School Based Violence Assessment Report

Using School Violence Index

Name of School: Chancho Aba Gada Secondary School
_______________________________________________
Address: Sululta Special Zone Surrounding Finfinne, Chancho town.

Assessment No: 1

Participants:

1. Administrative Staff = 3; 2M + 1F
2. Teachers = 4; 2M + 2F
3. Students = 4; 2M + 2F

Facilitators:

1. Gudeta Adugna; Abdisa Aga Secondary School Principal.

2. Gemechu Bekele; Program Manager, Shalom Humanitarian Development Association

About the School

 Established in 1988EC.
 It is a Government School.
 The school has students from grades 9 to10.
 Its current enrollment is 1246 students.
 Has a total 53 of teachers.

1. Assessment Objectives
The basic objective of the School Violence Index is to assess the level of school violence
within the secondary schools targeted in the “Safe School Project” of the “Making Change
Happen” Program, run by Initiative Africa (IA), to help develop violence free school
environment. IA is persuaded that measureable decreases in violent and non-violent incidents
in schools can be achieved through an assessment tool that enables the schools to make a rapid
appraisal (a quick ‘health check’) which can identify the problem areas and the extent.
The assessment is primarily done to:
 Build understanding of the complex issues involved in school violence reduction
 Determine strength and weakness of the school regarding addressing school violence
 Recommend ways to improve the effectiveness of the violence reduction programs in
the form of action plan
2. Assessment Scope
The assessment covers the following four dimensions on the target school:
Dimension 1: School Violence Prevention & Reduction Program:
Dimension 2: School Physical Security Improvement:
Dimension 3: School Policies & Rules to Combat Violence:
Dimension 4: Handling School Violence Incidences:
The indicators are given a score, minimum 0 and maximum 4, according to the level of agreement
which refers to the degree to which the indicator is applicable to or practice within the school,
translated into the level of agreement with the indicator.

Score Level of agreement Description: This indicator is…

0 None/not applicable
1 Disagree
2 Tend to disagree
3 Tend to agree
4 Agree
…not applied in our school
…hardly applied in our school
…sometimes applied in our school and occasionally put
into practice
…applied in our school and most of the time put into
practice
…very much applied to our school and always put into
practice

3. Major Issues Raised During the Discussion

3.1 Dimension 1: School Violence Prevention & Reduction Programs

Key points raised

Indicators
Students Teachers Principals & admin
1.1 School leadership leads violence prevention programs 1 3 4

1.2 The school has periodic training sessions on violence 0 0 1

prevention
1.3 Teachers are aware of their code of conduct 2 4 4
1.4 Students have sufficient perception of violence & its 3 4 4
types
1.5 There are discussions about violence issues among 2 3 3
school community members
1.6 There are activities that maintain positive relationships 3 4 4
among all school members
1.7 Special programs on violence prevention, health, safety 0 1 1
and security are in place for students
1.8 Local law enforcement bodies are involved in the 0 0 1
violence prevention education
1.9 Parents are involved in the violence prevention 1 1 1
education
1.10 Resources have been allocated to support and sustain 0 0 1
school’s violence prevention programs
Average 1.2 2.0 2.4

(%) (%) (%)

3.1.1 Ratings and analysis

The students, teachers and administration perceived that the school has periodic training sessions on
violence prevention, there are no special programs on violence prevention, health, safety and
security are in place for students, no involvement of local legal enforcement bodies in the violence
prevention education, parents are not adequately involved, and the school allocates insufficient
resources for violence prevention program.

3.2Dimension 2: School Physical Security Improvement

Key points raised

Indicators
Students Teachers Principals & admin
2.1 The school has a supervised fencing 4 4 4
2.2 All exterior entrances are monitored not 4 4 4
to allow intruders
2.3 Restrooms are separate for boys & girls in 0 0 0
different direction
2.4 The school monitors the use of the school 1 1 3
compound during afterschool programs

2.5 The school maintains a smoke-free 4 4 4

environment
2.6 Restricted areas within the school are 4 4 4
properly identified and secured
2.7 Plantings in the school allow visual 2 3 3
surveillance and are not hiding places
2.8 The school surrounding has no activities 0 1 1
that divert students’ attention

2.9 The local law enforcement patrols and 1 2 2

assures the safety of the school
surrounding
2.10 Students (especially girls) are safe on the 0 0 1
way to and from the school
Average 2.0 2.3 2.6
(%) (%) (%)

3.2.1Ratings and analysis

The students, teachers and principals/administration all agreed that female students on their way to
and from schools are highly vulnerable to plumping/being looted, and the school surrounding has no
activities that divert students’ attention. Both the students and teachers feel that the school does not
monitor the use of the school compound during afterschool programs. All the parties (school
students, teachers and principals) verified that there are no separate restrooms which again induce
rape within lavatories. Of course, all the three confirmed that the school has a supervised fencing, all
exterior entrances are monitored not to allow intruders.

3.3Dimension 3: School Policies & Rules to Combat Violence

 Key points raised
Indicators Students Teachers Principals & admin
3.1 The school plan defines violence 1 3 3
behavior/act
The school uses school guideline to 2 3 3
3.2 alleviate disciplinary problems
3.3 The school is committed to apply basic 0 3 3
regulations
3.4 The school involves the whole school 1 1 1
community in its violence prevention
program
3.5 The school periodically evaluates its 0 0 1
violence status
3.6 The school uses regulation to promotes 1 3 4
teachers’ code of conduct
3.7 The school uses an up to date discipline 1 3 4
guideline
3.8 The school adopted the code of conduct 1 2 3
developed by the Ministry of Education

0.875 2.25 2.75

(%) (%) (%)

3.3.1 Ratings and analysis

Students’ perception of existence and execution of school Policies & Rules to Combat Violence are
virtually void though it seems apparently that teachers and administration insisted in a counter way.
The school teachers and administration discussed the existence of school guideline to alleviate
disciplinary problems and the school’s commitment to apply basic regulations. They also justified
that the school uses regulation to promote teachers’ code of conduct, and the school uses an up to
date discipline guideline.
 3.4 Dimension 4: Handling School Violence Incidences
Key points raised
Indicators
Students Teachers Principal and admin
4.1 Students know how to report school based 4 4 4
violence
4.2 School based violence are usually reported to 4 4 4
the school
4.3 Perpetuators often identified 3 3 3
4.4 Causes of the violence incidences are known 4 4 4
4.5 The school has provided specific support for 1 1 2
students who are victimized
4.6 The school has provided specific support for 0 2 2
students who are perpetrators
4.7 The school often applied the code of conduct 2 3 4

4.8 The school has a violence recording system 0 0 0

that differentiates the type of violence
4.9 The school involved parents in treating victims 0 1 1
of school violence
4.10 The school community is involved in helping 3 3 4
victims of school violence to recover
4.11 The school distinguished the type of violence 2 3 3
incidents to be reported to local law
enforcement bodies
4.12 Incidents happened were used as springboard 2 4 4
for prevention of violence
Average 2.08 2.66 2.58
(%) (%) (%)

3.4.1 Ratings and analysis

All the school communities of this assessment (students, teachers, and administration) agreed that
the school has a violence recording system that differentiates the type of violence, does not parents
in treating victims of school violence, and does not provide specific support for students who are
victimized. However, they also reached on consensus that students know how to report school based
violence, the school identifies perpetuators, school based violence are usually reported to the
school, and the school community is involved in helping victims of school violence to recover.

4. Conclusion and Suggestions

As observed from the rating scale orchestrated by the above tables, students have sufficient
perception 0f violence and its types, have activities that maintain positive relationships among all
school members, the teachers have also aware of their code of conduct, the school leadership leads
violence prevention programmes, and also maintains a smoke free environment, has supervised
fencing, and exterior entrances.
However, there are few or almost no resources allocated to support and sustain schools violence
prevention programs, virtually local law enforcement bodies are not involved in the violence
prevention education and also there are no special programs on violence prevention, health, safety,
and security for students, rest rooms are not separate for boys and girls, and girls are noted safe
from the way to school and back.
The school does not periodically evaluate its violence status, and not adequately involve the whole
school community in its violence prevention program, has no violence recording system, and does
not sufficiently involve parents in treating victims.
From the analysis, the school has lacked many of school violence prevention measures stipulatred in
the rating scale. Therefore, there should be interventions to be in place that can avert under
performances related to teachers, students, parents, and government authorities.
School communities in the form of clubs, committees, communication media, and collaboration with
government legal offices to enforce the policies and regulation by contextualizing the local norms
and traditions;
Schools should progressively adopt bystander approach and also psycho social support to minimize
and mend the victim survivors.

Average scores for each dimension for Tulu Milki Secondary School.
Dimensions Average score
School Violence prevention &reduction programs 1.87
School physical Security Improvement 2.3
School Polices , Rules and regulations 1.96
Handling School violence incidences 2.44
Average 2.14