Author Topic: Independent Study Shows Success. (Read 25842 times)

Dysfunction Junction · « **Reply #135 on:** December 13, 2010, 01:12:10 PM »

Fine, we all agree you are lying about it. Thanks for admitting it anyway.

Take note, readers, Whooter admitted he lies all the time, so be sure to challenge every detail of his phony stories to get to the truth.

Whooter · « **Reply #136 on:** December 13, 2010, 01:13:30 PM »

Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction"

Fine, we all agree you are lying about it. Thanks for admitting it anyway.

Take note, readers, Whooter admitted he lies all the time, so be sure to challenge every detail of his phony stories to get to the truth.

Okay lets move on.

...

Whooter · « **Reply #137 on:** December 13, 2010, 01:22:52 PM »

Taking a look at another link provided by DJ in an earlier post:

Link

“Until now, our industry has relied on anecdotal evidence and individual success stories to substantiate the outstanding work that has been done by high-quality, private residential treatment programs throughout the United States,” said Jan Moss, executive director of the National Association of Therapeutic Schools and Programs, a national organization representing programs and professionals assisting young people with emotional and behavioral difficulties. “This research demonstrates what we’ve always believed – that research-driven and evidence-based private residential programs can help turn around teens in trouble. This information will give new hope to thousands of families who have been struggling with the difficult decision of how to best help a child.”

...

Dysfunction Junction · « **Reply #138 on:** December 13, 2010, 02:44:59 PM »

Let's clear up some more disinformation. That post was someone else's and I quoted it. I did not write it. Whooter knows this, but he's trying to spin things as if "we all agree" which we do not. Just a heads up for the readers. That is a quote from another poster and not me.

Whooter · « **Reply #139 on:** December 13, 2010, 03:06:21 PM »

Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction"

Let's clear up some more disinformation. That post was someone else's and I quoted it. I did not write it. Whooter knows this, but he's trying to spin things as if "we all agree" which we do not. Just a heads up for the readers. That is a quote from another poster and not me.

You are correct, DJ. "guest4NKQD" who posted a few links to various sites outside of fornits. You re-posted that post in this thread. These are the links that I am referring to. Thanks for clearing that up. I apologize for the confusion.

...

Whooter · « **Reply #140 on:** December 13, 2010, 03:09:51 PM »

Most adolescents improve during residential treatment. Though reported outcomes vary widely,
ranging from about 25 % to 80%, reviews suggest that 60%-80% of adolescents improve during
residential treatment (Curry, 1991; Curtis et al., 2001; Epstein, 2004; Hair, 2005; Wells, 1991).
The following factors have been shown to predict outcome: age, intelligence, degree of pathology,
stability of the discharge placement, aftercare participation, and the absence of externalizing
behaviors (Connor, Miller, Cunninghan, & Melloni, 2002; Epstein, 2004; Gorske, Srebalus,
Walls, 2003; Wells, 1991) Specifically, research suggests that adolescent females with high IQ,
less severe dysfunction, acute and late onset, better academic ability, absence of learning
disorders, low levels of behavioral problems, and high levels of internalizing problems tend to
have positive outcomes. Some researchers have concluded that residential treatment is best for
higher functioning, less vulnerable youth (Connor et al., 2002). One recent study that sampled
from 17 public residential treatment programs, found that age and race predicted outcomes
(Lyons, McCulloch, & Romansky, 2006), with mid-aged adolescents and African American
adolescents having relatively worse outcomes. It bears repeating that the degree to which the
findings within this corpus of research apply top r i va t e residential treatment programs is largely
unknown.

...

shaggys · « **Reply #141 on:** December 13, 2010, 04:59:43 PM »

I thought this study had already been exposed as hogwash a couple of days ago. What are you doing Whoot? Just because you have a superfly cool new avatar does not give you the right to come here and beat this dead horse.
BTW will somebody PM me with an avatar i can use that will put Whooters to shame. This is ridiculous.

Whooter · « **Reply #142 on:** December 13, 2010, 05:02:28 PM »

Quote from: "shaggys"

I thought this study had already been exposed as hogwash a couple of days ago.

Apparently fonits is the only forum which believes this. So a few people are out trying to drum up support. Until then I guess we need to stick with the study as being valid.

Quote

What are you doing Whoot? Just because you have a superfly cool new avatar does not give you the right to come here and beat this dead horse.
BTW will somebody PM me with an avatar i can use that will put Whooters to shame. This is ridiculous.

Thanks shaggys.

...

Gonzotherapy · « **Reply #143 on:** December 13, 2010, 05:41:17 PM »

As I am waiting for a response back from the review board, I think that a few things still can be said about how this study was conducted and what the information she has presented here actually means. I do not think in any way that the questions asked and the answers recorded are wrong, I don't beleive that she completely shirked her medical duty to present accurate information.

The real problems contained within the study is the absence of data from further down the road. As most of us who have gone through these programs recognize, the damage done isn't apparent for several years following discharge. I know personally that I thought the program I was in was good for me for several years following my release; and this of course was a program that was shut down, along with many of its sister programs in the late 90s early 2000s, for extremely abusive conditions.

Also she made the assumption that teens and parents of teens released against program recommendations lied in their responses and underreported problems because of the confrontations they had with staff about early release. Basically she is saying that these parents and teens are liars because her original hypotheses was incorrect. (great science!!!)

If you were to go that far in making that assumption, I believe you would also have to assume that graduates of the program are liars as well. I mean who has greater motivation to lie about their progress than the person whos freedom depends on it? How many convicts tell the parole board, "Hey man, as soon as I get out of here I'm gonna kill, rape, and steal the first chance I get."

The data is not the problem here, it's the lack of complete data, and some of the inferred evidence. Also, the methodology of programs is to only move up and graduate the kids who would score higher on these specific tests. You will not graduate a program without convincing the program that you are "all better now."

If I was to take a thousand kids and wanted to change their behavior, any behavior. Say I wanted all these kids to eat a pound of brussel sprouts every day; if I took these kids and beat them every day unless they showed their love for the sprouts, and forced them to eat brussell sprouts and tell me how much they love them, and tell me how great brussell sprouts are. If I told them that until they could show me that they really loved brussell sprouts, they would be stuck in my crazy brussell sprout camp. And I spent a year with these kids watching their every move, making sure they didn't write home and talk bad about the sprouts, or tell anyone else they didn't like them, or ever gag on their sprouts. And if they did they would get a beating and be back to sprout level one, I guarantee you I would have some sprout lovin' little bastards.

Now if I did a study and documented who didn't like sprouts at the beginning and who didn't like sprouts at the end, I would get positive results, does that mean my methods are ok? Does that mean that years down the road many of these kids aren't going to have a giant sprout chasing them around in their nightmares.

This study doesn't prove anything that psychology hasn't known for many years, if you encourage one behavior and discourage another, behavior will change. What the study doesn't cover, but should if it wants any kind of real recognition, is what are the longterm effects of this sort of behavior modification. Is it a good way to change a behavior, ask any child psychologist, or even a dog trainer for that matter, positive reinforcement works much better than discipline.

Whooter · « **Reply #144 on:** December 13, 2010, 06:15:50 PM »

Quote from: "Gonzotherapy"

As I am waiting for a response back from the review board, I think that a few things still can be said about how this study was conducted and what the information she has presented here actually means. I do not think in any way that the questions asked and the answers recorded are wrong, I don't beleive that she completely shirked her medical duty to present accurate information.

The real problems contained within the study is the absence of data from further down the road. As most of us who have gone through these programs recognize, the damage done isn't apparent for several years following discharge. I know personally that I thought the program I was in was good for me for several years following my release; and this of course was a program that was shut down, along with many of its sister programs in the late 90s early 2000s, for extremely abusive conditions.

Also she made the assumption that teens and parents of teens released against program recommendations lied in their responses and underreported problems because of the confrontations they had with staff about early release. Basically she is saying that these parents and teens are liars because her original hypotheses was incorrect. (great science!!!)

If you were to go that far in making that assumption, I believe you would also have to assume that graduates of the program are liars as well. I mean who has greater motivation to lie about their progress than the person whos freedom depends on it? How many convicts tell the parole board, "Hey man, as soon as I get out of here I'm gonna kill, rape, and steal the first chance I get."

The data is not the problem here, it's the lack of complete data, and some of the inferred evidence. Also, the methodology of programs is to only move up and graduate the kids who would score higher on these specific tests. You will not graduate a program without convincing the program that you are "all better now."

If I was to take a thousand kids and wanted to change their behavior, any behavior. Say I wanted all these kids to eat a pound of brussel sprouts every day; if I took these kids and beat them every day unless they showed their love for the sprouts, and forced them to eat brussell sprouts and tell me how much they love them, and tell me how great brussell sprouts are. If I told them that until they could show me that they really loved brussell sprouts, they would be stuck in my crazy brussell sprout camp. And I spent a year with these kids watching their every move, making sure they didn't write home and talk bad about the sprouts, or tell anyone else they didn't like them, or ever gag on their sprouts. And if they did they would get a beating and be back to sprout level one, I guarantee you I would have some sprout lovin' little bastards.

Now if I did a study and documented who didn't like sprouts at the beginning and who didn't like sprouts at the end, I would get positive results, does that mean my methods are ok? Does that mean that years down the road many of these kids aren't going to have a giant sprout chasing them around in their nightmares.

This study doesn't prove anything that psychology hasn't known for many years, if you encourage one behavior and discourage another, behavior will change. What the study doesn't cover, but should if it wants any kind of real recognition, is what are the longterm effects of this sort of behavior modification. Is it a good way to change a behavior, ask any child psychologist, or even a dog trainer for that matter, positive reinforcement works much better than discipline.

Thats a great perspective, Gonzo, I like the Brussel Sprout analogy! I think we can agree that we would like to see how long these behaviors last. I disagree with your thoughts that positive reinforcement is not used. I believe this varies from program to program. Some use positive reinforcement, others use discipline and still others a combination of both or harsh consequences.
I know for sure that not all the kids feel pressured to say the right thing on the study, but I am sure some do. It all comes down to Behavior Modification and how long lasting it is. I think that depends on many factors, the environment the kids go back to, their attitudes and parents' attitudes towards a commitment to lasting change.

As the child psychologists see these changes first hand and witness the turn around in the children it will further reinforce that these programs are effective and predominantly non-punitive behavior modification can create positive change in adolescence.

...

RobertBruce · « **Reply #145 on:** December 13, 2010, 08:12:02 PM »

Quote from: "Whooter"

I think everyone has seen you point, DJ, myself included. Lets get back on topic which is the study.

...

Why bother? We've all agreed that until Gonzo hears something back suggesting otherwise, the marketing tool will be considered invalid, and junk science. There's nothing futher to discuss until then.

Whooter · « **Reply #146 on:** December 23, 2010, 10:24:04 AM »

Quote from: "RobertBruce"

Quote from: "Whooter"
I think everyone has seen you point, DJ, myself included. Lets get back on topic which is the study.

...

Why bother? We've all agreed that until Gonzo hears something back suggesting otherwise, the marketing tool will be considered invalid, and junk science. There's nothing futher to discuss until then.

One of the strengths of an open forum is that we can present studies and data, provide links and then decide for ourselves whether or not we want to believe it or not and individually decide how much credence we apply to each item. We dont need to follow a majority opinion or be pressured to conform to a group consensus if we chose not to.

I am of the opinion that the study is valid, but I always keep my mind open to others opinion and input. So I think we should keep the discussion going for those of use who feel the study has validity and if for no other reason to at least keep people informed and up to date. I think this is one of those areas where can all agree.

Link

...

Anne Bonney · « **Reply #147 on:** December 23, 2010, 11:06:31 AM »

The title to this thread is "Independent Study Shows Success". A study of Aspen Ed bought and paid for by Aspen Ed isn't exactly independent.

heretik · « **Reply #148 on:** December 23, 2010, 11:20:56 AM »

Quote from: "Anne Bonney"

The title to this thread is "Independent Study Shows Success". A study of Aspen Ed bought and paid for by Aspen Ed isn't exactly independent.

Thank you, Anne.

Anne Bonney · « **Reply #149 on:** December 23, 2010, 11:24:01 AM »

Quote from: "Whooter"

I am of the opinion that the study is valid,

I'm shocked....truly shocked.

Quote from: "Whooter"

but I always keep my mind open to others opinion and input.

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Fornits
Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry