Participants’ Evaluation of the Project P.A.T.H.S.: Are Findings Based on Different Datasets Consistent?
Table 2
Summary of the students’ perception towards the program.
Respondents with positive responses (options 4–6)
S1
S2
S3
Overall
%
%
%
%
(1)
The objectives of the curriculum were very clear.
87,337
83.96
56,778
82.43
26,979
84.11
171,094
83.50
(2)
The design of the curriculum was very good.
83,446
80.30
53,948
78.41
25,821
80.55
163,215
79.75
(3)
The activities were carefully planned.
84,793
81.75
55,532
80.83
26,465
82.70
166,790
81.76
(4)
The classroom atmosphere was very pleasant.
81,986
79.18
54,047
78.79
26,137
81.76
162,170
79.91
(5)
There was much peer interaction among the students.
83,730
81.21
55,507
81.16
26,486
83.15
165,723
81.84
(6)
Students participated actively during lessons (including discussions, sharing, games, etc.).
84,124
81.08
54,932
79.97
25,896
80.91
164,952
80.65
(7)
The program had a strong and sound theoretical support.
79,513
76.69
52,063
75.78
25,018
78.17
156,594
76.88
(8)
The teaching experience I encountered enhanced my interest in the course.
79,692
77.11
51,635
75.35
24,872
77.88
156,199
76.78
(9)
Overall speaking, I have a very positive evaluation of the program.
78,676
75.96
51,580
75.13
25,049
78.33
155,305
76.47
(10)
On the whole, I like this curriculum very much.
79,811
77.27
51,527
75.19
24,944
78.13
156,282
76.86
Note: all items are on a 6-point Likert scale with 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = slightly disagree, 4 = slightly agree, 5 = agree, 6 = strongly agree. Only respondents with positive responses (options 4–6) are shown in the table.
