AzTrials
AzTrials

School AttendanceASEPNCT04281966

Testing the Efficacy of the Ability School Engagement Partnership Program (ASEP)

A study testing Ability School Engagement Program Conference in people with School Attendance and Welfare Dependence, run by The University of Queensland at 1 site in Australia.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This project is an up-scaled test of the Ability School Engagement Partnership (ASEP) Project. The ASEP is a partnership program that aims to increase school attendance and is grounded in the theory of Third-Party-Policing (TPP). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 12 to 16 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
What is being tested?
Ability School Engagement Program Conference
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
753 participants
Where
1 siteAustralia
Study dates
21 Jun 2019to 30 Nov 2021
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 12 to 16 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child

Who may be able to join

  • High school aged young people only, aged 12 to 16;
  • Have 15% or more unexplained absences over each other previous two school terms;
  • Have no known legitimate explanation for absences (e.g., ongoing medical issue); and
  • Have at least one responsibly adult in their lives (e.g., parent, guardian, or carer) who provides social and/or financial support.

Who cannot join

  • None

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Lorraine Mazerolle, Ph.D. contact

+61 7 334 67877

l.mazerolle@uq.edu.au

Australia1 site, 1 recruiting

  • The University of Queensland

    Brisbane, Queensland, 4072

    Lorraine Mazerolle, Ph.D., +61 7 334 67877, l.mazerolle@uq.edu.au

    Lorraine Mazerolle, Ph.D.

    Recruiting

Other trials in Australia

About this study

This project is an up-scaled test of the Ability School Engagement Partnership (ASEP) Project. The ASEP is a partnership program that aims to increase school attendance and is grounded in the theory of Third-Party-Policing (TPP). In ASEP, school-based police officers partner with schools (i.e., the third-party) who have legal powers to control and prevent school absenteeism. The ASEP intervention includes an ASEP conference in which the legal requirements to attend school are explicitly communicated in a procedurally just way to young people missing school and their parents/guardians. Restorative Outcomes Australia (ROA) is a provide provider partner who will oversee the facilitation of the ASEP conferences. While the program is designed to re-engage these young people in school and/or facilitate transitions to work and reduce antisocial behavior (e.g., delinquency), this trial will also test the capacity of the program to improve collaboration between the schools and police and also monitor young participants' future life outcomes, such as future welfare dependence.

Read the detailed description

The ASEP is grounded in the theory of Third Party Policing (TPP). TPP interventions focus on controlling negative behavioral outcomes through partnerships that use a third party's legal powers. In ASEP, the police partner with the schools to work together to engage with young people, reduce their anti-social behavior and increase their school attendance. At the core of the partnership is communication of the legal lever: in ASEP, it is the Queensland Education (General Provisions) Act (2006) - requiring young people attend school up to age 16 and holding parents legally responsible. The laws are communicated to parents and young people who are not regularly attending school in a procedurally fair way within the context of an ASEP conference. The ASEP conference is especially designed to incorporate fair communication of the laws and consequences and involves a purpose-built script that seeks to increase willingness of both parents and young people to comply with the law. The ASEP conference participants include a trained facilitator (from Restorative Outcomes Australia; ROA), the young person missing a lot of school, their parent or guardian, a uniformed school-based police officer, and a school representative (e.g., teacher). An individually tailored Action Plan is developed during the conference which stipulate the "actions" that all conference participants are to take over the subsequent two months in order to ensure that the young person increases their school attendance and re-engages with school and/or transitions into paid work.

Being tested
Ability School Engagement Program Conference
Keywords
School Attendance, Welfare Dependence, Antisocial Behavior, Third-Party Policing Partnerships
Medical subject headings
Antisocial Personality Disorder

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Ability School Engagement Program ConferenceBehavioural

    The ASEP conference focuses on understanding the reasons behind why the young person is not attending school regularly, understand how the young person's non-attendance affects other conference participants, highlight the legal consequences of parents and/or guardians to ensure that their child attends school, and the development of a young person-centered Action Plan, which will specifically detail the "actions" that all parties are to take over the next three months to ensure that the young person re-engages with school and/or transitions into paid work.

Study groups in NCT04281966
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
ExperimentExperimentalFor young people from schools randomly assigned to the experimental ASEP condition will participate in the ASEP intervention. The ASEP intervention is a Third-Party Policing partnership that involves a partnership between police and school, an ASEP conference and follow up which is organized and led by a conference facilitator with the young person, their parent (or guardian), a school representative (e.g., teacher), and a uniformed school-based police officer. The police and school representatives will be trained by the facilitator to utilize procedurally just dialogue during the entirety of the conference. The ASEP conference script will utilize a procedurally just dialogue to increase both the young person and their parents' perceptions and knowledge of the legitimacy of the truancy laws, police, and schools in order to gain willing compliance to follow the rules.
Receives: Behavioral: Ability School Engagement Program Conference
ControlNo interventionParticipants allocated to the control condition will be given the "business-as-usual' approach to handling school non-attendance. The control participants will be sanctioned in the usual manner for engaging in truancy through the requirements denoted in the Queensland Education (General Provisions) Act (2006).

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Official School Absences

    A count of the number of school absences of young people.

    Measured: Six-Months Post-Intervention

  2. Official Arrest Records

    A count of official arrest records of young people.

    Measured: Six-Months Post Intervention

  3. Perceptions of School Legitimacy

    These measures are adapted from the original ASEP Project Trial (Mazerolle, 2014). The original ASEP researchers adapted these scales from Murphy and Mearns (2008), Sunshine and Tyler (2003), and Tankebe (2009). These indices include five items that address respondents' (young people and parents/guardians in the experimental group only) perceptions of legitimacy of school staff with higher values equating to better perceptions of school staff legitimacy.

    Measured: Two-months post intervention

  4. Perceptions of School Procedural Justice

    These measures are adapted from the original ASEP Project Trial (Mazerolle, 2014). The original ASEP researchers adapted these scales from Murphy and Mearns (2008), Sunshine and Tyler (2003), and Tankebe (2009). These indices include five items that address respondents' (young people and parents/guardians in the experimental group only) perceptions of procedural justice of school staff with higher values equating to better perceptions of school staff procedural justice.

    Measured: Two-months post intervention

  5. Perceptions of Police Legitimacy

    These measures are adapted from the original ASEP Project Trial (Mazerolle, 2014). The original ASEP researchers adapted these scales from Murphy and Mearns (2008), Sunshine and Tyler (2003), and Tankebe (2009). These indices include five items that address respondents' (young people and parents/guardians in the experimental group only) perceptions of legitimacy of police in general with higher values equating to better perceptions of police legitimacy.

    Measured: Two-months post intervention

  6. Perceptions of Police Procedural Justice

    These measures are adapted from the original ASEP Project Trial (Mazerolle, 2014). The original ASEP researchers adapted these scales from Murphy and Mearns (2008), Sunshine and Tyler (2003), and Tankebe (2009). These indices include five items that address respondents' (young people and parents/guardians in the experimental group only) perceptions of procedural justice of police in general.

    Measured: Two-months post intervention

  7. Perceptions of Family Legitimacy

    Adapted from the work of Trinkner, 2012; Trinkner et al., 2012; Trinker \& Cohn, 2014. Measures respondents' (young people and parents/guardians in the experimental group only) perceptions of family legitimacy with higher values equating to better perceptions of family legitimacy.

    Measured: Two-months post intervention

  8. Perceptions of Family Procedural Justice

    Adapted from the work of Trinkner, 2012; Trinkner et al., 2012; Trinker \& Cohn, 2014. Measures respondents' (young people and parents/guardians in the experimental group only) perceptions of family procedural justice with higher values equating to better perceptions of family legitimacy.

    Measured: Two-months post intervention

  9. General Well-being

    The Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS; Haver et al., 2015; Stewart-Brown et al., 2009; Taggart et al., 2015; Tennant et al., 2007) to be administered to young people and parents in the experimental condition only. It includes 7 items, scores range from 7 to 35, and higher scores coincide with better well-being.

    Measured: Two-months post intervention

  10. Self-efficacy

    Includes 12 items from the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory (Carver et al., 1989; Carver, 1997) to be administered to young people and parents in the experimental condition only. Scores will range from 12 to 48 and coded so that higher values equate to better coping skills.

    Measured: Two-months post intervention

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted24 Feb 2020
  2. Study start21 Jun 2019
  3. Primary completion30 Nov 2021 (estimated)
  4. Study completion30 Nov 2021 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
The current project utilizes a randomized controlled cluster trial to assess the efficacy of the ASEP intervention and thereby theoretically test the efficacy of third-party-policing. Data will be collected from high schools that are in either socially disadvantaged areas or have students who reside in socially disadvantaged areas. A total of 69 high schools were identified as eligible for the Trial based upon measures of social disadvantage. The 69 eligible high schools were randomly assigned to participate in the ASEP (experiment) or business-as-usual (control) conditions. Young people from schools who take part in the ASEP (experiment) will be recruited from the experimental schools. Official data will be obtained about the young people (identified for those in the experimental condition who consent; de-identified for the young people in the control schools).
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
753 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04281966
Sponsor's protocol ID
2019002851
Acronym
ASEP
Status last verified
Mar 2020
First submitted
20 Feb 2020
Last updated
9 Mar 2020
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No

Publications

  • Antrobus, E., Bennett, S., Mazerolle, L., & Eggins, E. (2019). Parental and student perceptions of procedural justice and legitimacy in the context of truancy: Results from a randomized field trial. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 52(4), 534-557.

  • Bennett, S., Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Eggins, E., & Piquero, A. R. (2018). Truancy intervention reduces crime: Results from a randomized field trial. Justice Quarterly, 35(2), 309-329.

  • Cardwell, S. M., Mazerolle, L., & Piquero, A. R. (2019). Parental attachment and truant rationalizations of antisocial behavior: findings from a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Crime and Justice, 1-19.

  • Cardwell, S. M., Mazerolle, L., & Piquero, A. R. (2019). Truancy intervention and violent offending: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 49.

  • Cardwell, S. M., Mazerolle, L., Bennett, S., & Piquero, A. R. (2019). Changing the relationship between impulsivity and antisocial behavior: the impact of a school engagement program. Crime & Delinquency, 65(8), 1076-1101.

  • Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989 Feb;56(2):267-83. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.56.2.267.

    PubMed 2926629

  • Cohn, E. S., Trinkner, R. J., Rebellon, C. J., Van Gundy, K. T., & Cole, L. M. (2012). Legal attitudes and legitimacy: Extending the integrated legal socialization model. Victims & Offenders, 7(4), 385-406.

  • Mazerolle, L. (2014). The power of policing partnerships: Sustaining the gains. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10(3), 341-365.

  • Mazerolle L, Antrobus E, Bennett S, Eggins E. Reducing Truancy and Fostering a Willingness to Attend School: Results from a Randomized Trial of a Police-School Partnership Program. Prev Sci. 2017 May;18(4):469-480. doi: 10.1007/s11121-017-0771-7.

    PubMed 28317075

  • Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Cardwell, S. M., Piquero, A. R., & Bennett, S. (2019). Harmonizing legal socialization to reduce antisocial behavior: Results from a randomized field trial of truanting young people. Justice Quarterly, 1-28.

  • Mazerolle, L., Bennett, S., Antrobus, E., Cardwell, S. M., Eggins, E., & Piquero, A. R. (2019). Disrupting the pathway from truancy to delinquency: a randomized field trial test of the longitudinal impact of a school engagement program. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 35(4), 663-689.

  • Murphy, K., & Mearns, M. (2008). The Public Safety and Security in Australia Survey: Survey methodology and preliminary findings. ARC Centre for Excellence in Policing and Security (Working Paper, October 2008). The Australian National University.

  • Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 513-548.

  • Tankebe, J. (2009). Public cooperation with the police in Ghana: Does procedural fairness matter? Criminology, 47(4), 1265-1293.

  • Tennant R, Hiller L, Fishwick R, Platt S, Joseph S, Weich S, Parkinson J, Secker J, Stewart-Brown S. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007 Nov 27;5:63. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-5-63.

    PubMed 18042300

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Ability School Engagement Program Conference in people with School Attendance and Welfare Dependence, run by The University of Queensland at 1 site in Australia.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Mar 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Australia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Lorraine Mazerolle, Ph.D. (+61 7 334 67877, l.mazerolle@uq.edu.au), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Official School Absences (time frame: Six-Months Post-Intervention). The study lists 10 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04281966, which also lists 22 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Mar 2020.

AzTrials uses cookies for analytics and advertising. You can accept or reject them; the site works either way. Privacy Policy.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in