Ellen Behren's Industry Study Funded by AEG

[Whooter]

Thank you, Guest, for the very informative post, once and for all putting this issue to bed.  Your post has been bookmarked and filed under "Fornits troll answers".  Stick around.  Kickass research that was.

 :notworthy:

You welcome,  I expect that as more and more studies come out showing the effectiveness of some of these programs the more resistance we will see here on fornits.  Originally many were asking for just studies, then independent studies, then long term indpendent studies.  Now that the studies are independent long term the critisicim move torwrds the authors and demand for longer term.  Each time a study emerges the criteria for acceptance here on fornits changes lol.

Heart studies are done by doctors who have a background and knowledge in the area.  I dont think we could find a drug study or medical study performed by someone who knew nothing about the area they are testing or lacked a background.

These studies should be completed by people who have a background and knowledge in the area.

If the results showed that the programs were ineffective then they would be accepted at face value as are the various stories we read about here.  But they are not.

There was an independent study which was published in a journal a few years back and that was rejected by fornits regulars also because it showed the schools to be effective.

The above post was mine, sorry for the confusion.

[Troll Control]

There appears to be continued confusion around the study conducted by Ellen Behrens. While she and other industry pundits claim it was an Independent Study, nothing could be further from the truth.

1999 Behrens Clinical Director for Youth care
http://cache.zoominfo.com/cachedpage/?a ... me=Behrens

2002 Founded Canyon Research
http://canyonrc.com/experience.html

2003 - 2005 Behrens conducting surveys
http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/pre ... 060817.htm
 
2004 Behrens doing Consulting for AEG
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 0626.shtml

2006 Behrens completes her survey results passed off as Independent Study
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5360.shtml
"We also tried to eliminate all students discharged from the programs before graduation because the clinical staff thought it was actually an inappropriate placement, or when they felt the program couldn't be helpful to the child. As a result, the operating assumption of the study is that the students included in the analyzed data were those who were appropriately placed."

http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5494.shtml
Comment: ....It would be helpful to know more about Dr. Behren’s research design and methodology. I presume she drew a random sample for the study; otherwise, the results cannot be generalized to the school/residential population at large.
Jerry W Clark
Dba Behavioral Services Ltd
Reno, NV

No Jerry, she didn't. Families from 9 Aspen programs participated in her "study". She and all her staff have links to Aspen programs.
http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc
viewtopic.php?p=215887#p215887

Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement:  Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc

2006 Behrens is a contributor to NATSAPs "Journal of Therapeutic Schools and Programs.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5456.shtml

ASPEN EDUCATION GROUP APPLAUDS STUDY
(April 26, 2007) According to an article on PRNewswire, Elliot Sainer, President of Aspen Education Group (AEG), Cerritos, CA, announced "AEG is extremely pleased to learn of the very positive findings from the final phase of our industry's first long-term, multi-year clinical study on the effectiveness of private therapeutic residential programs for adolescents. AEG will continue to advocate for new industry research that will further illustrate and promote the best practices and methodologies and enhance our industry's abilities to produce positive and long-lasting results in adolescent therapeutic education."

I guess he was pleased. He paid her to present AEG in the best possible light.

This was a marketing gig paid for by AEG.  Behrens failed even to disclose AEG was her employer.  Anti-intellectual nonsense, which is worshipped by program parents as the "holy truth" *YAWN*  Next, please, this one is dead.

[Whooter]

Thank you, Guest, for the very informative post, once and for all putting this issue to bed.  Your post has been bookmarked and filed under "Fornits troll answers".  Stick around.  Kickass research that was.

 :notworthy:

You welcome,  I expect that as more and more studies come out showing the effectiveness of some of these programs the more resistance we will see here on fornits.  Originally many were asking for just studies, then independent studies, then long term indpendent studies.  Now that the studies are independent long term the critisicim move torwrds the authors and demand for longer term.  Each time a study emerges the criteria for acceptance here on fornits changes lol.

Heart studies are done by doctors who have a background and knowledge in the area.  I dont think we could find a drug study or medical study performed by someone who knew nothing about the area they are testing or lacked a background.

These studies should be completed by people who have a background and knowledge in the area.

If the results showed that the programs were ineffective then they would be accepted at face value as are the various stories we read about here.  But they are not.

There was an independent study which was published in a journal a few years back and that was rejected by fornits regulars also because it showed the schools to be effective.

Not a problem.  Thanks for posting this again.

[Anonymous]

The above post was mine, sorry for the confusion.

No need to bother, everyone knows you are the only poster that can use "guest" as a username, whotter.

[Whooter]

Thank you, Guest, for the very informative post, once and for all putting this issue to bed.  Your post has been bookmarked and filed under "Fornits troll answers".  Stick around.  Kickass research that was.

 :notworthy:

You welcome,  I expect that as more and more studies come out showing the effectiveness of some of these programs the more resistance we will see here on fornits.  Originally many were asking for just studies, then independent studies, then long term indpendent studies.  Now that the studies are independent long term the critisicim move torwrds the authors and demand for longer term.  Each time a study emerges the criteria for acceptance here on fornits changes lol.

Heart studies are done by doctors who have a background and knowledge in the area.  I dont think we could find a drug study or medical study performed by someone who knew nothing about the area they are testing or lacked a background.

These studies should be completed by people who have a background and knowledge in the area.

If the results showed that the programs were ineffective then they would be accepted at face value as are the various stories we read about here.  But they are not.

There was an independent study which was published in a journal a few years back and that was rejected by fornits regulars also because it showed the schools to be effective.

I think I remember that Study.  It was independent and showed that programs can be very effective.  Do you have a link?  I would like to read it again.

[Troll Control]

There appears to be continued confusion around the study conducted by Ellen Behrens. While she and other industry pundits claim it was an Independent Study, nothing could be further from the truth.

1999 Behrens Clinical Director for Youth care
http://cache.zoominfo.com/cachedpage/?a ... me=Behrens

2002 Founded Canyon Research
http://canyonrc.com/experience.html

2003 - 2005 Behrens conducting surveys
http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/pre ... 060817.htm
 
2004 Behrens doing Consulting for AEG
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 0626.shtml

2006 Behrens completes her survey results passed off as Independent Study
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5360.shtml
"We also tried to eliminate all students discharged from the programs before graduation because the clinical staff thought it was actually an inappropriate placement, or when they felt the program couldn't be helpful to the child. As a result, the operating assumption of the study is that the students included in the analyzed data were those who were appropriately placed."

http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5494.shtml
Comment: ....It would be helpful to know more about Dr. Behren’s research design and methodology. I presume she drew a random sample for the study; otherwise, the results cannot be generalized to the school/residential population at large.
Jerry W Clark
Dba Behavioral Services Ltd
Reno, NV

No Jerry, she didn't. Families from 9 Aspen programs participated in her "study". She and all her staff have links to Aspen programs.
http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc
viewtopic.php?p=215887#p215887

Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement:  Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc

2006 Behrens is a contributor to NATSAPs "Journal of Therapeutic Schools and Programs.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5456.shtml

ASPEN EDUCATION GROUP APPLAUDS STUDY
(April 26, 2007) According to an article on PRNewswire, Elliot Sainer, President of Aspen Education Group (AEG), Cerritos, CA, announced "AEG is extremely pleased to learn of the very positive findings from the final phase of our industry's first long-term, multi-year clinical study on the effectiveness of private therapeutic residential programs for adolescents. AEG will continue to advocate for new industry research that will further illustrate and promote the best practices and methodologies and enhance our industry's abilities to produce positive and long-lasting results in adolescent therapeutic education."

I guess he was pleased. He paid her to present AEG in the best possible light.

This was a marketing gig paid for by AEG.  Behrens failed even to disclose AEG was her employer.  Anti-intellectual nonsense, which is worshipped by program parents as the "holy truth" *YAWN*  Next, please, this one is dead.

Ahhh, yes.  Now I remember where I saw this study.  This is the bogus one done by AEG about AEG programs with no scientific structure.  Thanks for posting the links!!

[Whooter]

Thank you, Guest, for the very informative post, once and for all putting this issue to bed.  Your post has been bookmarked and filed under "Fornits troll answers".  Stick around.  Kickass research that was.

 :notworthy:

You welcome,  I expect that as more and more studies come out showing the effectiveness of some of these programs the more resistance we will see here on fornits.  Originally many were asking for just studies, then independent studies, then long term indpendent studies.  Now that the studies are independent long term the critisicim move torwrds the authors and demand for longer term.  Each time a study emerges the criteria for acceptance here on fornits changes lol.

Heart studies are done by doctors who have a background and knowledge in the area.  I dont think we could find a drug study or medical study performed by someone who knew nothing about the area they are testing or lacked a background.

These studies should be completed by people who have a background and knowledge in the area.

If the results showed that the programs were ineffective then they would be accepted at face value as are the various stories we read about here.  But they are not.

There was an independent study which was published in a journal a few years back and that was rejected by fornits regulars also because it showed the schools to be effective.

I think I remember that Study.  It was independent and showed that programs can be very effective.  Do you have a link?  I would like to read it again.

Here is the link.  When I get time I'll run through with everyone.

Link to Study

[Troll Control]

There appears to be continued confusion around the study conducted by Ellen Behrens. While she and other industry pundits claim it was an Independent Study, nothing could be further from the truth.

1999 Behrens Clinical Director for Youth care
http://cache.zoominfo.com/cachedpage/?a ... me=Behrens

2002 Founded Canyon Research
http://canyonrc.com/experience.html

2003 - 2005 Behrens conducting surveys
http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/pre ... 060817.htm
 
2004 Behrens doing Consulting for AEG
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 0626.shtml

2006 Behrens completes her survey results passed off as Independent Study
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5360.shtml
"We also tried to eliminate all students discharged from the programs before graduation because the clinical staff thought it was actually an inappropriate placement, or when they felt the program couldn't be helpful to the child. As a result, the operating assumption of the study is that the students included in the analyzed data were those who were appropriately placed."

http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5494.shtml
Comment: ....It would be helpful to know more about Dr. Behren’s research design and methodology. I presume she drew a random sample for the study; otherwise, the results cannot be generalized to the school/residential population at large.
Jerry W Clark
Dba Behavioral Services Ltd
Reno, NV

No Jerry, she didn't. Families from 9 Aspen programs participated in her "study". She and all her staff have links to Aspen programs.
http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc
viewtopic.php?p=215887#p215887

Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement:  Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc

2006 Behrens is a contributor to NATSAPs "Journal of Therapeutic Schools and Programs.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5456.shtml

ASPEN EDUCATION GROUP APPLAUDS STUDY
(April 26, 2007) According to an article on PRNewswire, Elliot Sainer, President of Aspen Education Group (AEG), Cerritos, CA, announced "AEG is extremely pleased to learn of the very positive findings from the final phase of our industry's first long-term, multi-year clinical study on the effectiveness of private therapeutic residential programs for adolescents. AEG will continue to advocate for new industry research that will further illustrate and promote the best practices and methodologies and enhance our industry's abilities to produce positive and long-lasting results in adolescent therapeutic education."

I guess he was pleased. He paid her to present AEG in the best possible light.

This was a marketing gig paid for by AEG.  Behrens failed even to disclose AEG was her employer.  Anti-intellectual nonsense, which is worshipped by program parents as the "holy truth" *YAWN*  Next, please, this one is dead.

Ahhh, yes.  Now I remember where I saw this study.  This is the bogus one done by AEG about AEG programs with no scientific structure.  Thanks for posting the links!!

Yeah,  I re-read it again.  I'm generally pro-program, but this document falls far short of being scientific or statistically valid in any way.  AEG should have had an independent researcher that didn't work for AEG do the study.  Then it would have meant something, but this surely does not.

[Whooter]

Here is one of many findings in the independent study.

Psychiatric medication was used by 60% of the student sample prior to ASR, and only 46% of the student sample after ASR. Before treatment, the average ASR student was suspended 1.5 times and ran away from home 1.1 times, but has done neither since.

Link to Study

Kids do much better post program and are integrated back into their home lives and schooling.  Amazing success.

[Troll Control]

Trying to throw off the trail now?  Abondoned the industry shill piece by Behrens?  Now linking to a student paper to try to salvage something of your argument?  Very sad attempt.  Th bait and switch didn't work, Whooter.  A student paper is not an "independent study."  You've lost again and I know how frustrated you get, but this is just dishonest.

[Anonymous]

... a sampling bias could have potentially have had a large
impact on the results of this study, the excuses I heard not to participate had to do with
behavioral breakdowns as often as they had to do with too many after school
commitments and other measures of success ...

So basically out of 190 families scheduled to graduate, only 125 families graduated (65 did not).  So right there, there are 65 failures.  Out of those 125 who graduated, 25 could not be contacted. That leaves us with 25 unknown, 65 failures.  Out of the 100 left, only 30 responded.  Those 30 reported well due to sampling bias.  That leaves 30 successes, 25 unknown, 65 failures.  Out of the 70 remaining, half were still having "issues".  The other half I'll give you generously as "successes".  That leaves 65 successes (only 30 of which responded to a survey), 25 unknown, and 100 failures. (out of 190 scheduled to graduate).  Hardly stellar, even if the numbers are accurate.

[Troll Control]

Very interesting.  This marketing material gets pretty flimsy when you start to examine the data.  They leave out anything that might look negative.  This is not the way studies are done.

[Whooter]

... a sampling bias could have potentially have had a large
impact on the results of this study, the excuses I heard not to participate had to do with
behavioral breakdowns as often as they had to do with too many after school
commitments and other measures of success ...

So basically out of 190 families scheduled to graduate, only 125 families graduated (65 did not).  So right there, there are 65 failures.  Out of those 125 who graduated, 25 could not be contacted. That leaves us with 25 unknown, 65 failures.  Out of the 100 left, only 30 responded.  Those 30 reported well due to sampling bias.  That leaves 30 successes, 25 unknown, 65 failures.  Out of the 70 remaining, half were still having "issues".  The other half I'll give you generously as "successes".  That leaves 65 successes (only 30 of which responded to a survey), 25 unknown, and 100 failures. (out of 190 scheduled to graduate).  Hardly stellar, even if the numbers are accurate.

Thanks everyone, there is no better way to valid a study then to start using it as a reference for discussion.  Lets all take a closer look, shall we?

One hundred percent of parents and students that participated in this study said that they would recommend ASR to others. In addition, all participants were asked to rate how much impact ASR had on the different aspects of the child’s present behavior. With 1 being an extremely negative influence, and 7 being an extremely positive influence, the average parental rating across psychopathology scales was a 5.4 and across positive adaptation scales a 5.3. The average student ratings were likewise high, being both a 5.6 on psychopathology and positive adaptation scales.

[Troll Control]

Very interesting.  This marketing material gets pretty flimsy when you start to examine the data.  They leave out anything that might look negative.  This is not the way studies are done.

Yes, I worked for Canyon Research during this study and we were all told that the results had to be positive.  Many people quit because, as scientists, that's not the way we behave.  We should be data-driven, not trying to support predrawn conclusions.  This study was rigged before it ever started.

[Whooter]

Thanks everyone, there is no better way to valid a study then to start using it as a reference for discussion.  Lets all take a closer look, shall we?

One hundred percent of parents and students that participated in this study said that they would recommend ASR to others. In addition, all participants were asked to rate how much impact ASR had on the different aspects of the child’s present behavior. With 1 being an extremely negative influence, and 7 being an extremely positive influence, the average parental rating across psychopathology scales was a 5.4 and across positive adaptation scales a 5.3. The average student ratings were likewise high, being both a 5.6 on psychopathology and positive adaptation scales.

If the study was as useless as you say then you wouldnt be putting so much energy into dismissing it...lol

A few more results:

Substance abuse and dependence is significantly reduced, with results lasting through the 12-month follow-up. Students experienced substance-related pathology within the clinically significant and elevated range pretreatment, but symptoms fell within a normal range upon graduation. Most importantly, these results were sustained through the three and 12 month follow-up assessments.