Last reviewed: 2023
Intended Outcomes:
This program provides hands-on strategies and resources to help motivate the unmotivated student, support students with trauma, improve engagement, and increase academic success.Continuum of Care:
Universal Prevention
Topic Areas:
Behavioral Health/Mental Health, Disruptive Behaviors, Trauma
Ages:
Childhood (4-12), Teen/Adolescent (13-18)
Geographic Locations:
Rural, Urban
Delivery Settings:
School-Based
Cultural Considerations:
No research found involving diverse populations
Audience:
This program is intended for students grades K-12.
Credentials:
This program is implemented by teachers and counselors.
Manuals:
Yes
Is Training Required?
Yes, see developer info
Who can provide the required training?
Please visit the following site for more training information: https://whytry.org/training/
Program Costs (materials, training, etc.):
Yes, refer to program website
Program/Practice Website:
https://whytry.org
Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research:
Alvarez, M. E. & Anderson-Ketchmark, C. (2009). Review of an evidence-based school social work intervention: WhyTry. Children and Schools, 31(1), 59-61.
WV Rating:
Unable to Be Rated
»WV Ratings Info
Rationale for Rating:
This program was unable to be rated. The curriculum’s website suggests that the program has been concluded to yield improvements in locus of control, the ability to set and achieve goals, relationships with teachers and fellow students, classroom engagement, attendance, academic performance, and Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BASC) scores. However, such highlighted literature was concluded to predominately be comprised of program website-hosted smaller school-focused/student-focused case studies often without details of the evaluation’s methodologies. Additional review yielded limited findings, with much of the identified literature being unavailable through major databases (e.g., Wymore, 2007, Williams, 2009; Mortensen & Rush, 2007; Acuna et al., 2008). Further, of studies identified, many were non-peer reviewed dissertations (e.g., Whittle, 2010; Minor, 2009; Kula, 2012; Baker, 2008), theses (e.g., Price, 2020), poster presentations (e.g., Knick, 2010), and field research (e.g., Elliot, 2016, Bise, 2009, Bird, 2010). Of the one peer reviewed manuscript that was identified (i.e., Alverez & Anderson-Ketchmark, 2009), the manuscript was a general program description with reviewed programs either not adhering to the WhyTry protocol, or being of a very small sample size, limiting interpretation.
Contraindications or Concerns:
None identified
Other Registries/Ratings
The California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare:
Not On Registry
Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development:
Not On Registry
Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness:
Not On Registry
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Model Programs Guide:
Not On Registry
Washington State Institute for Public Policy:
Not On Registry