Fluent Essays

This assignment asks you to locate an assigned needs assessment study and answer a series of questions in a preformatted document.  I provide the DOI in the assignment handout.  Use the DOI to locate a copy of the article in our databases and download it to your computer.  To find the article in our databases, first, use the URL DOI, which will direct you to Wiley.  Follow the instructions in the handout to log into our databases.  If you prefer, you can use the article title and author names to locate it in the databases.   Next, provide the required information and enter it on the handout.  Upload the handout when you are done.  Be sure to follow all instructions.   I uploaded the article and the preformated questions. PS I need to submit this by 11 eastern stadard time today. 66 Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 Articles © 2020 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved. Received 04/15/19 Revised 09/12/19 Accepted 01/15/20 DOI: 10.1002/jaoc.12081 High-Risk Youth and Their Families: A Qualitative Needs Assessment Vaibhavee R. Agaskar, Amy Albert, and Venessa Garcia This qualitative study of 36 high-risk youth and their families identified the need for educational/career services, high quality after-school programs, behavioral health and social services, safety and violence interventions, sports/recreational activities, and sex education. Keywords: high-risk youth, risk and protective factors, needs assessment, juvenile justice system, parental-perceived needs of high-risk youth The juvenile justice system has experienced a paradigm shift from a punitive model toward a rehabilitation model in response to poor outcomes among institutionalized youth as well as budgetary restrictions (Mallett, 2012). An increase in evidence-based programs for prevention, early interventions, and treatment approaches will increase the probability of positive and desirable outcomes for youth involved in the juvenile justice system (Sarri, 2014). The interrelated and comorbid nature of behavioral issues and mental health prob- lems complicates preventive and intervention efforts and poses a significant problem that professional counselors are well equipped to handle (Mallett, 2012). Thus, it is imperative for professional counselors to work with high- risk children and youth who have increased vulnerability due to disabilities, trauma experiences, mental health issues, and other delinquency risk factors. These factors exponentially increase their chances to become involved in the juvenile justice court system. Although the extant literature suggests the predictive validity of these factors (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Mallett, 2012), there is a scant coverage of the needs of high-risk youth and their families, which creates a significant gap between the needs of these families and the offerings of service providers or governmental agencies. Thus, we aimed to fill this void by offering a holistic perspective of the lived experiences and needs of high-risk youth and their families. Vaibhavee R. Agaskar, Department of Counselor Education, and Venessa Garcia, Department of Criminal Justice, New Jersey City University; Amy Albert, Haven Adolescent Community Respite Center, Jersey City, New Jersey. This study was funded by the Hudson County Department of Health and Human Services. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Vaibhavee R. Agaskar, Department of Counselor Education, New Jersey City University, 2039 Kennedy Boulevard, Jersey City, NJ 07305 (email: [email protected]). Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 67 For this article, we use the term high-risk youth to describe youth who are at risk, involved in the juvenile justice system, or in the child welfare system. Kingston et al. (2016) defined high-risk youth as “those who are exposed to multiple risk factors or to a high level of a single risk factor for problem behavior” (p. 132). Research has shown that youth with multiple risk factors are less likely to have protective factors, which predicts future problem behavior (Pollard et al., 1999). Risk factors are “those characteristics, variables, or hazards that, if present for a given individual, make it more likely that this individual, rather than someone selected at random from the general population, will develop a disorder” (Arthur et al., 2002, p. 576), whereas protective factors mediate or moderate the effects of risk factors (Arthur et al., 2002). Risk factors could be internal or external in nature, such as poverty, family dysfunction, violence, trauma, mental health disorders, academic problems, and unsafe neighborhoods (Mallett, 2012). Several models exist to understand both risk and protective factors of high-risk youth; however, an ecological model of risk factors based on the typology of individual-, family-, and community-level risk factors underscores the intertwined nature of these risk factors (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [HHS], 2001). Most children and youth are resilient, so few are susceptible to the risk factors that might manifest into offending behavior that leads to delinquency and juvenile justice court involvement. Andrews et al. (1990) developed the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model of correctional assessment and rehabilitative programming for criminal and delinquent behavior. The main implication of the RNR model is crime prevention through the delivery of clinical, social, and human services to high-risk youth and adults. In a subsequent study, Andrews and Bonta (2010) identified risk and needs factors that predict criminal conduct, labeling them the “central eight” risk and needs factors. The first four factors, known as the “big four,” are (a) a history of antisocial behavior, (b) antisocial personality patterns, (c) antisocial cognition, and (d) antisocial associates. These well-studied four variables have been considered major predictors of criminal behaviors in individuals. In this article, we shed light on the other four variables, which can predict movement toward (i.e., onset and escalation) or away from (i.e., de-escalation and desistance) delinquency. Labeled the “moderate four,” these risk factors include (a) family/marital circumstances, (b) school/work, (c) leisure/recreation, and (d) substance abuse. Moreover, we examine four core interrelated risk factors that Mallett (2012) attributed to delinquency: (a) abuse and neglect, (b) mental health disorders, (c) substance use disorders, and (d) educational difficulties. There is a similarity between Mallett’s (2012) four core interrelated risk factors and Andrews and Bonta’s (2010) moderate four risk-needs factors for high-risk youth. Family dynamics, such as a positive child-parent relationship and a tight bond, serve as a protective factor in the criminal behavior trajectory of high-risk youth (Salvatore & Markowtiz, 2014), whereas 68 Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 noninvolvement in organized leisure-time activities and poor use of free time are considered predictors of delinquency (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). A high-crime, disadvantaged neighborhood may influence a positive parent and child relationship and expose youth to criminal behavior. Poor quality education, academic failure, underachievement, high absenteeism, and a sporadic attendance pattern have been linked to delinquency, especially violent delinquency (Cuervo & Villanueva, 2018; Lane & Carter, 2006). Due to no- or low-tolerance school policies, youth with educational issues face a more punitive approach, which leads to criminal involvement with juvenile court and paves the way for the school-to-prison pipeline (Mallett, 2016). The prevalence of mental health disorders, such as depression, bipolar disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and learning disabilities, are significantly higher among high-risk children and youth (Barrett et al., 2014; Mallett et al., 2009). Barrett et al. (2014) found that high- risk youth were more likely to have a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) diagnosis based on a pattern of aggression or impulsivity or a school- classified learning disability or emotional/behavioral disorder. Weist et al. (2001) pointed to a serious gap between the mental health needs of youth and the resources and effective programs available to meets their mental health needs. Drawing upon this risk/needs knowledge, service providers can plan interventions for high-risk youth. Although several distinct service delivery systems exist to address their needs, including special education, mental health and substance abuse, child welfare, and juvenile justice, high-risk youth share many common risk factors; thus, a systemic level of collabo- ration is needed to efficiently deal with youth and their families (Mallett, 2012). Suter and Bruns (2009) recommend a wraparound approach, which emphasizes a system of care framework, offering a comprehensive and coordinated network of services to youth with severe emotional and be- havioral needs. Such an approach aims to integrate juvenile justice, mental health, child welfare, and educational services for youth and their families. Early screening for risk factors is a pivotal step in planning effective in- terventions and prevention of future risky and delinquent behavior among high-risk youth. Over the last 2 decades, there has been a steady rise in using actuarial screening (brief screening on a number of objective criteria that measure the outcome of behavior, such as the risk of offending) in combination with clinical screening to improve the predictive outcome of high-risk youth’s future behavior (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Considering the intertwined nature of mental health and substance health issues among high-risk youth, standardized instruments, such as the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument and the Level of Services, are used widely for screen- ing. The Level of Services/Case Management Inventory, an evidence-based quantitative instrument, and newer versions, such as the Youth Level of Services, were developed on the basis of the previously mentioned central eight risk factors (Andrews et al., 2004). The Level of Services has great Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 69 predictive validity to assess various domains of youth, information that can be integrated for effective service delivery, and case management skills. Although there is growth in evidence-based assessments for early screening, few studies have evaluated the needs of high-risk youth from their own perspective and by focusing on all domains of their lives. Purpose of the Study and Research Question The purpose of this study was to conduct a needs assessment of high-risk youth and their parents or guardians from one urban, ethnically diverse, and densely populated county in the eastern United States. The outcome of this needs assessment aimed to effectively inform the joint planning process for services and support of high-risk youth work done by the county’s Juvenile Justice Commission (JJC) and HHS. County officials recruited the first and second authors as external evaluators to fulfill the state’s JJC mandate that counties conduct a needs assessment every 3 years. Such an assessment involves a process of identifying the needs of a group of people or an organization and in turn identifying and implementing needs-based solutions (Altshuld & Kumar, 2010). The county’s needs as- sessment centered on the following main research question: What are the needs and concerns of high-risk youth and their families? (For the focus group questions, see the Appendix.) Method Research Design The study used qualitative content analysis, a method that emerged during the World War II era as a distinctive analytical technique to interpret war- related propaganda material (Morgan, 1993). According to Hsieh and Shannon (2005), qualitative conventional content analysis is usually used to describe a phenomenon when there is a scarcity of existing theory or research literature. Content analysis is very similar to the grounded theory approach during the initial analytical approach, but the ultimate goal is concept development or model building rather than theory development (Lindkvist, 1981). It also can be used to compare and solicit different perspectives from two data sources (Morgan, 1993). The advantage of using conventional content analysis is that categories are directly derived from the data rather than imposing pre- conceived categories or theoretical perspectives (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). Qualitative content analysis can be used to interpret all visual and verbal data, including focus group and interview transcripts (Mayring, 2000). Research Team The research team, comprised of a female South Asian American clinical mental health counselor educator with 15 years of experience with child and adoles- cent behavioral health and a female Jewish American public defense lawyer 70 Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 with 17 years of experience, brought a strong diverse and interdisciplinary approach. Both team members served as focus-group facilitators, guiding participants through a series of predetermined questions. The research team met weekly or biweekly throughout the research process. During the initial stages of data collection, the team spent time identifying and addressing their assumptions about the research. This process, known as bracketing, is used in qualitative research to mitigate the potentially deleterious effects of preconceptions that may taint the research process (Tufford & Newman, 2012). Both members of the research team are mothers who have helped children and youth in different capacities for a long time. Thus, taking steps toward reflexivity and knowing their biases were essential in this study. Researcher bias included knowledge of the unmet and dire needs of this population and a need for systematic change in the criminal justice and mental health fields. During the data analysis stage, the research team paid attention to their own biases while analyzing and interpreting participants’ voices or stories. An external auditor (the third author), a female Hispanic American criminal justice educator, was used to increase the trustworthiness of the data during the analysis writing phase of the project. The first and third authors have experience in program evaluation and qualitative research methodology. To increase the credibility of the research, the team used various techniques, such as negative case analysis, peer debriefing, verbatim transcripts, and prolonged engagement (McMillan & Schumacher, 2010). Sampling Procedure and Instrument After receiving the institutional review board approval, the research team selected all participants (youth and parent/guardians) by using purposive sampling (Creswell, 1998), primarily for their ability to provide informa- tion that reflected the needs of county high-risk youth and their interest in the well-being of these youth. HHS personnel circulated an electronic flyer detailing the focus of the study to county-funded organizations, such as com- munity mental health centers, hospitals, schools, and homeless shelters, and arranged for focus groups to be held in those organizations’ own settings. For this study, the selection criteria for youth participants were defined as male or female, in the age range of 14 to 21 years, and involved with the juvenile justice system and other youth-serving systems, such as the Division of Child Protection and Permanency and the Children System of Care. The research team and the county’s HHS decided to combine youth from JJC and the child welfare system for this needs assessment because many of these youth share common risk factors. Thus, the county could gain generic information about the needs of youth so it could allocate funding and resources. This reasoning also is consistent with the empirical literature (Mallett, 2012) and mandated by the state JJC. The selection criteria for parent/guardian participants were that they were above the age of 21 and had a child. Parents/guardians all lived in the county, and their children may or may not have been involved in a county youth-serving system. Those who expressed interest were sent Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 71 consent forms that described the scope of the study, procedure, and the option to withdraw from the study at any point without penalty from their serving systems. Parental consent forms were collected prior to the focus groups for all minor participants. Focus group questions were developed based on a literature review and input from county and respite center personnel. The focus group questions and process were piloted with one small group of three parents. At the time of each focus group, participants submitted a signed informed consent and a demographic questionnaire. The research team conducted nine focus groups (five youth focus groups and four parent/ guardian focus groups), each approximately 45 to 60 minutes, during the spring and summer of 2017. They were audio recorded and transcribed by a professional service. To protect confidentiality in this study, the research team replaced all participants’ names with pseudonyms. Participants Youth participants. Thirty-six high-risk youth participated in this study. Most of the participants had at least one contact with the juvenile justice system and had various offenses, such as sex offense, arson, curfew violations, school disciplinary offense, truancy, and possession of drugs. The rest of the participants were involved with the child welfare system. To protect participant confidentiality, group composition is not disclosed other than in the demographic information that follows. Their ages ranged from 14 years to 21 years (M = 17.5). Twenty-six (72\%) were male; 10 (28\%) were female. The racial makeup varied: 42\% of the youth identified as African American, 39\% identified as Latina/o, 8\% identified as European Ameri- can, 6\% identified as Asian American, and the remaining 6\% identified as mixed race. Fourteen percent of the sample were first-generation im- migrants. Languages spoken in the household included English, Spanish, French, Tagalog, and Urdu. Education also varied: 89\% were either in high school/alternative educational programs or working toward their general educational diploma, 6\% had completed their general educational diploma, and 6\% were homeschooled. Only one participant was working part-time. Seventy-eight percent of the participants lived with their parents or legal guardian, whereas the rest resided in a homeless shelter. Parent/guardian participants. A total of 13 parents/guardians participated in this study. Eighty-five percent were female and 15\% were male. Twenty- three percent were first-generation immigrants. The racial breakdown of the parent/guardian participants included 54\% African Americans, 15\% European Americans, 15\% Latinas/os, and 15\% Asian Americans. Parents/ guardians spoke varying languages at home, including English, Spanish, Urdu, and Tagalog. Almost all of the participants reported working at low- paying single or multiple jobs, were the sole providers for their families, and belonged to a working-class background. One parent identified as a single mother, three were grandmother guardians, and the remaining nine belonged to two-parent families. 72 Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 Data Analysis The research team made a deliberate decision to analyze parental and youth focus groups separately and then compared data between the two groups because the developmental levels of the two groups differed. To achieve immersion and gain the whole sense of the data, the research team reread transcribed reports of the focus groups multiple times. The data were read word-by-word to bring out persistent words, phrases, or themes (Morse & Field, 1995). Codes were derived by first highlighting the exact words from the text that appeared to capture key thoughts and concepts for later retrieval and resorting. Labels for codes emerged that were reflective of more than one key thought. Codes were then sorted into categories based on how different codes were related and linked; emergent categories were then organized into meaningful clusters (Patton, 2002). Categories were kept broad at the initial stages of data analysis, and major categories were sorted into smaller categories during the later stages of the analysis (Morse & Field, 1995). A tree diagram was developed to organize these categories into a hierarchical structure (see Figures 1 and 2). Next, definitions of each category, subcategory, and code were developed. All data were analyzed manually by highlighting words and using Microsoft Excel to store and manage emerging codes and categories. Results Major Findings: Youth We started the youth focus group by asking participants to talk about their best quality as an icebreaker activity. This was followed by a question on the services a county can offer to make their best quality even better. Analysis of youth focus groups yielded four major themes related to ser- vices they believed the county should provide to youth: educational and FIGURE 1 Categories From Youth Needs Assessment Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 73 career services, behavioral health and social services, safety and violence interventions, and sports and recreational activities. Educational and career services. Education and career preparedness were major concerns for the youth. Each participant articulated a variety of deficiencies in secondary educational offerings, which included a limited range of vocational programs, lack of business classes, poor teacher quality, and a lack of information about how to get into the programs they were interested in or thought would best suit their needs. Most of the youth were not happy with the range of subjects available to them. They pointed to the lack of training in business, music, or other areas in which they were interested. Some talked about how little information they got about voca- tional programs. All youth expressed concern about how little they knew about the college admission process or financial aid. Jacob expressed his views about the uselessness of his education: “School teaches us subjects like math and science, which actually do not help us to get jobs.” Clinton explained that “School is not meant for everyone, but maybe if we can get training in plumbing or mechanical work then we can earn more money than a college graduate.” Mohammad reported that “County Vocational School will help you out to get a job after you graduate.” Rahim stated, “The only thing the county can really do is to provide us with better job opportunities.” Most of the youth were aware of their needs. Most participants were particularly disappointed with teachers. Sherry criticized their competency by demanding quality teachers to do real teaching. Deshawn, who went to a traditional educational program, lamented that he would prefer learning from teachers and not just worksheets to complete at home or in the classroom. In sum, youth demanded an applied curriculum that would prepare them to enter the workforce as well as college. They were more interested in school taking a lead role in preparing them for a future career or job. Behavioral health and social services. Youth participants focused heavily on behavioral health and social service needs, including drug treatment, FIGURE 2 Categories From Parent/Guardian Needs Assessment 74 Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 violence reduction, help with family conflict, and juvenile justice/criminal justice reentry services. Many of the young people talked about the need for more and better services that are more targeted toward their individual needs. They spoke at length about the impact of drugs and alcohol on their lives. Most of the youth agreed that drug abuse was a major problem in the county and that it affected their lives in many ways. David summed up his fears: “Keep kids away from negative influences.” Participants also talked about the need for services that address family conflict. They agreed that there might be a range of services that are appropriate, but expressed particular concern about police involvement in family conflicts. Mike, for example, voiced his concerns by stating, “I gather I did something stupid, but are you going to call police on your own family?” Alyssa added, “I will never want [my mom] to try to call the cops on some [one] you gave birth to. . . . I just wouldn’t understand it.” David and Mike both believed that “some problems you can work out at home, and you don’t need the police.” Their responses clearly demonstrated a need for family-centered interventions for the youth and their parents. Finally, some participants discussed the need for better reentry services for criminal justice–involved/juvenile justice–involved youth. Some of the youth talked about increasing the age limits for benefits for homeless youth and for services that meet basic needs, such as grants for education, housing, and entitlements assistance. Safety and violence interventions. Because safety and violence intervention emerged as major themes during our discussion of behavioral health, we decided to make this as a separate category in the final phase of the research. Most county youth reported that their neighborhoods were not safe places: “No way; it’s not safe unless you move out of the city. But some people don’t want to move” or “If you like your life don’t come outside of your home.” Most of the youth had been exposed to trauma, such as shootings in their neighbor- hood, and thus they felt unsafe. Although many youth expressed a desire for intervention from the government to prevent violence and to make them feel safer, some said that they were not comfortable with police being in their neighborhood and reported that “I don’t like cops that’s always outside. That would make it dangerous” (Keith). A few talked about safe neighborhood-based recreational opportunities as a solution. They simply focused on the need for intervention: “I just feel scared not only for myself and for like everybody . . . my little brother” (Steve). Others dealt with the violence by putting on an air of toughness and indifference. Shaquan, for example, said, “I grew up around there, so I don’t have any to bother. I am not scared of anyone. Whatever hap- pens.” Whatever their attitude toward the violence in their neighborhoods, it was apparent that this was a constant factor impacting their lives. Sports and recreational activities. Most of the youth participants were interested in a variety of sports-related activities, such as basketball, baseball, soccer, softball, cricket, martial arts, and boxing. They also liked to visit local malls with their peers. Kevin shared, “It’s not about Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling • October 2020 • Volume 41 75 what we do in school; it’s about what we do after 8 o’clock.” Most of the youth wanted to spend time out in the late evening with their peers in a violence-free recreational facility that was closer to their home or in the same neighborhood. Furthermore, most of the youth lamented that they were not satisfied with the equipment or supplies provided by existing sports programs within the county. Another complaint was that there were only a few facilities available in the county that were free, had a convenient location, and were open late. However, a lack of transportation or limited and expensive access to public transportation prevented many of the youth from engaging in existing programs. Interestingly, three of the 36 youth stated that they did not want the county to provide them with anything. This could be interpreted in two ways: either they really have all needs met or they really do not trust government to fulfill their needs, which could be the result of resistance to an oppressive system. Major Findings: Parents/Guardians We began each parent/guardian focus group by talking about the strengths of their children. Then, we focused on the service needs that parents/ guardians identified. Overall, we identified three broad themes from the parent focus group data: behavioral health and social services, high-quality after-school programs, and sex education in the school system. Behavioral health and social services. When we asked parents in what areas their children needed the most support, most parents identified their chil- dren’s needs and their needs as parents. They also vented about the lack of care as well as barriers to seeking services. Most participants reported that their children had a variety of mental health issues, such as frustra- tion, anxiety, depression, aggression, bullying, and suicidal ideation. They also had drug-related problems. Parents estimated that at least 30\% of their teenagers were involved in drugs and alcohol use. However, at least one parent noted, “My kids don’t do drugs. They actually hate it.” Most of the parents agreed that they needed the low cost or free inpatient and outpatient services for their children for issues like substance use or mental health. Deborah, a grandmother who is the guardian of her 17-year- old grandson, lamented that … Analyzing a journal article that focuses on needs assessment research. Must use this article by Agaskar, Albert & Garcia—the DOI will take you to the article (in Wiley). Once you are at Wiley’s webpage, look for the link for full text. Click that. On the next page, you will see the option to log in to FSCJ’s databases. Select that option and enter your log in credentials. You will be directed to the article. OR: Log in to our databases and find the article yourself by using the title and the author names. High-Risk Youth and Their Families: A Qualitative Needs Assessment Vaibhavee R. Agaskar, Amy Albert, & Venessa Garcia https://doi.org/10.1002/jaoc.12081 · (This article is available in full text in our library). · You will need to download it and create a complete reference for the article. · All responses must be in complete, grammatically correct sentences. · Proof-read to ensure you have provided enough detail. · Include page numbers from the article to indicate where you found the answer for each question. · Cite your book when prompted to do so—be sure to provide the page number in the citation or the chapter and section number. Begin Here: complete reference in APA style (3 points): Step 1: What is the objective of this study? (See the introduction section of the article) a. Write down the exact statement in which the authors describe what they were testing or investigating. This may be provided as a purpose statement or a hypothesis. Include quotation marks around the exact wording (do not forget the page number) (4 points) Enter answer. b. Describe the purpose of the study, as you understand it, in your own words. (3 points) Enter answer. c. What is the gap in the previous research that the authors are trying to fill by conducting this study? In other words, what did they say other studies had not done? (Do not forget the page number). (4 points) Enter answer. Step 2: What are the major findings of the study? (See the discussion section of the article) a. What are the authors’ major conclusions or findings? Include quotation marks if using exact wording—do not forget the page number. (5 points) Enter answer. b. Summarize the conclusions, as you understand them, in your own words. (3 points) Enter answer. Step 3: How did the authors test their hypothesis or carry out their investigation? (See the methods section of the article) a. Briefly summarize the main steps or measurements that the authors used in their methods. Should include type of study (survey, observation, etc.), (orientation to data—qualitative or quantitative), how, where and when the authors gathered data. Be sure to note the study population or participants—do not forget the page number. Do not cut and paste this information. (5 points) Enter answer. b. How did the authors analyze their data? What statistical test(s) if any, did the authors use if the study was quantitative? If the study was qualitative—how did they analyze their data descriptively? Did they follow a particular method or strategy? (5 points) Enter answer. Step 4: How reliable are the results? (See discussion or limitations section) a. Do the authors suggest any problems or limitations with their methodology? Do you see any problems or limitations with their methodology? Put this in your own words and be sure to link this to what you have learned from your book. Cite the book and give page or chapter and section numbers. (5 points) Enter answer. b. Do the authors connect or relate their findings to any previous study? Write down the exact statement in which the authors describe how their study supports earlier research. Include quotation marks around the exact wording (do not forget the page number). (5 points) Enter answer. Step 5: What is the importance of this research study? (See discussion or limitations section) a. Write (in your own words) the significant contributions of the research in this article as reported by the authors. (3 points) Enter answer. b. How could the results of this study help the helping community meet needs? Be specific and relate this to your book. Be sure to cite the book and give page or chapter and section numbers (5 points) Enter answer. Adapted from · Student Worksheet: Analyzing a Journal Article. https://www.lib.uoguelph.ca/sites/default/files/student_worksheet.pdf. University of Guelph. 2013 · Information Literacy Toolkit: How to Read a Scholarly Journal Article. University of Texas at Austin, University of Texas Libraries. 2013.