Last updated: 2000 www.ojjdp.gov/mpg

1 

Academic Skills Enhancement 

School is one of the primary institutions in which adolescents learn socially appropriate behavior, 

develop cognitive skills, and establish patterns of early career development. While schools labor to aid 

every student in developing these skills, problems inevitably arise for some students. One of the most 

visible problems for students is academic difficulty. Academic problems, by themselves, can thwart 

educational aspirations, but academic problems can also be a precursor to more serious behavior 

problems. Academic failure is often viewed as a gateway to delinquency (Maguin and Loeber 1996). In 

fact, research demonstrates that academic problems place juveniles at significant risk for later serious 

and violent offending (Catalano, Loeber, and McKinney 1999; Maguin et al. 1995). The research is less 

clear when examining specific subgroups. Some research indicates that the association is stronger for 

males than females, stronger for Caucasians than African Americans, and independent of 

socioeconomic status (Maguin and Loeber 1996). Other studies indicate that the relationship is stronger 

for females (Hawkins et al. 2000) and African Americans (Voelkl, Welste, and Wieczorek 1999). 

Academic problems, however, must be examined within the broader context of youth development. It 

is important to consider not only the behavior itself but also whether the behavior has previously 

occurred, in multiple settings and with what frequency, duration, and intensity (Kelly et al. 1997). For 

example, a fourth grader who frequently fails examinations in multiple subjects over the course of an 

academic year and is consistently reprimanded for poor conduct is of more concern than a second 

grader who gets a bad grade on a test or two. In other words, a certain degree of misbehavior, 

experimentation, or independence-seeking is common among youth (Kelly et al. 1997). In fact, some 

researchers suggest that the onset of oppositional behavior in adolescence is due to the normal process 

of individuation (American Psychiatric Association 1994). But youths who persistently and 

progressively engage in problem behaviors with significant impairment in personal development, 

social functioning, academic achievement, and vocational preparation are of a much greater risk for 

later serious violent behavior. 

Conversely, students who experience high academic achievement (Henggeler 1989; Elliot and Voss 

1974; Hawkins and Lam 1987; Gottfredson 1988) and actively engage in and feel attached to their school 

(Johnson, Crosnoe, and Elder 2001) are less likely to engage in problem behaviors and delinquency. 

Moreover, interventions that immerse students into the rich fabric educational resources have been 

shown to reduce delinquency (Maguin and Loeber 1996). These students are bolstered by various 

protective factors such as high expectations for youth by the community, positive bonds with parents 

and family, effective parenting, opportunities for participation in the school and community, and 

involvement with positive peers and peer-group activities.

Suggested Reference: Development Services Group, Inc. 2000. “Academic Skills Enhancement.” Literature review. Washington, D.C.: 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

https://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg/litreviews/Academic_Skills_Enhancement.pdf

Prepared by Development Services Group, Inc., under cooperative agreement number 2013–JF–FX–K002. Points of view or opinions 

expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of OJJDP or the U.S. 

Department of Justice.

 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention www.ojjdp.gov 
Theoretical Foundation

The link between educational experiences and delinquency uses various theoretical frameworks, 

including both control theory (Hirschi 1969) and strain theory (Cloward and Olin 1960; Elliot, Huizinga, 

and Ageton 1985). Strain theory suggests that the delinquency associated with academic failure results 

from an unfilled desire to achieve conventional goals (e.g., academic success). Control theory, by 

contrast, proposes that delinquency results from the failure of adolescents to internalize conventional 

norms or a breakdown of the bonds between the individual and society. According to this perspective, 

the school acts as a socializing agent by introducing and endearing adolescents to conventional norms 

and values. Unfortunately, poor academic performance may inhibit the attachment to conventional 

norms and thus break the bond with society, separating individuals from the internal controls that 

discourage delinquent behavior. 

The underlying point of both theoretical frameworks is that for some students, academic failure 

produces frustration and poor study habits. This, in turn, can initiate a chain of events that lead to a 

withdrawal from and rejection of participation in classroom activities, prompting some youths to 

become disruptive in class or even drop out of school. If left unchecked, this behavior can eventually 

lead to delinquency and other serious problem behaviors (Elliot and Voss 1974). 

Outcome Evidence 

The research findings indicating a positive association between academic failure and future 

delinquency have led some practitioners to design prevention strategies that promote the acquisition 

of practical academic skills. 

One of the strategies specifically designed to increase academic skills for at-risk populations is 

alternative schools. Alternative schools are essentially specialized educational environments that place 

great emphasis on small classrooms, less structured classrooms, high teacher-to-student ratios, 

individualized instruction, and noncompetitive performance assessments (Raywid 1983). The purpose 

of these schools is to provide academic instruction to students expelled or suspended for disruptive 

behavior or weapons possession, or who are unable to succeed in the mainstream school environment 

(Ingersoll and LeBoeuf 1997). 

Recent evaluations (Kemple and Snipes 2000; Cox 1999; Cox, Davison, and Bynum 1995) suggest that 

alternative schools have some positive effects. A meta-analysis of 57 alternative school programs found 

that alternative schools have a positive effect on school performance, attitudes toward school, and selfesteem but no effect on delinquency (Cox, Davison, and Bynum 1995). The study also found that 

alternative schools targeting at-risk youths produced larger effects than other programs and that the 

more successful programs tend to have a curriculum and structure centered on the needs of the 

designated population. These effects, however, may be short term. Using an experimental design with 

a 1-year follow-up of a single alternative school, Cox (1999) found that these positive effects were not 

observed 1 year later. Consequently, the type of follow-up support given to students in alternative 

schools may be important in achieving the long-term goals of the program. Finally, a 5-year evaluation 

of the career academy concept (the OJJDP alternative school model) covering nine schools and 1,900 

students found that, compared with their counterparts who did not attend, at-risk students enrolled in 

career academies were 1) one third less likely to drop out of school; 2) more likely to attend school, 

complete academic and vocational courses, and apply to college; and 3) provided with more 

opportunities to set goals and reach academic and professional objectives (Kemple and Snipes 2000). 

While few other academic skill-building interventions have evaluated the specific impact of academic 

success on delinquency, several studies have examined the educational impact of the programs. In fact, 

 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention www.ojjdp.gov 2
 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention www.ojjdp.gov 3 

a rigorous review of hundreds of such programs by the American Youth Policy Forum recently 

identified 20 academic skills programs that produce significant gains in academic achievement. An 

overall analysis of these programs found that in comparison with peers or their own past academic 

performance, the adolescents involved in these 20 programs have higher test scores, graduate from 

school in higher numbers, and matriculate and remain in college in higher numbers (Jurich and Estes 

2000). 

Specifically, one of the programs included in the analysis was the Boys and Girls Club of America. 

BGCA initiated an afterschool program for public housing youths in 1996. The program includes 

activities such as essay writing, homework sessions, leisure reading, and educational games. It was 

evaluated with a nonrandomized comparison and control group design. The comparison and control 

groups were identical in age, gender, and ethnic/racial background. Some of the youths in the 

comparison and control group received tutoring but did not attend the structured program. The 

evaluation found that between the pre-test and 18-month follow-up, program youths had made 

statistically significant improvements in the average grades for mathematics, English, writing, science, 

social studies, and an overall grade. The school attendance rates of program youths also increased 

(Schinke, Cole, and Poulin 2000). 

Finally, a qualitative analysis of these 20 programs found that each shares common features that 

American Youth Policy Forum mapped into five strategies of successful programs (Jurich and Estes 

2000). These common features include the following: 

High Expectations for Youths, Program, and Staff 

This program feature reflects concepts such as academically challenging programmatic content; the 

expectation that all students have the ability to succeed; clear, well-defined education goals; ongoing 

staff training; and rigorous program evaluation. 

Personalized Attention 

This program feature emphasizes a concern for the youth as a student and as a person. The 

programmatic features include an adoption of small learning environments, the use of individual help 

and support, and a concern for the youth who may need extra services and support. Other personalized 

activities include homework and college application assistance, referral to health care and social 

services, career counseling, and assistance with strengthening the youth's family. Innovation is key in 

meeting ambitious educational goals. 

Innovative Structure/Organization 

This program feature concentrates on using traditional styles of program structure and organization to 

raise academic skills. The specific feature included in this category are research-focused programming, 

flexible hours of operation, extending the school year, using summer months and afterschool hours, 

changes in teacher and administrator roles, team teaching and teacher involvement in program design, 

and family, business, and community involvement. 

Experiential Learning 

Innovative educational environments sometimes require experiential learning to make academic 

instruction exciting and meaningful. Multicultural awareness, community services, internships, 

project-based learning, contextual learning, and career focus/planning are components of this program 

feature. 
 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention www.ojjdp.gov 4 

Long-Term Support 

This feature is crucial to the success of academic skills programs, as study habits and critical thinking 

are not tasks to be learned overnight. Programs should run for 1 to 5 years and continue from grades 9 

through 12 with an emphasis on academic transitions and post-graduation support. 

References 

American Psychiatric Association. 1994. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth 

Edition, DSM– IV. Washington, D.C.

Catalano, R.F.; R. Loeber; and K.C. McKinney. 1999. School and Community Interventions to Prevent 

Serious and Violent Offending. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice, Office of Justice 

Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 

Cloward, R., and L.E. Ohlin, 1960. Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. Glencoe, 

Ill.: Free Press. 

Cox, S. 1999. “An Assessment of an Alternative Education Program for At-Risk Delinquent Youth.” 

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 36(3):323–36. 

Cox, S.; W. Davison; and T. Bynum. 1995. “A Meta-Analytic Assessment of Delinquency-Related 

Outcomes of Alternative Education Programs.” Crime and Delinquency 41(2):219–34. 

Elliot, D.; D. Huizinga; and S. Ageton. 1985. Explaining Delinquency and Drug Use. Beverly Hills, Calif.: 

Sage. 

Elliot, D., and H. Voss. 1974. Delinquency and Dropout. Lexington, Mass.: DC Health. 

Gottfredson, Gary D. 1988. American Education–American Delinquency. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins 

University, Center for Social Organization of Schools. 

Hawkins, J.D., T.I. Herrenkohl, D.P. Farrington; D. Brewer; R.F. Catalano; T.W. Harachi; and L. 

Cothern. 2000. Predictors of Youth Violence. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 

Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 

Hawkins, J.D., and T. Lam. 1987. “Teacher Practices, Social Development, and Delinquency.” In J.D. 

Burchard and S.N. Burchard (eds.). Prevention of Delinquent Behavior. Newbury Park, Calif.: 

Sage. 

Henggeler, S.W. 1989. Delinquency in Adolescence. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage. 

Hirschi, T. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press. 

Ingersoll, S., and D. LeBoeuf. 1997. Reaching Out to Youth Out of the Education Mainstream. Bulletin. 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, OJJDP. 

Johnson, M.K; R. Crosnoe; and G.H. Elder. 2001. “Students’ Attachment and Academic Engagement: 

The Role of Race and Ethnicity.” Sociology of Education 74:318–40. 

Jurich, S., and S. Estes. 2000. Raising Academic Achievement for America’s Youth: A Study of 20 Successful 

Programs. Washington, D.C.: American Youth Policy Forum. 

Kelly, B.T.; R. Loeber; K. Keenan; and M. DeLamatre. 1997. Developmental Pathways in Boys’ Disruptive 

and Delinquent Behavior. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice 

Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 

Kemple, J., and J. Snipes. 2000. Career Academies: Impacts on Students’ Engagement and Performance in 

High School. San Francisco, Calif.: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. 

Maguin, E.; J.D. Hawkins; R.F. Catalano; K. Hill; R. Abbott; and T.I. Herrenkohl. 1995. “Risk Factors 

Measured at Three Ages for Violence at Age 17–18.” Paper presented at the American Society 

for Criminology, November, Boston, Mass. 

Maguin, E., and R. Loeber. 1996. “Academic Performance and Delinquency.” In Michael Tonry (ed.). 

Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 20. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press. 

Raywid, M. 1983. “Alternative Schools as a Model for Public Education.” Theory Into Practice 22:190–

97. 
Schinke, S.; K. Cole; and S.R. Poulin. 2000. “Enhancing the Educational Achievement of at-Risk 

Youth.” Prevention Science 1(1):51–60. 

Voelkl, Kristen, John W. Welte, and William F. Wieczorek. 1999. “Schooling and Delinquency Among 

White and African American Adolescents.” Urban Education 34(1):69–88. 

 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention www.ojjdp.gov 5