Skip to main content

Table 1 Median scores for answers to training satisfaction questions by module

From: Alpha test results for a Housing First eLearning strategy: the value of multiple qualitative methods for intervention design

Item

Module 1

(n = 9)

Module 2

(n = 10)

Module 3

(n = 10)

Module 4

(n = 10)

 

Median (range)

Median (range)

Median (range)

Median (range)

1. In my opinion, the planned objectives of the module were met.

4 (4–5)

4 (3–5)

4 (4–5)

4 (4–5)

2. The issues were within as much depth as the length of the module allowed.

4 (4–5)

4 (2–5)a

4 (3–5)

4 (2–5)a

3. The length of the module was adequate for the objectives and content.

4 (3–5)

4 (2–5)a

4 (2–5)a

4 (2–5)a

4. The method was well-suited to the objectives and content.

4 (4)

4 (4–5)

4 (3–5)

4 (3–5)

5. The method used enabled me to take an active part in training.

4 (4–5)

4 (4–5)

4 (2–5)a

4 (3–5)

6. The training enabled me to share professional experiences with colleagues.

3 (2–5)b

4 (2–5)b

4 (3–5)

4 (3–5)

7. The information in the modules was realistic and practical.

4 (4)

4 (4–5)

4 (4–5)

4 (4–5)

8. The documents linked to the module were of good quality.

4 (3–4)

4 (3–5)

4 (1–5)c

4 (3–5)

9. The training context was well-suited to the training process.

4 (3–4)

4 (3–5)

4 (4–5)

4 (3–5)

10. The training received in this module is useful for my specific job.

4 (3–5)

4 (3–5)

4 (3–5)

4 (3–5)

11. The training in this module is good for my personal development.

4 (3–5)

4.5 (3–5)

4 (4–5)

4.5 (3–5)

12. The training in this module merits a good overall rating.

4 (4–5)

4 (2–5)a

4 (4–5)

4 (4–5)

  1. Items scored on scale from 1 = “totally disagree,” 5 = “totally agree”
  2. aItem received one score of 2 (i.e., disagree)
  3. bItem received two scores of 2 (i.e., disagree)
  4. cItem received one score of 1 (i.e., totally disagree)