Implementation and Evaluation of the Empower Youth Program

Abstract

The goal of this research was to implement and evaluate the Empower Youth Program-a holistic, peer support, and education intervention aimed at enabling middle school-aged adolescents to take greater control over their health through improving self-care resources (SCR). Empower is based on the Mind, Body, Spirit Program developed by Rodgers and colleagues and tested on adults. An experimental pretest and posttest design was used to compare outcomes for two randomly assigned groups. Forty middle school participants completed measures of academic and emotional SCR before and after the 9-week intervention. It was hypothesized that after controlling for strength of preexisting SCR, participants who received the intervention would show greater improvement in self-reports after completing the program compared to participants receiving usual school services. The differences in scores between groups are clinically meaningful but not statistically significant. Future studies with larger samples may be able to detect significant contributions of the Empower program.

Application of the Modified Erikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory: 25 Years in Review

“…In research with early adolescents, relationships were found among psychosocial attributes, and both cognitive and combined cognitive and psychological health variables were found (Bray, 2005). Galvin Nash (2003, 2007) studied middle school children from a racially and ethnically diverse, low income area and noted they had lower MEPSI scores ( M = 3.54), particularly in their Trust scores ( M = 3.41) which may have influenced the ineffective intervention results. In studies of young adults, learning disabled students scored lower on both coping and psychosocial measures compared with non-learning disabled students (Thomas, 2004).…”

“…Comments from some of the researchers have suggested that item analysis and examination of awkwardly worded items is also needed. Hearn (1993) in a study of older adults and Nash (2003, 2007), in a study of adolescents, commented that their subjects had difficulty with the wording of some items. Studies by De Haan and MacDermid (1994) and MacDermid et al (1996; which used the same modified version of the Generativity subscale as a measure of Global Generativity) reported that they needed to drop one item from the subscale, “It is more important to work on behalf of those I care about than to work just for myself,” to raise the alpha to .62 and .63 in their different studies.…”

“…Most were financially comfortable. Those studies that looked at more diverse populations noted the importance of considering psychosocial development to tailor interventions (Nash, 2003, 2007) and to better understand the personal resources that can assist individuals to move out of situations like homelessness (Caton et al, 2005).…”

“…Table 1 provides a brief review of the projects and findings relevant to the MEPSI/psychosocial development and is organized according to age groups and/or the issues studied. These include adolescents, young adults, adults in challenging situations Nash (2003Nash ( , 2007 Minority middle school students MEPSI scores provided a profile of participants suggesting a less than optimal resolution of psychosocial developmental tasks, particularly Trust vs. Mistrust, may have affected the program's effectiveness and may be useful for tailoring interventions.…”

“…Two of the studies of older adults (Curl, 1992;Sachar, 2004) had excellent aggregate (total) score reliabilities (.91 and .93), but the subscale reliabilities were more in an "acceptable" range, whereas 1 to 2 reliabilities (depending on the study) were in an "of Concern/Unacceptable" range (.49-.57). Bray (2005) .95 Nash (2003Nash ( , 2007 .…”