Process Communications Model - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Process Communications Model PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 73025-ZDc1Z


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Process Communications Model


Prairie View's organizational consulting, training, and research division ... Strong school board pressure for hard-line fear-based tactics such as drug dogs ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:32
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 82
Provided by: out8


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Process Communications Model

School-based interventions to reduce drug/alcohol
use Evidence-based practice in the trenches 316-284-6446
Who is Prairie View?
  • Non-profit Community Mental Health Center
  • Open since 1954
  • 450 employees, serves 12,000 patients/year
  • Full range of services, including inpatient
    hospital, outpatient therapy, school for at-risk
    youth, adolescent residential program,
    community-based outreach, housing
  • 15 years of clinical outcomes research
  • 14 years of adventure-based programming with
    inpatient, outpatient, and non-clinical
    populations of all ages
  • 6 years of outcomes research in adventure
  • Partnering with Project Adventure to study
    outcomes tools, provide open enrollment
    trainings, and study behavioral management

Who is Process Solutions?
  • Prairie Views organizational consulting,
    training, and research division
  • Vision statement Renewing Spirit, Discovering
    Strengths, Pursuing Excellence
  • Three core components
  • Process Communication Model (PCM)
  • Adventure-based learning models
  • Self-Efficacy outcomes measurement

  • Setting the stage
  • Getting the contract making the case,
    connecting the dots
  • Research design and data collection
  • Results so far
  • Lessons learned
  • Discussion

Prior experience
  • Worked with Haysville Alternative school during
    2005-2006 school years experimenting with
    combination of adventure course and school-based
    adventure groups.
  • Collected outcomes data with control groups
    showing effectiveness in raising self-efficacy
  • Had begun capacity building with alternative
    school staff to conduct school-based groups

The big one!
  • Haysville school district taking bids on
    drug-alcohol reduction programs
  • Already had a liking for adventure-based methods
  • Strong school board pressure for hard-line
    fear-based tactics such as drug dogs
  • School advisory council allowed us to make a
    presentation, submit a bid

Making our case
  • Escalating drug and alcohol use, along with the
    negative health and societal consequences
  • Increasing communication gap between youth and
    adult culture
  • Changes in socio-economic profile and gaps
  • Increasingly fragmented family and community
    support systems
  • More and more responsibility shifted to schools
    to help deal with the problems
  • So many things interfering with the learning

Our hope
  • Reducing drug and alcohol use/abuse among youth
  • Making school a place where youth are developing
    the skills necessary to become healthy,
    contributing adults
  • Feeling like we are really connecting with kids,
    making a difference in their lives
  • Modeling effective approaches, where others can
    come to observe and learn

Wheres the problem? Wheres the solution?
  • Attitudes, values, and beliefs about student drug
    and alcohol use
  • From your perspective, whats the solution to all
    this nonsense?

How did you answer?
  • Nurturing ___
  • Values ___
  • Information ___
  • Fun ___
  • Direction ___
  • Excitement ___

Source Pauley, Bradley Pauley (2003). Heres
How to Reach Me. Brooks Publishing
Less than 20 of the youth account for more than
80 of the problems
Toward No Drug Abuse (TND)
  • SAMHSA Model program status
  • Lists individual, family, school, and community
    protective factors
  • 1/3 of the factors relate to having adequate
  • The remaining 2/3 relate to developing social and
    emotional intelligence

CTC Survey Data for Haysville
  • Drug/Alcohol use above county and state averages
    on most indicators
  • Below averages on protective factors
  • Above averages on risk factors
  • Getting bad press
  • Of the 17 peer/individual, family, and school
    risk factors, 14 relate to social/emotional
    intelligence process factors, i.e. patterns of
    getting motivational needs met in unhealthy ways,
    failure to engage or relate effectively, or
    mismatch between environmental demands and coping

So what are the keys?
  • Self-awareness - understanding what makes me tick
    and stop ticking effectively
  • Responsibility - Skill-building in meeting my
    needs in healthy ways, recognizing and reversing
    negative attention patterns
  • Belief in my ability to act on what I know and
  • Hope that my effort will get me somewhere
  • Support - peer, school, family, and community
    support for positive change

  • A persons belief in their ability to act in a
    manner appropriate and necessary to deal with
    various situations (Bandura)
  • Social/Emotional skills in action
  • The difference between what you know, and what
    you do with what you know.
  • With regard to its impact on health and
    wellness, positive behavior change, and
    overcoming obstacles, self-efficacy is the most
    well-researched and strongly supported construct
    currently available.

For a glimpse into the world of self-efficacy, go
  • Differs from attitudes, values and beliefs about
    others or situations self-efficacy is focused
    on personal capabilities.
  • Transcends age, gender, type of problem, or
    socioeconomic status.
  • Self-efficacy is necessary for a person to act on
    what they know or learn.
  • It connects a persons innate gifts, resources
    and potential with the demands of the real world
  • Is NOT self-esteem (see work by Roy Baumeister)
  • Strongly connected to failing forward and

Process Solutions knows what works
  • Prairie View has a 52 year history in building
    self-efficacy. We are in the change business.
  • 14 year history in measuring outcomes in mental
    health and substance abuse treatment exploring
    the most effective approaches.
  • Just received Lattner Foundation grant to advance
    our work in outcomes
  • 13 year history in adventure-based programming
  • Present nationally at conferences
  • Published outcomes tools
  • Partnership with Project Adventure, the nations
    premier adventure training and programming
  • Ongoing calendar of training programs
  • Ongoing research programs
  • Proven results with local schools

Programs are effective when they
  • Understand the impact of personality on behavior,
    engagement, learning, and motivation
  • Involve models of personality that go deep enough
    in explaining distress, negative attention, and
    many of the dynamics influencing drug/alcohol use
  • Place emphasis both on providing information AND
    building self-efficacy
  • Focus on potential and resiliency instead of
    whats wrong with youth (i.e. strengths-based)
  • Focus on empowering youth to make positive
    changes rather than trying to control behavior
  • Include effective capacity-building for staff
  • Provide tools for culture change within systems

Our tools
  • Perceived Competence of Functioning Inventory
    (PCFI) 16 item self-report assessment of
  • Motivational competencies - setting and pursuing
  • Affective competencies dealing with feelings
    about self
  • Cognitive competencies judgment and critical
  • Relational competencies - connecting with
    others, giving and receiving support
  • General Level of Functioning overall efficacy
  • Internal consistency of .88 - .90
  • Test-retest reliability - .73
  • Validated against the MCMI, Hope Scale, Ways of
    Coping Scale, Brief Symptom Index, and OQ-45
  • Preliminary data from a large-scale
    longitudinal study at University of Minnesota on
    the impact of adventure-based interventions on
    drug/alcohol use shows that raising motivational
    and relational competencies are the two strongest
    predictors of success.

Our tools
  • PCFI 8-item scale for ages 10-13
  • Same subscales as PCFI-16
  • psychometrics not established yet

Our tools
  • Process Communication Model (PCM)
  • Transactional personality communication model
  • Defines 6 personality types, each with specific
    and predictable
  • Perceptual filters and preferred channels of
  • Character strengths
  • Psychological needs and motivators
  • Learning styles and environmental preferences
  • Second by second negative attention and sabotage
  • Likely racket emotions /authentic unresolved
  • Typical clinical manifestations
  • Manual, training trajectory, and competency
    skills verification exists, so fidelity easier to

Experiential/Adventure Learning
  • Learning through doing
  • Clearly superior to sit n git learning
    enhances retention and application of material
  • Engages multiple learning and personality styles
  • When done well, closely mimics real-life social
    and emotional challenges
  • Proven to positively impact key areas of
  • Published meta analysis proves effectiveness
  • Our data from 800 students completing similar
    programs over the last 3 years replicates these

Our success with youth
  • Analysis of 800 youth participating in our
    adventure course programs show statistically
    significant gains in self-efficacy with moderate
    to large effect sizes.
  • Numerous individual examples of transformed
  • No comparison groups or follow-up data yet.

Our success with at-risk youth Grades 6-12
  • Analysis of 204 at-risk students from 5 different
    schools (including Haysville Alternative) who
    have completed our school-based programs since
    2005, and 23 matched controls.
  • Slight reduction in motivational, affective,
    cognitive, and relational capabilities for
    control group
  • Significant improvements in all scales for
    treatment group
  • When asked to rate their confidence in coping
    without using drugs or alcohol negligible
    change in control group, improvement in treatment
    group. Although the improvement was fairly
    small, it was 15 x larger than the change in the
    control group.
  • Our programs reversed a negative trend without
    changing curriculum or staffing. When we train
    staff and parents to use these tools, outcomes
    can be even more dramatic.

Why choose Process Solutions?
  • Local relationships and support that will be here
    for the long term
  • Clinical expertise and history
  • Proven tools, proven outcomes
  • Research experience and national partnerships for
  • Shared values

What do you have to gain?
  • Impact on target behaviors, enhanced student
    efficacy and achievement, enhanced staff morale
  • Publicity and recognition for innovation
  • Opportunity and research data to obtain grant

Implementation Planstart small, demonstrate
results, get funding to expand
  • Level 1 Direct services for at-risk youth
  • Level 2 Capacity building for staff
  • Level 3 Consultation/Coaching
  • Level 4 Advanced training to build local leaders

Level 1 Direct Services
  • LEEP program Learning and Empowerment through
    Experiential Programs
  • Up to 15 students
  • 1 hour/week on-site groups for 6 weeks
  • Finish with 1 day on adventure course
  • Outcomes tracking for treatment and matched
    control group
  • Fidelity
  • Program manual
  • Weekly facilitator consultation group
  • Dual facilitator model

Level 2 Capacity Building
  • 2 day PCM training (second semester)
  • Content
  • Teach teachers the PCM model, which outlines
    basic skills in connecting, motivating, and
    reducing conflict in the classroom for all 6
    personality types
  • Teach tools for empowering students to get their
    psychological needs and motivators met in
    healthy, productive ways (rather than with
  • Teach basics of transforming the classroom into
    an environment that supports all learning styles
    and engages all students
  • Could be applied for parents as well (perhaps
    even include parents?)
  • Fidelity
  • Manual and rigorous certification training
  • Regular group consultation among trainers
  • Dual trainer model

Level 3 Consultation/Coaching
  • PVPS staff on-site for regular consultation and
  • 1 hour ten times during semester

Level 4 Advanced Training
  • For selected staff/students who will be mentors
    and consultants to rest of the system
  • Students selected/apply from LEEP program
  • 3-days customized training in using PCM and
    adventure based methods in the school to
  • enhance impact of programs such as Challenge Day
    or other adventure-based programs, every day
    throughout the year.
  • meet diverse student needs
  • increase self-efficacy
  • break down barriers and stereotypes
  • build peer accountability culture

Funding Options
  • Funds that directly relate to these services
  • Safe and Drug Free Schools dollars
  • Staff Development funds
  • At Risk Student funds
  • Other options?

Anticipating resistance
Yes, but.
  • Not many people will receive your services. How
    can that really make a difference?
  • At risk youth can lead the gangs, or they can
    lead the healthy initiatives. Connect with them
  • Its not about Prairie View connecting with each
    person. Its about initiating a culture change,
    moving toward a tipping point, empowering the
    right people to spread positive energy, finding
    and developing leaders, and gaining momentum.
  • Capacity building recognizes that those who deal
    with the kids, families, and community day in and
    day out are the ones who can really make a

Yes, but.
  • What about the kids who are already using?
  • You cant stop them, but you can begin to create
    a culture and environment that is incompatible
    with drug/alcohol abuse
  • This is a long-term investment

Yes, but.
  • When will we fit this all in?
  • How are at risk youth spending their time now?
    How productive is it? What are they
  • How much time are staff spending dealing with the
    distraction of disengaged youth, consequences of
    drug/alcohol use and other problems we are
    attempting to address?
  • The intended result is that everyone involved
    (staff and students) are making more productive
    use of their precious time.

Yes, but.
  • What about the schools who arent involvedwhat
    can they do?
  • Assist in efforts to find funding
  • Work to develop community coalitions and
  • Volunteer to be a control group
  • Send one or two staff to our open enrollment
    seminars to test-drive what we do
  • Initial demonstration training should include
    staff from around the district so we can discuss
    this question during those two days
  • Promote the program and listen to what others are

Obtaining Collaboration
  • Built on existing relationship with the
    districts education coordinator and principle
    from one of the grade schools
  • Proposal presented to district site council
  • Follow-up presentations and planning meetings
    with principles and counselors from the two
    participating schools

Research Design
  • Crossover design. Conditions crossed over at
    Spring semester
  • New elementary school - 5th graders 2 classes
    (N 27) experimental group, 2 classes (N 28)
    control group
  • H.S. Access Program for students designated as
    at risk based on grades and other behavioral
  • 49 students Randomly assigned to experimental and
    control groups

Data Collection Protocol
  • PCFI at week 1, 4, and 6 of LEEP, day before and
    day after Adventure course, and semester end.
  • Control group Week 1, 4, 6, and semester end
  • Behavioral data collected for prior year (2006)
    and current year to date.
  • GPA
  • Math and Reading test scores
  • Attendance (h.s. only)
  • Behavioral referrals (h.s. only)
  • Attendance (h.s. only)

Challenges along the way
  • Getting all the PCFI data collected
  • Designated internal staff person trained to
    collect all PCFI data for every condition
  • All PCFIs were completed in classroom setting,
    same time of day (even for adventure course)
  • PVPS facilitators brought data back to our lab
    for scoring
  • Our outcomes coordinator had constant contact
    with school to update on status of data
    collection, missing data, etc.

Challenges along the way
  • Changing plans mid-stream
  • H.S. staff didnt show up for consultation,
    didnt support LEEP program
  • Resources and funds diverted to elementary school
    for second semester

Challenges along the way
  • Gathering behavioral data
  • Took several months for school to collect and
    deliver all the data
  • Lots of missing data, no referral or attendance
    data for elementary students
  • Lots of passing the buck

What weve got so far!
  • Psychometrics of the PCFI
  • PCFI self-efficacy data for program and control
  • Associated behavioral data for program and
    control groups

Testing Internal Consistency
  • 49 high school students completed PCFI-16 at 4
    time frames throughout semester. Program group
    (N 25) also completed PCFI before and after day
    on adventure course
  • 55 5th grader students completed PCFI-8 at 4 time
    frames throughout semester. Program group (N
    28) also completed PCFI before and after day on
    adventure course

(No Transcript)
  • Reliability goes up with repeated administrations
    (would be expected) but stabilizes somewhat over
  • As with our previous experience, initial
    administration with a group is less reliable than
    follow-up administrations (demand
    characteristics, lack of trust, etc.)
  • 8-item PCFI performed respectably, may present a
    viable alternative for younger children
  • Examining test-retest reliability, and subscale
    characteristics are the next steps

(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
Prairie Elementary PCFI Results
Prairie Elementary PCFI Results
Prairie Elementary PCFI Results
Prairie Elementary PCFI Results
Prairie Elementary PCFI Results
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
Behavioral Measures Prairie Elementary
Prairie Elementary SummaryProgram Vs. Control
  • PCFI
  • No difference between groups on any scales at
  • Motivational scale significantly higher at end
    for program group
  • Cognitive scale approaching significance at end
    for program group
  • GPA Change Scores
  • N.S. difference between groups
  • Math Change Scores
  • N.S. difference between groups
  • Reading Change Scores
  • Control group started higher and made
    significantly more change than program group

(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
Campus High School PCFI Results
Campus High School PCFI Results
Campus High School PCFI Results
Campus High School PCFI Results
Campus High School PCFI Results
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
Behavioral Measures Campus H.S.
H.S. At risk youth SummaryProgram Vs. Control
  • PCFI
  • Groups did not differ significantly at the
    beginning on any scales
  • Groups did not differ significantly at the end on
    any scales
  • GPA Change Scores
  • N.S. difference at beginning or end of semester
  • Math Change Scores
  • N.S. difference at beginning or end of semester
  • Reading Change Scores
  • Control group started higher and made
    significantly more change than program group

(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
Teacher Capacity building
Day on the adventure course
Two-day course on student communication and
Alternative H.S. Students
  • School-based groups running autonomously using
    school staff
  • Each semester the group comes to the adventure

(No Transcript)
Good news / Bad news
  • Prairie Elementary has invested fully, is moving
    forward with teacher capacity building and
    culture shifts.
  • Campus high school still teetering, trying to
    decide what to do wants us to treat the problem
    kids, little ownership for culture change.
  • Alternative high school continues to use the
    adventure course, and rely on us for
    consultation, and achieving great results.
  • Comparing these three schools, seems that it pays
    to commit over time, invest in internal capacity,
    and integrate adventure more fully into the
    educational climate.

Next Steps
  • Finish out school year, see what second semester
    data after crossover looks like.
  • Definitely increase intensity of school-based
    interventions in both schools.
  • Continue to track behavioral and PCFI data over
    the next 12-18 months.
  • Stick with protocol as best we can.
  • Explore ways to increase motivational and
    relational scales more.
  • Continue tracking CTC data
  • Explore gender differences as well as the
    psychometrics of PCFI-8
  • Examine fidelity of implementation better