Does federal policy support the use of scientific evidence in school-based prevention programs?
Does federal policy support the use of scientific evidence in school-based prevention programs?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11121-006-0058-x
复制
发表时间：
2007-03-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Hartman, Shane
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hallfors, Denise D.;Pankratz, Melinda;Hartman, Shane
自1998年以来，联邦政策明确要求在学校使用“循证”预防计划。我们回顾了这项政策是如何通过安全和无毒品学校(SDFS)计划的州接受者来实施的，以及其他联邦和私人机构如何通过提供关于特定计划有效性的科学证据的指导来支持这项政策。我们报告了对SDFS州办公室主任的调查数据，并对最受欢迎的有效计划列表进行了比较和对比。州办事处为管理SDFS计划提供基础设施，向当地学区提供技术援助，监督地方一级联邦政策的实施，并根据合规性确定资金资格。我们发现，各州在很大程度上依赖联邦名单来确定学区是否符合联邦政策要求，特别是国家有效方案和做法登记处(NREPP)。然而，SDFS和NREPP都在发生变化，这些变化对将预防科学转移到学校来说不是一个好兆头。最后给出了结论和建议。
Since 1998, federal policy has explicitly required the use of "evidence-based" prevention programs in schools. We review how this policy has been implemented through state recipients of the Safe and Drug Free Schools (SDFS) Program, and how other federal and private agencies have supported the policy by providing guidance about the scientific evidence for specific programs' effectiveness. We report data from a survey of SDFS state office directors, and we compare and contrast the most popular lists of effective programs. State offices supply the infrastructure for administering the SDFS Program, providing technical assistance to local school districts, monitoring the implementation of federal policy at the local level, and determining funding eligibility based on compliance. We found that states rely heavily on federal lists to determine whether school districts are meeting federal policy requirements, particularly the National Registry of Effective Programs and Practices (NREPP). Both SDFS and NREPP are changing, however, and the changes do not bode well for the transfer of prevention science to schools. Conclusions and recommendations are presented.