Child Behavior
Conditions
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to investigate whether a classroom-based program promoting a prosocial classroom climate is more effective than treatment-as-usual (control condition).
Detailed description
A positive, prosocial classroom climate is associated with improved social competence and academic achievement, as well as decreased internalizing and externalizing problems and antisocial behavior in children. It is expected that motivation to behave prosocially is needed to achieve a prosocial climate in the classroom, and that such motivation can be enhanced through three components of self-determination theory (SDT): competence, relatedness, and autonomy. The goal of this study is to examine the effectiveness of a classroom-based program based on SDT that aims to promote prosocial classroom climate, through a cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). SterkWerk is hypothesized to be more effective than treatment-as-usual (TAU) in creating more prosocial classrooms, through improving prosocial (intrinsic) motivation and behavior, social autonomy, social competence, and social relatedness. The design of the current study is a cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) with two conditions: the intervention condition and a waitlist control condition (TAU: treatment-as-usual). Schools in the intervention condition receive the materials and training to implement the intervention in the school year 2023/2024. Schools in the control group do not receive the intervention (do not receive material or training), and function as normal (TAU). Control schools are requested to not start any social-emotional program during the school year 2023/2024.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALSterkWerk
Classroom-based intervention program
BEHAVIORALTreatment-as-usual
Active control group
Sponsors
Utrecht University
KiVa B.V.
Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
The design of the current study is a cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) with two conditions: the intervention condition and a waitlist control condition (TAU: treatment-as-usual). Schools are randomized into the intervention or control condition.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Primary school children of grades 5-8 (mostly aged between 8-12 years) * Teachers and school leaders of participating schools (no age limit)
Exclusion criteria
* No
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in prosocial behavior as an injunctive form assessed with three items specifically developed for this study | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | It is a self-reported instrument rated on a 3-point scale from 1 (not true) to 3 (definitely true), measuring children's attitudes towards prosocial behavior that are on average held in the classroom. Higher scores reflect a higher injunctive norm of the group towards prosocial behavior. |
| Change in individual prosocial behavior assessed with four items based on the subscale prosocial behavior of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | The adapted SDQ subscale prosocial behavior is a self-reported instrument rated on a 4-point scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always). Higher scores reflect more prosocial behavior. |
| Change in prosocial relations in the classroom assessed with sociometric nominations | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | Children see a list with the names of all classmates and select the classmates that fit the question best according to them. Two items are used, assessing the child's prosocial behavior according to classmates. The number of received nominations is devided by the number of possible nominations, resulting in a proportion score for prosocial relations. |
| Change in cooperation and conflict in the classroom assessed with the Classroom Peer Context Questionnaire (CPCQ), subscales cooperation and conflict. | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | The CPCQ is a self-reported instrument. The cooperation subscale consists of four items assessing the extent to which children experience positive behavior. The conflict subscale consists of two items assessing the extent to which children experience negative behavior. The items are rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (not true) to 4 (completely true). Higher scores on the cooperation subscale reflects more positive behavior, while for the conflict subscale it reflects more negative behavior. |
| Change in intrinsic (prosocial) motivation assessed with four items specifically developed for this study | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | This instrument is a self-reported instrument, rated on a 3-point scale ranging from 1 (not true) to 3 (definitely true). Higher scores reflect more intrinsic (prosocial) motivation. |
| Change in social competence assessed with five items based on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | The adapted RSES is a self-reported istrument, rated on a 3-point scale ranging from 1 (not true) to 3 (definitely true). Higher scores reflect more social competence. |
| Change in social autonomy assessed with five items based on the School as a Caring Community Profile-II (SCCP-II) and the Child Development Project | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | It is a self-reported instrument, rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 4 (always). Higher scores reflect more autonomy. |
| Change in social relatedness assessed with the Classroom Peer Context Questionnaire (CPCQ), subscales comfort and cohesion. | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | The CPCQ is a self-reported instrument. The comfort subscale consists of four items assessing the extent to which children feel at ease in the classroom. The cohesion subscale consists of two items assessing the extent to which the children in the classroom spend time together. The items are rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (not true) to 4 (completely true). Higher scores on both subscales reflect more positive behavior. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in school wellbeing assessed with seven items specifically developed for this study | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | This is a self-reported instrument. School belonging is measured with 7 items, rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 4 (always). Higher scores reflect positive school wellbeing. |
| Change in school wellbeing assessed with one item specifically developed for this study | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | This is a self-reported instrument. School safety is measured with 1 item, rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very unsafe) to 7 (very safe). Higher scores reflect positive school wellbeing. |
| Change in social position (kindness, leadership, unkindness, popularity, best friends) assessed with sociometric nominations | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | Children see a list with the names of all classmates and select the classmates that fit the question best according to them. Five items are used, assessing the child's social position according to classmates. The number of received nominations is devided by the number of possible nominations, resulting in a proportion score for each social position (kindness, leadership, unkindness, popularity, best friends). |
| Change in bullying and bullying victimization assessed with the Olweus Bully-Victim Questionnaire (OB-VQ) | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | The OB-VQ is a self-reported instrument, consisting of items related to bullying, bullying victimization and the perceived behavior and attitudes of the teacher. Nine items related to bullying and victimization are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (I did not bully / I was not bullied) to 5 (several times a week). Higher scores reflect more bullying and victimization. |
| Change in bullying and bullying victimization (where child is victimized) assessed with the Olweus Bully-Victim Questionnaire (OB-VQ) | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | The OB-VQ is a self-reported instrument, consisting of items related to bullying, bullying victimization and the perceived behavior and attitudes of the teacher. One item asks where the child is bullied. with answer options such as: in the halway, on the way to school, in the classroom (with the teacher present). |
| Change in bullying and bullying victimization assessed with sociometric nominations | T1 (baseline); T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention; T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention | Regarding sociometric nominations,10 questions related to bullying victimization and one question related to bullying will be asked to children. Children see a list with the names of all classmates and select the classmates that fit the question best according to them. The number of received nominations is devided by the number of possible nominations, resulting in a proportion score for bullying. |
Countries
Netherlands
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORTessa Kaufman, dr.
Utrecht University
Outcome results
None listed