Process assessmentProcess measures of reports of teachers to delivering intervention lessons based on transtheoretical model
Flow of participants
Process assessment
Pupils started the computer programme with their identification number and password, so on second and third sessions feedback could be given on their progress. We therefore had an accurate attendance register and calculated percentage attendance for each occasion of use. Pupils could skip through the programme by pressing the continue button, which would mean that although they attended physically, they missed the individualised messages. The computer programme, however, measured the time taken to complete the interventions. To assess how long was necessary to get the messages, we asked four "smokers" in our department and four "non-smokers" to use the intervention rapidly but attentively. We calculated the mean time necessary (7 minutes for a non-smoker and 11 minutes for a smoker) and hence the percentage of smokers and non-smokers who took long enough to have received the full intervention. At the end of the computer programme, a five item Likert scale questionnaire recorded students’ reactions to the programme each time they used it. We calculated the percentage of smoking and non-smoking participants who endorsed either of the two positive responses by occasion of use. We evaluated the process of lesson delivery in the intervention arm by asking teachers to return a self completion questionnaire after delivering each lesson. Thirty eight teachers from the 26 intervention schools were trained, but it was left to them to decide which teacher taught which of the several classes in year 9 in which term. The questionnaires used a Likert format to get information about teachers’ delivery, the content of the lesson plan, and how well each of the activities were received by the pupils; we assumed a score of 1-5 and calculated mean scores.
Process measures of reports of teachers to delivering intervention lessons based on transtheoretical model
| | First lesson | Second lesson | Third lesson |
| No (%) of schools returning questionnaires | 12 (46) | 16 (62) | 8 (31) |
| No of questionnaires returned | 19 | 46 | 26 |
| Adequate time (No (%) yes) | 19 (100) | 42 (91) | 21 (81) |
| Cover all material (No (%) yes) | 19 (100) | 41 (89) | 22 (85) |
| Lesson delivery (mean score; 1=very poor to 5=very good) | 4.0 | 3.8 | 3.7 |
| Lesson understanding (mean score; 1=very poor to 5=very good) | 4.1 | 3.9 | 3.7 |
| Reception of lesson by pupils (mean score; 1=very poor to 5=very good) | 4.1 | 3.8 | 3.7 |
Flow of participants
