Research & Results

In the Community Youth Development Study Survey, it is reported that the adolescent health problems and behavioral problems of the CTC community are 25% to 33% lower than community problems.

Care in the community was tested in a randomized controlled trial. Twenty-four communities in seven states are matched pairwise in the state, randomly assigned to receive the CTC, or as the control community.

In this exam, a team of 4,407 students from the CTC and the management community were tracked annually since the grade level. By the 8th grade students from the CTC community had significantly less health and behavior problems than group students from the control community.

One year after the trial intervention phase was over, these important effects continued until the 10th grade. By the end of the 10th grade students from the CTC community group have a 25% lower probability of engaging in violence over the past year than the control community.

In this randomized trial, the CTC community has implemented over 90% of the core components of the CTC system for many years. The primary leader of the CTC community is likely to adopt science-based prevention methods. The CTC Alliance has achieved royalties of more than 90% by faithfully executing evidence-based programs over the control community and complying with established program goals, core components, and dosages. These evidence-based programs provide children, young people and guardians of the CTC community more services than the control community.

Experimental trials that do not rely on CTC, where more than 100 Pennsylvania communities participate, showed that CTC is effective in reducing juvenile delinquency and improving adolescent academic performance.

By the end of the eighth grade, all of the protective factors confirmed by the group's youth report social development strategy from the CTC community to support active youth development were higher than the control group. Young people in the CTC group have greatly improved social skills, exchanges with parent social associates, school awareness about participation in social contribution, and community opportunities for community participation.

The great impact of CTC on adolescent health and behavioral issues brings long-term economic benefits. Every dollar invested in CTC returns a low criminal justice system, crime victims and medical expenses, and an increase in income and tax revenue of $ 5.31

Community psychometric attributes related to short-term depression scale and standard validity Washington University Social Development Study Group

External validity refers to the prevalence of research results, ie whether results are proportionally related to other conditions (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2009). According to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009), this may be of particular concern if your research is based on small samples from participants in the same group and these participants are other participants It is quite different. Our research shows that its external validity is limited. We believe that the sample size of 294 respondents distributed to 6 questionnaires is not sufficient to correlate with other situations. In addition, our group of respondents are quite homogeneous. 92.5% of our samples belong to the 19-25 year old group, most of them are students. External validity is therefore a problem in our research and can be avoided by tracking more diverse samples of different age groups. However, there is usually a trade-off between internal effectiveness and external effectiveness.

External validity is affected by the selected sample. According to Saunders, Lewis and Thorn-hill (2009), external validity refers to the degree of prevalence of our findings. As our sample is fairly homogeneous, we can conclude that our results can not be extended throughout the population. However, a convenient sample in our classical experiment will improve our internal validity as we control the context in most experiments (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). A handy sample consisted of 294 respondents, most of whom participated in the course (N = 252)

Systematic deviation is due to sampling deviation. This means that there is a certain difference between the sample result and the theoretical outcome of the whole population. The results of the study using the convenience sample were almost the same as those of the group as a whole. The result of systematic bias is the result of bias. Another important criticism of the use of convenience samples is limitation of generalization and inference of the whole population. Since the sample does not represent a population, the results of this study do not represent the entire population. This leads to low external validity of the study