whooter made it up. You have correctly pointed out the fact that WIRB had nothing whatsoever to do with "oversight" or "auditing" of this study, as they told me when I called. They don't claim that, Canyon/Behrens don't claim that...only Whooter claims that. He got burned behind that statement and now he's just throwing a hissy.
Now he's back to claiming "third-party oversight" and he doesn't name who "oversaw" the study, of course, because that's just made up, too. He was formerly claiming it was WIRB, but that is proven false, so now he just makes the claim with no attribution whatsover.
This guy is as phony as it gets and will say anything to try to market Aspen, even if it means publicly pooping in his own pants over and over. It appears that "fiduciary interest" he has in Aspen Education has clouded his judgment. Remember, he's in it for the money, not the truth.