Child sexual abuse and mandatory reporting intervention preservice content preferred by student teachers.

This article was downloaded by: [217.73.129.112] On: 01 August 2014, At: 08:51 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Child Sexual Abuse Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcsa20

Child Sexual Abuse and Mandatory Reporting Intervention Preservice Content Preferred by Student Teachers a

Juliette D. G. Goldman & Peter Grimbeek a

b

Griffith University , Gold Coast , Queensland , Australia

b

Griffith University , Nathan , Queensland , Australia Published online: 06 Jan 2014.

To cite this article: Juliette D. G. Goldman & Peter Grimbeek (2014) Child Sexual Abuse and Mandatory Reporting Intervention Preservice Content Preferred by Student Teachers, Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 23:1, 1-16, DOI: 10.1080/10538712.2014.859200 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2014.859200

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 23:1–16, 2014 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1053-8712 print/1547-0679 online DOI: 10.1080/10538712.2014.859200

BRIDGING THE GAPS IN CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE

Downloaded by [217.73.129.112] at 08:51 01 August 2014

Child Sexual Abuse and Mandatory Reporting Intervention Preservice Content Preferred by Student Teachers JULIETTE D. G. GOLDMAN Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia

PETER GRIMBEEK Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia

The importance of preservice university teacher training about child sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting intervention is addressed in educational literature, although very little is known about student teachers’ learning interests and preferences in this area. In this article, student teachers refer to students in university who are training to become teachers whose training includes teaching experiences in schools. This study examines the content about child sexual abuse and its intervention that student teachers believe they should learn. Results based on quantitative analyses show the relative importance of gender in determining responses to questions about university training and, to a lesser extent, the importance of a previous acquaintance with victims of sexual abuse, previous employment, and the length of the university course. Results based on qualitative data show that content knowledge preferred by elementary/primary and secondary school student teachers includes the teacher’s role in mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse and signs, experiences, and responses to student disclosure. Student teachers prefer content examples of school professionals’ responses and procedures after disclosure and prefer direct learning content from intervening school professionals. Received 10 December 2011; revised 26 May 2012; accepted 11 December 2012. Address correspondence to Juliette D. G. Goldman, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Building G30, Gold Coast, Queensland 4222, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] 1

2

J. D. G. Goldman and P. Grimbeek

These outcomes could usefully guide teachers and educators who design intervention curricula on child sexual abuse for preservice teachers.


KEYWORDS child protection, professional education, preservice teachers, student teachers, intervention courses

University students’ engagement, purposive intent, and interactivity with the content of an educational course of study enhance their learning outcomes (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2010). It is evident at every level of contemporary quality education—whether primary school, secondary school, or tertiary education—that the needs, interests, and preferences of the students should be paramount considerations in the design, content, structures, and delivery of courses (see Brady & Kennedy, 2003; Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2010; United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural & Scientific Organization [UNESCO], 2009). Similarly, a considerable body of literature now recommends that interventionary knowledge, skills, and competencies regarding child abuse and neglect and its mandatory reporting need to be taught to preservice teachers at university (Arnold & Maio-Taddeo, 2008; Buckley & McGarry, 2011; Davies, Mountford, & Gannon, 2009; Kenny, 2007; McKee & Dillenburger, 2009; Walsh et al., 2011; Wurtele, 2009). However, there is remarkably little literature that identifies just what content student teachers encounter in such a course of learning (see Brown, 2008; Fenton, 2008; McCallum, 2003). Even less literature has been found about student teachers’ preferences for interventionary professional training on child and youth sexual abuse (see Goldman, 2010; Goldman & Bradley, 2011; Goldman & Grimbeek, 2008; Goldman & Torrisi-Steele, 2004). The data reported here are drawn from a larger study on student teachers’ preferences about the design, form, content, and implementation of such courses during preservice university education. This article examines the content that student teachers would prefer to learn in an interventionary course on child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting; that is, what they say they need to know and should be able to learn in order to help children and youth (up to 18 years) deal with this serious and sensitive issue.

MANDATORY REPORTING OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT, INCLUDING CHILD AND YOUTH SEXUAL ABUSE Many countries have ethical codes or legislation requiring certain people and/or professions to make reports about suspected cases of child abuse and neglect so that children may be protected from harm (Wallace & Bunting, 2007). With some minor jurisdictional variations, school teachers in every

Intervention Education for Student Teachers

3

state and territory of Australia are mandated reporters of suspected sexual abuse, physical abuse, neglect, and emotional abuse, including the witnessing of domestic violence or abuse to children and young people (Higgins, Bromfield, Richardson, Holzer, & Berlyn, 2009).


CHILD AND YOUTH SEXUAL ABUSE International definitions of child sexual abuse include any sexual contact, such as kissing, fondling, oral sex, and vaginal or anal intercourse or any noncontact sexual experience, such as exhibitionism, voyeurism, exposing a child to pornography, and online grooming that is perpetrated on a child or young person by an adult or person 5 or more years older (see Finkelhor, 2009; Freyd et al., 2005; Wurtele, 2009). Acts of child or youth sexual abuse constitute criminal offenses and very often cause significant and/or lifelong harm or even death (Freyd et al., 2005; Goldman & Bode, 2012). The great majority of cases involving child sexual abuse, exploitation, and pornography, however, are not detected or reported (Council of Australian Governments [COAG], 2009; Wurtele, 2009). While the legal age of sexual consent is generally 16 years in Australia, sexual abuse and mandatory reporting laws in all states and territories cover young people up to the age of 18 years (Higgins et al., 2009), when they are usually in their final year of secondary school. For this reason, child and youth sexual abuse will be discussed in this article.

KNOWLEDGE OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE AND MANDATORY REPORTING Teachers need specific and adequate intervention knowledge and skills to fulfill their obligations as child protection professionals (Briggs, 2006; Wallace & Bunting, 2007). However, as Baginsky and Macpherson (2005) point out, no prior knowledge of these issues in teachers, or student teachers in university, can be assumed. Studies consistently show that teachers lack the knowledge and the confidence to be effective reporters of child abuse and neglect, particularly of child and youth sexual abuse (Goebbels, Nicholson, Walsh, & De Vries, 2008; Goldman, 2010; Walsh, Farrell, Schweitzer, & Bridgstock, 2005).

INCREASING DEMAND FOR UNIVERSITY PRESERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION IN CHILD PROTECTION In Australia, the Council of Australian Governments (2009), consisting of the federal and eight state/territory governments of Australia combined,


4


is moving to a collaborative public health model of child protection in the National Framework for Protecting Australia’s Children 2009-2020. This model includes health programs, family support, early intervention, and targeted service strategies, with statutory provisions seen as a last resort. “Sexual abuse specific strategies are needed both to increase detection of child sexual abuse and to prevent . . . [it] across a range of settings” (p. 31), and education about child well-being, safety, and protection is seen as a universal and cost effective baseline initiative. This significant governmental change in Australia builds on international calls for a preventative approach to child protection (Reading et al., 2009; Wurtele, 2009). Such calls recommend that education programs for all child professionals, identified as “central to the successful introduction of mandatory reporting laws” (Wallace & Bunting, 2007, p. 30), should address and include the longer term and broader effects of child abuse and neglect (see also Finkelhor, 2009). Furthermore, education about child and youth sexual abuse, prevention and intervention, and mandatory reporting should start during professional education at university, while student teachers and other child preprofessionals form a captive audience. There, student teachers may have the opportunities and motivation to learn appropriate interventionary knowledge, strategies, and skills for confidence in their suspicion of abuse and competencies to report it in order to act early and more effectively against child and youth sexual abuse (Baginsky & Macpherson, 2005; Clarke & Healey, 2006; Goldman & Torrisi-Steele, 2004; Walsh et al., 2011).

PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ TRAINING ON CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE AND MANDATORY REPORTING It is known that many universities do not include preservice courses on child abuse or its protection (Arnold & Maio-Taddeo, 2008), include only a little (Rossato & Brackenridge, 2009), or just give it lip service in a crowded curriculum (see Briggs, 2006; Goldman, 2010). However, calls for such courses for student teachers at university cover teaching at all school levels, such as early childhood (Kenny, 2009: McKee & Dillenburger, 2009), primary school (Brown, 2008; Goldman & Grimbeek, 2008, 2011; Walsh et al., 2005), and secondary school (Clarke & Healey, 2006; Smith et al., 2011). Designers of preservice teaching university courses must meet the compulsory requirements for mandated reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect, including child sexual abuse as well as the particular policies and procedures set up by the educational or governmental authority. Such courses also need to take into consideration university student teachers’ contemporary knowledge, understandings, and engagement with these issues (Arnold & Maio-Taddeo, 2008; Goldman & Grimbeek, 2008, 2011; Walsh et al., 2011). However, as noted, almost nothing is known about preservice


5

teachers’ learning preferences for courses in this area, particularly about the content knowledge, form, and direct learning interactive experiences regarding child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting (see Goldman & Bradley, 2011; Goldman & Grimbeek, 2011; Goldman & Torrisi-Steele, 2004).


CONTENT FOR INTERVENTION COURSES IN UNIVERSITY PRESERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION Student teacher educators, including Baginsky and Macpherson (2005) in the UK, Goldman (2005) in Queensland, and Laskey (2005) in Victoria, have specifically called for such intervention content to be integrated throughout the duration of preservice education rather than delivered in sparse and sporadic sessions. Furthermore, these researchers show that programs of deep learning in relevant content that engage student teachers’ affective, relational, and contextual responses to new material work to construct meaning and thereby enhance the impact and effectiveness of new learning. For example, in South Australia, even one semester (about 13 weeks of classes) of mentored learning for child protection training involving professionally guided scenarios with conceptual understanding of content, connections between learning and personal experiences, and evaluative procedures is helpful to move preservice teachers toward confident practice (McCallum, 2003). Similarly, Fenton’s (2008) Queensland study in early childhood education advocates a strengths approach widespread in social work, but not common in education, used with analysis and methodology categories as a positive and effective agent of change in addressing the deficit models of practice “where teachers are given negative facts, figures, and symptoms of child abuse and expected to follow the rescuer role” (p. 217). That study’s preservice 13-week module emphasizing content with “visioning and planning for positive outcomes” (p. 221), identification of strengths and resources, and development of strategies to raise resilience and self-esteem has been found by student teachers to be valuable, not least in “changing the frame” (p. 235) of possible outcomes for children. Another study in Queensland, this time by Brown (2008), of primary and early childhood student teachers, analyzed their recognition of child abuse and knowledge of child protection procedures, their preparedness to deal with these issues, and their recommendations for course content. Student teachers made suggestions such as “integrating content into existing courses; providing seminars, workshops, and information sessions; creating a new and separate course; and integrating content and procedures into professional experience courses” (p. 30). Crucially, some student teachers recognized that changes to course content and/or structure need to be compulsory.

6


The objective of this study is to ask university student teachers, probably for the first time anywhere, to indicate their needs, interests, and preferences for specific academic content in a future course on child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting intervention. It is, thus, evidence-based, and is part of a larger study on student teachers’ preferred learning that hypothesized minimal understanding of child sexual abuse by students and minimal understanding of what they need to know for their future role as primary/elementary school teachers.

METHOD


Selection and Ethics Procedures Following ethical clearance, a voluntary, anonymous, and confidential 10page questionnaire was offered during two plenary lectures to university student teachers (N = 321) in Queensland, Australia. Student teachers were informed about the research purposes; its expected benefits and lack of risk; its inclusivity, confidentiality, and anonymity of responses; the consent and privacy statements; and the mechanism for distribution, return, and feedback. Student teachers’ questions were then answered. The participation and return rate was 100% of the lecture attendees, and most questionnaires were completed in less than an hour.

Participants Of the 321 student teachers, with 2 null responses for degree enrollment, approximately one-third (34%, n = 109) were completing a bachelor of education (primary) degree, and, of these, males constituted 16%. Another one-third (35%, n = 112) were completing a master of teaching (primary) degree, and, of these, males constituted 25%. Another 10% (n = 32) were completing a master of teaching (secondary) degree, and, of these, males constituted 28%. The remaining 20% of student teachers (n = 64) were enrolled in an aggregation of three graduate diploma of education courses for primary, middle, and secondary schools, and, of these, males constituted 46%, likely due to a federal government tuition fee-relief scheme for science teaching. In Australia, university degrees in teaching routinely have a higher proportion of female to male student teachers. Of the 321 student teachers, with 4 null responses for gender, 77% (n = 243) were female and 23% (n = 74) were male. More females than males had enrolled in every degree sampled, with the slimmest majority (58%) for the graduate diploma of education (GDE; secondary). Student teacher’s ages (n = 306, with 15 null responses) ranged from 20 to 52 years, with a mean age of 25.5 years. The length of student teachers’ current university programs (n = 311, with 7 null responses) ranged from


7

1 to 5 years, with a mean length of 2.3 years. Student teachers’ total university study time (n = 310, with 11 null responses) ranged from 1 to 9 years, with a mean length of 4.5 years. Finally, 85% of student teachers (n = 264) had previously been employed outside the education field, most for about 7 years. These student teacher characteristics are similar across Australian universities offering teacher education.


Materials The questionnaire included 14 sections totaling 140 questions, generating quantitative and qualitative data about student teachers’ preferences for a possible dedicated university intervention preservice course on child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting. However, as this article is part of a larger study including other focuses of student teachers’ learning preferences, only the sections that cover preferences on the content of a face-to-face, 10-credit-point course of 13 weeks duration are addressed. The content aspects of courses are very important to university students and academics and need to be based on sound educational principals aimed at engaging student teachers’ interest and purposive action to enhance learning. Most teacher-educators are well aware that student teachers have strong opinions on all of these aspects. Student teachers were asked to preference 19 questionnaire options about course content knowledge regarding child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting, 14 options about content examples of professionals’ experiences as addressed by their lecturer, and also 15 options about direct learning content through guest speakers. Student teachers responded on a 5point Likert scale by indicating their preference, ranging from definitely not (1) through mild preference (3) to strong preference (5). Student teachers were given the option of stating other or extra content preferences in an open-ended question. Student teachers were also asked an ethics-committee-approved question on their personal awareness or experience of child or youth sexual abuse (n = 311, with 10 null responses), and half of the student teachers (51%, n = 160) reported knowing a survivor of child or youth sexual abuse. Of this group, most (n = 119) agreed they knew this person well.

Analysis The general approach was to report student teachers’ preferences for each of three multi-item questions about content initially in the form of a figure, with the items ordered by mean score. Based on exploratory factor analyses, responses to items were clustered to form scales and scores (mean) computed for each of these scales. Generally speaking, the items and scale

8


scores identified via factor analysis aligned at a more impersonal level with an interest in the facts, the symptoms, and policies related to child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting and at a more personal level with the direct versus indirect experiences of professionals in the field and of other guest speakers. Stepwise regressions were conducted for each of the computed scale scores, with the outcomes compiled as a single table to illustrate the relative influence of predictor variables such as age in years, gender (being female), length of current course, total years of university study, previous employment outside the education field, personal awareness, and acquaintance and/or experience of child or youth sexual abuse.


RESULTS Student Teachers’ Preferred Content Knowledge in an Intervention Course Figure 1 shows that student teachers most prefer to learn content knowledge about teachers’ role in mandatory reporting in schools, including policy and procedures. They least prefer learning about child development as, they say, it is covered in other preservice courses. Table 1 shows, in outcomes for three stepwise regressions, that female student teachers most prefer content knowledge about facts on child and youth sexual abuse and its symptoms. In contrast, student teachers who know an abuse survivor well as well as those who have been employed outside the education field most prefer to learn about policies in this area. Qualitative responses emphasize the relevance and importance of content knowledge as a prerequisite component in teachers’ intervention

FIGURE 1 Content knowledge that student teachers would prefer to learn in a course about child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting (color figure available online).

9


TABLE 1 Composite Outcomes for Three Regressions with Seven Independent Variables Related to Student Teachers’ Preferred Knowledge about Child and Youth Sexual Abuse and its Mandatory Reporting Coefficients

SE

β

t

Sig.

Dependent Variable

0.341 0.347 0.211

0.134 0.098 0.094

0.165 0.224 0.146

2.543 3.535 2.250

0.012 0.000 0.025

Facts about sexual abuse Symptoms of sexual abuse Policies related to sexual abuse

0.246

0.125

0.128

1.977

0.049

Policies related to sexual abuse

in child and youth sexual abuse. These student teachers are most concerned with the well-being of their future students and recognize the need for mandatory reporting.

Student Teachers’ Preferred Content Examples Addressed by Their Course Lecturer Figure 2 shows that student teachers most prefer to study content examples, as addressed by their lecturer, from school counselors’ experiences of child and youth sexual abuse cases. The average level of preference for the two most preferred content examples fall in the moderate to strong preference range (average scores greater than 4). They least prefer content examples from men or women who were sexually abused as children. Even the least preferred item (men or women who were sexually abused as School counselor’s experiences of cases of child and youth sexual abuse in schools Social worker’s experiences of cases of child and youth sexual abuse in schools Principal’s experiences of cases of child and youth sexual abuse in schools How specific schools deal with child and youth sexual abuse School nurse’s experience of cases of child and youth sexual abuse in schools Father who has dealt with his daughter’s experience of being sexually abused Items


Being female Being female Know sexual abuse victim well Employed outside education field

B

Mother who has dealt with her son’s experience of being sexually abused Mother who has dealt with her daughter’s experience of being sexually abused Father who has dealt with his son’s experience of being sexually abused Police officer’s experiences of cases of child and youth sexual abuse in schools The role of privately funded sexual abuse support groups Medical doctor’s experiences of cases of child and youth sexual abuse in schools Man who was sexually abused as a child Woman who was sexually abused as a child 3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

4

4.1

4.2

Mean scores

FIGURE 2 Content examples of professionals’ experiences addressed by their lecturer that student teachers would prefer to learn in a course about child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting (color figure available online).

10


TABLE 2 Composite Outcomes for Two Stepwise Regressions with Seven Independent Variables Related to Student Teachers’ Preferred Examples in Context of Lecture on Child and Youth Sexual Abuse and its Mandatory Reporting Coefficients


Being female Being female

B

SE

β

t

Sig.

Dependent Variable

0.446 0.314

0.159 0.121

0.181 0.167

2.808 2.589

0.005 0.010

Direct experience Indirect experience

children) received an average rating slightly above 3.6, still indicating a mild to moderate preference to study these examples. Table 2 shows outcomes for two stepwise regressions. Female student teachers were more likely than males to prefer content examples addressed by their lecturer to be of direct and indirect professional experiences dealing with child and youth sexual abuse and its reporting. Qualitative responses regarding content examples addressed by the student teachers’ lecturer are somewhat surprising in that student teachers prefer nonteaching school professionals’ experiences over those of teachers and/or principals, although only by slight margins. These student teachers are also concerned with the well-being of survivors and feel they have sufficient information content about such firsthand experience examples.

Student Teachers’ Preferred Direct Learning Content Addressed by a Guest Lecturer Figure 3 shows that student teachers most prefer direct learning content from a guest lecturer to be a teacher who has reported child or youth sexual abuse, or from a school principal who has received such a mandatory report. Average scores for these most preferred items approximated 4, a moderate level of preference. Student teachers least prefer direct learning content from a male perpetrator who has been jailed for child or youth sexual abuse. The average score for this item fell in the slight to mild preference range, with an average score slightly above 2.7. Table 3 shows, in outcomes for two stepwise regressions, that student teachers’ responses to direct learning content items addressed by a guest lecturer are related to the length of their course, with greater responses to items of direct experience if the course is shorter. In contrast, female student teachers respond more strongly to indirect learning content items. Qualitative responses regarding direct learning content addressed by a guest lecturer again emphasize the relevance and importance, to student teachers, of school professionals’ knowledge and experiences regarding child and youth sexual abuse interventions. These student teachers believe that a male perpetrator as guest lecturer is inappropriate, at best.

11


Teacher who has reported child or youth sexual abuse to the principal School principal who has received a mandatory report from a teacher Guest speaker from a child and youth privately funded sexual abuse support group Police Child Abuse Squad Teacher who teaches protective behavior lessons to school students Social worker experienced with sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting

Items

Rape crisis center staff Department of education staff HRE (Human relationships education) specialist teacher Lawyer who has dealt with cases of child and youth sexual abuse Pediatric nurse (child specialist) Female adult who was sexually abused as a child Male adult who was sexually abused as a child Teacher who was sexually abused as a child Male perpetrator who was jailed for sexual abuse of a child or young person


2.7

2.9

3.1

3.3

3.5

3.7

3.9

4.1

Mean scores

FIGURE 3 Direct learning of content from a guest lecturer who student teachers would prefer to learn in a course about child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting (color figure available online). TABLE 3 Outcomes for Two Stepwise Regressions with Seven Independent Variables Examining Student Teachers’ Preferred Direct Learning Content in Context of Guest Speaker Coefficients Length of current course Being female

B

SE

β

t

Sig.

Dependent Variable

−0.167 0.300

0.058 0.119

−0.183 0.169

−2.855 2.531

0.005 0.012

Direct experience Indirect experience

DISCUSSION This study examines the preferences of university student teachers about the academic content of a possible intervention course on child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting planned for university preservice professionals in teacher education. Student teachers welcomed the chance to participate, and although not all of them answered every question, there was general, even fervent, agreement that some/more professional education on this issue was needed. The present findings are supported by qualitative responses from student teachers in other research on professional education for child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting carried out by Goldman and Bradley (2011), Goldman and Grimbeek (2011), and by Goldman and Torrisi-Steele (2004). Very little other research was found regarding student teacher interests or preferences for preservice university courses on child protection, but largely incidental research, garnered from other studies, includes student teacher responses supporting the significance of positive, integrated, and compulsory content for confident interventionary practice (see Brown, 2008; Fenton, 2008; McCallum, 2003).


12


As stated, the items and scale scores identified via factor analysis aligned at a more impersonal level with an interest in the facts, the symptoms, and policies related to child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting and at a more personal level with the direct versus indirect experiences of professionals in the field and of other guest speakers. Of the seven demographic variables of interest, only gender, work outside the field of education, knowing a child or youth sexual abuse survivor well, and length of university course proved to be statistically influential. Of these, gender was influential in five of the analyses regarding content knowledge, content examples addressed by lecturers, and indirect learning content from guest speakers. In each case, female student teachers exhibited significantly stronger preferences for this content than did males. One of this study’s strengths is that it appears to be the first anywhere to ask student teachers what content they prefer in a new preservice intervention course on child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting. Quite specific choices of content were provided to student teachers, including some they may never have considered before. Being a student-teacher centered piece of research is also a strength, since most university students like to be asked about their interests and preferences in university learning and like to think that their opinions will be influential in the design of university courses, specifically in this case, for teacher education courses. A further strength is that, as teacher-educators, we now have a quite detailed and precise picture of student teachers’ preferences for child and youth sexual abuse and intervention course content, which was not known previously, and this evidence permits approaches to faculties of education to justify the planning, funding, and implementation of such an academic course. Participation in such academic courses will be necessary to meet the child protection requirements outlined in the National Framework (COAG, 2009). While the size of the sample (N = 321) is relatively small by international standards, it is quite respectable in terms of the low and widespread population of Australia, the large number of Australian universities, and the ubiquity of faculties of education as the only sites for teacher education. Broader national and international sample comparisons would have provided useful data. Furthermore, many student teachers may not have considered the possibility or consequences of a face-to-face, 10-credit point, 13-week course about child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting before, thus biasing their replies. The literature on child and youth sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting in schools reveals that due to the lack of knowledge, skills, competencies, and confidence in elementary/primary and secondary school teachers, earlier, more intensive and integrated intervention training is needed in university preservice teacher education for all student teachers (Baginsky & Macpherson, 2005; Goldman & Bradley, 2011; Kenny, 2004, 2009; Smith et al., 2011). In tandem with current university academic educational policies



13

of addressing the learning needs, interests, and preferences of students, this study has identified student teachers’ preferences for the content of such an intervention course. Results from the quantitative and qualitative data show that these student teachers prefer content relating specifically to their own future roles as child protection professionals and mandatory reporters. This evidence may be a useful guide to teacher-educators, other child profession educators, and higher education administrators who plan to incorporate urgently needed preservice intervention courses on child and youth sexual abuse and mandatory reporting in university child profession degrees (see OECD, 2010; UNESCO, 2009). Recommendations for the content development of intervention courses in preservice teacher education and child profession higher education degrees may logically follow at least some of the preferences of student teachers. For example, content knowledge about the signs and symptoms of child and youth sexual abuse may be best presented by medical experts rather than by abuse survivors, and while discomfort for some student teachers may be inevitable, it is imperative that the safety and well-being of the children in the student teachers’ future care is at the forefront of education authorities’ priorities. The collective responsibility and frontline educational approach to child protection is well understood by teachers and student teachers (see Baginsky & Macpherson, 2005; Brown, 2008; Buckley & McGarry, 2011). It is now the responsibility of educational authorities, regulatory bodies, and universities in Australia to provide sufficient and in-depth training for the fulfillment of these legal and ethical responsibilities. Such preservice education is clearly a highly desirable and cost-effective element in the COAG’s (2009) response to the detection and prevention of child abuse. This professional education for student teachers, together with the inclusion of puberty, sexuality, and self-protection education (see Goldman & Collier-Harris, 2012; Goldman & Grimbeek, 2011) into national curricula such as the forthcoming first-ever Australian Curriculum (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], 2011) would thus constitute a multigenerational interventionist attack on the scourge of child and youth sexual abuse.

FUNDING This research was supported by a competitive University Faculty Research Grant.

REFERENCES Arnold, L., & Maio-Taddeo, C. (2008). Professionals protecting children: Child protection and teacher education in Australia. Adelaide, Australia: Australian Centre for Child Protection and Magill.


14


Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2011). The shape of the Australian curriculum (Version 3). Canberra, Australia: Author. Baginsky, M., & Macpherson, P. (2005). Training teachers to safeguard children: Developing a consistent approach. Child Abuse Review, 14, 317–330. doi:10.1002/car.905 Brady, L., & Kennedy, K. (2003). Curriculum construction. Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson. Briggs, F. (2006). Ignorance is not innocence. In G. Rienstra & A. Gonczi (Eds.), Entry to the teaching profession: Preparation, practice, pressure and professionalism (pp. 95–100). Deakin West, Australia: Australian College of Educators. Brown, A. (2008). Pre-service teachers’ understanding of child abuse and their professional role in child protection. Children Australia, 33(1), 25–32. Buckley, H., & McGarry, K. (2011). Child protection in primary schools: A contradiction in terms or a potential opportunity? Irish Educational Studies, 30(1), 113–128. doi:10.1080/03323315.2011.535979 Clarke, M., & Healey, J. (2006). Effectiveness of pre-service child protection training: Student teacher attitudes, perceptions and knowledge. International Journal of Practical Experience in Professional Education, 9(1), 46–62. Retrieved from http://arrow.uws.edu.au:8080/vital/access/manager/Repository/uws:4343 Council of Australian Governments. (2009). National framework for protecting Australia’s children 2009–2020. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia. Davies, I., Mountford, P., & Gannon, A. (2009). Every child matters: The perceptions of a sample of initial teacher education trainees in England. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32, 383–399. doi:10.1080/03323315.2011.535979 Fenton, A. (2008, November). “Caution children crossing ahead”: Child protection education with pre-service teachers using a strengths approach. Proceedings from Communities and Change Symposium, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. Finkelhor, D. (2009). The prevention of childhood sexual abuse. The Future of Children, 19(2), 169–194. Freyd, J., Putnam, F., Lyon, T., Becker-Blease, K., Cheit, R., Siegel, N., & Pezdek, K. (2005). Psychology: The science of child sexual abuse. Science, 308, 501. doi:10.1126/science.1108066 Goebbels, A. F. G., Nicholson, J. M., Walsh, K., & De Vries, H. (2008). Teachers’ reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect. Health Education Research, 23, 941–951. doi:10.1093/her/cyn030 Goldman, J. D. G. (2005). Student teachers’ learning about child sexual abuse strategies for primary school. Sex Education, 5(1), 79–92. doi:10.1080/1468181042000301902 Goldman, J. D. G. (2010). Australian undergraduate primary school student-teachers’ responses to child sexual abuse and mandatory reporting. Pastoral Care in Education, 28, 283–294. doi:10.1080/02643944.2010.530679 Goldman, J. D. G., & Bode, A. (2012). Female survivors’ perceptions of the lifelong impact on their education of child sexual abuse suffered in Queensland orphanages between 1940 and 1970. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 31, 203–221. doi:10.1080/02601370.20012.663799



15

Goldman, J. D. G., & Bradley, G. L. (2011). Assessing primary school student-teachers’ pedagogic implementations in child sexual abuse protection education. European Journal of Psychology Education, 26, 479–493. doi:10.1007/s10212-011-0059-4 Goldman, J. D. G., & Collier-Harris, C. A. (2012). School-based reproductive health and safety education for students aged 12 to 15 years in UNESCO’s (2009) International Technical Guidance. Cambridge Journal of Education, 42, 445–461. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2012.733343 Goldman, J. D. G., & Grimbeek, P. (2008). Student teachers’ understanding of policy behavioural directives concerning reporting child sexual abuse. Educational Research, 50, 291–305. doi:10.1080/00131880802309457 Goldman, J. D. G., & Grimbeek, P. (2011). Sources of knowledge of departmental policy on child sexual abuse and mandatory reporting identified by primary school student-teachers. Educational Review, 63(1), 1–18. doi:10.1080/00131911003717220 Goldman, J. D. G., & Torrisi-Steele, G. (2004). Education about child sexual abuse on interactive multimedia CD-rom for undergraduate teachers. Health Education Journal, 63(2), 127–144. Higgins, D., Bromfield, L., Richardson, N., Holzer, P., & Berlyn, C. (2009). Mandatory reporting of child abuse. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies. Kenny, M. C. (2004). Teachers’ attitudes toward and knowledge of child maltreatment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24, 1311–1319. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.06.010 Kenny, M. C. (2007). Web-based training in child maltreatment for future mandated reporters. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31, 671–678. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.12.008 Kenny, M. C. (2009). Child sexual abuse prevention: Psychoeducational groups for preschoolers and their parents. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 34(1), 24–42. doi:10.1080/01933920802600824 Laskey, L. (2005, July). Making a difference in child protection: Towards an effective education for teachers. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Australian Teacher Education Association Conference, Teacher Education: Local and Global, Surfers Paradise, Australia. McCallum, F. (2003, November). Using mentored learning to support pre-service teachers in child protection. Paper presented at the New Zealand Association for Research in Education/Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, Auckland, New Zealand. McKee, B. E., & Dillenburger, K. (2009). Child abuse and neglect: Training needs of student teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 48, 320–330. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2010.03.002 Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). Learning our lesson: Review of quality teaching in higher education. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/learningourlessonreviewofquality teachinginhighereducation.htm Reading, R., Bissell, S., Goldhagen, J., Harwin, J., Masson, J., Moynihan, S., . . . Webb, E. (2009). Promotion of children’s rights and prevention of child maltreatment. The Lancet, 373, 332–341. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61709-2


16


Rossato, C., & Brackenridge, C. (2009). Child protection training in sport-related degrees and initial teacher training for physical education: An audit. Child Abuse Review, 18, 81–93. doi:10.1002/car.1052 Smith, A., Schlichthorst, M., Mitchell, A., Walsh, J., Lyons, A., Blackman, P., & Pitts, M. (2011). Sexuality education in Australian secondary schools 2010. Melbourne, Australia: The Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2009). International technical guidance on sexuality education: An evidence-informed approach for schools, teachers and health educators (Vols. 1 and 2). Paris, France: Author. Wallace, I., & Bunting, L. (2007). An examination of local, national and international arrangements for the mandatory reporting of child abuse: The implications for Northern Ireland. Belfast, Ireland: National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. Walsh, K., Farrell, A., Schweitzer, R., & Bridgstock, R. (2005). Critical factors in teachers’ detecting and reporting child abuse and neglect: Implications for practice. Brisbane, Australia: Queensland University of Technology. Walsh, K., Laskey, L., McInnes, E., Farrell, A., Mathews, B., & Briggs, F. (2011). Locating child protection preservice education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(7), 33–58. doi:10.14221/ajte.2011v36n7.1 Woolfolk, A., & Margetts, K. (2010). Educational psychology (2nd ed.). Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson. Wurtele, S. K. (2009). Preventing sexual abuse of children in the twenty-first century: Preparing for challenges and opportunities. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 18, 1–18. doi:10.1080/10538710802584650

AUTHOR NOTES Juliette D. G. Goldman, PhD, ACM, Faculty of Education, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, is an academic and prolific researcher with numerous writings, including four books and more than 310 publications. She is an authority on children’s cognition of their development and found one of the earliest comprehensive figures for child sexual abuse in Australia. Peter Grimbeek, PhD, MAPS, adjunct member of the Centre for Health Practice Innovation, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia, has a particular interest in designing, developing, and analyzing surveys. Other statistical interests include the use of SPSS Optimal Scaling to develop demographic profiles, SPSS AMOS to do structural equation modeling, Winsteps to do Rasch item analysis, and Leximancer (http://www.leximancer.com) to do automated text analysis.

Preservice teachers' sources of information on mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse.

Child sexual abuse.

Consequences of child sexual abuse.

Child Abuse Reporting Barriers: Iranian Nurses' Experiences.

Child sexual abuse and HIV infection.

Rethinking child sexual abuse: an anthropological perspective.

Parent-Focused Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse.

Sexual abuse allegations in child custody disputes.

Child sexual abuse research: a methodological quagmire.

Child abuse by child abuse committees?

Adult sequelae of child sexual abuse.

The consequences of child sexual abuse.

Child sexual abuse in Hong Kong.

Child sexual abuse research knowledge among child abuse professionals and laypersons.

Child advocacy center based group treatment for child sexual abuse.

[Liability of the pediatrician and court reporting of child abuse].

Child abuse intervention in the emergency room.

Who Improved in a Trauma Intervention for HIV-Positive Women with Child Sexual Abuse Histories?

Compulsory reporting changing MDs' role in sexual-abuse cases.

Flexible reporting options for skilled child abuse professionals.

The impact of case characteristics on child abuse reporting decisions.

Exploring the influence of reporting delay on criminal justice outcomes: comparing child and adult reporters of childhood sexual abuse.

A Perplexing Case of Child Abuse: Oral Injuries in Abuse and Physician Reporting Responsibilities.

[Medical evaluation of suspected child and adolescent sexual abuse].