Go for the Gold Research (click here to view the full program evaluation)

The grant-funded organization, Marriage Works! Ohio, under the direction of the Elizabeth New Life Center, developed the Go for the Gold program, a 2 week classroom guidance program designed to teach adolescents the skills needed for healthy relationships. Go for the Gold has been taught in various high schools throughout Dayton and surrounding communities since 2008. While research shows that high school is an invaluable time to teach adolescents healthy relationship skills, there has been little or no evidence to show the results of this specific program.
Over the past three years over 8,000 students from 23 different high schools were exposed to this program. From those students exposed, 5,937 matched pre and post surveys have been collected. These surveys have then been compiled and compared in order to determine the efficacy of the Go for the Gold program, specifically highlighting the following areas: healthy relationship skills, a positive view towards marriage, recognizing abusive and risky behaviors, conflict resolution skills, financial awareness, premarital sex and cohabitation.

This study focuses on the current curriculum utilized for the Go for the Gold program, which has undergone various changes before being adapted into the current program. For the purposes of this study, only surveys from students who were exposed to the current eight hour curriculum will be utilized. This curriculum is research-based with credit being given to Boys Town and Dr. Joe S. McIlhaney and Dr. Freda McKissic Bush, authors of  Hooked: New Science on How Casual Sex is Affecting our Children.  The primary author of the curriculum is Terri Harsh.

The program in review was taught by various pairs of Marriage Works! Ohio presenters, in health life-skills classrooms. The program is taught through interactive lessons. The curriculum is eight hours long but in order to accommodate the full lesson and both a pre test and post test the program was taught over the course of ten school days in fifty minute sessions each. On Day 1 a pre-survey was administered by a specially-trained evaluator to gain demographic information and measure students’ attitudes and opinions prior to exposure.  On Day 10 a post-survey, administered by the same evaluator, was given to measure the change in opinions and attitudes.

The Go for the Gold program was taught in 23 high schools throughout six counties: Miami, Montgomery, Butler, Greene, Shelby and Warren. These counties have great diversity when it comes to race, socio-economic status and urban, suburban and rural settings.  Schools were not chosen for participation based on any specific criteria, other than existing within one of the six specified counties.

Of the sample of 5,937 anonymous students utilized, 51.4% were female and 48% were male. For race, students were only able to select one option. Of the sample, 73.4% were Caucasian, 13.3% were African American, 3.5% were biracial, 2.7% were Hispanic, 0.1% were Native American, 1.3% were Asian American and 5.3% identified themselves as “Other”. The average age for students in the sample population was 15.6 years old. The ages of those students exposed to the program ranged from 13 years old to 18 years old.  33.6% of the students exposed were 9th grade students. 40.3% were 10th grade students. 11.9% were 11th grade students and 13.8% were 12th grade students.
 

For the purpose of this research the survey responses of both the pre and post tests were translated into a Likert scale and then compared. In order to use the Likert scale each answer selection is coded with a corresponding value. For example, the answer “Agree a Lot” would have an answer value of 4 in a standard question and 1 in a reversal question. Reversal questions are those written in the negative, attempting to ensure participants are thoroughly reading the questions.  Answer values progress logically from there.

Once the data set was transferred to a Likert scoring the data was analyzed as a full program, scoring each participant’s full pre-survey to full post-survey. Then data was broken down into the various topics: students’ attitudes towards marriage, students’ views on risky behaviors, students’ attitudes towards conflict and resolution, students’ views towards responsible financial management and students’ views on premarital sex and cohabitation. All areas were reviewed for this research.  The following chart highlights the change in percentage from pre to post test experienced in the full program, each distinct category and across genders.

Analyzing the data collected over the past three years provides evidence that the Go for the Gold program did make an impact on the students exposed to it. For the overall program as well as each of the categories, average scores rose on the post-survey compared to the pre-survey. This means that in each situation students’ views moved from less healthy to more healthy after being exposed to Go for the Gold. This also holds true across genders, as both the scores of females and males, when analyzed separately, also moved from less healthy to more healthy.

Several students also provided anecdotal evidence as to the impact of the Go for the Gold program on their lives. One student from Beavercreek High School wrote, “Before this program, I was not even considering getting married. I have seen my parents fight my whole life, and I decided that I did not want that.  Thank you for showing me that I can build a healthy relationship.” And a student at Sidney High School shared that, “I learned that abuse needs to stop. And I need to stop hitting my girlfriend.” These and many other personal testimonies from students help to demonstrate how beneficial this program can be for high school students.

While this analysis provides strong evidence pointing towards the effectiveness of this program, the analysis is slightly limited in scope. Through this initial research we determined that the program does have an impact on the opinions of those exposed to it.  Future research should look to compare those taking this program with those in a control group, unexposed to this material. It would also be beneficial to perform a longitudinal study examining student behaviors pre and post exposure as well, analyzing behaviors immediately after the program and then again several weeks or months later, to determine lasting effects. This research provides solid ground work which will allow more in-depth evaluation to follow.