\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2019-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2019)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2019-01-15}
\title{The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Larry K.  Brendtro}

             \author[2]{Michael  Caslor}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 8 December 2018 Accepted: 4 January 2019 Published: 15 January 2019}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


Youth in conflict with adults often gravitate to friends who support high-risk behavior. Various group treatment programs have sought to reverse this negative peer influence with two different strategies. In peer pressure programs, youth discipline one another to reinforce behavior norms. In peer helping programs such as Positive Peer Culture (PPC), youth support one another by solving problems and building strengths. While both approaches have been shown to improve short-term behavior, peer-helping creates long-term change in prosocial values, thinking, and behavior. This article reviews relevant research on the effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture and reports a study comparing recidivism of a residential PPC program in corrections with matched controls. Differences were apparent after 12 months as PPC groups had significantly lower recidivism at each quarterly interval of the 24-month follow-up period.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 \par
Positive Peer Culture reverses negative peer influence by enlisting youth in helping one another and building respectful bonds with adults. PPC has roots in Europe and the United States. August \hyperref[b0]{Aichhorn (1935)} of Austria piloted democratic approaches to group work and trained Fritz Redl who came to the U.S. to escape the Nazi occupation. Redl established a therapeutic group milieu at the University of Michigan Fresh Air Camp which trained youth professionals for three decades.  {\ref Redl}   \hyperref[b50]{James (1970)}. Vorrath was called to the Red Wing Minnesota State Training School after residents had rioted. Instead of punishment, he created "a culture of caring-what one finds in a strong happy family" (p. 125).Students worked in small groups to help solve their problems and develop prosocial values. roubled youth often gravitate to like-minded peers who reinforce one another's anti-social behavior. This process called peer deviancy training can disrupt education, treatment, and correction programs \hyperref[b16]{(Dodge, Dishion, \& Lansford, 2006}). Peer problems are not unique to settings for youth at risk since bullying research shows that cultures of harassment are common in many schools \hyperref[b11]{(Bradshaw \& Waasdorp, 2009)}. T Psychiatrist Richard \hyperref[b31]{Jenkins (1958)} concluded GGI at Highfields could succeed with two types of youth. Maladjusted delinquents act out because of emotional frustration; the warm relationships at Highfields reduced inner stress and distrust of authority. Adaptive delinquents were socially competent but gravitated to antisocial gangs; the group process helped them build prosocial values and relationships. Criminologist Walter \hyperref[b53]{Reckless (1958)} observed that involving peers in problem-solving results in rapid treatment, producing a change in only a few months. Resilience researchers Werner and Smith (1992) have described effective programs for youth at risk as more like a supportive family than a treatment intervention. The Highfields program was both.\par
As GGI proliferated, the original Highfields spirit sometimes shifted from democratic to authoritarian relationships  {\ref (Polsky, 1970)}. Group members became enforcers with the power to discipline peers. Vorrath 
\section[{II.}]{II.}\par
From GGI to PPC Harry Vorrath completed his social work internship at Highfields in the 1960s. Prior experience as a seminary student and a Marine gave him a dual perspective-nurturing youth and demanding accountability. Vorrath saw how the military could take a group of young soldiers and in a few months prepare them to risk their lives for one another. Vorrath implemented GGI in several group homes and correctional facilities. opposed using peer pressure for behavior modification, believing youth were only empowered to help. Thus, he split from GGI to create Positive Peer Culture, highlighting this distinction in his initial PPC publication: Do group members punish? Absolutely not! In fact, the group may not even recommend punishment; their only function is to help. If a serious situation arises which the group cannot handle, the staff will decide what to do.  {\ref (Vorrath, 1972, p. 4)} While this is a clear statement, the challenge would be maintaining a caring climate.\par
The initial Positive Peer Culture manual \hyperref[b55]{(Vorrath \& Brendtro, 1974)} described key elements of PPC which correspond to principles of positive youth development:\par
? Relationships of trust. Youth feel safe to share concerns and challenges. ? Problems as an opportunity. Overcoming difficulty builds strength and resilience.\par
? Cultures of respect. No one hurts another person, and all are responsible for helping. Thus, while some group programs use peers for behavior control, PPC builds respectful relationships which meet developmental needs for belonging, mastery, independence, and generosity (Giacobbe, 
\section[{III. caring versus coercion}]{III. caring versus coercion}\par
A critical distinction in group treatment programs is whether youth are empowered by caring or coercion. The peer group literature can be confusing when researchers fail to make this distinction. While GGI and PPC each use problem-solving meetings, they may have different goals: While GGI typically targets managing behavior, PPC seeks to build prosocial values, thinking, and behavior \hyperref[b20]{(Fatout, 2017)}. One should not romanticize any model since the most positive philosophy can mutate into malpractice. coercion from adults to peers. Whatever its source, power-based discipline impedes empathy and moral development \hyperref[b28]{(Hoffman, 2000)}. The distinction between caring and coercion is dramatic.  {\ref Grissom}  Gottfredson (1987) also found that various peer group programs in school s had limited effectiveness and sometimes made matters worse; this is consistent with a meta-analysis of bully-prevention in schools \hyperref[b32]{(Juvonen \& Graham, 2013)}. Researcher Dan \hyperref[b40]{Olweus (1996)} of Norway found that the antidote to bullying is a democratic school culture. But in U.S. schools, most bully-proofing policies are coercive and fail to change either the school culture or student values \hyperref[b17]{(Edmonson \& Zeman, 2011)}.\par
IV. 
\section[{Preventing Harm}]{Preventing Harm}\par
The measure of status among youth in PPC is using one's abilities to help each other \hyperref[b47]{(Tate \& Copas, 2010)}. But some programs called PPC are counterfeit imitations of a caring culture. \hyperref[b7]{Brendtro and Ness (1982)} studied ten PPC programs to identify misuse of peer group methods. These included hostile peer confrontation, discipline by peers, and distant staffstudent relationships. As proposed by \hyperref[b26]{Gottfredson (1987)}, this study of potential abuses is now used to establish program fidelity standards.\par
Certain persons face more challenges in peergroup approaches, including beset youth whose relational trauma made it hard for them to trust either  {\ref (1996)} found that youth who failed in PPC had problems Traynelis-Yurek, \& Laursen, 1999).\par
Using youth as behavior enforcers merely shifts pressure" (p. 15) whenever a norm is violated-and they list over 200 norms. This requires hundreds of daily confrontations by staff and peers. In contrast, Positive Peer Culture expects hundreds of daily acts of care and concern.\par
Collegefields \hyperref[b41]{(Pilnick et al., 1967}) was a community-based treatment program using GGI and academic experiences with teen boys. Peers were charged with detecting and controlling deviant behavior. The term "caring" was distorted to mean enforcing norms with group confrontation. Cult-like methods included repeating a litany of required responses to gain the group's forgiveness. "When confronted with evidence of holding back information about transgressions, a boy might be badgered, humiliated, made to kneel, and finally confess to the transgressions"  {\ref (Gottfredson, 1987, p. 691)}. In this toxic environment, 42 percent of the boys failed to complete the program.\par
The Provo Experiment \hyperref[b19]{(Empey \& Erickson, 1972}) also operated in the community. In group meetings, youth were forced to disclose their delinquent history and those who were guarded met ridicule and attack; this contrasts with PPC where the groups seek to create a climate of trust rather than attacking defenses. Provo youth were told if they did not make progress, they would be sent to the state reformatory. Peers had the power to impose sanctions ranging from derision, locked detention, and exclusion from the group; none of these are permitted in PPC. Staff wielded power by keeping youth in the dark about their decisions, a classic authoritarian ploy. adults or peers \hyperref[b25]{(Gold \& Osgood, 1992)}. Robert Lee\par
The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk Highfields model to a culture of confrontation. Here are with openness to relationships. Joseph \hyperref[b43]{Ryan (2006)} reported that those with histories of maltreatment had higher rates of recidivism following PPC; this mismatch of personality and treatment model is greatest in confrontive group settings. While all youth can benefit from positive peers, those with histories of trauma need additional relational and therapeutic support \hyperref[b2]{(Bath \& Seita, 2018)}. Best practices in PPC now include training both staff and young people to be trauma-informed since the most powerful forces for healing are natural caring relationships \hyperref[b27]{(Greenwald, 2017)}.\par
V.\par
the evidence base of positive peer culture\par
While PPC emerged from practice, decades of research have grounded this model in evidence from sociology, resilience, trauma, neuroscience, and youth development \hyperref[b5]{(Brendtro \& Mitchell, 2015;}\hyperref[b13]{Caslor, 2003)}. The core goals of PPC are expressed in the Circle of Courage resilience model and include the universal growth needs for belonging, mastery, independence, and generosity. Research shows that these needs are hard-wired into the human brain (Brendtro, Brokenleg, \& Van Bockern, 2019) and are essential in developing resilience to successfully cope with adversity \hyperref[b61]{(Werner, 2012)}.\par
Erik \hyperref[b34]{Laursen (2010)} summarized PPC studies which report these outcomes:\par
Student and staff safety, bonding to adults, problem-solving skills, reduction in crisis, internal locus of control, increased self-worth, prosocial values, school engagement, positive youth and family evaluation, and reduction in recidivism. Since many studies of PPC are not widely disseminated, we highlight representative research below: \hyperref[b44]{Sherer (1985)} studied the impact of PPC on moral development of "distressed" Israeli teens. Peers known to street-corner gang workers were randomly assigned to either a PPC group or a control group. A third control group included youth from other street-corner gangs who did not have personal contact with members of the first two groups. There was a significant positive difference for PPC participants and on some indices for their friends in the related group. \hyperref[b25]{Gold and Osgood (1992)}   \hyperref[b14]{(Clark, 2011)}. Finally, the California Evidence-based Clearing House lists PPC as highly rated on the Scientific Rating Scale \hyperref[b30]{(James, 2011)}.Moral Development. Moshe\par
Treatment Environment. \hyperref[b38]{Mitchell and Cockrum (1980)} found PPC more effective than a Level System at decreasing runaways, physical aggression, property destruction, and self-injurious behavior. The most striking difference was physical aggression towards staff; in a six month period there were 19 such incidents in the Level System and none in PPC. Bill \hyperref[b57]{Wasmund (1988)} compared the social climates of two peer group and two non-peer group residential programs using treatment environment questionnaires. PPC students reported a more orderly climate with greater support, involvement, and freedom for expression of feelings.\par
Academic Gains. Students with emotional and behavioral disorders have high levels of educational deficits (Nelson, Benner, Lane, \& Smith, 2004). Among 1,000 consecutive students in PPC programs at Starr Commonwealth, the mean achievement score was .65 years across the students' educational history \hyperref[b6]{(Brendtro, Mitchell, \& McCall, 2008)}. Thus, a typical tenth grader could be expected to achieve at the sixth or seventhgrade level. However, during enrollment in Starr's alternative schools, PPC students averaged between 1.5 and 2.0 years gain for each year in attendance.\par
Elk Hill Farm in Virginia also assessed academic achievement gains in PPC. A study of 40 students showed 2.15 months of academic gain for each month between pre-and post-test \hyperref[b8]{(Giacobbe \& Traynelis-Yurek, 1993)}. Traynelis-Yurek (1997) notes that the group process enhances problem-solving, reflective thinking, and listening skills, making PPC a wholistic education and treatment strategy. strategies. Boys at an Ohio youth correctional facility were randomly assigned to experimental or control groups. Experimental groups showed positive changes based on staff incident reports, self-reports, and school attendance. Twelve months after release, the experimental group's recidivism rates were significantly lower at 15 percent while recidivism of controls were 40 percent. 
\section[{VI. The Michigan Peer Influence Study}]{VI. The Michigan Peer Influence Study}\par
Attachment. Most students formed positive bonds with both staff and peers. Research shows that traumatized or beset youth need close personal relationships to reconstruct their lives. This support can come from staff, peers, and family. Staff who do not form close bonds diminish their influence, but young people who like their staff and peers engage in more prosocial behavior in the program and the community.\par
Achievement: Many troubled youth have difficult school experiences; research shows that much delinquent behavior is provoked by failure and conflict in school. Teachers in successful schools give students at risk uncommonly warm emotional support and prevent them from failing by fostering success. Youth who are engaged in school make achievement gains and have better adjustment to the community.\par
Autonomy: In successful programs, youth share responsibility for decisions affecting them. Staff teams that give students autonomy form closer bonds with youth, which in turn develop more prosocial group cultures. In contrast, adult domination and coercive control feed negative peer subcultures, which in turn sabotage educational and treatment progress. The most robust predictor of positive groups is a positive staff team.\par
Altruism: Caring is the core value in peer helping groups. Student behavior is assessed against the standard of whether it displays concern for the well-being of others. This ethos counters the peer abuse typical in traditional correctional settings as well as many community schools. In addition to participation in peer-helping, caring for others is generalized beyond the group through service-learning activities.\par
Effective PPC programs require trained staff and measures to ensure fidelity in implementation.\par
Misapplication of this methodology is most likely to occur in authoritarian settings where peer groups are used as agents of control instead of resources for helping. In the simplest of terms, no program qualifies for the designation Positive Peer Culture unless it creates a caring climate among staff and youth; this is essential if young people are to experience change. 
\section[{VIII.}]{VIII.} 
\section[{Context}]{Context}\par
The research was completed as a Master of Social Work thesis \hyperref[b13]{(Caslor, 2003)}  group included a sample of all-male youth discharged in the same time period from all other Manitoba youth institutions. Ridge Point was excluded since it was using parts of PPC and did not fit into either the treatment or comparison group. 
\section[{VII. Effects of Positive Peer Culture on Recidivism}]{VII. Effects of Positive Peer Culture on Recidivism}\par
The most extensive research on PPC was conducted by Martin Gold \& D. Wayne Osgood (1992) of the University of Michigan. Their quasi-experimental study compared 45 self-contained PPC groups, each with its own staff team. All groups were nominally using PPC but there were natural differences in implementation of the model. Researchers tracked a myriad of factors related to success in the program and community. Here we highlight key findings concerning developmental needs: PPC has been the primary programming at the Agassiz Youth Centre (AYC) in Portage La Prairie, Manitoba, since the mid-1970's.\par
Other youth correctional facilities in Manitoba did not run PPC, with the exception of Ridge Point that had started a pilot at the time of the original research.\par
Recidivism was operationally defined as a) the length of time (ratio) before a subsequent charge, b) length of time before a subsequent incarceration, c) the number of subsequent charges (ratio), convictions (ratio), and length of the subsequent incarceration (ratio), d) the number of subsequent charges (ratio), convictions (ratio), and length of subsequent incarcerations (ratio) after multiple placements, and e) the seriousness of the most serious offense. Breach of conditions of probation (like being out past curfew or consuming alcohol) was not defined as recidivism.\par
The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk For PPC to be a total system for building transformational change, it requires strategies to impact relationships in the ecology of family, school, peer group, and community \hyperref[b12]{(Bronfenbrenner, 2005)}.The key question is whether these group interventions have a lasting positive impact; this was the focus of a previously unpublished study of recidivism of Canadian youth in a well-established Positive Peer Culture program.\par
X. 
\section[{Results}]{Results}\par
a) Length of time before a subsequent charge.\par
The analysis was able to assess how many months elapsed after the end of the first incarceration before the next charge occurred. The differences were not statistically significant at the 3-month, 6-month, 9month, or 12-month intervals, although AYC did have lower re-charge rates at the 6-month, 9-month, or 12month intervals. After the one-year interval, AYC recharge rates are significantly lower at 15 months (p < .05); 18 months (p< .01); 21 months (p< .05) and 24 months (p > .05) than the comparison group. For example, at the 24-month interval AYC's re-charge rate was 66.7\%, while the comparison group's rate was 82.7\%. b) Length of time before a subsequent incarceration. c) Subsequent charges, convictions, and length of incarcerations.\par
The study tracked recidivism for 24 months after release. The number of subsequent charges and convictions were lower for AYC but did not reach statistical significance. However, AYC students had significantly fewer (p >.01) incarcerations (2.1 versus 2.7) and were sentenced to significantly fewer (p < .01) months of incarceration (9.7 versus 15.7) over the two years than the comparison group. 
\section[{d) Subsequent charges, convictions, and length of incarcerations after multiple placements in PPC.}]{d) Subsequent charges, convictions, and length of incarcerations after multiple placements in PPC.}\par
XI. 
\section[{Limitations}]{Limitations}\par
While the matching strategies helped mitigate potential sample variations, some differences remain. Other potentially significant variables may include youth alcohol/drug abuse and the strength of the youth family/support network. Data on participation in other programs (like anger management or cultural experiences) were not available and therefore were not controlled for in sampling.\par
Second, the information came from the Province's Criminal Offender Management System (COMS), which was phased in just before the timeframe of the original sample. Other researchers \hyperref[b1]{(Bacon \& Bracken, 2002)} had noticed some errors in the COMS data during similar timeframes; this current study did not cross-reference recidivism data from COMS with official court records to identify any potential errors.\par
Third, while AYC was a well-established PPC program, the research did not assess the fidelity of PPC Volume XIX Issue X Version I   
\section[{Discussion}]{Discussion}\par
At-risk youth behavior emerges over time from experiences of trauma, disconnection, mistrust, a lack of opportunities, oppression, and disrespect. PPC Similar analysis was undertaken to assess how many months after the end of the first incarceration had elapsed before the next incarceration occurred. At the 3-month interval, AYC had a significantly higher reincarceration rate than the comparison group (p < .05). Non-significant differences were seen at the 6-month, 9month, or 12-month intervals, with AYC having slightly lower re-incarceration rates at each interval. AYC discharges have significantly lower re-incarceration rates at the 15-month, (p <.05); 18-month, (p< .01), 21month; (p<.05); and 24-month intervals (p < .05) than the comparison group. At the 24-month interval, AYC's re-incarceration rate was 64\%, while the comparison group's rate was 80\%. From all youth who were re-incarcerated, a subsample was identified who were placed in the same group as initially (AYC, N=44 and Other, N=40). What was the impact of more than one experience of PPC? Those with multiple placements in AYC continue to have significantly fewer (p < .05) incarcerations (1.69 versus 2.20). AYC youth also had significantly fewer (p< .05) months of incarceration  {\ref (5.91}  PPC also seems to affect the seriousness of the youths' most serious offense. This was assessed using the Manitoba Department of Justice's three-level classification system of all criminal law offenses, namely Low, Medium, or High. Repeated-measures MANOVA identified that youth with multiple discharges from a PPC program have somewhat less serious convictions than youth with multiple incarcerations in the comparison group, although it didn't reach the level of statistical significance (p = .08).\par
The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk\par
Sampling. An aggregate matched sampling strategy selected a treatment group (youth who were first incarcerated at AYC) and a sample comparison group (youth who were first incarcerated at an institution other than AYC) that were non-significantly different across the following control variables: Aboriginal or Non-aboriginal, Rural or Urban Residence, Gang Association, Parental Living Arrangement, Type of Primary Offence (property / personal / other), Child and Family Service Involved, History of Suicide Attempts (Yes / No), Type of Reintegration (standard supervision/intensive supervision), Education, Most Serious Offense, Primary Risk Assessment, Number of Charges, Number of Convictions, and Age at First Incarceration. Where significant differences existed between the original populations, case records were randomly removed focusing on those significantly different attributes until the samples were non-significantly different.\par
The findings suggest differences in recidivism between AYC and comparison group were not immediately apparent in the short term although AYC consistently had a lower re-charge and re-incarceration rate (at virtually every 3-month interval) than the comparison group over a 24-month follow-up period. These differences in recidivism reach statistical significance after the 12-month interval.\par
Comparing youth who were re-incarcerated and had multiple placements in AYC with youth who were reincarcerated and had multiple discharges in another institution demonstrated AYC discharges had significantly fewer charges, convictions, number of months incarcerated and number of incarcerations. Changing habits and attitudes, referred to as 'habitudes' by John Dewey (1916), takes time and multiple experiences with PPC have a cumulative long-term positive impact.     \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
Vorrath gained prominence in the book Children\\
in Trouble: A National Scandal by Pulitzer Prize author\\
Howard\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_0}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.366447985004686\textwidth}P{0.41822867853795687\textwidth}P{0.06532333645735706\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Year 2019\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 9\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Volume XIX Issue X Version I\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep ( A )\\
The comprehensive evidence base for Positive Peer Culture is summarized in several sources. Three Positive Peer Culture manuals review PPC research Brendtro, 1985). Strength-Based Services International surveyed research on PPC programs (Giacobbe, Traynelis-Yurek, \& Laursen, 1999). Positive Peer Culture is a model strength-based program (Ellis, 2009). Children Australia lists Positive Peer Culture as a research-supported therapeutic residential care model\tabcellsep Reducing Recidivism. Researchers evaluated 140 males\tabcellsep -Global Journal of Human Social Science\\
\tabcellsep who completed a PPC program at Elk Hill Farm in\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Virginia (Giacobbe \& Traynelis-Yurek, 1992). They found\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep significant positive change on all 14 factors scores on\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep the Jesness Behavior Checklist. Subsequent research\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep found recidivism was significantly reduced by offering\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep follow-up services for a year after release (Giacobbe,\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Traynelis-Yurek, Powell, \& Laursen, 1994).\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Leeman, Gibbs, and Fuller (1993) evaluated a\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep PPC program that equipped youth in peer helping\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep © 2019 Global Journals\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_2}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{}
\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_3}}\end{figure}
 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Giacobbe and Traynelis-Yurek ()]{b21}\label{b21} 	 		\textit{},  		 			G Giacobbe 		,  		 			E Traynelis-Yurek 		.  		1992.  	 
\bibitem[Tate et al. ()]{b54}\label{b54} 	 		\textit{},  		 			T Tate 		,  		 			R Copas 		,  		 			W Wasmund 		.  		2012.  	 
\bibitem[Nelson et al. ()]{b39}\label{b39} 	 		‘Academic achievement to K-12 students with emotional and behavioral disorders’.  		 			J Nelson 		,  		 			G Benner 		,  		 			K Lanne 		,  		 			B Smith 		.  	 	 		\textit{Exceptional Children}  		2004. 71  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Attitudinal changes as measured by the Jesness behavior checklist in a residential peer group program International Journal of Adolescence and Youth]{b22}\label{b22} 	 		‘Attitudinal changes as measured by the Jesness behavior checklist in a residential peer group program’.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Adolescence and Youth}  		3  (3-4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Ellis ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		\textit{Best practices in residential treatment},  		 			R Ellis 		.  		2009. New York, NY: Routledge.  	 
\bibitem[Olweus ()]{b40}\label{b40} 	 		‘Bully/victim problems at school’.  		 			D Olweus 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Emotional and Behavior Problems}  		1996. 5  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Juvonen and Graham ()]{b32}\label{b32} 	 		‘Bullying in schools: The power of bullies and the plight of victims’.  		 			J Juvonen 		,  		 			S Graham 		.  	 	 		\textit{Annual Review of Psychology}  		2013. 65  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[James ()]{b50}\label{b50} 	 		‘Changing delinquent subcultures: A social-psychological approach’.  		 			H James 		.  	 	 		\textit{Social system perspectives in residential institutions},  				 			H Polsky,  			D Claster,  			\& C Goldberg 		 (ed.)  		 (Philadelphia, PA; East Lansing, MI)  		1970. 1970. Michigan State University Press. p. .  	 	 (Children in trouble: A national scandal) 
\bibitem[Greenwald ()]{b27}\label{b27} 	 		\textit{Child trauma handbook: A guide for healing trauma-exposed children and adolescents},  		 			R Greenwald 		.  		2017. New York, NY: Routledge.  	 
\bibitem[Redl and Wineman ()]{b51}\label{b51} 	 		\textit{Children who hate},  		 			F Redl 		,  		 			D Wineman 		.  		1951. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.  	 
\bibitem[Pilnick et al. ()]{b41}\label{b41} 	 		\textit{College fields: From delinquency to freedom},  		 			S Pilnick 		,  		 			R Allen 		,  		 			H Dubin 		,  		 			A Youtz 		,  		 			R Treat 		,  		 			J White 		,  		 			F Rose 		,  		 			S Habas 		.  		1967. Newark, NJ.  		 			Newark State College, Laboratory for Applied Behavioral Science 		 	 
\bibitem[Tate and Copas ()]{b47}\label{b47} 	 		‘Combat or cooperation?’.  		 			T Tate 		,  		 			R Copas 		.  	 	 		\textit{Reclaiming Children and Youth}  		2010. 18  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Huefner et al. ()]{b29}\label{b29} 	 		‘Conduct disordered youth in group care: An examination of negative peer influence’.  		 			J Huefner 		,  		 			M Handwerk 		,  		 			J Ringle 		,  		 			C Field 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Child and Family Studies}  		2009. 18  (6)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Redl and Wineman ()]{b42}\label{b42} 	 		\textit{Controls from within},  		 			F Redl 		,  		 			D Wineman 		.  		1952. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.  	 
\bibitem[Brendtro and Mitchell ()]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		\textit{Deep brain learning: Evidence-based essentials in education, treatment, and youth development},  		 			L Brendtro 		,  		 			M Mitchell 		.  		2015. Albion, MI: Starr Commonwealth.  	 
\bibitem[Brendtro et al. ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		\textit{Deep brain learning: Pathways to potential with challenging youth},  		 			L Brendtro 		,  		 			M Mitchell 		,  		 			H Mccall 		.  		2008. Albion, MI: Starr Commonwealth.  	 
\bibitem[Ryan ()]{b43}\label{b43} 	 		‘Dependent youth in juvenile justice: Do Positive Peer Culture programs work for victims of child maltreatment?’.  		 			J Ryan 		.  	 	 		\textit{Research on Social Work Practice}  		2006. 16  (5)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Dodge et al. ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		\textit{Deviant peer influence in programs for youth: Problems and solutions},  		 			K Dodge 		,  		 			T Dishion 		,  		 			J Lansford 		.  		2006. New York, NY: Guilford Press.  	 
\bibitem[Sherer ()]{b44}\label{b44} 	 		‘Effects of group intervention on moral development of distressed youths in Israel’.  		 			M Sherer 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Youth and Adolescence}  		1985. 14  (6)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Giacobbe and Traynelis-Yurek ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		\textit{Elk Hill: A successful residential treatment program for young men},  		 			G Giacobbe 		,  		 			E Traynelis-Yurek 		.  		1993. Richmond, VA: G \& T Publishing.  	 
\bibitem[Hoffman ()]{b28}\label{b28} 	 		\textit{Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice},  		 			M Hoffman 		.  		2000. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Leeman et al. ()]{b36}\label{b36} 	 		‘Evaluation of a multi-component group treatment program for juvenile delinquents’.  		 			L Leeman 		,  		 			J Gibbs 		,  		 			D Fuller 		.  	 	 		\textit{Aggressive Behavior}  		1993. 19  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bacon and Bracken ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		\textit{Evaluation of the Partner Abuse Short-Term (PAST) program Winnipeg},  		 			B Bacon 		,  		 			D Bracken 		.  		2002.  		 			MB: Child and Family Services Research Group, University of Manitoba 		 	 
\bibitem[Lee ()]{b35}\label{b35} 	 		‘FIRO-B scores and success in a positive peer culture residential treatment program’.  		 			R Lee 		.  	 	 		\textit{Psychological Reports}  		1996. 78 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Weiss et al. ()]{b58}\label{b58} 	 		‘Iatrogenic effects of group treatment for anti-social youths’.  		 			B Weiss 		,  		 			A Caron 		,  		 			S Ball 		,  		 			J Tapp 		,  		 			M Johnson 		,  		 			J Weisz 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology}  		2005. 73  (6)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Seita and Brendtro ()]{b45}\label{b45} 	 		\textit{Kids who outwit adults},  		 			J Seita 		,  		 			L Brendtro 		.  		2005. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.  	 
\bibitem[Bronfenbrenner ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		\textit{Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development},  		 			U Bronfenbrenner 		.  		2005. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.  	 
\bibitem[Edmonson and Zeman ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		‘Making school bully laws matter’.  		 			L Edmonson 		,  		 			L Zeman 		.  	 	 		\textit{Reclaiming Children and Youth}  		2011. 20  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Fatout ()]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		\textit{Models for change in social group work},  		 			M Fatout 		.  		2017. New York, NY: Routledge.  	 
\bibitem[Werner and Smith ()]{b60}\label{b60} 	 		\textit{Overcoming the odds: High-risk children from birth to adulthood},  		 			E Werner 		,  		 			R Smith 		.  		1992. New York, NY: Cornell University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Partners in empowerment: A practitioner's guide to implementing peer group treatment models]{b48}\label{b48} 	 		\textit{Partners in empowerment: A practitioner's guide to implementing peer group treatment models},  		Albion, MI: Starr Commonwealth.  	 
\bibitem[Gottfredson ()]{b26}\label{b26} 	 		‘Peer group interventions to reduce the risk of delinquent behavior: A selective review and a new evaluation’.  		 			G Gottfredson 		.  	 	 		\textit{Criminology}  		1987. 25  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Gold and Osgood ()]{b25}\label{b25} 	 		\textit{Personality and peer influence in juvenile corrections},  		 			M Gold 		,  		 			D Osgood 		.  		1992. Westport, CT: Greenwood.  	 
\bibitem[Brendtro and Ness ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		‘Perspectives on peer group treatment: The use and misuse of Guided Group Interaction/Positive Peer Culture’.  		 			L Brendtro 		,  		 			A Ness 		.  	 	 		\textit{Children and Youth Service Review}  		1982. 4 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Vorrath and Brendtro ()]{b55}\label{b55} 	 		\textit{Positive Peer Culture},  		 			H Vorrath 		,  		 			L Brendtro 		.  		1974. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.  	 
\bibitem[Mitchell and Cockrum ()]{b38}\label{b38} 	 		‘Positive Peer Culture and a level system: A comparison in an adolescent treatment facility’.  		 			J Mitchell 		,  		 			D Cockrum 		.  	 	 		\textit{Criminal Justice and Behavior}  		1980. 7  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Vorrath ()]{b62}\label{b62} 	 		\textit{Positive Peer Culture: Content, structure, process},  		 			H Vorrath 		.  		1972. Lansing, MI: Michigan Center for Group Studies.  	 
\bibitem[Steinebach et al. ()]{b46}\label{b46} 	 		\textit{Positive peer culture: Ein Manual für Gruppengespräche},  		 			C Steinebach 		,  		 			A Schrenk 		,  		 			U Steinebach 		,  		 			L Brendtro 		.  		2018. Weinheim Basel: Beltz Juventa.  	 
\bibitem[Karakos ()]{b33}\label{b33} 	 		‘Positive peer support or negative peer influence? The role of peers among adolescents in recovery high schools’.  		 			H Karakos 		.  	 	 		\textit{Peabody Journal of Education}  		2014. 89  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bradshaw et al. ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		‘Re-educating troubled youth: Environments for teaching and treatment’.  		 			C Bradshaw 		,  		 			T Waasdorp 		,  		 			L Brendtro 		,  		 			A Ness 		.  	 	 		\textit{School Psychology Review}  		2009. 1983. Aldine Publishing Company. 38  (3)  p. .  	 	 (Measuring and changing a culture of bullying) 
\bibitem[Brendtro et al. ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		\textit{Reclaiming youth at risk: Futures of promise},  		 			L Brendtro 		,  		 			M Brokenleg 		,  		 			S Van Bockern 		.  		2019. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.  	 
\bibitem[Brendtro ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		\textit{Respectful Alliances: Positive peer cultures \& inspired staff teams},  		 			L Brendtro 		.  		2020. Lennox, SD.  	 	 (: The Resilience Academy and Reclaiming Youth at Risk) 
\bibitem[Werner ()]{b61}\label{b61} 	 		\textit{Risk, resilience, and recovery. Reclaiming Children and Youth},  		 			E Werner 		.  		2012. 21 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Giacobbe et al. ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		\textit{Strengths based strategies for children \& youth: An annotated bibliography},  		 			G Giacobbe 		,  		 			E Traynelis-Yurek 		,  		 			E Laursen 		.  		1999. Richmond, VA: G \& T Publishing.  	 
\bibitem[The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk]{b23}\label{b23} 	 		\textit{The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk},  		 	 
\bibitem[The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk]{b63}\label{b63} 	 		\textit{The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk},  		 	 
\bibitem[Maxfield and Babbie ()]{b52}\label{b52} 	 		‘The Effectiveness of Positive Peer Culture with Youth at Risk 40’.  		 			M Maxfield 		,  		 			E Babbie 		.  	 	 		\textit{Research methods in criminal justice and criminology},  				 (Belmont, CA)  		1998. West Wadsworth.  	 	 (2nd ed.) 
\bibitem[Caslor ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		‘The effects of Positive Peer Culture on the recidivism rates of male young offenders in Manitoba’.  		 			M Caslor 		.  	 	 		\textit{Canada}  		2003.  		 			Thesis for Masters of Social Work, University of Manitoba 		 	 
\bibitem[Gibbs et al. ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		\textit{The EQUIP Program: Teaching youth to think and act responsibly through a peer-helping approach},  		 			J Gibbs 		,  		 			G Potter 		,  		 			A Goldstein 		.  		1995. Champaign, IL: Research Press.  	 
\bibitem[Laursen ()]{b34}\label{b34} 	 		‘The evidence base for Positive Peer Culture’.  		 			E Laursen 		.  	 	 		\textit{Reclaiming Children and Youth}  		2010. 19  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Mccorkle et al. ()]{b37}\label{b37} 	 		\textit{The Highfields story: An experimental treatment project for youthful offenders},  		 			L Mccorkle 		,  		 			A Elias 		,  		 			F Bixby 		.  		1958. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company.  	 
\bibitem[Empey and Erickson ()]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		\textit{The Provo experiment: Evaluating community control of delinquency},  		 			L Empey 		,  		 			M Erickson 		.  		1972. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.  	 
\bibitem[Wasmund ()]{b57}\label{b57} 	 		‘The social climates of peer group and other residential programs’.  		 			W Wasmund 		.  	 	 		\textit{Child and Youth Care Quarterly}  		1988. 17  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bath and Seita ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		\textit{The three pillars of care: Trauma and resilience in the other 23 hours},  		 			H Bath 		,  		 			J Seita 		.  		2018. Winnipeg, MB: University of Winnipeg Faculty of Education Publishing.  	 
\bibitem[Traynelis-Yurek ()]{b49}\label{b49} 	 		‘Thinking clearly through Positive Peer Culture’.  		 			E Traynelis-Yurek 		.  	 	 		\textit{Reclaiming Children and Youth}  		1997. 6  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Clark ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		‘Three therapeutic residential care models, The Sanctuary Model, Positive Peer Culture, and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy and their application to the theory of congruence’.  		 			A Clark 		.  	 	 		\textit{Children Australia}  		2011. 36  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Jenkins ()]{b31}\label{b31} 	 		‘Treatment considerations with delinquents’.  		 			R Jenkins 		.  	 	 		\textit{Youthful offenders at Highfields},  				 			H Weeks 		 (ed.)  		 (Ann Arbor, MI)  		1958. University of Michigan Press. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Vorrath and Brendtro ()]{b56}\label{b56} 	 		 			H Vorrath 		,  		 			L Brendtro 		.  		\textit{Positive Peer Culture},  				 (New York, NY)  		1985. Aldine de Gruyter.  	 	 (2nd ed.) 
\bibitem[Aichhorn ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		\textit{Wayward youth},  		 			A Aichhorn 		.  		1935. New York, NY: Viking Press.  	 	 (First published in German in 1925) 
\bibitem[James ()]{b30}\label{b30} 	 		‘What works in group care? A structured review of treatment models for group homes and residential care’.  		 			S James 		.  	 	 		\textit{Child and Youth Services Review}  		2011. 33  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Dishion et al. ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		‘When interventions harm: Peer groups and problem behavior’.  		 			T Dishion 		,  		 			J Mccord 		,  		 			F Poulin 		.  	 	 		\textit{American Psychologist}  		1999. 54  (9)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Grissom and Dubnov ()]{b24}\label{b24} 	 		\textit{Without locks and bars: Reforming our reform schools},  		 			G Grissom 		,  		 			W Dubnov 		.  		1999. Westport, CT: Praeger.  	 
\bibitem[Reckless (ed.) ()]{b53}\label{b53} 	 		\textit{Youthful offenders at Highfields: An evaluation of the effects of short-term treatment of delinquent boys},  		 			W Reckless 		.  		H. Weeks (ed.)  		1958. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. p. .  	 	 (The small residential institution) 
\bibitem[Weeks ()]{b59}\label{b59} 	 		\textit{Youthful offenders at Highfields: An evaluation of the effects of the short-term treatment of delinquent boys},  		 			H Weeks 		.  		1958. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
