While both studies produced favorable results, there are still aspects of each program that could be improved to better the overall outcome. As stated by the National Institute of Justice, to realize a “significant and lasting reduction in youth gang activity, we must prevent young people from joining gangs in the first place” (NIJ, 2013). This is important aspect to consider when analyzing both programs. G.R.E.A.T seems to have done an excellent job in focusing on preventing the creation of gangs, however, the Gang Reduction Program was more concentrated in helping youth once they have already been involved in the gang life. In addition, when evaluating whether a program is effective or not, it is important to also consider the four elements
…show more content…
To begin, the Gang Reduction Program did an excellent job in addressing its target population and in addressing the diversity of the community. This program was implemented in Boyle Heights in East Los Angeles, California, which was selected for its long history of gang violence. Boyle Heights was home to approximately 2,000 documented and suspected gang members belonging to 4 major gangs and had received significant media attention for its gang activity in recent years (Cahill & Hayeslip, 2010). The target area was 97% Hispanic and 50% male. Thirty-two percent lived below the poverty level. Nevertheless, the Gang Reduction Program focused more on providing services instead of laying the groundwork for gang-reduction efforts. While it is important to provide services for youth who are already involved in gang activity, there needs to be more proactive measures taken to prevent youth from joining gangs in the first place. In order to address the problem, it is important to start from the root, meaning that there needs to be a focus on preventing the formation of youth gangs. Also, the program did not have …show more content…
Unlike suppression and intervention programs, which are directed at youths who already are gang members, G.R.E.A.T. is intended for all students (National Evaluation of G.R.E.A.T, 2002). They did an excellent job in including those at greatest risk, but also intervening early. The program targets youth from ages 12-14, who according to the National Institute of Justice, is the prime age group most vulnerable to youth gang involvement (NIJ, 2011). In addition, the program is intervening early before the youth has a chance to become involved in gang activities. One of the benefits of the program is that they have law enforcement personnel teaching the classes, which could be the main reason to why they had positive results when it came to the prosocial attitudes towards the police. However, like the DARE program, which provided education to elementary school students on the consequences of drugs, the use of law enforcement as teachers could also be harmful to the overall results. These officers do not specialize in education or how to teach youth, therefore, the courses being given may not produce the best results if the execution of the course is not done properly. Also, gang membership was measured by self-nomination (e.g., “Are you now in a gang?”), which is the same method that many police departments use throughout the country, however, this form of measurement is
To begin, the Gang Reduction Program did an excellent job in addressing its target population and in addressing the diversity of the community. This program was implemented in Boyle Heights in East Los Angeles, California, which was selected for its long history of gang violence. Boyle Heights was home to approximately 2,000 documented and suspected gang members belonging to 4 major gangs and had received significant media attention for its gang activity in recent years (Cahill & Hayeslip, 2010). The target area was 97% Hispanic and 50% male. Thirty-two percent lived below the poverty level. Nevertheless, the Gang Reduction Program focused more on providing services instead of laying the groundwork for gang-reduction efforts. While it is important to provide services for youth who are already involved in gang activity, there needs to be more proactive measures taken to prevent youth from joining gangs in the first place. In order to address the problem, it is important to start from the root, meaning that there needs to be a focus on preventing the formation of youth gangs. Also, the program did not have …show more content…
Unlike suppression and intervention programs, which are directed at youths who already are gang members, G.R.E.A.T. is intended for all students (National Evaluation of G.R.E.A.T, 2002). They did an excellent job in including those at greatest risk, but also intervening early. The program targets youth from ages 12-14, who according to the National Institute of Justice, is the prime age group most vulnerable to youth gang involvement (NIJ, 2011). In addition, the program is intervening early before the youth has a chance to become involved in gang activities. One of the benefits of the program is that they have law enforcement personnel teaching the classes, which could be the main reason to why they had positive results when it came to the prosocial attitudes towards the police. However, like the DARE program, which provided education to elementary school students on the consequences of drugs, the use of law enforcement as teachers could also be harmful to the overall results. These officers do not specialize in education or how to teach youth, therefore, the courses being given may not produce the best results if the execution of the course is not done properly. Also, gang membership was measured by self-nomination (e.g., “Are you now in a gang?”), which is the same method that many police departments use throughout the country, however, this form of measurement is