Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jun 14;3(6):e0001404.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001404. eCollection 2023.

Understanding why EmpaTeach did not reduce teachers' use of violence in Nyarugusu Refugee Camp: A quantitative process evaluation of a school-based violence prevention intervention

Affiliations

Understanding why EmpaTeach did not reduce teachers' use of violence in Nyarugusu Refugee Camp: A quantitative process evaluation of a school-based violence prevention intervention

Camilla Fabbri et al. PLOS Glob Public Health. .

Abstract

EmpaTeach was the first intervention to address teacher violence to be tested in a humanitarian setting and the first to focus on reducing impulsive use of violence, but a cluster randomised trial found no evidence that the intervention was effective in reducing physical and emotional violence from teachers. We aimed to understand why. We conducted a quantitative process evaluation to describe the intervention implementation process (what was implemented and how); examine teachers' adoption of positive teaching practices (was the content of the intervention taken up by participants), and test mechanisms of impact underlying the program theory (how the intervention was supposed to produce change). Despite participation in the intervention activities and adoption of intervention-recommended strategies (classroom management and positive disciplinary methods), we show that teachers who used more positive discipline did not appear to use less violence; and teachers in intervention schools did not experience gains in intermediate outcomes such as empathy, growth mindset, self-efficacy or social support. Our findings suggest that the intervention did not work due to the failure of some key hypothesised mechanisms, rather than because of implementation challenges.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Effect of intervention on teachers’ use of positive practices.

Similar articles

References

    1. Hillis S, Mercy J, Amobi A, Kress H. Global Prevalence of Past-year Violence Against Children: A Systematic Review and Minimum Estimates. Pediatrics. 2016;137(3):e20154079. doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-4079 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stark L, Landis D. Violence against children in humanitarian settings: A literature review of population-based approaches. Social Science & Medicine. 2016;152:125–37. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.01.052 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Osofsky JD. The Impact of Violence on Children. The Future of Children. 1999;9(3):33–49. - PubMed
    1. Wodon Q., Fèvre C., Malé C., Nayihouba A., Nguyen H. Ending Violence in Schools: An Investment Case. 2021.
    1. Mathews S, Achyut P, October L, Makola L. Evidence Review: Prevention of violence against children through schools in the Global South. 2021.

LinkOut - more resources