Do the Write Thing Violence Prevention Program: The Case of a Middle School on the U.S.–Mexican Border

“Do the Write Thing Challenge” is the major initiative of the National Campaign to Stop Violence, a nonprofit organization committed to reducing violence in early adolescents (https://www.dtwt.org). Founded by the Kuwait-American Foundation, primary goals of the program are to prevent bullying, violence, and juvenile delinquency and for middle level students to make a lasting commitment to help end violence in their lives, schools, homes, and communities. Each year, participating middle schools conduct classroom activities on violence for approximately three to four weeks in November and December. With the exception of the students’ essay writings, the program does not prescribe a common curriculum or set of learning activities, thus allowing schools to tailor the program to their local needs and goals. However, the challenge program has been aligned with the Common Core English Language Arts Standards in Writing for Grade 7 (http://www.core-standards.org/ELA-Literacy/W/7/) and Grade 8 (http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/W/8/), and it is strongly recommended that teachers use learning activities that allow them to engage students in rich discussions about the impact of violence.

Examples of learning activities include having guest speakers, discussing scenarios or watching videos focused on violence, and gathering information and data (researching the internet, for example) by students and culminating in the writing of essays concerning experiences with violence in their lives as victims, perpetrators, or witnesses. Students also use these data to design prevention and intervention initiatives and projects as they are committed to taking action and addressing problems in their homes, schools and communities. Teachers are free to use any of these various classroom activities, giving them flexibility to incorporate the program into their school’s curriculum and align with their state standards. The program does not focus on specific types of violence but rather allows participating school districts to decide if they want to focus on violence in general, or on more specific violence including bullying, domestic problems, disruptive conduct, illicit drug use and even unruly neighborhoods and gangs.

Activities typically take place over several weeks in November and December. The culminating activity of the program is asking students to write essays about: (a) the way violence has affected their lives, (b) what they see as the causes of this violence, and (c) how they might help prevent future violence. Currently, 26 communities in the United States are actively participating in the annual DtWT Challenge. Locally, DtWT Challenge programs are typically organized and administered by a DtWT Committee known as the Blue Ribbon Panel, a volunteer community action group comprised of leaders from the community, family court judges and attorneys, business, education, and government. The National Campaign to Stop Violence provides youth with the opportunity to share experiences, ideas and solutions concerning violence in their community leaders at four annual recognition events.

Student essays are judged by the local Blue Ribbon Panel using a rubric (see Figure 1) to judge the quality of the essays on the basis of content, originality and the most thought provoking responses to the three components of the essays (National Campaign to Stop Violence Book of Writings, 2020). Based on essay scores, semifinalists and their parents are selected to participate in an interview with Blue Ribbon Panel members, resulting in the selection of two student ambassadors from each of the 26 U.S. participating cities. In order to qualify as a school finalist, students are required to submit their essays along with a signed student/parent consent form. Student ambassadors attend National Recognition Week in Washington, DC, accompanied by a teacher, parent, program coordinator and the DtWT Chair for each city. The program aspires to empower middle level students by: (a) communicating their thoughts and feelings, (b) letting them know that adults hear their thoughts and concerns, (c) identifying those who can benefit from school and community services, and (d) building trusting relationships with teachers by providing open lines of communication (https://www.dtwt.org).

Although DtWT does not have an explicitly stated theoretical framework, we determined that the theory of planned behavior (TPB, see Figure 2) provides the most relevant framework for examining program impact with the goal of informing the design and further implementation of DtWT (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). The TPB posits that specific behaviors are determined by individuals’ intentions to implement those behaviors. Furthermore, intentions to act are guided by individuals’ beliefs about: (a) carrying out the behaviors (attitudes); (b) what they think others expect and value (normative beliefs); and (c) their ability to actually perform the behavior (perceived control). See Table 1 for these variables and definitions.

TPB has been used extensively to study changes in health-related behaviors, and more recently to examine bullying behaviors (Heirman & Walrave, 2012; Pabian & Vandebosch, 2014) and interventions (Hawley & Williford, 2015). Previous research by Pryce and Frederickson (2013) supports the use of TPB to evaluate antibullying interventions and has shown that changes in bullying behaviors are significantly associated with changes in behavioral intentions. Conversely, research on cyberbullying found that adolescents’ attitudes strongly predicted perpetration of bullying behaviors (Heirman & Walrave, 2012; Pabian & Vandebosch, 2014).

Within DtWT, the TPB suggests that students’ intentions to change their behaviors regarding violence will be influenced by three constructs. The first is their attitudes toward performing specific behaviors. Attitudes are defined as the students’ evaluations/beliefs regarding specific behaviors, whether positive or negative. The second construct is their beliefs regarding the school norms surrounding these behaviors. School norms are defined as the students’ expectations that important people in their lives will carry out specific behaviors. The third construct is perceived behavioral control, defined as students’ efficacy for being able to perform the specific behaviors (see Table 1 for these definitions and examples). Because DtWT seeks to change students’ attitudes and behaviors with respect to violence, the TPB serves as an informative framework for examining program impact and informing recommendations for future program development.

The purpose of this research was to conduct an initial case study on participation in DtWT for one middle school. Research questions include: (a) Using TPB as a theoretical framework, how did participation in DtWT impact students’ intentions and behaviors for reducing and preventing violence? (b) From the teachers’ perspectives, how did the program impact students? (c) How did participation in DtWT impact teachers? (d) What learning activities were used and how did participation in these activities relate to program impacts?

“Bordertown” Middle School is located approximately 2 miles from the Mexican border near a large urban area in the Southwestern United States. All but two of nearly 600 students were Hispanic and many were economically disadvantaged; 30% were English learners, and 60% were considered at risk. Due to the recent history of drug wars in neighboring Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, approximately 10% of students in Bordertown have lost a close family member due to drug-related violence in Mexico and 20% to 30% are separated from their families in Mexico to attend school in the United States (Marin & Haley, 2014). Although all participating schools in Bordertown’s city are on the US/Mexican border, this school was selected because the school has participated in DtWT every year since its inception in 2003. In addition, several students from Bordertown Middle School have been selected to represent the city as ambassadors to the National Recognition event in Washington, DC, and teachers have been fully committed to the program. Over the years teachers at this school have expressed their enthusiasm for DtWT as they witnessed the reduction of violence in this small town since the inception of the program, and they have expressed interest in collaborating on research projects.

Student participants in this study included 331 students who participated in DtWT (147 seventh graders and 184 eighth graders; 46% female and 54% male; 95% Hispanic; all but 7 wrote essays on violence). The control group was comprised of 113 students from three middle schools in surrounding districts who did not participate in DtWT (11 sixth graders, 68 seventh graders and 34 eighth graders; 58% female and 42% male; 79% Hispanic). Participants also included seven Hispanic female adults working at Bordertown Middle School who participated in the focus group. Five were teachers (mean age = 37; mean years of teaching experience = 6). Two of the teachers participated in DtWT in their seventh grade English and language arts (ELAR) classes; two in their 8th grade ELAR classes, and one in an English as a second language class. Participants also included the school’s DtWT liaison (an instructional specialist in ELAR) and the school librarian who also worked closely with students and teachers in DtWT to select literature pieces, poetry, and videos related to the impact of violence and violence prevention.

We used a mixed methods case study to address the research questions. Specifically, we used an explanatory design in which quantitative data was collected first via student questionnaires, and then followed up with qualitative data collection to elaborate on the findings via teacher focus groups (Fraenkel et al., 2019). This methodologically diverse approach was recommended by Song et al. (2010) as the most appropriate method for initial examination of an intervention that has not yet been researched in depth, such as DtWT. Our goal was to conduct initial research on one middle school to examine appropriateness of the theoretical model and to collect evidence for effectiveness of the intervention before conducting larger scale research across schools and districts. As recommended by Song et al., (2010), “Of all the domains to be addressed in the pilot testing of an intervention, the most relevant to proceeding with the intervention is determining its association with, and efficacy in addressing, the targeted problem” (p. 36).

After obtaining IRB approval from the researchers’ university and school district, participating teachers at Bordertown Middle School implemented DtWT learning activities from late October to mid-December. A curriculum packet of recommended teaching activities provided to teachers included real life scenarios for classroom discussions, videos, and literature pieces (novels and poetry) concerning violence and the impact of violence on people. A 5-day writing plan was also provided that was developed by a master teacher to help students write their essays. The writing activities were aligned with state standards and designed to be compatible with teachers’ curriculum requirements in English/language arts and social studies, and they complemented character building, antibullying/antidomestic violence and drug abuse prevention programs typically found in schools.

In early February we obtained quantitative data via teacher and student surveys and in March we conducted the focus group with teachers/educators. This timing gave teachers and students potential opportunities following the holiday break to implement their learning from the program. Teachers administered surveys in their ELAR/ESL classes after obtaining parent permission and student assent. The focus group session with teachers lasted 90 minutes and was conducted by one of the authors who served as facilitator to obtain teachers’ perceptions, attitudes, and experiences relating to the following guiding questions: (a) How did the program impact the students? (b) How did the program impact the teachers? (c) What learning activities were used? (d) How did participation in these activities relate to program impact? The following key questions were developed by both authors prior to the session to guide the focus group discussions: (a) How do you view your role as a teacher in helping to reduce and/or prevent violence? (b) How would you describe the culture of your school with respect to students and teachers stepping up to reduce and/or prevent violence? How does DtWT impact this culture? (c) How does writing the essays impact students? (d) How does writing the essays impact teachers? (e) What learning activities do you use for DtWT? The facilitator created a permissive environment that allowed teachers to share different perceptions and points of view without pressuring them to reach consensus. Other questions were added as needed to seek clarification and further elaboration of responses from teachers such as: What is the most common type of violence that students experience in this community? Do you want to share additional detail? What kind of music do you use? Is there anything else you can think of concerning the activities you conduct in class? Have you (as a group) identified a set of poems, songs, books, novels, etc that all of you use? Tell me about the connection with the TEKS (Texas State Standards). The focus group session was recorded and subsequently transcribed by a graduate research assistant.

Scale construction for the quantitative data using the TPB followed recommendations from Fishbein and Ajzen (2010). We designed questionnaires to address program impact and relationship of learning activities with outcomes. Based on the coauthors’ extensive involvement in DtWT over a number of years, we first identified three target student behaviors promoted in DtWT: (a) telling someone to stop being violent or to stop bullying; (b) telling an adult about an act of violence or bullying; (c) sharing ideas with adults for ways to stop violence or bullying (see Figure 1). Next, for each of these three behaviors, we constructed items that represent the three TPB variables that have been shown to predict intentions and enactment of these behaviors: attitudes, normative beliefs, and perceived control. Attitudes toward the three targeted behaviors were measured with 5-point semantic differentials ranging from positive to negative (e.g., very helpful to very harmful; alpha = .84). Normative beliefs were measured with questions asking students to rate the likelihood that most kids would engage in each of the three target behaviors. Responses ranged on a 4-point scale from definitely yes to definitely no (alpha = .77). Perceived control items measured students’ efficacy beliefs for engaging in the three targeted behaviors, with 4-point responses ranging from very sure to not sure at all (alpha = .77). Behaviors were measured by asking students how many times they had engaged in the targeted behaviors in the past 30 days, with 4-point responses ranging from 5 or more times to never (alpha = .68). Intentions were measured by asking students how likely they would be to engage in the behaviors in the next 30 days, with 4-point responses ranging from definitely yes to definitely no (alpha = .67). See Table 1 for examples of these questions. Finally, eight questions asked respondents to rate the helpfulness of classroom activities for DtWT; responses ranged from “very helpful” to “not helpful” or “didn’t do.”

Quantitative procedures were used to analyze student survey data. We conducted multi-variate analyses of variance (MANOVA) to address the first research question, comparing DtWT students with control students on TPB variables. We used multiple regression analyses to address the fourth research question, examining the relationship of specific classroom learning activities to program impacts. Qualitative analyses of the teacher focus group involved a standard inductive approach to address the second and third research questions addressing impact on students and teachers.

Qualitative analyses took place in several stages. First, one coauthor transcribed the recording to prepare for data analysis. Second, the contents of the recordings were qualitatively analyzed based on the grounded theory approach. In particular, the qualitative pieces were thematically coded and each coded piece was categorized into different topic foci corresponding with the various themes. Specifically, the coauthors independently adopted a “close reading,” highlighting relevant thoughts and making margin notes to begin identifying salient themes (Shank, 2002). Using a constant comparative strategy (Miles & Huberman, 1994), they utilized the transcripts and notes to identify and refine common themes, discussing and selecting quotes that supported each theme. To enhance credibility, themes and quotes were then shared and discussed with a colleague who had collaborated on previous DtWT research, culminating in a final selection of the most illustrative quotes. Furthermore, member checking was conducted by asking focus group participants to review the themes and quotes. Participants agreed that the summary was an accurate representation of the interview and that the quotes were illustrative of the themes. This systematic analysis of transcripts and selection of relevant quotes provided insights into program impact on both students and teachers.

• Research Question 1: Using TPB as a theoretical framework, how did participation in DtWT impact students’ intentions and behaviors for reducing and preventing violence?

Using student survey results, a MANOVA comparing students from Bordertown with control students indicated an overall significant difference in TPB variables in favor of Bordertown students (F(5, 280) = 3.72, p = .003, partial η² squared = .062). We found significant differences for: (a) intentions to enact behaviors (F(1, 284) = 4.84, p = .029, partial η² = .017) and total attitudes toward behaviors (F(1, 284) = 10.06, p = .002, partial η² = .034) (see Table 2). No differences were found for normative beliefs, perceived control, or behavior enactment. Separate MANOVAs were conducted for each behavior to determine if overall differences were specific to any of the three targeted behaviors. These results indicated that the only targeted behavior that differed was sharing ideas about violence prevention/intervention with an adult. Significant differences for this behavior were found for intentions (F(1, 295) = 4.94, p = .027, partial η² = .017) and attitudes toward sharing ideas with adults (F(1, 295) = 5.17), p = .024, partial η² = .017). Program and control students did not differ significantly in their intentions and attitudes for telling an adult about an incidence of violence/bullying or intervening to prevent or stop an incidence of violence/bullying.

• Research Question 2: From the teachers’ perspectives, how did the program impact students?

Analyses of the teacher focus group generated five themes for impact on students: (a) better understanding the importance of stopping to think before reacting to violent behaviors; (b) opportunities to bring up touchy subjects or personal stories in a safe environment; (c) opportunities to recognize different forms of violence—physical, verbal, mental, neglect; (d) developing awareness of violent themes in music, films, videos, ads; and (e) importance of being kind to others.

Considering the first theme, teachers felt that the school culture had changed for the better with respect to students stepping up to reduce and/or prevent violence since the implementation of DtWT in their school. In the words of one of the teachers, participation in DtWT has helped students gain a better understanding of the importance of stopping to think before reacting to violent behaviors:

The second theme identified from the focus group with teachers was how the DtWT activities provided students with the opportunity to bring up touchy subjects or personal stories in a safe environment. One teacher had this to say:

A third theme from the focus group was how DtWT provides students with opportunities to learn about different forms of violence, including physical, verbal, mental, and neglect. Examples included the following:

A fourth theme reflected how discussions helped students develop an awareness of violent themes in music, films, videos and ads. A teacher had this to say: “That’s the whole point, since [students] are listening to music anyway, they don’t realize what they are singing. All of a sudden, they start paying attention to it. ‘Oh, this is what this means!’”

Finally, the fifth impact on students was the realization of the importance of being kind to others. For example:

• Research Question 3: How did participation in DtWT impact teachers?

Analyses of the teacher focus group also generated themes for how the program impacted them as teachers. These themes included: (a) importance of being proactive in reducing/preventing violence in classrooms/ schools; (b) opportunities to understand students and their issues better, resulting in improved relationships; (c) providing students with available resources to help them cope with their personal circumstances; (d) developing greater appreciation of working as a team with colleagues; and (e) opportunities to share their own personal stories with students.

Considering the first theme, teachers became much more aware of their role in reducing and preventing violence. They learned how important it was for them to be proactive in classrooms and schools. For example:

A second important theme expressed repeatedly by teachers was the opportunity to get to know and better understand their students and their issues. Teachers felt that they knew their students better and by reading their essays gained a deeper level of getting to know their students. They realized that there is so much more going on in students’ lives that make them look at them in a different way. These opportunities led to improved and closer relationships with the students. It also gave teachers the opportunity to provide resources that [students] were going to need. For instance: “when the students have issues … they can come and talk to me or … the counselor, or I will send them or leave little notes, just however they feel comfortable.”

A third theme for impact on teachers was greater appreciation for working together as a collegial team. They shared materials, ideas and strategies to work more effectively with students. As one teacher said,

A fourth theme is that teachers appreciated the opportunity to share their own personal stories with students. For example:

In summary, the focus group with teachers and open-ended survey questions for students provided compelling evidence that DtWT impacts teachers as well as students in important ways. Students became much more compassionate and aware of when their classmates were hurting and needed help and were willing to reach out to them. The teachers’ daily experiences with students offered a more personal perspective than was captured by the student survey data. Teachers believed that the program had a positive impact on the teacher-student relationship and that the essays helped them get to know the students better in ways that they hadn’t realized or didn’t know how to address in their classrooms

• Research Question 4: What learning activities were used and how did participation in specific DtWT learning activities relate to program impacts?

Table 3 shows learning activities and students’ ratings of helpfulness of those activities. Although all were rated as at least somewhat helpful, students believed that classroom discussions about violence and personal experiences with violence were most helpful, followed by watching videos about violence, and then writing DtWT essays. Stepwise regressions indicated that participation in specific activities predicted various targeted behaviors: (a) small group discussions about personal experiences with violence predicted Intentions (p < .002), Behavior (p < .003), and Normative beliefs (p < .003); writing an essay predicted Intentions (p < .05); role playing activities predicted Normative Beliefs (p < .046); reading and discussing newspaper articles about violence predicted Perceived Control (p < .16); and Reading Stories about Violence (p < .013) predicted Total Attitudes. Taken together these results provide valuable information about benefits of specific learning activities and suggest that classroom discussions about personal experiences with violence have positive impact on students.

Analysis of the focus group responses indicated that teachers used a variety of creative materials and activities to address DtWT objectives. They used literary selections with themes related to violent acts against others, including poetry, drama and novels—with the book, A Child Called It, being a favorite among all focus group participants. Other books included The Outsiders, Thirteen Reasons Why, The Giver, and Don’t Read This. Teachers also used music, videos, ads, and short films to emphasize the importance of identifying negative violence-related messages. They emphasized the importance of collaborating as a team, sharing resources, being able to easily tie DtWT learning activities into specific state standards, and incorporating the theme of violence throughout learning activities for the remainder of the year.

Our results offer encouraging initial support for the positive impact of DtWT on both students and teachers. Using the TPB, the study indicated that students in Bordertown demonstrated more positive attitudes overall toward behaviors to reduce violence as well as intentions to enact these behaviors than students in nonparticipating schools. These results support previous research showing that antibullying interventions can improve attitudes toward victims (Beran et al., 2004) as well as lead to more negative attitudes toward bullies (Frey et al., 2005). A noteworthy finding is that students who participated in DtWT had greater intentions specifically for sharing their ideas about violence prevention with adults, rather than students in the control schools. This finding is important because to the best of our knowledge, DtWT is unique in encouraging this behavior. Antibullying initiatives such as Olweus typically encourage students to tell an adult and/or intervene when they witness or hear about bullying or other acts of violence, so students in our control schools were also likely to report their intentions to engage in these two behaviors. It is also important that intentions to engage in sharing ideas were more positive because research has shown that intentions predict antibullying/antiviolence behaviors (Pryce & Frederickson, 2013).

Although results of comparisons between program and control students are modest, they are nonetheless promising for three reasons. First, results of large-scale analyses of school wide violence prevention programs that take place throughout the school year have been modest at best (NASEM, 2016). Given DtWT is implemented only for several weeks during the academic year makes it more impressive that we found a significant effect for sharing ideas about violence with adults. Second, DtWT is typically implemented in language arts classrooms due to the essay writing component, so students are not exposed to the program in their other classes as they would be in schoolwide programs. Third, many of the antibullying programs include training components for teachers, whereas DtWT provides a set of instructional materials and a limited training component for two teachers for each participating city attending the National Recognition event in Washington, DC. Professional Development workshops are offered at this event each year. Research has shown that training in bullying and violence prevention increases teacher self-efficacy (Bell et al., 2010; Domitrovich et al., 2016; Newman-Carlson & Horne, 2004; Sela-Shayovitz, 2009), which in turn is related to enactment of bullying prevention behaviors (Boulton et al., 2014; Duong & Bradshaw, 2013). Therefore, the program is likely to have even greater impact if professional development activities are included for all participating teachers from each school.

Results from the teacher focus group added important insight into the ways in which the program impacted students. Cognitively, the learning activities increased students’ understanding of different forms of violence and how they are communicated across various media, as well as thinking first before reacting to others. Affectively, the program helped create a safe environment for students and teachers to discuss sensitive issues and the importance of being kind to others. These impacts closely reflect findings from a previous study on 49 student representatives who attended a DtWT national recognition event as ambassadors from their city (Peterson et al., 2016). Results also support previous research on antibullying programs, which have most often shown positive impacts on student attitudes, knowledge, and perceptions (NASEM, 2016).

Previous research on school-based violence prevention programs has focused primarily on student outcomes, with significantly less research examining outcomes for teachers (DeVoe & Bauer, 2011; Farmer et al., 2011; Pergolizzi et al., 2011). Although this case study involved too few teachers to report quantitative results, analyses from the focus group provided compelling evidence that DtWT impacted teachers. One important impact centered around teachers’ understanding of their role in addressing violence. When teachers believe that addressing violence is part of their role they are more likely to engage in violence prevention and intervention behaviors (Peterson et al., 2016; Pryce & Frederickson, 2013; Somech & Oplatka, 2009). Another impact was improved relationships with students. This theme was particularly striking, as middle level standards address the importance of teacher-student relationships: “When teachers get to know their students by listening closely to their interests, stories, needs, and dreams, and by sharing parts of their own lives, they make strong personal connections that enhance personal and academic growth” (Atkinson & Sturgis, 2003). This theme also reflects previous research on DtWT that found improved teacher-student relationships as a result of program activities (Peterson et al., 2016). Furthermore, positive teacher-student relationships have been shown to play a substantial role in addressing violence. For example, Elsaesser et al. (2013) found that students who perceived more positive student–teacher relationships also exhibited lower levels of relational aggression, and this relationship became stronger over the course of middle school. Similarly, Wang et al. (2015) found that middle school students are less likely to engage in bullying perpetration when they have positive relationships with their teachers.

Finally, our findings offer insights into classroom learning activities that teachers and students found to have the most impact. Salient among these are classrooms discussions using fiction and nonfiction library selections with themes related to violent acts against others. The book, A Child Called It, was a favorite but teachers also used music, videos, ads and short films to instill in students the importance of identifying negative violence-related messages. These results are in line with a recommendation by Farrington and Ttofi (2009), arguing for the importance of discussing bullying during class time, and using lessons to foster skills and competencies, effective communication, and strategies for responding to bullying. Perhaps most importantly, student survey results indicated that small group discussions about personal experiences with violence and writing their essay best predicted their intentions to engage in behaviors addressing violence.

Results allow us to make several recommendations for future program development that are relevant as well for other violence prevention programs. First, Domitrovich et al. (2010) have recommended that programs integrate violence prevention efforts so that all staff across school are involved. Because DtWT typically takes place in English language arts classes, schools should consider expanding learning activities into other classroom curricula since the most effective prevention programs appear to be comprehensive schoolwide programs (NASEM, 2016). For example, teacher teams could coordinate learning activities and essay writing across subject areas that are in line with strategies recommended in the Turning Points model for middle school curriculum focusing on interdisciplinary theme-based units (Atkinson & Sturges, 2003). In addition, the 3-week time frame of DtWT could be expanded throughout the year, allowing more opportunities to help students translate their intentions into actual behaviors by carrying out interdisciplinary violence prevention projects.

This mixed methods case study served its goal of engaging in initial research into DtWT, but it is not without limitations. First, future research with larger samples will be able to disaggregate and make comparisons for students and teachers. Second, due to the limited number of teachers we were unable to use quantitative results from teacher surveys as we were able to do for students. Third, we were unable to obtain pre–post measures on students and teachers to observe change in TPB variables over time as a result of participation in the DtWT program. A more extensive longitudinal study using pre- and posttests is needed to examine impact of the program on actual behaviors to reduce or prevent violence. Fourth, because essays are the cornerstone of DtWT, future research should examine the role of students’ writing in violence prevention.

Results of this case study in one middle school provide initial evidence that participation in DtWT has a positive impact on both students and teachers. Importantly, the program also had a positive impact on teacher-student relationships, a fundamental component of effective middle level education. Finally, the study confirmed the appropriateness of the TPB as a theoretical framework that should be considered for adoption so that learning activities can be designed to specifically target evidence-based attitudes, beliefs, intentions, and behaviors related to violence.