Evidence Map of School-Based Violence Prevention Programs in Israel

• Author: Hagit Sabo Brants,Barak Ariel
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1057567720967074
• Published date: 01 March 2023
• Date: 01 March 2023
• Subject Matter: Original Articles

Original Article

Evidence Map of School-Based

Violence Prevention

Programs in Israel

Hagit Sabo Brants

1

and Barak Ariel

1,2

Abstract

School-based youth violence is a worldwide concern. One common approach to dealing with this

problem is implementing state-sponsored intervention programs for large populations of pupils.

However, there is a growing concern that school-based interventions (SBIs) are being implemented

without sufficient evaluations of their efficacy and cost-effectiveness. We take Israel as a national

case study. Although its state education system strongly advocates an evidence-based approach to

implementing “best-practice” SBIs, it is unclear to what extent Israeli SBIs are informed by impact

evaluations. We coded information on all SBIs aimed at reducing violence in the state education

system and reviewed the quality of evaluations associated with each SBI. Of 1,510 SBIs, 113 were

dedicated to violence prevention programs in schools. Only 15 of these programs (13%), however,

had any quantitative appraisal, and only two completed tests of SBIs were assessed using randomized

controlled trial designs; five programs in total were evaluated under sufficiently rigorous conditions.

We conclude that without valid causal estimates of treatment effects, Israeli pupils will continue to

be at risk of being exposed to unhelpful and potentially damaging SBIs.

Keywords

evidence map, evidence-based policy, school-based prevention, violence

A common approach to dealing with youth violence in schools is to implement school-based

interventions (SBIs) and other policies (Sullivan et al., 2008; Wilson & Lipsey, 2007). In countries

with a centralized government administration and a national education system, the state funds a

range of treatment providers (e.g., the police, nongovernmental organizations, for-profit entities,

educators, and virtual media) to implement SBIs (Anderson et al., 2018; Barnes et al., 2017; Spiel &

Strohmeier, 2011). These interventions take different forms including one-on-one counseling, group

sessions, role-playing exercises, knowledge and capacity building, and more bespoke educational

treatments such as music, art, or animal therapy (Grommon et al., 2018). The common theme,

1

Faculty of Law, Institute of Criminology, Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel

2

Reader in Experimental Criminology, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom

Corresponding Author:

Hagit Sabo Brants, Faculty of Law, Institute of Criminology, Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem 91905, Israel.

Email: hagit.brants@mail.huji.ac.il

International CriminalJustice Review

ª2020 Georgia State University

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1057567720967074

journals.sagepub.com/home/icj

2023, Vol. 3 1) 50 65

–

3(

however, is their national or regional reach and in particular state sponsorship (Brunzell et al., 2016;

Burrus et al., 2018; Clayton et al., 2001; Spiel et al., 2011).

Given the breadth of SBIs, we are interested in the extent to which these taxpayer-funded

interventions are based on evidence. This is an ongoing concern that has troubled scholars for some

time (Flynn et al., 2015; Peterson et al., 2001). On the one hand, the literature on SBIs highlights the

need for policies that are based on rigorous testing prior to implementation and initiatives that are

based on scientific evidence (Astor et al., 2005, 2008; Benbenishty et al., 2008; Eisner et al., 2016;

Hall, 2017). Policy makers in the highest levels of the Ministry of Education in Israel, for example,

commonly express support for evidence-based SBIs. On the other hand, some scholars have sug-

gested that some programs were applied without any assessment of their effectiveness (Benbenishty

et al., 2006). Implementing treatments that are logical or based on what “has always been done” but

lack systematic and empirical support may lead to worsening effects. The American Scared Straight

program, for example, exposed at-risk youth to living conditions in prisons in order to deter them

from a life of crime, but it resulted in an increase in their criminal behavior (Petrosino et al., 2003).

There are also cost implications in implementing harmful or ineffective SBIs (see e.g., Mccabe,

2007; Welsh & Farrington, 2001).

When considering these issues globally, rigorous evaluations of SBIs are even scarcer outside of

English-speaking countries. With the exception of Scandinavian nations (Eisner et al., 2016; Garner

et al., 1998; Rasmussen & Montgomery, 2018; Seedat et al., 2009), the global evidence on the

effectiveness of SBIs to reduce violence is problematically thin. As there are clear cultural, eco-

nomic, psychosocial, and other variations between countries, there is a need for localized indepen-

dent evaluation programs that would increase the generalizability of our understanding of SBIs for

violence reduction in non-English-speaking countries (Hillis et al., 2016; Mihalic & Elliott, 2015).

Taking Israel as a case study, we explore the extent to which SBIs designed to prevent school-

based violence are supported by local evaluations and the methodological rigor of this body of

evidence. We use “evidence maps,” which is a methodological approach that resembles the

approach of systematic reviews but address applied practice rather than evidence produced through

research (Miake-Lye et al., 2016; Saran & White, 2018). The process includes two steps. First, a

protocol-based, methodical, and transparent review of practices that share a common aim. Second,

an assessment of the rigor of the research applied to quantify the effectiveness of these applied

practices. The outcomes of these evaluations can then be synthesized meta-analytically or descrip-

tively, depending on size and range of the available evidence. However, the key feature of evidence

maps is the ability to systematically, and critically, review the scientific evaluations that may or may

not have contributed to the implementation of certain practices. We use the Maryland Scientific

Methods Scale (Farrington et al., 2002; Sherman et al., 1998) to gauge whether the evaluation of

each program provides valid estimates of program effectiveness, particularly in terms of the internal

validity of the methodologies used.

SBIs

Causal research on the effects of school-based programs on violence is rich, and there are

multiple systematic reviews on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of several interventions (e.g.,

Cox et al., 2016; De La Rue et al., 2017; Gavine et al., 2016; Hall, 2017; Lester et al., 2017;

Waschbusch et al., 2019). This interest is well placed, as exposure to school violence can have

devastating educational and psychological effects, and it can alter a student’s life trajectory (Astor

et al., 2009; Bender & Lo¨sel, 2011; Knafo et al., 2008; Peguero et al., 2018; Ttofi et al., 2012). Meta-

analyses illustrate how exposure to violence in childhood is linked to elevated risks related to a broad

range of problems (e.g., Ttofi et al., 2016).

51

Brants and Ariel