Skip to main content

Table 3 Coding structure

From: What factors influence implementation of whole-school interventions aiming to promote student commitment to school to prevent substance use and violence? Systematic review and synthesis of process evaluations

Process Construct from General Theory of Implementation

Influence construct from General Theory of Implementation refined to encompass school factors

Influence Sub-construct (where relevant)

Sense-making

Intervention capability to be made sense of – good materials and support

 

School capacity to make sense of an intervention – rooted in existing priorities and capacities

Cognitive participation

Intervention capability for local tailoring and adding value

Particularly for whole-school components where these could jeopardise other work

Intervention capability for using data to build commitment

But can undermine as well as build commitment

Intervention capability in terms of student participation

Staff potential for commitment based on perceived need

Staff potential for commitment based on existing strategies and values

Cherry-picking components most aligning with potential

Collective action

Intervention capability as workable

 

Planning groups as a key element of intervention capability

Planning groups and participative decisions as a potential source of deviation

Synergy between intervention components as a key element of intervention capability

 

School capacity to support collective action

Time resources

Leadership resources

Staff/school relational and culture resources

Reflexive monitoring

Intervention capability for reflexive monitoring

 

Collective reflexive monitoring to refine implementation

Reflexive monitoring reinforcing implementation