Evaluation Review

David Whitehead
HCS412: Health Promotion Planning & Evaluation
Instructor Beharie
May 11, 2015

The program I chose to evaluate is Experimental evaluation of a bystander prevention

program for sexual assault and dating violence. The overall idea and plan is to assess whether or
not programs used to prevent sexual and dating violence among on college campuses are
effective. This study will provide an experimental evaluation of the prevention program set in
place for sexual and dating violence among college students. Because of the alarming rates of
sexual and dating violence on college campuses the U.S. Department of Education made it
mandatory that college campus conduct violence prevention programs.
The two programs chosen were a standard traditional classroom setting psychoeducation
training program and a bystander prevention program. To begin with the plans, they had to
choose the participants. They randomly selected and assigned 554 incoming freshmen at a small
liberal arts university to two different dating and sexual violence prevention programs during
their first-year student orientations. To get the students to participate, they were told they would
be entered into a drawing for prizes they could win valued at a total of $300. One group
participated in the bystander program. The program provided training for students on bystander
skills and the concept of bystander intervention. The other group participated in a traditional
psych education program. The demographic for both programs were similarly identical. The
majority of students in the program were females (248) and white (286). The majority of
students were also identified as being heterosexual (90.7%), and the other percentage listed as
homosexuals. Both groups completed either a pre-test survey a posttest assessment or a six
month follow up. The programs were delivered by trained professionals who received their
training from the University of New Hampshire. Each program consisted of a 90minute session
presented to same sex groups of students. During the traditional psychoeducation program, the
students were shown the film It Aint love, which is a documentary of a teen group struggling

with relationship issues such as dating violence. They were also education on the topics of sexual
and dating violence and given literature for further reference. In the bystander program, the
session was more in depth and was given more information. They were educated on what exactly
a bystander is, and examples of times that sexual or dating violence occurred and no one
intervened. Also informed about what could have happened to prevent those situations. Another
session consisted of empathy building and research on an undetected rapist. The last session
discussed action plans for the intervention of bystanders and acted out scenarios of sexual and
dating violence.
The pretest survey determined the results of each program, posttest assessment and six
month follow up.

A few different measures assessed them; rape myth acceptance, dating violence attitudes,
knowledge/awareness scale, and bystander efficacy scale. The bystander efficacy scale asked
how confident each student felt they could do each of the 14 bystander behaviors listed. Some
behaviors were expressing discomfort if they overhear someone blame the victim for being

raped, and rather or not to get help if they hear about an abusive relationship on campus. Dating
violence attitudes were assessed by yes or no responses, on questions such as; do you feel any
situation is acceptable for a boyfriend to slap his girlfriend or vice versa. Rape myth acceptance
was assessed by using a 5 point agree or disagree scale about rape myths.
Two things I feel the missed out on during this program were gathering credible evidence
and ensuring use and sharing lessons learned. One question I have did they choose this school
because of the high rates of violence or choose it because they agreed to do it. This program
could have better suited for a school that has had past situations and needed the knowledge and
guidance the most. Also I addition to the pretest and post survey and the six month follow there
should have been a survey or questionnaire to follow up on the effectiveness of the program.
Gather feedback from the participants to see if the programs were helpful or just going through
the motions because it was mandatory for orientation. I also feel the methods were not
externally valid due to the social desirability that happens when a group tries to please the
evaluator. I feel this had a chance of happening due to the seriousness and fragile nature of the
topic at hand. Some people involved may have felt the need to answer certain questions a certain
way for fear of being labeled insensitive. With it being a brand new program, the only thing that
was missing was comparing it to a previous program that they cant because it is brand new. I
feel it should have been implemented at more than one college campus. Some information I think
that could have been collected were questions that were directly associated with their campus.
Such as have they witnessed sexual or dating violence on campus and are there outlets in which
they can inform someone on campus if they have or do encounter.
The results show promise of a program that can help with educating more college
students on the prevention of sexual and dating violence and may also help reduce the violence

by helping students become active bystanders. These programs show promise, but they can be
resource-intensivemaking it difficult to achieve full participation of the student body. More
rigorous research is necessary.(Palm Reed, K.M. Hines 2015) I feel the program should not
have been limited to one school especially a small private school. If anything the program should
have been initiated at a few different colleges to gain more information and collect more data.
Also with the group of students testing on the small campus some students in may have been
influenced by others in the separate group. If the one school had to be used it should have been
more than just incoming freshman, but also staff and upperclassmen to get an even more
unbiased opinion and larger demographic and more data.

Reference

McKenzie, J. F., Neiger, B. L., & Thackeray, R. (2012). Planning, Implementing, &
Evaluating Health Promotion Programs: A Primer (6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Benjamin
Cummings. Web May 2, 2015. Retrieved from Vital Source Bookshelf.

Palm Reed, K. M., Hines, D. A., Armstrong, J. L., & Cameron, A. Y. (2015).
Experimental evaluation of a bystander prevention program for sexual assault and dating
violence. Psychology Of Violence, 5(1), 95-102. doi:10.1037/a0037557. Retrieved from the
EBSCO database.