nach oben

Prevention Science

Erschienen in:

01.06.2007 | Original Paper

Fidelity of Implementation in Project Towards No Drug Abuse (TND): A Comparison of Classroom Teachers and Program Specialists

verfasst von: Louise A. Rohrbach, Clyde W. Dent, Silvana Skara, Ping Sun, Steve Sussman

Erschienen in: Prevention Science | Ausgabe 2/2007

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

This paper presents the results of an effectiveness trial of Project Towards No Drug Abuse [TND], in which we compared program delivery by regular classroom teachers and program specialists within the same high schools. Within 18 schools that were randomly assigned to the program or control conditions, health classrooms were assigned to program delivery by teachers or (outside) specialists. Classroom sessions were observed by pairs of observers to assess three domains of implementation fidelity: adherence, classroom process, and perceived student acceptance of the program. Pre- and immediate posttest survey data were collected from 2331 students. Of the four composite indexes of implementation fidelity that were examined, only one (quality of delivery) showed a difference between specialists and teachers, with marginally higher ratings of specialists (p < .10). Both teachers and program specialists achieved effects on three of the five immediate outcome measures, including program-specific knowledge, addiction concern, and social self-control. Students’ posttest ratings of the program overall and the quality of program delivery failed to reveal differences between the teacher- and specialist-led classrooms. These results suggest that motivated, trained classroom teachers can implement evidence-based prevention programs with fidelity and achieve immediate effects.

In California, alternative high schools are referred to as “continuation” high schools. Students in continuation high schools have transferred out of the regular school system due to functional problems (e.g., lack of credits, drug use). These youth are at risk for dropout, but they have transferred to an alternative school to fulfill a California mandate that all youth receive at least part-time education until they are 18 years of age.

Basen-Engquist, K., O’Hara-Tompkins, N., Lovato, C. Y., Lewis, M. J., Parcel, G. S., & Gingiss, P. (1994). The effect of two types of teacher training on implementation of smart choices: A tobacco prevention curriculum. Journal of School Health, 64, 334–339.PubMed

Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., Dusenbury, L., Tortu, S., & Botvin, E. M. (1990). Preventing adolescent drug abuse through a multimodal cognitive-behavioral approach: Results of a 3-year study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58, 437–446.PubMedCrossRef

Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., Dusenbury, L., Botvin, E. M., & Diaz, T. (1995). Long-term follow-up results of a randomized drug abuse prevention trial in a white middle-class population. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 1106–1112.PubMedCrossRef

Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., James-Ortiz, S., Botvin, E. M., & Kerner, J. (1992). Smoking prevention among urban minority youth: Assessing effects on outcome and mediating variables. Health Psychology, 11, 290–299.PubMedCrossRef

Cameron, R., Brown, K. S., Best, J. A., Pelkman, C. L., Madill, C. L., Manske, S. R., & Payne, M. E. (1999). Effectiveness of a social influences smoking prevention program as a function of provider type, training method, and school risk. American Journal of Public Health, 89, 1827–1831.PubMed

Clarke, G. N. (1995). Improving the transition from basic efficacy research to effectiveness studies: Methodological issues and procedures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63(5), 718–725.PubMedCrossRef

Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision for scale disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 213–220.CrossRefPubMed

Dane, A. V., & Schneider, B. H. (1998). Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: Are implementation effects out of control? Clinical Psychology Review, 18(1), 23–45.PubMedCrossRef

Dent C. W., Sussman, S., McCuller, W. J., & Stacy, A. W. (2001). Project towards no drug abuse: Generalizabilty to a general high school sample. Preventive Medicine, 32, 514–520.PubMedCrossRef

Dent, C. W., Sussman, S., Hennesy, M., Craig, S., Moss, M. A., & Stacy, A. W. (1998). Implementation, process, and immediate outcomes evaluation of the project towards no drug abuse classroom program for high risk youth. Journal of Drug Education, 28, 361–375.PubMed

Domitrovich, C. E., & Greenberg, M. T. (2000). The study of implementation: current findings from effective programs that prevent mental disorders in school-aged children. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11(2), 193–221.CrossRef

Dusenbury, L., Brannigan, R., Falco, M., & Hansen, W. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18(2), 237–256.PubMedCrossRef

Flay, B. R. (1986). Efficacy and effectiveness trials (and other phases of research in the development of health promotion programs. Preventive Medicine, 15, 451–474.PubMedCrossRef

Glasgow, R. E., Lichtenstein, E., & Marcus, A. G. (2003). Why don’t we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. American Journal of Public Health, 93(8), 1261–1266.PubMedCrossRef

Gottfredson, D. C., & Wilson, D. B. (2003). Characteristics of effective school-based substance abuse prevention. Prevention Science, 4(1), 27–38.PubMedCrossRef

Graham, J. W., Flay, B. R., Johnson, C. A., Hansen, W. B., Grossman, L. M., & Sobel, J. L. (1984). Reliability of self-report measures of drug use in prevention research: Evaluation of the project SMART questionnaire via the test-retest reliability matrix. Journal of Drug Education, 14, 175–193.PubMed

Green, L. W., & Glasgow, R. E. (2006). Evaluating the relevance, generalization, and applicability of research. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 29(1), 126–153.CrossRef

Greenwald, P., & Cullen, J. W. (1985). The new emphasis in cancer control. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 74, 543–551.PubMed

Hansen, W. B., Graham, J. W., Wolkenstein, B. H., & Rohrbach, L. A. (1991). Program integrity as a moderator of prevention program effectiveness: Results for fifth grade students in the adolescent alcohol prevention trial. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52, 568–579.PubMed

Hansen, W. B., & McNeal, R. B. (1999). Drug education practice: Results of an observational study. Health Education Research, 14, 85–97.PubMedCrossRef

Harrington, N. G., Giles, S. M., Hoyle, R. H., Feeney, G. J., & Yungbluth, S. C. (2001). Evaluation of the all stars character education and problem behavior prevention program: Effects on mediator and outcome variables for middle school students. Health Education & Behavior, 28(5), 533–546.CrossRef

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1980). Improving inservice training: The messages of research. Educational Leadership, 37, 379–385.

McNeal, R. B., Hansen, W. B., Harrington, N. G., & Giles, S. M. (2004). How all stars works: An examination of program effects on mediating variables. Health Education and Behavior, 31(2), 1–14.CrossRef

Moos, R. H. (1979). Evaluating educational environments. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mowbray, C. T., Holter, M. C., Teague, G. B., & Bybee, D. (2003). Fidelity criteria: Development, measurement, and validation. American Journal of Evaluation, 24(3), 315–340.

Murray, D. M., & Hannan, P. J. (1990). Planning for the appropriate analysis in school-based drug-use prevention studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58(4), 458–468.PubMedCrossRef

Nunally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Perry, C. L., Murray, D. M., & Griffin, G. (1990). Evaluating the statewide dissemination of smoking prevention curricula: Factors in teacher compliance. Journal of School Health, 60, 501–504.PubMedCrossRef

Resnicow, K., Davis, M., Smith, M., Lazarus-Yaroch, A., Baranowski, T., Baranowski, J., Doyle, C., & Wang, D. T. (1998). How best to measure implementation of school health curricula: a comparison of three measures. Health Education Research, 13(2), 239–250.PubMedCrossRef

Rohrbach, L. A., D’Onofrio, C. N., Backer, T. E., & Montgomery, S. B. (1996). Diffusion of school-based substance abuse prevention programs. American Behavioral Scientist, 39(7), 919–934.CrossRef

Rohrbach, L. A., English, J., Hansen, W. B., & Johnson, C. A. (2000). Development and pilot testing of project SMART. In S. Sussman (Ed.), Handbook of program development for health behavior research and practice (pp. 425–446). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Rohrbach, L. A., Graham, J. G., & Hansen, W. B. (1993). Diffusion of a school-based substance abuse program: Predictors of program implementation. Preventive Medicine, 22, 237–260.PubMedCrossRef

Rohrbach, L. A., Grana, R., Sussman, S., & Valente, T. W. (2006). Type II translation: Transporting prevention interventions from research to real-world settings. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 29(3), 1–32.CrossRef

Rohrbach, L. A., Sussman, S., Dent, C. W., & Sun, P. (2005). Tobacco, alcohol, and other drug use among high-risk young people: a five-year longitudinal study from adolescence to emerging adulthood. Journal of Drug Issues, 35(2), 333–356.

SAS Institute (2004). SAS release 9.0. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute, Inc.

Schoenwald, S. K., & Hoagwood, K. (2001). Effectiveness, transportability, and dissemination of interventions: What matters when? Psychiatric Services, 52(9), 1190–1197.PubMedCrossRef

Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–427.CrossRefPubMed

Skara, S., Rohrbach, L. A., Sun, P., & Sussman, S. (2005). An evaluation of the fidelity of implementation of a school-based drug abuse prevention program: Project Towards No Drug Abuse (TND). Journal of Drug Education, 35(4), 305–329.PubMedCrossRef

St. Pierre, T. L., Osgood, D. W., Mincemoyer, C. C., Kaltreider, D. L., & Kauh, T. J. (2005). Results of an independent evaluation of project ALERT delivered in schools by cooperative extension. Prevention Science, 6(4), 305–317.PubMedCrossRef

Sun, W., Skara, S., Sun, P., Dent, C. W., & Sussman, S. (2006). Project towards no drug abuse: Long-term substance use outcomes evaluation. Preventive Medicine, 42, 188–192.PubMedCrossRef

Sussman, S., & Dent, C. W. (1996). Correlates of addiction concern among adolescents at high risk for substance abuse. Journal of Substance Abuse, 8, 361–370.PubMedCrossRef

Sussman, S., Dent, C. W., Burton, D., Stacy, A. W., & Flay, B. R. (1995). Developing school-based tobacco use prevention and cessation programs. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

Sussman, S., Dent, C. W., Stacy, A. W. (2002) Project towards no drug abuse: A review of the findings and future directions. American Journal of Health Behavior, 26(5), 354–365.PubMed

Sussman, S., Earleywine, M., Wills, T., Cody, C., Biglan, T., Dent, C. W., & Newcomb, M. D. (2004). The motivation, skills, and decision-making model of ‘drug abuse’ prevention. Substance Use & Misuse, 39(10–12), 1971–2016.CrossRef

Sussman, S., Galaif, E. R., Newman, T., Hennesy, M., Pentz, M. A., Dent, W. W., Stacy, A. W., Moss, M. A., Craig, S., & Simon, T. R. (1997). Implementation and process evaluation of a “school-as-community” group: A component of a school-based drug abuse prevention program. Evaluation Review, 21, 94–123.PubMedCrossRef

Sussman, S., McCuller, W. J., & Dent, C. W. (2003). The associations of social self-control, personality disorders, and demographics with drug use among high-risk youth. Addictive Behaviors, 28, 1159–1166.PubMedCrossRef

Tinsley, H. E., & Weiss, D. J. (1975). Interrater reliability and agreement of subjective judgments. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 358–376.CrossRef

Tobler, N.S., & Stratton, H. H. (1997). Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs: A meta-analysis of the research. Journal of Primary Prevention, 18(1), 71–128.CrossRef

Tobler, N. S., Roona, M. R., Ochshorn, P., Marshall, D. G., Streke, A. V., & Stackpole, K. M. (2000). School-based adolescent drug prevention programs: 1998 meta-analysis. Journal of Primary Prevention, 20(4), 275–336.CrossRef

Tortu, S., & Botvin, G. J. (1989). School-based smoking prevention: The teacher training process. Preventive Medicine, 18, 280–289.PubMedCrossRef

U.S. Department of Education [DOE] (2005). Preliminary overview of programs and changes included in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Safe and drug-free schools and communities (Title IV, Part A). http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/progsum. Accessed on October 6, 2005.

Titel: Fidelity of Implementation in Project Towards No Drug Abuse (TND): A Comparison of Classroom Teachers and Program Specialists
verfasst von: Louise A. Rohrbach
Clyde W. Dent
Silvana Skara
Ping Sun
Steve Sussman
Publikationsdatum: 01.06.2007
Verlag: Kluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers
Erschienen in: Prevention Science / Ausgabe 2/2007
Print ISSN: 1389-4986
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6695
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-006-0056-z

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Fidelity of Implementation in Project Towards No Drug Abuse (TND): A Comparison of Classroom Teachers and Program Specialists

Abstract

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2007

A Biosocial-Affect Model of Adolescent Sensation Seeking: The Role of Affect Evaluation and Peer-Group Influence in Adolescent Drug Use

Intervention Effects on Foster Preschoolers’ Attachment-Related Behaviors From a Randomized Trial

An Innovative, Effective and Cost Effective Survey Method Using a Survey-Check Response Format

Methamphetamine Use and Sexual Risk Behaviors in U.S. High School Students: Findings from a National Risk Behavior Survey

Alcohol Outlet Characteristics and Alcohol Sales to Youth: Results of Alcohol Purchase Surveys in 45 Oregon Communities

Gender Similarities and Differences in the Association Between Risk and Protective Factors and Self-Reported Serious Delinquency