Table 5.
Community Health Advisors’ Effectiveness as Trainers
| Observers’ Ratings1 | ||
|---|---|---|
| The Community Health Advisor … (1 Strongly disagree to 4 Strongly Agree) | Mean | SD |
| appeared prepared and organized. | 3.2 | 0.9 |
| made appropriate and regular eye contact with participants. | 3.1 | 1.1 |
| appeared confident in his/her role as trainer. | 3.6 | 0.7 |
| was enthusiastic and engaged when delivering training content and leading activities/discussions. | 3.5 | 0.9 |
| encouraged and solicited responses and participation from participants throughout the session. | 3.4 | 0.9 |
| interacted with participants appropriately and with respect (e.g., in answering questions, responding to comments, and general interactions). | 3.7 | 0.4 |
| tended to read from the slide notes or slides when delivering the training content.1 | 2.7 | 1.0 |
| Church Committee Training Attendees’ Ratings3 | ||
| The Community Health Advisor … (1 Strongly disagree to 4 Strongly Agree) | Mean | SD |
| kept the training interesting. | 3.3 | 0.6 |
| was an effective teacher. | 3.4 | 0.6 |
| appeared to have a good understanding of the material. | 3.5 | 0.5 |
| was effective in answering questions about the material. | 3.5 | 0.5 |
1
Means of eight observers’ ratings of 15 Community Health Advisors during nine of 22 co-delivered church training sessions (one observer observed two sessions); n=2 Community Health Advisors’ ratings missing.
2
Lower ratings indicate better performance (i.e., not reading from notes or slides).
3
Means of 202 church committee training attendees with complete data provided 395 ratings of CHAs’ effectiveness during 18 training sessions on each of four items.