Implementation evaluation of an intervention aimed at reducing test anxiety in adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Approximately 15 % of adolescents experience test anxiety in school settings. This type of anxiety, characterized by worries and physiological reactions to school assessments, can lead to significant academic and psychological difficulties. In response to the lack of effective school-based interventions, the Pastel workshops were developed. This targeted group intervention, which combines a cognitive-behavioral approach with study skills training, has demonstrated significant effects in reducing test anxiety in at-risk adolescents. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to: 1) determine whether the training provided by Boscoville to program facilitators was properly implemented, 2) evaluate the implementation of the Pastel workshops, and 3) explore the facilitators and barriers encountered in supporting facilitators and implementing the workshops. METHODOLOGY: The sample includes 24 students aged 14-17 in grades 10 and 11 from five schools who participated in the workshops, and nine professionals who facilitated them. Fidelity, delivered dosage, quality of delivery, and attendance and homework completion were measured to evaluate the implementation, while semi-structured interviews with the youth and facilitators were conducted to assess the implementation context. RESULTS: Findings show an overall score of 84 % for the evaluation of the training implementation and an average adherence score of 79 % for the workshop implementation. The context evaluation identified enablers and challenges based on Domitrovich's multilevel framework, across societal, environmental, intervention-specific, and support system levels. Key enablers included the involvement of a third-party organization, the group-based format, strong motivation among facilitators, the relevance of the strategies presented, and the quality of the training. However, challenges emerged at multiple levels, including limited engagement for some participants, issues related to the organization of the workshop content, suboptimal quality of some implementation materials, and time constraints related to preparation and facilitation. CONCLUSION: This study highlights that successful implementation of school-based psychosocial programs relies on thorough planning that integrates both core components and contextual factors. When combined with strong facilitator support, such planning fosters high fidelity, quality delivery, and sustained participant engagement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".