Clinical trial NCT05891067: The Effectiveness of a Classroom-based Intervention Promoting a Prosocial Classroom Climate in Children
Official title: The Effectiveness of a Classroom-based Intervention Promoting Proscial Classroom Climate in Children
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Phase: NA
Conditions: Child Behavior
Lead sponsor: Utrecht University
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: KiVa B.V.
name: Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research
First posted: 2023-06-06
Enrollment: 3360
Sex: ALL
Standard ages: CHILD
ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: yes
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
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.
Primary purpose: PREVENTION

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.

Eligibility criteria: 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 exclusion criteria

Primary outcomes:
measure: Change in prosocial behavior as an injunctive form assessed with three items specifically developed for this study
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in individual prosocial behavior assessed with four items based on the subscale prosocial behavior of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in prosocial relations in the classroom assessed with sociometric nominations
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in cooperation and conflict in the classroom assessed with the Classroom Peer Context Questionnaire (CPCQ), subscales cooperation and conflict.
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in intrinsic (prosocial) motivation assessed with four items specifically developed for this study
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in social competence assessed with five items based on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)
timeFrame: 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
measure: 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
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in social relatedness assessed with the Classroom Peer Context Questionnaire (CPCQ), subscales comfort and cohesion.
timeFrame: 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
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Change in school wellbeing assessed with seven items specifically developed for this study
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in school wellbeing assessed with one item specifically developed for this study
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in social position (kindness, leadership, unkindness, popularity, best friends) assessed with sociometric nominations
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in bullying and bullying victimization assessed with the Olweus Bully-Victim Questionnaire (OB-VQ)
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in bullying and bullying victimization (where child is victimized) assessed with the Olweus Bully-Victim Questionnaire (OB-VQ)
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in bullying and bullying victimization assessed with the Olweus Bully-Victim Questionnaire (OB-VQ)
timeFrame: 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
measure: Change in bullying and bullying victimization assessed with sociometric nominations
timeFrame: 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
Other outcomes:
measure: Child characteristics assessed with items specifically developed for this study
timeFrame: T1 (baseline)
measure: Teacher characteristics assessed with items specifically developed for this study
timeFrame: T1 (baseline)
measure: School characteristics assessed with items specifically developed for this study
timeFrame: T1 (baseline)
measure: Working elements (i.e., meaningful roles, weekly meetings and compliments) assessed with items specifically developed for this stuy
timeFrame: T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention
measure: Working elements (i.e., meaningful roles, weekly meetings and compliments) assessed with items specifically developed for this stuy
timeFrame: T3 (postintervention) approximately 10 months after the start of the intervention
measure: Program integrity assessed with items specifically developed for this study
timeFrame: T2 (mid-intervention) approximately 5 months after the start of the intervention
Locations:
city: Utrecht
country: Netherlands
facility: Utrecht University
Study officials:
affiliation: Utrecht University
name: Tessa Kaufman, dr.
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References: