Evaluating a Sexual Violence Primary Prevention program in Australian Secondary Schools: A Protocol for a Pilot Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial

This paper outlines the protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial in Australian secondary schools designed to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of the Schools Education Program—a multi-component sexual violence prevention intervention—while integrating realist evaluation methods to understand the mechanisms and contexts driving its outcomes.

The Gist

Imagine a school as a giant garden. For years, gardeners have known that if you want to stop weeds (sexual violence) from taking over, you can't just pull them up after they've grown; you have to change the soil and the way the garden is tended so the weeds never get a chance to start.

This paper is the blueprint (or recipe) for a new experiment to test a specific gardening tool called the Schools Education Program (SEP). The researchers want to see if this tool works in Australian high schools before they try to use it everywhere.

Here is the plan, broken down simply:

1. The Goal: Testing a New "Garden Tool"

The researchers are running a pilot study. Think of this as a "dress rehearsal" before the main show. They aren't trying to prove the tool works perfectly yet; they are trying to see if the tool is easy to use, if the students will listen to it, and if the measurements they are using to check for success actually make sense.

2. The Players: 12 Schools and 192 Students

• The Gardeners: The researchers are working with 12 secondary schools in one Australian state.
• The Plants: They are focusing on Year 9 students (ages 13–15). This is a critical age, like the "teenage years" of a plant, where habits and beliefs are still forming and can be shaped.
• The Split: They will divide the schools into two groups:
  • The "New Tool" Group (6 schools): These schools get the SEP program.
  • The "Waitlist" Group (6 schools): These schools keep doing their normal lessons for now. They are promised the new program later, after the study is done, so no one is left out.

3. The Intervention: What is the "Schools Education Program"?

The SEP isn't just a lecture; it's a three-part workshop designed to change how students think about relationships, consent, and respect.

• The Sessions: Students get three 90-minute classes.
  • Session 1: Discusses healthy relationships and busting myths (like the idea that "she asked for it").
  • Session 2: A lawyer talks about the real-world rules of consent, digital safety, and what to do if things go wrong.
  • Session 3: Students learn how to be "bystanders"—how to step in safely if they see a friend making a hurtful joke or crossing a line.
• The Extra Helpers: The program also recruits "Student Champions" (popular students who help spread the message) and holds sessions for parents and teachers to make sure the whole school garden is watered with the same ideas.

4. The Measurement: How Do They Know It Worked?

The researchers are using a survey (a questionnaire) as their "ruler" to measure change. They check three times:

1. Before the program (Baseline): To see what students know and believe at the start.
2. Immediately after: To see if the program made an instant difference.
3. Six months later: To see if the lessons stuck around.

They are looking for changes in:

• Knowledge: Do they actually know what consent is?
• Attitudes: Do they believe in equality between boys and girls?
• Intentions: If they see something bad happening, do they plan to speak up? (They are measuring intentions because it's too early and too hard to measure actual behavior changes in a short pilot).

5. The "Realist" Twist: The Detective Work

This study has a special secret ingredient. Alongside the survey numbers, they are doing a Realist Evaluation.

• The Analogy: If the survey is the score of the game, the Realist Evaluation is the commentary explaining why the team won or lost.
• They are interviewing students, teachers, and facilitators to understand how the program works, who it works best for, and what conditions (like a supportive teacher or a quiet classroom) help it succeed. They want to know the "recipe" for success, not just the final result.

6. The Rules of the Game

• Fairness: To make sure the test is fair, they used a computer to randomly assign schools to the two groups, making sure both groups had similar numbers of students, similar locations, and similar backgrounds.
• Safety: Because the topic is sensitive (sexual violence), they have strict rules. Parents and students must agree to participate. If a student gets upset, there are support systems in place.
• Privacy: The data is kept anonymous and secure, like a locked diary.

The Bottom Line

This paper doesn't give the final results yet (the study is still happening). Instead, it lays out the map for the journey. The researchers hope that if this "dress rehearsal" goes well, they will have enough proof to run a much bigger, definitive study across Australia (and maybe the world) to see if this program can truly help stop sexual violence before it starts.

In short: They are testing a new, comprehensive lesson plan in 12 schools to see if it can help teenagers build better habits around consent and respect, while carefully watching how and why it works (or doesn't) along the way.

Technical Summary

Technical Summary: Evaluating a Sexual Violence Primary Prevention Program in Australian Secondary Schools

Problem Statement
Sexual violence remains a critical global public health issue and a gender-based human rights violation, with prevalence rates in Australia indicating that over 22% of women and 6.1% of men have experienced sexual violence since age 15. While schools are recognized as promising settings for primary prevention—capable of shaping social norms and attitudes before perpetration occurs—there is a significant evidence gap regarding effective interventions in secondary school settings. Existing reviews have found no definitively effective primary prevention interventions in Australian secondary schools, and many promising programs originate in the United States, limiting their applicability to the Australian context. Furthermore, current Relationship and Sexuality Education (RSE) is often criticized for focusing on risk-reduction and heteronormative values rather than providing practical skills for navigating consent and diverse relationships. There is an urgent need for evidence-based, gender-transformative primary prevention programs tailored to the Australian context.

Methodology
This paper outlines the protocol for a two-arm, parallel pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) embedded within a concurrent realist evaluation. The study is designed to assess the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of the "Schools Education Program" (SEP), a primary prevention intervention delivered by a community-based sexual assault support service.

• Study Design: A pilot cRCT involving 12 secondary schools (clusters) across one Australian state, targeting Year 9 students (aged 13–15).
• Randomisation: Ten schools will be randomly allocated using covariate-constrained randomisation to either the intervention group (n=6) or a waitlist control group (n=4). Two additional schools are pre-assigned to the waitlist control group due to logistical constraints. Covariates for balance include student population size, geographic region, Indigenous enrolment, ICSEA, and IRSD.
• Intervention (SEP): The program consists of three 90-minute student modules facilitated by specialists, covering healthy relationships, legal consent, image-based abuse, bystander strategies, and challenging rape myths. It is grounded in gender-transformative theory and the Change the Story framework. The intervention also includes the recruitment of "School Student Champions" and 2-hour educational sessions for staff and parents.
• Control: Control schools continue with the standard state-based Health and Physical Education curriculum, which focuses on personal wellbeing (e.g., diet, fitness) rather than sexual violence prevention. They receive the intervention post-trial.
• Data Collection: Quantitative data will be collected at three time points: baseline (T0), immediately post-intervention (T1), and 6-month follow-up (T2).
• Outcomes:
  • Primary Outcome: Change in sexual violence knowledge (measured by a 6-item author-generated survey).
  • Secondary Outcomes: Changes in attitudes toward gender equality and rape myths, and changes in behavioural intentions regarding consent and bystander intervention.
  • Implementation Outcomes: Reach, retention, fidelity, and acceptability, assessed via facilitator fidelity sheets and qualitative interviews (part of the embedded realist evaluation).
• Analysis: The primary analysis will use linear mixed-effects models with a random intercept for schools to account for intra-cluster correlation. The study aims to provide preliminary estimates of effect sizes and key parameters (e.g., intra-cluster correlation coefficients) to inform a future definitive trial. An intention-to-treat approach will be used.

Key Contributions

• First Pilot Trial in Australia: This study represents the first pilot trial evaluating a sexual violence primary prevention intervention specifically designed for Australian secondary schools.
• Novel Instrument Development: The research team has developed a new survey instrument tailored to the Australian context, addressing the lack of suitable tools in existing literature. A key objective of this pilot is to assess the psychometric properties and acceptability of this instrument.
• Integrated Realist Evaluation: By embedding the cRCT within a realist evaluation, the study moves beyond "does it work?" to investigate "how, when, and for whom" the program works. This approach theorizes the mechanisms and contextual conditions that drive outcomes, offering deeper insights into implementation processes.
• Comprehensive Scope: The intervention addresses multiple levels of influence, including student education, parent/caregiver engagement, staff training, and student leadership (Champions), aligning with a whole-of-school approach.

Results
As this document is a study protocol, it does not report empirical results, statistical findings, or final conclusions regarding the effectiveness of the intervention. The paper details the study design, timeline (commencing Q3 2025, with results expected Q4 2027), and analytical plan. The authors note that the pilot nature of the study means it is not powered to detect definitive effects on rare events (actual sexual violence perpetration) but is designed to detect signals of effect on proximal outcomes (knowledge, attitudes, intentions) and to test trial feasibility.

Significance and Claims
The authors position this study as a critical step toward addressing the dearth of peer-reviewed evidence on primary prevention of sexual violence in Australian secondary schools.

• Feasibility and Scalability: The primary significance lies in determining the feasibility of conducting a large-scale trial, including recruitment and retention rates, and assessing the adaptability of the SEP for national and international scaling.
• Informing Future Research: The study aims to generate preliminary data to calculate sample sizes and design parameters for a future, fully powered definitive trial.
• Policy and Practice: Findings are intended to inform the Australian Government's National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children. By integrating realist evaluation, the study seeks to provide actionable insights on implementation quality and contextual factors, ensuring that future iterations of the program are evidence-based and effective.
• Modesty of Claims: The authors explicitly state that this is a pilot study. They caution that findings should be interpreted as preliminary estimates and that the study is not designed to provide definitive proof of behavioral change. The ultimate goal is to establish whether a larger trial is warranted and feasible.