I Can Problem Solve (ICPS)
An Evidence-Based Practice
Description
This school-based intervention trains children in generating a variety of solutions to interpersonal problems, considering the consequences of potential solutions, and recognizing thoughts, feelings, and motives that lead to problem situations. The program is appropriate for all children, but it is especially suitable for young (ages 4 and 5), poor, and urban students who may be at the highest risk for behavioral dysfunctions and interpersonal maladjustment. The program was originally designed for use in nursery school and kindergarten, but it has also been successfully implemented through the sixth grade. Throughout the intervention, instructors use pictures, role-playing, puppets, and group interaction to help develop students' thinking skills. Children's own lives and problems are used as examples when teachers demonstrate problem-solving techniques.
Goal / Mission
The goal of this program is to teach children effective problem-solving skills.
Impact
Studies demonstrated that ICPS participants scored better than the control group on impulsiveness, inhibition, and total behavior problems; showed fewer high-risk behaviors than never-trained controls; showed improvement in positive, prosocial behaviors and decreases in antisocial behaviors; and performed better on standardized achievement tests.
Results / Accomplishments
I Can Problem Solve (ICPS) has been evaluated extensively over the past 20 years. The effects of the nursery intervention last for at least 1 full year without further training. For youngsters not trained in nursery, kindergarten is not too late. Kindergarten students scored significantly higher than never-trained controls in both their abilities to generate alternative solutions to problems and in consequential thinking. One year of training (either year) is effective in enhancing both cognitive problem-solving and behavioral skills.
The 5-year longitudinal study that compared ICPS students with a control group (study 2) demonstrated that ICPS participants: 1) Scored better than the control group on all three factors rated by independent observers--impulsiveness, inhibition, and total behavior problems; 2) Showed, after kindergarten, fewer high-risk behaviors than never-trained controls; 3) Showed improvement in positive, prosocial behaviors and decreases in antisocial behaviors; 4) Performed better on standardized achievement tests (this suggests that children whose behavior improved could better concentrate on the task-oriented demands of the classroom).
Study 3 found support for the effectiveness of the ICPS program in increasing prosocial behaviors and in reducing aggressive behaviors. Moreover, there was some evidence to support an additive effect of an additional year of ICPS instruction. In other words, participants receiving 2 years of ICPS instruction showed greater improvements (depending on the construct and measurement employed) than those receiving a single year of instruction. Specifically, ICPS was more effective in increasing prosocial behavior than in decreasing aggressive behavior. The HBRS prosocial behavior subscale showed a 12% effect size favoring ICPS instruction. This figure increased to 19% when the 1-year ICPS instruction group was excluded from the analysis. Similarly, the PSBS overt and relational aggression subscales showed 3% and 4% effect sizes, respectively, favoring ICPS instruction. These figures increased to 6% and 9% when the 1-year ICPS instruction group was excluded from the analysis.
The 5-year longitudinal study that compared ICPS students with a control group (study 2) demonstrated that ICPS participants: 1) Scored better than the control group on all three factors rated by independent observers--impulsiveness, inhibition, and total behavior problems; 2) Showed, after kindergarten, fewer high-risk behaviors than never-trained controls; 3) Showed improvement in positive, prosocial behaviors and decreases in antisocial behaviors; 4) Performed better on standardized achievement tests (this suggests that children whose behavior improved could better concentrate on the task-oriented demands of the classroom).
Study 3 found support for the effectiveness of the ICPS program in increasing prosocial behaviors and in reducing aggressive behaviors. Moreover, there was some evidence to support an additive effect of an additional year of ICPS instruction. In other words, participants receiving 2 years of ICPS instruction showed greater improvements (depending on the construct and measurement employed) than those receiving a single year of instruction. Specifically, ICPS was more effective in increasing prosocial behavior than in decreasing aggressive behavior. The HBRS prosocial behavior subscale showed a 12% effect size favoring ICPS instruction. This figure increased to 19% when the 1-year ICPS instruction group was excluded from the analysis. Similarly, the PSBS overt and relational aggression subscales showed 3% and 4% effect sizes, respectively, favoring ICPS instruction. These figures increased to 6% and 9% when the 1-year ICPS instruction group was excluded from the analysis.
About this Promising Practice
Organization(s)
Drexel University
Primary Contact
Myrna B. Shure, Ph.D
Drexel University
Department of Psychology
3141 Chestnut St.
Stratton Hall Suite 119
Philadelphia, PA 19104
(215) 553-7120
mshure@drexel.edu
http://www.thinkingchild.com/
Drexel University
Department of Psychology
3141 Chestnut St.
Stratton Hall Suite 119
Philadelphia, PA 19104
(215) 553-7120
mshure@drexel.edu
http://www.thinkingchild.com/
Topics
Health / Mental Health & Mental Disorders
Health / Children's Health
Health / Children's Health
Organization(s)
Drexel University
Source
SAMHSA's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (NREPP)
Date of publication
2002
For more details
Target Audience
Children