ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
National Security Law Education in Hong Kong: Qualitative Evaluation Based on the Perspective of the Students.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Multidimensional Competitive Orientation Inventory.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, we adopted a qualitative evaluation approach to understand the subjective views of the students on a program on law abidance leadership education covering the Hong Kong National Security Law. The program involves a 3 h lecture and 7 h of self-study on topics surrounding national security. To evaluate the program, we adopted a general qualitative research design to collect data via focus groups using a semi-structured interview guide. Researchers with a doctoral degree and qualitative research experiences conducted six focus groups involving 52 randomly selected students, with 6 to 12 participants per group. Results showed high inter-rater reliability in the thematic analyses. With reference to the questions in the semi-structured interviews, several observations could be highlighted. First, students had different views on different aspects of the lecture, including content, arrangement, lecture notes and assessment. Second, students generally had positive views of teachers' interaction with students and their teaching performance. Third, students had positive learning experiences and they perceived benefits and value of the program. Fourth, despite the positive comments of the students, some students proposed suggestions for improvement. Finally, the program was not seen as brainwashing by the students. Together with evaluation findings based on four other evaluation studies, the triangulated findings suggest that this program promoted the knowledge about law abidance leadership in the students and nurtured their positive attitudes towards law abidance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.