How did the Good School Toolkit reduce the risk of past week physical violence from teachers to students? Qualitative findings on pathways of change in schools in Luwero, Uganda.

Violence against children is a serious violation of children's rights with significant impacts on current and future health and well-being. The Good School Toolkit (GST) is designed to prevent violence against children in primary schools through changing schools' operational cultures. Conducted in the Luwero District in Uganda between 2012 and 2014, findings from previous research indicate that the Toolkit reduced the odds of past week physical violence from school staff (OR = 0.40, 95%CI 0.26-0.64, p < 0.001), corresponding to a 42% reduction in risk of past week physical violence. This nested qualitative study involved 133 interviews with students, teachers, school administration, and parents, and two focus group discussion with teachers. Interviews were conducted using semi-structured tools and analysed using thematic analysis complemented by constant comparison and deviant case analysis techniques. Within a context of normative acceptance of corporal punishment this qualitative paper reports suggestive pathways related to teacher-student relationships through which reductions in violence operated. First, improved student-teacher relationships resulted in improved student voice and less fear of teachers. Second, the intervention helped schools to clarify and encourage desired behaviour amongst students through rewards and praise. Third, many teachers valued positive discipline and alternative discipline methods, including peer-to-peer discipline, as important pathways to reduced use of violence. These shifts were reflected in changes in the views, use, and context of beating. Although the GST is effective for reducing physical violence from teachers to students, violence persisted, though at significantly reduced levels, in all schools with reductions varying across schools and individuals. Much of the success of the Toolkit derives from the support it provides for fostering better student-teacher relationships and alternative discipline options. Such innovation could usefully be incorporated in teacher training syllabi to equip teachers with knowledge and skills to maintain discipline without the use of fear or physical punishment

Findings from the SASA! Study: a cluster randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of a community mobilization intervention to prevent violence against women and reduce HIV risk in Kampala, Uganda

Background Intimate partner violence (IPV) and HIV are important and interconnected public health concerns. While it is recognized that they share common social drivers, there is limited evidence surrounding the potential of community interventions to reduce violence and HIV risk at the community level. The SASA! study assessed the community-level impact of SASA!, a community mobilization intervention to prevent violence and reduce HIV-risk behaviors. Methods From 2007 to 2012 a pair-matched cluster randomized controlled trial (CRT) was conducted in eight communities (four intervention and four control) in Kampala, Uganda. Cross-sectional surveys of a random sample of community members, 18- to 49-years old, were undertaken at baseline (n = 1,583) and four years post intervention implementation (n = 2,532). Six violence and HIV-related primary outcomes were defined a priori. An adjusted cluster-level intention-to-treat analysis compared outcomes in intervention and control communities at follow-up. Results The intervention was associated with significantly lower social acceptance of IPV among women (adjusted risk ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.79) and lower acceptance among men (0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.15); significantly greater acceptance that a woman can refuse sex among women (1.28, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.52) and men (1.31, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.70); 52% lower past year experience of physical IPV among women (0.48, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.39); and lower levels of past year experience of sexual IPV (0.76, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.72). Women experiencing violence in intervention communities were more likely to receive supportive community responses. Reported past year sexual concurrency by men was significantly lower in intervention compared to control communities (0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.91). Conclusions This is the first CRT in sub-Saharan Africa to assess the community impact of a mobilization program on the social acceptability of IPV, the past year prevalence of IPV and levels of sexual concurrency. SASA! achieved important community impacts, and is now being delivered in control communities and replicated in 15 countries

Implementation of the Good School Toolkit in Uganda: a quantitative process evaluation of a successful violence prevention program.

BACKGROUND: The Good School Toolkit, a complex behavioural intervention designed by Raising Voices a Ugandan NGO, reduced past week physical violence from school staff to primary students by an average of 42% in a recent randomised controlled trial. This process evaluation quantitatively examines what was implemented across the twenty-one intervention schools, variations in school prevalence of violence after the intervention, factors that influence exposure to the intervention and factors associated with students' experience of physical violence from staff at study endline. METHODS: Implementation measures were captured prospectively in the twenty-one intervention schools over four school terms from 2012 to 2014 and Toolkit exposure captured in the student (n = 1921) and staff (n = 286) endline cross-sectional surveys in 2014. Implementation measures and the prevalence of violence are summarised across schools and are assessed for correlation using Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient. Regression models are used to explore individual factors associated with Toolkit exposure and with physical violence at endline. RESULTS: School prevalence of past week physical violence from staff against students ranged from 7% to 65% across schools at endline. Schools with higher mean levels of teacher Toolkit exposure had larger decreases in violence during the study. Students in schools categorised as implementing a 'low' number of program school-led activities reported less exposure to the Toolkit. Higher student Toolkit exposure was associated with decreased odds of experiencing physical violence from staff (OR: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.67-0.86, p-value< 0.001). Girls, students reporting poorer mental health and students in a lower grade were less exposed to the toolkit. After the intervention, and when adjusting for individual Toolkit exposure, some students remained at increased risk of experiencing violence from staff, including, girls, students reporting poorer mental health, students who experienced other violence and those reporting difficulty with self-care. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that increasing students and teachers exposure to the Good School Toolkit within schools has the potential to bring about further reductions in violence. Effectiveness of the Toolkit may be increased by further targeting and supporting teachers' engagement with girls and students with mental health difficulties. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov , NCT01678846, August 24th 2012

Remote methods for research on violence against women and children: lessons and challenges from research during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Collecting data to understand violence against women and children during and after the COVID-19 pandemic is essential to inform violence prevention and response efforts. Although researchers across fields have pivoted to remote rather than in-person data collection, remote research on violence against women, children and young people poses particular challenges. As a group of violence researchers, we reflect on our experiences across eight studies in six countries that we redesigned to include remote data collection methods. We found the following areas were crucial in fulfilling our commitments to participants, researchers, violence prevention and research ethics: (1) designing remote data collection in the context of strong research partnerships; (2) adapting data collection approaches; (3) developing additional safeguarding processes in the context of remote data collection during the pandemic; and (4) providing remote support for researchers. We discuss lessons learnt in each of these areas and across the research design and implementation process, and summarise key considerations for other researchers considering remote data collection on violence