Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-02-2019 | Original Paper

Self-Reported Engagement in a Drug Prevention Program: Individual and Classroom Effects on Proximal and Behavioral Outcomes

Authors: William B. Hansen, Charles B. Fleming, Lawrence M. Scheier

Published in: Journal of Prevention | Issue 1/2019

Abstract

Numerous studies emphasize the role of student engagement in academic learning and performance. Less known is whether engagement plays a role in drug prevention program outcomes. We examined a self-report measure of engagement as part of the All Stars Core drug prevention program evaluation, assessing its impact on target risk mechanisms and behavioral outcomes. Students completed pretests just prior to and posttests just after completing the intervention. Surveys assessed demographics, proximal intervening measures (i.e., commitments to avoid substance use and antisocial behavior, perceived lifestyle incongruence with substance use and antisocial behavior, normative beliefs about substance use and antisocial behavior, and parental attentiveness), and distal outcome measures of alcohol, cigarette use, and antisocial behaviors. A brief 6-item posttest measure including items tapping the students’ perspective on the quality of teaching the program material and their level of engagement with the program was internally consistent (α = .79). Multi-level analyses positing engagement effects at both the classroom- and individual-level indicated that classroom average engagement was significantly associated with all the targeted risk mechanisms, and outcomes of antisocial behavior and alcohol use, controlling for pretest measures and classroom size. Individual student engagement relative to classroom peers was significantly associated with all posttest target risk mechanisms and behavioral outcomes. The current findings suggest that students should routinely provide assessments of engagement and perceived quality of teaching, which would improve our understanding of how prevention programs work. Teachers can improve engagement by paying attention to students when they speak in class, making the program enjoyable to participants, encouraging students to share opinions, stimulating attentiveness, being well prepared to deliver the intervention, and helping students think broadly about implications of drug prevention as it affects their lives. This type of support will ultimately engage students in ways that will enhance the likelihood that these programs will have their desired effects.

Available only for authorised users

We use the term “authoritative” in a manner consistent with studies of parenting and child development, which discern between authoritarian and authoritative parents (Baumrind, 1966, 1971). The authoritative teacher is fair, democratic, reasons with the student, encourages self-reliance and individuality, is responsive to the students’ needs but is also firm and has high standards.

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303.CrossRef

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002.CrossRef

Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J.-S., & Pagani, L. (2009a). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32(3), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007.CrossRefPubMed

Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Morizot, J., & Pagani, L. (2009b). Adolescent behavioral, affective, and cognitive engagement in school: Relationship to dropout. Journal of School Health, 79(9), 408–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00428.x.CrossRef

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development, 37(4), 887–907. https://doi.org/10.2307/1126611.CrossRef

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4, 1–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030372.CrossRef

Beets, M. W., Flay, B. R., Vuchinch, S., Acock, A. C., Li, K.-K., & Allred, C. (2008). School climate and teachers’ beliefs and attitudes associated with implementation of the positive action program: A diffusion of innovations model. Prevention Science, 9(4), 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-008-0100-2.CrossRefPubMed

Berkel, C., Mauricio, A. M., Schoenfelder, E., & Sandler, I. N. (2011). Putting the pieces together: An integrated model of program implementation. Prevention Science, 12(1), 23–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-010-0186-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bishop, D. C., Pankratz, M. M., Hansen, W. B., Albritton, J., Albritton, L. P., & Strack, J. (2014). Measuring fidelity and adaptation reliability of an instrument for school-based prevention programs. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 37(2), 231–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278713476882.CrossRef

Blatchford, P., Bassett, P., & Brown, P. (2011). Examining the effect of class size on classroom engagement and teacher–pupil interaction: Differences in relation to pupil prior attainment and primary vs. secondary schools. Learning and Instruction, 21(6), 715–730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.04.001.CrossRef

Bloom, A. (1987). The closing of the American mind: How higher education has failed democracy and impoverished the souls of today’s students. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Bond, L., Butler, H., Thomas, L., Carlin, J., Glover, S., Bowes, G., et al. (2007). Social and school connectedness in early secondary school as predictors of late teenage substance use, mental health, and academic outcome. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40(4), 357.e9–357.e18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.10.013.CrossRef

Botvin, G. J., & Griffin, K. W. (2010). Advances in the science of practice of prevention: Targeting individual-level etiologic factors and the challenge of going to scale. In L. M. Scheier (Ed.), Handbook of drug use etiology: Theory, methods and empirical findings (pp. 631–650). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Carter, M., McGee, R., Taylor, B., & Williams, S. (2007). Health outcomes in adolescence: Associations with family, friends, and school engagement. Journal of Adolescence, 31(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.04.002.CrossRef

Connell, J., & Wellborn, J. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. Gunnar & L. Sroufe (Eds.), Minnesota Symposium on Child Development (pp. 43–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7358(97)00043-3.CrossRefPubMed

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7.CrossRef

Dee, T. S., & West, M. R. (2011). The non-cognitive returns to class size. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(1), 23–46. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373710392370.CrossRef

Dishion, T. J., & Dodge, K. A. (2005). Peer contagion in interventions for children and adolescents: Moving towards an understanding of the ecology and dynamics of change. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33(3), 395–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-005-3579-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Dotterer, A. M., & Lowe, K. (2011). Classroom context, school engagement, and academic achievement in early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(12), 1649–1660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-011-9647-5.CrossRefPubMed

Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 327–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0.CrossRefPubMed

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. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/18.2.237.CrossRefPubMed

Edmunds, J., Ntoumanis, N., & Duda, J. L. (2008). Testing a self-determination theory-based teaching style intervention in the exercise domain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(2), 375–388. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.463.CrossRef

Evans, R. I., Hansen, W. B., & Mittelmark, M. B. (1977). Increasing the validity of self-reports of behavior in a smoking in children investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(4), 521–523. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.62.4.521.CrossRef

Fredericks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059.CrossRef

Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763–782). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_37.CrossRef

Furlong, M. J., Whipple, A. D., Jean, G. S., Simental, J., Soliz, A., & Punthuna, S. (2003). Multiple contexts of school engagement: Moving toward a unifying framework for educational research and practice. The California School Psychologist, 8(1), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340899.CrossRef

Giles, S., Jackson-Newsom, J., Pankratz, M. M., Hansen, W. B., Ringwalt, C. L., & Dusenbury, L. (2008). Measuring quality of delivery in a substance use prevention program. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 29(6), 489–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-008-0155-7.CrossRefPubMed

Giles, S. M., Harrington, N. G., & Fearnow-Kenney, M. (2001). Evaluation of the All Stars Program: Student and teacher factors that influence mediators of substance use. Journal of Drug Education, 31(4), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.2190/GGVY-Y4AK-EPB0-0MQ5.CrossRefPubMed

Giles, S. M., Pankratz, M. M., Ringwalt, C., Jackson-Newsom, J., Hansen, W. B., Bishop, D., et al. (2012). The role of teacher communicator style in the delivery of a middle school substance use prevention program. Journal of Drug Education, 42(4), 393–411. https://doi.org/10.2190/DE.42.4.b.CrossRefPubMed

Goodenow, C. (1993). Classroom belonging among early adolescent students: Relationships to motivation and achievement. Journal of Early Adolescence, 13(1), 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431693013001002.CrossRef

Gottfredson, D. C., Cross, A., Wilson, D., Rorie, M., & Connell, N. (2010). An experimental evaluation of the All Stars prevention curriculum in a community after school setting. Prevention Science, 11(2), 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-009-0156-7.CrossRefPubMed

Gottfredson, D. C., & Wilson, D. V. (2003). Characteristics of effective school-based substance abuse prevention. Prevention Science, 4(1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1021782710278.CrossRefPubMed

Gregory, A., & Ripski, M. B. (2008). Adolescent trust in teachers: Implications for behavior in the high school classroom. School Psychology Review, 37(3), 337–353.

Griffiths, A.-J., Lilles, E., Furlong, M. J., & Sidhwa, J. (2012). The relations of adolescent student engagement with troubling and high-risk behaviors. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 563–584). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_27.CrossRef

Hansen, W. B. (2015). All-Stars: A conceptual history. In L. M. Scheier (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent drug use prevention: Research, intervention strategies, and practice (pp. 197–216). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14550-012.CrossRef

Hansen, W. B., & Hansen, J. L. (2016). Using attitudes, age and gender to estimate an adolescent’s substance use risk. Journal of Children’s Services, 11(3), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-06-2015-0020.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hansen, W. B., Malotte, C. K., & Fielding, J. E. (1985). The bogus pipeline revisited: The use of the threat of detection as a means of increasing self-reports of tobacco use. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(4), 789–792. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.70.4.789.CrossRef

Hansen, W. B., & McNeal, R. B. (1996). The law of maximum expected potential effect: Constraints placed on program effectiveness by mediator relationships. Health Education Research, 11(4), 501–507. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/11.4.501.CrossRef

Hansen, W. B., & McNeal, R. B. (1999). Drug education practice: Results of an observational study. Health Education Research, 14(1), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/14.1.85.CrossRefPubMed

Hansen, W. B., Pankratz, M. M., & Bishop, D. C. (2014). Differences in teachers’ and observers’ assessments of fidelity. Journal of Primary Prevention, 35(5), 297–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-014-0351-6.CrossRef

Hansen, W. B., Pankratz, M. M., Dusenbury, L., Giles, S. M., Bishop, D. C., Albritton, J., et al. (2013). Styles of adaptation: The impact of frequency and valence of adaptation on preventing substance use. Health Education, 113(4), 345–363. https://doi.org/10.1108/09654281311329268.CrossRef

Jessor, R., & Jessor, S. (1977). Problem behavior and psychosocial development. New York, NY: Academic Press.

Jimerson, S. R., Campos, E., & Greif, J. L. (2003). Toward an understanding of definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. The California School Psychologist, 8(1), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340893.CrossRef

Kam, C.-M., Greenberg, M. T., & Walls, C. T. (2003). Examining the role of implementation quality in school-based prevention using the PATHS Curriculum. Prevention Science, 4(1), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021786811186.CrossRefPubMed

Lillehoj, C. J., Griffin, K. W., & Spoth, R. (2004). Program provider and observer ratings of school-based preventive intervention implementation: Agreement and relation to youth outcomes. Health Education & Behavior, 31(2), 242–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198103260514.CrossRef

Lisha, N. E., Sun, P., Rohrbach, L. A., Spruijt-Metz, D., Unger, J. B., & Sussman, S. (2012). An evaluation of immediate outcomes and fidelity of a drug abuse prevention program in continuation high schools: Project Towards no Drug Abuse (TND). Journal of Drug Education, 42(1), 33–57. https://doi.org/10.2190/DE.42.1.c.CrossRefPubMed

Low, S., Van Ryzin, M. J., Brown, E. C., Smith, B. H., & Haggerty, K. P. (2014). Engagement matters: Lessons from assessing classroom implementation of steps to respect: A bullying prevention program over a one-year period. Prevention Science, 15(2), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-012-0359-1.CrossRefPubMed

Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153.CrossRef

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 & Behavior, 31(2), 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198103259852.CrossRef

McNeely, C., & Falci, C. (2004). School connectedness and the transition into and out of health-risk behavior among adolescents: A comparison of social belonging and teacher support. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 284–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08285.x.CrossRef

Miller-Day, M., Pettigrew, J., Hecht, M. L., Shin, Y. J., Graham, J., & Krieger, J. (2013). How prevention curricula are taught under real-world conditions: Types of and reasons for teacher curriculum adaptations. Health Education, 113(4), 324–344. https://doi.org/10.1108/09654281311329259.CrossRefPubMed

Murray, D. M., O’Connell, C. M., Schmid, L. A., & Perry, C. L. (1987). The validity of smoking self-reports by adolescents: A reexamination of the bogus pipeline procedure. Addictive Behaviors, 12(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4603(87)90003-7.CrossRefPubMed

Newmann, F. M. (Ed.). (1992). Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools. New York, NY: Teacher’s College Press.

Nye, B., Hedges, L. V., & Konstantopoulos, S. (1999). The long-term effects of small classes: A five-year follow-up of the Tennessee class size experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 127–142. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737021002127.CrossRef

O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Johnston, L. D. (1983). Reliability and consistency in self-reports of drug use. International Journal of the Addictions, 18(6), 805–824. https://doi.org/10.3109/10826088309033049.CrossRef

Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents’ perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.83.CrossRef

Pettigrew, J., Graham, J. W., Miller-Day, M., Hecht, M. L., Krieger, J. L., & Shin, Y. J. (2015). Adherence and delivery: Implementation quality and program outcomes for the seventh-grade Keepin’ it REAL program. Prevention Science, 16(1), 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-014-0459-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Pettigrew, J., Miller-Day, M., Shin, Y., Hecht, M. L., Krieger, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2013). Describing teacher–student interactions: A qualitative assessment of teacher implementation of the 7th grade keepin’ it REAL substance use intervention. American Journal of Community Psychology, 51(1–2), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-012-9539-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Sage.

Reddy, R., Rhodes, J. E., & Mulhall, P. (2003). The influence of teacher support on student adjustment in the middle school years: A latent growth curve study. Development and Psychopathology, 15(1), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579403000075.CrossRefPubMed

Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700–712. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027268.CrossRef

Ringwalt, C. L., Pankratz, M. M., Hansen, W. B., Dusenbury, L., Jackson-Newsom, J., Giles, S. M., et al. (2013). The potential of coaching as a strategy to improve the effectiveness of school-based substance use prevention curricula. Health Education & Behavior, 36(4), 696–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198107303311.CrossRef

Rohrbach, L. A., Dent, C. W., Skara, S., Sun, P., & Sussman, S. (2007). Fidelity of implementation in Project Towards No Drug Abuse (TND): A comparison of classroom teachers and program specialists. Prevention Science, 8(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-006-0056-z.CrossRefPubMed

Ryan, A. M. (2001). The peer group as a context for the development of young adolescent motivation achievement. Child Development, 72(4), 1135–1150. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00338.CrossRefPubMed

Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437–460. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038002437.CrossRef

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.CrossRef

Scheier, L. M. (Ed.). (2015). Handbook of adolescent drug use prevention: Research, intervention strategies, and practice. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14550-000.CrossRef

Shin, Y., Miller-Day, M., Pettigrew, J., Hecht, M. L., & Krieger, J. L. (2014). Typology of delivery quality: Latent profile analysis of teacher engagement and delivery techniques in a school-based prevention intervention, keepin’ it REAL curriculum. Health Education Research, 29(6), 897–905. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyu061.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school years. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571.CrossRef

Slavin, R. E., Hurley, E. A., & Chamberlain, A. (2003). Cooperative learning and achievement: Theory and research. In C. E. Weinstein & P. J. Way (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol VII Educational psychology (pp. 177–198). New York, NY: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471264385.wei0709.CrossRef

Stephens, P. C., Sloboda, Z., Grey, S., Stephens, R., Hammond, A., Hawthorne, R., et al. (2008). Is the receptivity of substance abuse prevention programming affected by students’ perceptions of the instructor? Health Education and Behavior, 36(4), 724–745. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198107304388.CrossRefPubMed

Tobler, N. S. (1986). Meta-analysis of 143 adolescent drug prevention programs: Quantitative outcome results of program participants compared to a control or comparison group. Journal of Drug Issues, 16(4), 537–567. https://doi.org/10.1177/002204268601600405.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. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021314704811.CrossRef

Urberg, K. A., Değirmencioğlu, S. M., & Pilgrim, C. (1997). Close friend and group influence on adolescent cigarette smoking and alcohol use. Developmental Psychology, 33(5), 834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.33.5.834.CrossRefPubMed

Urdan, T., & Schoenfelder, E. (2006). Classroom effects on student motivation: Goal structures, social relationships, and competence beliefs. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.003.CrossRef

Walker, J. M. (2008). Looking at teacher practices through the lens of parenting style. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(2), 218–240. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.2.218-240.CrossRef

Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411–419. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.411.CrossRef

Winters, K. C., Stinchfield, R. D., Henly, G. A., & Schwartz, R. H. (1990). Validity of adolescent self-report of alcohol and other drug involvement. International Journal of the Addictions, 25(sup11), 1379–1395. https://doi.org/10.3109/10826089009068469.CrossRef

Title: Self-Reported Engagement in a Drug Prevention Program: Individual and Classroom Effects on Proximal and Behavioral Outcomes
Authors: William B. Hansen
Charles B. Fleming
Lawrence M. Scheier
Publication date: 01-02-2019
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Prevention / Issue 1/2019
Print ISSN: 2731-5533
Electronic ISSN: 2731-5541
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-018-00532-1

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Self-Reported Engagement in a Drug Prevention Program: Individual and Classroom Effects on Proximal and Behavioral Outcomes

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Three Critical Elements for Real-Time Monitoring of Implementation and Adaptation of Prevention Programs

Qualitative Comparative Analysis: A Mixed-Method Tool for Complex Implementation Questions

Implementation Through Community Coalitions: The Power of Technology and of Community-Based Intermediaries

Acknowledgment of Reviewers of Volume 39

Testing and Exploring the Limits of Traditional Notions of Fidelity and Adaptation in Implementation of Preventive Interventions

Provider Readiness and Adaptations of Competency Drivers During Scale-Up of the Family Check-Up