Providing high-quality education in juvenile corrections: Next steps.

Self Cite

To promote the safety and well-being of youth who are incarcerated, the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education identified the importance of evidence-based mental health interventions. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize and synthesize intervention research focusing on the mental health of youth who are incarcerated since the publication of Guiding Principles for Providing High-Quality Education in Juvenile Justice Secure Care Settings. ProQuest and Ebsco databases were searched to identify relevant published studies from 2015 to 2020. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies mainly focused on cognitive-behavior interventions and included the following outcome domains: symptoms, functioning, personal growth, and multiple domains. To evaluate study quality, modified versions of Gersten et al.'s (2005) group design and Mulcahy et al.'s (2016) single-case design quality indicators were used.Of concern are the small number of studies, methodological limitations within studies, and lack of a common intervention and outcomes of focus that limit individual study conclusions and evaluation across studies. In particular, studies rarely included necessary information, such as participant mental health characteristics, interventionist training or qualifications, intervention details, and/or measures/reports of treatment integrity. For the Guiding Principles to be realized, one key issue is for government funding to target high-quality mental health interventions in juvenile correctional facilities within identified target areas. Public Policy Relevance StatementNo systematic literature review has addressed progress on mental health interventions since the publication of the Guiding Principles for Providing High-Quality Education in Juvenile Justice Secure Care Settings. This review brings to light the urgent need for high-quality research that continues to consider effects on symptoms, functioning, and personal growth as outcomes, as well as additional short-and long-term outcomes. While some of the reviewed interventions appear promising in the secure care setting and are based on solid research, additional studies are needed to clearly chart a path forward for research, policy, and practice. aaa T he core philosophy of the juvenile correctional system in the U.S. is that youth are qualitatively different than adults and they can be educated and rehabilitated (Gagnon & Barber, 2019). This view has been substantiated by neuroscience (Steinberg, 2009) and supported via court decisions (e.g., Graham v. Florida, 2010;Roper v. Simmons, 2005). However, the promise of education and rehabilitation has too often been unfulfilled. In response, the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice (U.S. DOE/DOJ) collaborated to publish the groundbreaking Guiding Principles for Providing High-Quality Education in Juvenile Justice Secure Care Settings (2014). While providing a framework for practice, continued research is necessary within each of the principles to provide further guidance to practitioners.Consider...

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental health interventions for youth who are incarcerated: A systematic review of literature.

Gagnon¹,

Benedick²,

Mason-Williams³

2022

Self Cite

“…At the first stage, we located all research aligned with the Guiding Principles. In this section, we summarize the multiple-gated search process, honing in on the process for identifying studies on intervening to improve behavior among incarcerated youth (Principle I intervention studies focused on improving mental health are described in Gagnon et al, 2022). Figure 1 illustrates the process in its entirety.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To great extent, the articles identified were published within a year of the original search, making it likely the additional articles had not yet been indexed by Ebsco or ProQuest. This process is described in greater detail in Gagnon et al (2022). Article titles and abstracts were reviewed for the following journals: This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

Section: Additional Search Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interventions addressing incarcerated youth behavior: A review of literature.

Gagnon¹,

Ruiz²,

Mathur³

et al. 2022

Self Cite

address this issue in Principle 1, which asserts the importance of ensuring the safety and well-being of youth who are incarcerated. To address the research progress since publication of the Guiding Principles, ProQuest and Ebsco were systematically searched and a hand search was conducted. Ten intervention studies were identified that addressed youth behavior. The studies primarily employed a single subject research design and focused on increasing youth compliance and/or decreasing disruptive behaviors. Reviewed studies provide support for providing clear behavioral expectations and reminders, praise, and reinforcement, as well as cognitive-behavioral interventions. However, methodological limitations, including the lack of treatment integrity in nine of the studies, limit conclusions. Public Policy Relevance StatementThe Guiding Principles for Providing High-Quality Education in Juvenile Justice Secure Care Settings offered a framework for researchers to ensure intervention studies are conducted that focused on the behavioral interventions necessary to ensure a safe and healthy juvenile correctional environment. The current systematic review reveals important research is being conducted on increasing youth compliance and decreasing disruptive behaviors. However, researchers must be provided access to facilities and conduct highquality single subject and group design research in juvenile correctional facilities that also addresses such issues as youth lack of social skills, socially acceptable self-assertion, and ability to cooperate with peers. aaa This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

“…To identify research studies aligned with Principle IV of the Guiding Principles document, a multistage search was conducted (See Gagnon et al, 2022) Simultaneously, we hand-searched 20 peer-reviewed research journals for additional relevant articles to include. Author four utilized their expertise in JJ research to identify the 20 journals for the hand search and did title searches in the selected journals to identify articles for inclusion.…”

Section: Methods Search Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recruitment, employment, and retention of qualified education staff; Principle IV. Rigorous and relevant curricula; and Principle V. Formal processes and procedures to ensure collaboration across child-serving systems and that promote youth reentry (See Gagnon et al, 2022). Eight articles were identified as pertaining to Principle IV (n = 8) and reviewed.…”

Section: Methods Search Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Curriculum, instruction, and promoting college and career readiness for incarcerated youth: A literature review.

Hunter¹,

Clark²,

Mason-Williams

et al. 2022

Self Cite

Access to high-quality curriculum and instruction is essential for all youth incarcerated in juvenile corrections facilities. In a landmark 2014 collaboration between the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice Guiding Principles for Providing High-Quality Education in Juvenile Justice Secure Care Settings were established. Principle independent variable (IV) identified the importance of access to rigorous and relevant curricula and evidence-based instruction that promotes college- and career-readiness. To explore research progress since publication of the Guiding Principles, a systematic review of research was conducted. The review identified eight peer-reviewed studies relevant to curriculum and instruction published since 2014. Employing a variety of research designs, the studies focused on literacy (n = 5) and instruction (n = 3). Quality indicators, based on modified forms of Mulcahy et al. (2016) single case design, Gersten et al. (2005) group design, and Miles et al. (2019) qualitative standards, were used to evaluate the studies. Results revealed a lack of replicable information pertinent to participants and intervention, as well as a lack of fidelity. Of grave concern is that only four of the participants included across all studies were female. Research that adheres to quality indicators, is described with replicable precision, and is representative of females is needed.