Friends Evaluation Results

Imlay City – Spring 2004

Bridgework Theater

 

 

Introduction

 

     Bridgework Theater creates and performs plays that address urgent problems faced by children and youth.  In 1993-94, Bridgework created a play that addresses the problem of peer conflict.  The play, Friends, targets children in grades one, two, and three.  Bridgework designed Friends to (1) support the conflict resolution programs of schools where such programs are in place and (2) assist schools without such a program to initiate one.  The play and supporting materials are based on several conflict resolution programs including the Community Boards Program of San Francisco and Committee for Children in Seattle.

 

Goal and Objectives

 

     The goal of Friends is to increase the ability of participants to effectively resolve peer conflict. 

 

     Objectives of the play are that children who participate in Friends will demonstrate at least one of the following:

 

 

Ë increased willingness to share feelings as a way to resolve conflict

Ë increased confidence in their ability to handle anger

Ë increased confidence in their ability to turn enemies into friends

Ë increased willingness to take personal responsibility as a way to resolve conflict

 

 

 

The Play and Related Activities ‑ Program Description

 

Bridgework's program consists of:

 

1.  A live performance of Friends, a 35 minute play

 

2.  A classroom activity session

 

3.  A classroom poster that students use to record instances of successful conflict resolution

 

4.  A list of resources that schools can use to create an on‑going conflict resolution program

 

 

 

 

Evaluation Design

 

     Bridgework's evaluator wanted to know if the combined effect of the play, the activity session, and the poster accomplished the objectives of the program's designers.  The evaluator decided to compare the attitudes of a randomly selected group of children who had participated in the program (PARTICIPANTS) with the attitudes of a matched control group made up of children who had not (CONTROL). 

 

     The evaluation instrument consisted of five questions.  The first question allowed a yes/no response and asked simply if the child had seen the play. 

 

The remaining four questions tested the four objectives of the program.  The response sheet offered a semantic differential of three possible answers to each question: always, sometimes, never.  In two of the four questions, the order of the answers was reversed to read never, sometimes, always.

 

Question #2 (If someone in your class makes you mad, will you tell them how you feel?) measured willingness to share feelings as a way to resolve conflict.  The evaluator used the phrase "in your class" in this and other questions to exclude adults and strangers -- people children have little control over.

 

Question #3 (If someone in your class makes you mad, can you calm down?) measured confidence in ability to handle anger.

 

Question #4 (If someone in your class is your enemy, can you turn them into a friend?) measured confidence in ability to turn enemies into friends.

 

Question #5 (If someone in your class makes you mad, do you want to think about what YOU can do to solve the problem?) measured willingness to take personal responsibility as a way to resolve conflict.

 

Imlay City schools used Bridgework's written instructions to (1) randomly select class rooms of students who had not participated in the program to take the test as a control group and to (2) select similar, but different classrooms of students who had participated to take the test as participants.  Classroom teachers used Bridgework's written instructions to administer the test.

 

     The control group totaled 141 students (Nc=141).  Participants totaled 142 (Np=142).  Total number of students tested equaled 283 (Nt=283).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Scoring

 

     Points along the semantic continuum were weighted with values of one (left side of the continuum) to three (right side of the continuum).  The mean score of the control group was compared to the mean score of participants.  For every question, the desired direction of difference was toward "always."   Since the order, left to right, of the choices in the continuum alternated between questions, for questions 2 and 4, a significant increase in mean score was desired.   For questions 3 and 5, a significant decrease in mean score was desired.

 

 

Significance

 

     A Z‑test at the .05 level of significance (95% chance that test results can be replicated) was used to determine statistical significance.  A Z‑score of 1.65 or higher was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.

 

 

Validity

 

The validity of this instrument was tested in 1995.  The direction of desired change correlated with teacher perceptions of conflict resolution ability.

 

 

Results

 

     Responses of students who participated in Friends were significantly different than responses of the control group in all four questions.  The program accomplished its objective.

 

 

 

Statement 2

Statement 3

Statement 4

Statement 5

Mean, Control Group

 

 

1.92

1.86

1.83

1.91

Mean, Participant Group

 

2.39

1.49

2.24

1.57

Z-score (Control compared to Participant)

 

6.68

5.25

6.05

4.79

p value

 

p< .0005

p>.0005

p>.0005

p>.0005

Desired Direction?

 

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

 

 

 

 

Summary

 

Evaluation results indicate that, compared to a control group, students who participated in Bridgework Theater's Friends program were:

 

Ë  more willingness to share feelings as a way to resolve conflict

Ë  more confident in their ability to handle anger

Ë  more confident in their ability to turn enemies into friends

Ë  more willing to take personal responsibility as a way to resolve conflict

 

Extremely low p-values (probability that test results are significant) mean that we can be quite confident in the outcome of this test.