EVALUATE PREVENTIONEVALUATE PREVENTIONHow harmonize the experimental controlHow harmonize the experimental controlwith the implementation of the programmeswith the implementation of the programmesin not controllable contexts?in not controllable contexts?Washington, 23-24 October 2003Washington, 23-24 October 2003
Why do weWhy do weevaluate?evaluate?• Scientists evaluate to improve theknowledge in the field of drug prevention.• Prevention workers evaluate to know theeffectivenness of our projects.• Can scientificals and prevention workers usethe same methodologies and the sametools?
Some logical requirementsSome logical requirementsof the evaluationof the evaluation• Keep the control on the variables:– The project is implemented according to thedesign.– Control Group and Intervention Group don’tchange during the process.– Control Group don’t receive any interventionduring the study.– Teacher act as an automaton implementing theproposed activities without adaptation.
Some risks of theSome risks of theexperimental evaluationexperimental evaluation• Project don’t take into account the differencesbetween students and it is implemented in astandarised way.• The programme is external to the school andits evaluation is artificial.• Teacher, key element in the implementation,become a tool forced to a standarised work.
Basic criteria aboutBasic criteria aboutdrug educationdrug education• Every classroom is different to the others.• Every teacher is different to the others.• Every school, in every context, has specificcaracteristics.• Teachers live a lot of pressures which makehim inconstant.
Thinking about evaluationThinking about evaluation• All of us know well the scientific criteria forexperimental evaluation.• All of us know well the requirements of theimplementation of drug education projects.• The question is not “to be or not to be” strictscientists.• The question is “to be or not to be” realistic about theschool and the teachers who mustn’t adaptate himselfto the programme but the programme has to beadaptated to them.
Our main programmeOur main programmeThe Adventure of LifeThe Adventure of Life• In 1989 we created The Adventure Of Life.• A health education programme.• Aimed at schoolchildren from 8 to 12 years old.• Core themes:– Self-Steem– Life Skills– Information and attituds toward Drugs– Healthy habits
• Materials:• an Album with picture cards for each child• a Guide for each teacher• a Manual for each family• Coverage:• 250 Municipalities in 10 regions in Spain.• 80,000 schoolchildren, 5,000 educators and thousandsof families.• It is implemented in 15 Latin American countries,reaching more than 300,000 schoolchildren every year.• Evaluation:• In 2002, we evaluated the programme in 11 countries,interviewing 215 teachers and testing 7.300 pupils.Nuestra señas de identidadNuestra señas de identidadLas drogas, un nuevo reto socialLas drogas, un nuevo reto socialLa escuela, un laboratorio de futuroLa escuela, un laboratorio de futuroPRIMARY EDUCATIONPRIMARY EDUCATIONEducación secundaria obligatoriaEducación secundaria obligatoriaEducación secundaria postobligatoriaEducación secundaria postobligatoriaIntervención integral en la escuelaIntervención integral en la escuelaContextos educativos no formalesContextos educativos no formalesMás allá de la escuelaMás allá de la escuela
Challenges for the evaluationChallenges for the evaluation• In Europe and in Latin America it is difficult tofind financial resources for long time evaluations.• This project is implemented in each school on avoluntary basis.• Teachers start with a high motivation but thischange along the school years.• Students are not well separated according totheir age. So, in Ecuador, you can find 11 and 14years aged pupils in the same class-room.• It is more and more difficult to find ControlGroups.
Qualitative evaluationQualitative evaluation• Is it possible to use qualitative evaluations withacceptable results?• Teachers know a lot about the evolution of theschoolchildren. So, qualitative methodologiescan be useful to reach this information.• Teachers can think about the internal challengesof the preventive programmes according to theirpractical experience.
Quantitative evaluationQuantitative evaluation• Is it possible to use different levels of control?• Can we create different aproachs to theevaluation according to the resources, thecontexts, the knowledge, the financiation?• Is it possible to build different practical modelsof evaluation with a diferent experimental level,to help communities to evaluate its work withoutthe requirements of the scientists?
Particular de Indautxu, 948011 Bilbao, SPAINedex@email@example.comThanks a lotfor your attention!