Personally I see your conclusion as a little harsh and too quick to judge and would like to expand on my initial thoughts??. what I am trying to say is there are going to be an unlimited number of outcomes, long term and short term, for these kids. One positive or one negative outcome should not be used to label a school or define its effectiveness, but we need to look at outcomes over a longer period of time as a determination. I believe we can safely say that ASR was able to reach all the kids that finished the program. If the program wasn?t working for them then the parents were notified and they were sent home, no sense wasting the kid?s time and the parent?s money when there are other kids waiting to attend.
Prior to a childs graduation the school , along with the child?s therapist (support team), recommends the next steps the child should take to continue his or her s success. This may be as simple as a recommended school/ home environment or as complex as detailed on going treatment.
I guess there are many ways to look at it, but 2 never finished the program so:
Of the graduates: Tanner, Biance, Ashley, Maryellen, Unnamed. ASR was able to help them all !! 2 of the 5 regressed after leaving. The cause is unknown, maybe they didn?t follow up with their individualized treatment. I don?t think this was talked about?
We should also note that we are not sure if this is a representative sample of the kids at ASR, just 7 that Oz Girl picked out, there was also :Andy, Eva, Willow, DJ, Tyrone, Mary Alice and others in the book who did well and many others. If we added just them we would be looking at:
11 of 11 benefited from their stay at ASR and 9 of 11 benefited long term. I am not placing these on the table as dependable statistics, just indicating that a longer term study would be needed to determine long term effectiveness.