Table 2:

Qualities of Effective Prevention: Comparison of studies reviewed in DeGue et al. and of the National Sexuality Education Standards (NSES)

Commonalities of effective prevention programs (Nation et al., 2003)	Did programs reviewed by DeGue meet these qualities? Source: DeGue, S., Valle, L. A., Holt, M. K., Massetti, G. M., Matjasko, J. L., & Tharp, A. T. (2014). A systematic review of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence perpetration. Aggression and Violent Behavior,19(4), 346–362.	Can programs that follow the NSES meet these qualities? Source: Future of Sex Education Initiative. (2016). Building a Foundation for Sexual Health Is a K–12 Endeavor: Evidence Underpinning the National Sexuality Education Standards. Retrieved from http://futureofsexed.org/documents/Building-a-foundation-for-Sexual-Health.pdf
1. Compre-hensive	No: The vast majority of studies “utilized a narrow set of strategies to address individual attitudes and knowledge related to SV. Fewer than 10% included content to address factors beyond the individual level, such as peer attitudes, social norms, or organizational climate and policies” (p. 356).	Yes: Don’t focus solely on sexual violence. Rather, it teaches about positive sexual health in its entirety. This means that the entire spectrum of sexual health would be covered in an age appropriate manner. 7 key topic areas are included: Anatomy and Physiology; Puberty and Adolescent Development; Identity; Pregnancy and Reproduction; Sexually Transmitted Diseases and HIV; Healthy Relationships, and Personal Safety.
2. Varied teaching methods	No: “Nearly 1/3 of interventions utilized a single mode of intervention delivery (or teaching method) and another 40% utilized two modes of instruction. The most common modes of intervention delivery involved interactive presentations, didactic-only lectures, and/or videos. Only about 1/3 involved active participation in the form of role-playing, skills practice, or other group activities” (p. 357).	Implied: States that “students need opportunities to engage in cooperative and active learning strategies.”
3. Sufficient dosage	No: 75% of interventions “had only 1 session, and half of all studies involved a total exposure of 1 h or less. It is likely that behaviors as complex as SVP will require a higher dosage to change behavior and have lasting effects” (p. 357)	Implied: Don’t recommend a specific amount of time to be allotted to each topic, but do state that sufficient time should be given for students to master the topics and skills delineated in the curriculum. Furthermore, it spans K-12, implying that sufficient dosage will be given.
4. Theory driven	No: DeGue et al. did not “systematically evaluate the theoretical underpinnings of the interventions…[However], the most common risk factors addressed were knowledge and attitudes about rape, women, and sex. There is limited empirical evidence linking legal or sexual knowledge to sexual violence perpetration and virtually no theoretical reason to believe that rape is caused by lack of awareness and laws prohibiting it” (p. 357).	Yes: Reflects the social learning theory, social cognitive theory, and the social ecological model.
5. Positive relationships	No: “The short length and didactic nature of most interventions reviewed here do not lend themselves well to relationship-building” (p. 357).	Yes: Of the 7 key topics covered, “Healthy Relationships” is an entire topic area.
6. Appropriate timing	No: “More than 2/3 of sexual violence prevention strategies…targeted college samples…However, because many college men have already engaged in sexual violence before arriving on campus or will shortly thereafter, prevention initiatives that address this age group may miss the window of opportunity to prevent SV before it starts” (p. 356).	Yes: The curriculum starts in Kindergarten and lasts through the end of high school, ensuring that developmentally appropriate health objectives are met in each grade.
7. Socio-culturally relevant	No: Only three interventions included content designed for specific racial/ethnic groups. 14 studies evaluated programs for fraternity men, male athletes, and the military. Two-thirds of programs were implemented with majority-white samples (p.357).	Yes: States that sexuality education should “focus on health within the context of the world in which students live.”
8. Outcome evaluations	Mixed: Most outcome evaluations did not include follow-up past 5 months and only 21 studies measured sexually violent behavior as an outcome.	Not Stated: In order to understand if a curriculum built in the NSES works in changing perpetration behavior, it is important to conduct an outcome evaluation. Part of our argument in this paper is that when an NSES-guided CSE curriculum is implemented, it should be evaluated with sexually violent behavior as an outcome.
9. Well trained staff	No: “Only one-quarter of interventions were implemented by professionals with expertise related to sexual violence prevention and extensive knowledge of the program model. The majority of programs were implemented by peer facilitators, advanced students, or school/agency staff who may not have specific expertise in the topic” (p.357).	Yes: Part of the recommendations include pre-service teacher training, professional development, and ongoing support and mentoring for teachers to ensure that the staff delivering CSE are well trained.