A Systematic Review of Teen Court Evaluation Studies

A Focus on Evaluation Design Characteristics and Program Components and Processes

Katie Stalker, Caroline B.R. Evans

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Teen Court is a restorative justice program serving non-chronic juvenile offenders. A number of Teen Court evaluation studies exist, however, considerable heterogeneity across Teen Court programs suggests the need to more closely examine the program components (i.e., elements of Teen Court such as sanctions) and processes (i.e., how Teen Court operates such as referral sources and participation criteria) of these existing evaluation studies. The aim of the current systematic review was to provide a comprehensive review of existing Teen Court evaluation studies by synthesizing (1) evaluation design characteristics and (2) program components and processes. Using AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) guidelines, the authors used identical key words to search 12 databases for relevant articles, book chapters, dissertations, and theses. Pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to evaluate each document; 46 articles reporting results from 35 studies were included in the review. Program participation criteria and referral sources varied considerably across studies. Twenty studies included a comparison group and only two used random assignment. Most studies reported recidivism rates, however the definition and measurement of recidivism were inconsistent across studies. Distinct differences in participation criteria and referral sources across programs suggested that some programs serve youth who would otherwise be served by the juvenile justice system whereas other programs serve youth who would otherwise face school disciplinary measures. Rigorous research on Teen Court is minimal and additional studies using strong study designs are needed in order to draw confident conclusions about the impact of Teen Court. Terminology for distinguishing between Teen Court programs based on participation and referral criteria and standards for assessing recidivism are offered.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)425-447
Number of pages23
JournalAdolescent Research Review
Volume3
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2018

Fingerprint

evaluation
youth program
Referral and Consultation
participation
Social Justice
disciplinary measures
justice
juvenile offender
earning a doctorate
sanction
technical language
Terminology
exclusion
inclusion
Databases
Guidelines
school
Research
Group

Keywords

  • Delinquency
  • Diversion
  • Juveniles
  • Recidivism
  • Teen Court

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cite this

A Systematic Review of Teen Court Evaluation Studies : A Focus on Evaluation Design Characteristics and Program Components and Processes. / Stalker, Katie; Evans, Caroline B.R.

In: Adolescent Research Review, Vol. 3, No. 4, 01.12.2018, p. 425-447.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{e8eed5a89b7044cb8ee1a0d87e54df59,
title = "A Systematic Review of Teen Court Evaluation Studies: A Focus on Evaluation Design Characteristics and Program Components and Processes",
abstract = "Teen Court is a restorative justice program serving non-chronic juvenile offenders. A number of Teen Court evaluation studies exist, however, considerable heterogeneity across Teen Court programs suggests the need to more closely examine the program components (i.e., elements of Teen Court such as sanctions) and processes (i.e., how Teen Court operates such as referral sources and participation criteria) of these existing evaluation studies. The aim of the current systematic review was to provide a comprehensive review of existing Teen Court evaluation studies by synthesizing (1) evaluation design characteristics and (2) program components and processes. Using AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) guidelines, the authors used identical key words to search 12 databases for relevant articles, book chapters, dissertations, and theses. Pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to evaluate each document; 46 articles reporting results from 35 studies were included in the review. Program participation criteria and referral sources varied considerably across studies. Twenty studies included a comparison group and only two used random assignment. Most studies reported recidivism rates, however the definition and measurement of recidivism were inconsistent across studies. Distinct differences in participation criteria and referral sources across programs suggested that some programs serve youth who would otherwise be served by the juvenile justice system whereas other programs serve youth who would otherwise face school disciplinary measures. Rigorous research on Teen Court is minimal and additional studies using strong study designs are needed in order to draw confident conclusions about the impact of Teen Court. Terminology for distinguishing between Teen Court programs based on participation and referral criteria and standards for assessing recidivism are offered.",
keywords = "Delinquency, Diversion, Juveniles, Recidivism, Teen Court",
author = "Katie Stalker and Evans, {Caroline B.R.}",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s40894-017-0056-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
pages = "425--447",
journal = "Adolescent Research Review",
issn = "2363-8346",
publisher = "Springer International Publishing AG",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Systematic Review of Teen Court Evaluation Studies

T2 - A Focus on Evaluation Design Characteristics and Program Components and Processes

AU - Stalker, Katie

AU - Evans, Caroline B.R.

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - Teen Court is a restorative justice program serving non-chronic juvenile offenders. A number of Teen Court evaluation studies exist, however, considerable heterogeneity across Teen Court programs suggests the need to more closely examine the program components (i.e., elements of Teen Court such as sanctions) and processes (i.e., how Teen Court operates such as referral sources and participation criteria) of these existing evaluation studies. The aim of the current systematic review was to provide a comprehensive review of existing Teen Court evaluation studies by synthesizing (1) evaluation design characteristics and (2) program components and processes. Using AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) guidelines, the authors used identical key words to search 12 databases for relevant articles, book chapters, dissertations, and theses. Pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to evaluate each document; 46 articles reporting results from 35 studies were included in the review. Program participation criteria and referral sources varied considerably across studies. Twenty studies included a comparison group and only two used random assignment. Most studies reported recidivism rates, however the definition and measurement of recidivism were inconsistent across studies. Distinct differences in participation criteria and referral sources across programs suggested that some programs serve youth who would otherwise be served by the juvenile justice system whereas other programs serve youth who would otherwise face school disciplinary measures. Rigorous research on Teen Court is minimal and additional studies using strong study designs are needed in order to draw confident conclusions about the impact of Teen Court. Terminology for distinguishing between Teen Court programs based on participation and referral criteria and standards for assessing recidivism are offered.

AB - Teen Court is a restorative justice program serving non-chronic juvenile offenders. A number of Teen Court evaluation studies exist, however, considerable heterogeneity across Teen Court programs suggests the need to more closely examine the program components (i.e., elements of Teen Court such as sanctions) and processes (i.e., how Teen Court operates such as referral sources and participation criteria) of these existing evaluation studies. The aim of the current systematic review was to provide a comprehensive review of existing Teen Court evaluation studies by synthesizing (1) evaluation design characteristics and (2) program components and processes. Using AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) guidelines, the authors used identical key words to search 12 databases for relevant articles, book chapters, dissertations, and theses. Pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to evaluate each document; 46 articles reporting results from 35 studies were included in the review. Program participation criteria and referral sources varied considerably across studies. Twenty studies included a comparison group and only two used random assignment. Most studies reported recidivism rates, however the definition and measurement of recidivism were inconsistent across studies. Distinct differences in participation criteria and referral sources across programs suggested that some programs serve youth who would otherwise be served by the juvenile justice system whereas other programs serve youth who would otherwise face school disciplinary measures. Rigorous research on Teen Court is minimal and additional studies using strong study designs are needed in order to draw confident conclusions about the impact of Teen Court. Terminology for distinguishing between Teen Court programs based on participation and referral criteria and standards for assessing recidivism are offered.

KW - Delinquency

KW - Diversion

KW - Juveniles

KW - Recidivism

KW - Teen Court

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85040697487&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85040697487&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s40894-017-0056-1

DO - 10.1007/s40894-017-0056-1

M3 - Review article

VL - 3

SP - 425

EP - 447

JO - Adolescent Research Review

JF - Adolescent Research Review

SN - 2363-8346

IS - 4

ER -