Updates

Blog: Contextual prevention of child abuse – safety for school students

This is the second instalment in our series on contextual prevention. You can find an introduction to contextual prevention and its core components here.

The recent Child Safe Organisations Act 2024 requires all organisations with responsibility for children to identify and address risks to child safety, and in particular child sexual abuse. In their recent presentation to the Quality Collaboration Network, co-leaders Nadine and Sue from the Sexual Violence Research and Prevention Unit (SVRPU) discussed the use of contextual prevention in a school concerned about harmful sexual behaviours (HSBs). This case study illustrates the core components of contextual prevention and how schools (and other organisations) can make meaningful improvements to the safety and wellbeing of children by applying a contextual approach.

Contextual assessment – understanding behaviour in context

What questions would you ask if you were trying to understand HSBs in a school setting? How might you go about answering these questions?

Key questions for contextual assessment include classic “who”, “what” and “when” questions, like “who is involved?” and “when and where is the problem happening?”. The contextual prevention approach also helps us identify other crucial questions, such as “what are the routine activities in the school?”, “what is the physical environment like?” and “how might this help or hinder guardianship?” To answer these questions, the SVRPU team scanned the school environment and the activities within it (this is called an environmental audit; we will discuss this in more detail in a later instalment); reviewed the policies and procedures in place; and spoke to staff to find out what they had noticed and the safety strategies they had already tried.

The team found that HSBs were happening in classrooms and playground areas before, during and after school, and that there were several barriers to active guardianship. The playground and classrooms were difficult to guard during breaks, with limited lines of sight, and the teachers were underconfident in identifying and responding to HSBs. Monitoring access to the school grounds was also difficult, with sections of open and broken fencing, and the administration building placed at the back of the grounds instead of being at the entrance.

Contextual intervention

Having identified clear contextual risks, the team were able to develop effective interventions:

• Barriers to active guardianship were addressed by increasing playground supervision, roping off areas where students were not to go, and clearing the classroom windows of pictures and posters that had reduced visibility.
• Access to the school was made more secure with fences repaired, the entrance re-designed, and the administration moved to a building at the entrance.
• Policies and procedures were updated to create clarity about expectations and responsibilities.

As this example illustrates, improving children’s safety is an ongoing responsibility. While immediate changes can be made to reduce risks, a long-term commitment is also required. For example, training in active guardianship and minor environmental changes to a family support delivery setting or to practices in client homes may be rolled out over weeks or months, while significant environmental and structural changes take sustained effort and resourcing over time.

QCOSS is grateful to the University of the Sunshine Coast SVRPU’s Associate Professor Nadine McKillop and Dr Susan Rayment-McHugh for all their work and for their generosity in sharing ground-breaking research and implementation strategies with the Quality Collaboration Network (QCN). The QCN is a peer support network for community sector professionals with responsibilities for quality, governance and compliance. You can join the QCN and sign up for On Board, our governance newsletter, here.