Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Aspen Education Group
Programs In Behrens Study Charged with Abuse
Whooter:
Good points, DJ, Many times parents see the results of the childs improvement (in earlier phases) and want to remove the child from the program early. The final phase of the program is focused on getting the child ready for transition home and solidifying the changes that were made. So the child that leaves early may report the same results as those who complete the program (because the results are the same)… or the child and parents may under-report problems to reinforce their feelings that the child has improved enough to leave, if they are taking their child out against the programs advice.
These are the biases that can exist in studies of this kind and was pointed out by Behrens. This also shows that Behren was being open and honest with the data results and reporting and not just a puppet of Aspen Education for marketing purposes.
This is also why many studies will focus only on those students who complete the program and discarding the data of those who leave early.
I tried to point out to you that the study wasn't just a polished marketing tool for Aspen Education. Once you get into it you will see that there are pitfalls and downs sides to Residential Treatment along with the benefits. This is the strength of doing studies. As more studies are done we can begin to better solidify the results found here with Behrens Study and start to see the mean leangth of time it takes for a child to improve and solidify the improvement. Maybe the studies will show that the program length should be shortened from 14 months to 8 months.
Good discussion.
...
Troll Control:
Really, if you by Behrens' results, your kid doesn't need to spend more than a single day in a program to have the same results as a kid who finishes it. My question then becomes why send your kid at all? If they get full benefit in one day then they surely shouldn't spend any more than that.
This study may have been believable if there were a control group and a follow up, but, unfortunately, it has neither. Also unfortunately, Aspen presented it as "proof Aspen programs work," when in fact, no such thing is proven at all. That is shameless lying to promote its programs, an issue that even Ed Cons openly admit and discuss on their own websites while advising parents to simply "avoid Aspen Education programs."
Bottom line? This study has no weight, is biased, unreviewed, unpublished, no control group and no follow up. Despite these massive failures, Aspen holds it out as proof the programs in it "help kids," even though those same programs have been formally charged with abuse, killed children via abuse/neglect and were shut down by authorities for systemic child abuse.
All these facts add up and are reflected in Aspen Education's sliding income and worsening care standards, according to those in the business of referring kids to programs. Parents would do well to simply avoid Aspen programs as many are now suggesting - even people who make fees for sending kids to Aspen.
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---Really, if you by Behrens' results, your kid doesn't need to spend more than a single day in a program to have the same results as a kid who finishes it. My question then becomes why send your kid at all? If they get full benefit in one day then they surely shouldn't spend any more than that.
--- End quote ---
I agree if a child spends one day there and has the same results as a child who spends 14 months then the length of time should be shortened to 24 hours. But I didnt see this in the study. What I read was that the kids reported similar results whether they were released early or completed the program. Like I mentioned most of the work is completed in earlier phases and the final phase is used to prepare the child for release and solidify the work that has been done.
...
Troll Control:
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---Really, if you by Behrens' results, your kid doesn't need to spend more than a single day in a program to have the same results as a kid who finishes it. My question then becomes why send your kid at all? If they get full benefit in one day then they surely shouldn't spend any more than that.
--- End quote ---
I agree if a child spends one day there and has the same results as a child who spends 14 months then the length of time should be shortened to 24 hours. But I didnt see this in the study. What I read was that the kids reported similar results whether they were released early or completed the program. Like I mentioned most of the work is completed in earlier phases and the final phase is used to prepare the child for release and solidify the work that has been done.
...
--- End quote ---
Right, no matter how early they left the results were similar. Why stay more than a day then?
The final phase isn't assessed in this work because there was no follow up to check the results at any time after the day of discharge. However, no matter how long they stayed, they didn't do any better than any other kids, so why stay? There's no data in this work to suggest any benefit whatsover from staying longer than a day. Let's face the facts. This work is hokey at best.
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---Really, if you by Behrens' results, your kid doesn't need to spend more than a single day in a program to have the same results as a kid who finishes it. My question then becomes why send your kid at all? If they get full benefit in one day then they surely shouldn't spend any more than that.
--- End quote ---
I agree if a child spends one day there and has the same results as a child who spends 14 months then the length of time should be shortened to 24 hours. But I didnt see this in the study. What I read was that the kids reported similar results whether they were released early or completed the program. Like I mentioned most of the work is completed in earlier phases and the final phase is used to prepare the child for release and solidify the work that has been done.
...
--- End quote ---
Right, no matter how early they left the results were similar. Why stay more than a day then?
The final phase isn't assessed in this work because there was no follow up to check the results at any time after the day of discharge. However, no matter how long they stayed, they didn't do any better than any other kids, so why stay? There's no data in this work to suggest any benefit whatsover from staying longer than a day. Let's face the facts. This work is hokey at best.
--- End quote ---
By final phase, I meant the last phase of the child stay at the program. If you read the study and conclude that a child who spends a day receives the same benefit as those who spent months then that is your choice.
I think the main thing is that people start reading the study and getting out what they will on an individual basis. Its a big step for you to read the study and to start discussing the results. So I take this as a plus (even though we disagree on the findings).
I think we can both agree that if this were just a polished marketing campaign then the study would not reflect anything negative as you have pointed out.
...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version