Background
The Wellbeing in Secondary Education (WISE) intervention
Staff peer support service
Teacher training in MHFA for schools and colleges
Teacher mental health awareness raising session
Implementation strategy
Process evaluation aims
Mechanisms of change
Differentiation and usual practice
Intervention implementation
Acceptability
Sustainability
Process evaluation domain | Research question |
---|---|
Mechanisms of change | RQ1: Are the intervention’s mechanisms of change operationalised as hypothesised? RQ2: How is the operationalisation of the mechanisms of change influenced by contextual factors? RQ3: Does the interaction of the mechanisms of change with contextual factors give rise to unintended effects? |
Programme differentiation and usual practice | RQ4: Is the Wellbeing in Secondary Education (WISE) intervention differentiable from ‘usual practice’ and does this differentiation change during the study? RQ5: Is there contamination of usual practice in control schools by receipt of the WISE intervention or similar approaches? |
Implementation (WISE training components) | RQ6: What is the reach of the WISE training components (e.g. 8% of staff attending Standard Mental Health First Aid)? RQ7: How many targeted staff complete the WISE intervention training? RQ8: Are the WISE training components delivered with fidelity and what is the nature of any adaptions undertaken? RQ9: Are there differences in the delivery of the WISE training components between England and Wales, and what gives rise to any differences? RQ10: How well are the WISE training components delivered? |
Implementation (peer support service) | RQ11: What proportion of teachers receive support from the peer support service? RQ12: Is the peer support service delivered with fidelity and what is the nature of any adaptions undertaken? RQ13: What are the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the peer support service? |
Acceptability | RQ14: Is the WISE intervention acceptable to funding organisations, intervention trainers, head-teachers, teachers and students? |
Sustainability | RQ15: How likely is the WISE intervention to be sustainable and what factors might ensure sustainability? |
Methods
Study design and sample
School | Trial status | Site | Administrative region | Free school meal eligibility | School size | Inspectorate assessment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
School 1 | Intervention | England | 1 | Low | Large | Good |
School 2 | Intervention | England | 2 | High | Small | Inadequate |
School 3 | Intervention | Wales | 3 | High | Small | Adequate |
School 4 | Intervention | Wales | 4 | Low | Large | Good with outstanding features |
School 5 | Control | England | 1 | Low | Large | Requires improvement |
School 6 | Control | England | 2 | High | Small | Good |
School 7 | Control | Wales | 3 | High | Small | Adequate |
School 8 | Control | Wales | 4 | Low | Large | Good |
Data sources
Research domain | Research question | Data source | Informant | Procedure of data collection | Time of data collection | Analysis |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mechanisms of change | RQ1: Operationalisation of intervention mechanisms RQ2: Contextual factors RQ3: Unintended effects | A. Teacher questionnaires; student questionnaires | Teachers (n ~ 1440) Students (n ~ 3600) | Self-assessment; survey questions regarding school-related stress and satisfaction, support and quality of relationships; perceptions of school caring about wellbeing | Baseline; 12 mth follow-up (teachers); 24 mth follow-up | Logistic regression examining impact on outcomes (part of main analysis) |
B. Audit of school polices | School Contact (n = 25) | Self-assessment; paper audit | Baseline; 24 mths follow-up | Tables of activities/policies; narrative description | ||
D. Observation of intervention training courses | WISE trainers (n = 10); training attendees (n = TBC; intervention case study schools n = 4) | Independent assessment of intervention training course by study team (n = 2); completion observation schedules | During intervention training course | Summaries of scores (means/medians); narrative description; inter-rater reliability | ||
G. Peer supporter log and feedback | Peer supporters (n = TBC, intervention schools n = 12) | Self-assessment; logs; feedback session hosted by study team | Termly following intervention training course; 2 × feedback sessions | Tables and summaries of quantitative data; thematic analysis | ||
I. WISE trainer interview | WISE trainer (n = 6) | Interview led by study team | Within 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
J. Head-teacher interview | Head teachers (n = 25) | Interview led by study team | From 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
K. Peer supporter and schools MHFA attendee focus groups | Training course attendees (n = 4–8 staff, intervention case study schools n = 4) | Focus group led by study team | 6 mths post-training; 18 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
L. Recipient of peer support service interview | Peer support recipients (n = 5 staff, intervention case study schools n = 4) | Interview led by study team | 12 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
M. Teacher focus group | Teachers (random sample 4–8 staff, intervention and control case study schools n = 8) | Focus group led by study team | 12 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
N. Year 10 focus group | Students (n = 6–8 students, intervention and control case study schools n = 8) | Focus group led by study team | 12 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
Programme differentiation and usual practice | RQ4: Differentiation RQ5: Contamination | A. Teacher questionnaires; student questionnaires | Teachers (n ~ 1440) Students (n ~ 3600) | Self-assessment; survey questions regarding training and support received through school | Baseline; 12-mth follow-up (teachers); 24-mth follow-up | Tabulate responses |
B. Audit of school polices | School Contact (n = 25) | Self-assessment; paper audit | Baseline; 24-mth follow-up | Tables of activities/policies; narrative description | ||
J. Head-teacher interview | Head-teachers (n = 25) | Interview led by study team | From 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
L. Recipient of peer support service interview | Peer support recipients (n = 5 staff, intervention case study schools n = 4) | Interview led by study team | 12 mths post-trainings | Thematic analysis | ||
M. Teacher focus group | Teachers (random sample 4–8 staff, intervention and control case study schools n = 8) | Focus group led by study team | 12 mths post-trainings | Thematic analysis | ||
N. Year 10 focus group | Students (n = 6–8 students, intervention and control case study schools n = 8) | Focus group led by study team | 12 mths post-trainings | Thematic analysis; | ||
Implementation (Training) | RQ6: Reach RQ7: Completion RQ8/RQ9: Fidelity RQ10: Quality | C. Attendance records | Trainers (n = 10) | Course registers | During intervention training course | Tabulate attendees |
D. Observation of intervention training courses | WISE trainers (n = 10), training attendees (n = TBC; intervention case study schools n = 4) | Independent assessment of intervention training course by study team (n = 2); observation schedules | During intervention training course | Summaries of scores (means/medians); narrative description; inter-rater reliability | ||
E. Fidelity checklist and training materials used | WISE trainers (n = 10), training attendees (n = TBC; intervention schools n = 12) | Self-assessment; checklists and materials log | During intervention training course | Summaries of scores (means/medians); tabulate materials used | ||
F. Training evaluation form | Training attendees (n = TBC; intervention schools n = 12) | Self-assessment; evaluation forms | Following intervention training | Summaries of scores (means/medians); paired t-tests | ||
J. Head-teacher interview | Head-teachers (n = 25) | Interview led by study team | From 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
I. WISE trainer interview | WISE trainer (n = 6) | Interview led by study team | I. WISE trainer interview | Thematic analysis | ||
Implementation (Peer support service) | RQ11: Reach RQ12: Fidelity RQ13: Barriers and facilitators | A. Teacher questionnaires; student questionnaires | Teachers (n ~ 1440) Students (n ~ 3600) | Self-assessment; survey questions regarding use of peer support service | Baseline; 12-mth follow-up (teachers); 24-mth follow-up | Tabulate responses |
G. Peer supporter log and feedback | Peer supporters (n = TBC; intervention schools n = 12) | Self-assessment; logs; feedback session hosted by study team | Termly following intervention training course; 2 × feedback sessions | Tables and summaries of quantitative data; thematic analysis | ||
J. Head-teacher interview | Head teachers (n = 25) | Interview led by study team | From 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
K. Peer supporter and schools MHFA attendee focus group | Training course attendees (n = 4–8 staff; intervention case study schools n = 4) | Focus group led by study team | 6 mths post-training; 18 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
M. Teacher focus group | Teachers (random sample 4–8 staff, intervention and control case study schools n = 8; intervention case study schools n = 4) | Focus group led by study team | 12 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
Acceptability | RQ14: Acceptability | G. Peer supporter log and feedback | Peer supporters (n = TBC, intervention schools n = 12) | Self-assessment; logs; feedback session hosted by study team | Termly following intervention training course; 2 × feedback sessions | Tables and summaries of quantitative data; thematic analysis |
H. Funding organisation interview | Funding organisation representative (n = 3) | Interview led by study team | From 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
I. WISE trainer interview | WISE trainer (n = 6) | Interview led by study team | Within 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
J. Head teacher interview | Head-teachers (n = 25) | Interview led by study team | From 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
K. Peer supporter and schools MHFA attendee focus group | Training course attendees (n = 4–8 staff; intervention case study schools n = 4) | Focus group led by study team | 6 mths post-training; 18 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
L. Recipient of peer support service interview | Peer support recipients (n = 5 staff, intervention case study schools n = 4) | Interview led by study team | 12 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
M. Teacher focus group | Teachers (random sample 4–8 staff; intervention and control case study schools n = 8) | Focus group led by study team | 12 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
N. Year 10 focus group | Students (n = 6–8 students; intervention and control case study schools n = 8) | Focus group led by study team | 12 mths post-trainings | Thematic analysis | ||
Sustainability | RQ15: Sustainability | H. Funding organisation interview | Funding organisation representative (n = 3) | Interview led by study team | From 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis |
I. WISE trainer interview | WISE trainer (n = 6) | Interview led by study team | Within 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
J. Head-teacher interview | Head-teachers (n = 25) | Interview led by study team | From 6 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
K. Peer supporter and Schools MHFA attendee focus group | Training course attendees (n = 4–8 staff; intervention case study schools n = 4) | Focus group led by study team | 6 mths post-training; 18 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
L. Recipient of peer support service interview | Peer support recipients (n = 5 staff; intervention case study schools n = 4) | Interview led by study team | 12 mths post-training | Thematic analysis | ||
M. Teacher focus group | Teachers (random sample 4–8 staff; intervention and control case study schools n = 8) | Focus group led by study team | 12 mths post-training | Thematic analysis |