2012-2013 > Academic research: refereed > Publication in refereed journalVersion of RecordPublishe

Ma, Hing Keung

Merrick, Joav

Shek, Daniel T. L.

The Scientific World JOURNAL

English

PubMed

Daniel T. L. Shek

Hing Keung Ma

Joav Merrick

Crossref

The Scientific World JournalVolume 2012, Article ID 427801, 4 pagesdoi:10.1100/2012/427801The cientificWorldJOURNALEditorialEffectiveness of the Project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong: EvaluationBased on Different Strategies and Different Studies over TimeDaniel T. L. Shek,1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Hing Keung Ma,6 and Joav Merrick71Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong2Public Policy Research Institute, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong3Department of Sociology, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China4Kiang Wu Nursing College of Macau, Macau5Division of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Kentucky Children’s Hospital, University of Kentucky College of Medicine,Lexington, KY 40506, USA6Department of Education Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong7National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Jerusalem 91012, IsraelCorrespondence should be addressed to Daniel T. L. Shek, daniel.shek@polyu.edu.hkReceived 11 September 2011; Accepted 11 September 2011Copyright © 2012 Daniel T. L. Shek et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons AttributionLicense, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properlycited.There are worrying trends and phenomena related to thedevelopment of adolescents in Hong Kong, such as theintensification of substance abuse and Internet addictionproblems [1, 2]. With reference to such adolescent devel-opmental problems, primary prevention programs targetingspecific adolescent developmental problems and positiveyouth development programs are called for. Unfortunately,research findings show that there are very few systematic andmultiyear positive youth development programs in HongKong. Furthermore, systematic and long-term evaluation ofthe available youth development programs does not exist [3].Against the above background, The Hong Kong JockeyClub Charities Trust approved HK$400 million to launcha project entitled “P.A.T.H.S. to Adulthood: A Jockey ClubYouth Enhancement Scheme” to promote adolescent devel-opment in junior secondary school students in Hong Kongin 2004. The word “P.A.T.H.S.” denotes Positive AdolescentTraining through Holistic Social Programmes. The trustinvited academics of five universities in Hong Kong toform a research team with The Hong Kong PolytechnicUniversity as the lead institution to develop a multiyearuniversal positive youth development program to promoteholistic adolescent development in Hong Kong, with thefirst author as the Principal Investigator. Besides developingthe program, the research team also provides training forteachers and social workers who implement the program andcarries out longitudinal evaluation of the project. Because ofthe overwhelming success of the project, it was extended foranother cycle with an earmarked grant of HK$350 million in2008.There are two tiers of programs (Tier 1 and Tier 2Programs) in this project. The Tier 1 Program is a universalpositive youth development program in which students inSecondary 1 to Secondary 3 participate, normally with 20hours of curricular-based training in the school year at eachgrade. Because research findings suggest that roughly one-fifth of adolescents would need help of a deeper nature, theTier 2 Program is provided generally for at least one-fifthof the students who have greater psychosocial needs at eachgrade (i.e., selective program).The project consists of two implementation phases—the Experimental Implementation Phase and the Full Imple-mentation Phase. For the Experimental ImplementationPhase (2005/06 to 2007/08 academic year), 52 secondaryschools participated in the project with the objectives ofaccumulating experience in program implementation andfamiliarizing frontline workers with the program designand philosophy. In 2006/07 school year, the programs wereimplemented on a full scale at Secondary 1 level. In 2007/08school year, the programs were implemented at Secondary1 and Secondary 2 levels. In 2008/09 school year, theprograms were implemented at Secondary 1, Secondary 22 The Scientific World Journaland Secondary 3 levels. For the extension phase of theproject, the program would be implemented from 2009/10to 2011/12 school years.The overall objective of the Tier 1 Program is topromote holistic development among junior secondaryschool students in Hong Kong via the inclusion of positiveyouth development constructs in the program [4]. Thepositive youth development constructs covered in the Tier1 Program include promotion of bonding, cultivation ofresilience, promotion of social competence, promotion ofemotional competence, promotion of cognitive competence,promotion of behavioral competence, promotion of moralcompetence, cultivation of self-determination, promotion ofspirituality, development of self-eﬃcacy, development of aclear and positive identity, promotion of beliefs in the future,provision of recognition for positive behavior, provisionof opportunities for prosocial involvement, and fosteringprosocial norms. Both Chinese and English curriculumman-uals have been published and utilized in the implementationprocess [4].Systematic and adequate training is another emphasisof the Project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong [5]. For each ofthe Secondary 1 to Secondary 3 programs, both teachersand social workers involved receive 20 hours of trainingbefore implementing the program in their schools. Generallyspeaking, there are three days of training at each grade.On day 1, the conceptual foundation, program philosophy,curriculum issues, and evaluation methods are introduced.On day 2 and day 3, the training program covers the teachingunits in the curriculum as well as the ways by which theprogram can be successfully implemented (e.g., programimplementers have adequate debriefing skills and adoptreflective practice). In the training program, the potentialprogram implementers are encouraged to reflect on theirmotivation to teach the program and identification with theprogram philosophy. They are also empowered to carry outthe experiential learning activities that are quite foreign toChinese teachers. The positive evaluation findings of thetraining programs have been documented and published[6, 7].In view of the huge scope of the project, evaluationplays an important role in understanding the impact ofthe project. Adopting postpositivistic and pragmatic standswhere multiple research methods are recognised, diﬀerentevaluation strategies have been used to evaluate the Tier 1Program. These strategies include the following(1) Objective Outcome Evaluation (Randomized GroupTrial): in the Full Implementation Phase, 24 experi-mental schools and 24 control schools were randomlyselected to participate in a randomized group trialin 2006/07 school year. Analyses of data collected atdiﬀerent time points using individual growth curvemodels controlling for diﬀerences between the twogroups in terms of pretest scores, personal variables,and random eﬀects of schools showed that partici-pants in the experimental schools had significantlyhigher positive youth development levels than didparticipants in the control schools at posttest basedon diﬀerent indicators derived from the ChinesePositive Youth Development Scale. Students in theexperimental schools also displayed less risk behaviorthan did students in the control schools. The findingsbased on the total eight waves of data are presentedin a paper in this special issue (“Impact of theProject P.A.T.H.S. in the junior secondary school years:objective outcome evaluation based on eight waves oflongitudinal data” by D. T. L. Shek and C. M. S.Ma; “Longitudinal impact of the Project P.A.T.H.S.on adolescent risk behavior: what happened after fiveyears?” by D. T. L. Shek and L. Yu).(2) Subjective Outcome Evaluation (Tier 1 Program): bothstudents and program implementers were invitedto complete subjective outcome evaluation forms(Form A and Form B, resp.) after completion of theprogram to understand their perceptions of the pro-gram, the implementers and benefits of the program.Existing quantitative as well as qualitative findingsgenerally showed that diﬀerent stakeholders had pos-itive views about the program and the program wasbeneficial to the participants. The subjective outcomeevaluation findings were found to converge withobjective outcome evaluation findings and the relatedchanges. In the present special issue, two papers basedon the perceptions of the program participants andimplementers are included (“Participants’ evaluationof the Project P.A.T.H.S.: are findings based on diﬀerentdatasets consistent?” by D. T. L. Shek and R. C. F.Sun; “Program implementers’ evaluation of the ProjectP.A.T.H.S.: findings based on diﬀerent datasets overtime” by D. T. L. Shek and C. M. S. Ma).(3) Subjective Outcome Evaluation (Secondary Data Anal-yses): to gain an in-depth understanding of theimpact of the project, program implementers wereinvited to write down five conclusions regarding theproject based on the Form A and Form B data.In separate studies, secondary data analyses of theconclusions drawn by the program implementersbased on the Form A and Form B reports revealedthat diﬀerent stakeholders had positive views of theprogram and they perceived the program to bebeneficial to the program participants. Integrationof the secondary data analyses of the reports inall cohorts of students in the project revealed thatthe program was perceived to be beneficial to theprogram participants. The detailed findings can beseen in the paper in this special issue (“Secondary dataanalyses of subjective outcome evaluation data based onnine databases” by D. T. L. Shek).(4) Process Evaluation: in process evaluation, systematicobservations were carried out by trained researchassistants in randomly selected schools to understandthe program implementation details. Several studiesgenerally revealed that program adherence was high,with a mean adherence of over 80%. Besides, thefindings generally showed that the program imple-mentation quality in these schools was high. InThe Scientific World Journal 3this special issue, an integrative study analyzing allprocess evaluation data collected at diﬀerent stages ofthe project was carried out. The findings showed thatthe overall program adherence and implementationquality was high (“Process evaluation of a positiveyouth development program in Hong Kong based ondiﬀerent cohorts” by B. M. F. Law and D. T. L. Shek).(5) Interim Evaluation: to understand the process ofimplementation, interim evaluation was conductedby randomly interviewing roughly half of the partici-pating schools in the Experimental ImplementationPhase or the Full Implementation Phase. In thisspecial issue, the data in all interim evaluation studieswere integrated and analyzed. The findings gener-ally showed that the participants and implementersperceived the merits and benefits of the program,although diﬃculties in implementing the programand recommendations for improving the programand the implementation process were observed(“Interim evaluation of the Project P.A.T.H.S.: findingsbased on diﬀerent datasets” by D. T. L. Shek and L. YuInterim).(6) Qualitative Evaluation (Focus Groups Based on Stu-dents): focus groups involving students based onschools randomly selected from the participatingschools were carried out in previous years. In thisspecial issue, all focus group data based on previousstudies were subject to secondary data analyses. Withspecific focus on how the informants described theprogram, results showed that the descriptors usedwere mainly positive in nature. When the informantswere invited to name three metaphors that couldstand for the program, the related metaphors werebasically positive in nature. Finally, the program par-ticipants perceived many beneficial eﬀects of the pro-gram in diﬀerent psychosocial domains (“Qualitativeevaluation of the Project P.A.T.H.S.: an integration offindings based on program participants” by D. T. L.Shek and R. C. F. Sun).(7) Qualitative Evaluation (Focus Groups Based on Pro-gram Implementers): focus groups involving programimplementers based on schools randomly selectedfrom the participating schools were also conductedin the project. Secondary data analyses of the relateddata collected in the project revealed several obser-vations. First, the program implementers identifiedstrengths and positive features of the program.Second, they perceived the program to be beneficialto the development of the program participants.Third, they proposed suggestions on how the pro-gram could be improved. Generally speaking, theprogram implementers have positive evaluation ofthe program (“Qualitative evaluation of the ProjectP.A.T.H.S.: an integration of findings based on programimplementers” by D. T. L. Shek).(8) Evaluation Based on Student Weekly Diaries: aftercompletion of the Tier 1 Program, students wererandomly selected from the participating schools towrite a reflective journal in the form of weekly diaryto reveal their perceptions and feelings regarding theTier 1 Program and the related benefits. Secondarydata analyses showed that most of the respondentshad positive views on the program, had positive viewson the instructors, and stated that they had acquiredcompetencies at the societal, familial, interpersonal,and personal levels after joining the program (“Evalu-ation of the Project P.A.T.H.S. based on students’ weeklydiaries: findings from eight datasets” by D. T. L. Shekand R. C. F. Sun).(9) Evaluation Based on Repertory Grid Test: at the endof the Full Implementation Phase, students wererandomly selected from schools to complete reper-tory grid tests to understand how the participantsperceived changes in their identity at diﬀerent pointsof time. The findings generally showed that theparticipants had improved self-representations afterjoining the program (“Evaluation of a positive youthdevelopment program based on the repertory grid test”by D. T. L. Shek).(10) Subjective Outcome Evaluation (Tier 2 Program):the participants were invited to complete subjectiveoutcome evaluation forms (Form C) after comple-tion of the Tier 2 Program to understand theirperceptions of the program, the implementers, andbenefits of the program. Existing quantitative as wellas qualitative findings generally showed that diﬀerentstakeholders had positive views about the program,the implementers, and benefits of the program. Inthe present special issue, one paper based on theperceptions of the program participants about theTier 2 Program is included (“Helping adolescentswith greater psychosocial needs: subjective outcomeevaluation based on diﬀerent cohorts” by D. T. L. Shekand T. Y. Lee).There are several special features of the studies coveredin this special issue. First, large sample sizes were involvedin diﬀerent evaluation studies. For example, 206,313 Tier1 Program participants responded to the subjective out-come evaluation form (Form A), 7,926 Tier 1 Programimplementers responded to the subjective outcome evalu-ation form (Form B), 60,241 Tier 2 Program participantsresponded to subjective outcome evaluation form (Form C),and 1,138 pieces of student diaries were collected. Second,data based on diﬀerent cohorts of participants were inte-grated and analyzed in diﬀerent studies covered in the papersreported in this special issue. The use of diﬀerent cohortscan give an aggregated picture of evaluation findings overtime. Third, based on the wide range of evaluation strategiesused in the studies included in this special issue, the findingsconsistently showed that diﬀerent stakeholders had positiveperceptions of the Project P.A.T.H.S. and the two tiers ofprogram were beneficial to the development of the programparticipants. Finally, this is the first known collection ofevaluation studies of a positive youth development programin diﬀerent Chinese contexts based on multiple evaluation4 The Scientific World Journalstrategies and longitudinal data (“Positive youth developmentprograms in Chinese communities: where are we and whereshould we go?” by D. T. L. Shek and R. C. F. Sun) [8–10]. It is our modest wish that through the project andthe related evaluation studies, evidence-based positive youthdevelopment programs can be promoted in diﬀerent Chinesecommunities [11, 12].AcknowledgmentThe preparation for this paper and the Project P.A.T.H.S.were financially supported by The Hong Kong Jockey ClubCharities Trust.References[1] D. T. L. Shek, “Tackling adolescent substance abuse in HongKong: where we should and should not go?” TheScientific-WorldJOURNAL, vol. 7, pp. 2021–2030, 2007.[2] D. T. L. Shek, V.M. Y. Tang, and C. Y. Lo, “Internet addiction inChinese adolescents in Hong Kong: assessment, profiles, andpsychosocial correlates,” TheScientificWorldJOURNAL, vol. 8,pp. 776–787, 2008.[3] D. T. L. Shek and R. C. F. Sun, “Eﬀectiveness of the tier 1program of project P.A.T.H.S.: findings based on three years ofprogram implementation,” TheScientificWorldJOURNAL, vol.10, pp. 1509–1519, 2010.[4] D. T. L. Shek and R. C. F. Sun, “Development, implementationand evaluation of a holistic positive youth developmentprogram: project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong,” InternationalJournal on Disability and Human Development, vol. 8, no. 2,pp. 107–117, 2009.[5] D. T. L. Shek and C. L. Y. Wai, “Training workers implement-ing adolescent prevention and positive youth developmentprograms: what have we learned from the literature?” Adoles-cence, vol. 43, no. 172, pp. 823–845, 2008.[6] D. T. L. Shek and Y. L. Y. Chak, “Design of training programsfor a positive youth development program: project P.A.T.H.S.in Hong Kong,” International Journal of Adolescent Medicineand Health, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 345–367, 2010.[7] D. T. L. Shek and Y. L. Y. Chak, “Training potential programimplementers of the project P.A.T.H.S. (Secondary 1 Program)in Hong Kong,” International Journal of Adolescent Medicineand Health, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 369–384, 2010.[8] D. T. L. Shek, C. S. M. Ng, and P. F. Tsui, “Qualitative evalua-tion of the project P.A.T.H.S.: findings based on focus groups,”International Journal on Disability and Human Development,vol. 9, pp. 307–313, 2010.[9] D. T. L. Shek, “Using students’ weekly diaries to evaluatepositive youth development programs: are findings based onmultiple studies consistent?” Social Indicators Research, vol. 95,no. 3, pp. 475–487, 2010.[10] D. T. L. Shek, “Quantitative evaluation of the training programof the project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong,” International Journalof Adolescent Medicine and Health, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 425–435,2010.[11] D. T. L. Shek, M. C. Lam, and K. W. Tsoi, “Evidence-basedsocial work practice in Hong Kong,” in International Per-spectives on Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work, B. Thyerand M. Kazi, Eds., pp. 213–222, Venture Press, London, UK,2004.[12] D. T. L. Shek, “Enthusiasm-based or evidence-based charities:personal reflections based on the project P.A.T.H.S. in HongKong,” TheScientificWorldJOURNAL, vol. 8, pp. 802–810,2008.

Effectiveness of the Project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong: Evaluation Based on Different Strategies and Different Studies over Time

Editorial writing of The Scientiﬁc World Journal, vol. 2012, 2012.Department of Applied Social SciencesPublic Policy Research Institut

Shek, DTL

Ma, HK

Merrick, J

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Pao Yue-kong Library

Editorial : effectiveness of the Project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong : evaluation based on different strategies and different studies over time

Directory of Open Access Journals

University of Kentucky

Effectiveness of the Project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong: Evaluation Based on Different Strategies and Different Studies Over Time

2012-2013 > Academic research: refereed > Publication in refereed journalVersion of RecordPublishedC

PolyU Institutional Repository

D.T.L.Shek,“Quantitativeevaluationofthetrainingprogram of the project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong,”

D.T.L.Shek,V.M.Y.Tang,andC.Y.Lo,“Internetaddictionin Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong: assessment, proﬁles, and psychosocial correlates,”

Design of training programs for a positive youth development program: project P.A.T.H.S.

Development, implementation and evaluation of a holistic positive youth development program: project P.A.T.H.S.

Eﬀectiveness of the tier 1 program of project P.A.T.H.S.: ﬁndings based on three years of program implementation,”

Enthusiasm-based or evidence-based charities: personal reﬂections based on the project P.A.T.H.S.

h e k ,M .C .L a m ,a n dK .W .T s o i ,“ E v i d e n c e - b a s e d social work practice in Hong Kong,”

Qualitative evaluation of the project P.A.T.H.S.: ﬁndings based on focus groups,”

Tackling adolescent substance abuse in Hong Kong: where we should and should not go?”

Training potential program implementersoftheprojectP.A.T.H.S.(Secondary1Program) in Hong Kong,”

Training workers implementing adolescent prevention and positive youth development programs: what have we learned from the literature?”

Using students’ weekly diaries to evaluate positive youth development programs: are ﬁndings based on

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=3374134

Effectiveness of the Project P.A.T.H.S. in Hong Kong: Evaluation Based on Different Strategies and Different Studies over Time

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Pao Yue-kong Library

Directory of Open Access Journals

University of Kentucky

PolyU Institutional Repository