Urban Improv (OJJDP Model Program Guide)

Office of Justice Programs, Innovation - Partnerships – Safer Neighborhoods

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) Serving Children, Families and Communities

PREVENTION

IMMEDIATE SANCTIONS

INTERMEDIATE SANCTIONS

RESIDENTIAL

REENTRY

MPG HOME SEARCH HOME SEARCH ENTIRE PROGRAM DATABASE SEARCH USING RISK & PROTECTIVE FACTORS PROGRAM TYPES RATING SYSTEM REFERENCES NOMINATE PROGRAMS RELATED LINKS RESOURCES DMC-REDUCTION BEST PRACTICES DATABASE DSO BEST PRACTICES DATABASE

Urban Improv

Intervention:

The Urban Improv (UI) program is an interactive, theater-based youth violence prevention program designed for at-risk students living in the inner city. The program was developed to affect three psychological and behavioral outcome domains: aggressive behaviors, prosocial behaviors, and scholastic attention and engagement.

Active in Boston, Mass., public schools since 1992, UI uses theater improvisation to develop decision-making, impulse-control, and conflict-resolution skills. The program is based on the idea that providing students with interactive opportunities to rehearse conflict scenarios will enhance their ability to solve problems in a nonviolent manner. UI lasts 27 weeks and is organized into three 9-week intervals, including age-appropriate content for three categories: elementary, middle, and high school. The fourth-grade curriculum, for example, incorporates the following themes: friendship, self-esteem, imagination, peer pressure, fairness, violence/conflict resolution, sharing, and family.

The weekly sessions are 75 minutes long during school hours in a local theater space; students are accompanied by their teacher. Program instructors include a director and four actors who have been trained in youth education, expressive arts, and improvisational theater. Each session begins with a song about one of the included themes, followed by a prearranged scene that relates to the theme of the day. The students are allowed to make important decisions when the director freezes the scene and a student replaces one of the actors. The outcome of the scene is then changed by which decision the student makes. The students are then divided into groups to act out the previous scene. The session ends with a group discussion of the students' choices and the subsequent consequences. This allows for further explanation of values and provides a forum for students' personal experiences.

Evaluation Methodology:

Study 1 (Kisiel et al. 2005) used a quasi-experimental, matched control group design. Participants included fourth grade elementary school students from eight classrooms in five inner-city schools in the same school district. The intervention classrooms were matched to comparison classrooms by school setting, grade, gender, race, learning, first language, and socioeconomic characteristics. There were 140 students in the eight classrooms. Four classes (77 students) acted as controls, and four classes (63 students) received the intervention. Students ranged in age from 8 to 11. Gender was evenly distributed (47.9 percent female, 52.1 percent male). The ethnic/racial distribution was predominantly ethnic minority: African American (44.5 percent), Hispanic (27.7 percent), biracial (13.1 percent), Asian American (5.8 percent), white (2.2 percent), Native American (0.7 percent), and other (5.8 percent).

Intervention students were compared with comparison group students on aggressive and prosocial behaviors, scholastic engagement, and attention. Surveys were administered at baseline and immediately following program completion. Students were measured using the Social Skills Rating System (Elementary Level), including the student and teacher report versions; the Youth Coping Inventory self-report; and the Normative Beliefs about Aggression self-report. Data collection took place during school times in intact classrooms.

Study 2 (Zucker et al. 2010) used a matched control group design with four groups:

A UI intervention group received the basic UI program.
An enhanced UI intervention group received UI plus a classroom-based teacher curriculum (TC).
A TC–only intervention group received TC as a standalone program.
A control group received none of the programs.

The study included 260 fourth grade students in 15 inner-city classrooms (basic UI = 70 students in four classes; enhanced UI = 71 students in four classes; TC only = 43 students in three classes; and control = 76 students in four classes). Control classes were drawn from the same schools as intervention classrooms. Ethnic/racial distribution was primarily minority: Hispanic/Latino (38.5 percent), African American (35.7 percent), Bi/multiracial (10.7 percent), white (4.4 percent), Native American (2.0 percent), Asian (0.8 percent), and other (7.9 percent). Outcomes included prosocial behaviors, aggression, and scholastic attention and engagement, which were measured using the student and teacher versions of the Social Skills Rating System (Elementary Level), the Normative Beliefs about Aggression self-report, and the teacher version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Analyses of variance were used to assess baseline differences and multilevel modeling was used to account for the clustering of students in classrooms and to determine whether enhanced UI program provide an additive effect over the basic UI program.

Evaluation Outcome:

The immediate post intervention results for Study 1 revealed increased teacher-reported prosocial behaviors, prevention of new onset aggression, and decreased hyperactivity and internalizing symptoms among students in the UI program. In contrast, youths in the comparison group exhibited increases in aggression, hyperactivity, and internalizing symptoms and decreases in levels of prosocial behaviors during the same period, suggesting that UI not only halts the progression of aggressive behaviors but also supports the development of prosocial behaviors. It should be noted, however, that these significant findings were based on teacher reports immediately after the intervention. There were no statistical differences in student reports of aggressive or prosocial behaviors or hyperactivity and internalizing symptoms.

Results of Study 2 indicated that the comprehensive UI program appeared to demonstrate an additive effect on two of the three domains of behaviors assessed, although the results are somewhat inconsistent and based on teacher and student reports. Aggression and conduct programs remained generally stable across time in all four groups.

Other Information:

References:

Kisiel, Cassandra, Margaret Blaustein, Joseph Spinazzola, Caren Swift Schmidt, Marla Zucker, and Bessel van der Kolk. 2005. “Evaluation of a Theater-Based Youth Violence Prevention Program for Elementary School Children.” Journal of School Violence 5(2).

Zucker, Marla, Joseph Spinazzola, Amie Alley Pollack, Lauren Pepe, and Stephanie Barry. 2010. “Getting Teachers in on the Act: Evaluation of a Theatre- and Classroom-Based Youth Violence Prevention Program.” Journal of School Violence 9:117–35.

Program Specification:

Current Rating:

Promising

Expected Date of Re-Review:

Summer 2013

Program Type:

Classroom Curricula

Conflict Resolution / Interpersonal Skills

Ethnicity:

American Indian or Alaska Native

Asian

African American

Hispanic or Latino (of any race)

White

Gender:

Both

Age:

8 - 11

Target Settings:

Urban

Problem Behaviors:

Aggression/Violence

Risk & Protective Factors:

Risk

Individual

Antisocial behavior and alienation / Delinquent beliefs / General delinquency involvement / Drug dealing

Lack of guilt and empathy

Life stressors

Poor refusal skills

Peer

Association with delinquent and/or aggressive peers

Peer rejection

Protective

Individual

Healthy / Conventional beliefs and clear standards

High individual expectations

Positive / Resilient temperament

Self-efficacy

Social competencies and problem solving skills

Peer

Good relationships with peers

Involvement with positive peer group activities

School

Opportunities for prosocial school involvement

Rewards for prosocial school involvement

Additional Information:

Status:

Program is in operation at this time.

Performance Measures:

Suggested OJJDP Performance Measures for the Program Types(s):

Delinquency Prevention
Classroom Curricula
Logic Model: PDF
Performance Matrix:PDF
School Programs
Classroom Curricula
Logic Model: PDF
Performance Matrix:PDF

Contact Information:

Program Developer:
Kippy Dewey
Urban Improv
8 St. John Street
Jamaica Plain, MA 02130
Phone: 6172321175
Fax: 6177308932
Email: Click Here
Website: Click Here

Training & TA Provider:
Kippy Dewey
Urban Improv
8 St. John Street
Jamaica Plain, MA 02130
Phone: 6172321175
Fax: 6177308932
Email: Click Here
Website: Click Here