Home  «  Program  «  Positive Peer Culture  « 

Positive Peer Culture (PPC)

Scientific Rating:
2
Supported by Research Evidence
See scale of 1-5
Child Welfare Relevance Level:
Medium

See descriptions of 3 levels

Brief Description

The information in this program outline is provided by the program representative and edited by the CEBC staff. The Positive Peer Culture (PPC) program has been rated by the CEBC in the area of: Higher Level of Placement.

PPC is a peer-helping model designed to improve social competence and cultivate strengths in troubled and troubling youth. “Care and concern” for others (or “social interest”) is the defining element of PPC. Rather than demanding obedience to authority or peers, PPC demands responsibility, empowering youth to discover their greatness. Caring is made fashionable and any hurting behavior totally unacceptable. PPC assumes that as group members learn to trust, respect, and take responsibility for the actions of others, norms can be established. These norms not only extinguish antisocial conduct, but more importantly reinforce pro-social attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. Positive values and behavioral change are achieved through the peer-helping process. Helping others increases self-worth. As one becomes more committed to caring for others, s/he abandons hurtful behaviors.

Essential Components

  • Building group responsibility: Group members learn to keep one another out of trouble, much as they would be expected to do with their siblings at home.
  • The group meeting: Serves as the problem-solving arena in which youth are able to help one of their peers in a safe environment; meetings are structured: problem reporting, awarding the meeting, problem solving, group leader’s summary. A distinct problem list is used in the program to ensure a universal language.
  • Service learning: Youth are engaged in multiple community projects, developed to reinforce the value of helping others; many projects are conducted along side adult service clubs. Youth are taught that community service is an expected part of community living, not a punishment for misbehavior. In the context of a Positive Peer Culture program, service learning is not simply a program component — service learning is meant to develop a life-style of community responsibility and action.
  • Teamwork primacy: A highly successful program management model, which assumes that “teamwork” is the highest administrative priority. Staff teams are organized around distinct groups of children.

Child Component

Positive Peer Culture (PPC) was designed with a child component that addresses the following presenting problems and symptoms:

  • Delinquent youth and those at-risk for delinquent behavior.

Age range: 12 – 17

Developmental Delays:

This program was not developed for children with developmental delays, and has not been tested for children with developmental delays.

Parent / Caregiver Component

Positive Peer Culture (PPC) was not designed with a parent/caregiver component.

Group Format

Positive Peer Culture (PPC) was designed to be conducted in a group setting; but has not been tested for use in a group setting.

Recommended group size:

8-12

Delivery Settings

This program is typically conducted in a(n):

  • Outpatient Clinic
  • Residential Care Facility
  • School

Homework

This program does not include a homework component.

Languages

Positive Peer Culture (PPC) does not have materials available in a language other than English.

Minimum Provider Qualifications

  • Bachelor's degree in the helping professions for direct service workers; Master's degree in social work or a related field for group leaders.
  • Supervisors should have five or more years experience in positive youth development programming.
  • Staff should have a working understanding of Situational Leadership, stages of group development, and developmental psychology.

Education and Training Resources

There is a manual that describes how to implement this program, and there is training available for this program.

Training Contacts:
  • The Academy for Positive Peer Culture, c/o Reclaiming Youth
    P. O. Box 57
    Lennox, CA 57039
  • Thomas F. Tate
    Starr Commonwealth
    Albion, MI 49224
  • Erik K. Laursen
    United Methodist Family Services
    3900 West Broad Street
    Richmond, VA Richmond
Training is obtained:

Both classroom training and program immersion are utilized as training methods.

Number of days/hours:

Varies.

Additional Resources:

There currently are additional qualified resources for training:

  • Richard Quigley
    phone: (218) 728-7500
    Woodland Hills, 4321 Allendale Avenue, Duluth, MN 55803

Implementation Information

Since Positive Peer Culture (PPC) is highly rated on the Scientific Rating Scale, information was requested from the program representative on available pre-implementation assessments, implementation tools, and/or fidelity measures.

Show implementation information...

Pre-Implementation Assessments

To be given to organizations or providers in order to measure organizational or individual readiness:

While not designed specifically to be a pre-implementation assessment, two standardized surveys specifically assess organizations using Positive Peer Culture:

    • The Workplace Environmental Survey assesses the work environment for staff.
    • Treatment Environmental Survey assesses the environment as perceived by students.

Both surveys can be obtained by contacting Starr Commonwealth, Thomas F. Tate, 13725 Starr Commonwealth Rd, Albion, MI 49224

    • (1999). Treatment environmental survey. Albion, MI: Starr Commonwealth.
    • (1999). Workplace environmental survey. Albion, MI: Starr Commonwealth.

Implementation Tools — for the program (e.g., implementation guides or manuals)

  • Vorrath, H. & Brendtro, L. (1985). Positive Peer Culture (2nd ed.). New York: Aldine.
  • Positive Peer Culture includes the basic information effectively implement PPC in residential and school-based programs. It includes a discussion of common mistakes staff make during the implementation process and a chapter on evaluating programs based on PPC.
    • Wasmund, W. C. and Tate, T. F (Eds.). (1996). Partners in empowerment: A peer group primer. Albion, MI: Starr Commonwealth.
    • Partners in empowerment covers an expansive list of topics related to individuals and groups along with a detailed discussion of group and meeting mechanics

Fidelity Measures

There are no fidelity measures available for this program.

Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research

This program is rated a "2 - Supported by Research Evidence" on the Scientific Rating Scale based on the published, peer-reviewed research available. The practice must have at least one rigorous randomized controlled trial with a sustained effect of at least 6 months. Please see the Scientific Rating Scale for more information.

Child Welfare Outcome: Child/Family Well-Being

Show relevant research...

Nas, C. N., Brugman, D., & Koops, W. (2005). Effects of the EQUIP programme on the moral judgement, cognitive distortions, and social skills of juvenile delinquents. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 11(4), 421-434.

Type of Study: Pre-test/Post-test with non-randomized comparison groups
Number of Participants: Treatment: 31, Control, 25.

Population:

  • Age range — Boys between 12 and 18
  • Race/Ethnicity — Not Specified
  • Gender — Not Specified
  • Status — Youths in high-security juvenile correction facilities.

Location / Institution: The Netherlands

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
The study compared youth in an EQUIP program, which employs the Positive Peer Culture model, at their facility with a control group made up of youth from two other facilities. Moral judgment was measured pre-and post-test using the Sociomoral Reflection Measures—Short Form (SRM-SF), which includes indicators of values of contract, truth, affiliation, life, property and law, and legal justice. Cognitive distortions were assessed with the How I Think (HIT) Questionnaire, which looks at self-centeredness, blaming others, mislabeling/minimizing, and assuming the worst. Social information processing was examined by presenting participants with 4 vignettes of hypothetical situations where they were put at a disadvantage by a peer. Participants also took the Attitudes towards Delinquent Behavior Questionnaire, assessing moral beliefs and were assessed on social skills under stressful or problematic circumstances with the Inventory of Adolescent Problems—Short Form (IAP-SF). Results showed that. At post-test, the EQUIP group had lower cognitive distortion scores on covert behavior, self-centeredness, blaming others, minimizing/mislabeling, stealing and lying than did the comparison group. No differences were found for other cognitive distortion subscales. The treatment group also had more negative attitudes toward delinquent behavior. No differences were found for moral judgment, social skills or social information processing.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: None.

Leeman, L. W., Gibbs, J. C., & Fuller, D. (1993). Evaluation of a multi-component group treatment program for juvenile delinquents. Aggressive Behavior, 19, 281-292.

Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial
Number of Participants: 57 boys

Population:

  • Age range — Average age 16
  • Race/Ethnicity — 67% Caucasian, 31% Black, 2% Hispanic
  • Gender — Not Specified
  • Status — Youths admitted to a medium-security correctional facility.

Location / Institution: Midwestern U.S.

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
Participants were randomly assigned to receive the EQUIP program, based on the Positive Peer Culture model, or one of two control conditions. Simple control youths were told that measures were being used for research on delinquency. Motivational control youths were given a 5-minute motivational induction urging them to help other inmates. Measures of conduct and mediating variables were taken before and after the intervention. Archival conduct measures consisted of the felony level of the original offense committed, institutional incident reports, and unexcused school absences. Parole revocation or recomitment were also noted. Self-reported conduct was measured using a questionnaire asking about pre-commitment delinquent behavior and institutional misconduct. Moral judgment as a mediating variable was measured with the Sociomoral Reflection Measure—Short Form (SRM-SF) and social skills were measured with the Inventory of Adolescent Problems—Short Form (IAP-SF). All groups gained in moral judgment scores and they did not differ significantly at the end of the study. The experimental group gained significantly more than other groups in social skills. The EQUIP group also showed significant improvements in conduct over the control groups. The EQUIP group also showed lower recidivism rates over 12 months than the control groups. Interpretation of the results of this study is limited by small sample sizes.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: 12 months (recidivism only).

Sherer, M. (1985). Effects of group intervention on moral development of distressed youth in Israel. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 14(6), 513-526.

Type of Study: Non-randomized comparison group
Number of Participants: 32 boys and 16 girls

Population:

  • Age range — 15-18
  • Race/Ethnicity — Not Specified
  • Gender — 32 boys and 16 girls
  • Status — Street corner gang members who had volunteered for activities directed by a paraprofessional

Location / Institution: Israel

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
Participants were assigned to one of three groups. The Positive Peer Culture (PPC) group consisted of gang members who agreed to participate in a PPC course. The first comparison group consisted of randomly chosen members of the same gangs the PPC groups belonged to. Only one gang member was included in the PPC course from each gang. The second comparison group consisted of randomly chosen members of gangs who had no contact with the PPC course or course participants. Measures were taken at the beginning and end of the PPC course. Moral development was measured using the Morality Test for Children (MOTEC). This measure consists of five components: resistance to temptation, moral development, feelings after offense, judgment about severity of punishment, and confession. These are presented to respondents using pictures and stories depicting moral dilemmas. PPC group members scored higher at posttest on resistance to temptation and moral development. For feelings after offense and severity of punishment, the PPC and the same-gang comparison groups scored higher than the other comparison group. No significant differences were found for confession. The authors conclude that the PPC group had a positive effect on other members of their gangs.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: None.

Steinebach, C., & Steinebach, U. (2009). Positive Peer Culture with German youth. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 18(2), 27-33.

Type of Study: One group pretest-posttest design
Number of Participants: 163

Population:

  • Age range — Mean age 16 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — German
  • Gender — Males
  • Status — Participants were adolescent males in residential treatment with behavioral problems and delinquency.

Location / Institution: St. Augustine Home, Ettlingen, Germany

Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
The study evaluated the effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture (PPC) for the treatment of behavioral problems and delinquency in a sample of adolescent males in residential treatment. Participants were enrolled in the intervention over a three-year period and completed assessment measures six times, every six months. No long-term post-intervention follow-up data was presented. Results indicated reductions in violence and increases in pro-social behavior and self-esteem. Major study limitations included lack of randomization and lack of a control or comparison group.

Length of post-intervention follow-up: None.

References

Show references...

Brendtro, L. & Shahbazian, M. (2004). Troubled Children and Youth: turning problems into opportunities. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Laursen, E. K. (2005). Rather than fixing kids – build positive peer cultures. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 4(3), 137-142.

Vorrath, H. & Brendtro, L. (1985). Positive Peer Culture (2nd ed.). New York: Aldine.

Wasmund, W. C. and Tate, T. F (1996). Partners in empowerment: a peer group primer. Albion, MI: Starr Commonwealth.

Contact Information

Name: Erik K. Laursen
Agency/Affiliation: Academy for Positive Peer Culture
Website: www.umfs.org
Email:
Phone: (804) 254-9666
Fax: (804) 239-1261

Date Reviewed: June 2011 (originally reviewed in January 2008)