| Literature DB >> 30110358 |
Mabula Nkuba1,2, Katharin Hermenau1,3, Katharina Goessmann4, Tobias Hecker3,4.
Abstract
The high global prevalence of school violence underlines the need for prevention. However, there are few scientifically evaluated intervention approaches that aim at preventing violence by teachers. We evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of the preventative intervention Interaction Competencies with Children for Teachers (ICC-T). In a cluster randomized controlled trial we assessed attitudes towards and use of violence by teachers (self-reported and reported by students) at eight schools in four regions in Tanzania. Two regions were randomly assigned as intervention regions. Data were assessed in the months before and three months after intervention. In total, 158 teachers (58% females; age: 32.08 years, SD = 5.65) and 486 students (54% females; age: 15.61 years, SD = 0.89) participated in this study. The feasibility was very good: Participants' acceptance was high and they reported a good integration of the core elements in their working routine. The significantly stronger decrease in the use of emotional and physical violence reported both by teachers and students as well as the stronger decrease in positive attitudes of teachers towards physical and emotional violence in the intervention schools at follow-up provide initial evidence of the efficacy. However, further evidence for the sustainability of its effect is needed.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30110358 PMCID: PMC6093611 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201362
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Flow-chart of the study design.
Fig 2Use of emotional and physical violence against students and positive attitudes towards emotional and physical violence reported by teachers in intervention and control schools at pre-assessment and follow-up assessment.
*1 significant interaction effect, *2 significant decrease from pre-assessment to follow-up in intervention group, *3 significant difference between intervention and control schools at follow up.
Descriptive statistics of the teacher sample in intervention and control schools at pre- and follow-up assessment.
| Intervention schools | Control schools | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | ||||||
| Gender | 65 | 33 | 51 | 75 | 25 | 33 |
| Qualification ( | 65 | 44 | 68 | 75 | 52 | 69 |
| Other sources of income ( | 65 | 52 | 80 | 75 | 50 | 67 |
| Household income /month | 65 | 40 | 62 | 75 | 50 | 67 |
| Age ( | 65 | 31.69 | 5.63 | 75 | 32.75 | 5.87 |
| Average teaching experience | 65 | 5.88 | 4.14 | 75 | 6.51 | 5.26 |
| Average working hours | 65 | 40.02 | 1.67 | 75 | 39.60 | 2.70 |
| Average number of students per class | 65 | 68.05 | 24.57 | 75 | 54.63 | 17.07 |
| Attitude towards emotional violence ( | 64 | 3.53 | 2.02 | 65 | 3.40 | 2.38 |
| Attitude towards emotional violence ( | 64 | 0.97 | 1.10 | 65 | 2.51 | 1.68 |
| Attitude towards physical violence ( | 64 | 3.28 | 2.83 | 65 | 3.48 | 3.24 |
| Attitude towards physical violence ( | 64 | 0.81 | 0.99 | 65 | 2.15 | 1.68 |
| Use of emotional violence ( | 64 | 7.39 | 4.30 | 65 | 8.40 | 5.98 |
| Use of emotional violence ( | 64 | 1.69 | 1.66 | 65 | 5.52 | 2.88 |
| Use of physical violence ( | 64 | 9.59 | 5.50 | 65 | 8.02 | 6.96 |
| Use of physical violence ( | 64 | 1.17 | 1.44 | 65 | 5.17 | 3.39 |
Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation; N = total number of respondents; % = percentage; n = number of responses in a particular category; PA = pre-assessment; FU = follow-up assessment.
Fig 3Exposure to emotional and physical violence reported by students in intervention and control schools at pre-assessment and follow-up assessment.
*1 significant interaction effect, *2 significant decrease from pre-assessment to follow-up in intervention group, *3 significant difference between intervention and control schools at follow up, *4 significant difference between intervention and control schools at follow up (after controlling pre-assessment scores).
Descriptive statistics of student sample in intervention and control schools at pre- and follow-up assessment.
| Intervention schools | Control schools | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | ||||||
| Gender | 209 | 94 | 45 | 191 | 90 | 47 |
| Grade ( | 209 | 116 | 56 | 191 | 95 | 50 |
| Students’ parents alive | 209 | 158 | 76 | 191 | 164 | 86 |
| School location | 209 | 98 | 47 | 191 | 88 | 46 |
| Age ( | 209 | 14.83 | 1.06 | 191 | 14.80 | 0.82 |
| Exposure to emotional violence ( | 204 | 9.13 | 6.28 | 187 | 9.97 | 5.92 |
| Exposure to emotional violence ( | 204 | 5.40 | 4.12 | 187 | 9.68 | 4.70 |
| Exposure to physical violence ( | 204 | 12.21 | 9.21 | 187 | 15.28 | 7.68 |
| Exposure to physical violence ( | 204 | 6.22 | 6.80 | 187 | 10.30 | 7.53 |
Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation; N = total number of respondents; % = percentage; n = number of responses in a particular category: PA = pre-assessment; FU = follow up assessment.