Date:
This is a comprehensive, long-term prevention program that seeks to prevent chronic and severe conduct problems in high-risk children in first through 10th grades. The program is rated Promising. Treatment group children demonstrated a statistically significantly fewer number of conduct problems and improvement in social cognition, compared with control group children. However, there were no statistically significant effects on academic progress or social competence.
A Promising rating implies that implementing the program may result in the intended outcome(s).
This program's rating is based on evidence that includes either 1) one study conducted in multiple sites; or 2) two or three studies, each conducted at a different site. Learn about how we make the multisite determination.
A Promising rating implies that implementing the program may result in the intended outcome(s).
This program's rating is based on evidence that includes either 1) one study conducted in multiple sites; or 2) two or three studies, each conducted at a different site. Learn about how we make the multisite determination.
Program Goals
Fast Track is a comprehensive, long-term prevention program that aims to prevent chronic and severe conduct problems in high-risk children. It is based on the view that antisocial behavior stems from the interaction of multiple influences such as school, home, and the individual. The main goals of the program are to increase communication and bonds between and among these three domains; to enhance children’s social, cognitive, and problem-solving skills; to improve peer relationships; and ultimately to decrease disruptive behavior at home and in school.
Target Population
The program targets children identified in kindergarten for disruptive behavior and poor peer relations. The program can be implemented in rural and urban areas for boys and girls of varying ethnicities, socioeconomic backgrounds, and family compositions.
Program Components
Fast Track extends from 1st through 10th grades, with particularly intensive interventions during the transitions at school entry and from elementary to middle school. The primary intervention is designed for all youths in a school setting. The PATHS (for Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies) curriculum was revised for use in the Fast Track program. In addition to this universal intervention, Fast Track includes an intervention component for children considered high risk. This includes academic tutoring, parent groups, child social-skills training, and home visits. The most intense phase of intervention took place in the first grade year for each of three successive cohorts.
Program Theory
The developmental model guiding this project indicates that an effective prevention program would address classroom, school risk, and family risk factors, including communication between parents and schools (Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group 2002).
Study 1
Social Cognition
Treatment group children demonstrated higher levels of social cognition such as social problem-solving skills, compared with control group children, at the end of grade 3. This difference was statistically significant.
Social Competence
There was no statistically significant difference between treatment group children and control group children in social competence at the end of grade 3.
Parenting Behavior
Parents of treatment group children demonstrated more positive parenting behavior such as less endorsement of physical punishment, compared with parents of control group children, at the end of grade 3. This difference was statistically significant.
Academic Progress
There was no statistically significant difference between treatment group children and control group children in academic progress at the end of grade 3.
Conduct Problems
The evaluation by the Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (2002) found that treatment group children who participated in Fast Track had fewer conduct problems according to school records, compared with control group children, at the end of grade 3. This difference was statistically significant.
Study
The Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (2002) evaluated the comprehensive Fast Track program during its first 3 years. Subjects attended 54 schools in four geographic sites serving neighborhoods identified as high risk on the basis of crime and poverty statistics. The schools at each geographic site were divided into two sets, matched on size, ethnic composition, achievement scores, and percentage of free lunch recipients. Half of the schools were randomly assigned to a treatment group; the other half served as the control group. A multistaged screening included all kindergarten children in three successive cohorts at all four schools. The screening included teacher ratings of disruptive behavior followed by parent ratings of child behavior at home. More than 9,000 kindergarteners were screened, and those who scored in the top 40 percent on a teacher scale of conduct problems were screened further, using parent-reported behavior scores.
Children with the highest composite screen scores were selected to form a sample size of 891 (treatment group = 445; control group = 446). The sample was 51 percent African American, 47 percent European American, and 2 percent other ethnicities. Only 32 percent of the participants were from middle-class families. Analysis of demographic and behavioral variables at baseline indicated no significant differences between the two groups. A normative sample of 387 children was also followed to serve as a basis of comparison with the high-risk sample.
A curriculum in social and emotional development revised from the Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies (PATHS) curriculum was implemented in grades 1, 2, and 3 at the treatment group schools. The Fast Track program also included parent training, home visiting, academic tutoring, and child social skills training along with additional parent and child group training that occurred weekly in grade 1, biweekly in grade 2, and monthly in grade 3. After grade 1, tutoring and other individualized support components of the program were offered if individual children and families met a risk-based criterion for each component. A Fast Track Educational Coordinator provided support and consultation for teachers and monitored implementation of the PATHS curriculum at intervention schools.
Data was collected from parents, teachers, and children each summer following grades 1, 2, and 3. Outcomes at grade 3 included conduct problems, social cognition, academic progress, social competence, and parenting behavior. These outcomes were measured through school records, peer nominations, home visits, and questionnaires. No subgroup analyses were conducted.
These sources were used in the development of the program profile:
Study
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. 2002. “Evaluation of the First 3 Years of the Fast Track Prevention Trial With Children at High Risk for Adolescent Conduct Problems.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 30(1):19–36.
These sources were used in the development of the program profile:
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. 1999. “Initial Impact of the Fast Track Prevention Trial for Conduct Problems: 2. Classroom Effects.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 67(5):648–57.
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. 2010. “Fast Track Intervention Effects on Youth Arrests and Delinquency.” Journal of Experimental Criminology 6:131–57.
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. 2011. “The Effects of the Fast Track Preventive Intervention on the Development of Conduct Disorder Across Childhood.” Child Development 82(1):331–45.
Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:
Designed to foster the development of five interrelated sets of cognitive, affective, and behavioral competencies, in order to provide a foundation for better adjustment and academic performance in students, which can result in more positive social behaviors, fewer conduct problems, and less emotional distress. The practice was rated Effective in reducing students’ conduct problems and emotional stress.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors - Multiple juvenile problem/at-risk behaviors |
|
|
Mental Health & Behavioral Health - Internalizing behavior |
This practice consists of programs designed to increase self-control and reduce child behavior problems (e.g., conduct problems, antisocial behavior, and delinquency) with children up to age 10. Program types include social skills development, cognitive coping strategies, training/role playing, and relaxation training. This practice is rated Effective for improving self-control and reducing delinquency.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
|
Crime & Delinquency - Multiple crime/offense types |
|
|
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors - Self-Control |
This practice includes programs that seek to provide families and parents with training and skills to help promote their children’s physical, mental, and social skills. The practice is rated Effective for reducing child problem behaviors for children whose families participated in early family/parent training programs, compared with control group children whose families did not participate in programming.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
|
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors - Multiple juvenile problem/at-risk behaviors |
This practice involves the promotion of social and social-cognitive competencies to prevent future antisocial behavior. The practice is rated Effective for preventing overall antisocial behavior, aggression, delinquency, oppositional and disruptive behaviors, and general antisocial behavior.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
|
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors - Overall antisocial behavior |
|
|
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors - Aggression |
|
|
Crime & Delinquency - Multiple crime/offense types |
|
|
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors - Oppositional/disruptive behaviors |
|
|
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors - General antisocial behaviors |
Age: 5 - 15
Gender: Male, Female
Race/Ethnicity: White, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander
Geography: Urban Rural
Setting (Delivery): School
Program Type: Academic Skills Enhancement, Classroom Curricula, Conflict Resolution/Interpersonal Skills, Parent Training, School/Classroom Environment
Current Program Status: Active
Box 90545, Duke University 503B Keller RCB 5246, 8888 University Drive
Kenneth A. Dodge
Professor
Fast Track
Durham, NC 27708
United States
Website
Email
Fast Track, Child Study Center
PA 16802
United States
Website
Email
Robert J. McMahon
Professor
Department of Psychology, Simon Fraser University
United States
Website
Email