*Result*: An action research mixed method evaluation of the implementation of an anxiety intervention/prevention program for year 3 children at a language development centre preparing to enter into mainstream education

*This study examines the effectiveness of implementing a modified cognitive behavioural (CBT) anxiety intervention/prevention program to meet the specific needs of speech and language impaired (SLI) children enrolled in a Language Development Centre (LDC), as they prepare to exit the LDC and enter into mainstream education. The study implemented the anxiety CBT program over two consecutive school years incorporating two different Year 3 cohorts (age range 7 to 9 years) and is reported in three stages. The first study aimed to modify an anxiety CBT intervention/prevention program (namely the FRIENDS for Life program) for SLI children enrolled in Year 3 at a LDC as they prepared to exit the LDC and enter into mainstream education. All children offered the program participated in the study however, parent participation was low. Previous research (Barrett et al, 1996, Barrett, 1999; Bett, 2002; Mendlowitz, 1996 & Rapee et al, 2005) found that in order for anxiety intervention/prevention programs to be efficacious for children, the program focus needed to include parents. The inclusion of parent participation for children with language impairment is considered essential, as the children are more likely to benefit from having the CBT strategies consolidated and supported at home (Bett, 2002). Therefore, the second study involved a re-implementation of the modified FRIENDS for Life program to a second cohort of SLI children in Year 3 the following year. Due to low participation of parent involvement in the first study, this study aimed for improved parent involvement and participation of the parent FRIENDS for Life sessions. Thirty-two children participated in study one and thirty-three children participated in study two. Both studies used an action research mixed method evaluation approach to gain a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of the program. The outcomes, using standardised outcome measures showed no significant difference between the control group and t*