Process evaluation of a pilot subject on service leadership for university students in Hong Kong

References

1. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations, 4th ed. New York: Free Press, 1995.Suche in Google Scholar

2. Rohrbach LA, Graham JW, Hansen WB. Diffusion of a school-based substance abuse prevention program: predictors of program implementation. Prev Med 1993;22:237–60.10.1006/pmed.1993.1020Suche in Google Scholar

3. Dehar MA, Casswell S, Duignan P. Formative and process evaluation of health promotion and disease prevention programs. Evaluat Rev 1993;17:204–20.10.1177/0193841X9301700205Suche in Google Scholar

4. Saunders RP, Evans MH, Praphul J. Developing a process evaluation plan for assessing health promotion program implementation: a how to guide. Health Promot Pract 2005;6:134–47.10.1177/1524839904273387Suche in Google Scholar

5. Dane AV, Schneider BH. Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: are implementation effects out of control? Clin Psychol Rev 1998;18:23–45.10.1016/S0272-7358(97)00043-3Suche in Google Scholar

6. Durlak JA. Successful prevention programs for children and adolescents. New York: Plenum Publishing Corporation, 1997.10.1007/978-1-4899-0065-4Suche in Google Scholar

7. Dusenbury L, Brannigan R, Falco M, Hansen WB. A review of research on fidelity of implementation: implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Educ Res 2003;18:237–56.10.1093/her/18.2.237Suche in Google Scholar

8. Harachi TW, Abbott RD, Catalano RF, Haggerty KP, Fleming CB. Opening the black box: using process evaluation measures to assess implementation and theory building. Am J Community Psychol 1999;27:711–31.10.1023/A:1022194005511Suche in Google Scholar

9. Hornik R. Shedding some light on evaluation’s myths. Dev Commun Rep 1980;29:1–4.Suche in Google Scholar

10. Durlak JA, DuPre EP. Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. Am J Commun Psychol 2008;41:327–50.10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0Suche in Google Scholar

11. Salmivalli C, Kaukiainen A, Voeten M. Anti-bullying intervention: implementation and outcome. Br J Educ Psychol 2005;75:465–87.10.1348/000709905X26011Suche in Google Scholar

12. Watson M, Battistich V, Solomon D. Enhancing students’ social and ethical development in schools: an intervention program and its effects. Int J Educ Res 1998;27:571–86.10.1016/S0883-0355(97)00055-4Suche in Google Scholar

13. Kam CM, Greenberg MT, Walls CT. Examining the role of implementation quality in school-based prevention using the PATHS curriculum. Prev Sci 2003;4:55–63.10.1023/A:1021786811186Suche in Google Scholar

14. Scheirer MA, Shediac MC, Cassady CE. Measuring the implementation of health promotion programs: the case of the Breast and Cervical Cancer Program in Maryland. Health Educ Res 1995;10:11–25.10.1093/her/10.1.11Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Chen HT. A comprehensive typology for program evaluation. Eval Pract 1996;17:121–30.10.1177/109821409601700204Suche in Google Scholar

16. Baranowski T, Stables G. Process evaluations of the 5-a-day projects. Health Educ Behav 2000;27:157–66.10.1177/109019810002700202Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Law BM, Shek DT. Process evaluation of a positive youth development program in Hong Kong based on different cohorts. ScientificWorldJournal 2012, Article ID 736730, 9 pages. DOI:10.1100/2012/736730.10.1100/2012/736730Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

18. Shek DT, Yu L, Ma CM, Sun RC, Liu TT. Development of a credit-bearing service leadership subject for university students in Hong Kong. Int J Adolesc Med Health 2013;25:353–61.10.1515/ijamh-2013-0033Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Chung P. Hong Kong Institute of Service Leadership and Management Education. Available at: URL:http://hki-slam.org/index.php?r=article&catid=2&aid=16. Accessed on June 15, 2013.Suche in Google Scholar

20. Shek DT, Yu L, Ma CM. The students were happy, but did they change positively? Int J Disabil Human Dev 2014;13:505–11.10.1515/ijdhd-2014-0348Suche in Google Scholar

21. Shek DT, Lin L, Liu TT. Service leadership edcuation for university students in Hong Kong: Subjective outcome evaluation. Int J Disabil Human Dev 2014;13:513–21.Suche in Google Scholar

22. Shek DT, Lin L, Liu TT, Law MY. Service leadership edcuation for university students in Hong Kong: qualitative evaluation. Int J Disabil Human Dev 2014;13:523–9.Suche in Google Scholar

23. Shek DT, Sun RC. Process evaluation of a positive youth development course in a university setting in Hong Kong. Int J Disabil Human Dev 2012;11:235–41.Suche in Google Scholar

24. Shek DT, Sun RC. Process evaluation of a leadership and intrapersonal development subject for university students. Int J Disabil Human Dev 2013;12:203–11.10.1515/ijdhd-2013-0018Suche in Google Scholar

25. Shek DT, Ma HK, Lui JH, Lung DW. Process evaluation of the tier 1 program of the Project P.A.T.H.S.. ScientificWorldJournal 2006;6:300–9.Suche in Google Scholar

26. Rossi PH, Lipsey MW, Freeman HE. Evaluation: a systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2004.Suche in Google Scholar

27. Helitzer D, Yoon SJ, Wallerstein N. The role of process evaluation in the training of facilitators for an adolescent health education program. J School Health 2000;70:141–7.10.1111/j.1746-1561.2000.tb06460.xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed