The Role of Ecological Variables in Residential Treatment

Abstract

The importance of a supportive ecology after a child returns from residential treatment has been documented in a number of follow-up studies. This study used ratings by liaison staff in a residential treatment program to measure both personal and ecological variables at admission and discharge and investigate the relationship of those ratings to adjustment status of students 6 months after discharge. It was found that some ecological data gathered at admission were predictive of follow-up status while most personal characteristics of the student were not. Unlike earlier follow-up studies, ratings of improvement, both of the student's behavior and his ecological support, were significantly related to follow-up ratings, possibly because liaison staff had worked directly with members of students' ecologies and were aware of support and problems to be faced on return to the community. These findings seem to support the proposition that personal change and ecological change must occur together for residential treatment to be successful.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allerhand

M. E.

, Weber

R. E.

, & Haug

(1966). Adaptation and adaptability. New York: Child Welfare League of America.

Bailey

J. S.

, Wolf

M. M.

, & Phillips

E. L.

(1970). Home-based reinforcement and the modification of predelinquents' classroom behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3, 223–233.

Durkin

R. P.

, & Durkin

A. B.

(1975). Evaluating residential treatment programs for disturbed children. In Guttentag

, & Streuning

E. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of evaluation research (Vol. 2, pp. 275–339). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Fixsen

D. L.

, Phillips

E. L.

, & Wolf

M. M.

(1973). Achievement place: Experiments in self-government with predelinquents. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 31–47.

Hartmann

, Glasser

B. A.

, Greenblatt

, Solomon

M. H.

, & Levinson

D. J.

(1968). Adolescents in a mental hospital. New York: Grune & Stratton.

Hobbs

(1966). Helping disturbed children: Psychological and ecological strategies. American Psychologist, 21, 1105–1115.

Hobbs

(1982). Troubled and troubling children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kirigin

K. A.

, Braukmann

C. J.

, Atwater

J. D.

, & Wolf

M. M.

(1982). An evaluation of teaching-family (achievement place) group homes for juvenile offenders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 1–15.

Lewis

W. W.

(1982). Ecological factors in successful residential treatment. Behavioral Disorders, 7, 149–156.

10.

Lewis

W. W.

(1984). Ecological change: A necessary condition for residential treatment. Child Care Quarterly, 13, 21–29.

11.

Maloney

D. M.

, Harper

T. M.

, Braukmann

C. J.

, Fixsen

D. L.

, Phillips

E. L.

, & Wolf

M. M.

(1976). Teaching conversation related skills to predelinquent girls. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 371.

12.

Mora

, Talmage

, Bryant

F. T.

, & Hayden

B. S.

(1969). A residential treatment center moves toward a community mental health model. Child Welfare, 48, 585–590.

13.

Nelson

C. M.

, & Kauffman

J. M.

(1977). Educational programing for secondary schoolage delinquent and maladjusted pupils. Behavioral Disorders, 2, 102–113.

14.

Nelson

R. H.

, Singer

M. J.

, & Johnson

L. O.

(1978). The application of a residential treatment model. Child Care Quarterly, 7, 164–173.

15.

Oxley

G. B.

(1977). A modified form of residential treatment. Social Work, 22, 493–498.

16.

Phillips

E. L.

(1968). Achievement place: Token reinforcement procedures in a home-style rehabilitation setting for predelinquent boys. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 213–223.

17.

Taylor

, & Alpert

(1973). Continuity and support following residential treatment. New York: Child Welfare League of America.

18.

Weinstein

(1974). Evaluation of a program for reeducating disturbed children. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED-141-996)