In this study, we randomly assigned 123 sixth and seventh grade classrooms from seven middle schools in the greater Cleveland area to one of two five-session curricula addressing gender violence/sexual harassment (GV/SH) or to a no-treatment control group. A baseline survey and two follow-up surveys were administered immediately after the treatment (Wave 2) and about six months posttreatment (Wave 3). In an earlier paper, we demonstrated the effectiveness of two approaches to youth GV/SH prevention programming (a fact-based, law and justice curriculum and an interaction-based curriculum). In this paper, we explored whether these largely positive findings remain for both girls and boys, including whether girls experience higher levels of GV/SH than boys. Most of our statistical models proved to be non-statistically significant. However, in 2 of our 48 victimization/ perpetration (any violence, sexual violence and non-sexual violence) models (across two post-intervention follow-up points), we observed that the interventions reduced peer (male or female, non-dating partner) sexual violence victimization and reduced peer perpetration, but another outcome model indicated that the interventions increased dating perpetration. These mixed findings will need to be explored further in future research. Regarding our primary research question, we observed no statistically significant differences for the treatment multiplied by gender interaction terms for any of the perpetration or victimization outcome models, suggesting that the treatment had similar effects on girls and boys. However, we did observe that boys are more involved in violence than girls: both as victims and perpetrators. Boys experienced significantly more of three types of victimization from peers and dating partners compared to what girls experienced at the hands of their peers and dating partners. As perpetrators, boys committed more sexual victimization against peers (immediately post-intervention only) and more sexual victimization against dating partners than girls. The implications of these results are discussed.
In this experiment, 123 sixth and seventh grade classrooms from Cleveland area schools were randomly assigned to one of two five-session curricula addressing gender violence/ sexual harassment (GV/SH) or to a no-treatment control. Three-student surveys were administered. Students in the law and justice curricula, compared to the control group, had significantly improved outcomes in awareness of their abusive behaviors, attitudes toward GV/SH and personal space, and knowledge. Students in the interaction curricula experienced lower rates of victimization, increased awareness of abusive behaviors, and improved attitudes toward personal space. Neither curricula affected perpetration or victimization of sexual harassment. While the intervention appeared to reduce peer violence victimization and perpetration, a conflicting finding emerged-the intervention may have increased dating violence perpetration (or at least the reporting of it) but not dating violence victimization.
A previously published effectiveness study of Project ALERT delivered in schools by outside providers from Cooperative Extension found no positive effects for the adult or teen-assisted delivery of the curriculum despite high-quality implementation. Those findings and the likelihood that more outside providers will deliver evidence-based drug prevention programs in the future, led to this investigation of possible influences of leaders' personal characteristics on ALERT's program effects. Influence of leader characteristics on students' drug use and mediating variables for use were assessed by modeling program effects on within-student change as a function of leader characteristics. Students in classrooms with adult leaders who were more conscientious, sociable, or individuated were more likely to experience beneficial program effects. Students in teen-assisted classrooms with teen leaders who were more sociable or, to a lesser extent, highly individuated, showed more positive effects. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.