Embed
Email

Schools & drugs Research Review

Document Sample
Schools & drugs Research Review
Shared by: Doug McCall
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
27
posted:
10/24/2011
language:
English
pages:
274
1









Schools, Public Health and Drugs

The Research Evidence Underlying a Strategic and Systems-Oriented Review

of FPT Capacity to Prevent Problem Substance Use/Addictions through

School-based and School Linked Policies, Programs, Services and Practices









Mary M. Shannon, Douglas S. McCall

March 2004

Prepared for the Office of Alcohol and Drug Policy

Health Canada

2







Contents



A Introduction



1. Purposes

2. Methodology

3. Organization of Report



B Summary of Findings



1. Impact of School Environment

2. Prevention/Promotion Role of School

3. Promising Approaches

4. Promising and Non-Promising Interventions

5. Organizational Capacity of Ministries

6. Conclusions



C. Findings



1. Select Relevant Determinants & Vulnerable Populations

2. Balance Perspectives on Issues-Populations and Settings

3. Understand Impact and Prevention Role of School Environment

4. Select population/sub-populations

5. Integrate with other Health Issues

6. Select the Issue/Aspect and Approach

7. Coordinate Systems and Interventions

8. Re-orient Systems towards Prevention, Improvement, Climate

9. Involve, Empower Individuals and Groups

10. Focus on Public Policy and Cost Benefits

11. Build Resilience & Behaviours within Individuals

12. Surveil Outcomes, Monitor Programs



D. Conclusions



E. References



F. Appendix One – Theories & Questions Underlying this Review of Research

3







A Introduction



1. Purposes



This review of the research has been commissioned as part of a strategic assessment of the

organizational capacities of education and health ministries to prevent substance abuse by

encouraging, requiring and supporting their respective school, public health and addiction

systems to implement evidence-based policies, programs and practices.



The general purpose of this review is to identify the pertinent questions that should be asked in

assessing the organization capacities of provincial/territorial ministries, as well as to answer the

following questions:



 Does the social and physical environment of the school play a significant role in

enabling or preventing substance abuse?



 Can the school, working with parents, public health and addiction agencies and

the broader community, implement sustainable school-based and school-linked

policies, programs and practices that prevent substance abuse and promote mental

health as well as healthy child/adolescent development?



 What are the best or promising overall approaches in enhancing that

prevention/promotion role for schools and relevant agencies/systems? What are

the best or promising, cost-effective and cost-beneficial interventions? How can

these interventions be best organized, coordinated, delivered, sustained and

evaluated?



 How can the organizational capacity of provincial/territorial education and health

ministries be strengthened to encourage, require or support their health, addictions

and education systems to prevent substance abuse?



For the purposes of this review, ―substance abuse‖, ―problem use‖, ―addictions‖, and other

addictive behaviours are treated as being synonymous.



School-based and school-linked policies, programs and practices are grouped under general

terms such as ―comprehensive school health‖ or ―healthy schools‖. We use these terms to

capture the many community-based programs that, in fact, rely on schools as a central

component of their strategies and interventions. Many so-called ―community‖ programs are

dependent on schools for delivery of programs to children and youth, recruitment of children and

youth, facilities and for reaching parents about their programs.



―Prevention‖ is used in a general way and often encompasses promotion of overall health and

supportive conditions, preventing overuse or delaying onset of use of alcohol and drugs as well

as inappropriate use of medications and assisting or re-integrating individuals who are under

treatment or counselling.



2. Methodology





This review included a search of the relevant Canadian, ERIC, CINAHL, Medline and PsychInfo

databases as well as a complete search of all records on the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse

4







database. As well, several records and references from the web site of the National Institute of

Drug Abuse (NIDA) were tracked down and reviewed.



Government web sites such as Health Canada were also searched for relevant studies and

publications. Given the context noted above, we not only assessed the evidence base for school-

based or school-linked interventions but also looking at what researchers can tell us about

effecting real change through systems-based strategies.



As well, the Google search engine was used to locate specific items on the Internet and that often

led to related materials.



A variety of search words and combinations of search words were used in our searches including

schools, prevention, addictions, drug abuse, problem use, school health, alcohol, and others.



The breadth of this review made it impossible to delve into the related sub-topics too deeply, so

we sought to locate more recent references, Canadian references and meta-analyses or major

reports whenever possible.



Many of the topics touched upon in this review are worthy of separate investigations in and of

themselves, but this is beyond the scope of this inquiry.



We focused our searching by:



1. using an ecological and systems-based analytical framework that is emerging in the

research literature about schools and other environments to ensure that we are indeed

asking the right questions in this review

2. identifying evidence-based interventions that are within the recommended scope of

population health and comprehensive school health approaches as defined in the research

literature. We then described those interventions very briefly and tried to summarize the

research evidence indicating that these interventions are worthy of being promoted by

governments.

3. examining how government ministries can encourage, require or support those

interventions in their respective education, public health and addictions systems by first

identifying the organizational capacities that ministries would need to do this effectively,

and then searching the literature to see if these capacities are being used, documented and

discussed.



In this review, there were several systems that come under scrutiny, including schools, the public

health systems and, to the degree that they are separate from public health, the systems that

deliver professional services or addictions prevention workers as well as mental health services

and police officers who work with local communities and schools.



To that end, we used a series of conceptual frameworks that including:



 A population health approach that identifies relevant populations or sub-populations,

relevant determinants of health for that population, the settings that reach those

populations and the issues (or aspects of those issues) of most significant impact for that

population. The principles used in this analysis are:

o Focusing on Determinants, Identifying Vulnerable Populations

o Balancing Perspectives on Issues, Populations and Settings

o Understanding the Impact and Prevention Role of Environments

o Selecting a population or sub-population

5







o Integrating with other health issues

o Selecting an Issue or aspect of the issue

o Coordinating multiple interventions across systems

o Re-orienting systems to support prevention/promotion

o Involving/empowering individuals (youth), parents, groups and communities

o Focusing on public policy and cost-benefits

o Building resilience, behaviours, skills, attitudes/beliefs knowledge in individuals

o Maintaining surveillance of health outcomes, system outputs and system capacity



 A comprehensive approach to school-based and school linked health promotion

(often called Comprehensive School Health, Coordinated School Health or Health

Promoting Schools) that can be used to integrate the approach to multiple health issues as

well as frame, list and coordinate the many different interventions that can be delivered

by educators, public health professionals, nutritionists/dieticians and others. These

interventions are grouped under five headings:

o Policy and leadership

o Instructional strategies

o Reoriented, Preventive Health Services

o Social support from staff, parents, students and the community

o Physical environment and economic or other practical resources



 An environmental/ecological analysis that helps to explain the multiple, linked micro-

environments of the school setting and environments that can be influenced by school-

based interventions and a systems theory orientation that suggests that sustainable

intervention s need to be rooted in the systems named above in order to be effective and

therefore we need to examine the nature of these ―open‖, ―loosely-coupled‖ and

―professional bureaucracies‖ (which school, public health and addictions systems are) as

well as related concepts such as:

o organizational capacity (which we have defined in this project in a certain way

based on the World Health Organization model (2003) and which is similar but

different than community capacity),

o organizational change, diffusion theory, educational change

o how knowledge is transferred to and used (or not) by policy makers,

o how policy is made, implemented and evaluated,

o how professional concerns about innovations and the characteristics of the change

being proposed affect their adoption and

o how formal and informal decisions are actually negotiated within systems.



 The developing knowledge about organizational capacity as exemplified in the World

Health Organization (2003) Rapid Assessment and Action Planning Program. That set of

criteria included

o Explicit policy and managerial support for coordination of school

o Adequate staffing/infrastructure at the provincial and local/regional levels

o Formal and informal mechanisms to support coordination

o Adequate time/resources to gather, analyze and disseminate knowledge

o Ongoing and adequate pre-service and inservice activities as well as work place

health programs

o Timely, reliable and usable surveillance ongoing monitoring of the policies,

programs, practices

o Early identification and appropriate management of emerging issues



 Concepts and activities related to strategic thinking and planning, including

6







o Scanning the internal and external environment

o Anticipates and manages emerging issues

o Analyzes potential partnerships

o Worries constantly about cost-effects and cost-benefits

o Analyzes the positioning the issues and organizations.



There is an overlap between these conceptual frameworks that is captured in the chart on the next

page. Our findings have been tabulated and described to address these overlaps in a way that is

less repetitive to read. We also developed our instruments in a manner consistent with this chart.



There are additional theories and conceptual frameworks within the chart below that are related

to implementation and diffusion of these approaches and programs within the school and other

settings. These include conceptual frameworks that describe system and organizational change,

educational reform and innovation, how decisions are made by individuals within organizations,

the process and politics of policy-making and implementation, stages of change within

individuals when they adopt new health behaviours and others. However, given that the focus of

this assessment is only on organizational capacity at the provincial/territorial ministry level, we

have not elaborated on these concepts in this report. They are, however, listed briefly in the chart

below.

7

Implementation/

Population Health Comprehensive School Health Ecological/Systems Theory Organization Capacity Strategic Thinking Systems Change

Social Change



1. Focus on determinants 4e. Physical Environment & Resources Social Change

(poverty, gender, culture) to Theories

identify vulnerable

populations



2. Perspectives on issues-

populations – settings



3. Understand 2. Understand limits of school setting, Examine micro- 1. Interaction between 1. Scan environments

environments/settings environments within school individual and environments regularly.

2. Interactions with other

environments 3. Multiple

dimensions of environments



4. Select population or sub- 5. Adapt programs for special needs. Ensure youth friendly.

population



5. Integrate with other health 1. Holistic view of health. Integrate health issues. Managers protect systems 7. Identify, manage emerging issues 2. Anticipate, manage

issues from disturbances issues strategically.



6. Select your issue and 5. Position issue and

approach. your organization.



7. Coordinate multiple 3. Coordinate school-based and school-linked 5. Systems are loosely 1. Explicit policy/manager support for 3. Analyze partnerships Diffusion/ Education

interventions across systems interventions. coupled coordination for risk, benefits, Change/

at all levels investments. Organizational

2. Staff time/ infrastructure for Change Theories

coordination

3. Formal, informal mechanisms for

coordination



8. Reorient health system 4c. Provide health, social services in or linked to schools as 6. Change in professional 4. Knowledge Transfer (Best Practices Policy-making

towards prevention, improve well as work place health programs 4d. Improve bureaucracies occurs through Guidelines Theory

school system, both systems psychosocial environment through peer, parent, whole shared vision, knowledge,

to focus on social/physical school, volunteers programs. 4e. Physical Environment & skills 5. Workforce Development

environment Resources



9. Involve/empower 4d. Involve parents and youth in decisions

individuals or groups



10. Focus on public policy 4a. Develop, implement, evaluate school and PH policies 4. Systems are open to 4. Knowledge Transfer to Decision-

influences at all levels makers



11. Build resilience/ 4b. Establish curriculum, support instruction Stages of Change

behaviours in individuals Theories



12. Maintain surveillance of 6. Describe realistic outputs for SH programs and monitor 7. System Managers often 6. Timely, reliable, PT and local data for 4. Assess cost-effect, Knowledge about

child/youth health outcomes school/public health/other policies &programs focus on boundaries. surveillance and monitoring cost-benefit. valid Indicator

and monitor policies, systems

programs and capacity

3. Organization of Report



This lengthy review of the published research literature essentially follows the chart on the previous

page.



The overlapping concepts of population health and comprehensive school health promotion have been

used as the organizing categories for the references and records located in our searches of databases

and other published works.



We begin with a brief summary of our findings, walk through the various categories outlined above and

then conclude briefly.



Each section contains some selected specific questions, derived from those guiding frameworks that

helped to focus our inquiries.



By necessity, this review covers a lot of ground. Each of the sub-sections could have been the focus for

a more detailed search of the literature. However, our purpose was to substantiate our consideration of

the various elements and questions that will be sued in the other activities of this overall assessment

project. Once we had located sufficient evidence that the specific question or sub-topic was worthy of

examining, we moved on to the next potential sub-topic.



Each sub-section begins with a brief explanation of the concepts being discussed and a very brief

overview of our findings in that sub-section.



An Appendix to this report presents the framework we have used for this investigation in a more

convenient format.



Given the nature of this subject, there is overlap among some of the sub-sections and there are other

ways to organize this significant amount of material. However, it did serve to organize our findings in a

way that validated our use of the organizational capacities that we are seeking to investigate in the

overall assessment project. Having done this review, those organizational capacities seem all the more

important to us.

9



B Summary of Findings



1. Impact of School Environment



Recent Canadian surveys such as the Ontario Drug Use Survey (2003) indicate that substance use by

young people has stabilized at relatively high levels that developed during the 1990’s. While smoking is

declining, alcohol, cannabis and ecstasy are basically unchanged in recent years. Adolescents now first

use cigarettes at a later age, but their first use of alcohol and cannabis is stable at about age 14. About

one-third of Canadian youth report that they have used an illicit drug. With possible decriminalization

of marijuana use, expanded sales of alcohol in private outlets and general realization that moderate use

of alcohol in not necessarily bad for health all marking a plateau being reached in Canadian efforts to

control supply, it is timely for Canadian policy-makers to consider increased efforts in prevention

efforts to reduce demand. Schools should be part of this demand side strategy.



This increased effort would be timely for other reasons, including a general public interest in health

overall, increased attention and capacity being considered for public health programs and a potential

agreement among senior health and education officials to establish new mechanisms for school-based

and school health promotion, this review of the research evidence supporting such efforts is both

timely and relevant.



―Schools could do more than perhaps any other single institution in society to help young people, and

the adults they become, to live healthier, longer, more satisfying and more productive lives.‖

(Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989)



The school has been called a crucible in the development of children and youth. For most, it is a

launching pad for the rest of their lives. For many, it can be a turning point, towards alienation,

discouragement and substance use or towards reconciliation, renewal and healthier choices and

conditions.



A leading researcher (Flay, 2002) has summarized research to show that the school environment is

linked and is possibly inseparable from the homes of the families and the community that it serves.

Research has shown that individual characteristics of the child/youth interact with that of the school

and are mediated by the practices and nature of the family environment.



The Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission (2003) has summarized the research literature on

factors that influence youth substance use and noted that the school environment can either increase

risk or help to protect young people. Not only is the ―connection‖ to schooling critical to health, this

review identifies many specific factors, both within individual students, the family and the local

community that can be influenced by school-based and school-linked programs. These include:

 social skills deficits

 skills to manage aggression and hostility

 problem solving skills

 positive bonding with adults

 parenting skills

 media literacy skills

 negative, disorderly school environments/caring school environments

 inappropriate school policies on drug use and punishment

 academic failure or lack of basic literacy skills

 high expectations from teachers

 involvement in positive peer groups and activities

 access or referral to preventive health and addiction services



9

10







Other researchers have noted that the school can influence mediating individual and environmental

factors such as:

 Social skills and competencies (Griffen et al, 2001; Epstein et al, 2000)

 Normative beliefs about substance use (Kumar et al, 2002)

 Parent-child communications (Komro et al, 2001)

 Handling crises and transitions (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2003)



As well, a renewed interest in health ―literacy‖ reflects the growing understanding that functional

knowledge about a health topic may be a pre-requisite for behavioural change, although such

knowledge is not necessarily sufficient in and of itself. (Further clarification of the essential,

functional knowledge is still required.) As well, research (Roberts at al, 2001) on how young people

perceive and use substances as part of their transition can guide school-based and school-linked

programs more effectively.



We may be at a critical point in our understanding of the complex nature of the school environment

and its linkages with homes, community and other agencies in the community. Many researchers

(Flay, 2000) have noted that there is growing evidence of ―clusters‖ of negative and positive

behaviours and conditions. This review has found that substance use is increasingly being linked

with mental health, social skills and social and emotional learning.



Other researchers have noted the newly understood significance of the psycho-social environment

of the school (Parcel et al, 2003; DeWitt et al, 2002; Hawe et al, 2001a, 2001b; Janosz et al, 1998)

While there is a consensus that these clusters and the overall school environment need to be

addressed by comprehensive programs (Perry, 2003; WHO Expert Committee, 1997; Kumpfer et al,

2002; Flay, 2000) that integrate our approach to several health issues and that coordinate multiple

interventions, researchers and program developers are struggling to sort out the best mix, duration

and type of interventions and how they can be sustained (Scheier et al, 2002; WHO Expert

Committee on School Health, 1997; Allensworth et al, 1997).



New ecological and systems-based understandings (McCall, 2004, Flay, 2002, Stokols, 1992;

Graham, 2003; Weicjk, 1982) about the school environment are emerging that may lead us to

answering some of those questions about mix and coordination of interventions, implementation,

cost –effectiveness, and sustainability.



2. Prevention/Promotion Role of School



The research evidence on the effectiveness of school-based and school-linked health promotion is

clearly established for several health issues for several years. This has been confirmed by major

reviews and reports from Canada (Stewart, 2001) and internationally (WHO Expert Committee on

School Health, 1997; Centers for Disease Control, 2003; Allensworth et al, 1997, St. Leger and

Nutbeam 2000)



The same solid case has been made for substance abuse where instructional programs based on

social skills development (Flay, 2000; Thomas et al , 1999, Caulkins et al, 2002) and programs

using coordinated multiple interventions within the school setting have been demonstrably effective

(Poulin & Elliott, 1997; Botvin et al, 1998; Gottfredson & Wilson, 2003; Cocking, 2002.)



However, the case for having schools prevent substance abuse/addictions has emerged relatively

recently, as programs moved beyond information/knowledge and specific resistance skills training



10

11





approaches to embrace life skills, mental health and whole school approaches. (Ellickson,

2003;Cuijpers et al, 2002)



In the late eighties the value of providing ‗the facts and the risks' about drugs was largely and

rightfully questioned. Young people looked around and found that despite the dire warnings about

alcohol and marijuana, their parents, friends and the media seemed to be unconcerned and largely

unaffected by occasional use of these substances.



The important work of Brian Flay (1986, 1989, 2000) on social influences and life skills emerged.

As well the coordination of instructional programs with accessible support services, school and

agency policies and modifications to the school social environment offered the proof of even more

effectiveness (Parcel et al, 2003, Leija et al, 2003; Sussman et al, 2002; Abbey et al, 2000). As well,

Botvin et al (1998) have described the evolution of different approaches to school-based substance

abuse prevention. These approaches include:

 Information Dissemination approaches which proved to be largely ineffective.

 Affective Education approaches which also proved to be problematic.

 Social Influence approaches that included orrecting Normative Expectations., Psychological

Inoculation.and Resistance Skills Training that do show considerablesuccess.

 Integrated Social Influence/Competence Enhancement Approaches that show consistent

success in the short term and even up to six years after.



Life skills training has re-emerged as a basis for prevention programs and appears to be gaining

credibility with recent evaluations noted in this review. In education, this is reflected in a renewed

concern for ―social-emotional learning‖, ―character education‖ and ―caring, respectful‖ schools etc



More recently, this social skills/social development approach has been extended into a approach

that promotes a safe and caring school environment with researchers such as DeWitt et al (2002),

Janosz et al 1998, Hawe 2001a, 2001b) in Canada. This is closely related to the promotion of a

comprehensive approach to mental health as promoted by researchers such as Weist et al (2001). It

is also related to the recent calls for ―youth development agenda‖(Catalano et al 2002)



As noted above, the evidence is emerging from leading researchers such as Flay (2002), Perry

(2003), Kumpfer et al (2002) and Spoth et al (2002) that shows that it is a combination of

instructional, school social environment, school policy, family involvement and peer support

programs and mental health services interventions that is m ost effective in prevention.



As well, more recently researchers have begun the evidence underlying the messages we are trying

to communicate about substance use. Although this development of a ―harm reduction‖ approach is

still relatively untested, it holds the promise of more measurable and realistic outcomes such as a

reduction in drinking and driving among young people, awareness of drugs being used in date rape

etc rather than an unrealistic attempt to have all young people abstain from experimenting with or

moderate use of alcohol (Riley, 1993; Nova Scotia Department of Health, 2003; McBride et al,

2004, Bonomo & Bowes, 2001).



The evidence of short-term, positive effects of school-based and school-linked interventions is very

clear and is noted several times above and throughout this review. However, most random,

controlled studies are short term, measuring effects only a year or two after the intervention. In

regard to the life long effect of school-based interventions, this review did, however, locate a

powerful cost-benefit analysis (Caulkins et al, 2002) that used conservative estimates and

calculations to estimate that for every per cent short term impact of a successful prevention



11

12





program, there will be a 0.15% life long impact. Since most high quality programs report 4-5%

impact in the short term, this would mean a significant impact. That calculation estimates that for

every $150.00 per participant in school instructional programs, $840.00 is saved in health care,

economic and social costs. Most of these savings would come from reduced tobacco and alcohol

consumption rather then illicit drugs. And, these calculations were done with single intervention

programs such as instruction in social skills, whereas the impact of combined and coordinated

interventions could be much higher. This review found similar, less extensive cost-benefit estimates

from others such as Stephens et al (2001), Wang et al (2000) and Chatterji et al, 2001)



However, there are several specific questions that have not been adequately addressed in the

research done on addictions and schools. These issues include topics such as:

 clarifying which approaches and which interventions are most effective for

which sub-populations of youth

 determining the ―critical mass‖ required of a comprehensive approach that

addresses many different needs with many different interventions and

combinations of interventions while being realistic about the capacity of schools

and local agencies to sustain those interventions

 effective coordination of interventions

 sustainability of interventions and coordination of programs

 being able to replicate effective programs through system change and ministry

leadership.

 strengthening the evidence that school-based programs have a lifelong effect



As well, there is a significant absence of knowledge on the impact of government policy, including

its implementation in school systems, public health/addictions and mental health systems. We know

little about the levers that must be used to sustain programs, services and policies at the

school/neighbourhood and regional authority/school board level.



Based on this need, this research review goes beyond the obvious frameworks of population health

and comprehensive school health, to examine the insights gained from ecological approaches

(Stokols, 1996) and open systems theory (Weicjk, 1982; Flay, 2002; Perry, 2003, McCall et al,

1999, McDowell, nd; Graham, 2003). In particular, we look at the organizational capacity of

professional bureaucracies to require, encourage, support and evaluate programs, services and

practices (World Health Organization, 2003; Rappaport, 1977, Kloos et al, 1997Perry et al, 1996) .



Implementation may be a big issue for alcohol and drug education in Canadian schools. American

and other studies (Dusenbury et al, 2003; Wehrman et al, 2002; Pentz, 2003) indicate that curricula,

comprehensiveness and the underlying approach (eg emphasis on social influences and skills) may

not be followed in school-based programs. No Canadian study has been done, but (Roberts et al

(2001) noted that the popular but ineffective DARE program was widely used in Canadian schools.

Canada has no comparable on-going study such as the School Health Polices and Programs Study

(Grunbaum et al, 2000).



The use of systems theory may explain this, as we learned from this review that teachers have

difficulty moving from a knowledge-based approach (to a social influences/normative/skills

approach) and that traditional teacher inservice training in the program was not sufficient to change

their underlying professional beliefs Rohrbach et al, 1993; Kealy et al,2000) . (We also learned that

programs such as DARE have significant parental support and this may also affect the decision to

go with these simplistic programs.)





12

13





Another emerging idea in this and other school health promotion sectors is that in order to be

successful in persuading educators to adopt health promotion policies and programs, we must first

recognize that the primary mission of schools is educational. This revolutionary thought then leads

us to connect and integrate our wish for ―healthy schools‖ with what educators describe as

―effective schools‖ and ―school improvement‖ St.Leger & Nutbeam (2000) have articulated this

concept in describing the dominant paradigms that influence educators and public health

professionals.



Consequently, by using systems theory, and understanding that in ―professional bureaucracies‖

where such professional norms will have an enormous impact on the fate of innovations and

programs, we can then understand how programs such as drug education programs are implemented

or not.



3. Promising Approaches



Indeed, this review found a considerable consensus on the approach and elements that should

characterize a school-based and school-linked prevention strategy. This would include seeing

harmful substance use within the context of



 normal adolescent development, where risk-taking and experimentation is a

healthy developmental task (Carr, 19965; Paglia, 1998, Centre on Addictions and

Mental Health, 1999))



 other related risk behaviours such as smoking, sexual risk-taking, aggression and

sensation-seeking activities (Jessor & Jessor, 1997, Flay, 2000)



 antecedent and underlying developmental factors such as social development,

mental health and self-awareness and control (Alberta Alcohol & Drug Abuse

Commission, 2003)



 an interaction between the person‘s individual characteristics, that of his/her

parents/home, the connection to the school and the connection to other adults in

the community (Flay, 2000)



 prevailing social norms, community characteristics and media influences

(Alberta Alcohol & Drug Abuse Commission, 2003)



This approach would include multiple school-based and school-lined program elements:



 instruction that emphasizes a combination of life skills and social competencies

(Flay, 2002; Thomas et al , 1999, Caulkins et al, 2002) including ―innoculation‖

against social influences, correcting normative beliefs about substance use and

enhancing social skills and also provides a basic ―literacy‖ or ―functional

knowledge‖ about alcohol and other drugs and where to access relevant services.



 instruction, co-curricular and whole school practices that encourage social-

emotional learning (Elias & Weissberg, 2000; Elias, 2003; Zins et al, 2003;

Payton et al, 2003) that includes self-knowledge, character development,

learning how to care for and respect others, knowing how to act in social





13

14





situations and how to build relationships.



 greater attention to the psycho-social environment of the school (DeWitt et al,

2002; Janosz et al, 1998; Hawe et al, 2001a, 2001b, Konu & Rimpela, 2002) ,

including youth participation in school policy-making, active programs to

engage students in extra-curricular and co-curricular activities, peer programs,

leadership programs, community service as well as parental involvement and

mentoring programs



 provision of a comprehensive range of mental health services (Center for Mental

Health Services, 2000; School Mental Health Project, 2001; Rones &

Hoagwood, 2001; Bond et al, 2004, Haynes, 2002) school-based prevention

activities organized by addictions workers, promotion activities by public health

nurses, liaison programs with police and interventions from school

psychologists, social workers and guidance counsellors



Research also indicates that if these interventions are coordinated the impact will be even greater. Perry

et al, 1996, 2003; WHO Expert Committee, 1997; Kumpfer et al, 2002; Flay, 2002)



4. Promising and Non-Promising Interventions



In addition to the evidence supporting the general strategies of instruction, social support and mental

health/addictions services described above, this review has identified several school-based or school-

linked interventions that have been evaluated as being effective or ineffective in reducing harmful

substance use among youth. These include:



 Comprehensive, non-punitive school-related policies and practices adopted by school

boards, police services, regional health authorities and addictions agencies and youth

serving professionals, when implemented in coordination withy other interventions

such as instruction, social support and health services can alter behaviour. Policies by

themselves, or narrow policies such as drug testing appear to not influence

behaviours.(Alcohol Policy Network, 2004; Nova Scotia Department of Health, 2002;

Goodstadt, 1989; Yamaguchi et al, 2003; Goldberg et al, 2003, Gliksman et al, 1995;

Grebow et al, 2000)



 Narrowly-focused instructional programs such as ―informational approaches‖ or

―abstinence‖ or ―resistance skills‖ or ―affective education‖ have been proved by be

ineffective (Flay, 2000).



 Traditional school-based and school-linked social support programs have been

demonstrated to have an effect on drug use; including peer helper programs,

mentoring programs, extra-curricular programs, community service programs and

others (Centre of Excellence for Youth Engagement, 2003; Ciliska at al, 1999; Black

et al, 1998; Collingwood et al, 2000; Mellanby et al, 2000)



 Parent-child communications and parenting practices have been strongly linked to

substance use and parenting education and support programs have been shown to

influence that communication and parenting effectiveness (Werch et al, 1991; 2003,

White et al, 1991, Kumpfer et al, 2003, Dishion et al, 2002)). However, the research

on whether representative parental involvement in prevention through parent groups



14

15





and advisory committees has an effect on behaviour and learning is unclear.



 School-based or school-linked delivery of addictions, student assistance and

preventive health services, particularly through school-based health clinics (SBHC‘s)

have been reported in case studies to have an effect on substance use behaviours

(Dryfoos et al, 1996; Costello-Wells, 2003, American Association of Psychologists,

2001; Pastore & Techow, 2004, Lowe et al, 2001; Kaplan et al, 1998) but more

research and meta analyses are required.



 There were a considerable number of references (Neylon, 1993; Bradley, 1997) to

the role of the public health nurse in schools playing a coordinating role in school

health promotion as well as addictions, but a Canadian study (McCall, 1999) shows

that on average, schools receive about five hours of nurse time per month, so it is

unlikely that such a role would be possible in most schools.



 Police officers being assigned as ―resource officers‖ to schools is an apparently

wide-spread practice in Canada (Ryan & Mathews, 1995) but this review did not

locate many controlled case studies or any meta-analyses of their impact on anti-

social behaviors of substance use (Stark et al, 2000; White et al, 2001; Staff et al,

1998). Similarly, the role of school-based addictions workers requires further study

and research (McDonald & Green, 2001; King et al, 2001)



5. Organizational Capacity of Ministries



This review is part of a strategic assessment of provincial/territorial organizational capacity and has

consequently used a definition of such capacity (World Health Organization, 2003) that has these

elements:



1. Explicit policy and managerial support for inter-ministry, interagency and inter-disciplinary

coordination and cooperation

2. Use of formal and informal mechanisms for such coordination and cooperation such as

joint committees, job procedures, written policy statements, joint inservice programs, joint

planning, shared budget allocations, joint vision development and consensus building etc

3. Assigned staff (infrastructure) at the ministry and agency level to facilitate and support

coordination and cooperation.

4. Mechanisms and processes to transfer knowledge to decision-makers and practitioners and

to promote best practices

5. Explicit and sustained programs and processes to develop the capacity of the ministry and

local agency workforce, including studies of current professional practices, guidance and

support for the development of university and college pre-service preparation programs and

development of guidelines, models and materials for sustained staff development programs.

6. Explicit and agreed upon procedures and processes to identify emerging issues and plan

responses accordingly.

7. Regular surveillance of the health status, knowledge, attitudes and behaviours, as well as the

social behaviours and connections to schooling of children and youth as well as monitoring

of local agency policies, programs and capacities.



Very few studies used any of the organizational capacities as a basis for studying implementation

processes and problems. Some exceptions were noted however, including Simpson (2002), Valois &

Hoyle (2000) and Brener et al (2003)





15

16



This review found that many studies (Ennett, et al, 2003; Simpson, 2002; Brown, 2001; Wenter et al,

2002; Ringwalt et al, 2002) that indicate that many, if not most, school-based and school-linked alcohol

and drug programs are not based on the current evidence available about program design and

implementation. Very few studies of this type have been done in Canada. The most prominent example

of this is the DARE program, which is wide-spread in Canada. Obviously, knowledge transfer is a

significant issue for many jurisdictions.



Most studies of implementation are based on top-down thinking (Allison et al, 1991; Giles et al, 2001,

Hahn et al, 2002), where the focus was on the teacher to follow the curriculum designed by experts

(Hallfors & Godette, 2002, Rohrback et al, 2002).



Few studies examined the practical concerns of teachers, nor of their current practices and capacities.

Most studies fidelity in externally funded and supported programs. Some studies noted the immediate

fall-off in fidelity, once those external supports were removed. A few studies of approaches based on

adult learning, professional concerns and perceptions and teacher development were located (Santi et

al, 1992; Flannery & Torquaiti, 1993; Jourdain et al, 2002, MacKinnon et al, 1992; Peterson et al, 2001,

Dusenbury et al, 2003, but more work needs to be done in this area. This is despite the long-standing

work of leading researchers such as Fullan, 1991; Hall & Hord, 1987; Leviinson-Gingiss & Hamilton,

1989).



This review located some studies on the role of personnel other than teachers, but the focus was mostly

on teachers and the classroom. McClanahan et al (1998) reports on school counsellors, King et al

(2001) on addictions workers, Barnett et al(1999) on physicians, Hootman et al (2002) on school

nurses, Berkovitz & Sinclair (2001) on psychiatrists were among the case studies located in this review.

The role and preparation of all of these categories of personnel deserve further study.



Research (Gingiss, 1992) indicates that systems change and adoption of new professional practices

usually takes about three years to be adopted. Few implementation studies have examined timelines

such as this.



Several Canadian reviews (Finlay, 2004; McCall, 2002; McCall et al, 1999; Shannon & McCall, 2001,

2002; Woodward e al, 2004) as well as international reviews (Allensworth et al, 1997, Nutbean & St.

Leger, 1997, WHO Expert Committee on School Health, 1997) have called for regular information on

professional and agency practices in public health and school health as well as on health status,

knowledge and behaviours of children and youth. This study did locate, but did not examine, the semi-

regular studies done on alcohol and drugs in the Atlantic provinces, Ontario and Alberta as well as the

youth health risk surveys done in British Columbia and Quebec.



5. Conclusions



This review of the published research literature has been undertaken to guide a strategic assessment of

the organizational capacities of provincial/territorial ministries of health (including addictions agencies)

and of education to encourage, require and support local agencies to prevent harmful substance use by

children and youth through school-based and school-linked programs, polices and practices.



This review has found that the social and physical environment of the school, acting in concert with the

home and the local community, can either increase or decrease the risk for youth. This review has

found substantial evidence that educators, working with addictions, health police and other agencies

can successfully and significantly intervene with solid evidence showing short term results of up to six

years and some intriguing evidence that, for a portion of young people, with life long effects that can

lead to impressive cost-benefits to society and the individuals concerned.



16

17







This review has found that drug education have evolved into programs that emphasize life skills and

social competencies and that this can be integrated with teaching aimed at social development overall.

This instruction can be coordinated with several interventions that can enhance the social environment

of the school as well as a range of preventive and mental health services offered in schools and nearby

in the community.



This review indicates that implementation of evidence-based programs is an urgent matter for

consideration by decision-makers, as most international studies report that most school-based programs

are not using current knowledge of program effectiveness. In Canada, there are no recent studies of

current practices, policies and programs that were located in this search.



The emerging lenses of ecological approaches to physical and social environments, as well as systems

theory offer many significant insights to policy-makers and practitioners. However, this review

identified only a few studies that have used such conceptual and analytical frameworks in their studies

of the current situation.



Further, this review located very few studies that examined the organizational capacities of ministries or

local agencies to promote, encourage, require or support local professionals and volunteers to do the

right things in preventing harmful substance use among our young people.









17

18



C. Findings



A population health approach is one that seeks to influence the health status of populations either through

interventions to enable them to practice healthy behaviours or to modify the environments in which they live,

learn, work or play. Health promotion strategies, policies and programs used to implement a population

health approach often have to make choices among

 the populations or sub-populations to be reached,

 the messages to be conveyed (general promotion, harm/risk reduction, prevention of specific

behaviours of conditions etc)

 the settings to be used to reach the population or

 the interventions (legislation/policy, education, services, social support, changes to physical

environments) to be used to convey those messages



Chomik (2001) has listed and described the elements of a population health approach for Health Canada that

has led us to ask several basic questions during this review. This framework has been adapted for this review.





1. Select Relevant Determinants & Vulnerable Populations



This section examines the application of the population health principle (PH) of considering

relevant determinants and addressing vulnerable populations and the Comprehensive School

Health (CSH) elements addressing the social and of the physical environment of the school

being used to alleviate the impact of some of those determinants on vulnerable sub-

populations of children and youth.



Our general finding for this sub-section of the report is that the school environment can

clearly influence several individual, family, school and community factors that either

increase risk or protect children and youth from harmful substance use. This conclusion is

based on two major overviews of the research and several small-scale studies.



Trends in Youth Substance Use



The most commonly used substances among youth are alcohol, tobacco and cannabis (marijuana,

hash, hash oil). Ontario's Addiction Research Foundation (now the Centre for Addiction and Mental

Health) has sponsored the longest ongoing Canadian survey of youth substance use. Due to the

limitations of this review, the findings of the most recent report of the Ontario Drug Use Survey

(2003) are used here to summarize patterns,of use among young people. Similar results can be

found in



 Provincial Student Drug Use Survey of the Atlantic Provinces 2002

 Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission (AADAC) 2002

 British Columbia / 2003 Adolescent Health Survey III



The escalating trend in drug use, which began in the early 1990s, has generally subsided. Between

2001 and 2003, the past year use of 5 measures significantly decreased:

 Cigarettes: from 23.1% to 19.2%

 Ecstasy: from 6.0% to 4.1%

 LSD: from 4.8% to 2.9%

 Barbiturates: from 4.0% to 2.5%



The use of any illicit drug, excluding cannabis, also declined, from 18% to 15%.



18

19







According to the Ontario Drug Use Survey (2003) report, there are five general patterns that

describe the long-term trends in drug use between 1977 and 2003:



1) Decreased in the 1980s, Increased in the 1990s, Currently Stable, but Elevated:

 Alcohol

 Binge Drinking

 Inhalants

 Cannabis

 Ecstasy

 Hallucinogens



2) Decreased in the 1980s, Increased in the 1990s, Currently on a Downward Trend:

 Cigarettes

 LSD



3) Decreased during the 1980s, Upward movement during the 1990s:

 Cocaine

 Crack



4) Decreased during the 1980s, Stable during the 1990s:

 Stimulants

 Tranquillizers

 Barbiturates



5) Low and Stable:

 Heroin

 PCP

 Methamphetamines



Other Patterns of Use

 About two-thirds (68%) of students have not used any illicit drug, including cannabis, in the

past year. Conversely, 32% of students have used an illicit drug, including cannabis.

 About one-third (30%) of students do not consume any substance, including alcohol or

tobacco, and another third (31%) consume only alcohol.

 One-in-ten (10%) students report using alcohol, tobacco, cannabis and at least one illicit

drug.

 The percentage reporting first-time drug use during the past year is as follows: 19% for

alcohol, 10% for cannabis, 9% for cigarettes, and 5% for illicit drugs other than cannabis.



Age of First Use

 The average age at which students smoke their first whole cigarette is currently about

age 13. This average age has increased since the early 1980s, when it was age 11.

 The average age of first alcohol use is about age 13, and has not showed any major

fluctuations over the past two decades.

 The average age of first cannabis use is currently about 14. Historically, this onset

age increased throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, and then decreased again in

recent years.









19

20





Risk and Protective Factors



The Alberta Alcohol & Drug Abuse Commission (2002) has prepared several papers on risk and

protective factors associated with adolescent substance use. These papers provided an overview of

findings of key government documents, journal articles and reports from leading addiction agencies.

Based on these reviews, key risk and protective factors were included in the The Alberta Youth

Experience Survey, 2002.



Risk factors are life events or experiences that are associated with an increase in problematic

behaviours such as alcohol and other drug use.1 Protective factors are life events or experiences that

reduce or moderate the effect of exposure to risk factors.2 The most effective prevention and

intervention projects focus on risk and protective factors within five major life domains: individual,

family, peer, school and community. While much research remains to be done, several risk and

protective factors have been identified (Please refer to the chart on the next page.).



Based on the Alberta Youth Experience Survey, 2002, the most important risk factors for harmful

use of substances and gambling are:

 age of user,

 peer risk behavior,

 family history of substance abuse,

 family discord and

 poor connections to school life.



The most important protective factors for harmful use of substances and gambling by Alberta youth

are:

 parental monitoring,

 good social skills,

 availability of and participation in pro-social activities,

 high school marks and

 good connections to school life.



In the past, the emphasis of adolescent addictions research has been on risk factors associated with

adolescent substance use. Recent research indicates the need for a broader perspective

encompassing both risk factors and protective factors. Protective factors function as a buffer

highlighting the interplay between risk and protective factors.



The severity, frequency, and duration of both risk and protective factors affect the adolescent‘s

ability to remain resilient against substance abuse and gambling.



Continued research examining the most relevant risk and protective factors will aid youth initiatives

to develop innovative and improved program solutions for this population.



The following chart is taken from Alberta Alcohol & Drugs Abuse Commission (2001) Youth Risk

and Protective Factors - May 2003, Edmonton, AB, Author









20

21





Risk and Protective Factors Within Major Life Domains

Individual Domain

Risk Factors Protective Factors

- social skill deficits -social skills and responsiveness

- genetic predisposition - emotional stability

- positive attitude about use - positive sense of self

- impulsivity - problem solving skills

- hostility and aggression - flexibility

- alienation - resilience

- rebelliousness

- learning difficulties

- behavioural problems

- temperament

- physical trauma

- early age of onset

Family Domain

Risk Factors Protective Factors

- parental abuse of alcohol, drugs, and/or gambling - positive bonding

- remaining in an abusive or conflict ridden family

- low parental support - emotional support and absence of severe criticism

- low parental monitoring - a sense of basic trust

- poor family management, discipline, and - high parental expectations

problem solving - clear rules and expectations

- favourable attitudes toward teen alcohol, other drug - parental monitoring

use and gambling

- parents‘ mental illness

- ineffective parenting skills, especially for children with

learning disabilities or behavioural problems



School Domain

Risk Factors Protective Factors

- academic failure - caring and supportive school environment

- negative, disorderly, and unsafe school climate - high expectations

- low teacher expectations - clear standards and rules for appropriate behaviour

- lack of clear school policies regarding drug use - youth participation, involvement, and responsibility in

- lack of commitment to school school tasks and decisions

- withdrawn/aggressive classroom behaviour



Peers Domain

Risk Factors Protective Factors

- involvement with peers who use and have - involvement with positive peer group activities and

favorable attitudes towards alcohol, other drugs, and norms

gamble • social competencies such as decision making skills,

- involvement with peers who engage in other problem assertiveness, and interpersonal communication

behaviours

- peer rejections

- poor social skills



Community Domain

Risk Factors Protective Factors

- community norms that promote or permit substance - caring and supportive community

use and gambling - high expectations of youth

- living in impoverished neighbourhoods characterized - being media literate

by high crime rates and alienation - counter-advertising messages (youth educated about

- high rates of transition/mobility advertising)

- cultural disenfranchisement - religious based activities

- community sponsored activities

Note: the factors that can be affected by schools are highlighted in italics and red font.





21

22







Becker (1997) has summarized various models for predicting substance use and abuse that could be

used a basis for determining the realistic outputs for school-based programs.



MODELS OF THE ROLES OF RISK FACTORS IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE



Models of the roles of risk and protective factors in substance abuse are implicit in the narrative review by

Hawkins and colleagues (1992). Figure 2 shows one possible model that incorporates contextual factors and

many of the individual and interpersonal factors described in the review.1 The model shown in figure 2 has 11

broad predictors of substance use and abuse outcome for a total of 12 components. Table 1 lists those

components.









Five components represent contextual factors, while the rest are interpersonal (parent and peer) and

individual factors. The outcome itself is broadly defined, and leads to a good example of how such process

models can be further delineated. For example, one could refine the model in figure 2 by focusing on drug

abuse or on alcohol abuse. Some predictive factors may be more relevant for one outcome than another;

factors that are irrelevant to a particular outcome could be omitted from the refined model for that outcome.



Younoszai (1999) found that involvement in problem behaviors was identified as the most salient

risk factor for drug use, while having a member of a non-using peer group was the most salient

protective factor.



Li et al; (2002) examined whether parents act as gatekeepers by testing the moderator effects of

parents' substance use on the relationships of friends' substance use to adolescent substance use

(cigarettes, alcohol and marijuana) in a longitudinal school-based trial for prevention of substance

use in adolescents. As part of a large substance use prevention trial, entering middle school over

1800 students from 57 schools were surveyed at baseline, 6 months and 18 months (n = 1807 from

57 schools). Results of logistic regression analyses and multiple group structural equation modeling

showed that increasing numbers of parents and friends using substances were associated with



22

23





greater risk of adolescent substance use, as were more substance offers and lower levels of refusal

self-efficacy. Additionally, refusal self-efficacy mediated the effects of baseline use and substance

offers on subsequent use. Non-using parents had a buffering effect on friends' influences to use

substances, such that friends' use did not affect adolescent use when parents were non-users, and the

effects of substance offers on refusal self-efficacy were weaker. The findings suggest that parent

substance use should be addressed in adolescent substance use prevention programs, and that

continuing non-use by parents should be reinforced.



School Influence on Mediating Factors



This review located several records indicating that several of these factors/determinants/ can be influenced

by the school environment, especially when the school works with municipal, police, public health policies,

mental health and addictions programs, services and practices in a sustainable way?



Griffin et al (2001) describe the protective role of personal competence skills in adolescent

substance use: psychological well-being as a mediating factor. Adolescents who use a variety of

cognitive and behavioral self-management strategies have been shown to report reduced rates of

early-stage substance use, but little is known about how these personal competence skills may be

protective. In a series of structural equation models, this study examined the association between

competence skills and substance use over a 3-year period among 849 suburban junior high school

students, and whether psychological distress, well-being, or both mediated this relation. Findings

indicated that well-being fully mediated the relation between early competence and later substance

use, but distress did not. Youth with good competence skills reported greater subsequent well-being,

which in turn predicted less later substance use. Findings suggest that competence skills protect

youth by enhancing well-being and that prevention programs should aim to enhance competence in

order to promote resilience.



Griffin et al (2002) note that several previous studies have investigated the relationship between

psychological distress and substance use among youth. However, less research has investigated the

potentially protective role of psychological well being on adolescent substance use, and the extent

to which personal competence skills may promote well-being. They examined personal competence

skills, psychological distress and well-being, and adolescent substance use over a 3-year period in a

predominantly minority sample of urban students (N = 1,184) attending 13 junior high schools in

New York City. Structural equation modeling indicated that greater competence skills predicted less

distress and greater well-being over time. Although psychological well-being was associated with

less subsequent substance use, distress did not predict later substance use. Findings indicate that

competence skills promote resilience against early stage substance use in part by enhancing

psychological well being, and suggest that school-based prevention programs should include

competence enhancement components in order to promote resilience.



An earlier study (Epstein et al , 2000) done in New York City found much the same thing. Social

competency skills can be a protective factor for substance abuse and these can be taught

successfully in school.



An even earlier study (MacKinnon et al, 1991) found similar results in how a social influences

program can influence mediating attitudes about substance use. . They describes (a) the effects of a

social-influences-based drug prevention program (the Midwestern Prevention Project) on the

mediating variables it was designed to change and (b) the process by which the effects on mediating

variables changed use of drugs (tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana). Students in 42 middle schools and

junior high schools in Kansas City, Missouri, and Kansas City, Kansas, were measured in the fall of



23

24





1984 (N = 5,065) and again 1 year later (N = 5,008) after 24 of the schools had been through the

program. Compared to students in control schools, students in program schools became less likely

to express belief in the positive consequences of drug use, less likely to indicate that they would use

such drugs in the future, more likely to report that their friends were less tolerant of drug use, and

more likely to believe that they were better able to communicate with their friends about drug or

school problems. Change in perceptions of friends' tolerance of drug use was the most substantial

mediator of program effects on drug use. There was evidence that intentions to use and beliefs about

the positive consequences of use may also mediate program effects on drug use.



Kumar et al (2002) examine the relationship between school norms of substance use disapproval

(disapproval by the student body) and students' use of cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana. Data came

from nationally representative samples of 8th (N = 16,051), 10th (N = 13,251), and 12th (N =

8,797) grade students, attending 150, 140, and 142 schools, respectively. These students

participated in the Monitoring the Future Project in 1999. Measures of school norms of disapproval

of substance use were obtained by aggregating students' personal disapproval of daily cigarette use,

heavy drinking, and marijuana use within each school. Analysis using logistic nonlinear hierarchical

models indicated that in general, school-level disapproval lowered the probability of students' use of

these substances, controlling for their own disapproval and for student and school demographic

characteristics. The beneficial effect of school-level disapproval of cigarette and marijuana use on

8th-grade students' probability of daily cigarette use and marijuana use was significantly higher than

it was for the 12th-grade students. The effect of school-level disapproval of heavy drinking on the

probability of students' drinking was not significantly different across the three grades. Further, a

school environment of disapproval was also found to create a protective environment for those

students in the 8th and 10th grades who were themselves not disapproving of daily cigarette use.

These results argue for prevention programs that include creation of an overarching environment of

disapproval of substance use in schools.



A Canadian study, (Smart & Stoduto, 1997) suggests that Drug education may give students the

knowledge and confidence to intervene in friends' drug use. This study investigated self-reported

interventions by students in the alcohol, tobacco, illicit drug use, and drinking-driving of their

friends. The data came from a study of 1184 students in Ontario schools in grades 7, 9, 11, and 13.

We found that about a third of students intervened in friends' illegal drug use and drinking-driving

but about half intervened about smoking. Students who intervened were more likely to be older and

spend fewer nights at home. They were less likely to use cannabis, but had more friends using

cannabis and illegal drugs. Also, they had more exposure to drug education and were more

disapproving of drug use.



Palmer et al (1998) also found that interventions establishing conservative drug use norms in

classrooms may be an effective strategy in reducing substance use onset among adolescents. They

examined the effectiveness of a social pressure resistance training and a normative education

(NORM) intervention against an information-only control group. RESULTS: The NORM condition

revealed 1-year program effects for cigarette and marijuana use with individuals as the unit of

analysis and only marginal effects with classroom as the unit of analysis. No program effects were

found using school as the analysis unit. A multilevel strategy revealed program effects for cigarettes

and marijuana with both class and school as grouping levels. The effect for alcohol use was

significant at the 2-year follow-up.



Komro et al (2001) analyze the impact of Project Northland on mediating variables. At the end of 3

years of intervention, significantly fewer students in the intervention school districts reported

alcohol use than students in the reference districts. Mediation analyses were conducted to



24

25





investigate if the intervention's effects on mediating variables could explain the reduction in alcohol

use. Important mediators of Project Northland's effect on alcohol use were: (1) peer influence to

use, including normative estimates, (2) functional meanings of alcohol use, (3) attitudes and

behaviors associated with alcohol and drug problems like stimulus seeking, rule violations and bad

judgement, and (4) parent-child alcohol-related communication around alcohol use. In addition,

among those who did not use alcohol at baseline, self-efficacy to refuse offers of alcohol was a

significant mediator.



Donaldson et al (1994) also examine the mediating variables that are affected by programs based

social influence that often prevent the onset of adolescent drug use. Analyses based on a total of

3077 fifth graders participating in the Adolescent Alcohol Prevention Trial revealed that both

normative education and resistance training activated the causal processes they targeted. While

beliefs about prevalence and acceptability significantly mediated the effects of normative education

on subsequent adolescent drug use, resistance skills did not significantly predict subsequent drug

use. More impressively, this pattern of results was virtually the same across sex, ethnicity, context

(public versus private school students), drugs (alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana) and levels of risk

and was durable across time. These findings strongly suggest that successful social influence-based

prevention programs may be driven primarily by their ability to foster social norms that reduce an

adolescent's social motivation to begin using alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana.



Puskar et al (2003) report that a Teaching Kids to Cope (TKC) program can have positive effects on

outcomes of depression and coping among rural adolescents. Results indicated improvement in

depressive symptomatology and certain coping skills. Students in the intervention reported a higher

use of cognitive problem-solving coping strategies.



2. Balance Perspectives on Issues-Populations and Settings



In applying population health principles, public health agencies and professionals are often

driven to respond to specific health problems, particularly as they affect more vulnerable

populations. Educators, on the other hand, are driven to provide equitable educational

opportunity to all children, including challenging successful people to achieve their best. This

sub-section examines the implications of policy-makers selecting the school as a setting to

respond to health issues.



It is obvious that schools can help all children and youth in maintaining their own health and

developing skills, knowledge, attitudes and other attributes to help them avoid or reduce the

impact of several, if not all, health and social problems. However, it is suggested here that

research should also be helping systems to identify exactly which parts of health problems are

best addressed by other settings and systems, to determine if intervening with school-age

children and youth has a life-long effect or if is it sufficient to affect their childhood and

adolescent development alone, and to determine if the school setting is a more appropriate

venue for delivering certain messages that are more credible in this setting.



A Shared Concern for Kids, Differing Perspectives, Overlap and Contradictions



It is obvious that health and education professionals and decision-makers share a common concern for

children and youth, easily see relationship between health and learning and see the school as a venue for

promoting health, social development and learning. However, we should look under that agreement to

discover important differences of perspective as well as some underlying contradictions or tensions.







25

26



St. Leger and Nutbeam (2000) have presented a model for mapping the linkages between health and

education agencies. They point out the difficulties inherent in a perspective that sees the school only as

a convenient venue in which to implement or indeed, simply send, packages of health information for

the classroom or sets of instructions (disguised as manuals) to teachers and educators to do more about

health problems. They also describe how a more of a “comprehensive”, “coordinated”, “health

promoting”, “whole school” or “school-community” approach that takes the burden off the

classroom/educators and distributes it to other parts of the school such as cafeterias, health services,

parental involvement, guidance services and that also requires specified actions and services from

health, social services and other agencies and professionals. This “institutional “ approach also

considers the underlying values and social climate of the school.



St. Leger and Nutbeam go on to describe the primary mission of the school as being that of an

“educational institution” and then map out two sets of perspectives, one education and the other,

health, on different but similar long term goals, school related outcomes, school-based interventions

and inputs into the two systems. Their discussion reveals some important differences in perspectives.

For example, they suggest that health tends to be “top-down” or expert-driven, seeking changes in

behaviour and is often focused on the classroom, while education is often more process oriented and

more open to hearing the perspectives from all sides, including those that may not have an expertise.



This type of analysis showing the overlaps and differences between the two sectors has been done

before. For example, the attributes of “effective schools” as defined in the education research is quite

similar to that of “healthy schools”.



The Ontario Task Force on Effective Schools defined these attributes of effective schools:



 There are high expectations for all students

 The teaching is top quality

 The learning environment is positive

 Teachers have a comprehensive knowledge of the curriculum

 School days are organized to provide the maximum amount of learning time

 Parents are involved in their child‘s learning

 Teachers plan for improvement

 Performance improvement goals are set and achieved

 Progress in student performance is closely monitored and regularly communicated

 Success is celebrated



The World Health Organization (nd) (has defined the attributes of a “health promoting schools” as

institutions that constantly strengthens their capacity as a healthy setting for living, learning and

working.



A health promoting school:



 Fosters health and learning with all the measures at its disposal.

 Engages health and education officials, teachers, teachers' unions, students, parents, health

providers and community leaders in efforts to make the school a healthy place.

 Strives to provide a healthy environment, school health education, and school health

services along with school/community projects and outreach, health promotion programmes

for staff, nutrition and food safety programmes, opportunities for physical education and

recreation, and programmes for counselling, social support and mental health promotion.







26

27





 Implements policies and practices that respect an individual's well being and dignity,

provide multiple opportunities for success, and acknowledge good efforts and intentions as

well as personal achievements.

 Strives to improve the health of school personnel, families and community members as well

as pupils; and works with community leaders to help them understand how the community

contributes to, or undermines, health and education.



Health promoting schools focus on:



 Caring for oneself and others

 Making healthy decisions and taking control over life's circumstances

 Creating conditions that are conducive to health (through policies, services, physical / social

conditions)

 Building capacities for peace, shelter, education, food, income, a stable ecosystem, equity,

social justice, sustainable development.

 Preventing leading causes of death, disease and disability: helminths, tobacco use,

HIV/AIDS/STDs, sedentary lifestyle, drugs and alcohol, violence and injuries, unhealthy

nutrition.

 Influencing health-related behaviours: knowledge, beliefs, skills, attitudes, values, support.



As one can see, the effective schools movement and the healthy schools movement share a concern for

a healthy, safe, orderly school environment and high expectations for all students.



Similarly, one can see similarities in standards, well-recognized statements or summaries of the essential

functions of public health (Frank et al, 2003) and public schooling (Shannon & McCall Consulting

Ltd. (1993).



Public Health Functions Schooling Functions

1. Assess the health of the population through 1. Regular reporting on academic achievement

regular needs, health status and system at all levels, participation in schooling and

reports. training, other related factors and propose

remedies and actions.



2. Regular surveillance of health, through 2. Prepare reports on activities and effectiveness

periodic health surveys and advice to system of education systems, accessibility of education

of increasing threat, what they need to look and equity and system efficiency.

for, and intervention required.

3. Promote health through inter-sectorial 3. Promote intellectual development,

partnerships, advocacy for healthy public educational attainment and lifelong learning in

policies; improving personal skills; language arts, mathematics, science, technology,

encouraging healthy behaviours, creating social studies, a second language and the arts as

physical and social environments to support well as health, family life, physical education

health,.

4 Prepare students for vocational purposes,

4. Disease prevention through immunizations; including competitive and innovative aptitudes

investigation and outbreak control; early and values early in school, counselling, career

detection linking and referring to health explorations and career planning in secondary

services and treatment facilities etc.. and vocational training in later years.



5.Socialize young people into the explicit and



27

28





implicit values and norms of society including

personal and character development, civic

participation, respect for others & diversity,

global awareness, social responsibility and other

values as well as valuing health and wellness.

5. Protect health through inspections of 6 Assure safe custody and health of children

facilities, water, air, land use and other factors. and youth during the school day.



7 Sort and select students for future academic

and vocational endeavours by certifying their

skills and knowledge.



Even a brief glimpse at the above chart reveals potential tensions and contradictions between the two

systems. The crowded nature of the three functions relating to what students will learn is immediately

apparent. As well, the often unrecognized and little discussed function of the school in sorting and

selecting students for future places in society may cause conflict with health goals to provide supportive

environments. For example, in schools, tests are designed to fail a certain proportion of students lest

they be accused of reduced standards and rigour. Experiencing failure in school can be a cause for

students to leave school early, thereby increasing potential health risks.



Norland et al (1996) indicates that a positive social climate may not be as simple as it sounds,

because schools perform the function of sorting and selecting people for later places in life. This

means that some people will recognize that they are being sorted and may respond through

substance use and other anti-social behaviours. They suggest that evaluations of school curricular

drug control efforts show they are only modestly successful because they are based on an inaccurate

theory of drug taking. Social control theory is suggested as a better model of drug taking and drug

resistance. Building strong bonds to school acts to decrease the likelihood of interaction with

delinquent peers and thereby decrease delinquency and drug use. Yet schools are sites of

stratification and competition, and strong bonds may be related to one's place in the school

hierarchy. If schools are unable to produce sufficient positions in the hierarchy, those with low

levels of academic success or commitment may turn to the drug subculture to find status and

rewards. A number of future research questions are suggested.



As well, Allison (1992) reports on a simple, yet significant, characteristic of school organization

that could be used to guide programming. He examined the relationship between academic stream

and cigarette, alcohol, and cannabis use among 2,543 high school students as part of the Ontario

Student Drug Survey (1987). Students in basic and general academic streams were found to have

significantly higher levels of cigarette, alcohol, and cannabis use compared to advanced level

students. The effects of academic stream remain significant (except for alcohol use) when gender,

grade average, drug education lessons, and pressure to use these substances are included in multiple

regression analysis. The findings indicate that the process of academic streaming needs to be further

examined as a possible precipitating factor in drug use.



The preceding discussion of similarities and differences in perspectives between educators and health

promoters would suggest that we need to be careful and focused in approaching collaboration between

the two systems, lest we end up promoting actions that actually run counter to existing professional and

social norms that dominate one system or the other.









28

29





Long Term Impact with Children and Youth



 Does the research evidence indicate that school-based interventions will have a life time

effect on substance use?



This review found some evidence that suggests that interventions aimed at the population of school-

aged children and youth will result in changes to substance use patterns that lead long-term health

outcomes. However, as noted below, the few longitudinal studies available to be reviewed are not

conclusive enough and further research is recommended.



The most extensive analysis located in this review comes from Caulkin et al (2002) in a publication

for the RAND Corporation. Some of their analysis is reproduced here.



In Chapter Four, we estimated the effects of school-based prevention on adolescent use of marijuana,

alcohol, and tobacco as of the end of the first evaluation follow-up, which we envision as happening in

eighth grade in our hypothetical model program. Unfortunately, with only one possible exception

among the programs we studied (the Lifeskills program), observed differences between treatment and

control groups had disappeared by the end of high school.



At some point, the delay in drug use caused by prevention comes to an end. However, this does not

render moot the question of effect on lifetime consumption. Not only is consumption reduced during

middle and high school, but there is reason to believe that people who use drugs less extensively as

youths will also use drugs less extensively as adults, even if they have tried drugs before leaving high

school (Everingham and Rydell, 1994; Kandel and Yamaguchi, 1993; Kandel, 1975). Still, it is

important to account quantitatively for this decay in observed effects and delay of initiation. The reason

it is important to account for decay and delay is that (as shown later in this chapter) we estimate, for

each drug, age-specific initiation rates, with and without prevention, and associate those rates

(through National Household Survey on Drug Abuse [NHSDA] data) with percentage changes in

lifetime consumption. Decay of the initiation effect thus impinges on estimated lifetime consumption.



It is important throughout this chapter to distinguish between effects on the predictor variables, which

we discuss in the first two sections, and effects on lifetime consumption, which we discuss in the last

section. The final calculation in this chapter divides the percentage differences in lifetime consumption

by the estimates of program effectiveness(shown in Table 4.5) to arrive at Factor 5, the percentage

reduction in lifetime consumption for each percentage-point reduction in prevalence at the end of the

program.









In reviewing the percentages shown in Table 5.2, several observations emerge:



First, one should not extrapolate reductions observed at the end of the program to lifetime reductions.

With the conservative initiation scenario (our preferred scenario), lifetime reductions are only one-sixth

as great as end-of-program initiation reductions for alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana. The





29

30



corresponding value for cocaine is noticeably larger (a bit above one-quarter), but still much less than

one.



Second, the results are quite sensitive to the initiation delay assumption, but in different ways for

different substances. More optimistic scenarios increase estimated effects on marijuana quite

markedly and steadily because people who do not try marijuana until older ages are much less likely

to use marijuana heavily than those who start early. For tobacco, the optimistic scenario yields only

modestly larger Factor 5 values than does the conservative scenario. However, there is a huge jump

when one moves to the very optimistic scenario because under that scenario, many of those whose

initiation is deferred through high school never initiate at all. In terms of reducing lifetime cigarette

consumption, the key is not delaying initiation but eliminating it altogether because those who start

smoking late end up smoking almost as much as those who start early. The trend for cocaine use is

similar. Those who initiate marijuana use between ages 19 and 21 historically have used almost as

much cocaine as those who initiated marijuana at age 17 or 18, so there is little projected gain in terms

of cocaine prevention in moving from the conservative to the optimistic scenario.



Third, focusing on the conservative initiation scenario (our preferred scenario), one can make a simple

but powerful generalization. Roughly speaking, for every 1 percent reduction in use observed at

the end of a prevention program, one can anticipate a 0.15 percent reduction in lifetime use of

the same substance; or, equivalently, 10 percent reductions at the end of the program suggest 1.5

percent reductions in lifetime use. For cocaine, there is about a 0.25–0.30 percent reduction in lifetime

use for every 1 percent observed reduction in marijuana use. Those with a more optimistic view of

initiation delay would bump up these reduction percentages somewhat for tobacco (to about 0.23:1—

i.e., 0.23 percent lifetime reduction per 1.0 percent reduction at program completion) and dramatically

increase the percentages for marijuana (to 0.35:1), but not increase them as much for cocaine or

alcohol (drunkenness). And those who are very optimistic about permanence would use even higher

factors (roughly 0.50:1 for cocaine and marijuana, 0.44:1 for tobacco, and 0.32:1 for alcohol

[drunkenness]).



Skara & Sussman (2003) examined the longer-term impact of prevention programs based on the

psycho-social approach. Although the initial effectiveness of psychosocial strategies programming

in preventing smoking and other drug abuse among adolescents has been well established through

literature reviews and meta-analyses, much less evidence exists for the long-term follow-up success

of these interventions. The primary goal of this paper, therefore, is to summarize the effectiveness

of published program evaluation studies that have followed adolescents across the transitional

period between junior high and high school for a period of at least 2 years. Studies for inclusion in

this review were accessed primarily through a computerized search of Medline, Healthstar, and

PsychINFO databases. Intervention studies that met five core criteria were retained for review. Two

authors independently abstracted data on study characteristics, methodology, and program

outcomes. Search results yielded 25 studies suitable for examination. The majority of these studies

reported significant program effects for long-term smoking, alcohol, and marijuana outcomes, while

indicating a fairly consistent magnitude of program effects. This review provides long-term

empirical evidence of the effectiveness of social influences programs in preventing or reducing

substance use for up to 15 years after completion of programming. However, this conclusion is still

somewhat tenuous given the lack of significant program effects reported in several studies and the

great variability that existed in the level of internal and external validity across all studies.



Shope et al (1998) evaluated the continuing impact of a grade six and seven instructional program

that developed social pressures resistance skills. This program showed short-term positive effects.

Repeated measures analyses of variance demonstrated that significant effects evident at seventh

grade for alcohol use and misuse, as well as cigarette, cocaine, and other drug use were generally

not maintained through twelfth grade. This result may be a result of two hypotheses, the first is that

it is too long a time between the intervention and the measurement almost six years later and that

repeated doses or maintenance of the intervention is required. Or, an alternative explanation is that

developing specific social pressure resistance skills at a certain age is effective for the



30

31





experimentation stage of drug use or that age group, but other skills, knowledge, attitudes/beliefs

need to be taught to affect decisions at later stages in life.



An American longitudinal study (Botvin et al , 2000) found that the students who participated in a

Life Skills Training program showed positive effects six years after the intervention. They

examined long-term follow-up data from a large-scale randomized prevention trial to determine the

extent to which participation in a cognitive-behavioral skills-training prevention program led to less

illicit drug use than for untreated controls. Data were collected by mail from 447 individuals who

were contacted after the end of the 12th grade, 6.5 years after the initial pretest. Results indicated

that students who received the prevention program (Life Skills Training) during junior high school

reported less use of illicit drugs than controls. These results also support the hypothesis that illicit

drug use can be prevented by targeting the use of gateway drugs such as tobacco and alcohol.



Cuijpers et al, (2002) describe the impact of a widely used school-based program in Holland and

conclude that the Healthy School and Drugs project as implemented in Holland may have some

effect on drug use in the children exposed to it. This quasi-experimental study in which students of

nine experimental (N = 1156) schools were compared with students of three control schools (N =

774). The groups were compared before the intervention, 1 year later, 2 years later and 3 years later.

Self-report measures of tobacco, alcohol and marijuana use, attitudes towards substance use,

knowledge about substances and self-efficacy. Some effects on the use of tobacco, alcohol and

cannabis were found. Two years after the intervention, significant effects could still be shown on

alcohol use. Effects of the intervention were also found on knowledge, but there was no clear

evidence for any effects on attitude towards substance use and on self-efficacy.



Flay (2000) reports on several interventions and concludes that many studies have reported positive

effects on behaviours for up to three years. However, data from several long term studies indicate

that effects gradually decay over time, suggesting the need for ―booster‖ sessions. However, Flay

also notes that little is known about the impact of such ―booster‖ sessions. He also notes that there

have been very few longitudinal studies on substances other than tobacco.



Flay (2000) also refers to long-term follow-up data from a large-scale randomized trial involving

students from 56 schools in New York State found reductions in smoking, alcohol, and marijuana

use 6 years after the initial baseline assessment (Botvin et al. 1995a). The magnitude of these

reductions ranged up to 44 percent in drug use and 66 percent in polydrug use (defined as

adolescents who used all three gateway substances during the past week). Results of studies

utilizing generic skills training approaches such as the LST program have also demonstrated an

impact on other forms of drug use. Several studies have demonstrated an impact on the use of

alcohol (Botvin et al. 1984a, b, 1990a, 1994b) and marijuana (Botvin et al. 1984a, b, 1990b, 1995a,

b). These reductions have generally been of a magnitude equal to that found with cigarette smoking.



In concluding this particular discussion, logic and intuition might suggest that the questions about

long-term effects should be more precise in such studies. For example, one question might be asked

to determine if universal programs are able to delay experimentation with alcohol and tobacco until

a later age, when more young people would be better equipped to decide about use. Another

question about long-term impact might ask specifically about harm reduction strategies such as

drinking and driving and whether school programs were a factor in reduced driving under the

influence.









31

32







 Does the research describe which of the sub-populations or which of the specific

addictions/substance messages that can be reached or conveyed through school-based or

school-linked programs? How many children/youth of school age are truly not present in

school during the day?

This review found a few studies that tested the use of “universal” prevention programs on students

who are “indicating” problem use. Other studies were noted that seemed to indicate that middle school

programs might be the best age for school-based educational programs. However, none of the studies

located in this review were definitive.



 Which alcohol/drug messages are more credible coming from teachers, counsellors, peer helpers,

coaches, parent volunteers, principals etc. Which are more credible if they come from parents?

From public health nurses? etc



This review did not locate any records that sought to apply such communications analysis to school-

based prevention programs on alcohol and drugs. We also did not locate any studies that asked

youth about their current sources of information and knowledge about alcohol and other drugs. This

type of question has often been asked on other surveys on other health topics such as sexual health

(Boyce et al 2004) that found that schools were the primary and most reliable source of information

oh sexual health, when compared with sources such as parents, friends and the Internet.



Another aspect of this question would be to verify which sources are more or less effective in

communicating with youth who are at higher risk of harmful use. This writer has questioned the

assumption that “street youth” are not reachable through schools. In fact, there are very few youth who

actually live on the street. Most are “curb-siders” who go to school during the day, sometimes because

they have to do so for their parole requirements. Traditional school methods and norms will not likely

reach these young people, but it may be that the physical environment of the school is one of the few

environments in which these young people can be contacted.



A review done in preparation for Health Canada’s Compendium of best practices in youth prevention

(Roberts et al, 2001) described the ways to communicate with youth about drugs and which messages

might be more effective. The following suggestions have been derived from this analysis of the

youth population and their perceptions of substance use. Behavioral and other messages to be

delivered within prevention programs and services should be developed and implemented using

these five basic suggestions:



a) Understand and segment the youth population before selecting your messages.



b) Select messages that will be credible to your sub-population and local context



c) Ensure that the sources used and styles of delivery are congruent with the content of your

selected messages



d) Develop a grater understanding of the perceptions and practices of the immediate adult

intermediaries who live and work daily with youth. Develop prevention programs and

services that will help them to be more effective in communicating with youth about

substance use and abuse.



e) Consider how to involve youth more directly in decisions about which messages you will

include in your prevention programs and services.





32

33





People change their behaviours because of perceived risks and benefits. For young people and

others, the perceived level of risk will be significantly affected by their observations of others. If

they regularly see adults misusing alcohol, tobacco and other drugs, they are less likely to perceive

significant risk. If they see friends using drugs such as marijuana socially without dire

consequences, they are less likely to accept abstinence messages.



The perceived benefits of substance use for youth are the same as and different from those often

perceived by adults. People use alcohol, for example, to relieve stress, escape boredom and heighten

enjoyment. Youth, however, also may use alcohol for their own developmental purposes, such as

entry into adulthood, as a means to join a peer group, and as a way to experiment with different

lifestyles.



These youthful perceptions of risk and benefits in substance use are a major challenge in prevention

programming and policy-making. They serve as a reminder of why we need to consider carefully

how we can successfully communicate with youth about substance use and abuse.



Understanding Younger People



There are several factors that make youth a unique population in regard to substance abuse

prevention program planning and policy-making. These include being young, developmental needs

related to adolescent development, key transitions and life events and popular youth subcultures. All

of these factors lead to current levels of youth knowledge, perceptions and beliefs about substance

use which are briefly discussed here.



Being young



The exuberance of youth, their idealism, their lack of independence and their lack of experience all

create specific characteristics that need to be addressed in programs. Young people are generally

less able to see long term consequences (Paglia, 1998), so messages need to emphasize short term

benefits or risks. They are less bonded with conventional norms and customs Paetsch & Bertrand,

1999; Simons-Morton et al, 1999; Jenkins 1996), so messages need to help them form those

linkages. At the same time, they are controlled in almost very aspect of their daily lives due to a

lack of independent resources. So messages that promote autonomous decision-making have greater

appeal (Kim et al, 1998; Wallerstein & Bernstien, 1998). Young people are more likely to take

risks, positive or negative. So messages need to offer positive risks and challenges.



Youth today are optimistic, idealistic, self-reliant, activist and seeking authenticity (Health Canada,

nd). So messages need to be positive, point to personal goal attainment, issue calls for moral or

spiritual action, show youth in meaningful activities and be authentic in their meaning (Center for

Substance Abuse Prevention, 1999).



Child and Youth Development



Children and youth reach different stages at different ages; with each stage being accompanied by

important developmental tasks that need to be recognized and built into prevention strategies. These

stages and developmental tasks need to be addressed in prevention messages. These developmental

needs include recognition, the development of competencies, independence,

intimacy/interdependence with others, identify formation and social interaction and

experimentation. Council on Social Poilicy Renewal, 1999; Carr, 1996; Amos et al, 1997; Banwell

& Young, 1993; Wilks, 1992, Room, 1994, Center on Addictions and Mental Health, 1999). Risk



33

34





taking is an essential tool for youth to use in achieving these developmental tasks. (Irwin &

Millstein, 1986; Jessor, 1982)



The young person‘s need to create an identity separate from their parents leads to experimentation

with a variety of lifestyles. Consequently, youth sometimes choose to use drugs like they choose

clothes or music, as a means to build their new identities (Paglia, 1998). Perhaps we should not

overreact to experimentation with substances, in that such exploratory behaviour usually subsides

after age 20 (Paglia, 1998). The need to develop competence and for recognition can lead to

negative risk taking, unless there are other outlets. The need to form interdependent and intimate

relationships with peers will prompt young people to form or join groups as a way of finding those

relationships. Some of these groups may have norms that permit or encourage substance use. So

the use of drugs can facilitate entry into that group, or to gain social status within the group. Finally,

the physical changes associated with puberty can encourage youth to seek sensations to alleviate

those pressures. Thus, substance use can have a symbolic and functional benefit for youth.



Another major need in the development of children and youth is the acquisition of approp[riate

social skills or competencies. Without those interpersonal, coping and decision-making skills, an

adolescent is at higher risk from several health and social problems. Consequently, it is not

surprising that many prevention programs seek to instill these skills (Flay, 1985; Rooney & Murray,

1996).



Transitions and Events Can Heighten Vulnerability



Several key transitions in the development of the young person, as well as life events such as

bereavement, moving to a new neighbourhood, family crisis or parent unemployment can create

times of greater risk (Rutter, 1989).



Alcohol use during pregnancy can have serious effects. Up to age five, children learn about

expected behaviors and consequences through family interactions and play with others. The

transition from home to school at age five can be difficult, leading to antisocial behaviours.

Children aged six to 12 can learn incrementally about substances, and develop social and decision-

making skills that will later be applied to substance use. The transition into high school can be

difficult for many, particularly girls. Later in school, boys become more vulnerable, suffering more

from school dropout, violence and less participation in post-secondary education or training. The

transition to college, university or to a new job often creates opportunities to abuse substances in

less controlled environments, with many youth becoming susceptible for at least a period of time.



Throughout childhood and adolescence, youth can become more vulnerable to risk due to

bereavement, divorce, moving to another neighbourhood, working too much at a part time job or

from other life events.



Problematic use of substances is often linked with other risk behaviours and conditions. As

researchers such as Jessor and Jessor (1977) have explained, such problems are often presented in

clusters of negative behaviours and situations.



Selected messages and programs need to be available for youth as they encounter these transitions

and situations. .



Youth Subculture Can Be an Intermediary to Health Messages to Youth





34

35





Popular youth subculture can create social norms that are different from those of adults. While the

passage through this subculture may be transitory for most young people, their impact are no less

real than other social influences. Consequently, the youth sub-culture should be seen as an

intermediary in communicating with youth (Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, 1999).



Popular youth culture cuts across racial, ethnic, geographic and other boundaries. This culture is

very prominent and are promoted quickly in the mass media and through other new technologies.

While the fashions and language in this subculture change quickly, there are some core features

such as nonlinear thinking, rapid change, low respect for prescribed authority, and disrespect for

secondhand adult attempts to be ―cool‖. These features need to be recognized when choosing

sources and styles of message delivery (Health Canada , 1999).



Youth Knowledge, Perceptions and Beliefs about Substance use



Youth knowledge about substances and their impact on health appears to be consistently high. But

young people, like adults, continue to use and abuse substances, so we need to dig deeper in our

analysis.



One important factor are the youth normative beliefs about alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. If they

believe that most or many people use these substances, then they are less likely to abstain from use

or be worried about regular use. Consequently, messages need to be developed and delivered for a

variety of youth sub-populations and programs to convey the message that most don‘t smoke, most

don‘t misuse legal drugs and most don‘t use illicit drugs.



A second important factor is the personalization of risk (McCallum, 1995). Young people, like

adults, are aware of the risks of substance use, but are less able to calculate the consequences, have

a poor sense of the time frames or believe they can control the consequences (Holtgrave et al, 1995;

Paglia, 1998). Since the personalization of the risk is essential to behaviour change, this presents a

major challenge for prevention program planners.



Canadian Studies of Youth Knowledge and Beliefs about Substances



Health Canada (1996) studies tracking youth attitudes/beliefs toward substance use as well as other

studies comparing the drug-related beliefs of all youth population and ―out of the mainstream

youth‖ (OMY) should inform message development. These attitudes or beliefs about substances are

reliable predictors of substance use.



That same 1996 Health Canada study found that youth attitudes towards drug use were becoming

more liberal between 1996 and 1993. These included items such as a party needs drugs, doing drugs

is cool, some drugs are all right, marijuana to teens is like alcohol to adults and mist drugs are not

harmful if not used too much.



The Health Canada comparisons between all youth and OMY youth should also inform message

development. They found that:

neither OMY youth or all youth believe that it is necessary to drink alcohol to be accepted

more OMY youth believe a party needs drinking

more OMY youth believe that their peer group drinks

more OMY youth find it difficult to talk with their parents about alcohol and drugs

more OMY youth are surrounded by friends and family that smoke

fewer OMY youth believe their parents would tell them to stop smoking



35

36





fewer OMY youth believe their best friend would care if they smoked

the same proportion of OMY youth and all youth were asked to stop smoking last year



Segmenting the Youth Population



Identifying sub-populations of youth that can be served through prevention programs and services is

essential to effectiveness. This can be done in a variety of ways, including grouping by level of

substance abuse or the different stages of adoption or change, by age, gender, race/culture, local

community or family context or even by psycho graphic profiles.



Grouping youth by their levels of substance use



This is a popular and traditional way to organize prevention programs. Primary, secondary and

tertiary prevention programs have been developed in the past. More recently, such programs have

come to be called Universal, Selective and Indicated Programs. This compendium has adopted this

categorization of programs.



Stages of Adoption or Cessation



Similarly, prevention messages can be aimed at different the individual‘s various stages of

adoption/cessation of substance use. (See the earlier discussion of how young people experiment

with drug use and how they may become regular or heavy users.) Studies have shown how these

levels of involvement with drugs can be used to develop specific messages for different youth.

Experimentation with substances can be viewed as normal, but it can have harmful unintended

consequences such as car accidents and unplanned pregnancies. As well, earlier experimentation is

associated with higher risk of abuse. So onset should be delayed as long as possible. Research

(Paglia, 1998; Blaze-Temple & Low, 1992; Mackesi-Amito et al, 1997) has debunked the myth of

so-called gateway drugs that lead to heavy, harder drug use, so messages should not focus on

specific substances. Specific risks associated with regular use, such as binge drinking (De Wit et al,

1997; Clapper & Lipsitt, 1992), drinking and driving and substance use while deciding about sex,

should be addressed with specific messages within prevention programs. Heavy drug users should

benefit from specific messages encouraging reduced harm and risk, such as using drugs in a safe

environment, clean needles and limiting use as much as possible. Specific messages should also be

tied to different stages in rehabilitation particularly when risks of recidivism are highest.



Stages of Change



Prevention messages can also be organized to move youth along a stages of change continuum

related to substance use and behaviour change (McGuire, 1989; NiMurcho et al,1997; Prochaska et

al, 1994, 1994a; Migneault et al, 1997). Messages first raise awareness and knowledge, then modify

perceptions of risk and benefits as well as attitudes and beliefs, then develop relevant coping skills

and then provide awareness of and access to sources of support from peers, parents, educators and

agencies. Messages aimed at only one part of this continuum (eg. only knowledge, or only

resistance skills) have proved to be limited in their effect. Consequently, programs and services

need to deliver a variety of messages along this stages of change continuum (Werch & Anzalone,

1995; Werch et al, 1993; Werch & DiClemente, 1994).



Different Age Groups







36

37





Differentiating the youth sub-populations by age is often done. The key to success here is to identify

the relevant stages of childhood and adolescent development and address those developmental

needs with specific messages, in age appropriate ways. As well, the content of the messages needs

to be age appropriate, building a scope and sequence to their learning about substances.



Differentiating by Gender



Grouping messages by gender may also be useful. Boys appear to be at greater risk of substance

abuse. They have lower perceptions of risk, are more prone to sensation seeking, and tend to be

more peer oriented in their decision-making Cunningham-Burley, 1999; Paglia, 1998). Different or

more messages may be appropriate for this male sub-population. Girls appear to be more influenced

by social consequences, attractiveness issues and appearances that relate to maturity.



Race, culture, language and spiritual beliefs



All of these cultural and ethnic beliefs can have an influence. Consequently, the sources and styles

of messages should be adapted for these factors. For example, aboriginal youth can benefit from

programs that include messages about traditional ways that are interwoven with prevention

messages.



Local Community Context, Family Situation, Economic Circumstance



Local community norms re substance use as well as the family‘s practices should also be taken into

account in tailoring the messages to specific groups of youth (Hawkins et al, 1992; Vertinsky &

Mangham, 1992). Young people living in rural communities or inner cities may have differing

perceptions of substance use. The children of alcoholic parents have specific needs that need to be

addressed with specific messages of support. Economic disadvantage is obviously part of this

contextual analysis (Frhalick, nd).



Psycho graphic Profiles/Segmentation



More recently, psycho graphic profiling (grouping youth by clusters of strongly held and

interrelated perceptions and beliefs) has been applied to drug abuse prevention for youth. Using this

technique, a Health Canada project (Adrian, 1995; Mintz & Laporte, 1995) found that ―TGIF‘ers

(gregarious youth) and ―Luddites‖ (passive loners) as being at higher risk of substance abuse. This

technique is often used by marketing agencies to sell commercial products.



Street Youth



Canadian studies (Caputo et al, 1997; Adrian, 1995) have described the lives and norms of street-

involved youth. This sub population is composed of hard-core street-entrenched youth as well as

many who are ―curb-siders‖ who stay at home but who spend most of their free time on the street.



Programs for street-entrenched youth should focus first on meeting their practical, urgent, daily

needs rather than being too focused on substance use. Programs for ―curb-siders‖ should aim more

at reintegrating the young people into stable environments such as the school, revised home

situation or foster care (Caputo, 1997).



Credible and Non-Credible Messages





37

38





If a prevention program is based on or includes a behavioral or other message that is not credible

with youth, then it is less likely to succeed. In this part of the discussion we address issues such as

abstinence-only and cold turkey messages, fear and social consequences messages and truly

understanding the influence of peer groups.:



―Abstinence-only‖ messages



At a certain point abstinence-only messages with older youth become less credible. Cognitive

dissonance occurs, when youth observe adult substance consumption patterns and are subjected to

media influences promoting such consumption. As well, other studies show that youth may

establish their own common sense rules about use of drugs such as marijuana based on their own

use or observations of their peers who use the drug socially without dire consequences (Brown et al,

1997). This reality negates any attempts to treat this drug as the same as other more addictive drugs.

As well, the previously discussed youth predisposition to experiment, a factor caused by adolescent

development, may make this abstinence-only message inappropriate for many youth. Such factors

interfere significantly with the credibility of a abstinence only message. Similarly, ―cold-turkey‖

messages may often be ineffective with regular or heavy users. A harm reduction message may be

more effective in many circumstances with this group of youth.



Fear-based messages



Fear-based messages when they are accompanied by nonfactual presentations of information or

presented without realistic avoidance strategies, may be more harmful than good (Paglia, 1998).

Scare tactics generally prove to be ineffective, unless they are based on factual presentations and

credible presenters (such as former addicts). Realistic alternatives and steps to avoid risky situations

need to be presented.



Social Consequences



Messages that emphasize immediate social consequences such as bad breath or looking stupid may

be very effective (McLennan et al, 1998). Similarly, novel presentations (eg a child simulating a

hung-over adult bragging about being drunk), may point out the false value of other social

consequences in a powerful way.



Social Justice Messages



Youth have a greater sense of moral outrage and sense of justice. Consequently, messages that show

how tobacco and alcohol companies market their products can be credible with youth (Center for

Substance Abuse Prevention, 1999).



Peer Group Membership, Not Peer Group Pressure



Misunderstanding the influence of the peer group may lead to inappropriate messages. For example,

there may be little direct pressure from peer group members to use drugs or alcohol (Banwell &

Young, 1993). On the other hand, there is intense pressure on youth to join or form a peer group

Oetting & Beauvais, 1987; Kinsmen et al, 1998) . Alcohol or tobacco use is an easy way for youth

to be seen to join a peer group. On the other hand, the role of a close friend may be very influential

(Smart. 1997; Urberg et al, 1997).



Relating to Other Dominant Youth Concerns



38

39







Marketing and health experts (Witte, 1995) often suggest that messages relate to other high priority

concerns of the target audience. Some of the dominant current concerns of today's youth are: getting

ahead in tough economic times, managing relationships, fitting in, health issues, especially those

that relate to attractiveness and managing stress. Messages that connect substance use reduction to

those concerns are more likely to succeed.



Blanket Messages or Slogans



Short slogans might look good on ads, but they are often ineffective with youth (Paglia, 1998). For

example, the public message, ―AIDS is everyone‘s problem‖ will have little resonance with most

people who have little personal contact with anyone with AIDS. Saying no to drugs is more

complicated than ―Just Say No‖ and all kids know it. So we should not try to fool them or pretend.



Effective Delivery of Messages



Selecting the sources (medium) as well as the style of delivery (pace/tone, spokespersons, images,

language) is also critical in delivering health messages to youth. If they are not congruent with the

content of the message, they will reduce its impact. These include understanding how youth

communicate today, choosing the source of the message, the pace and tone of the message as well

as the spokesperson, symbols and images and language used to convey the message.



Understanding How Youth Communicate



Before discussing aspects directly related to youth substance abuse prevention, let‘s examine how

young people are communicating in today‘s society. Media is a big factor in their lives (Health

Canada, nd). They appreciate words that capture the latest trends, but it is very difficult to use those

words in prevention messages because they change very quickly. They are very fashion conscious

and will reject messages if the person is wearing out of date clothes. Youth resent falseness, so

don‘t try to hide the fact that you are delivering a prevention message.



Youth today are also using the Internet as an alternative to television. They use it from home and

primarily for entertainment and social interaction. Advertisers have already recognized this reality.

As a consequence, youth are more likely to be comfortable with nonlinear forms of communication

and using multiple forms of communications simultaneously (Health Canada, nd).



Selecting Your Source Carefully



Choosing the source or the medium to deliver the message within a prevention program needs to be

done carefully. Parents can deliver (and receive) many messages to their children but may not be

credible on some drug related topics. Schools can teach certain things and provide support to all

students as well as help some at-risk students but they may not be able to address some topics or

help some youth at all. Recreational programs can provide alternatives to all youth and be aimed at

high risk youth as well, but are not universal. Street programs can reach some youth at some times

in certain ways, but are at the wrong end of the continuum of use.



But not all sources of prevention messages can do everything. Young people will and should

consider the source of the message and will judge its credibility accordingly. Prevention planning

needs to take this into account.





39

40





Pace and Tone of the Messages



The pace of the message will be a factor in the youth‘s perception of the message. Novel content or

presentation is often attractive to youth (Louis & Sutton, 1991). Messages that relate to the human

senses will be attractive to boys and messages that revolve around relationships will be attractive to

girls (Donahew et al, 1991).



Spokespersons



The spokespersons used to deliver the message will have an impact on its perceived credibility

(McKenzie, 1999) . For example, teachers are not likely to be seen as being credible as former

addicts on the impact of drug use. But they are seen to be credible helpers in avoiding conflict with

other teachers at school or in improving their grades.



However, a California study (Brown et al, 1997) indicates that youth want more than a simple

presentation from a former addict. They already know that drugs are ―bad‖. They want to be able to

relate that person‘s experience with their own lives and values, to explore and discuss the

relationships and experiences that might lead to drug abuse.



Symbols, Images, Language



The symbols, images and language used to deliver messages will influence their acceptance.

However, it is difficult for programs to stay current with the fast-changing language and fashions of

the youth subculture.



Communicating with Adults to Prevent Youth Substance Abuse



The perceptions, attitudes/beliefs and behaviours of adults working and living with youth will have

an impact on the effective delivery of health messages.



Unrealistic Understanding of Youth Substance Use



Some studies (Fromme & Ruela, 1994; DiLorenzo et al, 1991) show that parents and school

personnel tend to underestimate the level of substance use among youth. This lack of understanding

may lead to not actively discussing drugs in the home and to poor or sporadic delivery of school-

based programs.



Involving Youth in Decisions about Message Development and Delivery



Involving selected youth in decisions about which messages and how they will be delivered in prevention

programs is a relatively new phenomenon. There is a growing research base that suggest autonomy-based

learning can be effective (Kim et al, 1998; Labonte, 1994). Consequently, the decision to consult youth about

the messages to be included in prevention programs is often linked to an empowerment approach to health

promotion.



There is considerable promise from this approach that programs may become more relevant to youth,

particularly if the youth involved as decision-makers are truly from the intended youth sub-population and

have a meaningful way to consult them prior to deciding things.









40

41



However, reviews of such youth empowerment practices is at its infancy stage. It may well be that we are

empowering only a minority of youth (those with more personal resources) to influence and deliver programs

that are no more effective than those developed by sensitive and dedicated.



For example, a Health Canada project (Described in Shannon & McCall, 1999) that used a contest

to involve youth in deciding on tobacco prevention messages led to ads that were as successful in

raising youth awareness as other advertising themes selected by professionals. No worse, but also

no better.



If youth are to be involved in decision-making about prevention messages, there are several general

and specific conditions that need to be met for this to be successful (Center for Substance Abuse

Prevention, 1997). Timelines will need to be more flexible, trust will have to be nurtured, messages

will need to be in sync with youth values and norms and youth will need to have primary control

over the direction of the communications. The Health Canada study (Shannon & McCall, 1999)

examined youth involvement in other forms of public decision-making. Several specific criteria

were developed that can be applied to prevention program development.



3. Understand Impact and Prevention Role of School Environment



This sub-section of the report examines the impact of the social and physical environment of

the school on substance use and the role and effectiveness of school-bazsed and school-linked

programs in preventing harmful use. In this discussion, we examine the population health

principle of examining various settings or contexts for health. We examine the elements of

Comprehensive School Health promotion insofar as understanding the potential and the limits

the school setting. Ecological theory tells us to look for interactions between the individual and

the environments and among the environments that play a significant role in the lives of

children and youth. Strategic thinking tells us to scan these environments regularly/



Our key findings here are:

o research and several recognized behavioural theories confirm that the

environment of the school setting interacts with the characteristics of the child

and the family, as well as other systems and the community to influence the use

of substance by children and youth

o school-based and school-linked interventions and programs can positively

influence the substance use choices made by all young people, especially if they

are based on a social influences/social environment/mental health services

approach that coordinates multiple interventions and links substance use with

mental health, life skills and adolescent development.

o Well-founded theories, conceptual frameworks and new insights for explaining

the impact of the school environment and its linkages with the related

environment of home and community are emerging but several areas require

extensive study and research

o the knowledge about school-based and school-based programs and

interventions relating to alcohol and drugs is similar to that related to other

health issues; a coordinated approach using multiple interventions from a variety

of agencies is more effective but even a single intervention such as instruction

of parent involvement can have a limited but significant effect.

o There is considerable knowledge available from which a defensible program

model or logic could be constructed to guide the development of relevant and

meaningful Indicators. However, this model would have considerable gaps,

including the extent to which program effect could be sustained over time, the



41

42



degree to which and methods for interventions can be coordinated and

appropriate end points or outputs for health, social and learning outputs at the

time of graduation from high school (as opposed to longer term life related

outcomes.)



Diez-Roux (2002) notes that there is a growing body of research in epidemiology and public health

has examined how characteristics of the places where people live are related to a variety of health

outcomes, including health-related behaviors, prevalence and incidence of disease, and mortality.



In Canada, researchers have also described the importance of a settings-based approach (Poland,

Green & Rootman, 2000). Further, senior policy-makers have expressed interest in the use of

settings to coordinate and consolidate prevention efforts in the Healthy Living Strategy (Health

Canada, 2003) and in a preceding paper prepared for the Advisory Committee on Population Health

and Health Security (2002).



As well, the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR) have funded several projects on the

impact of environments on health, including the SHRN and other grant recipients represented at the

Vancouver workshop



The importance of the school environment on the development and maintenance of youth health

generally is established in the research literature (Allensworth et al, 1997, Mackie & Oickle, 1996;

Nutbeam & St. Leger, 1996, World Health Organization, 1991; World Health Organization Expert

Committee on Comprehensive School Health, 1997; Parcel et al, 2000; Perry, 2000; St. Leger,

1999; Whitman et al, 2000, Ronson, 2003, Miller, 2003, Cuijpers et al, 2002).



The importance of the school setting is felt in these ways (WHO Expert Committee on

Comprehensive School Health Education and Promotion, 1997, pp.1-2):



a) Health Status Affects the Capacity to Learn

Health is a key factor in school entry. Nutritional deficiencies, physical and mental

disabilities and problems associated with premature sexual activity, tobacco/alcohol/drug

use, injury, bullying and violence and other health/social issues can inhibit or prevent

academic success.



b) Educational Attainment Affects Health Status

A lack of basic academic, literacy and numeracy skills prevents a person‘s capacity to

participate fully in personal, family and community life. Formal academic status is directly

liked to economic status.



c) Purposeful interventions using the school as the delivery system can influence short-term

and long-term health status as well as improve educational achievement.



 Does the evidence suggest that the social and physical environment of the school

setting of the school has an impact in enabling or preventing substance abuse?

 Does the research indicate that school-based and school-linked programs are based on

recognized behavioural and environmental/determinants theories and approaches?









42

43









A New Way of Understanding the School Role



There are a variety of terms used to describe school-based and school-linked health promotion,

including ―Comprehensive School Health‖ (the Canadian term), a ―Health-Promoting School (the

European term) or ―Coordinated School Health‖ (the American term). In England, the term used in

policy documents is simply ―Healthy Schools‖. In Quebec, the term that has developed is ―Ecole et

milieu en sante‖. Similar terms such as the ―community school‖, a ―full service school‖ and ―cities

in schools‖ are also used for local promotion and prevention programs and approaches.



In addition to the different terms, there is also some confusion with the concept (Who Expert

Committee, 1997). Is it an outcome (a ―healthy‖ school), an approach (emphasis on different

agencies working together), a set of values (based on a holistic view of health and well-being), an

issue specific program (coordinated interventions to prevent one problem) or coordinated set of

programs and services (to address several health problems or to promote health in general)? To be

inclusive, we are saying that ―school health‖ includes all of those ideas.



We should also try to be both specific and inclusive in describing what we mean by the ―school‖. In

fact, we mean the students, volunteers and staff of the school, the parents served b y the school, the

surrounding neighbourhood, the professionals, agencies and that work with the school, the school

system and other systems that have mandates to work with the school.



Using this notion, we can define the potential roles of the school in promoting health as including:

o instruction to transmit coping skills, attitudes/beliefs, access to social support, awareness of

health services as well as health knowledge or information

o informal awareness and learning through extra-curricular, co-curricular and other school

activities

o empowering and engaging activities to enhance the young peoples‘ capacity to determine

their own futures and to influence their own environments

o creating peer-led health promotion activities, programs as well as using peer-helper

programs to enhance youth access to available preventive services and counseling/treatment

o delivery and re-orienting preventive and curative health (and other services) in a youth-

friendly, convenient and accessible manner\

o informing, involving and supporting parents to engage them in their child‘s schooling, lives

and neighbourhood life

o involving and supporting community and voluntary organizations to help them reach and

engage children, youth or their parents

o modifying the physical environment, equipment, facilities to enhance health, safety and

security

o compensating for a lack of economic resources among families by providing palliative

services such as school meals, access to toys and technology and specialized transportation

services.



We should also make it clear that ―the school‖ is not simply the classroom. There are many other

physical places within the school other than the classroom, there are many other formal and

informal activities in the school other than instruction and there are many linked activities and

systems that influence what happens in schools.







43

44





We have attempted to capture this inclusiveness and complexity in a diagram that follows this

discussion below. This diagram portrays some of the complexities and the messiness of the school

environment. We are trying to show that the same school can offer a different set of experiences for

different students or even the same student on different days or even the same student on the same

day. What happens in the hallway can be very different than what happens in the classroom, the

gymnasium or on the way to school.



In fact, our understanding of the nature and role of the school has evolved in the past two decades.

Nutbeam & St. Leger (1997, 7-16) have described the history of research in school-based or school-

linked health promotion.



“Early attempts at health education were driven mainly by the medical fraternity,

with exhortations to children about the dangers …. . This authoritarian,

instructionalist approach was superseded by a behavioural approach whose

interventions were shaped largely by social and cognitive behaviour themes.”



In 1988, a national conference sponsored by Health Canada led to a national consensus statement on

Comprehensive School Health (Canadian Association for School Health, 1990). This statement

was endorsed by over 25 national education and health organizations. It described many elements

and components of a comprehensive approach into four areas: instruction, social support, physical

environment and support services, rather than the traditional three.



The Canadian statement also noted that CSH is operationalized at several levels, including the

school/neighbourhood, school board/agencies, province/territory and nationally. There are several

purposes in using this framework, including promotion of school health, prevention of specific

diseases or problems, support for these experiencing poor health and treatment of illness/disorders.

Thus the Canadian contributions to the school health concept were the notion of

comprehensiveness, in integrating our approaches to various health issues as well as

coordinating multiple interventions through various levels in several different systems. Many

of the terms used in the Canadian statement would be found a year later in the World Health

Organization (1991) guidelines for comprehensive school health.



Meanwhile, a similar movement to a coordinated approach (going beyond education to include

health services and a healthy environment) was also underway in the United States. Diane

Allensworth, then Executive Director of the American School Health Association, who had assisted

in the development of the Canadian consensus statement, led discussions that resulted in changes in

the ASHA terminology and the development of an eight-part school health model in the United

States. In 1990, the Centers for Disease Control began its program to support ―coordinated school

health‖ in the United States. In 1997, the United States government commissioned a panel of

experts (Allensworth et al., 1997) to report on comprehensive school health that is a landmark in

our knowledge about school health programs.



Another important feature emerged in the discussions about the Canadian statement, equity of

effort and shared responsibility for school health. Traditionally, people and experts in the health

sector have articulated the roles, skills and content of the tasks that educators need to play in school

health. The traditional demands for more curriculum time and better teaching have been

supplemented by more demands on teachers to coordinate things for children with other agencies, to

engage youth in decision-making, to perform basic health services such as administering medicines

and responding to outbreaks of head lice, to have kids eat better in school than when they are in

their homes or the neighbourhood etc.



44

45







As well, health professionals have also recognized the impact of basic literacy, hence basic school

achievement as one of the determinants of health. Consequently, schools are now seen as a target

for the ―health literacy‖ movement, with greater attention being paid to school retention and

attention being paid once again to basic health knowledge. Consequently, school health proponents

need to learn more about educational paradigms such as ―effective schools‖ and ―school

improvement‖. We need to connect to landmark research about school dropouts from sources such

as Whelage & Rutter (1989). A Canadian review (Morris et al, 1991) has described this basic

research that describes the interaction between individual, family and school characteristics that can

lead to students dropping out or being ―pushed out‖.



As noted in the earlier section, Nutbeam & St. Leger (1997,) and St. Leger and Nutbeam (2000)

have called for a greater understanding of the constraints and pressures that schools face, but we

need to delve more deeply if we are to have health programs embedded into the fabric of schools.

While there is obvious synergy between the socialization and custodial functions of schools and

health promotion, there is also competition between health and the sorting/selection, academic and

vocational functions of schooling.



Even within the socialization function, there is a potential difference of perspective, where

educators see physical ―health‖ within the greater context of personal and social development.

Many traditional health professionals see health as avoiding a number of diseases and problems.



For example, our society has undergone a shift where we see many young people left looking to

their peers for the guidance that their parents used to provide. We also see that the media, political

leaders and business leaders are often providing the moral guidance (or lack thereof) that churches

and parents used to provide. So schools are struggling to provide ―character education‖. And, at the

same time as parenting skills and family life skills are may be waning, we see the elimination of

family studies from many schools. So, educators may see character, moral and parenting education

as more urgent than ―health‖ education.



The Europeans may be ahead of North American conceptions of school health on this question of

values and beliefs as the key elements of school health. The pioneers of the European Health

Promoting Schools Network met in 1990, where a few schools from the Czech Republic, Hungary,

Poland and Slovakia meeting to discuss their efforts. This was the beginning of the Health

Promoting School movement in Europe. Over the years, the European HPS Network has grown

and in 1997, their international conference resolution (Burger et al., 1999) captured and described

the HPS concept in several languages. This statement injected a new aspect to the discussion of

school health promotion. The European statement articulates ten principles of a comprehensive

approach that are more explicit about the social outcomes and values of the process. These include

concepts such as democracy, equity, empowerment, measuring success, collaboration, communities

and sustainability as well as a more traditional approach of defining elements such as school

environment, curriculum and teacher training.



In 1995, 27 countries in the Western Pacific responded to a WHO invitation to collaborate in the

development of health promoting schools. Guidelines for the development of HPS (World Health

Organization, 1995) identified six major elements of the framework including: school health policy,

physical environment, social environment, community, relationships, personal health skills and

health services. This South Pacific approach reflects the common characteristic of all attempts to

define school health promotion by listing some of the essential; ―components‖ that need to make up

the approach.



45

46







More recently, a Report of the 2000 Joint Committee on Health Education and Promotion

Terminology defined Coordinated School Health programs as:



―An organized set of policies, procedures and activities designed to protect, promote, and

improve the health and well-being of students and staff, thus improving a student‘s ability to

learn. It includes but is not limited to comprehensive school health education; school health

services; a healthy school environment; school counselling; psychological and social

services; physical education, school nutrition services; family and community involvement

in school health; and school site health promotion for staff.‖



In Canada, the concept of comprehensiveness and coordination was reinforced with the emergence

of the ―Population Health‖ approach (Health Canada, 1994; 1996). The comprehensive school

health approach was now understood as an application of the population health principles.



A Proposed Addition to the Theory Base for School Health Knowledge



The School Health Research Network (McCall, 2004, Miller, 2003) is attempting to develop a more

―ecological‖ and ―systems-based‖ approach to understanding how school health programs evolve.



Ecological Perspective



While the theory of ecological models has evolved over a long period of time, the application for

health promotion programming has been a recent development and Stokols has become a leader in

developing ecological models for health promotion. The ecological perspective, according to

Stokols (1992), is distinguished by four assumptions:



Assumption One: The health status of individuals and groups "is influenced not only by

environmental factors but also by a variety of personal attributes, including genetic heritage,

psychological dispositions, and behavioral patterns‖. Consequently, health promotion should

focus on the dynamic interplay among diverse environmental and personal factors as

opposed to a framework that focuses "exclusively on environmental, biological, or

behavioral factors.



Assumption Two: The relative scale and complexity of environments may be characterized

in terms of a number of components such as, physical and social components, objective

(actual) or subjective (perceived) qualities, and scale or immediacy to individuals and

groups.



Assumption Three: The effectiveness of an intervention can be enhanced significantly

through the coordination of individuals and groups acting at different levels.



Assumption Four: The interdependencies that exist among immediate and more distant

environments, and the dynamic interrelations between people and their environments need

to be recognized. ―People-environment transactions are characterized by cycles of mutual

influence, whereby the physical and social features of settings directly influence their

occupants' health."‖ Concurrently the participants in settings modify the healthfulness of

their surroundings through their individual and collective actions.‖ In health promotion,

for example, state and national ordinances aimed at promoting environmental quality and





46

47





protecting public health directly influence the occupational safety and health of community

work settings.



Stokols (1996) addressed the challenge of translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community

health programs.

1. Environmental settings have multiple dimensions such as social cohesion, emotional well

being, development maturation, and physical health status.



2. Environmental factors may affect people differently depending on such factors as

personality, health practices, perceptions of the controllability of the environment, and

financial resources.



3. Understanding the dynamic interaction between people and their environment requires the

application of such principles from systems theory as interdependence, deviation

amplification, homeostasis, and negative feedback.



4. This principle recognizes the importance of the interconnections between multiple settings

and life domains, and the close interlinkage between the social and physical facets of those

settings.



5. Social ecology analyses emphasize the integration of multiple levels of analysis (for

example macro level preventive strategies of public health and epidemiology with micro

level individual strategies from medicine) with diverse methodologies (epidemiological

analyses, environmental recordings, medical examinations, questionnaires, and behavioral

observations).



The diagram that follows illustrates this ecological and systems-based understanding of the school

environment. This environment is multi-faceted, interacts with home and the surrounding

community, is influenced by a variety of agencies who are part of professional and semi-

autonomous systems and interacts with the personal characteristics of the child in a variety of ways

that are not uniform for all children or even for the same child in the same day. For interventions

that promote health to be successful in this complex and multi-layered environment, they must be

sustained, coordinated and comprehensive.









47

48









48

49







 Does the research indicate that certain characteristics of the school environment

(ie practices, staff, organization, programs and services etc) interact with

characteristics of the families (eg substance use practices, parenting practices,

socio-economic status, race, religion, etc) and communities (eg. resources,

norms, services/programs) and with characteristics of the child (eg genetics,

intelligence, skills, etc) in ways that promote or discourage substance abuse?



This work being done by the School Health Research Network is similar to the work being done by

Brian Flay in ―triadic influences‖ on behaviour.



Flay (2002) presents the thesis that all behaviors have common causes. Generally agreed-upon

categories consist of individual (biological, personality, character traits, prior behaviors), social

(including family, school, peers, and neighborhood) and broader social environmental influences

(economic, political, religious, etc). Thus, reviews of the predictors of tobacco use, substance use

more generally, violence, sexual behavior, and mental health all propose similar categories of causes

of these behaviors.









He suggests that the more proximal the cause to the behavior, the more likely it is to be specific to a

behavior. For example, attitudes toward substance use will be predictive of substance use, but less

predictive of violence or mental health. More distal influences, on the other hand, are likely to have

more generalizable effects.







49

50



Thus, school/home environment and parental involvement are associated with various factors affecting

children‘s mental and physical well-being. A positive school environment both reduces the risk of

substance use and delinquency and improves academic achievement Parental involvement is also

very important to a child‘s overall behavior in school, motivation to learn, grades and test scores, and

long term success.



Flay also suggests that the school and home environments should not be viewed separately



Some researchers have found that lower income, less educated parents are less involved in their

child‘s school, whereas others have found that SES does not impact parent involvement. However,

family structure does predict parent involvement; single parents are less likely to actively participate in

their child‘s school. Parental school involvement is also affected by parenting style and enthusiasm.

Consequently, the institutions of school and family should not be viewed separately; when teachers

and parents interact more, students perform better in school, but to increase parental involvement, a

school‘s organizational structure and staff attitudes must be positive.



Flay (2002) further suggests that health-compromising behaviors seem to be a "patterned response"

to disadvantaged social contexts.



Those in disadvantaged situations are less likely to "mature out" of problem behaviors as they

approach adulthood than are those from more advantaged social contexts. To the degree that poverty

serves to impair general skills, poor children may grow up with compromised social and economic

skills. The lack of educational opportunities in earlier years may place children of poverty at additional

disadvantage. Effects of poverty on academic achievement and children‘s risk for school dropout are

well documented. African Americans drop out of high school at disproportionately high rates (47%),

finding higher education increasingly inaccessible. Although African-Americans and Latinos currently

compose the bottom of the educational and economic ladder, by the year 2000, they are expected to

represent one third of all work-age youth. Dropouts can expect a life of chronic unemployment or low-

status, low-paying employment and disenfranchisement from society and its institutions. The resulting

depressed self-esteem, dissatisfaction, and alienation experienced by many dropouts can escalate to

disordered, aggressive behaviors and a greater probability of crime.



Flay (2002) argues that it is commonly accepted that levels of involvement in risk behaviors vary by

age.



For example, risk behaviors are rare among preadolescents, peak in mid- or late adolescence, and

decline in young adulthood. However, there are clear variations across behaviors in the age of peak

behavior and the age and extent of decline. Some studies have also reported variations in the

relationships between risk behaviors and demographic factors such as race/ethnicity and age.



Flay (2002) also notes that many theories of youth risky behaviors have been proposed over the

years.



Some of these theories are very focused on proximal cognitive-affective factors such as the Theory of

Reasoned Action and the Theory Planned Behavior. Many theories focus on social factors such as the

social learning theories of Akers and Bandura and broader versions of them such as social cognitive

theory, the multistage social learning model, social control theory, the social development model, and

the social ecology model. Other theories have attempted to be more comprehensive. Some of these

such as the domain model of Huba and Bentler are quite atheoretical, attempting just to accommodate

the many predictors of behavior. Some are more theoretical, the most influential example being Jessor

and Jessor‘s8 problem behavior theory.



If research on youth problem and positive behavior is to advance, our theories need to be integrated

with each other. Fortunately, a rapprochement among multivariate theories is possible because they

are largely complementary, and where one theory is weak, another is usually strong. For instance,

bonding theories can describe why adolescents become involved with deviant peers, social learning

theories can describe how involvement with deviant peers affects an adolescent‘s beliefs about a



50

51



particular behavior, and the cognitive theories describe how attitudes toward the specific behavior can

affect the likelihood of the behavior. The one theory that comes closest to integrating all of the above

theories, and that comprehensively accounts for the multiple empirical findings reviewed above, is the

theory of triadic influence.



Flay and others have reviewed existing theories and showed how these theories could be arranged

into a two-dimensional matrix.



The first dimension represents three types of influence: (a) cultural/attitudinal factors (eg, media

depictions of behavior), (b) interpersonal factors (eg parental warmth), and (c) intrapersonal factors

(eg, low self-concept). The second dimension represents different levels of influence: (a) ultimate

factors that, although beyond the easy control of adolescents, indirectly put adolescents at risk for

problem behavior; (b) distal factors that are one or more steps from causing problem behavior; and (c)

proximal factors that affect problem behavior fairly directly. We then used this matrix to develop the

theory of triadic influence (TTI).



In its simplest form, TTI asserts that the various causes of problem behavior fall into 3 distinct

"streams" of influence: sociocultural factors that affect attitudes toward problem behavior,

interpersonal factors that affect the social pressure adolescents feel to engage in problem behavior,

and intrapersonal factors that affect problem behavior-related self-efficacy or related avoidance skills

(Figure 2). Within each stream of influence, there are 2 substreams, representing control/affective (eg,

values/evaluations, bonding/-motivation to comply) and identity/cognitive (eg, expectancies, normative

beliefs, social skills) elements. TTI then asserts that each stream flows through 7 tiers of influence,

ranging from a few proximal variables that affect problem behavior fairly directly (eg, smoking-related

intentions) to a variety of more distal variables that might affect problem behavior only indirectly (eg

parental divorce). Consistent with cognitive social psychologists, we propose that all influences are

mediated by the cognitive construct of intentions.



Flay also further posits that each instance of a behavior has a feedback influence on its predictors.



Thus, an adolescent‘s experimentation with smoking might change her relationships with peers and

family, her own perceptions of the physiological effects of smoking, and her "knowledge" about the

personal and social effects of use. These changes might occur toward the top of streams of influence

and then filter down just as original causes did. However, they might also occur at the proximal level

— that is, smoking alters one‘s expectancies about and attitudes toward smoking, one‘s expectations

of reinforcement from others, and one‘s self-efficacy for refusing offers to smoke.



In its more complete form (Figure 3), TTI is the most comprehensive model of behavior to date, in that

it provides a single, unifying framework that organizes the constructs from many other theories,

including theories of social control and social bonding, social development, peer clustering,

personality, cognitive-affective predictors, social/cognitive learning, biological vulnerability, and other

integrative theories. Further, TTI also provides dozens of testable hypotheses about causal processes,

including mediation, moderation, and reciprocal effects. Thus, TTI provides the framework for

generating hypotheses and integrating results concerning direct and indirect effects, interactions

among predictors, and feedback effects that represent the immediate and long-term consequences of

prior behavior, including ongoing changes in problem behavior and its predictors. Indeed, the theory

can be applied to all of the behaviors under consideration in this paper (Figure 4). Note, however, that

the more distal/ultimate the predictors, the more commonality they have with the multiple behaviors,

and the more proximal the predictors, the more specific to the behavior they must be.









51

52









Flay concludes that all behaviors have the same causes, especially at the distal/ultimate levels.



Social influences — the social ecology — are particularly important during adolescence. These include

the influences of families, schools, peers, and neighborhoods/communities. All are amenable to

prevention and health promotion efforts. Thus, future prevention and health promotion programs need

to involve whole schools, families, and communities in an integrated and coherent way. Classroom

curriculum can teach content and social skills. To be most effective, curricula must be school-wide,

encompassing every grade level in a carefully scoped and sequenced (developmentally appropriate)

way. Cultural appropriateness may also be important. School-wide climate change can provide a safe

learning environment and provide a common language and consistent reinforcement of positive

behaviors, as can integrated family and community programs. Family programs can also teach

improved parenting skills in a way consistent with a coherent program, and community components

can strengthen school and community links and provide opportunities for students to observe and

engage in community service.



Scheier et al (2002) examine how ―clustering‖ occurs within the school social environment and then

correlate those clusters to drug use. They seek to determine if students nested within schools may

show some resemblance based on common (peer) selection or school climate factors (i.e.,

disciplinary practices, group norms, or rules). Appropriate analyses of any treatment effects must be

statistically correct for the magnitude of clustering within these intact social units (i.e., intraclass

correlation coefficient [ICC]). There is little reported evidence, however, of variation in ICCs that

might occur with studies of racially or geographically diverse populations. The purpose of this study

was to generate estimates of intragroup dependence for drug use and psychosocial measures

(hypothesized mediators) from three separate drug abuse prevention trials. Clustering for the drug



52

53





use measures averaged .02 across study and age-groups (range = .002 to .053) and was equivalently

small for the psychosocial measures (averaging .03 across studies and age-groups; range = .001 to

.149). With few exceptions and across different samples, clustering decreased in magnitude over

time. Clustering was largest for peer smoking and drinking norms among white, suburban youth and

smallest for alcohol expectancies among urban black youth.



 Does the evidence suggest that the setting of the school is an effective place to

deliver education, preventive health services, social support and a protective,

healthy built environment that prevent addictions?



Trevor Hancock, in a review undertaken for the BC Ministry of Health planning found that there is

strong evidence of the impact of school health programs.



Healthy Schools (The Independent Inquiry, 1998) focused a lot of attention on the need to develop

health-promoting schools, in line with the World Health Organization's definition of such schools.

They concluded, based on recent evaluations, that such schools can "lead to gains in people's

knowledge, attitudes, self-esteem and health behaviours, particularly in primary schools". They paid

particular attention to the promotion of life management skills, substance misuse and sex education,

all of which had been evaluated and shown to be generally effective, particularly when they focused

on early education, a broad approach to wider influences on health-related behaviour, a supportive

school setting, quality programs and a comprehensive approach linked to broad life management

skills. They conclude that successful health promotion at school should increase "life skills" with

resultant improvements in many aspects of physical, mental and social health".



In the IUHPE review carried out for the European Union, St. Leger and Nutbeam (2000) state that

school-based interventions would be more effective if:

 the focus is on cognitive and social outcomes as a joint priority with behaviour change

 programs are comprehensive and 'holistic', linking the school with agencies and sectors

dealing with health

 the intervention is substantial, over several school years, and relevant to changes in young

people's social and cognitive development

 adequate attention is given to capacity building through teacher training, and provision of

resources.



They also note that the school environment is a major factor in school health promotion, including

the physical environment, the psychosocial environment and the organizational structure of the

school. Unusually - and very usefully - they point to some approaches to health promotion in

schools that have been shown to be ineffective and should not be used, including:

 programs which are developed in response to a perceived crisis (especially if accompanied

by scare tactics and preaching)

 broader school involvement which was spasmodic and uncoordinated

 programs based largely on external speakers and resources with little involvement of school

staff

 little or no investment in teacher training, and provision of support resources.



Finally, they point out that although integrated, comprehensive school health promotion programs

are needed; much of the research has concentrated on achieving specific behavioural outcomes. The

evidence shows that:

 nutritional practices can be improved, particularly through multifaceted (skill development,

policy supported) programs



53

54





 positive changes in physical activity can be achieved if the intervention is comprehensive

and integrated, uses properly trained personnel, ensures adequate time (60-80 minutes per

week), provides quality facilities and resources and occurs regularly during the week

 even well designed and implemented health promotion programs aimed at tobacco, alcohol

and drug use have "only a modest effect on behavioural goals", and then only if they meet

the same criteria as for nutrition and physical activity programs.



In a chapter on school health programs in its report on promising practices in chronic disease

prevention (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2003), the authors note that "rigorous

studies in the 1990's showed that health education in schools can reduce the prevalence of health-

risk behaviors among young people", including smoking, obesity, alcohol and marijuana use. A set

of promising practices for school health incorporate four key concepts:

 the coordination of multiple components and the use

 of multiple strategies

 the coordination of health and education agencies and other organizations

 the implementation of CDC's school health guidelines, and

 the use of a program planning process to achieve health promotion goals.



A systematic review of 18 strong quality published reviews on the topic of using school-based

programs to reduce adolescent risk behaviour (eight related to smoking/drug use prevention, six

related to sexual risk behaviour prevention, and four related to emotional/behavioural problem

prevention –(Stewart, 2001) found that

 Knowledge based didactic programs have no effect on behaviour.

 Interactive programs are more effective than non-interactive ones.

 Interactive programs based on social learning theory, including developmental, social norms

and social reinforcement are most effective.

 Results are modest.

 Some programs work for some subgroups of youth (e.g. programs focused on delaying

initiation of sexual activity among the uninitiated).



Finally, a review of 12 primary studies regarding the health promoting schools approach and 32

reviews of studies on the effectiveness of school health promotion (Stewart, 2001) found that

"Although the evidence supporting the health promoting schools approach is limited, this approach

is demonstrated to have an impact on the social and physical school environment in areas of staff

development, school lunch program, exercise, and social context. In some studies, this approach had

a positive impact on nutrition, physical activity, and mental and social well-being.‖ and the

reviewers concluded that:

 "Health promotion interventions are most effective when they entail a multifaceted

approach.

 Classroom education should be implemented in combination with changes to the school

environment and/or family/community participation.

 When initiating the health promoting schools approach, it is important to implement all

components inherent to this approach."



 Does the research indicate that certain characteristics of the school environment

(eg. practices, staff, programs and services) interact with the characteristics of the

families (eg. Substance use habits, parenting practices, socio-economic status,

race, religion etc), communities (resources, norms, services/programs) or

children (genetics, intelligence, skills etc) in ways that promote or discourage

substance use?



54

55







General Report and Meta-Analyses on Effectiveness



A review of Australian programs (Midford et al, 2002) identified the conceptual underpinnings of

effective school-based drug education practice in light of contemporary research evidence and the

practical experience of a broad range of drug education stakeholders. The research included a

review of the literature, a national survey of 210 Australian teachers and others involved in drug

education, and structured interviews with 22 key Australian drug education policy stakeholders. The

findings from this research are presented as a list of 16 principles that underpin effective drug

education. In broad terms, drug education should be evidence-based, developmentally appropriate,

sequential, and contextual. Programs should be initiated before drug use commences. Strategies

should be linked to goals and should incorporate harm minimization. Teaching should be interactive

and use peer leaders. The role of the classroom teacher is central. Certain program content is

important, as is social and resistance skills training. Community values, the social context of use,

and the nature of drug harm have to be addressed. Coverage needs to be adequate and supported by

follow-up.



Cuijpers (2002) working in the Netherlands, presents a similar list of ―ingredients‖ for effective

programs. He reviewed three types of studies; meta-analyses (3 studies were included), studies

examining mediating variables of interventions (6 studies), and studies directly comparing

prevention programs with or without specific characteristics (4 studies on boosters, 12 on peer-

versus adult-led programs, and 5 on adding community interventions to school programs). Seven

evidence-based quality criteria were formulated: the effects of a program should have been proven;

interactive delivery methods are superior; the "social influence model" is the best we have; focus on

norms, commitment not to use, and intentions not to use; adding community interventions increases

effects; the use of peer leaders is better; and adding life skills to programs may strengthen effects.



A random control trial conducted by Furr-Holden et al (2004) suggest that developmentally

appropriate programs that combine instruction with family involvement can be effective with

reducing experimentation with illicit drugs.



Ellickson et al, 2003, have reported on a large scale, random controlled trial in Dakota that reported

that a grade 7 and 8 program of 14 lessons can have an impact on cigarette and marijuana use

initiation, current and regular cigarette use, and alcohol misuse. Reductions ranged from 19% to

39%. Program effects were not significant for initial and current drinking or for current and regular

marijuana use.



Bruvold (1990) found in a non-quantitative meta analysis that, at that time, different programs had

different effects on knowledge or attitude/beliefs. He noted that recent meta-analytic reviews

indicate that information-focused interventions have more impact upon knowledge but less upon

attitudes and behavior whereas alternative interventions have less impact upon knowledge but more

upon attitudes and behavior. Bruvold replicated these meta-analyses on eight risk-reduction

programs meeting six standard methodological requirements for evaluation research in use at that

time in California..



Cuijpers P (2002) reviewed and compared peer-led and adult led prevention programs. They report

that several studies have suggested that peer-led drug prevention programs are more effective than

adult-led programs, but the evidence is not conclusive. Cuijpers presents a meta-analysis of studies

that compare drug prevention programs led by peers to the same programs led by adults. Twelve

studies were identified in a systematic literature search. The quality of these studies was not



55

56





optimal, and the interventions and target groups differed considerably among studies. Overall, peer-

led programs were found to be somewhat more effective than adult-led programs (standardized

difference d: 0.24). Large differences between studies were found, with some studies indicating

greater effects for peer-led programs and other studies showing greater effects for adult-led

programs. It is concluded that the effectiveness of a prevention program is determined by several

characteristics of the programs. The leader may constitute one of those characteristics.



McBride (2003) provides a systematic review of the school drug education literature to June 2001

and identifies components that have the potential for creating effective drug education programmes

in schools. The review adopts a well-defined search methodology, specific selection criteria, and

has made a series of recommendations based on the findings of past reviews and recent primary

studies that met the selection criteria. The review is inclusive of reviews and recent primary studies

that involved young people in school settings that encompassed a classroom intervention, included

drug-related behavioural measures and had a positive impact on students' drug-related behaviours.

The review identifies several areas that should be the focus of future programmes. These include

timing and programming issues, content and delivery issues, teacher training, and dissemination.

There is much refinement that can occur in school drug education implementation and research. The

way forward is to continue to create and test interventions that bring together all components of the

development, implementation and evaluation of school drug education that are effective in creating

behaviour change, and that are practical to the school setting.



Nation et al (2003) have identified a number of prevention principles that should be respected in

any program design. Using a review-of-reviews approach across 4 areas (substance abuse, risky

sexual behavior, school failure, and juvenile delinquency and violence), the authors identified 9

characteristics that were consistently associated with effective prevention programs: Programs were

comprehensive, included varied teaching methods, provided sufficient dosage, were theory driven,

provided opportunities for positive relationships, were appropriately timed, were socio-culturally

relevant, included outcome evaluation, and involved well-trained staff. This synthesis can inform

the planning and implementation of problem-specific prevention interventions, provide a rationale

for multi-problem prevention programs, and serve as a basis for further research.



This list of principles is similar to a Canadian compendium of best practices (Roberts et al, 2001)

The list of principles that they recommend areas follows:



Build a Strong Framework

 Address protective factors, risk factors and resiliency:

Focus on the factors that most directly promote resiliency or, conversely, contribute to

substance use problems in the population of interest.

 Seek comprehensiveness:

Tie activities to complementary efforts by others in the community for a holistic approach, and

seek support through agency policy and municipal and other government regulation.

 Ensure sufficient program duration and intensity:

Make certain there is sufficient contact time with participants; age appropriate coverage

needs to occur through childhood and adolescence and needs to be intensified as the risk of

participants increases.



Strive for Accountability

 Base program on accurate information:

Base program aims on reliable and, ideally, local information on the nature and extent of

youth substance use, problems associated with use and user characteristics.

 Set clear and realistic goals:

Set goals, objectives and activities that address local circumstances, are linked logically and

are measurable and time-limited.





56

57



 Monitor and evaluate the program:

Evaluate the process and impact of efforts and ensure that costs are in line with program

benefits.

 Address program sustainability from the beginning:

From the outset, work toward long-term sustainability and integration of the program into the

core activities of the relevant organization in the community.



Understand and Involve Young People

 Account for the implications of adolescent psychosocial development:

See substance use issues within the context of the stages of adolescent development in

order to respond most effectively.

 Recognize youth perceptions of substance use:

In order to be credible with participants, programs need to take account of the way young

people view the benefits and the risks associated with substance use.

 Involve youth in program design and implementation:

Young people need to see themselves, and to be seen by others, as their own best resource

for minimizing any harm associated with substance use.



Create an Effective Process

 Develop credible messages:

Both the explicit and implied messages delivered in a program need to be viewed as realistic

and credible by participants.

 Combine knowledge and skill development:

Skill development needs to be a central element in programs and it needs to be

accompanied by accurate, objective information.

 Use an interactive group process:

Engage and involve participants in skill development activities and discussions.

 Give attention to teacher or leader qualities and training:

Select and train leaders or teachers who demonstrate competence, empathy and an ability

to promote the involvement and interaction of young people



The National Institute on Drug Abuse in the United States has published a similar list of prevention

principles thatr are based on research evidence. They are also summarized below:



Lessons from Prevention Research*



The principles listed below are the result of long-term research studies on the origins of drug abuse

behaviors and the common elements of effective prevention programs. These principles were

developed to help prevention practitioners use the results of prevention research to address drug use

among children and adolescents in communities across the country. Parents, educators, and

community leaders can use these principles to help guide their thinking, planning, selection, and

delivery of drug abuse prevention programs at the community level.



Prevention programs are generally designed for use in a particular setting, such as at home, at school,

or within the community, but can be adapted for use in several settings. In addition, programs are also

designed with the intended audience in mind: for everyone in the population, for those at greater risk,

and for those already involved with drugs or other problem behaviors. Some programs can be geared

for more than one audience.



Principle 1 - Prevention programs should enhance protective factors and reverse or reduce risk

factors (Hawkins et al. 2002).



 The risk of becoming a drug abuser involves the relationship among the number and type of

risk factors (e.g., deviant attitudes and behaviors) and protective factors (e.g., parental

support) (Wills et al. 1996).

 The potential impact of specific risk and protective factors changes with age. For example,

risk factors within the family have greater impact on a younger child, while association with







57

58



drug-abusing peers may be a more significant risk factor for an adolescent (Gerstein and

Green 1993; Dishion et al. 1999).

 Early intervention with risk factors (e.g., aggressive behavior and poor self-control) often has

a greater impact than later intervention by changing a child‘s life path (trajectory) away from

problems and toward positive behaviors (Ialongo et al. 2001).

 While risk and protective factors can affect people of all groups, these factors can have a

different effect depending on a person‘s age, gender, ethnicity, culture, and environment

(Beauvais et al. 1996; Moon et al. 1999).



Principle 2 - Prevention programs should address all forms of drug abuse, alone or in combination,

including the underage use of legal drugs (e.g., tobacco or alcohol); the use of illegal drugs (e.g.,

marijuana or heroin); and the inappropriate use of legally obtained substances (e.g., inhalants),

prescription medications, or over-the-counter drugs (Johnston et al. 2002).



Principle 3 - Prevention programs should address the type of drug abuse problem in the local

community, target modifiable risk factors, and strengthen identified protective factors (Hawkins et al.

2002).



Principle 4 - Prevention programs should be tailored to address risks specific to population or

audience characteristics, such as age, gender, and ethnicity, to improve program effectiveness

(Oetting et al. 1997).



Principle 5 - Family-based prevention programs should enhance family bonding and relationships and

include parenting skills; practice in developing, discussing, and enforcing family policies on substance

abuse; and training in drug education and information (Ashery et al. 1998).



Family bonding is the bedrock of the relationship between parents and children. Bonding can be

strengthened through skills training on parent supportiveness of children, parent-child communication,

and parental involvement (Kosterman et al. 1997).



 Parental monitoring and supervision are critical for drug abuse prevention. These skills

can be enhanced with training on rule-setting; techniques for monitoring activities; praise

for appropriate behavior; and moderate, consistent discipline that enforces defined family

rules (Kosterman et al. 2001).

 Drug education and information for parents or caregivers reinforces what children are

learning about the harmful effects of drugs and opens opportunities for family discussions

about the abuse of legal and illegal substances (Bauman et al. 2001).

 Brief, family-focused interventions for the general population can positively change

specific parenting behavior that can reduce later risks of drug abuse (Spoth et al. 2002b).



Principle 6 - Prevention programs can be designed to intervene as early as preschool to address risk

factors for drug abuse, such as aggressive behavior, poor social skills, and academic difficulties

(Webster-Stratton 1998; Webster-Stratton et al. 2001).



Principle 7 - Prevention programs for elementary school children should target improving academic

and social-emotional learning to address risk factors for drug abuse, such as early aggression,

academic failure, and school dropout. Education should focus on the following skills (Conduct

Problems Prevention Research Group 2002; Ialongo et al. 2001):



 self-control;

 emotional awareness;

 communication;

 social problem-solving; and

 academic support, especially in reading.









58

59



Principle 8 - Prevention programs for middle or junior high and high school students should increase

academic and social competence with the following skills (Botvin et al. 1995; Scheier et al. 1999):



 study habits and academic support;

 communication;

 peer relationships;

 self-efficacy and assertiveness;

 drug resistance skills;

 reinforcement of anti-drug attitudes; and

 strengthening of personal commitments against drug abuse.



Principle 9 - Prevention programs aimed at general populations at key transition points, such as the

transition to middle school, can produce beneficial effects even among high-risk families and children.

Such interventions do not single out risk populations and, therefore, reduce labeling and promote

bonding to school and community (Botvin et al. 1995; Dishion et al. 2002).



Principle 10 - Community prevention programs that combine two or more effective programs, such as

family-based and school-based programs, can be more effective than a single program alone

(Battistich et al. 1997).



Principle 11 - Community prevention programs reaching populations in multiple settings—for

example, schools, clubs, faith-based organizations, and the media—are most effective when they

present consistent, community-wide messages in each setting (Chou et al. 1998).



Principle 12 - When communities adapt programs to match their needs, community norms, or differing

cultural requirements, they should retain core elements of the original research-based intervention

(Spoth et al. 2002b), which include:



 Structure (how the program is organized and constructed);

 Content (the information, skills, and strategies of the program); and

 Delivery (how the program is adapted, implemented, and evaluated).



Principle 13 - Prevention programs should be long-term with repeated interventions (i.e., booster

programs) to reinforce the original prevention goals. Research shows that the benefits from middle

school prevention programs diminish without followup programs in high school (Scheier et al. 1999).



Principle 14 - Prevention programs should include teacher training on good classroom management

practices, such as rewarding appropriate student behavior. Such techniques help to foster students‘

positive behavior, achievement, academic motivation, and school bonding (Lalongo et al. 2001).



Principle 15 - Prevention programs are most effective when they employ interactive techniques, such

as peer discussion groups and parent role-playing, that allow for active involvement in learning about

drug abuse and reinforcing skills (Botvin et al. 1995).



Principle 16 - Research-based prevention programs can be cost-effective. Similar to earlier research,

recent research shows that for each dollar invested in prevention, a savings of up to $10 in treatment

for alcohol or other substance abuse can be seen (Aos et al. 2001; Hawkins et al. 1999; Pentz 1998;

Spoth et al. 2002a).



* Information for this InfoFacts was taken directly from the publication, Preventing Drug Use among

Children and Adolescents, A Research-Based Guide for Parents, Educators, and Community Leaders,

Second Edition, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2003.



In an article published in Spanish, Fernandez et al (2002) describe the impact and associated

characteristics of preventive programs addressing consumption of tobacco, alcohol and illegal drugs

is a major public health problem in developed countries. The aim of the study is to describe the



59

60





impact and associated characteristics of preventive programs addressed at those problems in the

school setting. Meta-analysis focusing on evaluations of programs focusing on smoking, alcohol

and/or cannabis at the school setting are reviewed. The search was done at Cochrane Library and

Medline databases of articles published between 1993 and 1999, and including as keywords

programs, education, drugs prevention, prevention, smoking, alcohol, school, adolescence,

teenagers, young people, evaluation, health education, effectiveness, review, meta-analysis. We

found 5 meta-analysis of programs summarizing the effect of preventive programs, most of them

dealing with legal and illegal drugs. However, most of the interventions reporting changes in

behavior measured only smoking. More effective interventions addressed social influences, used

active methodology and were implemented by teachers or peers. The importance of booster

sessions, the quality of implementation and thorough evaluation is stressed. Overall, meta-analysis

of evaluated programs shows a small effect, although the population impact may be relevant..



4. Select population/sub-populations



This sub-section discusses the application of the population health principle of selecting a

population or sub-population for the health-promoting interventions as well as the element of a

comprehensive approach to school-based health promotion that suggests that programs should

be adapted to meet the needs of sub-populations as well as adapted to ensure that delivery of

health and other services is “friendly” to children and youth so that they will be encouraged to

access those services.



Are findings in this sub-section are:

o the research evidence is not clear as to whether programs should seek to include

a wide range of audiences or focus on those children who are at higher risk.

There is some evidence that suggests that universal programs should target

middle school students.

o Several studies show that programs and services can be adapted to meet special

needs based on culture, age and disadvantage. Research also indicates that

“universal” programs may have some positive effect on “indicated” populations

and that “indicated” programs can have an impact on a wider audience.



 Does the evidence suggest that there are sub-populations within the children/youth

population that would benefit more from school-based or school-linked policies,

programs and services?



Universal vs Indicated Approach



A question often debated in respect to school-based programs is whether schools should focus

solely on ―universal‖ messages about delaying onset or experimentation with alcohol and drugs or

whether they should also focus on the needs of students who are ―indicating‖ that they may be

abusing substances.



Poulin & Elliott (1997) call for a comprehensive approach to school and community prevention that

incorporates a variety of interventions for a variety of sub-populations. They use the Atlantic Drug

Use Survey to characterize adolescent drug use in terms of a risk continuum and to explore the

rationale for harm reduction as a potential approach for school-based drug prevention. The risk

continuum was also used as a policy framework. They conclude that there is a need for integrated

school- and community-based drug prevention programs, with goals, strategies and outcome

measures capturing the full spectrum of patterns of use and levels of risk among subgroups of the

adolescent student population



60

61







The prevention principles recommended by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (2003) quotes

several sources to suggest that programs should address all forms of harmful substance use

(Johnson, 2001) whilw tailoring their messages to specific drug problems in the local community

(Harkins et al, 2002)as well as to specific risks or local sub-population characteristics (oetting et al,

1999)..For most local prevention program managers implementing these three principles would be a

formidable task each year, so it is suggested here that further research is needed into the critical

mass, conditions and stable content of local; programs that can be sustained.



Griffen et al (2003), in a random controlled trial on the impact of a ―universal‖ prevention program on high

risk children may have spiked a myth about the inappropriateness of such programs for youth who are in

higher risk situations. The effectiveness of a universal drug abuse preventive intervention was

examined among youth from 29 inner-city middle schools participating in a randomized, controlled

prevention trial. A subsample of youth (21% of full sample) was identified as being at high risk for

substance use initiation based on exposure to substance-using peers and poor academic performance

in school. The prevention program taught drug refusal skills, antidrug norms, personal self-

management skills, and general social skills. RESULTS: Findings indicated that youth at high risk

who received the program (n = 426) reported less smoking, drinking, inhalant use, and polydrug use

at the one-year follow-up assessment compared to youth at high risk in the control condition that

did not receive the intervention (n = 332). Results indicate that a universal drug abuse prevention

program is effective for minority, economically disadvantaged, inner-city youth who are at higher

than average risk for substance use initiation.



Thompson et al (1997) examined the net effects of refining a high school-based indicated drug

prevention program. The Personal Growth Class (PGC), tailored to meet the needs of high-risk

youth, was designed to increase control of drug use, school performance, and emotional well-being.

The program integrates social support and life-skills training. Process evaluation revealed the need

for program enhancements that led to greater impacts of the program. The results support arguments

that effective indicated prevention programs should target specific high-risk youth employing

strategies to counteract the multifaceted risk factors they experience and enhance needed protective

factors.



An earlier review (Lamarine, 1993) reflected the discussion of the times when she suggested that

school programs should focus on children and youth who show (indicate) signs of more

susceptibility to substance abuse. She suggests that identification could be done as early as early

childhood.



Dent et al (2001) found that a successful classroom-based prevention program developed for youth

at alternative high schools (high risk) to youth at general high schools. A replication of a previously

tested prevention program in a general high school population was conducted with 1-year follow-up

data. Classrooms within each of three schools were randomly assigned to two conditions, classroom

education or standard care control. Statistically significant effects on alcohol and illicit drug use

were achieved in this population through a 1-year period following the program, although effects

were not achieved on cigarette smoking and marijuana use. These results suggest that this program

(Project Towards No Drug Abuse) has applicability to a wide range of older teens.



Gottfredson & Wilson (2003) using meta-analytic techniques, summarize the results from 94 studies

of school-based prevention activities that examined alcohol or other drug use outcomes. They set

out to determine what features of school-based substance abuse prevention programs are related to

variability in the size of program effects, It asked (1) Which populations (e.g., high risk vs. general



61

62





population) should be targeted for prevention services? (2) What is the best age or developmental

stage for prevention programming? (3) Does program duration matter? and (4) Does the role of the

person delivering the service (e.g., teacher, law enforcement officer, peer) matter? The results

suggest that targeting middle school aged children and designing programs that can be delivered

primarily by peer leaders will increase the effectiveness of school-based substance use prevention

programs. The results also imply that such programs need not be lengthy. The evidence related to

the targeting issue is sparse, but suggests that, at least for programs teaching social competency

skills, targeting higher risk youths may yield stronger effects than targeting the general population.

Suggestions for future research are offered.



Lisnov et al (1998) reported that students who participated in the DARE and Captain Clean

programs felt that school-based programs were far more effective in prevention than television ads,

testimonials by famous people, billboards, and print ads displayed on public transportation. Students

perceived the two school-based programs, Project DARE (a national program conducted through

local police departments) and Captain Clean (an intense live theater program coordinated with

student participation), as being equally effective overall, although the interactive theater program

was rated as significantly better at encouraging students to talk about their feelings concerning

substance abuse issues and at relating to the students' ethnic/racial backgrounds. When students

were categorized according to frequency of alcohol use, nonusers, infrequent users, and frequent

users differed significantly in their ratings of the school-based programs.



Snow et al (1997) use an amenability to treatment model that stipulates that interventions may be

differentially effective for subgroups of individuals with similar characteristics. Using such a

model, they tested the impact of two social-cognitive interventions implemented in the sixth

(Intervention I) and eighth/ninth (Intervention II) grades on students' skill acquisition and on their

ninth and tenth grade substance use. A randomized factorial design was used to examine main and

interaction effects within the context of student family household status and gender. Positive

program effects were found for Intervention II on skill acquisition and overall drug involvement.

Interaction effects of Intervention II x Family Household Status provided support for the

amenability to treatment model, but no support for the model was observed based on student

gender. Possible explanations for the study findings are presented and future research directions are

proposed to address why differences emerge in amenability to intervention and why such

differences occur for specific subgroups.



 Has the research described special programs that were able to influence the substance use of

various groups who may be at higher risk of problem substance use of addictions?

 Are there comprehensive models that address specific addiction issues such as FASD,

children of alcoholics, drinking and driving, experimentation with illicit drugs, abuse of

prescription or medications etc?



Marlatt et al (2003) have described how substance abuse prevention programs can be successfuly

adapted to fit with cultural traditions of aboriginal students. Similarly, Botvin et al (2001) reported

on how a program originally designed for a white middle class population can be adopted for a

minority, disadvantaged and inner city popultation.



Hecht ET AL (2003) report on the evaluation of a culturally grounded prevention intervention

targeting substance use among urban middle-school students. The curriculum consists of 10 lessons

promoting antidrug norms and teaching resistance and other social skills, reinforced by booster

activities and a media campaign. Three versions were delivered: Mexican American, combined

African American and European American, and Multicultural. Thirty-five middle schools were

randomly assigned to 1 of the 3 versions or the control. Students completed baseline and follow-up



62

63





questionnaires over a 2-year period (total 6,035 respondents). Analyses utilizing a generalized

estimating equations approach assessed the overall effectiveness of cultural grounding and the

cultural matching hypothesis. Support was found for the intervention's overall effectiveness, with

statistically significant effects on gateway drug use as well as norms, attitudes, and resistance

strategies but with little support for the cultural matching hypothesis. Specific contrasts found the

Mexican American and Multicultural versions impacted the most outcomes.



Horn & Kolbo (2000) have developed a conceptual model for developing programs for children of

addicts. A Cumulative Strategies Model posits four basic principals for effective prevention for high

risk children and guides prevention program design. Representing a Cumulative Strategies Model,

described herein is a multicomponent prevention program that is theory-driven, risk-based, and

targets children affected by familial alcohol abuse. Three components of this program and specific

methods of implementing each component are discussed, and field reactions are reviewed.



Emshoff & Price (1999) report on a literature search including both published and unpublished

descriptions and evaluations of interventions with Children of Alcoholic (COAs). The scope and

nature of the problems of growing up in an alcoholic home are presented. The risk and protective

factors associated with this population have been used as a foundation for preventive and treatment

interventions. The most common modality of prevention and intervention programs is the short-

term small group format. Programs for COAs should include the basic components of information,

problem- and emotion-focused coping skills, and social and emotional support. Physicians are in a

unique position to identify and provide basic services and referrals for Children of Alcoholics

(COA‘s). School settings are the most common intervention sites, but family and broad-based

community programs also have shown promise in alcohol and other drug prevention. They report

that several COA interventions have demonstrated positive results with respect to a variety of

measures including knowledge of program content, social support, coping skills, and emotional

functioning. But they also suggest that rigorous studies are needed to understand better the complex

ways children deal with parental alcoholism.



Zapert et al (2002) have described six different sub-groups of adolescents and their escalating or

stable use of substances. Six distinct clusters of substance users emerged-2 groups representing

relatively stable patterns of substance use from early through late adolescence (ie., nonusers and

alcohol experimenters), and 4 groups of users showing escalating patterns of substance use (i.e., low

escalators, early starters, late starters, and high escalators). Their work demonstrates the usefulness

of studying patterns of use across multiple substances, and underscores the importance of building

classification schemes based on repeated measurements of substance use to reflect changes over

time.









63

64



5. Integrate with other Health Issues



This sub-section address the population health principle that, whenever possible, prevention

and promotion efforts in regards to one health problem should be integrated with efforts to

address another health problem, where the research shows that the etiology of the behaviours

suggests that root causes are similar or the same and where, systems theory and strategic

analysis suggests that such integration is possible. One of the elements of a comprehensive

approach to school health promotion suggests that we view children and youth in a holistic way

and do not try to categorize them by their health or social problems, particularly during their

turbulent, changeable growing periods. An important learning from systems based theory is that

managers of “profession al bureaucracies” tend to protect their systems from external

disturbances. Consequently,, it makes sense to present “new” health problems in a way that

links them to what the system is already doing on another problem or within the context of an

established program. Our model of organizational capacity suggests that systems need to

identify and anticipate emerging health issues in advance, lest they force their way into the

system through a crisis or external public pressure. Strategic thinking also suggests that we need

to consider the impact of combining and identifying health issues through the lens of how

profile, human resources, funding, control and influence will be re-distributed so that we can

anticipate resistance or early adoption.



Our findings in this sub-section are closely related to the next, where we conclude that a

combination of instruction in social skills/competence as well as character education or “social,

emotional learning” with far greater attention to the psychosocial climate of the school and a

comprehensive approach to mental health services and promotion. Based on this review, we

believe that this combination of issues and approaches holds the most promise. On a more

specific level, the research clearly indicates that tobacco use, alcohol/drug use and other social

behavioral problems are closely related and could be addressed efficiently in comprehensive

programs.



 Does combining the prevention of substance abuse/addictions with other health issues

such as social skills, life skills, mental health, tobacco or within a risk/social behaviour

framework lead to enhanced intervention outcomes on addictions or on overall health?



 Does the research evidence truly suggest that taking a holistic view of the child,

recognizing that substance abuse is usually part of a larger health, social or

developmental problem is more effective?



Research on school health promotion (WHO School Health Working Group, 1996, Allensworth et

al, 1997) has often told us that there are ―clusters‖ of ―health-reducing‖ and ―health enhancing‖

behaviours and conditions. But we don‘t know which single or coordinated set of interventions can

best influence those behavioural and environmental clusters. The research cited here and in the next

sub-section may indicate that some of the linkages are beginning to become clearer, at least in

respect to social behaviours such as alcohol, drug and tobacco use.



Flay (2002) presents the thesis that all behaviors have common causes.



Generally agreed-upon categories consist of individual (biological, personality, character traits, prior

behaviors), social (including family, school, peers, and neighborhood) and broader social

environmental influences (economic, political, religious, etc). Thus, reviews of the predictors of

tobacco use, substance use more generally, violence, sexual behavior,and mental health all propose

similar categories of causes of these behaviors.He suggests that all behaviors, not just problem







64

65



behaviors, are related to each other. They are correlated, and they also cause each other. That is,

whatever one occurs first will be predictive of others.



He also shows the strong linkages between alcohol /drug use and other risk behaviours.



About a third of youths committing serious crimes consume alcohol just before the offense. More than

70% of teen suicides involve frequent use of alcohol or drugs. Nearly 40% of drownings involve use of

alcohol. Alcohol and drug use are the best predictors of early sexual activity and are associated with

more unplanned pregnancies, more sexually transmitted diseases, more HIV infection, and greater

school dropout than any other causal factor.



Flay concludes that all behaviors have the same causes, especially at the distal/ultimate levels.



Social influences — the social ecology — are particularly important during adolescence. These include

the influences of families, schools, peers, and neighborhoods/communities. All are amenable to

prevention and health promotion efforts. Thus, future prevention and health promotion programs need

to involve whole schools, families, and communities in an integrated and coherent way. Classroom

curriculum can teach content and social skills. To be most effective, curricula must be schoolwide,

encompassing every grade level in a carefully scoped and sequenced (developmentally appropriate)

way. Cultural appropriateness may also be important. School-wide climate change can provide a safe

learning environment and provide a common language and consistent reinforcement of positive

behaviors, as can integrated family and community programs. Family programs can also teach

improved parenting skills in a way consistent with a coherent program, and community components

can strengthen school and community links and provide opportunities for students to observe and

engage in community service.









65

66





Flay also suggests that although evidence for relationships among behaviors is strong, the direction

of the relationships is often unclear.



Does poor academic achievement lead to increased disruptive behavior, violence, and/or substance

use, or vice versa? He concludes that modern theories of behavioral development would suggest that

these relationships are, in fact, bidirectional, with one causal direction being dominant at some

developmental stages and the other direction at other developmental stages. For example, it is quite

reasonable to expect initiation of any of the problem behaviors to be predicted by prior mental health

or school performance, but for continued problem behavior to, in turn, influence future mental health or

school performance. He concludes that because all adolescent behaviors are interrelated, future

prevention and health promotion programs should address all youth behavioral development in a

comprehensive and coherent way.



Botvin et al (1998) have reviewed several studies concerning the etiology of tobacco, alcohol, and

drug use indicate that a variety of cognitive, attitudinal, social, personality, pharmacological, and

developmental factors promote and help maintain drug use (Baumrind and Moselle 1985; Blum and

Richards 1979; Jessor and Jessor 1977; Jones and Battjes 1985; Kandel 1978; Meyer and Mirin

1979; Newcomb and Bentler 1988; Wechsler 1976). They suggest that it ―seems logical to conclude

that the most effective prevention strategy would be one that is comprehensive, targeting a broad

array of etiologic determinants. They go on to say that ―research has been conducted over more than

15 years with broader based prevention approaches that emphasize the teaching of generic personal

and social skills either alone (Caplan et al. 1992) or in combination with components from the

social influence model (Botvin et al. 1980, 1983, 1984a, b, 1990b; Gilchrist and Schinke 1983;

Schinke and Gilchrist 1983, 1984). This type of prevention strategy is more comprehensive than

traditional cognitive/affective approaches or social influence training approaches. Moreover, unlike

affective education approaches, which rely on experiential classroom activities, these approaches

emphasize the use of proven cognitive behavioral skills training methods.‖



Cunningham & Henggeler (2001) suggest that combining drug abuse prevention with anti-bullying

may be effective. They describe the implementation of a collaborative preventive intervention

project (Healthy Schools) designed to reduce levels of bullying and related antisocial behaviors in

children attending two urban middle schools serving primarily African American students. These

schools have high rates of juvenile violence, as reflected by suspensions and expulsions for

behavioral problems. Using a quasi-experimental design, empirically based drug and violence

prevention programs, Bullying Prevention and Project ALERT, are being implemented at each

middle school. In addition, an intensive evidence-based intervention, multisystemic therapy, is

being used to target students at high risk of expulsion and court referral. Hence, the proposed

project integrates both universal approaches to prevention and a model that focuses on indicated

cases. Targeted outcomes, by which the effectiveness of this comprehensive school-based program

will be measured, are reduced youth violence, reduced drug use, and improved psychosocial

functioning of participating youth.



Flay et al (2001) report on the effectiveness of an integrated comprehensive school model for

character development, problem behavior prevention, and academic achievement enhancement. The

Positive Action program consists of a school curriculum, together with schoolwide climate, family,

and community components. As evaluated here, the yearly K-6 curriculum consists of over 140

fifteen-to-twenty-minute lessons per year delivered in school classrooms on an almost daily basis.

The program is based on theories of self-concept, learning, behavior, and school ecology. We use a

matched control design and school-level achievement and disciplinary data to evaluate program

effects on student performance and behavior in two separate school districts. The program improved

achievement by 16% in one district and 52% in another, and reduced disciplinary referrals by 78%





66

67





in one district and 85% in the other. We discuss implications of these replicated findings for the

prevention of substance abuse and violence, the improvement of school performance, and the

reform of American schools.



The next sub-section of this report examines how instructional and other approaches to preventing

harmful substance use have evolved from a focus on providing information on drugs, to developing

values and specific skills to a more general approach to developing social skills and competencies. In

that section we will suggest that attention also be paid to the “social and emotional learning” of

children, which is a new trend in education to focus on issues such as character education and to their

overall mental health. As part of that broader approach the trend in health promotion circles to focus

on “youth development” would appear to be part of that emerging strategy.



 Does the research describe how systems can identify and act upon emerging issues related to

addictions, children/youth and schools? Are there planned or regular ways that the systems,

ministries and agencies? Are there examples of systems, ministries that have consciously

chosen to focus on an aspect of addictions and children and youth for a defined strategic

reason rather than just convenience, urgency or external funding? Are there studies that

show how alcohol/drugs can successfully compete or cooperate with other health issues

being addressed by the school system?



This review did not locate any records addressing these questions derived from systems and strategic

thinking. More searching was beyond the scope of this inquiry but such further work is recommended. This

research should examine the bi-directional nature of the influences between and among negative of positive

behaviours to determine the timing and best approach for emphasizing one or the other in the development of

children and youth.





6. Select the Issue/Aspect and Approach



This sub-section continues the discussion from the previous, with a lengthy analysis of

approaches to drug education that have been taken in the past. (Much of this analysis is

provided by Botvin et al, 1998) and has been quoted or summarized here.) However, this

section also extends that analysis to suggest that the “integrated social influences/social

competence enhancement” approach recommended by Botvin et al is coordinated with an

emerging trend in education to teach students about character, caring and respect, as well as

with a focus on the overall mental health of students and on improving the psycho-social

environment of the school. Fortunately, in Canada, there are several research projects exploring

these new strategies that can and should be linked in with any activities undertaken in response

to this review.



Our findings here are two fold:

 a combination of social skills development, emotional and social learning, attention to

the psycho-social climate in the school and the provision of comprehensive mental

health services and programs offers the most solid evidence base that such an approach

would reduce harmful substance use

 the “harm reduction” approach is promising insofar as it helps to focus and clarify the

health messages being delivered to youth but this approach still needs further testing

and evaluation.



 Are there different impacts for programs based on different approaches (eg delay

of experimentation, abstinence, moderation or harm reduction) for all school-

aged children/youth or sub-populations within the children/youth population?



67

68





 Does an approach based on life skills/social skills/social influences work more

effectively?

 Does an approach based on specific resistance skills have an impact?

 Should programs focus on so-called ―gateway drugs‖ such as tobacco or

marijuana?

 Should a program focus on addictive behaviours? alcohol? all drugs? Illicit

drugs? Emerging drugs that youth may not know about?



Botvin et al (1998) have described the evolution of different approaches to school-based substance

abuse prevention. These approaches include:

 Information Dissemination Approaches

 Affective Education Approaches

 Social Influence Approaches

o Correcting Normative Expectations.

o Psychological Inoculation.

o Resistance Skills Training.

 Integrated Social Influence/Competence Enhancement Approaches



Information Dissemination Approaches



Botvin et al (1998) describe this approach.



Growing out of an educational tradition, the most common approach to drug abuse prevention found in most

schools has had a singular focus, that is, providing information about drugs and the consequences of drug

abuse. The focus of tobacco, alcohol, and drug education programs (as they are frequently called by school

personnel) involves factual information about the adverse health, social, and legal consequences of drug

use without providing any skill training relevant to drug prevention. Fear arousal strategies are frequently

incorporated into these programs in an effort to dramatize the deleterious effects of drug use and motivate

(i.e., scare) adolescents into remaining abstinent. Other topics usually covered in informational programs

include patterns of drug use, the pharmacology of various drugs of abuse, and methods of using drugs.

While most programs have a distinctly antidrug use orientation, some programs endeavor to present the

facts in a balanced and neutral manner. Such approaches to the problem of drug abuse rest on an implicit

assumption that drug use and even drug abuse are the end result of a logical decision-making process. It is

further assumed that if adolescents were better informed about the dangers of using drugs they would make

a rational and informed decision to remain drug free.



According to previous reviews of the drug abuse prevention literature (Botvin and Botvin 1992;

Dielman 1994; Dryfoos 1993; Ellickson 1993) and the results of meta-analytic studies (e.g., Bangert-

Drowns 1988; Tobler 1986), evaluation studies have consistently shown that prevention approaches

that rely exclusively or primarily on the information dissemination model do not prevent, reduce, or

deter drug use. Although virtually all information-based prevention programs are able to demonstrate

an increase in knowledge, and some studies have demonstrated an impact on attitudes in a direction

consistent with nondrug use, there is little evidence indicating that they can have any meaningful

impact on drug use behavior. The results of these studies should not be taken to mean that knowledge

or information does not have a role in prevention programs. Rather, they underscore the fact that there

are multiple factors promoting adolescent drug use and that prevention approaches based on more

complex models of drug initiation are required in order for prevention efforts to be effective.



Affective Education Approaches



Botvin et al describe this approach:



During the 1970s, the nature of drug education began to change in some quarters. This change grew

out of a dissatisfaction with the information approach and a recognition that some individuals were

more likely to become involved with drugs than others. While drug education efforts based on teaching



68

69



facts focused largely on drugs and their effects, affective education involved a change in perspective

and focus from drugs to the psychosocial needs of the individual. Implicit in the affective education

model of drug initiation was the underlying belief that individuals with a certain constellation of

characteristics were at risk for becoming drug users and that the solution was to be found in programs

promoting affective development. In contrast to information-based approaches, affective education

emphasizes personal and social development in order to either overcome personal deficiencies

believed to increase risk for using drugs or provide individuals with characteristics hypothesized to be

associated with decreased risk of using drugs such as high self-esteem, personal insight, and self-

awareness. Thus, the emphasis is on the affective rather than the cognitive.



An interesting feature of affective education is that it was more comprehensive than information

dissemination approaches and recognized the role of psychosocial factors in the etiology of drug

abuse. It also foreshadowed the expanded social skills training approach to drug abuse prevention,

which has demonstrated significant reductions in both the incidence and prevalence of drug use. For

example, components of affective education approaches that are used in some of the most successful

prevention programs include decisionmaking, effective communication, and assertiveness. However,

studies evaluating the effectiveness of affective education have produced disappointing results. Some

affective education approaches have demonstrated an impact on one or more of the correlates of drug

use, while others have not produced the expected effects on drug-related variables. More important,

they have not demonstrated an impact on drug use itself (Kearney and Hines 1980; Kim 1988).



Despite several strengths (i.e., emphasis on psychosocial variables and a more comprehensive

intervention approach), the affective education model has several major weaknesses. These include a

focus on a narrow and incomplete set of etiologic determinants, the use of ineffective methods to

achieve their stated program goals (such as the use of experiential games and classroom activities

rather than skills training methods), a lack of domain-specific information related to drug abuse, and

the inclusion of ―responsible use‖ norm-setting messages that may be counterproductive (Botvin

1995a, b).‖



Social Influence Approaches



Botvin et al go on to describe the development of the social influences approach.



In response to the disappointing findings of studies testing the effectiveness of information

dissemination and affective education approaches to prevention, researchers began testing a

prevention model based in social psychology. From this perspective, adolescent cigarette smoking, for

example, was conceptualized as being the result of social influences (persuasive messages) from

peers and the media in the form of peer offers to smoke cigarettes, of advertising appeals, or of

exposure to smokers who may serve as role models for these students.



The prevention approaches based on this model have typically contained two or more of the following

components: psychological inoculation, correcting normative expectations, and resistance skills

training. Early research with approaches based on this model emphasized psychological inoculation

and modifying normative expectations. More recent approaches have tested variations on this model,

emphasizing resistance skills training. Some approaches have added other components such as

having students make a public commitment not to use drugs. For the most part, the various

permutations of the social influence model are similar in that they are based on social cognitive theory

(Bandura 1977) and a conceptual model that stresses the fundamental importance of social factors in

promoting the initiation of adolescent drug use. Although this model includes social influences coming

from the family, peers, and the media, the focus of most preventive interventions is on the last two of

these, with the primary emphasis being placed on peer influences.



Psychological Inoculation.



Social psychological research in persuasive communications (McGuire 1964, 1968) led prevention

researchers (Evans 1976; Evans et al. 1978) to attempt to prevent cigarette smoking by

―psychologically inoculating‖ adolescents against prosmoking messages coming from their social

environment. These messages were conceptualized as the equivalent of ―germs‖ with the potential for





69

70



infecting adolescents with pro-smoking attitudes. In order to build up resistance to these germs,

adolescents were exposed initially to weaker forms of these messages and then to gradually stronger

pro-smoking messages. Adolescents were trained in critical techniques to refute these pro-smoking

messages. These techniques included recognizing a persuasive pro-smoking message, analyzing the

message and its source, and developing tactics for coping with these situations. For example,

adolescents are taught skills for dealing with situations involving an offer by a peer to smoke

cigarettes. It was hypothesized that, by being prepared for the situation and having a counterargument

ready before the offer is made, the adolescent would be better able to resist the pressure to try a

cigarette. Although this foreshadowed the use of refusal skills, it focused more on cognitions and

attitudes with little or no focus on skills training. Thus, the primary goal of this prevention approach

was to prepare adolescents for eventual exposure to persuasive pro-smoking influences from peers

and/or the media.



Correcting Normative Expectations.



A second component of social influence approaches to drug abuse prevention was based on a social

psychological principle called the ―false consensus effect‖ (Ross et al. 1977). The false consensus

effect helps explain the observation that adolescents who believe that cigarette smoking is a behavior

that nearly everyone engages in are more likely to smoke cigarettes. Providing students with accurate

information about the actual smoking rates or having them conduct their own survey to discover the

information themselves alters their perceptions of smoking norms.‖



Botvin (2000), in a different article, reports that a normative approach that targets individual level

etiologic factors can be effective. The most promising prevention approaches target individuals

during the beginning of adolescence and teach drug resistance skills and norm setting either alone or

in combination with general personal and social skills. Evaluation studies testing these approaches

show that they can significantly reduce adolescent tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use. While some

studies show that these effects may decrease over time, booster interventions have been found to

maintain and in some instances even enhance prevention effects. The results of one large-scale

evaluation study shows that it is possible to produce reductions in drug use that last until the end of

high school. Available evidence suggests that these approaches may be effective when taught by

different kinds of teachers and with different populations. The current paper provides a brief review

of school-based prevention approaches targeting individual-level etiologic factors, evidence

supporting their effectiveness, and a discussion of potential mediating mechanisms.



Another early study (Hansen et al, 1991) reported that a normative approach was effective in

reducing in substance use behaviours while a resistance skills approach was not effective with the

same sample of California students.



Donaldson et al (2000) assessed the effects of normative education, arguably the most successful

component of social influence based prevention programs, on alcohol and cigarette consumption

using both self- and reciprocal best friend reports of substance use. Analyses of subsamples of data

from 11,995 students participating in the Adolescent Alcohol Prevention Trial revealed that

normative education significantly delayed the onset of alcohol use across the eighth, ninth, and

tenth grades among public school students. A similar but somewhat less robust pattern was found

for cigarette use. Further, a ―best friend methodology eas used to overcome any problems

assocxiated with self-reporting substsance abuse. These results suggest that self-report bias does not

account for previous findings and demonstrate rather convincingly that normative education is an

effective drug prevention strategy for public school settings.



Resistance Skills Training.







70

71





Botvin et al (1998) describe the third major component of social influence approaches, resistance

skill training,



Resistance Skill training, which has become a central feature of such approaches over the past

decade, is to provide adolescents with the skills needed to identify and resist common social

influences to use drugs—influences coming from the media and especially influences from peers.

They suggest ― However, an important difference in these approaches is the focus on teaching

students the skills needed to resist these influences. The resistance skills dealing with the media are

intended to make students aware of the media influences they will be exposed to, with a particular

emphasis on the techniques used by advertisers to influence consumer behavior. Students are taught

to recognize advertising appeals designed to sell tobacco products or alcoholic beverages as well as

how to formulate counterarguments to those appeals. Resistance skills are also taught to combat both

subtle and more direct (and at times coercive) pressure from peers to smoke, drink, or use illicit drugs.

These skills typically include refusal skills, which are a subset of general assertive skills. Using

behavioral training techniques, skills for refusing offers to use drugs are modeled and practiced in the

classroom. Students are taught to identify high-risk situations (such as parties or hanging around after

school) where they are the most likely to experience peer pressure to smoke cigarettes, drink, or use

illicit drugs. They are shown how to handle these situations through a repertoire of verbal (refusal)

responses. They are also taught how to use these verbal responses in an effective (assertive) manner

(i.e., with an appropriate tone of voice, making eye contact, using ―I‖ statements, maintaining an

assertive body position, speaking clearly and confidently).



The target population for most of the research conducted with resistance skills training approaches

has been middle school or junior high school students (grades six to nine). Some studies have

targeted younger populations, such as fourth or fifth graders (Flynn et al. 1992). The length of

prevention approaches based on the resistance skills training model has ranged from as few as 3 or 4

sessions to as many as 11 or 12 sessions conducted over a 2-year period. Different types of program

providers have also been used in various research studies. Some programs have been implemented

by research staff members, others have been implemented by regular classroom teachers. Many

prevention programs teaching resistance skills have done so with the assistance of peer leaders

serving as program providers.‖



Palmer et al (1998) examined the effectiveness of a social pressure resistance training and a

normative education (NORM) intervention against an information-only control group. The NORM

condition revealed 1-year program effects for cigarette and marijuana use with individuals as the

unit of analysis and only marginal effects with classroom as the unit of analysis. No program effects

were found using school as the analysis unit. A multilevel strategy revealed program effects for

cigarettes and marijuana with both class and school as grouping levels. The effect for alcohol use

was significant at the 2-year follow-up. Interventions establishing conservative drug use norms in

classrooms may be an effective strategy in reducing substance use onset among adolescents.



These students are either older (e.g., 7th graders may be taught by 9th or 10th graders) or the same

age as the students participating in the prevention program. A common argument for using peer

leaders as program providers is that they have greater credibility with junior high school age

students with respect to lifestyle issues than do adults, since adolescence is a time characterized by

some degree of rebellion against parents and other adult authority figures. In addition to providing

students with information concerning rates of drug use and skills for resisting offers to use drugs, a

potentially powerful benefit of peer leader programs is that they may help alter school norms

regarding drug use and its social acceptability. To the extent that peer leaders are viewed by

students as being credible sources of information and influential role models who do not regard

drug use as being socially acceptable, peer-led prevention programs may have an important impact

on normative beliefs supportive of nondrug use. ―



Botvin et al (1998) conclude:





71

72



After more than 15 years, there is an impressive literature of studies testing interventions based on the

social influence approach. These studies have been published in high-quality peer-reviewed journals

and have documented its effectiveness in both small- and large-scale studies (Arkin et al. 1981;

Donaldson et al. 1994; Ellickson and Bell 1990; Hurd et al. 1980; Luepker et al. 1983; Pentz et al.

1989a, b; Perry et al. 1983; Snow et al. 1992; Sussman et al. 1993; Telch et al. 1982). The focus of

most of these studies has been on smoking prevention with some studies reporting results in terms of

smoking onset (preventing the transition from nonsmoking to smoking), others reporting results in

terms of overall smoking prevalence, and still others reporting results with respect to an index

measure or scale of smoking involvement.



Although there is considerable variability across studies in terms of methods and the magnitude of

effects, these studies have generally indicated that this type of prevention approach is capable of

reducing drug use by 30 to 50 percent after the initial intervention (based on a comparison of the

proportion of smokers in the experimental group with the proportion of smokers in the control group).

Studies reporting results in terms of smoking incidence have shown reductions ranging from

approximately 30 to 40 percent (comparing the proportion of new smokers in the experimental group

with the proportion of new smokers in the control group). Several studies have demonstrated

reductions in the overall prevalence of cigarette smoking in terms of both occasional smoking (one or

more cigarettes per month) and/or regular smoking (one or more cigarettes per week). Those

reductions have ranged from approximately 40 to 50 percent. Although there are fewer studies

assessing the impact of social influence approaches to substances other than tobacco, such as for

alcohol or marijuana use (Donaldson et al. 1994; Ellickson and Bell 1990; McAlister et al. 1980; Pentz

et al. 1989a; Shope et al. 1992), the magnitude of the reductions reported has generally been similar

to that found for smoking.



Over the years, several follow-up studies have been published that report positive behavior effects

lasting for up to 3 years (Luepker et al. 1983; MacKinnon et al. 1991; McAlister et al. 1980; Pentz et al.

1989b; Shope et al. 1992; Sussman et al. 1993; Telch et al. 1982). However, data from several longer

term followup studies have shown that these effects gradually decay over time (Bell et al. 1993;

Ellickson et al. 1993; Flay et al. 1989; Murray et al. 1988), suggesting the need for ongoing

intervention or booster sessions. Because little is known about the nature and timing of booster

interventions, additional research is needed. Also, because relatively little research has been

conducted with substances other than tobacco, data concerning the durability of prevention effects on

other substances are not available. The studies testing social influence approaches have been similar

in most respects. There are, nonetheless, some differences. In order to gain a better understanding of

the underlying mechanism of these programs, and to develop more effective interventions, the various

intervention components of these programs deserve closer scrutiny.



A common component of several resistance skills training approaches has been a procedure through

which individuals make a public commitment not to smoke, drink, or use drugs. However, a study by

Hurd and colleagues (Hurd et al. 1980) suggests that this component may not contribute to any

observed prevention effects. Another common component is the use of videotaped or filmed

prevention materials similar to those utilized by Evans and colleagues (Evans et al. 1978). Still, it is not

yet clear what type of media material is the most effective or the extent to which it is a necessary

component of these prevention programs. Similarly, little is known about the optimal time of

intervention (age or grade level), program length, program structure, type of provider, type of booster

intervention and its timing, or the characteristics of the individuals who are the most affected by these

interventions. Finally, nearly all of the studies testing resistance skills training approaches have used

peer leaders. Moreover, some studies have attempted to determine the effectiveness of peer leaders

relative to other program providers. By and large, the existing evidence supports the use of peer

leaders for this type of prevention approach (Arkin et al. 1981; Perry et al. 1983). Yet it is not

altogether clear from the available evidence that peer leaders are either necessary or better than other

providers. Mor work is necessary to determine the most appropriate kind of program provider and the

optimal mix of responsibilities between adult and peer providers.‖



Integrated Social Influence/Competence Enhancement Approaches



Botvin et al (1998) suggest that ―the underlying conceptual framework for social approaches is that

adolescents begin to smoke, drink, or use drugs either because they succumb to the persuasive



72

73





messages targeted at them or because they lack the necessary skills to resist social influences to use

drugs.



Although social influence approaches are important because they recognize the role social factors

play in the etiology of drug abuse, they have been criticized because they do not pay sufficient

attention to the intrapersonal factors involved in the etiology of drug use and abuse (Botvin and Botvin

1992). More comprehensive than either informational or affective education approaches, they still may

be based on an understanding of drug abuse etiology that is too narrow and fails to fully appreciate

the array of etiologic factors not subsumed under the social influence model. These approaches also

largely ignore the fact that there may be multiple developmental pathways leading to drug abuse.

While it may be the case that social influences may be the most potent factors promoting drug use for

some individuals, intrapersonal factors may be more important for others. For example, using drugs

may not be a simple matter of yielding to peer pressure for some adolescents, but it may be

instrumental in helping them deal with anxiety, low self-esteem, or a lack of comfort in social

situations. To the extent that this is correct, prevention approaches need to go beyond the social

influences model to interventions, which are broader based and more comprehensive.



The theoretical foundation for these approaches is Bandura‘s social cognitive theory (Bandura 1977)

and Jessor‘s problem behavior theory (Jessor and Jessor 1977). Drug abuse is conceptualized as a

socially learned and functional behavior, which is the result of the interplay between social

(interpersonal) and personal (intrapersonal) factors. Drug use behavior is learned through a process of

modeling/imitation and reinforcement and is influenced by an adolescent‘s cognitions, attitudes, and

beliefs.



Although these approaches have several features that they share with social influence approaches, a

distinctive feature of these approaches is an emphasis on the teaching of generic personal self-

management skills and social skills. These skills are taught in a systematic fashion using a

combination of instruction and demonstration, feedback, reinforcement, behavioral rehearsal (in-class

practice) and extended (out-of-class) practice through behavioral homework assignments. Examples

of the skills typically included in this prevention approach are decision-making and problem-solving

skills, cognitive skills for resisting interpersonal and media influences, skills for enhancing self-esteem

(goal setting and self-directed behavior change techniques), adaptive coping strategies for dealing

with stress and anxiety, general social skills (complimenting, conversational skills, and skills for

forming new friendships), and general assertive skills (requests and refusals). Most variations on this

prevention approach teach generic skills along with their application to situations related directly to

tobacco, alcohol, or drug use. An added benefit of this type of program is that it teaches students a

repertoire of generic skills that can be used to deal with many of the challenges confronting

adolescents in their everyday lives.



The purpose of programs based on this model is to provide students with the kind of generic skills for

coping with life that will have broad application. This contrasts markedly with social influence

approaches that focus exclusively on information and skills relating to the problem of drug abuse.

Although the problem-specific social influence approaches are most easily contrasted with the generic

skills training model, the most effective approaches appear to be ones that integrate features of both.

In fact, there is some evidence to suggest that generic skills training or competence enhancement

approaches are not effective unless they also contain domain-specific material (Caplan et al. 1992).



The target population for most of the studies conducted with the personal and social skills training

approach has been middle school and junior high school students. The vast majority of published

studies have involved students who were in the seventh grade during the first year of intervention.

Multiyear studies and followup studies have involved students during the 8th and 9th grades, and

some more recent studies have followed students up to the 12th grade (Botvin et al. 1995a, b). On the

other end of the age spectrum, very little work has been done with younger populations, although

some studies have been conducted with sixth graders (Kreutter et al. 1991). The reason for this is that

researchers have generally avoided younger populations because of the difficulty in demonstrating

statistically significant behavioral effects because the base rates of drug use are too low. Most of the

studies conducted with approaches that emphasize the teaching of personal self-management skills

and generic social skills have been implemented with adults as the primary program provider. In many

cases these adults were regular classroom teachers; in some cases they were outside health





73

74



professionals (i.e., members of the research project staff). Some studies used college students as

program providers, while others used either same age or older peer leaders. Peer leaders, when used,

frequently had clearly delineated responsibilities and worked under the direction and supervision of an

adult primary provider. Some studies have actually used peer leaders who had sole responsibility for

conducting these interventions and who did so on their own and without the help of adult providers.

Studies testing this prevention strategy have shown that it can be successfully implemented by peer

leaders, outside health professionals, and teachers.



The effectiveness of the expanded social influence/competence enhancement approaches has been

tested in a number of research studies, from small studies involving a few schools to large-scale,

randomized clinical trials. These studies have consistently demonstrated behavioral effects as well as

effects on hypothesized mediating variables. Importantly, the magnitude of reported effects of these

approaches has typically been relatively large. These studies have generally produced 40 to 80

percent reductions in drug use behavior. One criticism of contemporary prevention programs is that

even though they have been able to demonstrate impressive reductions in the incidence and

prevalence of drug use behavior, these reductions have generally occurred with respect to

experimental or occasional use. Although it is important to demonstrate reductions in the early stages

of drug use, critics argue that what matters most is demonstrating reductions in more frequent levels of

use—i.e., the kind of regular use that eventuates in addictive or compulsive patterns of use. Data from

two studies of a prevention program called Life Skills Training (LST) deal directly with this issue by

demonstrating reductions of 56 to 67 percent in the proportion of pretest nonsmokers becoming

regular smokers 1 year after the conclusion of the prevention program without any additional booster

sessions (Botvin and Eng 1982; Botvin et al. 1983). For those students receiving booster sessions,

these reductions have been as high as 87 percent (Botvin et al. 1983). Equally important is the finding

from several studies that produced initial reductions of 50 percent or more for regular cigarette

smoking (Botvin and Eng 1982; Botvin et al. 1983, 1990b).‖



The conclusions of Botvin et al (1998) are not always clearly accepted by everyone. A Canadian

study (Hundert et al, 1999) reflects the mixed pattern of evaluation studies that have examined the

impact of social skills training and education programs. This report describes program effects of the

Tri-Ministry Study a school-based, longitudinal trial carried out over a 5-year period to assess the

effectiveness of classwide social skills training (SS), partner reading (RE), and a combination of

both (SS & RE) to reduce maladjustment among children in the primary division (up to grade 3) of

Ontario schools. It also places these effects in the context of other school-based prevention studies

and discusses them in view of important methodological and programmatic issues. The incremental

effects attributable to the intervention programs were small and sporadic. There were statistically

significant increases in prosocial behaviour observed in the playgrounds of intervention schools

with no differentiation by program type. Furthermore, there was some evidence--a reduction in

teacher and parent-rated externalising problems--that the combination of SS & RE and SS alone

may have had modest beneficial effects. A review of nine other school-based studies, which

evaluated universally delivered mental health prevention programs in general populations of

students, revealed similar mixed results. There are both methodologic and programmatic issues

implicated in the weak findings that have been reported to date. These issues need to be addressed

to advance knowledge about the potential impact of mental-health prevention initiatives delivered

universally through school-based programs. A companion paper gives the specific details on the

programs, randomisation of schools, selection of subjects, measurements, and analysis.



Botvin et al , (2000) , in a later case study, illustrate more of the sometimes contradictory findings,

as the students who participated in a Life Skills Training program showed positive effects six years

after the intervention. The present study examined long-term follow-up data from a large-scale

randomized prevention trial to determine the extent to which participation in a cognitive-behavioral

skills-training prevention program led to less illicit drug use than for untreated controls. Data were

collected by mail from 447 individuals who were contacted after the end of the 12th grade, 6.5 years

after the initial pretest. Results indicated that students who received the prevention program (Life



74

75





Skills Training) during junior high school reported less use of illicit drugs than controls. These

results also support the hypothesis that illicit drug use can be prevented by targeting the use of

gateway drugs such as tobacco and alcohol.



Eise et al (2002) report on an evaluation of a life skills program (Lions Quest Skills for Adolesence)

and found a mixed set of results. In comparision to a random control group, there were some

positive impacts on substanhce related behaviours after one year for Hoispanics, but not for others.

There were also some improvements pre-test to post test for the experimental group.



Hansen WB. (1992) reviewed research on programs published between 1980 and 1990 and found

that ―comprehensive‖ and ―social influence‖ programs are found to be most successful in

preventing the onset of substance use.



Gorman (1998) argues that the social influences approach to drug prevention has not been proved.

Eisen et al (2003) evaluated the popular Skills for Adolescence (SFA) of Lions Quest, a widely used

comprehensive life skills training curriculum with a dedicated drug education unit, to determine if it

is more effective than standard care in deterring and delaying substance use through middle school.

Two-year posttest (1-year post-intervention) data were collected from 5691 eighth graders (77% of

those who completed the sixth-grade survey and 87% of those who completed the seventh-grade

survey). Lifetime and recent (last 30 days) use of five substances or combinations of substances was

compared using mixed-model regression to control for school clustering. There were two significant

treatment main effects at the end of the eighth grade: lifetime (P=.05) and recent (P3 visits) users of SBHC

services. Mental health problems among all participants included depression in 31%, use of alcohol

1 time or more per month in 21%, use of alcohol daily in 5%, suicidal ideation in 16%, history of a

suicide attempt in 10%, knowing someone who had been murdered in 50%, and being in at least 1

fight at school in 26%. Frequent users, average users, and nonusers did not differ by age, grade,

race, or any of the measured mental health problems. Among the 472 students who completed the

survey section on SBHC perceptions, 305 described health center use: 92% were satisfied with

health center services, 79% were comfortable being seen in the SBHC, 74% believed visits were

kept confidential, 61% told their parents about each visit, and 51% considered the SBHC their

regular health care source. The health center was used for mental health services by 34% and

sexuality-related care by 15%. The 167 students who described reasons for not using the SBHC

most frequently reported that they already had a physician (60%), did not need it (50%), prefer

continuing previous health care (45%), did not get around to it (30%), parents were opposed (20%),

were not comfortable (19%), did not know about the service (19%), and did not want problems

known (19%). they conclude that, in this urban high school, (1) average users, frequent users, and

nonusers did not differ in the mental health problems measured in this study; (2) those who used the

SBHC indicated strong satisfaction with the care received; and (3) those who did not use the SBHC

chose to stay away for a variety of reasons, most commonly the availability of other care or the

perception of lack of need.



Joost et al (1993) suggest that disproportionate use of school health rooms can be predicted on the

basis of product health diseases such as obesity. They found that such students are more likely to

use school-based health clinics This implies that such centers may be a means of reaching such

high-risk groups. Keyl et al (1996) found that school-based health clinics need to be actively

promoted to make their operation and services known to students and their parents.



Young & Ireson (2003) suggest that a combination of telehealth and school health clinics can help

rural schools and communities gain access to convenient care. This study evaluated the quality and

cost effectiveness of health care provided in urban and rural elementary school-based telehealth

centers, using plain old telephone system (POTS) technology. A telehealth school-based model was

developed that used a full-time school nurse, half-time mental-health consultant, linked pediatric

practice, and linked child psychiatrist via POTS with an electronic stethoscope; ears, nose, and



131

132





throat endoscope; and otoscope. One rural and 1 urban center were evaluated. Providers, nurses,

children, and parents completed satisfaction questionnaires. Providers and nurses also evaluated

how well telemedicine supported their clinical decision-making. Parents were asked how use of the

center affected them financially and at work. Of the combined 3461 visits to school nurses at both

centers, 4.3% resulted in 150 telehealth consultations referrals; 142 (95%) were completed during

the 2-year project. The most common teleconsult diagnoses were otitis media, pharyngitis,

dermatitis, and upper respiratory infections. Provider, nurse, child, and parent satisfaction all were

high. Providers' and nurses' decision confidence scores ranged from a low of 4 to a high of 4.8 on a

5-point scale. Average family savings per encounter were 3.4 hours of work time (43 dollars) and

177 dollars in emergency department or 54 dollars in physician costs. Including travel, savings for

families ranged from 101 dollars to 224 dollars per encounter. Thirteen children received

telepsychiatric evaluations resulting in diagnoses of depression and attention-deficit/hyperactivity,

anxiety, and conduct disorders. Telehealth technology was effective in delivering pediatric acute

care to children in these schools. Pediatric providers, nurses, parents, and children reported primary

care school-based telehealth as an acceptable alternative to traditional health care delivery systems.

The POTS-based technology helps to make this telehealth service a cost-effective alternative for

improving access to primary and psychiatric health care for underserved children.



Best Practices and Sustainability of School School-based Health Centers



The general principles and advisable program format appears to be well discussed



The School Health Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics (2001) offers guidelines on

the integration of expanded school health services, including school-based and school-linked health

centers, into community-based health care systems. The AAP suggests that expanded school health

services should be integrated so that they enhance accessibility, provide high-quality health care,

link children to a medical home, are financially sustainable, and address both long- and short-term

needs of children and adolescents.



These guidelines are consistent with professional guidelines published on the web site of the

Canadian Association of School Psychologists (New Brunswick Department of Education, 2001).



Sustainability and long term funding have been noted in much of the research on school-based

clinics.



Swider &Valukas (2004) discuss a variety of funding sources for SBHC‘s based on the American

experience. Obviously, not all of these sources will apply to Canadian jurisdictions. Promising

sources of funds include private grants, federal grants, and state funding. Using a variety of funding

sources will enable ongoing provision of health care to students. They suggest that SBHCs should

consider infrastructure development that allows a variety of funding options, including formalizing

existing partnership commitments, engaging in a needs assessment and strategic planning process,

developing the infrastructure for potential government grants and implementing a billing system for

client services. (In Canada, this could be to the local health unit or school board.)



Summers et al (2003) suggest that SBHC‘s need to use a variety of client-driven, community-based

and strategic approaches to ensure that their programs are well supported by local communities and

schools. They suggest a community-based model would aim programs and intervention at high-risk

adolescents identified as needing treatment. Community-Oriented Primary Care (COPC) bridges the

gap between primary care and public health to evaluate and improve the delivery of health care to

identified populations. The COPC model was used to develop and implement an adolescent school-



132

133





based health center in a southwestern border community. The four process steps based on the COPC

model include: identifying the community of interest, identifying the health problem, developing

and implementing intervention(s), and conducting ongoing evaluation. Key stakeholders from the

medical, educational, and consumer groups were invited to participate in the first and second steps.

Representatives of various school adolescent subcultures formed a group of promotores (health

promoters) to monitor, advise, and contribute to the process. The Dartmouth COOP survey was

selected to identify health concerns and risks of the targeted high school. The promotores prepared

and administered the survey to 1,116 students. Results were used to design the initial health center

program components using an interdisciplinary team to implement interventions aimed at the major

health concerns and risks identified by the COOP. A short feedback loop contributed to program

refinements, and ongoing evaluation continues to shape the practice of health care providers in the

school-based health care center.



Guernsey & Pastore (1996) present a similar analysis of the need for SBHC‘s to be closely tied to

their communities and schools with their mprograms, needs assessments and outreach. They discuss

the steps necessary to assess student needs and build community support, develop the plan for

delivery of school-based primary care, implement the school-based health center model, and

evaluate the health center program.



Roles of Public Health, Mental Health Personnel in SBHC‘s.



The roles of various health care and school personnel in SBHC‘s also appears to be well-discussed.



Gall (2002) suggests that Nurse practitioners are the primary clinician in the majority of SBHCs in

the United States. To help move the field of school-based health care from innovation to

mainstream, nurse practitioners need to continue to be part of the development of conceptual

frameworks, appropriate methods, and evaluation of the process and outcomes. Educational

achievement, access to care and reimbursement, and reduction of adolescent morbidity are

indicators that have great significance in policy development. The extent to which nurse

practitioners in SBHCs can provide evidence of making a difference will determine the success of

this important health care venue for adolescents and demonstrate their own professional excellence.



Hacker & Wessel (1998) have also described the collaboration necessary between SBHC‘s staff and

school nurses. Partnerships between school-based health centers and school nurses are critical for

the success of school-based health centers, and partnerships will enhance and expand roles for

school nurses. This paper clarifies the role of each in three areas: collaboration, communication, and

cooperation. In addition, obstacles to partnerships are examined. The goal of this collaboration is a

shared vision for the continuum of school health services in which school nurse and school health

center serve integral roles. Elements for successful collaboration between nurse and health center

are reviewed, including clarifying roles, shared leadership and program ownership, cooperative

training and continuing education, negotiating conflict, and most importantly, maintaining mutual

support and respect.



Kubiszyn T. (1999) reviews recent trends, developments and empirical support for the expansion of

psychological practice to include school-based treatment and management of serious and chronic

medical conditions, including somatization, in collaboration with primary health care providers.

Trends and developments reviewed include (a) the expansion and integration of health, mental

health, social and community services in schools, (b) the rapid growth of school-based health

centers (SBHCs), (c) psychology's increased involvement in the collaborative treatment of chronic

and serious medical disorders, (d) recent federal and state legislative initiatives, and (e) cost-driven



133

134





marketplace changes. Lack of empirical data specific to collaborative psychologist-health care

provider collaboration in schools and SBHCs, particularly around somatization, is discussed.

Ethical and legal, professional, and reimbursement issues that must be addressed if psychologists

are to practice in this emergent arena are identified. This article calls for research to document both

the clinical effectiveness and cost-efficacy of collaborative psychologist-primary care provider

intervention in schools and SBHCs.



Work Place Health, Wellness and Assistance Programs



Beyers (2001) review two meta-analyses (Peersimmian et al, 1998; France-Dawson et al, 1994) for the

Effective Public Health Practice Program in Ontario and found that most evaluations of workplace

health programs were methodologically flawed due to the absence of a control group in the studies.

Nevertheless, they suggest that comprehensive programs that include screening, risk assessment and

choice of treatment and education options by participants to be most promising.



(More To be added)



School Reform/Improvement and Health



A major Canadian research project on the relationship between student performance and student

engagement (Smith et al, 2001) can form the basis of this discussion. This study includes several

case studies and leading educational researchers in Canada.



They defined student engagement as being a multi-faceted concept





They used a framework based on an ―inside out‖ approach



They suggest that the student engagement is best understood as a series of “nested layers”, starting with

the student and reaching outward to the classroom, sxchool, family and community.



More To be added. Discuss Effective schooling, School improvement and Social/Emotional

Learning



Education and Health Systems Improving the Social and Physical Environment of the School



 Does re-orienting schools to focus on the psychosocial climate (including school

improvement and effective schooling) have an impact on health and social behaviours as

well as learning?



Schools provide a number of opportunities for engaging youth in meaningful ways. These include

instructional strategies such as self-directed and cooperative learning strategies, project-based

learning, student webquests and other online learning, formal student leadership programs and

obligatory community service programs. There are also many ways that schools can empower and

engage youth through school-based peer helper and mentoring programs, voluntary student activity

programs, clubs and other extra-curricular activities. The policy, procedures and practices of the

school can emphasize student involvement, fairness and assumption of responsibilities by young

people. Further, the decision-making processes of the school can be modified to enhance student

engagement, including formal roles for the Student Council, efforts to manage a wide range of

students and the frequent use of formal needs assessments and student surveys.





134

135





Youth engagement is the meaningful participation and sustained involvement of a young person in

an activity that has a focus outside of himself or herself. Youth can be engaged in many things, and

in many different ways. It may involve doing volunteer work, participating in a youth organization,

playing in a band or a school orchestra, working for a political party or a non-governmental

organization, or taking part in the activities of one‘s church, mosque or synagogue, among many

other things. Some youth will take a leadership role in these activities, helping to organize other

youth in their efforts, while other youth will be satisfied to be participants in the activity or

organization.



Research collected by the Centre of Excellence on Youth Engagement (2003) indicates that

activities and programs to engage youth can:

 make youth more aware of those in society who are disadvantaged

 help youth cope with stressful life situations

 provide youth with supportive social networks

 enhance their social skills

 increase their sense of what kind of work or occupation they might enjoy

 increase their sense of competence

 increase their self-esteem

 give them a better sense of what is right and wrong

 decrease problem behaviours

 increase their academic performance and their likelihood of going on to higher education

 enhance their life skills in areas such as public speaking

 make them feel empowered, valued and important

 help them get along better with adults

 increase their leadership abilities

 increase their sense of social responsibility

 reduce drug use, teen pregnancy and aggression



The knowledge about school health programs has identified several interventions that can be used to generate

increased social support and youth engagement in the school setting:



f. Social Support

a) Whole school programs to improve the school climate

b) Peer helper programs for early identification and referrals

c) Student leadership and community service programs for student involvement and

participation in school policy development, awareness activities and other

activities such as dry grads, etc

d) Parent involvement, education and support programs

e) Cooperation with local community programs, services and campaigns

f) Specialized out reach to local merchants and stores to cooperate in restricting

access of minors to alcohol, prescription drugs and other substances near schools



Note: Please note that youth participation in decision-making is more fully discussed in a subsequent sub-section.



Whole School Programs to Improve the Psychosocial Climate of the School



Parcel et al (2003) report on the Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health (CATCH)

study provided an opportunity to study how aspects of school climate are associated with continued

implementation of the CATCH program. Nutrient analysis of menus, observations of physical

education (PE) classes, and teacher and staff self-reports were used to measure CATCH program

components. Results of this study indicate that aspects of school climate were associated with





135

136





continued implementation of the CATCH classroom component but not the CATCH food service or

PE components. These findings have implications for how we plan for the progression of innovative

school health promotion programs from the initial trial stage to institutionalization. Measures of

school climate may be useful in determining a school's readiness to adopt and implement an

innovative health promotion curriculum.



Dewitt et al (2002) have conceptualized the role that the school culture and climate can play in

influencing school achievement and health outcomes. They have developed a ―schools as

communities‖ framework based on the work of others such as Whelage and Rutter. They suggest

that the student‘s perceptions of the school environment are influenced by the formal aspects of

―school climate‖ such as rules, size of school, organization of the school etc as well as by informal

aspects of the school such as interpersonal relationships, emphasis on learning and goals, positive

student behaviours and attitudes etc.



This framework has been discussed earlier in this paper. Similalry, the work of Michel Janosz and

Penny Hawe has also been presented and discussed ewarlier in this paper. All of these Canadian

researchers have indicated that the psycho-social climate of the school can have an important

impact on health, social behaviours and learning.



However, an earlier analysis by Norland et al (1996) indicates that a positive social climate may not

be as simple as it sounds, because schools perform the function of sorting and selecting people for

later places in life. This means that some people will recognize that they are being sorted and may

respond through substance use and other anti-social behaviours. They suggest that evaluations of

school curricular drug control efforts show they are only modestly successful because they are

based on an inaccurate theory of drug taking. Social control theory is suggested as a better model of

drug taking and drug resistance. Building strong bonds to school acts to decrease the likelihood of

interaction with delinquent peers and thereby decrease delinquency and drug use. Yet schools are

sites of stratification and competition, and strong bonds may be related to one's place in the school

hierarchy. If schools are unable to produce sufficient positions in the hierarchy, those with low

levels of academic success or commitment may turn to the drug subculture to find status and

rewards. A number of future research questions are suggested.



Konu & Rimpela (2002) present a conceptual model for well-being in schools. They suggest that a

theoretically grounded model based on the sociological concept of well-being is needed for

planning and evaluation of school development programmes. The School Well-being Model is

based on Allardt's sociological theory of welfare and assesses well-being as an entity in school

setting. Well-being is connected with teaching and education, and with learning and achievements.

Indicators of well-being are divided into four categories: school conditions (having), social

relationships (loving), means for self-fulfilment (being) and health status. 'Means for self-fulfilment'

encompasses possibilities for each pupil to study according to his/her own resources and

capabilities. 'Health status' is seen through pupils' symptoms, diseases and illnesses. Each well-

being category contains several aspects of pupils' life in school. The model takes into account the

important impact of pupils' homes and the surrounding community. Compared with others, The

School Well-being Model's main differences are the use of the well-being concept, the definition of

health and the subcategory means for self-fulfilment. Making the outline of the well-being concept

facilitates the development of theoretically grounded subjective and objective well-being indicators.



Greenberg et al (2003) suggest that a comprehensive mission for schools is to educate students to be

knowledgeable, responsible, socially skilled, healthy, caring, and contributing citizens. This mission

is supported by the growing number of school-based prevention and youth development programs.



136

137





Yet, the current impact of these programs is limited because of insufficient coordination with other

components of school operations and inattention to implementation and evaluation factors necessary

for strong program impact and sustainability. Widespread implementation of beneficial prevention

programming requires further development of research-based, comprehensive school reform models

that improve social, health, and academic outcomes; educational policies that demand

accountability for fostering children's full development; professional development that prepares and

supports educators to implement programs effectively; and systematic monitoring and evaluation to

guide school improvement.



Wyn J et al (2000) describe an Australian mental health program Mind Matters that is an example

of such coordination of social, emotional and academic learning within a mental health framework

The program provides a framework for mental health promotion in widely differing school settings.

The teacher professional development dimension of the program is central to enhancing the role of

schools in broad population mental health promotion.



Durlak & Wells (1997) used meta-analysis to review 177 primary prevention programs designed to

prevent behavioral and social problems in children and adolescents. Findings provide empirical

support for further research and practice in primary prevention. Most categories of programs

produced outcomes similar to or higher in magnitude than those obtained by many other established

preventive and treatment interventions in the social sciences and medicine. Programs modifying the

school environment, individually focused mental health promotion efforts, and attempts to help

children negotiate stressful transitions yield significant mean effects ranging from 0.24 to 0.93. In

practical terms, the average participant in a primary prevention program surpasses the performance

of between 59% to 82% of those in a control group, and outcomes reflect an 8% to 46% difference

in success rates favoring prevention groups. Most categories of programs had the dual benefit of

significantly reducing problems and significantly increasing competencies. Priorities for future

research include clearer specification of intervention procedures and program goals, assessment of

program implementation, more follow-up studies, and determining how characteristics of the

intervention and participants relate to different outcomes.



Davis (2003) describes the appalling young-adult outcomes of youth with serious emotional

disturbance who are served in public systems and suggests that they demonstrate a failure of

standard services to address the unique needs of these youths during their transition from

adolescence to adulthood. He discusses the needs of this population and the current ability of mental

health and other relevant agencies to meet those needs. The contrast between needs and system

status is presented through a framework of contrasting developmental and institutional transitions.

This article reviews the barriers to effective system reform, and the recommendations for changes

made by national panels focused on transition and applied research.



Patton et al (2000) outline the conceptual background and strategy of intervention for a systematic

and sustainable approach to mental health promotion in secondary schools through the study of The

Gatehouse Project in Australia. The conceptual origins of the Gatehouse Project are described in

terms of the epidemiology of adolescent mental health problems, attachment theory, education

reform research and health promotional theory and practice. The elements of health promotional

work are described in terms of structural change and priority setting; implementation at multiple

levels within the participating schools is described. The conceptual framework of the Gatehouse

Project emphasises healthy attachments with peers and teachers through the promotion of a sense of

security and trust, effective communication and a sense of positive self-regard based on

participation in varied aspects of school and community life. A school social climate profile is

derived from a questionnaire survey of students. An adolescent health team uses this information to



137

138





set priorities for change within the school. Interventions may focus on the promotion of a positive

social climate of the whole school or in the classroom. Curriculum-based health education is also

used and based on materials that are relevant to the normal developmental experiences of teenagers.

These are integrated into the mainstream curriculum and incorporate a strong component of teacher

professional development. Lastly, the intervention promotes linkage between the school and broader

community with a particular emphasis on the needs of young people at high risk of school drop-out.

They note that educational environments are complex systems undergoing continuous and

simultaneous changes. The Gatehouse Project will provide unique information on the relationship

between the social environment and the emotional wellbeing of young people. More importantly it

outlines a sustainable process for building the capacity of schools to promote the social and

emotional development of young people.



Noam GG, Hermann CA. (2002) introduces a school-based prevention and intervention method for

young adolescents called Responsive Advocacy for Life and Learning in Youth (RALLY).

Prevention practitioners, a new role developed by the program, work in classrooms and after-school

settings to provide nonstigmatizing support to students. Using a three-tiered prevention model,

practitioners integrate a mental health and educational focus to foster students' academic, social, and

emotional success. The intervention involves all children of an age cohort in middle schools. The

practitioners are developmental specialists who create relationships with youth, teachers, and

families in high-risk environments and serve triage functions to existing community and health care

institutions. The RALLY intervention builds on normative developmental and developmental

psychopathology theory, especially a risk and resilience framework. The paper describes the

principles behind the practice and how the work in this field has created innovations in theory and a

new impetus for research.



Rudd & Walsh (1993) ask if schools as healthful environments are a prerequisite to comprehensive

school health programs. They suggest that the development of healthy schools to support and nature

the well-being of students, teachers, and staff is proposed as a first step toward the goal of

comprehensive health education. A focus on healthy schools incorporates elements of an expanded

concept of comprehensive health education that demands careful consideration of the physical,

psychological, and social environment of the schools as a worksite to students, teachers, and staff.

The active participation of all stakeholders in environmental assessments, health and safety audits,

and restructuring of schools is an essential part of the school reform movement. A healthy worksite

concept supports the transformation of the school environment to increase "productivity" by

enhancing the ability of teachers, staff, and students to function well.



Hootman et al (2002) describe a program to educate school nurses about mental health

interventions. An educational program was designed to assist school nurses in the identification of

potential mental health problems. In addition, information about appropriate interventions for

students at risk for aggression, violence, and other mental health pathology was presented. The

program involved education on mental health assessment and intervention, as well as expert

psychiatric clinical support for the development of student support groups. School nurses were then

challenged to develop practice improvement projects incorporating this knowledge for a group of

students in their work setting.



Weissberg et al (2003) suggest that the most beneficial preventive interventions for young people

involve coordinated, systemic efforts to enhance their social-emotional competence and health.

They propose standards for empirically supported programming worthy of dissemination and steps

to integrate prevention science with practice. They highlight key research findings and common

principles for effective programming across family, school, community, health care, and policy



138

139





interventions and discuss their implications for practice. Recent advances in prevention research and

growing support for evidence-based practice are encouraging developments that will increase the

number of children and youth who succeed and contribute in school and life.



A Canadian study (Rye et al, 2001) also suggests that school climate and relationships with parents

is essential to program effectiveness. Parents, students, and program leaders involved in an in-

school drug prevention program called Opening Doors were assessed for their perceptions of the

efficacy of the program. In general, the feedback indicated a very high program satisfaction level

from respondents with parents indicating the highest level satisfaction (92%). Areas for

improvement ranged from: parent attendance, invitation process, increased support from schools,

and increasing awareness of scheduling and time involvement by leaders and school administration

based on program leader feedback as well as invitation process and program duration from the

parents (e.g., 37% thought the program was too short). Student satisfaction may be predicted from

the perceived impact of the program on significant relationships (e.g., with peers and family) as

well as affective reactions to the program (e.g., enjoyment of the program). Finally, a school-level

analysis indicated that the application of the Opening Doors Program in different schools was

provided uniformly.



School-based Peer Programs





There is a considerable body of evidence on impact of school-based peer helper programs, the

magnitude of which is beyond the scope of this paper. The Canadian Association of School

administrators (1992) has summarized the research on such peer programs. Quoting Rey Carr from

the BC Peer Resource Center, this document has summarized the functions of such peer helpers as:





students learn about school services







ut their concerns







The summary document also described the essential elements of a peer helper program:

1.The program must be led and supervised by an adult who is trained and experienced in

peer helping.

2.The program consists of training sessions, a tested curriculum-based on student needs.

3.The training environment encourages enjoyment, involvement and skill development.

4.Students selected as trainees must feel the training is special and trainees must represent

the social composition of the community in which they will be working.

5.The training methods must emphasize interactive components and feature applied

activities.

6.The training program and the roles of the peer helpers must have a broad base of support

from teachers, administrators, parents and other students.

7.The trainees must have ongoing supervision and learning opportunities.









139

140





This CASA summary, although somewhat dated, provides a review of the research. It shows the

impact of peer helper programs use in a variety of settings within the school towards a variety of

purposes and program goals.



A more recent Canadian review (Ciliska, 2001) has summartized the meta analysis of Harden et al,

1999) and reported that peer helper programs can be effective in reducing tobacco and drug use,

especially for high risk youth.



Mobilizing Social Support



The presence of an active social network is one of the determinants that can affect and individual‘s

health behavior. Such social support can be enhanced or created through a variety of programs

including:







-help groups





rtners/family members in the home setting.



The paper done for Health Canada on youth-led health promotion (McCall, 1995) prepared an

inventory of community and school-based programs. Working from a lengthy list of potential sites

within both the community and school settings, the findings relevant to this paper were:



programs aimed at youth out of the mainstream



effective in communicating with youth about health issues



had a health impact



no impact evaluation data was available.



Black et al (1998) have conducted a meta-analysis of peer programs related to substance abuse.

Their review focuses on the following: a) results of a 120-study meta-analysis of school-based drug

prevention programs and positive program features; b) considerations for falsely concluding that

peer programs are ineffective; c) features of two model or stellar programs that compared

interactive (peer leadership) to teacher/researcher-led (non-interactive) programs that followed

National Peer Helpers Association (NPHA) Programmatic Standards; and d) suggestions for

designing and implementing high-quality, peer-led programs. They conclude that interactive peer

interventions for middle school students are statistically superior to non-interactive didactic, lecture

programs led by teachers/researchers. Programs implemented according to NPHA Programmatic

Standards may eliminate Type II (false negative) and III ("implementation failure" or ineffectively

designed and implemented program) errors. Opportunities for prudent application of well-designed

peer programs appropriately implemented and evaluated must remain a salient priority.



Sussman et al (1997) described two studies that were conducted at high schools whose students are

at high risk for drug abuse. Twenty-one schools were randomly assigned to one of three conditions:

(a) standard care, (b) classroom drug abuse education only, or (c) classroom plus school-as-

community. Results of the first study indicated that the school-as-community component--which



140

141





involved weekly meetings and periodic events at seven schools--was implemented as planned, drug

abused focused, and perceived as productive in discouraging drug abuse. In the second study, staff

in the classroom plus school-as-community condition self-reported involvement in the greatest

number of community activities across the school year, compared with staff from the other two

conditions. These two studies support the feasibility of formalized groups of high-risk youth to

promote drug-free events.



Mellanby et al (2000) reviewed evaluations that compared the effects of peers or adults delivering

the same material. The identified studies indicated that peer leaders were at least as, or more,

effective than adults. However, they suggest that although their review uggests that peer-led

programmes can be effective, methodological difficulties and analytical problems indicate that this

is not an easy area to investigate, and research so far has not provided a definitive answer



Winkleby et al (2001) report on the impact of a peer advocacy program. Teen Activists for

Community Change and Leadership Education is designed to engage high school students living in

low-income neighborhoods in community advocacy efforts to transform their schools and

communities so they do not reinforce use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs. This nine month

intervention for 116 freshmen and sophomores in and near San Jose, California consisted of 30-90

minute meetings. Social cognitive constructs of sense of community, perceived self-efficacy,

outcome expectancies, incentive value, policy control, and leadership competence guided the

program. No changes in individual use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs were observed by the

end of the program, but improvements in community involvement and self-perception of many of

the constructs were observed.



Extra-Curricular Activities



The Centre for Excellence on Youth Engagement (2003) has described the research on the health

impacts of student engagement/participation in school activities: These impacts include direct

reference to substance use, social and emotional difficulties and overall risk behaviours. .



Youth Engagement and Alcohol Use



Eccles and Barber (1999) used data from the Michigan Study of Adolescent Life

Transitions (MSALT) to examine the relationship between youth engagement and

involvement in behaviours that might place their health at risk, such as alcohol and drug

use. Youth in the MSALT project were followed through 8 waves of data collection,

beginning when they were in the 6th grade (1983-84), and continuing into 1996-97, when

most were 25 or 26 years of age. The analyses presented in the Eccles and Barber (1999)

report include data from 1,259 respondents who had completed survey items about

activity involvement in the grade 10 wave of data collection (in 1988-89), and for whom

outcome data were available at wave 6 (in 1990-91, when most were in grade 12) and in

wave 7, two years later (in 1992-93). Information was collected on the adolescents'

involvement in a wide variety of activities while they were in the 10th grade, by presenting

them with a list of 16 sports and 30 school and community clubs and organizations, and

asking them to check off all activities in which they participated. An index was created to

indicate the level of involvement of each student in each of five major activities: prosocial

activities (e.g., volunteering and community service), performance activities (e.g., school

band, drama), team sports (e.g., basketball team), school involvement (e.g., student

government), and academic clubs (e.g., math club). Health risk behaviours were assessed

in the 10th and 12th grades by asking students to indicate on a scale from 1 (none) to 7

(21 or more times) how frequently over the previous 6 months they had engaged in a

number of risky behaviours, including drinking alcohol and getting drunk.



141

142







Results showed that individuals involved in prosocial activities such as volunteer work

when they were in grade 10 drank alcohol and got drunk at much lower rates than did

those who did not engage in these kinds of activities, when these behaviours were

measured two years later, in grade 12. The relationship between involvement in prosocial

activities and drinking remained, even after controlling for gender, mother's educational

level, intelligence, and even 10th grade drinking. This is consistent with a possible causal

relationship between prosocial activities and a reduction in drinking, in that prosocial

activity in grade 10 predicted changes in drinking behaviour from grade 10 to grade 12.

Similar effects were obtained for involvement in the performing arts, with adolescents who

were involved in these kinds of activities in grade 10 showing lower levels of alcohol

consumption in grade 12. Participation in school involvement activities and academic

clubs in grade 10 was not related to drinking in grade 12. Team sport involvement

assessed in grade 10, on the other hand, was related to increases in alcohol consumption

in grade 12.



Another study using a different sample from the MSALT data (Barber, Eccles & Stone,

2001) also examined the relationship between extracurricular involvements and alcohol

consumption. This study included approximately 900 of the MSALT participants, for whom

data were available during the 10th grade (wave 5), 12th grade (wave 6), and 2 (wave7)

and 6 (wave 8) years after high school. Engagement or involvement was measured in the

10th grade, as described above; adolescents were asked to check activities in which they

participated from a list provided to them. The activities were grouped into four categories:

prosocial activities, team sports, performing arts, and school involvement. Information on

drinking was collected at waves 5, 6, 7 and 8 for the previous 6 months, on a scale

ranging from 1=none to 7=21 or more times. The results indicated that those who had

participated in prosocial activities in Grade 10 drank significantly less frequently than

those who had not been involved in these kinds of activities across all time periods.

Indeed, participation in prosocial activities in the 10th grade predicted lower levels of

alcohol use up to 8 years later, 6 years after the individuals had completed high school.

Involvement in other kinds of activities &endash; sports, the performing arts and school,

showed a different relationship with drinking: sports team participation was associated

with higher levels of drinking, as was participation in the performing arts.



Vicary, Smith, Caldwell & Swisher (1998) utilized data collected as part of the Rural

Adolescent Development Study (RAD) to assess the relationship between involvement in

positive leisure activities and use of alcohol. The RAD study involved giving annual

surveys to students, originally in grade 7, 8 or 9, from a rural school in northeastern

Appalachia. This area was populated by families with low- to middle-income levels, with

two thirds of the adult population having a high school education or less. Involvement in

three kinds of activities was assessed in the survey: Personal Development Activities

(e.g., church attendance, volunteer activities); Social Activities (e.g., attending parties,

hanging out with friends); and School-Related Activities (e.g., after-school extracurricular

activities, school sports). Alcohol use was assessed by means of a subscale of the

Primary Prevention Awareness, Attitudes and Use Scale (PPAAUS; Swisher, Shute &

Bibeau, 1984), which asked respondents to indicate the frequency with which they

consumed alcohol, on a 6-point scale ("never" (1) to "many times daily" (6)). The data

from 460 respondents who had participated for at least two sequential years in the study,

and who had no history of drinking as assessed at time 1 were included in the data

analyses. The results indicated that decreases in sports, hobbies and crafts, and church

involvement preceded increased alcohol use for girls, but not for boys.



Komro et al. (1996) assessed the effects of adolescent participation in the planning and

promotion of alcohol-free social activities on drinking. This research was part of Project





142

143



Northland, a program based in northeastern Minnesota, which was designed to prevent or

reduce alcohol abuse among young adolescents using a "multi-level community wide"

approach (Komro et al, 1996, p. 328). The project has been implemented in 24 school

districts in the state since 1991. One component of the project is the "peer participation

program", in which seventh grade students in the intervention schools were recruited to

participate in the planning and promotion of alcohol-free activities, such as dances, ski

trips and movie nights, for their fellow students. Students who were involved in the

planning of the program activities (planners) were compared with students who attended

the peer-planned events, but were not involved in planning them (attenders), and students

who neither planned nor attended any of the events (nonparticipants), with regard to their

use of alcohol. All students involved in the study completed self-report surveys at three

points in time &endash; at the beginning and end of grade 6 (fall of 1991 and spring of

1992), before the program began, and after the program had been implemented, at the

end of grade 7 (spring 1993). In addition to items assessing demographic and background

characteristics contained in the earlier surveys, all surveys included questions assessing

alcohol use ("On how many occasions have you had alcoholic beverages to drink (during

the past 12 months, 30 days, and 7 days)?").



The study cohort consisted of 1,028 students, 166 of them who were "planners", 335 who

were "attenders" and 527 who were "nonparticipants". Analysis of covariance was used to

compare the drinking levels of the three groups as assessed on the grade 7 survey, with

baseline drinking levels and background variables from the grade 6 surveys as covariates.

These analyses showed a significant difference in alcohol consumption among the three

groups. The planners consumed significantly less alcohol than did the attenders and

nonparticipants. Moreover, the greatest impact of the peer participation program was on

planners who had reported alcohol use in the baseline surveys administered in grade 6.



Shannon & McCall Consulting Ltd (1996, 1998), in two reviews done for Health Canada found

differential effects for the youth organizers of youth activities as distinct from the youth

participants in such activities. While the experience of young people in leadership positions

appears to offer several benefits, the evidence on the impact of youth organized vs adult

organized activities seems less clear.



Nevertheless, the review done by the Centre of Excellence for Youth Engagement (2003) has

identified other sources that indicate that participation in such extr0currciuylar activities creates

health benefits.



Similarly, Jenkins (1996) found that extracurricular involvement was significantly and

negatively correlated with high school students' use of both gateway (cigarettes,

marijuana, beer, wine cooler, and liquor) and hard drugs (e.g., inhalants, LSD,

amphetamines, cocaine, heroin), independent of both academic performance and

affiliation with peers who used drugs. Their sample consisted of 2229 randomly selected

high school students from Grades 8, 10 and 12 from 17 school districts in Ohio.

Engagement was measured as a single-item self-report measure, in which students were

asked if they were involved in "any enjoyable extracurricular activities".



Youth Engagement and Smoking



Chung and Elias (1996) administered surveys to 556 adolescents (274 males and 282

females) in grades 9 to 12 who attended high school in New Jersey. The surveys included

self-report measures of seven "problem" behaviours: delinquent behaviour (e.g., hitting

someone, stealing), smoking, drinking alcoholic beverages such as beer and wine,

drinking hard liquor, use of inhalants, taking pills such as uppers and downers, and using

hard drugs. The survey also included a measure of the amount and quality of youths'



143

144



participation in a variety of non-academic activities such as sports. Using cluster analysis,

the investigators identified four groupings of the youth who exhibited similar patterns of

problem behaviour. One of the clusters they identified (comprising 22.7% of their sample)

was made up of youth who showed much higher levels of smoking than the youth in the

other three clusters that were identified. These "smokers" had significantly lower levels of

participation in various non-academic activities than did individuals in clusters that were

characterized by lower levels of smoking.



Youth Engagement and Overall Risk Behaviours.



In response to a perceived need to measure youth assets, Oman and his colleagues

(Oman, Vesely, McLeroy, Harris-Wyatt, Aspy, Rodine & Marshall, 2002) developed the

Youth Asset Scale. On the basis of a review of extant literature and extensive community

consultations, including interviews with 100 youth and adult "key informants", a list of

potential assets was identified. Factor analyses of these items resulted in six

developmental asset factors, which included the engagement-related variables of

"community involvement", "constructive use of time in groups and sports", and

"constructive use of time in religious activities or groups". Oman et al. assessed the

validity of their asset variables by examining the relation between risk behaviours and the

absence of each of the assets. Risk behaviours were obtained by youth self-report and

included drug and alcohol use, smoking, fighting, carrying a weapon, truancy, sexual

activity, and being arrested or picked up by the police. Participants included 1350 youth

with an average age of 15.4 years. Youth were identified as having an asset if they

indicated that they participated in the behaviours associated with that asset

"usually/almost always", that asset-related behaviours were "very/extremely important to

you", or that participation was "mostly/very much like you". Logistical regression indicated

that youth who reported an absence of each of the three engagement assets were

significant more likely to engage in between three and seven more risk behaviours than

youth who had the assets.



Youth Engagement and Socio-emotional Difficulties



McHale, Crouter, and Tucker (2001) examined the relation between engagement and

several indices of adjustment as part of a larger study of gender development. The

children were assessed at 10 years of age at baseline and again two years later.

Adjustment measures included depression, school grades, and conduct problems.

Participation in each of seven categories of free-time activities (e.g., hobbies, sports,

reading, hanging out) was measured at each time point, as well as demographic

information. They found that time spent in hobbies and sports at baseline was inversely

related to depression at 12 years of age. Time spent in unstructured activities (hanging

out and outdoor play) at baseline predicted adjustment difficulties two years later.



Mahoney, Schweder and Stattin (2002) surveyed 703 grade 8 adolescents (351 boys and

352 girls), from six communities in central Sweden. They also sent questionnaires to the

parents of the children who were surveyed. Analyses were performed on the 537

adolescents (281 girls and 256 boys) whose parents completed a survey. The survey

contained measures of involvement in structured after-school community-based activities,

such as sports, music, theatre and fine arts, scouting, church organizations and politics.

The adolescent respondents also completed a standardized 6-item scale used to assess

depressed mood (Diekstra, 1995). The scale included such items as: "How often do you

feel as if you don't want to live any more?" (1=almost never; 5=very often). The results

indicated that adolescents who participated in structured after-school activities had

significantly lower levels of depression than did those who did not participate in such

activities. The relationship between involvement and depression was especially strong for





144

145



young people who were "detached" from their parents, in that the parents had little

knowledge of their children's activities. The individuals with detached parents showed low

levels of depression if they were involved in structured activities, but high levels if they

were not.



The researchers at the Centre for Excellence on Youth Engagement identify several issues for further

research in relation to youth engagement or participation.



 Causation and Correlation: Much of the research evidence, however, has been

correlational and concurrent in nature, in which both engagement and health variables

were measured at the same point in time. Youth engagement researchers have long

recognized problems in making causal inferences from such data. Second, correlational

links between engagement and health may be a function of a shared connection to a third

variable (e.g., both engagement and a sense of self-efficacy may be the result of financial

resources). Finally, connections between engagement and health may be a function of

selection effects, which are potential confounds in studies in which youth determine their

own level of engagement. Youth who are engaged may differ from their nonengaged

peers in a number of important ways even before they become engaged. Further,

healthier youth may be more likely to maintain their engagement over time than less

healthy youth and thus possibly amplify pre-existing differences



 Mediating Processes: a convincing argument for a causal role for engagement also

requires understanding how engagement influences well being. These explanatory

processes, which specify the mechanisms through which engagement operates, are

known as mediating variables. For example, if engagement leads to reduced marijuana

use because engaged youth make friends in an activity with other youth who believe

drug use is wrong, than the relation between engagement and drug use is said to be

"mediated" by friends' values. Similarly, Adult activity leaders can serve as role models

and mentors, as well as providing social, emotional and instrumental support (Eccles &

Barber, 1999; Larson, 1994). Relationships with adults outside the family may help

adolescents establish the autonomy necessary for a successful transition to adulthood. In

addition, engagement activities may facilitate adolescents' social integration into the

larger community, since such activities frequently provide connections to adult

community leaders, promote community values and a sense of social responsibility, and

introduce youth to community organizations and how they function.



 Moderating Variables: The type of activity appears to be an important moderator of the

relation between engagement and outcome. Another potentially important moderator is

the extent to which the engagement activity is structured or unstructured. In a relatively

early study, Agnew and Peterson (1989) concluded that participation in organized

activities was associated with reduced delinquency, while time spent in unstructured

"hanging out" predicted increased difficulty. Mahoney and Stattin (2000) recently

reported a similar finding. High school youth who were involved in structured activities

showed lower antisocial behaviours, compared with peers who spent relatively large

amounts of time in unstructured activities. Further, in a separate study, time spent in

unsupervised peer contexts was associated with subsequent adjustment problems in a

longitudinal study of early adolescence, while leisure time spent with parents and

nonparental adults predicted positive outcomes (McHale et al., 2001).



Giles et al (2001) found that effective teaching engaged students in learning about alcohol and drugs

and was positively correlated with beneficial health outcomes in a comprehensive drug education



145

146





program. They examined the relationship between students' perceptions of a problem behavior

prevention program, All Stars, and changes in the program variables. Three factors--Program

Enjoyment, Student Engagement, and Teacher Relationship--were used to predict changes in the

four variables targeted by the All Stars program. Student Engagement was related to greater

changes in student idealism, commitment, and bonding. Program Enjoyment was related to positive

changes in student idealism and normative beliefs. Teacher Relationship had little impact on the

program variables



Collingwood et al (2000) use program evaluation data from school and community applications of a

physical fitness drug prevention program to report on extra-curricular activities as an alternative to

substance use. A train-the-trainer methology was applied to install the program in twenty-two

settings within the state of Illinois. The physical training program consisted of exercise and

educational modules delivered over a twelve-week time period that focused on learning values and

life skills through exercise. Complete pre-post data were obtained on 329 participating youth at six

school and community based sites. Significant increases were demonstrated in physical activity and

physical fitness (cardiovascular endurance, strength, and flexibility). Youth self-report data

indicated significant decreases in risk factors such as low self-concept, poor school attendance,

anxiety, depression, and number of friends who use alcohol and drugs. There were significant

reductions in the percentage of youth who used cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and alcohol. It was

concluded that a strong relationship was demonstrated for increased fitness leading to lowered risk

factors and usage patterns. Likewise, the train-the-trainer model was shown to be an effective

installation approach to expand fitness programming within prevention settings.



Carlini-Cotrim & de Carvalho (1993) describe data obtained among 16,117 high-school students in

fifteen Brazilian cities, involving participation in a number of extracurricular activities and

consumption of drugs and alcohol. In the great majority of cases, no association was found between

attendance of artistic-, community-, or sports-related activities and the use of these substances. On

the other hand, a weak but constant negative association was found involving alcohol/drug

consumption and attendance of religious activities.



The Centre for Excellence in Youth Engagement (2003) Larson's (1994) longitudinal investigation

of the impact of extracurricular involvement on delinquency (described above) is a good example of

this research strategy. Path analyses were conducted separately for each of the categories of

engagement (sports, arts and hobbies, and youth group activities) for two cohorts of youth (Grades

5/6 and Grades 7/8 at baseline), who were reassessed 2 and 4 years later. Controlling for baseline

levels of each variable, path analyses were conducted to determine the influence of Time 2

engagement on Time 3 delinquency, as well as the influence of Time 2 delinquency on engagement

at Time 3. Overall, Larson's (1994) results provide good evidence that involvement in arts and

hobbies, as well as participation in youth group activities, may reduce later delinquency. There was

no evidence for the hypothesis that delinquency affected subsequent engagement in either youth

group activities or arts and hobbies. Sports involvement, however, did not appear to influence later

delinquency. In fact, the significant inverse correlation between sports at Time 2 and Time 3

delinquency was better explained by the impact of delinquency on sports participation than the

effect of sports participation on delinquency.



In a similarly designed study, McHale, Crouter, and Tucker (2001) investigated relations between

free time activities and adjustment in middle childhood and early adolescence. They wanted to test

the hypothesis that youth select themselves into activities on the basis of pre-existing background

factors or personal attributes. McHale and her colleagues tested whether adjustment at 10 years of

age predicted activities at 12 years of age better than age 10 activities predicted age 12 adjustment.



146

147





They concluded that there was more support for the hypothesis that adjustment predicted activities

than the reverse pattern, although they concluded that associations between activities and

adjustment over time were probably reciprocal. Similar to Larson's (1994) findings, they found the

relation depended on the specific activity and adjustment measure. In addition, the measures of

activity participation showed lower longitudinal stability than the adjustment measures and this

differential stability may have affected the results.



School-based Mentoring Programs



McLaughlin et al (1993) report on a small case study of a teacher-mentor program that was

successful in reducing drug use in the short term. A Teachers as Facilitators (TAF) Program used

classroom teachers as leaders of small groups that promoted social, emotional, and academic

development of children at high risk of adopting potentially destructive substance abuse patterns.

The program was intended to increase participating students' positive socialization experiences and

academic achievement by successfully integrating these students into the school's social system. A

longer-range goal was to increase students' sense of worth as it affects their attitudes toward

relationships with other people and academic demands. Program results were: 1) school personnel

were found capable of accurately identifying and referring to the TAF Program children who were

at risk of substance usage and in need of assistance; 2) the TAF Program was effective in improving

at-risk students' perceived academic self-concept, but was less effective in increasing students'

perceived sense of social support; and 3) the program was endorsed by participating teachers,

counselors, and administrators.



Sipe (2002) provides a meta-analysis of mentoring programs for adolescents. He reviews the

research conducted on youth mentoring programs from the mid-1980s through the late 1990s. A

number of studies have documented the varied benefits youth derive through participation in

programmatic mentoring ranging from improved relationships to a reduction in the initiation of drug

and alcohol use. Not all mentors or mentoring programs, however, are equally effective. Strategies

that mentors use to foster the development of positive relationships and effective program practices,

related to screening, training, and ongoing support are also discussed. Finally, some questions that

remain to be addressed by the mentoring field are presented.



Community Service Learning



The Centre for Excellence on Youth Engagement (2003) has cited a well-controlled intervention

study, O'Donnell and her colleagues (O'Donnell et al., 1999), which showed that community service

involvement led to reduced violence . Details of the study are described above in the section on the

relation between engagement and violent/delinquent behaviours. There are several specific design

aspects of this study, however, that are particularly important for determining the potential causal

role of engagement on health outcomes. First, students were randomly assigned to experimental and

control group, through their classrooms. This means that groups were likely to be equal in

background and personal attributes before the engagement intervention. It also eliminates selection

effects as a possible explanation for the results. Second, the authors included pre- and post-test

measures, as well as a 6-month follow-up to assess long term effects. There is clearly a need for

similarly designed experimental studies to clarify the causal role of engagement in promoting

healthy youth.



As well the Centre for Excellence on Youth Engagement (2003) has cited an assessment of the

"Youth Volunteer" projects by Hamilton and Fenzel (1988) showed that, overall, participants in the

program showed modest but enduring gains in social responsibility over the project duration. Youth



147

148





in community service activities made greater gains sense of social responsibility than participants in

engaged in child care activities. These results were based on a sample of 44 adolescents, ranging in

age from 11 to 17 years of age. Conclusions from this study are limited, however, due to its

relatively small sample size and lack of a control group. The study by Jones and Offord (1989),

described earlier, provides support for engagement or participation as the causal factor. A primary

component of their preventive intervention was the opportunity for youth to participate in various

community activities, directed by highly skilled adults. They found that a community that offered

young people opportunities for participation had lower rates of youth crime than did a matched

control community that did not offer such opportunities. Allen, Philliber, Herling & Gabriel (1997)

found that adolescents who were randomly assigned to participate in a community service program

showed significantly better long-term adjustment than youth who were assigned to a control

condition in which they were not given the opportunity to participate in community service.



The Centre of Excellence on Youth Engagement (2003) has reviewed other evidence on

community service learning.



Youniss, Yates and Su (1997) used data from an ongoing survey of high school seniors

conducted annually by the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan to

look at the relationship between student activities and drug use. The survey is

administered each spring in about 125 public and private high schools representing a

cross section of high schools across the United States. Included in the survey were

measures of students' school involvements (e.g., working on school publications), creative

activities (e.g., creative writing), sports (e.g., playing sports either inside or outside

school), and partying (e.g., going to bars, parties). They grouped students into five

orientations based on their level of involvement in each of these activities: (1) a school

orientation; (2) a party orientation; (3) an all-around orientation (students who were high in

all four kinds of activities); (4) an average orientation (students who were average on all

activities); and (5) a disengaged orientation (students who were low in all activities). Also

measured on the survey was students' involvement in community service and marijuana

use. The results indicated that the more students were involved in community service, the

less frequently they used marijuana. This relationship between community service

involvement and marijuana use was found for all the orientations except for the "all-

around" orientation.



The relationship between marijuana use and community service involvement was

confirmed in another study by Youniss, McLellan, Su and Yates (1999), using a different

sample of adolescents from the annual survey conducted by the Institute for Social

Research. For this study, the authors utilized data collected from nearly 17,000 high

school seniors between 1988 and 1993. Participation in community service activities was

assessed by a survey item asking respondents to indicate the extent to which they had

participated in community service or civic affairs in the previous year Once again,

participation was significantly related to the frequency with which the students reported

having used marijuana in the previous 12 months. The more frequent their participation in

community service or civic affairs, the less frequently they used marijuana.



The relationship between community service and marijuana use was also found in the

studies using data from the Michigan Study of Adolescent Life Transitions (Eccles &

Barber, 1999; Barber, Eccles and Stone, 2001). Both these investigations found that

individuals who reported participating in community service and volunteer activities when

they were in grade 10 were less likely to use marijuana both in their later teenage years,

and into young adulthood. In addition to looking at marijuana use, the Eccles and Barber

(1999) study assessed use of hard drugs, using the same kind of scale that they had used

in assessing marijuana use (i.e., frequency of use in the previous six months, on a 7 point



148

149



scale ranging from "none" (1) to "21 or more times" (7)). They found that individuals who

participated in prosocial activities such as volunteering in grade 10 reported using hard

drugs less frequently when assessed two years later, in grade 12.



The Centre for Excellence (2003) identifies these implications for future research in youth

engagement through school and community social activities.



1. Research is needed in which 'pathways' to engagement are examined in the context of health

outcomes, for example, through the naturalistic, longitudinal study of youth (Farrow & Saewyc,

2002)

2. Each of the issues discussed above in relation to moderating, mediating, and causal factors

have important implications for future research. For example, little is know about the process by

which engagement is linked to outcomes (mediating processes).

3. We need to better understand how and why engagement is linked to health outcomes,

depending on the nature of the engagement, the type of outcome, and the particular persons

involved (moderating processes). This will require longitudinal studies involving large sample

sizes of youth, including highly involved and highly non-engaged youth from various

backgrounds. Such studies will also require measurement of a variety of health-related

outcomes and types of engagement.



This research agenda is similar to the one published by Calvert et al (2002).



Parent Involvement Programs



Not all parents have the time or resources to be fully involved in school activities. Consequently,

there needs to be a variety of specific ways that parents can become involved. Individual parent

involvement in school-related health promotion can occur in these ways.

 being regularly informed of their child's academic progress in health instruction, as well

as, their human, social and healthy development

 receiving additional, regular reports when their child is experiencing difficulty

 being informed of health or social problems relevant to their community

 receiving information on the goals of the school's health programs and relevant

community health services

 being involved in home-based learning activities that support the health curriculum and

classroom instruction

 responding to surveys on school health issues and programs

 being educated or trained in parenting skills or strategies on specific health problems

 being a parent volunteer for school activities relating to health

 electing parents to school advisory committees or councils that take an interest in health

issues



Collectively, parents can be involved in these ways:

 organizing a parent information meeting, workshop, parenting course or parent resource

center in the school

 serving on a parent committee or subcommittee on health

 fundraising for health materials, resources or equipment for the school

 forming a group to advocate for school or community health policies, programs or

services

 advocating for policy from the municipality, school board or board of health

 forming or joining a voluntary or self-help group







149

150





Inform, Educate, Involve and Empower



Based on the review of the research, it is suggested that schools can develop four different types of

approaches to programs to engaging parents in school-related health promotion. They are

informing, educating, involving and empowering.



Informing parents about health issues, programs and policies. This is the type of approach

most often used by schools and health agencies. The strategy is to raise general awareness

within the population using the school as a site to transmit information.



Educating or training parents in health-related knowledge or skills. There are several

programs addressing single health issues, as well as, general parent effectiveness programs that

illustrate this type of approach. Often an external agency partners with a school to offer this type

of program. At-risk families are often seen as the client for such programs.



Involving parents with their children's learning or in school/community decision-making about

health education, prevention and promotion. This type of program seeks to change the way

programs, services and policies are developed and implemented within the school, district,

health agency or community.



Empowering parents to influence public policy decisions. The goal of these activities is to

share the decision-making process with parents so that self-help or advocacy groups are

supported and new or different programs, services or policies are introduced that support

parental participation.



Parent Involvement In Prevention



A Health Canada review (Whitehead & Gliksman, 1984) of parenting programs has identified

several messages that can be delivered to parents, including how to (1) clarify and explain values,

(2) model behaviours, (3) understand children‘s needs and self-concept, (4) develop

communications skills and engage in reflective listening, (5) problem-solve, (6) use appropriate

reinforcement techniques, (7) present natural consequences, (8) use behavioural contracts, (9) foster

a democratic milieu within the family and (10) understand different parenting styles.



Research on the effectiveness of parent programs to prevent health and social problems is at an

early stage. Although the rationale for involving parents is solid (Mangham, 1992), several

reviewers (Dembo et al, 1985; White et al, 1992; Tobler, 1986; Bangert-Drowns, 1988) have

concluded that the results are inconclusive. This may be because of poor design of parent programs

resulting in the exclusion of at-risk parents; not coordinating parent education programs with other

health, social, employment training and housing services; and poor implementation of programs

(CASH, 1992).



Powell (1990) reviewed the research on parent education and support programs as well. Positive

effects of intensive, early childhood education programs included enhanced child competence,

maternal behaviours and several family characteristics. The success of these programs depended

upon the number of contacts with families and the range of services offered to the families.

Successful programs were characterized by collegial relationships between parents and staff, a

balanced focus on the needs of the child and the parent to create supportive social networks,

tailoring programs to specific groups of parents and allocating significant program time to open-

ended discussion.



150

151







Researchers are now reporting case studies of parental involvement in prevention programs. They

are also beginning to construct theories to explain why parents become involved or choose not to

participate.



Hahn et al (1996) used the Health Belief Model (HBM) to guide their examination of parent

involvement in a school-related drug prevention program for very young children. HBM suggests

that people will take action to prevent health probl



demographic, socio-psychological and structural situation.



They concluded that parents become involved when certain cues are received. These are: their

children's enthusiasm, transportation, child care and other incentives, positive attitudes from school

personnel, a combination of communications strategies and having multiple channels for their

participation.



Brock & Beazley (1995) also use the Health Belief Model (HBM) to explain parents‘ decisions to

participate in at-home learning activities in a grade nine AIDS/HIV and sexuality education

program. They found that 44% of the 100 parents who responded to the survey reported that they

were either moderately or highly involved in the five at-home activities. The authors noted that 20%

of the parents never received a guide from their children. They recommend a variety of

communication strategies to ensure that parents are informed of the existence of the activities

including direct mail, adaptation of materials to lower literacy levels, use of local media,

cooperation with parent councils and a covering letter from the principal.



Hearn et al (1992) reported that 75% of parents of 4th grade students participated in at-home

learning activities relating to cardiovascular health. Parents reported positive changes in some

nutrition habits, physical activity and role modeling as a result of the combined at-home and

classroom program. Parents with lower socio-economic status did not participate or benefit as

much, thereby requiring specific attention in programming.



Werch et al (1991) reported on the effects of a take-home drug prevention program using at-home

correspondence and other activities. 90% of mothers reported helping their children complete at

least one-fourth of the materials. Parent-child communications had no apparent impact of children's

intent to experiment with drugs. The authors recommended changes in program messages and

content.



Perry et al (1990) studied parental involvement in a smoking prevention program for students in

grades four to six. 95% of the parents participated in the program, with the child initiating the

activity in the vast majority of cases. Behavioural impacts were restricted to parents who were

smokers reporting that they intended to quit. Family discussions about smoking definitely increased

as a result of the program.



Perry et al, (1989) and Crockett et al (1989) have examined the behavioral impact of involving

parents of third grade students in at-home learning activities that complemented the classroom

instruction. The students that had home-based activities were compared to those with just the

classroom instruction. The results showed that home-based learning with instruction had a

significant effect on nutrition habits.







151

152





Perry et al, (19--), assessed the impact of a home learning activity program for the parents of pre-

adolescents. The program created an opportunity for parents to discuss smoking with their children.



Brannon et al, (1989) report that a combination of parent, TV and classroom instruction was able to

involve students in discussions with their parents and to gain wide participant acceptance.



Simons-Morton et al, (1984) reported that a combined instruction, parent and media program was

able to influence the snack choices of third and fourth grade students, at least for period of up to

eight weeks. However, the effect of the combined interventions declined after that time period.



Meininger (2000) found that studies combining behaviourally focused interventions with students

with efforts to change the social environment of the school by involving families and community

had little effect



Good et al (1997) describe an approach to neighbourhood-based consultation that emphasizes

collaboration with advocacy for local citizens. The primary goal is to facilitate involvement of

families and other citizens in collective action. It illustrates the assessment, collaboration, and

organizing activities dictated by an open-system, ecologically oriented community approach. The

authors define an open system as one that is understood to be part of its local context. In this case,

school boundaries are assumed to extend into the neighbourhood, and vice versa. Considered

within the school boundaries are families of the school children, neighbours, local businesses,

churches, and other community resources. Similarly, the school is viewed as a potential resource

for each of these. Practice involves assessment of direct interests as defined by participants,

development of bridge-building activities between school and citizens, small wins over time, and

long-range commitment to creation of organizational structures that connect the culture of the

school and the interests of the neighbourhood. Three types of participation structures were

identified: (a) settings and opportunities for families to have two-way communication with the

school; (b) settings and opportunities that promote communication among families; and (c) active

parent organizations that participate in decision making and planning, allowing for families to

communicate their interests as a group of stakeholders. Bridging activities include special event

and program planning along with spontaneous "moments of opportunity" that express family and

neighbourhood interests. The entry, assessment, and development of bridging activities in search

for more permanent structures is described in the context of the school district and its historical

relation to the neighbourhood. Questions addressed in the article included: 1) How can low-income

families be involved in schools in ways that benefit both their own empowerment and the well-

being of their children? 2) Where do barriers exist for meaningful participation of families in

schools?, and 3) What are the characteristics of meaningful family involvement?



Kumpfer et al (2002) tested the effectiveness of a multicomponent prevention program, Project

SAFE (Strengthening America's Families and Environment), with 655 1st graders from 12 rural

schools. This sample was randomly assigned to receive the I Can Problem Solve (ICPS) program

(M. B. Shure & G. Spivack, 1979), alone or combined with the Strengthening Families (SF)

program (K. L. Kumpfer, J. P. DeMarsh, & W. Child, 1989), or SF parent training only. Nine-

month change scores revealed significantly larger improvements and effect sizes (0.35 to 1.26) on

all outcome variables (school bonding, parenting skills, family relationships, social competency,

and behavioral self-regulation) for the combined ICPS and SF program compared with ICPS-only

or no-treatment controls. Adding parenting-only improved social competency and self-regulations

more but negatively impacted family relationships, whereas adding SF improved family

relationships, parenting, and school bonding more.





152

153





Weeks et al (1997) tested the effectiveness of involving parents in school-based AIDS education

with respect to altering AIDS-related knowledge, attitudes, behavioral intentions, communications

patterns, and behavior of students. Fifteen high risk school districts (pre-test N = 2,392) were

randomly assigned to one of three conditions: parent-interactive (classroom curricula + parent-

interactive component); parent non-interactive (classroom curricula only); control (basic AIDS

education ordinarily provided by the school). Students were tested over time in grades 7, 8 and 9.

Results indicate that both treatment conditions (parent-interactive and non-interactive) had a strong

positive impact in enhancing student's knowledge, attitudes, communication patterns and behavioral

intentions. However, results also indicate that there were no behavioral outcome differences

between the treatment groups and the control condition. Results demonstrate few outcome

differences between the two experimental conditions.



In the two treatment groups (parent-interactive and parent non-interactive), the program effects

appear to be the result of school-based curricula and of student self-determined intentions and

behaviors, rather than the presence or absence of planned parental involvement. Whether or not

structured or planned parental involvement becomes part of a school-based educational activity

should perhaps be determined by (a) the existing level of parent-school interaction based on the

nature of the community, (b) the amount of money readily available to follow through on a program

of parent involvement without compromising on student programs, (c) the age of the child and the

sensitivity of the issue, and (d) the ability of the parent/family to be involved effectively without

extraordinary expense or sacrifice by either parent or school.



Hahn et al (1998) studied the effects of a school and home-based drug prevention program on risk

factors for subsequent alcohol, tobacco, and other drug (ATOD) use among children were studied.

Data on parent and child risk factors for ATOD use were collected from fifty-six low-income

parents and their children, ages four to six years, using a pretest-posttest design. The parent-child

intervention was conducted over a two-month period. The intervention had no effect on parent or

child risk factors. However, the program was favorably received by parents and children.



Kumpfer et al (2003 examined the impact of a family-based drug education program. Because

"substance abuse" is a "family disease" of lifestyle, including both genetic and family

environmental causes, effective family strengthening prevention programs should be included in all

comprehensive substance abuse prevention activities. This article presents reviews of causal models

of substance use and evidence-based practices. National searches by the authors suggest that there is

sufficient research evidence to support broad dissemination of five highly effective family

strengthening approaches (e.g., behavioral parent training, family skills training, in-home family

support, brief family therapy, and family education). Additionally, family approaches have average

effect sizes two to nine time larger than child-only prevention approaches. Comprehensive

prevention programs combining both approaches produced much larger effect sizes. The

Strengthening Families Program (SFP) is the only one of these programs that has been replicated

with positive results by independent researchers with different cultural groups and with different

ages of children. Few research-based programs have been adopted by practitioners, partly because

of technology transfer issues. Overall, research on ways to improve dissemination, marketing,

training, and funding is needed to improve adoption of effective prevention programs.



Werch et al (2003) examined the one-year follow-up effects of the STARS (Start Taking Alcohol

Risks Seriously) for Families program, a 2-year preventive intervention based on a stage of

acquisition model, and consisting of nurse consultations and parent materials. A randomized

controlled trial was conducted, with participants receiving either the intervention or a minimal

intervention control. Participants included a cohort of 650 sixth-grade students from two urban



153

154





middle schools-one magnet (bused) and one neighborhood. For the magnet school sample,

significantly fewer intervention students (5%) were planning to drink in the next 6 months than

control students (18%), chi2 = 11.53, 1 d.f., P = 0.001. Magnet school intervention students also had

less intentions to drink in the future, greater motivation to avoid drinking and less total alcohol risk

than control students, Ps 70%

wanted to become involved or more involved and needed information on how they may be able to

participate. Only 25% believed they were adequately prepared. Two thirds believed school-based

clinics were one of the best ways to reach underserved children and adolescents and should include

preteens. They concluded that AAP pediatricians want to become more involved with

comprehensive school health programs. The ways in which they want to participate vary

substantially. Most pediatricians thought they needed additional education.



Epling et al (2003) present the rationale and describe how to develop and implement Case-based

teaching in preventive medicine. They suggest that the importance of prevention teaching is



165

166





increasingly recognized in medical education, but its implementation in medical school curricula is

hampered by its cross-specialty nature, lack of curricular time, and perception as a topic of less

importance than the traditional basic and clinical sciences. The Case-Based Series in Population-

Oriented Prevention (C-POP) was developed to address national objectives for prevention education

in a format that recognizes the students' abilities and preferences for case-based learning. This series

uses small-group discussion cases that can be adapted to a variety of settings and instructor

capabilities. These cases guide the learners from a specific clinical problem to the broader clinical

and population-based prevention issues for the topic. The cases were developed with the use of

local health department scenarios and data and have been taught and refined in a number of settings.

As part of the curriculum development project, evaluation tools that examined prevention skills and

orientation were developed and tested. With its emphasis on small-group learning, clinical

relevance, and adaptability to a variety of learner and instructor needs, the C-POP project

effectively integrates prevention concepts into medical education.



Berkovitz & Sinclair E.(2001) discuss the need to train psychiatrists in school consultation and

suggest that it is important to approach mental health and psychosocial concerns from the broad

perspective of addressing barriers to learning and promoting healthy development. There is a major

national impetus to improve academic achievement and literacy, which can be amplified by

addressing the social, emotional, and mental health needs of children and youth. Training in school

consultation allows the psychiatrist to better understand a critical institution in each child's life and

also provides technical assistance and training to school personnel, which facilitates networking

between programs and individuals involved in or interested in school mental health.



Hootman et al (2002) describe a program to educate school nurses about mental health

interventions. An educational program was designed to assist school nurses in the identification of

potential mental health problems. In addition, information about appropriate interventions for

students at risk for aggression, violence, and other mental health pathology was presented. The

program involved education on mental health assessment and intervention, as well as expert

psychiatric clinical support for the development of student support groups. School nurses were then

challenged to develop practice improvement projects incorporating this knowledge for a group of

students in their work setting.



Nader et al (2003) report on two national surveys on pediatric training and activities in school

health: 1991 and 2001 in the US. to determine whether training/education during residency

influences doing school health later in practice, and whether the amount or nature of residency

training in school health (as reported by practicing pediatricians) increased over time, as

recommended by various task forces. When resident education in school health is offered during

residency, it is associated with a higher likelihood of pediatricians' doing school health later in

practice. Recent trainees report having more residency training in school health, yet fewer recent

trainees report doing school health compared with their older colleagues. The gap between those

who do school health and have received education in school health during residency has continued

over at least a 10-year period. Recommendations include specification of school health and

community pediatrics competencies for the effective practice of pediatrics in the future.



Bullock et al (2002) used a survey to determine if attendance at specific continuing education

programs increased the perceived competence of school nurses who enrolled and completed the

programs. Respondents were queried about the general content of six courses offered by the

Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services in conjunction with the University of Missouri-

Columbia Sinclair School of Nursing. Specific content areas were mental health concerns, suicide

prevention, diabetes management, asthma management, seizure disorders, and developing clinical



166

167





skills as they pertained to school-age children. Comparing a sample of school nurses who had

attended the programs with a group whom had not, a statistically significant difference was found in

the participant group who reported higher self-perceived competence than the nonparticipant group

in all content areas. Results of the study suggest that school nurses who attend specific continuing

education programs feel more competent in practice than nurses who do not attend.



Burger & Spickard (1991) have described an attempt to integrate substance abuse into the

curriculum of a traditionally organized medical school. Faculty selection, determination of the skills

and knowledge needed, and methods for enriching the curriculum to include substance abuse are

discussed. Problems encountered during the project, benefits of implementing the curriculum

changes, and recommendations for other medical schools choosing to implement such a program

also are provided.



Power et al (2003) discuss Preparing psychologists to link systems of care in managing and

preventing children's health problems. They describe multiple pathways for the preparation of child-

oriented psychologists to link health, educational, and family systems, in keeping with the National

Institute of Mental Health guidelines for preparing professionals in child and adolescent

psychology. These pathways include training embedded in graduate programs specializing in

clinical child, pediatric, school, community, and family psychology. This article highlights a

training initiative for preparing child-oriented psychologists based in a school psychology program.



Interdisciplinary Training



Lia-Hoagberg et al (1997) reported on the value of creating inter-disciplinary teams of health and

education professionals. They describe an interdisciplinary health team training program for school-

based clinic staff in Minnesota. The project sought to improve team functioning, level of practice,

and health care services at the school sites. Participants were interdisciplinary staff members from

clinics in senior high, middle, and elementary schools. The program consisted of further

development in team training knowledge and skills and educational sessions on issues identified by

participants. Evaluations indicated participants reported greater knowledge and improved team

functioning experiences from the team training. Gains also were shown in knowledge and skills in

specific school topic areas such as violence, resiliency, working with resistant families, and self-

care. The program could serve as a model for other interdisciplinary school health team training



Mason & Wood (2000) found similar results with training of education and mental health workers.

A model is presented to illustrate a clinical mental health training program within a

multidisciplinary School-Based Health Clinic (SBHC). In collaboration with schools of education,

medicine, nursing, and social work, a multidisciplinary training and treatment program was

established that provided unique opportunities for clinical training. An ecological/public health

model was utilized as the conceptual framework for clinical mental health training, treatment, and

research. Preliminary clinical outcome data suggest that out of a sample of 381 patients, 15% of

those utilizing the SBHC's mental health services were being treated for substance abuse disorders.

This finding supports current research that has demonstrated that the SBHCs are providing access to

students who are in the most serious need to mental health services. Process data suggest that the

SBHC is an effective site for multidisciplinary clinical mental health training



Training/Staff Development & Technology



Findings indicate that more active innovation ands collaboration in the use of technology would

provide additional training for current staff .



167

168







Farel et al (2001) describe the effect of an online analytic skills training course on professional

development and practice and discusses recommendations for using this training modality in the

public health workforce. The Enhancing Data Utilization Skills Through Information Technology

initiative trained professionals in maternal and child health from 13 Southerntier state and local

health departments to collect, analyze, and interpret data via a year-long Web-based course. The

evaluation of this initiative was based on a model of change for health professionals that holds that

training influences behavior by increasing knowledge, influencing beliefs related to the behavior,

enhancing self-efficacy, and improving skills. Participants' knowledge, beliefs, and self-efficacy all

increased significantly during the course. Participants' self-assessed skill levels increased

significantly for each of 12 selected skills and overall for all skills combined. Distance learning is

potentially an effective means for professionals to advance their skills while continuing to fulfill

their work-related responsibilities.



An early study of computerized information for professional develoment purposes (Bosworth &,

Yoast, 1991) found that school staff used the information in their program planning. The computer

system, DIADS, provided access to a cost-effective planning resource that has information to

programs about alcohol, other drugs, and prevention, helps the school assess the effectiveness of its

current prevention efforts using an expert-generated school assessment model containing fourteen

factors. Feedback from the assessment provides suggestions for improvements in current prevention

programs. DIADS guides the selection of future activities and helps in program planning. Pilot test

of DIADS at several sites indicates school personnel find the information on DIADS helpful, timely

and easy to access



Bynum et al (2002) report on differential responses to distance education/training (telehealth)

programs. Socioeconomic and demographic factors can affect the impact of telehealth education

programs that use interactive compressed video technology. This study assessed program

satisfaction among participants in the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences' School

Telehealth Education Program delivered by interactive compressed video. Variables in the one-

group posttest study were age, gender, ethnicity, education, community size, and program topics for

years 1997-1999. The convenience sample included 3,319 participants in junior high and high

schools. The School Telehealth Education Program provided information about health risks, disease

prevention, health promotion, personal growth, and health sciences. Adolescents reported medium

to high levels of satisfaction regarding program interest and quality. Significantly higher satisfaction

was expressed for programs on muscular dystrophy, anatomy of the heart, and tobacco addiction (p

< 0.001 to p = 0.003). Females, African Americans, and junior high school students reported

significantly greater satisfaction (p < 0.001 to p = 0.005). High school students reported

significantly greater satisfaction than junior high school students regarding the interactive video

equipment (p = 0.011). White females (p = 0.025) and African American males (p = 0.004) in

smaller, rural communities reported higher satisfaction than White males. The School Telehealth

Education Program, delivered by interactive compressed video, promoted program satisfaction

among rural and minority populations and among junior high and high school students. Effective

program methods included an emphasis on participants' learning needs, increasing access in rural

areas among ethnic groups, speaker communication, and clarity of the program presentation.



Basen-Engquist et al (1994) did a similar study on the impact of video-based vs workshop training

of teachers in tobacco education. This study examined the implementation phase of a four-year

research project to test the effectiveness of strategies to increase diffusion of Smart Choices, a

school-based tobacco prevention program. The impact on curriculum implementation of two

approaches to teacher training are compared. School districts were randomly assigned to a live



168

169





workshop training or video training condition. The outcome of the evaluation was teachers'

implementation of Smart Choices. Results show a lower proportion of video-trained teachers

implemented the curriculum, but overall completeness and fidelity of implementation for those

teachers who did teach the curriculum were comparable for the two groups. Video-trained teachers,

however, were less likely to use brainstorming and student presentations/role plays, two of the

methods prescribed by the curriculum. Implications of the results for teacher training are discussed.









169

170



9. Involve, Empower Individuals and Groups



This sub-section examines the population health principle that health promotion programs are

more effective if individuals, groups and communities are involved and empowered in the

decisions affecting their health. In the school setting, this plays out through the involvement of

students, parents, volunteers and staff in classroom/school decision-making as well as decisions

about youth programs delivered by public health, addictions and other agencies.



Our findings in this sub-section can be summarized as follows:

 there is considerable research evidence showing correlations between youth/student

engagement and health as well as risk behaviours such as drug use. However, the

cause effect relationship is not clearly established and there needs to be more critical

examination of which youth (leaders vs participants) actually benefit. Very few

studies examine the impact of youth participation in decision-making on the

participants or recipients of the youth driven decisions.

 There is considerable research to show that parent involvement in their children’s

education and their values and expectations about schooling have a important

impact on achievement and health. However, collective parental involvement in

school decision-health care, or other agencies making is yet to be strongly

correlated, let alone seen as a cause, of either improved school performance or

healthier student outcomes

 The European definition of “health promoting schools” emphasizes “democratic

participation” more strongly than North American or other models. This is similar

to the emergence of calls for “democratic” schooling.

 School systems are using several formal means to involve and engage its clients in

decision-making, including student councils and consultations, obligatory student

community service learning, student leadership programs, parent councils,

mandatory report cards for parents and satisfaction surveys, school goal-setting,

school report cards, extensive use of Indicators as well as informal means such as

“active learning”, “styles of learning” and school climate enhancement to improve

levels of involvement and engagement. These multiple measures are far greater in

scope than those used by systems such as recreation, public health, or other youth-

serving agencies. Whether all of these measures are sufficient to counteract other

competing pressures on schools to measure, standardize and improve academic

results in selected academic subjects as well as overcome an underlying function to

transmit dominant values, norms and to exercise social control is another question.

Indeed, the built-in “inertia” of loosely coupled systems and professional

bureaucracies may actually safeguard schools and students from governments

wishing to exert too direct control over their direction.



Engaging, Empowering Youth in Decision-Making



Please note that this sub-section examines youth participation in decision-making of schools and

public health agencies. Other forms of engagement, such as peer programs, extra-curricular

activities, student leadership, and community service learning are discussed in the sub-section

above on involving and empowering individuals and groups.



The World Youth Report (Lansdowne, 2003) has summarized the evidence supporting a youth

engagement/development agenda:







170

171



―Participation promotes the well-being and development of young people. It is by questioning,

expressing their views and having their opinions taken seriously that young people develop

skills, build competencies, acquire confidence and form aspirations. It is a virtuous circle. The

more opportunities a young person has for meaningful participation, the more experienced

and competent he or she becomes. This allows more effective participation, which in turn

enhances development.‖



An expert on youth participation (Roger Hart) has described such involvement in an eight step

Ladder, described below in reverse order. The bottom three rungs describe youth involvement that

is not true participation whereas the top five rungs describe true participation.



8. Youth-initiated, shared decisions with adults is when projects or

programs are initiated by youth and decision-making is shared among

youth and adults. These project empower youth while enabling them to

learn from experience and the expertise of adults.

7. Youth-initiated and directed is when young people initiate and direct a

project or program

Adults are involved only in a supportive role.

6. Adult-initiated, shared decisions with youth is when projects or

programs are initiated by adults but the decision-making is shared with

the young people.

5. Consulted and informed is when youth give advice on projects or

programs designed and run by adults. The youth are informed about

how their input will be used and the outcomes of the decisions made by

adults.

4. Assigned but informed is where youth are assigned a specific role and

informed about how and why they are being involved.

3. Tokenism is where young people appear to be given a voice, but in fact

have little or no choice about what they do or how they participate.

2. Decoration is where young people are used to help or "bolster" a cause

in a relatively indirect way, although adults do not pretend that the

cause is inspired by youth.

1. Manipulation is where adults use youth to support causes and

pretend that the causes are inspired by youth





This review did not identify many studies indicating that youth participation in the decision-making of

adult agencies or programs has an impact of their health and well-being. As well, it is likely that the

distinction in the impact of the experience between the youth representative and youth in general would

need to be made here as well. However, the limits of this review prevented an in-depth examination of

this sub-topic.



Involving Parents in Decision-Making



Again, please note that this sub-section is addressing the impact of parental involvement in

decision-making of the school and public health programs through mechanisms such as formal

consultations, parent councils and other processes. Please see the more detailed discussion of parent

involvement in the section above on creating social support within a comprehensive approach to

school health promotion. That previous section covers the programs and policies promoting

involvement of individual parents in the health and learning of their children.



As in the case of youth, the evidence that individual parent participation in the health, development

and education of their children is quite strong. However, this review did not locate much evidence



171

172





that formal participation of parents in school or agency program decision-making had a significant

impact.



Rothwell (1992) examined the different forms of parental involvement. Her review indicates that

properly planned programs result in greater student achievement and more support for schools. She

also concluded that parental involvement can help to compensate for socioeconomic differences and

that school personnel can assist parents to be more effective in supporting their child.



Valpy (1995) has suggested that one of the best recommendations of the recent Ontario Royal

Commission on learning was the creation of school-community councils. He suggests that such

councils could become the "village educating the child", thereby providing a variety of resources

and support services. However, we did not locate any study that examined the impact of involving

such councils in prevention.



Add studies of parental involvement in decision-making that show little correlation to academic

achievement or health outcomes. OPSOA, etc





Involving Empowering Volunteers









Involving, Empowering Staff





Involving Empowering Community



Health Canada (199_ ) has developed a position paper and other materials which address one of the

primary determinants of heart health; the physical environment and economic resources available to

populations to follow heart healthy behaviors. The position paper, Promoting Heart Health in

Canada: Focus on Heart Health Inequalities presents the rationale and a fully explained process for

use of community development and advocacy strategies to increase the physical resources and

economic capacity of communities to improve their health. The paper shows that there is an

interaction between the risk conditions associated with poverty [occupation stress, polluted

environment, discrimination] and psychosocial risk factors [isolation, low self-esteem, low

perceived power] and behavioral risk factors [smoking, poor nutrition, physical inactivity]. The risk

conditions, psychosocial risk factors and behavioral risk factors eventually create greater risk to

cardiovascular disease.



This paper then presents a continuum for community health development.



Personal Small Group Community Coalition Political Aaction

Empowerment Development Organization Advocacy

practicing improving social developing local lobbying for supporting broad-

develop- support actions on healthier public based social

ment case work commu- policies movements

nity defined health

issues

enhancing promoting engaging in achieving creating a vision

personal personal behavior critical strategic of a sustainable,

perceptions of change community/pro- consensus pre- ferred future,



172

173



control and power fessional dialogue en- hancing

partici- patory

democracy

providing support raising conflict to collaborating and

for lifestyle the conscious conducting conflict

choices level resolution







Community Development



Health Canada has also published (199 ) a guide to mobilizing communities for heart health action.

This document identifies for key phases, each of which must be successful, for the intervention to

succeed. Phase One is community entry, enabling health promoters to find sustainable linkages to

the community being mobilized. Phase Two requires that the mechanisms for change be identified.

These will be specific to each community. Phase Three, activating the process, also will evolve

differently in different communities. Phase Four, implementing concrete plans, is perhaps the most

obvious and perhaps the easiest of the four stages. The document also suggests training and

technical systems for both health professionals and citizens/community leaders.



A public health effectiveness project undertaken by the Hamilton Teaching Health Unit Hayward et

al, 1993) discussed an empowerment-based approach to working with clients and communities.

This report links a community development approach to public health practice and provides a clear

role and rationale for public health nurses to follow.



Add more from Community School research here, examining the school as a hub for

community development.









173

174



10. Focus on Public Policy and Cost Benefits



This sub-section addresses the population health principle that public policy must actively

promote health. In the comprehensive school health framework, this policy element plays out

in four ways; there needs to be effective “policy” (that includes implementation and evaluation

cycles), there needs to be explicit policy supporting a comprehensive (integrated issues and

coordinated interventions), there needs to be specific and comprehensive policies on a variety

of health problems, and there needs to be a constant search for cost –effectiveness, cost-

benefits and sustainability. From systems theory, we know that schools, public health and other

systems that work with schools are open to external influences and pressures. This makes

effective policy-making more difficult.



Our findings in this sub-section are:

o this search found few studies that analyzed macro-policies and policy-making

processes exercised by governments aimed at ensuring that policy development

is multi-sectorial, supported, implemented and evaluated regularly

o most school health policy studies focused on the school system, especially

individual schools and appear to not recognize the policy-making process of

school systems nor show any interest in school health policies adopted by

regional health authorities, addictions agencies, social service agencies or police

services

o a small number of case studies were identified in this search that reported

different or little impacts on ATOD behaviours. A combination of policy,

instructional, service an environmental interventions is more effective and

recommended.

o a 1995 Ontario study indicates that most school board policies on alcohol/drugs

are comprehensive in nature. There are several publications on the appropriate

content nature of these comprehensive policies.

o zero tolerance and school-based drug searches have emerged as a controversial

policy topic.

o several cost-benefit studies on different health issues were located in this search.

However, there were none identified that addressed alcohol and drugs. Studies

on tobacco show that cost-benefits are significant. Further study into alcohol

and drugs is suggested.



Criteria for Effective Macro-Policy on Policy-making, Implementation and Monitoring



Policy-making is emerging as a key, overarching concern for school health approaches and

programs. The basics of effective policy-making (macro-policy) would include these criteria

(McCall et al, 1999)

1. Written, comprehensive policies define and describe the expectations of the system and

professionals working in those systems. Required actions from subordinate agencies are

described as well. (Canadian Association of School Administrators, 1990; National School

Boards‘ Association, 1981; Health Canada, 1994; Canadian Public Health Association,

1993)

2. There are explicit, written action plans to implement, monitor and evaluate the policies.

(World Health Organization, 1991; Canadian Public Health Association, 1993; Crichton,

1987)

3. The priorities of the system are explicit. (Broadfoot et al, 1994; Crighton, 1987)

4. Relevant research is monitored and disseminated regularly. (MacLean, 1996; World Health

Organization, 1997; Saskatchewan Education, 1996)



174

175





5. There are appropriate administrative structures and staff assignments. (Odden, 1991;

Macbeth, 1980; World Health Organization, 1997; Health Canada, 1994)

6. Resources, in the form of funding, staffing or materials are linked to policy directions.

(Funk, 1991; Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 1996; Canadian Public Health

Association, 1993; Health Canada, 1994)

7. Systematic staff development and training occurs regularly. (MacKinnon et al, 1994; Health

Canada, 1994; Canadian Public Health Association, 1993)

8. Cooperation among the systems that serve youth is encouraged, supported and facilitated.

(Fisher, 1990; Allensworth et al, 1997; Canadian Association for School Health, 1994a;

Capper et al, 1996)

9. There are mechanisms in place to monitor the activity and impact of the systems.

(Granaheim et al, 1990; Mutchler & Pollard, 1994; Allensworth et al 1997)

10. Regular written reports are issued that describe the performance of the systems. (Funk,

1991; Health Canada, 1994; Allensworth et al, 1997)

11. Policy-makers communicate with their publics about the progress of the system and

relevant issues. (Canadian Association of School Administrators, 1990, Allensworth et al,

1997)



The seven strategies outlined by Taylor et al., (2000) and used throughout Sweden move from

policy development to program development and include: 1. policy development happening at

different societal levels (national, local), 2.laws and regulations (affecting public health),

3.reorienting organizations (aims at obtaining sustainable development in organizations to support

public health), 4. advocacy for improved health (encourages actions for improved health at different

societal levels preceded by activities responding to health needs), 5. building alliances and creating

awareness (new alliances between different partners in different settings), 6. enabling (providing

basic prerequisites to support people to follow health conducive behaviour such as product

development), and 7. mobilizing/empowering



Many other researchers have concluded that schools need to have health policies (Nutbeam et al.,

1987; Smith et al., 1992; Tones and Tilford, 1994) and that such policies should be aimed at

students, teachers and support staff (Smith et al., 1992). Policies should also include the need for

enhanced community links (Smith, 1992), in-service training and involvement for non-teaching

staff, parents and other adults (National Foundation for Educational Research, 1993). It was also

recommended that young people have a role in the decision-making procedures in all matters

relating to health (WHO, 1993; Miller, 1993, 1997).



Schmid et al (1995) has described the evolution of policy/advocacy efforts to prevent cardiovascular

disease. The Policy Approach is divided into two areas: legislation/regulation and organizational

policy. Environmental strategies, influenced by policy and advocacy measures, can alter or control

the physical or social department. Policy strategies aimed at organizational change can help

government health agencies establish a new focus on prevention and promotion. This can include

advocacy to shift resources to prevention and health promotion activities.



The Canadian Association of Principals (McCall, 2004) has prepared a set of principles that should

guide the development of all school health policies.



What



1. ―School Health Policies‖ are adopted and implemented by schools, school boards, education

ministries, public health units, health ministries, social service agencies, social service ministries and

other sectors to guide, develop and support the actions of educators, public health staff and other



175

176



publicly funded professions and agencies that work with or within schools.



2. Policy-making should be seen and understood as happening within mandated, publicly accountable

systems, not individual school buildings. Consequently, education ministries and school board

policies and procedures should set the stage and encourage appropriate policies, procedures and

practices adopted at the school level. Further, School Health Policies are not only adopted by

educational authorities, they are equally the responsibility of health, social and other youth serving

agencies.



3. School Health Policies are part of a comprehensive and coordinated approach to using the school as

a setting within the community to promote health. Other elements in this comprehensive approach

include sustained instruction in health, personal and social development, family studies and physical

education, preventive health services, changes to the physical environment/facilities, encouraging

social support through parental involvement, youth engagement, specific efforts to reduce inequities

and coordination with community-based agencies.



4. School Health Policies should cover a number of health-related topics, including tobacco use, injury

prevention, drug/alcohol use and other addictions, premature and risky sexual behaviour, nutrition,

hygiene, physical activity, mental health, safe water and sanitation, anti-social behaviour/bullying,

citizenship and character development, social equity and basic educational achievement for all.



5. Other School Health Policies should define minimum levels of service and required mandates for

agencies, schools and professionals. For example, policies should stipulate a recommended or

minimum time for health instruction, for pupil-nurse and pupil-counsellor staffing ratios, for minimum

services to special education and chronically ill students etc.



6. School Health Policies should also require specific professionals, agencies and ministries to

coordinate their efforts in response to specific health issues, setting standards for information

sharing, procedures for referrals, communications among professionals and with parents etc. These

policies should cover ministry, agency and school responsibilities to coordinate their efforts, to

involve parents, to engage youth, to conduct regular assessments of student health and health

determinants that their institutions can reasonably influence, etc.



Why



1. There are research studies showing that specific policies, when implemented within a

comprehensive prevention approach, can have a significant impact on health behaviours and

outcomes. Other policies such as guaranteeing convenient youth friendly services, implementing

parent resource centres or a minimum instructional time of 50 hours of health instruction per year

have been shown to have very positive effects. For example, a policy of implementing a mandatory

anti-smoking program in all schools would save 15 dollars in health care and other costs for every

dollar invested in the instructional program.



2. Evidence is emerging that comprehensive policies requiring schools and other agencies to be

―health-promoting‖ can lead to improved academic outcomes, even for disadvantaged schools. As

well, other studies have shown that increasing and improving physical education time in schools can

lead to improved student achievement in academic subjects.



How



1. Policy-making should be seen as a springboard for action, that the process is equally important to

the words that end up on paper, because through the process of consultation and adoption the

school personnel, volunteers and community/parents become engaged and committed to the

implementation of the policy.



2. Policies should be adopted with clear and specific references to the human and financial resources

required to implement them. Policies should identify the qualifications and training required for their

implementation. Any changes in job descriptions or professional roles should be the subject of

consultations or negotiations with relevant associations or unions.







176

177



3. The policy-making process should be cyclical in nature, including adequate provisions to identify

emerging health issues, appropriate consultations and surveys, transparency in public decision-

making, stipulated reporting procedures and evaluation criteria and opportunities to review and

enhance the written policies.



4. Policy development should include staff representation, parental involvement, youth involvement and

representation from appropriate health and social agencies or professions. Wherever possible,

policies should be based upon and should refer to available scientific evidence supporting the

proposed interventions.



5. School Health Policies should be comprehensive in nature and encourage coordinated interventions

that include instructional, environmental and services elements. For example, a school tobacco

policy would include no smoking rules and enforcement steps, critical outcomes for curriculum and

instruction, minimum instructional time, adequate guaranteed access to information, adequate

access to cessation services, encouraging student peer helper programs, stipulating procedures for

parental involvement etc.



The content of school and public health and addiction agency policies relative to addictions and

substance abuse should include the following elements:



h) School Policies, Practices, Organization

1. Description of Board Approach (Complexity, Punitive-Supportive,

Harm Reduction, Addictive Behaviours vs Substances etc)

2. Integration with policies on student development & health

3. Relationship to Relevant Laws, Regulations

4. Overall policies on school climate/culture/relationships in school

5. School Discipline and Suspension Policies

6. School Search & Seizure Policies

7. Procedures on Records, Exchange of Information with Other

Agencies

8. Expected Outputs of Curriculum, Early Identification,

Guidance/Counselling/Assistance Programs

9. Description of Staff, Volunteer and Student Rights and

Responsibilities

10. Process for Staff, Volunteer Development

11. Support for Student, Community Groups

12. Alcohol Use at Student Graduation, Field Trips

13. Alcohol Use at Adult Functions in Schools, Adults on Field Trips

14. Related Policies on Substance Abuse by Employees/Assistance

Programs

15. Procedures for Evaluation, Reporting on Policy



There are several guides and manuals that have described such policies in detail, including the

publications from Nova Scotia (NS Department of Health, 2002), British Columbia (McCall, 1990)

and Ontario (Addictions Research Foundation, 1991; Alcohol Policy Network, 2004)



 Does the research indicate that legislation/regulation interventions can be used

effectively generally in society as well as with schools/children to be effective in

influencing behaviour or conditions that determine substance use? Does the

research also describe how proponents can successfully advocate for such

policies?







177

178





 Does the research indicate that relevant school health policies will have an

impact on behaviours or conditions relating to substance abuse?



Goodstadt (1989) suggests that schools that are attempting to reduce substance abuse by

implementing policies related to use of alcohol and other drugs in schools should recognize that

studies indicate that: 1) neither educational nor school policy strategies by themselves are likely to

effectively prevent use and abuse; 2) to be effective, education and policies must acknowledge and

incorporate clear statements of community norms about alcohol and drug use; 3) to be effective,

educational and policy strategies must complement and reinforce each other; and 4) education and

policies must acknowledge and reinforce the positive behavior of the large number of students who

do not use or abuse alcohol and other drugs.



Yamaguchi et al (2003) have described the relationship between student illicit drug use and school

drug-testing policies. Their report provides information about drug testing by American secondary

schools, based on results from national surveys. The study provides descriptive information on

drug-testing practices by schools from 1998 to 2001, and examines the association between drug

testing by schools and reported drug use by students. School-level data on drug testing were

obtained through the Youth, Education, and Society study, and student-level survey data were

obtained from the same schools participating in the Monitoring the Future study. A relatively small

percentage of schools (about 18%) reported testing students for drug use, with more high schools

than middle schools reporting drug testing. Drug testing was not associated with students' reported

illicit drug use, or with rate of use among experienced marijuana users. Drug testing of athletes was

not associated with illicit drug use among male high school athletes.



Goldberg et al (2003) report the results of a study on Drug testing athletes to prevent substance

abuse: Two high schools, one with mandatory drug testing (DT) consent before sports participation,

and a control school (C), without DT, were assessed during the 1999-2000 school year. The past 30-

day index of illicit drugs (4-fold difference) and athletic enhancing substances (3-fold difference)

were lower (p < .05) among DT athletes at follow-up without difference in alcohol use. However,

most drug use risk factors, including norms of use, belief in lower risk of drugs, and poorer attitudes

toward the school, increased among DT athletes (p < .05). Although a reduction in the illicit drug

use index was present among nonathletes at the DT school, at the end of the school year, it did not

achieve statistical significance (p < .10). The authors conclude that random drug testing (DT) may

have reduced substance use among athletes. However, worsening of risk factors and small sample

size suggests caution to this drug prevention approach.



The Nova Scotia Department of Health (2001), in a manual on school board drug policies sates that

Zero Tolerance generally refers to school policies regarding alcohol, tobacco, other drugs, and

violence that emphasize punitive actions such as suspension, expulsion, or notification of the police.

Very little has been done to evaluate the effectiveness of zero-tolerance policies;10 however, research

suggests that such policies can have negative effects, such as:

 Alienating students at risk of harmful involvement, and further alienating students who may

already be on the perimeter of the school community;9,11

 Placing the student at risk for dropping out of school – being suspended from school is a

strong predictor of dropping out;10

 Placing the student in an environment where use is more likely – suspension and expulsion

may place the student ‗on the street‘;10

 Criminalizing users;5

 Reinforcing the adult status of certain activities, such as drinking, which may serve to

increase curiosity and desire to use;9 and

 Discouraging and preventing students from self-reporting substance use problems and

seeking help for themselves or their friends.5,9,11



178

179



 Suspension, expulsion, and/or police intervention may be necessary in more extreme

cases,12 such as continuous infractions or students caught trafficking drugs. However, harm

minimization policy alternatives are less punitive, and may be more helpful to the student by

minimizing harm or preventing further use.



The Department advocates a harm minimization approach to school policies that would aim to

promote health and well-being, and reduce the risk and severity of the adverse consequences of

substance use. Such policies take into consideration the impact that zero-tolerance may have on a

student. Policies may vary depending on the type or severity of the student offense. For instance,

trafficking may be dealt with differently than possession (see Legal Issues, p. 10), or when the

substance is cocaine versus cannabis.



 Does the research indicate the ―school health policies‖ (ie policies adopted by

education ministries, school boards, or schools, health ministries, regional health

authorities or local health authorities) are actually implemented, evaluated and

enforced?

 Are there studies that describe whether appropriate policy-making (that includes

managerial support, consensus development for implementation, adequate

resources, implementation, timelines and reporting requirements are being

employed?



Gliksman et al (1995) examined the development and implementation of School Drug Policy in

Ontario Boards of Education, the components of these policies, and the composition of policy

development committees. Data from 125 Boards of Education were obtained from responses to a

questionnaire administered in the Fall of 1991. Findings from the study indicate that school drug

policies are increasingly comprehensive-including not only disciplinary measures, but also a

preventive curriculum and early intervention component. The composition of policy development

working groups normally consisted of such groups as board personnel, teachers, and practitioners

from other fields. Students were not often included in the process of policy development. Thus, the

development and implementation of school drug policy in Ontario indicates a "top down" rather

than "bottom up" approach.



Scott DM, Friedli D (2002) report on the nature and implementation of school policies on

absenteeism, drug use and violence in Nebraska schools. For "using drugs other than alcohol or

tobacco at school" in both areas, disciplinary procedures included parent contact and short-term

suspension. For "using drugs other than alcohol or tobacco at school," for a second time offense was

long-term suspension and semester expulsion for a third-time offense. Some of the discrepancies in

disciplinary actions, however, suggest the need for consistent enforcement and communication of

policies for both urban and rural schools



Grebow et al., (2000) state that students learn best in a school that promotes their physical and

psychosocial health as a matter of established policy. Policies which support a healthy physical

environment carry the message that students are valued, that adults respect them and give them a

connectedness and sense of well-being related to school. If the emphasis on the physical

environment becomes policy it is not susceptible to budget cuts. Policies that address the needs of

the people in the building of their relationship to one another make up the psychosocial

environment. When academic and extracurricular opportunities are open to everyone, students are

free from harassment and discrimination; and they receive the support services they need, students

are free to learn.







179

180





Grebow et al., (2000) also suggest that a thoughtful policy analysis will consider the various needs

and cultures within the school, with attention to input from youth. In addition, although teachers

and administrators try to meets the needs of staff and students, policy goes a long way in ensuring

protections and supports for everyone. Valuing teachers and creating policy that commits the

district to ensuring professional treatment for all teachers, regardless of changes in schools or

administration, seems to be important as well. They describe teachers as the keystone of efforts to

strengthen student achievement and valued and supported teachers are more likely to model positive

strategies for communication and conflict resolution. Creating policy to institutionalize family and

community engagement as part of every day school life is another consideration. Also community

members volunteer in schools and attend cultural events and athletics, where they view the school

in a positive light. In addition, policy is essential for the coordination of a school health program –

for the integration of a healthy school with a school‘s other health-related goals that helps it become

an institutionalized part of the school culture. The authors suggest linking school environmental

health issues to the district‘s mission, goals, and budget and its stated priorities. For instance,

national attention to standardized testing has led to local school boards focused on increasing

academic achievement. Therefore, if hiring a social worker or beginning a family outreach program

is the goal for the healthier school environment, then emphasize the potential for strengthening

student achievement. Finding community advocates who share the goal for improving the school

environment can help support school health policies. Consider possible challenges to the

recommendations and also ways to implement in small steps. Incrementally, working through

advisory boards and committees also garners support and working through appropriate channels

expedites getting the information to the right people and conveys authority. Finally, the authors say

that it is important to understand limitations of protocol and that not all efforts will succeed on the

first try.



Tubman & Soza Vento (2001) examine the key role of enforcement in school policies. This study

describes anti-tobacco policies implemented by middle and high schools in Florida. All schools had

in place formal anti-tobacco policies but implementation of those policies was more rigorous at the

middle school level. Principals and health education teachers reported the formal and informal

strategies used to enforce their school's anti-tobacco policies. Punitive enforcement strategies were

more commonly reported than non-punitive strategies. Enforcement strategies were significantly

associated with several features of school settings including number of supports for teachers' efforts,

teachers' perceptions of program success, and training opportunities for teachers. Middle school

staff reported using significantly more enforcement strategies than high school staff, and their

strategies were more likely to be associated with school context variables.



 Does the research indicate if certain school health interventions or combinations of

such interventions are more effective, cost effective, cost-beneficial?



Plotnick (1994) presents the basic ideas of benefit-cost analysis and its closely related tool, cost-

effectiveness analysis. It then sketches a "blueprint" for a benefit-cost analysis of an experimental

drug use prevention program intended to prevent relapse into drug use by parents receiving

methadone maintenance and to lower the risk that the children of these parents will become

substance users. The blueprint can help structure evaluations of other prevention programs.



Caulkins et al (2002) in a report to the RAND Corporation, have calculated the social and economic

benefits of school-based drug prevention. Their work is factual, objective and powerful. It also

shows that the majority of social and economic benefits accrue from the prevention of tobacco and

alcohol use rather than illicit drugs.





180

181



Our report shows that school-based drug prevention programs are a good investment from the benefit-

cost standpoint. The best estimate of social costs saved per prevention program participant ($840)

greatly exceeds the program cost per participant ($150), and that dollar-figure difference is highly

robust with respect to uncertainty about various parameter values.



It should also be noted that the $840 in savings does not entirely or even primarily take the form of

increased revenue accruing to the government. That is, we are not arguing that funding school-based

prevention programs is a good way to balance the budget, even in the long run. On the other hand, a

favorable social benefit-to-cost ratio is an important factor in the decision to invest in a wide range of

public programs, from highway improvements to flood control. School-based drug prevention is a good

social investment in that sense.



Thus, school-based drug prevention‘s benefits do not stem primarily from reduction in the use of illicit

drugs. The same cannot be said of the benefits from locking up drug dealers or some forms of drug

treatment (such as methadone maintenance not accompanied by associated social services). Other

forms of treatment are as much about helping addicts acquire job skills, resolve interpersonal conflicts,

get help from social services, and improve their general health and welfare as they are about reducing

drug use. School-based drug prevention is more akin to the other forms of treatment than it is to drug

law enforcement or methadone maintenance in this regard. Although

school-based drug prevention is not primarily about preventing illicit drug use, it nevertheless appears

to have a favorable benefit-cost ratio on the basis of its impact on illicit drug use alone.



However, viewing school-based drug prevention in so narrow a light unfairly penalizes prevention,

relative to other programs for which reductions in drug use are in fact the primary benefit, because

prevention‘s benefits

with regard to licit drug use are in that case disregarded. Some readers might infer from this

discussion that school-based prevention should be viewed as a public health intervention, and not a

criminal justice intervention, and thus it should be funded out of health dollars rather than criminal

justice (or education) dollars.



An interesting implication of the trade-off between drug prevention programs and traditional classroom

instruction is that the programs should be evaluated not only in terms of their behavioral effects but

also in terms of the educational value, if any, they provide. Suppose a prevention program teaches

critical thinking, analysis, and writing or math skills almost as effectively as the conventional academic

instruction it displaces. Such a program could be much more cost effective in a real economic sense

than another prevention program that offered no such academic benefits, even if the second program

were more effective at reducing drug use. Currently, drug prevention programs are rarely evaluated in

terms of their contribution to educational outcomes (which are quite distinct from mere knowledge

about drugs and their effects).



Our findings may also have implications for the level of support of drug prevention programs within

schools. School administrators and teachers do not always feel comfortable with their unsought-after

responsibility for helping to prevent the use of illicit drugs (Reuter and Timpane, 2001). Tying the

program to a broader range of public health benefits might serve to pique their interest.



Finally, an implication of our program effectiveness findings (see the ―Other Results of Interest‖

section), is that prevention programs, even the cutting-edge ones, should not be viewed as ―vaccines‖

that inoculate those in the program against drug use. There is very strong empirical support for the

belief that these programs reduce drug use, but there is even stronger support for the belief that they

leave an even greater proportion of baseline users unaffected. Prevention may be cost effective, but it

cannot be expected to single-handedly address concerns about substance abuse, at least in its

present form and as far as we currently understand prevention‘s effectiveness.



As a final note in that regard, one contribution that a systems analysis, such as this one, can make is

to highlight those parameters for which the evidence is thinnest. In this analysis, the evidence is

clearly the thinnest on the decay function. Therefore, we suggest that future evaluations of school-

based drug prevention programs should plan for more frequent and sustained follow-up data collection

and that researchers who have unpublished follow-up data from past evaluations should publish their

results now.







181

182







A Canadian study (Stephens et al, 2001) cited in the recent Romanow report, examined the

economic benefit of classroom programs to reduce tobacco use. This study compared the costs of

developing and delivering an effective school-based smoking prevention program with the savings

to be expected from reducing the prevalence of smoking in the Canadian population over time. A

smoking prevention program that meets published criteria for effectiveness, implemented nationally

in Canada, would cost $67 per student (1996 dollars). Assuming such a program would reduce

smoking by 6% initially and 4% indefinitely, lifetime savings on health care would be $3,400 per

person and on productivity, almost $14,000. The benefit-cost ratio would be 15.4 and the net

savings $619 million annually. Sensitivity analyses reveal that considerable economic benefits

could accrue from an effective smoking prevention program under a wide range of conditions.



Wang et al (2001) examine the Cost-effectiveness of a school-based tobacco-use prevention

program. Using data from the previously reported 2-year efficacy study of the Project Toward No

Tobacco Use (TNT), we conducted a decision analysis to determine the cost-effectiveness of TNT.

The benefits measured were life years (LYs) saved, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) saved, and

medical care costs saved, discounted at 3%. The costs measured were program costs. We quantified

TNT's cost-effectiveness as cost per LY saved and cost per QALY saved. INTERVENTION: A 10-

lesson curriculum designed to counteract social influences and misconceptions that lead to tobacco

use was delivered by trained health educators to a cohort of 1234 seventh-grade students in 8 junior

high schools. A 2-lesson booster session was delivered to the eighth-grade students in the second

year. The efficacy evaluation was based on 770 ninth-grade students who participated in the

program in the seventh and eighth grades and in both the baseline and the 2-year follow-up survey.

RESULTS: Under base case assumptions, at an intervention cost of $16 403, TNT prevented an

estimated 34.9 students from becoming established smokers. As a result, we could expect a saving

of $13 316 per LY saved and a saving of $8482 per QALY saved. Results showed TNT to be cost

saving over a reasonable range of model parameter estimates. CONCLUSIONS: The TNT is highly

cost-effective compared with other widely accepted prevention interventions. School-based

prevention programs of this type warrant careful consideration by policy makers and program

planners.



Wang and another group of researchers (Wang et al, 2000) have done an economic evaluation of

Safer Choices: a school-based human immunodeficiency virus, other sexually transmitted diseases,

and pregnancy prevention program. The baseline cost-effectiveness and cost benefit were derived in

4 steps: (1) estimation of intervention costs; (2) adaptation of the Bernoulli model to translate

increases in condom use into cases of human immunodeficiency virus and other sexually

transmitted diseases averted, and development of a model to translate increases in contraceptive use

into cases of pregnancy averted; (3) translation of cases averted into medical costs and social costs

averted; and (4) calculation of the net benefit of the program. Multivariable sensitivity analysis was

performed to determine the robustness of the base-case results. RESULTS: Under base-case

assumptions, at an intervention cost of $105,243, Safer Choices achieved a 15% increase in condom

use and an 11% increase in contraceptive use within 1 year among 345 sexually active students. An

estimated 0.12 cases of human immunodeficiency virus, 24.37 cases of chlamydia, 2.77 cases of

gonorrhea, 5.86 cases of pelvic inflammatory disease, and 18.5 pregnancies were prevented. For

every dollar invested in the program, $2.65 in total medical and social costs were saved. Results of

most of the scenarios remained cost saving under a wide range of model variable estimates.

CONCLUSIONS: The Safer Choices program is cost-effective and cost saving in most scenarios

considered. School-based prevention programs of this type warrant careful consideration by policy

makers and program planners. Program cost data should be routinely collected in evaluations of

adolescent prevention programs.



182

183







A third study led by Wang (Wang et al, 2003) has done an economic analysis of a school-based

obesity prevention program. To assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of Planet Health, a

school-based intervention designed to reduce obesity in youth of middle-school age children.

Standard cost-effectiveness analysis methods and a societal perspective were used in this study.

Three categories of costs were measured: intervention costs, medical care costs associated with

adulthood overweight, and costs of productivity loss associated with adulthood overweight. Health

outcome was measured as cases of adulthood overweight prevented and quality-adjusted life years

(QALYs) saved. Cost-effectiveness ratio was measured as the ratio of net intervention costs to the

total number of QALYs saved, and net-benefit was measured as costs averted by the intervention

minus program costs. Under base-case assumptions, at an intervention cost of $33,677 or $14 US

dollars per student per year, the program would prevent an estimated 1.9% of the female students

(5.8 of 310) from becoming overweight adults. As a result, an estimated 4.1 QALYs would be

saved by the program, and society could expect to save an estimated $15,887 USD in medical care

costs and $25,104 USD in loss of productivity costs. These findings translated to a cost of $4305

USD per QALY saved and a net saving of $7313 USD to society. Results remained cost-effective

under all scenarios considered and remained cost-saving under most scenarios. The Planet Health

program is cost-effective and cost-saving as implemented. School-based prevention programs of

this type are likely to be cost-effective uses of public funds and warrant careful consideration by

policy makers and program planners.



Young & Ireson (2003) suggest that a combination of telehealth and school health clinics can help

rural schools and communities gain access to convenient care and save health care costs. This study

evaluated the cost effectiveness of health care provided in urban and rural elementary school-based

telehealth centers, using plain old telephone system (POTS) technology. A telehealth school-based

model was developed that used a full-time school nurse, half-time mental-health consultant, linked

pediatric practice, and linked child psychiatrist via POTS with an electronic stethoscope; ears, nose,

and throat endoscope; and otoscope. Average family savings per encounter were 3.4 hours of work

time (43 dollars) and 177 dollars in emergency department or 54 dollars in physician costs.

Including travel, savings for families ranged from 101 dollars to 224 dollars per encounter. Thirteen

children received telepsychiatric evaluations resulting in diagnoses of depression and attention-

deficit/hyperactivity, anxiety, and conduct disorders. Telehealth technology was effective in

delivering pediatric acute care to children in these schools. Pediatric providers, nurses, parents, and

children reported primary care school-based telehealth as an acceptable alternative to traditional

health care delivery systems. The POTS-based technology helps to make this telehealth service a

cost-effective alternative for improving access to primary and psychiatric health care for

underserved children.



Chatterji et al (2001) outline economic cost analysis methods and demonstrate their applicability to

school-based prevention programs. As an example, the paper focuses on estimating the economic

cost of ALPHA, an intensive school-based substance use prevention program..



Guay et al (2003) examined the relative costs of immunization in school and clinical delivery

points. In 1994, immunization against hepatitis B was implemented in schools in Quebec, targeting

grade 4 students. In 1996-1997 and 1997-1998, one Local Community Service Centre (CLSC)

replaced the school-based program in its district with vaccination offered in community clinics after

school hours. The aim of the current study was to compare the effectiveness and costs of school-

based and clinic-based programs. Vaccination coverage data were collected in the CLSC with the

clinic-based program (CBP), and in three matched CLSCs with a school-based program (SBP),

from 1994 to 2000. Surveys were conducted to estimate costs to parents, to schools and to CLSCs in



183

184





1997-1998. With the implementation of the CBP, the vaccination coverage fell to 73%, compared

with over 90% in the SBPs. Coverage increased to 90% when the CBP was abandoned. Costs to the

CLSC were not much lower in the CBP. Societal costs were $63 per student vaccinated in the CBP,

and < or = $40 in the SBPs. Results demonstrate the advantage of a SBP over a CBP for the

immunization of schoolchildren.



A similar Canadian study (Sadoway et al, 1990) showed that labour costs for delivering

immunization to young children (0-4 years) were 2.9 times higher in Ontario, where private

physicians were used as compared to Alberta, where public health nurses were used.





11. Build Resilience & Behaviours within Individuals



This sub-section discusses another principle of the population health approlach, that education

and information programs and health services should help to build individual resilience in the

forms of basic health literacy, knowledge, skills, attitudes/beliefs, awareness of health services,

ability to access social support and willingness to help others and the development of

personalized action plans or behavioral intentions. Within the school health promotion context,

these attributes are developed primarily by instructional or health education strategies. This can

be broken down into sub-elements such as curriculum design, teaching and learning methods

and providing other supports for teaching.



Our findings in this section can be summarized as follows

o instructional design could be based on readily available and proven theories of

how individuals learn about health, but they are not necessarily designed that

way

o further research is required into the specific learning outcomes, scope and

sequence that is most effective for preventing harmful substance use

o further research should be done into combining curricular and instructional

approaches that promote social skills/competence, mental health, social and

emotional learning and yet still retain sufficient functional knowledge about

drugs and alcohol

o more research should be done into how instruction in these areas described

above could be successfully linked to enhancements to the psycho-social climate

of the school and comprehensive addictions and mental health services



 Has the research applied and described programs that are based on stages of change

theories and behavioural theories? Has the research described the key individual

resilience characteristics and coping skills needed? Functional knowledge needed?

Attitudes and Beliefs Needed? Self-knowledge Needed? General Skills and Specific

Skills Needed? Awareness and Use of Health Services Needed? Awareness and

Skills needed to Access to Social Support from friends, parents, others?



The population health approach/health determinants theory is well founded on knowledge of

research about behavior and behavior change. Similarly, Parcel (1984) has reviewed several of these

theories about behavior change, including psychosocial influences, social learning and reasoned

action that support the use of school-based and school-linked health promotion strategies.



Several models of health promotion have been developed from the understanding of behavioral

change, including the Health Belief Model, the reduction or elimination of risk conditions/factors



184

185





and the PRECEDE Model. These models explain how individual health behaviors and

environmental influences are linked in influencing health status. For a summary of these behavior

change theories, visit the following WebSite

www.commint.com/power_point/change_theories/index.htm



The Health Belief Model suggests that there are two major factors that influence the likelihood that

a person will adopt a recommended preventive health action. First, they must feel personally

threatened by the disease (i.e., they must feel personally susceptible to a disease with serious or

severe consequences) and second, they must believe that the benefits of taking the preventive action

outweigh the perceived barriers to (and/or costs of ) preventive action. This model is essential to

understanding the effectiveness of interventions aimed at the individual. In the past, the strategy

used to influence health beliefs was education and the focus was on preventing particular

behaviours. Gradually, as knowledge of health promotion increased, the focus has broadened to

include attention to social support and the impact of the entire environment.



The reduction or elimination of risk conditions or external factors (Catania et al, 1990) has been the

focus of more recent health promoting strategies. Social, economic or biological status can be

influenced by advocating for economic changes, better housing or more reoriented health services.



The PRECEDE model, (Green & Kreuter, 1991) explains the interactions between individual and

the environment.









More recently, health promotion experts have been trying to identify the specific environmental

factors or internal beliefs (or combinations thereof) that create resilience (Mangahm et al, 1994)

within a person despite unhealthy or harsh environmental conditions.



Stages of Change in Individuals



There are several theories about the stages of change that individuals undergo when they are

adopting healthy behaviours also need to take into account. These include:

1.Becoming aware of the issue or problem (usually through social marketing and media

campaigns.)

2.Becoming informed about the issue and having access to good information (usually

through printed materials, telephone services, or electronic means).

3.Developing relevant knowledge, skills, understanding and attitudes (usually through

education programs).

4.Having an opportunity to practice their new skills (usually as part of education programs).



185

186





5.Being motivated and supported in their new behaviours by others or with new resources

(usually through new forms of social support, changes in service delivery or in advocacy/

policy or funding to create better conditions).



Use of Theory in Program Design



McCallum (1995) also reviewed some of the theories and models underpinning effective

communication practice. The following checklists provides a guide to program planners

munication planning and pretesting







terials with the target audience



to them



audiences likely to see them when public service air time is available





rengths



reinforce the change



-term communication objectives

component over the long-term, one shot campaigns

are unlikely to have a lasting effect.



Comprehensive school health theory and knowledge has described these elements of school-based

instruction to build resilience, literacy and skills:



i) Instruction

1. Instruction to convey functional knowledge and awareness of

addictions, drugs and risks etc

2. Instruction on specific skills such as refusal skills, resistance to peer

pressure etc

3. Instruction in more general skills such as media literacy, social skills,

decision-making, problem solving

4. Instruction to address self-knowledge, self worth, common challenges

associated with puberty etc

5. Instruction to increase awareness of local and other sources of

addictions information, advice, counselling and crisis interventions

6. Features of successful curriculum design

7. Features of effective teaching methods and strategies

8. Features of successful implementation and professional development

strategies for teachers in implementing the curriculum

9. Features for effective involvement of students as peer leaders in

instruction.

10. Features for effective involvement of parents in take home learning

associated with the school curriculum.





186

187





11. Effective adaptations of programs for specific message such as

drinking & driving, for sub-populations such as the children of

alcoholics, for aboriginal students, for ethno-cultural minority

students, for rural students etc.





The following questions are pertinent to drug education and most other issues within a broad health

education programs:



 Does the literature adequately describe the types and breadth of outputs (ie going beyond

facts to define ―functional knowledge‖ that is important, the specific behaviours to promote,

to describe general or specific social and problem solving skills, to describe what attitudes

and beliefs etc that can be transmitted by school programs?

 Does the literature describe a minimum and optimum set of health-related learning outputs

related to alcohol/drugs education that can be achieved by schools?



In the past we falsely equated health knowledge as a proxy for health behaviour, then we learned

that often knowledge alone often did not affect behaviour, then some of us have rejected school

health education programs as being ineffective (again falsely) It may be time that we reviewed

again the evidence of the SHEE large scale evaluation of health education (Connell & Turner, 1985)

showed a positive cumulative effect of 50 hours of health instruction. Also, it may be time that we

seek a new understanding about health knowledge or health literacy, as being the skills, aptitudes,

awareness and ability to plan and use functional knowledge about health to improve our health and

well-being.



(Allensworth et al, 1997, p. 286, Nutbeam & St. Leger, p.10) suggest that we need to clarify what

learning about health is essential (knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs, values, personal goal-setting,

problem-solving/decision-making, media literacy, awareness of health services, career and life

aspirations etc). We also need to describe exactly how curricula and teaching practice can be

organized and delivered to achieve those essential outputs.



The National Institute on Drug Abuse (2003) has identified research evidence that suggests that

instructional programs should be geared to age-appropriate outcomes. Pre-school programs should

address risk factors such as aggressive behaviours, poor social skills and learning difficulties.

(Webster-Stratton et al, 2001). Elementary programs should focus on basic academic outcomes,

social-emotional learning and skills such as self-control, self-awareness, social skills, problem

solving and reading skills(Coordinated Problem Behaviours Group, 2002; Lalong et al, 2002).

Junior High programs should increase academic and social skills (Botvin et al, 1998; Scheir et al,

1999) such as study habits, communication, peer relationships, self-efficacy, assertiveness skills,

resistance skills and personal action plans. .NIDA also suggests that instructional programs should

help students at key transition points in their lives such as entry into secondary school (Dishion et

al, 2002)



Dusenbury L, Falco (1995) were among the first to identify potential components of effective drug

abuse prevention curricula. A review of school-based drug abuse prevention programs was

conducted for 1989-1994. In addition to a comprehensive literature review, interviews were

conducted with a panel of 15 leading experts in prevention research. Key elements of promising

prevention curricula were identified. Effective prevention programs were found to be based on a

sound theoretical or research foundation. They included developmentally appropriate information

about drugs, social resistance skills training, and normative education. Broader based personal and



187

188





social skills training appeared to enhance program effects. Effective programs used interactive

teaching techniques and teacher training, and provided adequate coverage and sufficient follow-up.

Cultural sensitivity to the target population was found to be critical to program success. Additional

program components were expected to enhance curriculum effectiveness. Finally, experts agreed

that adequate evaluation of prevention curricula was critical. Unfortunately, despite information

about the types of curricula that are effective, the most promising prevention curricula are not

widely disseminated. Reasons for under-utilization are explored, and recommendations made for

correcting the situation.



Sancho nd), in a summary of effective health education, suggests that cultural factors need to be

infused into the health curriculum. Pikes & Banoub-Baddour (1991) report that a cardiovascular

health education program facilitated by the public health nurse was successful in changing health

knowledge of adolescents. Schall (1994) reports that studies have shown that school-based health

education programs that start early and continue for several grades provide significant and sustained

effects on health knowledge, attitudes and behaviors.



Implementation of Instructional Programs



The studies reviewed for this paper noted that implementation was a key factor to success.

Grunbaum (1998) noted that the characteristics of successful health education programs often

centered on the training provided to teachers. A similar finding Renaud, 1997) comes from a heart

health project in Montreal. The characteristics of the teachers and the program explained the level

of implementation of the heart health curriculum. Hausman & Ruzek (1995) suggest that

implementation of school health education should focus on teacher concerns.



Three Canadian associations (Canadian Association of Principals et al, 1996) have also described

strategies and conditions for effective health education. These criteria for effectiveness include:



Supports for Success

h other parts of a comprehensive approach having learning

outcomes associated with skill development, attitudes/beliefs, as well as knowledge about

nutrition.

-prepared teachers, active parent

involvement and at-home activities, peer-based informal learning to supplement the

curriculum, coordination of classroom teaching with community awareness programs and

community expertise





Goals/Content

emphasizing generic skills



-making taught through

role playing]



health messages to all youth with specific messages to high-risk youth



units



Methods/Techniques





188

189





nal techniques









A Canadian study, (Ross et al, 1998) which showed null effect on knowledge, skills and self

efficacy underlines the need for high quality, well-implemented instructional programs to be

effective.





Our review found some references showing that peer and parental involvement improved the

chances of classroom instruction effect. Hern et al (1998) reported that high school biology

students can be educated by older peers drawn from undergraduate nursing students. Johnson &

Johnson (1987) report that when cooperative learning is implemented effectively in peer-based

learning, long-term modifications of nutrition knowledge, attitudes and behavior result. A report on

the Chicago Heart Health Curriculum (Petchers et al, 1987) reported that the parent participation

component had no effect on student knowledge or behavior with regard to cardiovascular disease

prevention. However, Gordon & Haynes (1982) report that parental involvement with homework in

nutrition education at the elementary grade level was successful.



In a three year trial, Botvin et al (1990) found that a cognitive-behavioral approach to substance

abuse prevention had significant prevention effects were found for cigarette smoking, marijuana

use, and immoderate alcohol use. Prevention effects were also found for normative expectations and

knowledge concerning substance use, interpersonal skills, and communication skills. In a

randomized block design, schools were assigned to receive (a) the prevention program with formal

provider training and implementation feedback, (b) the prevention program with videotaped

provider training and no feedback, or (c) no treatment. After pretest equivalence and comparability

of conditions with respect to attrition were established, students who received at least 60% of the

prevention program (N = 3,684) were included in analyses of program effectiveness.



Park (2000) reported on a study that examined the effects of parental involvement in instruction.

Preparing for the Drug-Free Years (PDFY) is a curriculum designed to help parents learn skills to

consistently communicate clear norms against adolescent substance use, effectively and proactively

manage their families, reduce family conflict, and help their children learn skills to resist antisocial

peer influences. This study examined the effects of PDFY on the trajectories of these factors, as

well as on the trajectory of alcohol use from early to mid adolescence. The sample consisted of 424

rural families of sixth graders from schools randomly assigned to an intervention or a control

condition. Data were collected from both parents and students at pretest, posttest, and 1-, 2- and 3

1/2-year follow-ups. Latent growth models were examined. PDFY significantly reduced the growth

of alcohol use and improved parent norms regarding adolescent alcohol use over time. Implications

for prevention and evaluation are discussed.



Ambtman et al (1999), in a study done for the Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba, evaluated the

effectiveness of a province-wide chemical abuse prevention education program for grades two

through six. Two separate studies were conducted. Study 1 measured pre- and post-scores on a test

with 1101 experimental and 991 control subjects in a quasi-experimental design. Study 2 surveyed

500 elementary school teachers on their opinions and practices regarding drug education, and on the

prevalence of the program in schools. The study found that: 1) students had a high initial knowledge

level; 2) students showed modest but statistically significant knowledge gains for urban schools and



189

190





grades three, four, and five of rural schools; 3) the program was most effective with students with a

low base knowledge; 4) an estimated 20 to 30 percent of Manitoba elementary teachers had been in-

serviced and/or were using the program across the province; and 5) the program was received well

among teachers.



Ramirez et al (1999) evaluated Mirame!/Look at Me!, a substance abuse prevention program for

low-income Mexican-American youth aged 9-13 years. The theory-driven curriculum, developed

for mass distribution via a satellite television network, features social models who demonstrate

cognitive-behavioral skills and display conservative norms regarding substance abuse. An 18-

session curriculum contains 5-min videos that are assigned to be followed by discussion and social

reinforcement from a teacher or volunteer. This case study reports the program development

process and experiences in the initial dissemination of the program through national networks for

schools and cable television subscribers.



Finke et al (2002) in a small scale study found that children with a plan to resist the use of drugs

were more likely not to use drugs.



Sussman et al (1997) found that direct instruction by teachers was more effective than self-

instruction for students in alternative high schools, despite the fact that such self instruction was the

primary means of learning in such schools.



Abbey et al (2000) report on a family-based program that was aimed at family communications and

substance abuse was effective in beliefs about delaying experimentation with alchol. A family-

based substance abuse prevention program was evaluated which emphasizes family cohesion,

school and peer attachment, self-esteem, and attitudes about adolescent use of alcohol and tobacco.

The program was implemented in rural communities and targeted families with students entering

middle or junior high school. Baseline surveys were conducted with students and parents in four

schools and were readministered one year later. Because the program was voluntary, a quasi-

experimental design was used to compare participants (29 students and 28 parents) and

nonparticipants (268 students and 134 parents). Analyses of covariance indicated that student

participants, as compared to nonparticipants, had higher family cohesion, less family fighting,

greater school attachment, higher self-esteem, and believed that alcohol should be consumed at an

older age at the one year follow-up. There were fewer significant results for parent participants.

Strategies for involving parents in prevention programs are discussed.



Lilja et al (2003), based on the results from meta-analyses of outcome studies of school-based

programs, conclude that interactive programs tend to be more effective than not only those mainly

intended to increase factual knowledge about tobacco, alcohol, and illegal drugs, but also those

initiatives aimed at influencing adolescents' attitudes toward those substances. The interactive

strategy corresponds to problem-based learning or the interactive educational approach, now widely

popular in educational circles. These outcome studies have provided us with important knowledge.

However, there are relatively few evaluation investigations that analyze in substantive detail the

process by which adolescents change their alcohol, tobacco, and illegal drug-use behavior, and alter

their perceptions about these substances.



Ellickson et al (2003) report on Project Alert, an instructional program. Fifty-five South Dakota

middle schools were randomly assigned to program or control conditions. Treatment group students

received 11 lessons in 7th grade and 3 more in 8th grade. Program effects for 4276 8th-graders were

assessed 18 months after baseline. The revised Project ALERT curriculum curbed cigarette and

marijuana use initiation, current and regular cigarette use, and alcohol misuse. Reductions ranged



190

191





from 19% to 39%. Program effects were not significant for initial and current drinking or for current

and regular marijuana use. School-based drug prevention programs can prevent occasional and

more serious drug use, help low- to high-risk adolescents, and be effective in diverse school

environments.



Midford et al (2002) describe the conceptual underpinnings of effective school-based drug

education practice in light of contemporary research evidence and the practical experience of a

broad range of drug education stakeholders. The research involved a review of the literature, a

national survey of 210 Australian teachers and others involved in drug education, and structured

interviews with 22 key Australian drug education policy stakeholders. The findings from this

research have been distilled and presented as a list of 16 principles that underpin effective drug

education. In broad terms, drug education should be evidence-based, developmentally appropriate,

sequential, and contextual. Programs should be initiated before drug use commences. Strategies

should be linked to goals and should incorporate harm minimization. Teaching should be interactive

and use peer leaders. The role of the classroom teacher is central. Certain program content is

important, as is social and resistance skills training. Community values, the social context of use,

and the nature of drug harm have to be addressed. Coverage needs to be adequate and supported by

follow-up. It is envisaged that these principles will provide all those involved in the drug education

field with a set of up-to-date, research-based guidelines against which to reference decisions on

program design, selection, implementation, and evaluation.



Sussman et al (2003) report on a RCT that shows that direct instruction in health education for

youth indicating substance abuse is more effective than self-instruction. After two years, the self-

instruction program produced no behavioral effects relative to the standard care control condition.

The results indicated maintenance of program effects on cigarette smoking and hard drug use in the

health educator-led version.



Cloetta & Bisegger (2000) focused on the contribution of student characteristics and of teaching

quality to the gain in knowledge about drugs. 165 8th- and 9th-graders in eight classes answered a

questionnaire three times: before, immediately after and five months after the intervention. There

was a significant increase in knowledge immediately after the intervention (mean m = 6.2) and after

five months (m = 6.1) compared to the score before (m = 4.5). Furthermore, non-German speaking

students of the "Sekundarschule" (higher level) learned the most, non-German speaking students of

the "Realschule" (lower level) learned nothing at all. We found a positive association between

teaching quality as assessed by each class and knowledge gain in the same class. Multiple linear

regression analysis showed that five months after the intervention student characteristics explained

an important part of the variance in knowledge gain (25% of the total variance), while teaching

quality explained another 5%. Consequently, these characteristics can serve as predictors of

knowledge gain in such programmes.



Ellickson et al, (1993) found that school-based programs are able to affect knowledge and some

attitudes and beliefs but were not able to influence underlying attitudes about alcohol use. Evaluated

with over 4,000 students in an experimental test that included 30 diverse California and Oregon

schools, the curriculum seeks to help young people develop both the motivation to avoid drugs and

the skills they need to resist pro-drug pressures. Using regression analyses, we examine the

program's impact on the intervening (cognitive) variables hypothesized to affect actual use:

adolescent beliefs in their ability to resist, perceived consequences of use, normative perceptions

about peer use and tolerance of drugs, and expectations of future use. The analysis depicts program

effects for perceptions linked to each target substance (alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana), across all

students and for those at different levels of risk for future use. Results show that the curriculum



191

192





successfully dampened cognitive risk factors from each of the above categories for both cigarettes

and marijuana, indicating that social influence programs can mitigate a broad range of beliefs

associated with the propensity to use drugs. However, it had a limited impact on beliefs about

alcohol, the most widely used and socially accepted of the three drugs.









192

193



12. Surveil Outcomes, Monitor Programs



This sub-section addresses the population health principle that health promotion efforts should

be based on regular health assessments and should be evaluated by relevant and meaningful

health surveillance outcomes and local program, policies and practices. For school health

promotion, this principle has three important aspects; one, the measures used to monitor

“system outputs” (for school systems and other systems) should not be confused with long

term health outcomes, two, the responsibility for accomplishing these health outputs and

outcomes is shared and is still only a piece of the puzzle in terms of overall health status and

three, it is more relevant to monitor health status and behaviours, social behaviours and selected

learning outcomes simultaneously. From systems theory, we know that system managers will be

concerned about “system boundaries” so this clarity of desirable outputs and sharing of

responsibility for health outcomes is very important if we hope to secure their cooperation.

Finally, from our overview of organizational capacity, we are looking for reports on effective

ways and means that systems can regularly surveil health, social and learning outputs/outcomes

and local policy/programs and practices.



Our findings in this sub-section are:

o the current indicators used to monitor child/youth health need revision, as they

are often based on deficit models, do not measure the influence of physical and

social environments

o the current indicators used to measure health, social behaviors and learning do

not clearly establish end points based on realistic program logic models and

these need to be clarified

o the current surveys used to monitor child and youth development in Canada are

inadequate in thst they are irregular, limited to national samples, and not timely

enough for program planning at the provincial/territorial or local levels



This sub-section looked for research that would answer these questions. Our review did not locate

many studies, particularly studies describing or explaining Canadian systems if surveillance and

monitoring. (These explanations may be available but not published, as the rationales and as part of the

regular Alcohol and Drug and youth risk surveys undertaken by several provinces in Canada.)



 Does the research tell us how relevant determinants can be described and monitored

through a system of reliable Indicators related to the school environment that can be

used to measure health, social and educational outcomes as well as the context, inputs,

processes and outputs of school and public health systems? Are there such Indicator

systems currently being used or contemplated?

 What is currently being monitored in alcohol and drug surveys in Canada? Is the impact

of the school environment and the status of programs and policies being monitored? Are

youth assets as well as deficits being reported? Is there adequate data on psycho-social

factors?

 Does the research tell us to what extent are current policies, programs, services and

practices in the two systems based on research evidence? Can we identify and describe

ministries or agencies that have consciously made decisions about major school-based or

school-linked programs or services based on such evidence?

 Does the research indicate that school systems, public health and addictions

systems have established appropriate Indicators of system performance that

include defensible program logic, contextual, input, process and output indicators

as well as appropriate outcomes data that are truly related to the program logic

model?





193

194





 Does the research indicate the nature of a minimum number of the most

appropriate measures to surveil and monitor substance use and related health

status, FPT policy and program status and local agency/community capacity that

can be used to report on system accountability?

 Are there studies that describe systems that have established evidence-based surveillance

and monitoring systems relative to health, addiction behaviours of children and youth?



Similar to the principle of a population health approach that suggests we describe and monitor

expected inputs, processes and outputs, an important element of a school health promotion program

is to describe realistic roles and outputs for each of the systems involved. This leads to questions

such as the following:



 Does the research describe the roles of the three primary systems responsible for preventing

problem substance use through schools (ie education, public health and addictions agencies?

Has the research describe realistic outputs for school-based and school-linked addictions

prevention programs that can be monitored over time? How do these outputs (appropriate

adolescent knowledge, skills, attitudes, changes to school environment, access to services

etc) relate to long-term health outcomes related to substance use? Does the research clearly

delineate the two (outputs after 12 years of schooling vs life long outcomes)?



Wyrick et al (2001) examined ten secondary health education state curriculum frameworks in the

US were reviewed for their inclusion of 12 topics/mediators commonly used to prevent adolescent

substance use. Beliefs about consequences, decision-making skills, and stress management skills

were identified most often while commitment, lifestyle incongruence, and normative beliefs were

identified least often. Among states that included Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drugs, beliefs about

consequences and resistance skills were the most commonly identified mediators. Commitment,

goal setting, and normative beliefs were not identified in any ATOD sections.



Finlay (2004), in an unpublished review prepared for the BC Ministry of Health Services and

planning identified several gaps in the surveillance data relating to the health of children and youth.



―To determine the Canada-wide applicability of the recommendations of the BC Provincial Health

Officer, the data presented in his Report were compared with similar data for the other provincial and

territorial jurisdictions. This examination of and search for comparable data on the health status and

behaviours of school age children in Canada resulted in the following observations.



There is an abundance of data on the health status and health behaviours of school age children in

Canada (at the provincial and territorial level, as well as on a national basis). There are good sources

of comparable data on a number of health indicators that provide provincially comparable data on

school-age children and youth. Examples of these sources include the Physical Activity Monitor of the

Canada Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute, the Canadian Community Health Survey, Health

Canada – Notifiiable Diseases; Health Canada: Injury Surveillance and various surveys of Statistics

Canada.



Notwithstanding these sources, there are significant difficulties in finding data, based on regularly

conducted surveys that are comparable on a province-by-province (or territory) basis.



For example, data are available from a number of studies that have been done for an individual

province of territory. While data from these studies and reports are valuable, they present challenges

in term of comparability as many of these studies have been done as ―one-off‖ studies that address a

specific question or concern that is of interest at a particular time within one province. Therefore, the

replication of these studies or surveys over a period of years is not necessarily carried out. Nor are

similar studies carried out in the other provincial and territorial jurisdictions.



Further challenges to data comparability occurs in the following instances:



194

195





1. Where similar studies or surveys are carried out, the findings vary somewhat. (E.g. Health

Canada’s Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey versus Statistics Canada Survey of

% of Smokers in the Population)

2. Where similar surveys have been undertaken in more than one jurisdiction, the

methodologies or the presentation of the data often varies (e.g. slightly differing age

groupings, attempted suicide versus suicide mortality rates), thus making the

comparability of findings between jurisdictions difficult and open to debate.



As well, some surveys or studies report national data based on a sample sizes that are too small to

produce statistically significant data for an individual province or territory. Thus, these studies are of

little value with regard to providing data that are comparable on a province-by-province basis.‖



The findings of this recent review by Finlay are similar to other reviews prepared for the Council of

Ministers of Education, Canada, the Canadian Education Statistics Council and Justice Canada

(McCall, 2002; Shannon & McCall, 2000; 2001).



The review undertaken for Justice Canada, the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada and the

Canadian Association of Principals (Shannon & McCall Consulting, 2001) is still pertinent to this

discussion, although there are new surveys such as the CTCUMS that have been launched since the

writing of the paper from which excerpts are reproduced below:



What Kind of Information and Why?



We begin this discussion with a reminder that regular, reliable and timely (Indicators) data should be

collected to monitor the conditions of children and youth, their environments and the status of relevant

policies and programs. Such data is sometimes used to confirm or duplicate empirical, controlled

studies that show a specific condition or intervention has an impact but this should not be the primary

purpose of collecting the data. Collecting and analyzing regular, reliable data should alert policy-

makers and practitioners that something is working, or not working in their various public systems.



Positive and Negative Behaviours and Factors



Before discussing the scientific feasibility of collecting reliable data on the social behaviours, social

environments and relevant public policies and programs, we would like to raise one important principle

that should underline our approach to these issues and to lay to rest some of the legitimate concerns

raised by educators and others about the misuse of statistical data in the form of Indicators.



First, we should not be collecting information only on the negative behaviours of children and youth.

Obviously, positive and negative behaviours are important to having a complete picture of the situation

and so we need to collect both kinds of information. Consequently, in the conceptualization of the

rationale for collecting such data, we need to consider items that go beyond ―deficits‖ thinking about

children and youth. For example, Claudet & Ellett (1999) suggest a conceptual scheme that goes

beyond negative or deficit only thinking. They suggested three scales: 1) student achievement; 2)

perceived organizational effectiveness; 3) school holding power. Other similar work on communities,

such as that of Robert Samson of the University of Chicago, has turned from monitoring community

safety to monitoring community ―efficacy‖.



Our thinking on this important principle has also been influenced by the work of a scientific panel

convened by the U.S. Department of Education (Special Study Panel on Education Indicators, 1991).

This panel proposed a set of positive and negative features of the school environment so that we can

know that that school environment is purposeful, caring and ordered.



Valid, Proper Use of Statistics



Second, we need to collect data that can be used within a valid, defensible Indicators system. This

means a number of things. One, we need to select data sources or items that are meaningful







195

196



reflections of the reality of the situation. Two, we need a number of reliable data sources to provide a

comprehensive picture. Three, those data sources need to report on more than simply outcomes.



Early mistakes with the development of education Indicators in Canada have led to resistance to their

use. The misuse of statistical data by the media and a tendency among some policy-makers to create

―rankings‖ of schools has led many in the front-line to resist collecting data about their systems.



Most Indicators systems related to Canadian school systems developed piece-meal, with ad-hoc data

reported in isolated and infrequent reports. As well, output and outcomes data were often reported

without having contextual and process (programs and resources) data. Consequently, many education

and other practitioners have become cynical or wary about reporting and monitoring systems that do

not present an accurate and complete picture. In some instances, this has hardened into resistance to

all Indicators.



Secondly, there is an unfortunate tendency of the media and some authorities to present single-issue

data (such as test results) in a way that encourages the ―ranking‖ of schools. Lists of ―good‖ and ―bad‖

schools are published in newspapers, without background information and without including other

pertinent, contextual, policy/program and community information. School boards and

provinces/territories also suffer periodically with these types of simplistic rankings.



Ironically, this ranking tendency is best countered by reliable, regular and comprehensive data that

allows schools and school systems to report progress over time. They are able to present context,

input, process and output data simultaneously and they are able to compare their progress with their

own previous results. Consequently, meaningful reports and discussion emerge more frequently.



In order to be valid, Indicator systems should:

a) be directly related to the goals for the system,

b) collect data relating to the social and economic context as well as the family and community

characteristics,

c) measure inputs to the system,

d) describe throughputs or processes within the system,

e) report on outputs directly attributable to the system and

f) record long-term outcomes or impacts of the system.



The Scientific Feasibility



We need to be reasonably confident that researchers and policymakers have developed a stable,

albeit evolving, consensus on what needs to be measured and monitored. We need to know that those

items are based on sound conceptual models that have been tested through research and practice.

We need to know that the items being measured and monitored present a reliable picture.



In this project we are asking about the feasibility of measuring three basic things: the social behaviours

of youth, the social environments in which they live, learn and play and the school and agency policies

and programs that seek to support them.



In this brief discussion, we hope to identify:

a. where there is agreement on what items should be measured and monitored;

b. issues raised in previous consultations or in published sources about the reliability of

methods or items.



The Social Behaviours of Youth



There is a significant amount of research, theory and knowledge development that is relevant to the

discussion of the social behaviour of children and youth. Our understanding of health determinants,

resilience, (National Crime Prevention Council, nd), behaviour change models (National Crime

Prevention Council, nd) and the developmental stages and tasks of children and adolescents (National

Crime Prevention Council, 1996; 1997) need not be repeated here. However, this ever-widening and

deepening pool of knowledge should form a backdrop to our understanding of how behaviour is

developed.





196

197



There appears to be a consensus in the research literature that we should be monitoring a variety of

youth social behaviours. For the purposes of this paper, we have categorized such behaviours as

follows:

 Pro-social behaviours such as participating in extracurricular activities.

 Volunteering/community service is seen to be important in character and career

development by many.

 Avoiding higher risk situations such as being unsupervised after school or going to

dangerous places in community or school is also monitored in some studies.

 Health risk behaviours such as smoking, drinking or early sexual activity have been

associated with anti-social behaviours.

 Anti-social behaviours such as bullying and delinquency are emerging as a consistent

topic in studies.

 Criminal behaviours ranging from small property crimes to serious crimes and threats

against people have been reported in several studies.



While there appears to be some discussion in the research literature (Education Testing Service,

1999; Gaustad, 1991) as to whether these behaviours can be placed on a continuum or whether they

can be clustered into non-serious and serious groupings, there appears to be a consensus on their

relevance.



Staying with the individual, there also appears to be a consensus in the research that selected

attitudes, beliefs, perceptions and values. For the purposes of this brief overview, we have grouped

these items as follows:

 respect for others

 good character

 having positive life goals

 having a positive self-image/esteem

 being confident, not stressed (mental health)

 having an attachment to school (including detentions, suspensions, expulsion).



Researchers and policymakers have also developed a consensus that certain knowledge and skills

are important factors to individual social behaviours. These include:

 social skills

 decision-making/coping/problem-solving skills

 conflict resolution skills

 media literacy about violence on TV, games

 having basic academic skills and school success

 acquiring job-related skills



There is also a consensus that social support, in a variety of forms, is also be a factor worthy of

monitoring and measuring, including:

 trust, positive relationship with parents

 trust, able to confide in at least one adult

 trust, positive leadership with teachers or other caregivers

 trust, able to confide in a friend

 trust, able to relate to positive peer group

 successful initial job experiences

 access to technology.



Researchers and policy-makers have agreed that preventive, treatment and rehabilitation services will

have a direct impact on social behaviours. Youth access and use of the following services should be

monitored:

 access, use of supervised after-school programs

 access to youth friendly personal, academic, pastoral, health and career counseling

 appropriate access to remedial or alternative schooling

 appropriate, adapted special education services and programs

 therapeutic services

 appropriate temporary or long-term custody institutions

 alternative/diversion programs and services

 victim support services



197

198



 rehabilitation services



Finally, we have prepared a list of youth behavioural outcomes. These are the statistics that are most

often cited in the media and include:

 youth crime status

 youth health status

 youth employment status

 youth academic status (drop-outs, high school graduates, training programs and post-

secondary education).



The summary above describes the items relating to youth social behaviours which are most often cited

in research evidence and various studies and surveys. Together, they provide a meaningful,

composite portrait of the individual factors that influence behaviours.



However, there are some important issues that have been raised in previous consultations about

measuring and monitoring youth behaviours.



a) Can we measure anti-social behaviour in an adequate manner?



Bonita & Hanson (1994) review the difficulties associated with using administrative data (inaccurate,

misleading) victimization/perception surveys (missing ―victimless‖ crime such as prostitution or

vandalism, subjective) and self-reported behaviours (uncertain results). MacDonald & da Costa, 1996;

1996) have expressed similar concerns about underreporting of incidents by students. Definitions and

terminology can also be a factor when asking people to report on subjective issues such as ―hate

crimes‖ (Canadian Heritage, 1998).



Our rudimentary review of the published research done in preparing this paper located some

responses to these concerns. For example, the U.S. Department of Education (1996) has defined the

elements of a good administrative data collection strategy. As well, the Nation Center on Education

Statistics (nd) resolved many of the definition and terminology issues through the work of an expert

task force.



b) Who Should Be Surveyed?



Another potential problem in monitoring social behaviours and social climate is associated with who

should be surveyed. An example of this can be found in two U.S. reports on school safety (National

Center for Education Statistics, 1998), one which surveyed school principals and another which

surveyed students.



The obvious answer to this difficulty is to have more than one type of respondent from each social

environment, but is this scientifically and technically feasible?



c) Are people desensitized or over sensitive in victimization/perception surveys?



This is an issue raised in previous consultations on these issues? Can respondent bias, if any, be

controlled through scientific study design?



d) Can Reliable Administrative Data be collected from Administrators



A survey done as part of the CMEC paper on school safety data showed that most schools in Canada

are required to report serious incidents, such as violent incidents, criminal acts or serious property

crimes to their school boards. However, that survey also showed that most schools are not keeping

records on other, less serious antisocial behaviours, nor on their actions to deal with those incidents.

Consequently, some have raised concern about the reliability of existing administrative records from

schools.



Todd et al (1996) shows us some of these risks in their analysis of the data collection practices at

several Georgia schools. Respondents felt such data collection was worthwhile but they lacked

reliable baseline or comparative data, displayed a poor understanding of indicator items and, often,

respondents from the same school reported widely different estimates of incidents.



198

199





This issue has been discussed in both the published research literature. Researchers have reported

on a case study that shows how local school administrators can use good administrative record

keeping to improve their practices in helping students in difficulty. Further, there is considerable

experience being developed in Canadian and American schools in the collection and use of

administrative and student data as part of the Effective Behaviour Support (EBS) program, originating

out of Oregon. This holistic school safety program teaches school-based administrators how to collect

and use reliable and meaningful data through maintaining confidential, individual records. These

student case records can be aggregated to provide accurate, practical and meaningful information to

schools in the form of administrative data.



For more comprehensive advice on the nature of appropriate administrative data from schools, we can

turn to a task force established by the National Center for Education Statistics (Crime, Violence and

Discipline Reporting Task Force, 1996). This report had very detailed recommendations on the nature

of administrative data that should be collected from schools.



The Social Environments Related to Youth



In this section we discuss the social environments related to youth. They include, for the purposes of

this brief overview, the home, the school, public recreation/other programs, and public places in the

community.



The Home/Family



There appears to be considerable consensus among researchers and policy-makers about the

characteristics of the home and family that are relevant to the social behaviours and achievement.

They include:

 socio-economic status

 employment status, aspirations of parents

 ethnocultural factors

 marital status and history

 social and cultural capital

 parental involvement and parenting style



The School



The concern for the social environment of the school as an important factor in public view with studies

relating to school dropouts (Rutter, et al, 1979; Janosz & Lecler, 1993). The concept of the ―quality of

school life‖ evolved into ―school climate‖ and eventually into ―school culture‖ and has become as a

well-defined and understood part of the research literature on ―effective schools‖. More recently,

researchers and policy-makers have reexamined the school‘s social environment in relation to

violence and have reviewed concepts such as school discipline/codes of conduct.



In the rudimentary literature search undertaken in preparation of this summary, we located several

conceptual frameworks to explain the influences of the school‘s social environment (Jason et al, 1998;

Lighthouse, 1999; Macintosh, 1991; Applied Research Branch, 2000; Office of Educational Research

and Improvement, 2001; National Center for Education Statistics, 1991). There are many, many more

sources.



The elements of an effective, positive school culture have been generally seen to include:

 shared responsibility and decision-making

 parental involvement

 high teacher expectations

 recognizing cultural differences

 relevant learning

 research-based instructional practices

 sense of personal responsibility

 safe orderly learning environments

 focus on learning

 teacher encouragement



199

200



 frequent monitoring of progress



Public Funded Recreation, Day-care and Other Programs



Although there is a consensus in the preliminary collection of published works identified in the

preparation of this paper that the status and nature of well-organized, publicly funded recreation, day-

care, arts and other programs should be measured and monitored, our rudimentary search did not

locate documents providing the depth and detail as that for homes and schools.



Consequently, we will ask the questions of others at the Ottawa meeting. Is there a consensus in the

research and current practice that would make it feasible to identify specific items to measure and

monitor.





Public Places in the Community for Youth



Our rudimentary review of the published literature did identify several, disparate sources that measure

and monitor perceived and reported levels of safety, crime and social behaviours in public places in

the community. For example, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (2001) and the Canadian

Institute for Health Information (1995) include safety information in their Indicators programs. As well,

composite reports or detailed analysis of various surveys, such as The Progress of Canada‘s Children

(Canadian Council on Social Development, 2001) or Income and Well-being (Canadian Council on

Social Development, 1999) have used NLSCY data on issues such as recreation user fees and

problem neighbourhoods. However, most studies of community safety issues such as the CCSD

Personal Security Index (Canadian Council on Social Development, 2001) do not have detailed data

or analyses on how youth perceive and behave in public places such as streets, shopping malls and

other locales. Our search located several, similar reports that had not isolated youth data in Calgary

(nd), Toronto (nd), Albuquerque (2000), Trans Country (nd), King County (nd) and San Mateo (2000).



The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (1999) has noted that anti-social and

criminal behaviours peak in the after school hours or in the evening on non-school days. The U.S.

Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics (2001) has reported that a broader set of

Indicators of youth sexual behaviours and social environments is needed. They call for positive

indicators of youth behaviour in the community and on neighbourhood environments.



Consequently, one of the means within our discussion of scientific feasibility should be if and how we

can measure and monitor the impact of social environments in the community. This discussion should

not only include issues of safety but also overall community social support or ―efficacy‖. At the meeting

some of our expert participants will be able to expand on these concepts.



The Status of Relevant Policies, Programs and Practices



This is an area of activity that is often overlooked within Indicator programs. We need reliable, regular

and family information on the status of policies, programs and practices that are relevant to youth

social behaviours and social environments. We need to be able to determine if appropriate policies are

in place, whether those programs are being implemented and whether these policies and programs

are having the desired impact on professional practice.



We should be able to measure and monitor the relevant policies, programs and practices of:

 schools and school systems

 police services

 public health

 social services/child welfare agencies

 youth courts

 custody agencies

 employment agencies

 recreation departments

 municipalities.









200

201



We should also be able to determine the availability and programs/practices of relevant community-

based agencies, including:

 youth serving organization

 diversions/alternative programs

 arts/cultural organizations

 sports organizations

 religious organizations

 business organizations.



It is not feasible, nor necessary, to provide detailed descriptions of the appropriate policies, programs

and practices of these public and voluntary agencies within this discussion paper. At the meeting in

Ottawa, we need only to determine if it is feasible to collect reliable, regular and timely data on these

topics. However, it may be useful to present just one example of one agency to illustrate the type of

information needed. Once again, the school appears to be the agency that has been most studied in

the published research literature.



There is a considerable agreement on the policy and program elements that make up a safe, orderly

school environment. These have been summarized in a research-based Canadian consensus

statement. (Canadian Association of Principals, 2000):

 inclusive curriculum

 fair and consistently applied codes of behaviour

 problem-solving, not punitive approach

 natural justice approach

 leadership and teacher training

 pro-social leadership

 coordination of services delivery to children and youth

 police-school partnerships and protocol

 whole school approach

 focus on specific issues, including bullying, attendance, incidents, student attachment

 engaging youth in after school programs, peer mediation, community service learning,

school watch and school court programs

 instruction in social skills, conflict resolution, law-related education, drug prevention,

decision-making, anger management, character development, media literacy

 clear, positive behaviour expectations

 parent, agency and community involvement and support

 appropriate security precautions

 well designed, maintained facilities

 police, health, employment, social and community services coordinated with school

 youth friendly alternatives to suspension

 alternate schooling arrangements

 restorative justice programs.



This section of the discussion paper has briefly reviewed some of the questions pertaining to the

scientific feasibility of measuring and monitoring youth social behaviours, social environments and the

relevant policies, programs and practices. Our discussion has been based on a rudimentary review of

some of the published research literature.



Based on these sources, it seems scientifically feasible to identify measures and statistical sources

that can be monitored over time to report regularly, reliably and in a timely fashion. This finding is open

for discussion at the meeting in Hull.



If Data Were Gathered, Is it Needed? Would it Be Used?



The survey of local school districts that was done for the CMEC report has underlined the need for

reliable information. This survey was administered to 50 school districts selected on a random basis.

The results were as follows:



 About half of the school districts in the small random sample were using external,

published studies and surveys on school safety to review and improve programs.







201

202



 Less than half of the school districts are collecting data on the attachment their

students have to their schools and, when they do, this is usually in the form of

monitoring school dropout rates.

 Two thirds of school districts do not monitor factors such as student perceptions of the

school climate.

 Just over half of the school districts monitor serious incidents such as criminal

behaviours in their schools. Less serious incidents such as vandalism, bullying or

harassment are not monitored by two-thirds of the school districts.

 Three-quarters of the school districts said they are not required to report such data to

their respective education ministries.

 Half of the school districts require reports from their schools on the policies and

programs being implemented to improve school safety.



The vast majority (over 85%) of school district administrators said that it was important or very

important to have regular, reliable information on youth antisocial behaviours that take place in schools

and the community.



Administrators wanted such information to be practical, comparable and analyzed so that policy and

program implications are clearly identified. An open-ended question in the survey prompted several

suggestions that the burden of data collection in schools should not be onerous.



Do We Have that Information Now?



Increasing Concern, Several Studies, Incomplete Picture



Canadians are increasingly concerned about the safety of youth in schools and in the community.

Media reports about violent crimes in schools as well as increased worries about the devastating

consequences of antisocial behaviours such as bullying and harassment have heightened these

concerns. This has led to the development of several studies and one-time surveys in Canada. As

well, some ongoing surveys have included more questions on specific issues and topics.



Unfortunately, these studies tend to be measuring only one aspect and many are not necessarily

going to be repeated. As well, some of these studies are narrow in scope, reporting only on the

negative behaviours of youth and/or risk factors without any data on the pro-social behaviours and

factors that can reinforce resilience and social attachment. It is perhaps not surprising, therefore, to

find that the findings of these reports vary. For example, the prevalence of bullying behaviours varies

from five to 45% among the various studies.



Further, most of these studies are based on surveys of only one population such as youth, parents,

teachers or administrators. They often do not report adequately on the social, economic and family

contexts, or on the status and delivery of programs and policies to prevent antisocial behaviours.



Large scale, ongoing surveys (such as the General Social Survey) that are done at the national level,

often do not have sufficient specificity to report adequately on the impact of school and community

social environments on safety and learning. Other, more specific surveys such as the Health

Behaviours of School-age Children (HBSC) have a better selection of questions, but the Canadian

sample size is very limited.



The National Longitudinal Survey on Children and Youth (NLSCY) has multiple respondents and a

good selection of questions, but is largely inaccessible to local decision-makers, does not have

provincial/territorial data for children/youth over age five and has a lengthy lag time (over five years)

between data collection and publication of results, thereby making it problematic for use by

policymakers seeking to monitor their systems. As well, we understand that the most recent cycle of

data collection has not been able to collect a sufficient number of schools participating and that this

part of the NLSCY may be discarded.



There have been some recent studies (that may become ongoing surveys) undertaken by education

ministries that have asked questions about school climate. However, they tend to be part of larger

scope surveys of school graduates and academic-oriented school report cards and, consequently, do







202

203



not provide in depth coverage of school climate and school safety issues. These surveys also do not

report on context or on the status of relevant policies and programs.



At the national level, the interest in youth antisocial behaviours is reflected in the introduction or

expansion of items in surveys done by HRDC, Health Canada, Justice Canada and Statistics Canada.

However, these surveys are often difficult to access, ask a limited number of questions or are

sampling only at a national level.



Very few of the surveys done to date in the provinces/territories or at the national level have asked

questions about the status of prevention programs and policies in schools, other agencies or the

community. Consequently, we have little information on whether such policies and programs are being

implemented. These strengths and weaknesses in all of these studies and surveys are examined in

more detail in the analysis of current and recent surveys presented later in this report.



Therefore, this paper suggests that there is an urgent need for education, justice and other authorities

to consider how regular, reliable information about school and community safety can be collected and

made easily accessible to education, justice, law enforcement, health, social service and other

professionals and agencies.



Content Analysis of Existing Surveys and Recent Studies



A general content analysis was undertaken of the existing national and provincial/territorial surveys

and recent one-time studies relating to youth social behaviours, environments and programs. It should

be noted that this analysis is only of their general nature. The framework used to analyze their

questions is based on the preceding discussion of what should be monitored and measured.



The brief summary below is based on a general content analysis of the surveys listed. The purpose of

this preliminary analysis is to indicate the types of questions being asked in regular Canadian surveys

and recent one-time studies. Several gaps in our knowledge of the social behaviours, environments

and relevant public policies/programs are noted after the presentation of the results. Appendix One of

this paper contains a description of these studies and the content analysis for each survey or study.



If collaboration in the collection and sharing of these data is deemed to be feasible, further specific

examination of these studies would be required.



The following regular surveys and recent one-time studies were examined.

(Note: In some cases, some of the recent studies or reports within a province are grouped together in

this report.)



Regular National Surveys

 National Longitudinal Survey of Chidren and Youth (NLSCY)

 Health Behaviours of School-age Children (HBSC)

 General Social Survey (GSS) (Victimization and Activities Components)

 Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR)

 Youth Custody and Court Survey (YCCS)

 Youth Court Survey (YCS)

 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)

 National Population Health Survey (NPHS)

 Youth in Transition Survey (PISA/YITS)

 School Achievement Indicators Program (SAIP)



Regular Provincial/Territorial Surveys

 New Brunswick Positive Learning Environments

 Newfoundland School Report Card/Quality of Student Life/School Activities

Survey

 Quebec NCPC Project Survey/Previous Studies/Superior Council on Education

Recommendation

 Ontario Suspensions & Incidents Data/School Report Card Development

 BC School Report Card/McCreary Adolescent Health Survey/Auditor-General

Recommendations



203

204



 Nunavut Community Profile

 Personal Education Number (BC, AB, MB, SK, QC, NF)



One time National and Provincial/Territorial Studies

 Teacher Federation Surveys (Several reviewed, please see Appendix for details)

 Family Characteristics of Problem Kids

 Profile of Youth Justice in Canada

 Alternative Measures in Canada/Alternative Measures Survey

 Community Involvement/ Youth Volunteering on Rise

 Survey of School Board Polices on Violence (Day et al, 1995)

 School Violence and the Zero Tolerance Alternative (Gabor, 1995)

 Truancy and the Social Context of Schooling Frank & Lipps, 1997)

 Bullying and Victimization among Canadian Children (Craig et al, 1998)

 Weapons Use in Canadian Schools (Walker, 1995)

 Exemplary Police-School Programs (Ryab & Mathews, 1995)

 Nova Scotia School Code of Conduct: Report to the Minister (2001)

 Manitoba Longitudinal Survey of Recent Graduates (1999)

 BC Auditor-General Report (2000)

 Alberta Centre on the Law and the Family (Gomes et al, 2000)

 Northwest Territories School Relationships Study (1996)

 Alberta Tri-University Qualitative Reports on Disruptive Behaviours (1996-98)

 Education Quality and Accountability Office of Ontario Survey (2001)

 NLSCY Analysis Participation in Activities (2001)



The timeliness of the data as well as the sample size (national results only, provincial/territorial results,

local results). The gaps in the coverage of these data sources are discussed after the table

summarizing the results. One-time studies are not reported in this summary, but are examined in the

Appendix.



The following summary indicates clearly that we rarely have a regular, reliable data source from

among the surveys and studies reviewed in preparation of this paper for most of the topics listed here.

In some cases, for some age groups, we have data from some surveys with a national only sample. In

other cases, we have good data from one or two provinces, but not from the rest.



In some cases, we have identified a national survey with a few questions on a few related topics.

Other times, we found national surveys with many questions on several topics, but it covered only one

age group.



Further, we need to be cautious about the practical value of national data sources to provincial and

local policy-makers and practitioners. Since most major public systems are administered provincially,

those policy-makers will, more often than not, need provincial/territorial results for them to decide on

new directions. Local agencies are the ones that are often required to make decisions about the use of

scarce resources, and they need to be persuaded to collect data and use existing data.







Summary of Content Analysis of Canadian Surveys and One-time Studies









204

Type of Indicator

Context Data

 Economic Conditions – the general national or provincial economic conditions are usually not sought or

reported with the survey results GSS

 Social Conditions- these data are usually not sought, nor reported with the survey results GSS

 Media Influences – none

 Other Data - none reported

Input Data

 Family Characteristics- major surveys include questions, best data available every five years from a national

sample only for under 15 years old (NLSCY), PISA/YITS has one time p/t data on 15 yrs.old

 Community Characteristics – major surveys include these questions, best data every five years from a national

sample under 15 years old (NLSCY)

 Local Employment Rates-questions rarely asked

 Other Data

 Funding, resources, characteristics of schools, agencies, police etc-characteristics of schools asked in several

studies, questions rarely asked about other community agencies

Process Data

 Administrative data from:

o Schools- questions from 3 p/t surveys, 3 other p/t developing systems, no national data source

o Police Services- regular data from UCR, crimes only

o Courts- regular data from YCS, crimes and probation only

o Custody Agencies- some from YCCS (not sure if this is an ongoing survey)

o Recreation Dep’t’s – no survey or study reviewed had admin data from this source

o Youth Serving Organizations- no survey or study reviewed had admin data from this source

o Employment Agencies – no survey or study had admin data from this source

 Perceptions/Victimization Surveys of schools (S), home (H) Community (C ), recreation programs (R)

o Youth – 3 p/t surveys have questions, best national data is every 3 yrs (HBSC), some p/t data from

PISA/YITS, (data is on schools mostly, some on community or homes)

o Parents – NLSCY has best data every five years in national sample every five years

o Teachers – NLSCY has best national data, NB, QC, have data.

o Principals – NLSCY has best national data every five years,

o Caregivers – no survey had questions from other caregivers

o Police Officers- no survey had questions from police officers

o Citizens/General Public – few questions in NPHS (national), CCHS (local/provincial)

 Impact. Awareness of Social Influences

o Parent behaviours, practices – best national data from NLSCY(5 yrs), HBSC (every 3 years), 3 p/t

surveys have questions

o Peer behaviours, practices – best national data from NLSCY, HBSC, 3 p/t surveys have some questions

 Status of Policies/ Programs/Practices

o Schools – best national data from NLSCY (5 yrs), two p/t surveys have data

o Recreation Dept’s – some data from NLSCY

o Police- some data from NLSCY

o Youth Courts - some data from YCS

o Public Health – some data from NLSCY every 5 years

o Social Service/Child Welfare – some data from NLSCY every five years

o Employment – no data source available

o Arts/Cultural Organizations – no data available

o Youth Serving Organizations – no data available

o Religious Organizations – no data available

o Diversion/Alternatives Programs –no data available

o Other – no other type reported



Output Data

 Youth Behaviours -

o Pro-social Behaviours – NLSCY, HBSC, YITS, BC, NF, QC

o Community Service/Volunteering – YITS, BC

o Risk Situations (eg home alone) – HBSC

o Health Risk Behaviours – NLSCY, HBSC, BC

o Anti-social Behaviours – NLSCY, HBSC, GSS, BC, QC, NB,

o Criminal Behaviours – UCR, YCS, NLSCY

206

 Youth Attitudes/Beliefs -

o Respect for Others – Canadian Heritage is initiating survey with Stats Canada

o Character/Values - CCHS (Optional), NLSCY, YITS, QC

o Personal Life Goals – NLSCY, YITS, HBSC, NB, QC, BC

o Self-Image – NLSCY, HBSC, NB, QC, BC

o Confidence, Mental Health, Stress, Anxiety – NLSCY, HBSC, CCHS (Option), NPHS, NB, QC, BC

o Attachment to school – NLSCY, HBSC, YITS, NF, QC, BC, BC, Student Numbers

 Youth Knowledge/Skills -

o Social Skills – YITS (15+), NF, QC, BC, MB

o Decision-making Skills, Problem solving skills – YITS (15+)

o Conflict resolution Skills – none

o Knowledge of Legal Responsibilities/ Rights – none

o Media Literacy Skills – none

o Basic Academic Skills – SAIP, NLSCY

o Job-related skills – NLSCY, YITS, MB

 Access to Social Support -

o Trust in Parents – NLSCY, YITS, HBSC, BC, QC,

o Trust in at least one adult – NLSCY, BC

o Trust in teachers, service providers – NLSCY, YITS, HBSC, NB, NF, QC

o Trust in friend – NLSCY

o Trust in friends, peer group –NLSCY, HBSC, BC

o Initial Job Experiences – YITS, MB

o Access to technology – YITS (Option), NF

 Access, Use of Preventive/ Emergency Services -

 Preventive/Protective Services -

o After School, Recreation ,Programs etc – NLSCY, YITS, HBSC, GSS, CCHS (option), NF, QC, BC

o Personal, pastoral, health, career counseling –NLSCY, HBSC, CCHS, YITS, NPHS, MB

o Remedial/alternative schooling – NLSCY, YITS, NB, NF, Student Number?

o Adapted Sp. Ed Programs – QC, Student Number?

 Treatment/Rehabilitation Services –

o Therapeutic Services – NPHS, NB

o Custodial Institutions - YCCS, YCS

o Alternative Programs – YCCS

o Victim Support Services – none

o Rehabilitation Services – none

Outcomes Data

 Youth Health Status – NPHS (12+), CCHS, GSS (15+)

 Youth Crime Status – UCR, YCS

 Youth Employment Status – Unemployment data

 High School Dropout/Grad Rates/Training/PSE Status – SAIP



In addition to the general gaps and difficulties identified prior to the presentation of the table

above, this general contents analysis identified a n umber of specific gaps in our knowledge,

including:



a) There were very few surveys that were able to correlate contextual and input data with outputs

and with process data.



b) Most national surveys have very little administrative data from schools. The administrative data

from other agencies such as recreation departments, public health, child welfare agencies and

other agencies is not collected in any of these surveys. Administrative data from police services is

not necessarily representative and even when combined with the available youth court crime

stats, these surveys do not offer explanations or warning signs about antisocial behaviours For

example, bullying is not monitored in these surveys, yet it is a major problem, with severe

consequences.



c). Almost all of these surveys and studies collect very little input data that describes the

characteristics of institutions and agencies that are supposed to support youth. Where it is done,

it is usually done only for schools.



d) Perception/victimization surveys, that can go deeper than administrative data to catch

unreported crimes or behaviours, are not used in common way in many ofd the surveys and

206

207

studies. As well, when these perceptions and victimization surveys are used, they often do not

use multiple respondents in order to capture the variations in perceptions.



e) Most surveys and studies do not collect information on the status or reach of prevention or

promotion programs. We need to know if such programs are actually being delivered to children

and youth, if they are of high quality and if they are actually used by an appropriate number of

youth or by the appropriate sub-populations of youth.



f) Overall, when one looks at all of the surveys and studies, there is a wide, good range of pro and

antisocial behaviours being measured at different times, for different ages of youth or for different

jurisdictions. However, this wide range of behaviours is not often captured within one survey or for more

than one age group, or they are monitored infrequently or only at national level.





g) We can gather very little knowledge about the relevant attitudes/beliefs and values of youth

from the existing number of surveys and studies.



h) The survey and studies provide very little information about the related knowledge and coping

skills of youth, despite the fact that we know these types of programs can reduce violence and

improve pro-social behaviours.



i) There is a wide range of questions about youth access to various forms of social support, but

these data sources are not regular, reliable, timely, nor are they available with provincial/territorial

results.



j) These surveys and studies provide very little information on how many kids are participating in

preventive, protective and treatment services such as career counseling, health services,

treatment services, diversion programs etc.



k) In these surveys and studies, outcomes data is often presented and measured without having

information on the other factors such as context, inputs and process. Consequently, these results

do not inform decision-makers adequately, confuse the public, and move us no closer to better

policies or programs. .



l) The NLSCY has the best set of instruments, but its cohort sample is only national after age 5,

the data is not timely, and the schools surveys are being dropped because of lack of

respondents.



m) The optional nature of several components of the HBSC and CCHS surveys may make

comparative analysis with other countries or among communities difficult.



n) Some of the surveys examine school climate and home climate, but few surveys examine

other public places within the community that serve youth. It is not clear if general surveys about

the community safety and social climate currently differentiate the responses from youth about

those youth-specific places.



o) Five provinces now developing school report cards that include data on antisocial behaviours

data (NF, ON, ON, AB, QC).



p) Several school boards are developing local tracking systems using administrative data such as

that recommended in the Oregon EBS program.



Wenter et al (2002) assessed how current practice in US middle school substance use

prevention programs compares with seven recommended guidelines adapted from the Centers

for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for school-based tobacco use prevention

programs. An estimated 64.2% of schools met four or more of the recommendations for school-

based substance use prevention practice; 4.0% met all seven recommendations. Schools were

most likely to report having and enforcing substance use prevention policies (84.3%) and least

likely to report training teachers in substance use prevention (17.9%). More recommendations

were implemented in schools that were public and had larger enrollments, greater perceived

availability of resources, greater school board and parental support for substance use

207

208

prevention, and had hired a school substance use prevention coordinator. The authors

concluded that the low prevalence of comprehensive substance use prevention programs in U.S.

middle schools may limit the potential impact of school programs on the prevalence of youth

substance use.



A similar study on US schools and curricula (Ringwalt et al, 2002) found that 26.8% of all

schools, including 34.6% of public schools and 12.6% of private schools, used at least 1 of the

10 effective curricula specified. Few school or respondent characteristics were related to

program implementation. Over two thirds of schools reported using more than 1 curriculum,

and almost half reported using 3 or more. Results demonstrate the considerable gap between

our understanding of effective curricula and current school practice.



McCall, (1997); Allensworth et al, (1997, p. 287) and Nutbeam & St. Leger, (1997) suggest in

their reviews of the research on school health that we need a clearer understanding of the

potential and the realistic, sustainable limits of school-based and school-linked interventions to

prevent specific health problems. In other words, knowing what is achievable for the school in

relation to several health issues, including which, if any, issues are more easily influenced by

school health programs and which are essential for the school to address for which age groups

of youth at what stages of their development. (For example, the US has identified six health

issues for school-aged children based on their health impact. Is anyone studying whether some

issues are not modifiable through school health programs?)



These same research reviews have suggested that we need better and more frequent monitoring

of the status of policies, programs and services available in the school and the community

through the development of Indicators (Nutbeam & St. Leger, 1996, 1997; Allensworth et al,

1997, McCall, 1997, WHO Working Group, 1996, WHO Expert Committee 1997)



Finally, these international reviews suggest that a set of Indicators to monitor the "health" of

schools, school systems and related systems such as public health, social services, recreation,

police and youth employment services be developed. These Indicators need to be more

meaningful ion measuring factors such as the resiliency within children, the capacity of systems

to respond rather than simply deficits and negative incidents or treatment statistics. The

tendency in health promotion and education is to focus on the concepts that are most easily

operationalized and measured. There is an urgent need for more meaningful indicators that

report on a comprehensive set of indicators that cover context, inputs and processes at all levels

as well as immediate outputs and long-term outcomes.



A survey of ministry and school board practices (McCall et al, 1999) in monitoring school

health and HIV/sexual health policies and programs would suggest that ongoing monitoring

might be a problem within Canada.



Education ministries and school districts were asked how they reported student achievement in

health education. Respondents were asked to indicate which of several following reporting

procedures were used. Less than 20% of education respondents reported that they reported

student health achievement scores or indicators in annual reports, or that they assess the

effectiveness of the health education program in respect to learning outcomes. As well, very

few education respondents were tracking the number of students who were opting to take

health, physical education or family studies courses in senior high school grades.



Health ministries and public health units were asked abut their reporting requirements on the

prevention aspects of their inter-ministry (all ministries) action plan on AIDS/HIV. Very few

health ministries nor public health units reported that there were regular mechanisms for

evaluating progress.

208

209



Very few health or education ministries or local agencies regularly monitored public opinions

about health issues, nor did they monitor client satisfaction with prevention programs. Very fe

ministries or agencies monitored participation rates in various optional programs such as health

education or preventive health services.









209

210

D. Conclusions





This literature review has identified substantial evidence that supports the use of the school setting

to influence substance use by children and youth.





 Can the school, working with parents, public health and addiction agencies and

the broader community, implement sustainable school-based and school-linked

policies, programs and practices that prevent substance abuse and promote

mental health as well as healthy child/adolescent development?



 What are the best or promising overall approaches in enhancing that

prevention/promotion role for schools and relevant agencies/systems? What are

the best or promising, cost-effective and cost-beneficial interventions? How can

these interventions be best organized, coordinated, delivered, sustained and

evaluated?



How can the organizational capacity of provincial/territorial education and health ministries be

strengthened to encourage, require or support their health, addictions and education systems to

prevent substance abuse?



The sources identified in this wide-ranging review show that the social and physical environment

of the school has an impact on the nature of such use by adolescents. Further, some prominent

researchers are suggesting that the school environment is linked directly to the environments of the

home and the local community, so interventions in the school setting may have an impact on those

other contexts.



The research identifies the mediating factors related to risk and protection from harmful substance

use that can be influenced within the school setting. New understanding about the use of alcohol,

tobacco and other drugs by youth, as well as new insights into adolescent development make the

evidence base about suitable and effective approaches to school-based and school-linked

prevention more understandable and clear. A better balance between harm reduction and

abstinence messages might well be achievable.



As well, this review has identified new ways of understanding the ecological nature of the multiple

micro-environments within the school, as well as systems theory that can explain how programs

can be made more sustainable.



A considerable consensus now exists on the nature of effective instructional programs that are

based on social skills development. This review has also described bow that effective instruction

about drugs and alcohol can be linked to broader instruction in social and emotional learning,

whole school approaches to enhance the social environment within the school and comprehensive

mental health services.



This review has also briefly reviewed some of the research on specific interventions that are part of

population health and comprehensive school health approaches, but further research into many of

these principles and elements is strongly suggested.



The organizational capacity of health, education and other ministries to promote this new

understanding, these new approaches and these multiple, coordinated interventions would appear

to be urgent. This review found that many systems fail to make use of research evidence.



The capacity of health and education ministries to coordinate policy, promote cooperation,

210

211

transfer knowledge, develop their work forces, monitor and report on outputs and systems and

manage emerging issues will be a critical factor in sustainability, coordination and ultimately

harmful use of substances by youth.



This review identified and described these capacities, located some sources indicating their

importance and relevance and showed why they should be used in other parts of this strategic

assessment project. However, we did not locate many studies, especially Canadian studies, that

used this type of systems thinking to assess the current status of programs and policies.



Consequently, it is important further assessment be done into the next levels of the systems, the

local school boards, regional health authorities, addictions agencies, police and mental health

agencies.



As well, it is important that the many points of further inquiry that can be done by more in-depth

research reviews or further research that have been identified in this report be considered through

the development of a research agenda on the role of the school setting in preventing harmful

substance use.









211

212

E. References



Aas J, Klepp KI. (1992). Adolescents‘ alcohol use related to perceived norms. Scandinas

Journal of Psychology. 33(4):315-25.



Aos, S.; Phipps, P.; Barnoski, R.; and Lieb, R. The Comparative Costs and Benefits of

Programs to Reduce Crime. Vol. 4 (1-05-1201). Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for

Public Policy, May 2001.



Abbey A, Pilgrim C, Hendrickson P, Buresh S. (2000). Evaluation of a family-based substance

abuse prevention program targeted for the middle school years. J Drug Educ. 30(2):213-28.



Abt Associates Inc., Eggert Leona L, Kumpfer Karol L. (1997). Drug abuse prevention for at-

risk individuals. (NIDA Drug Abuse Research Dissemination and Applications (RDA)

Materials ; NIH Publication No. 97-4115) Rockville: National Institute on Drug Abuse. Office

of Science Policy and Communications. Public Information Branch. v, 165 p. (ADAI bk) HV

5825 A224 1997 .



Addiction Research Foundation. (1990). Suggested drug education curriculum content areas for

each grade division. Notebook. Toronto, ON: Centre on Addiction and Mental Health.



Addiction Research Foundation. (1991). Alcohol and Drug Policies: A Guide for School

Boards. (2nd ed.). Toronto, ON: Author.



Adelman HS, Taylor L. (2000). Moving prevention from the fringes into

the fabric of school improvement. Journal of Education and Psychological Consultation. vol.

11, no. 1, p. 7–36.



Adrian M, Layne N, Williams R. (1995). Canadian Youth and Drugs: A Health Promotion and

Social Marketing Resource Guide. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada.



Advisory Committee on Population Health. 2000. The Opportunity of Adolescence. Ottawa,

ON: The Health Sector Contribution, Health Canada.



Advisory Committee on Population Health. 2002. Advancing Integrated Prevention Strategies

in Canada: An Approach to Reducing the Burden of Chronic Disease, Ottawa, ON: Health

Canada



Ajzen I, Fishbein M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Behavior. Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.



Ajzenstat J, Gentiles L. (1988). Sex Education in Canada: A Survey of Policies and Programs.

Toronto, Ontario: Human Life Research Institute.



Alberta Alcohol & Drugs Abuse Commission. (2001) Youth Risk and Protective Factors - May

2003. Edmonton, AB: Author.



Alberta Alcohol & Drug Abuse Commission. (2002). An Overview of Risk and Protective

Factors The Alberta Youth Experience Survey 2002. Edmonton, AB: Author.



Alcohol and Public Health Research Unit. (nd). Alcohol Advertising.

http://www.aphru.ac.nz/projects/Alcohol/advertising.htm#children.



212

213

Alcohol Policy Network. (2004). Let‘s Take Action on Alcohol Problems in Schools, Colleges

and Universities: A Practical Guide to Policy Development for Administrators, Educators,

Students and Others Concerned about Health, Safety, and Liability. Toronto, ON: Ontario

Public Health Association.



Allensworth DD, Lawson E, Nicholson I , Wyche J, eds. (1997). Schools & Health. Our

Nation's Investment, Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine. National Academy Press.



Allensworth DD. (1993). Health education. The state of the art, Journal of School Health,

63(1):14-20.



Allensworth DD. (1994). The research base for innovative practices in school health education

at the secondary level. Journal of School Health, 64(5):180-7.



Allison KR. (1992). Academic stream and tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis use among Ontario

high school students. Int J Addict. May;27(5):561-70.



Allison KR, Silverman G, Dignam C. (1990). Effects on students of teacher training in use of a

drug education curriculum. J Drug Educ. 20(1):31-46.



Allott R, Paxton R, Leonard R. (1999). Drug education: a review of British Government policy

and evidence on effectiveness. Health Educ Res. Aug;14(4):491-505.



Ambtman R, Madak P, Koss D, Strople MJ. (1999). Evaluation of a comprehensive elementary

school curriculum-based drug education program. J Drug Educ. 20(3):199-225.



American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on School Health. (2001). School health centers

and other integrated school health services. Committee on School Health. Pediatrics.

Jan;107(1):198-201.



American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental

disorders. (4 ed.) Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.



Ames A, Gray D, Currie C, Elton R. (1997). Healthy or druggy? Self-image, ideal image and

smoking behavior among young people. Social Science and Medicine, 45:847-858.



Andreasen AR. (1995). Marketing Social Change: Changing Behaviour to Promote Health,

Social Development and the Environment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.



Anthony JC, Petronis KR. (1995). Early onset drug use and risk of later drug problems. Drug

and Alcohol Dependency, 40(1):9-15.



Armbruster P. (2002). The administration of school-based mental health services. Child

Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. Jan;11(1):23-41.



Arnett J. (1992). Reckless behavior in adolescence. A developmental perspective.

Developmental Review. 12:339-373.



Ashery, R.S.; Robertson, E.B.; and Kumpfer, K.L.; eds. Drug Abuse Prevention Through

Family Interventions. NIDA Research Monograph No. 177. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1998.



Auditor General of British Columbia. (2001). Fostering a Safe Learning Environment:

213

214

How the British Columbia School System Is Doing, Government of British Columbia.



Austin, Gregory. (1992). School failure and alcohol and other drug abuse. (Children at Risk)

Madison, WI : Wisconsin Clearinghouse, i, 57 p. (ADAI bk) HV 5824 Y68 A87 1992.



Bandura A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.



Bangert-Drowns J (1988), "The Effects of School-based Substance Abuse Education: A Meta-

Analysis", Journal of Drug Education, 18(3).



Banks C. (1993). Restructuring schools for equity: What we have learned in two decades. Phi

Delta Kappan. 75, 42-48.



Banwell CL, Young D. (1993). Rites of passage: Smoking and the construction of social

identity. Drug and Alcohol Review, 12:377-385.



Barnett S, Niebuhr V, Baldwin C. (1998). Principles for developing interdisciplinary school-

based primary care centers. J Sch Health. Mar;68(3):99-105.



Barnett S, Duncan P, O'Connor KG. (1999). Pediatricians' response to the demand for school

health programming. Pediatrics. Apr;103(4):e45.



Barrett M. (1994). Sexuality education in Canadian schools: An overview in 1994. Canadian

Journal of Human Sexuality, 3(3):199-208.



Basen-Engquist K, O'Hara-Tompkins N, Lovato CY, Lewis MJ, Parcel GS, Gingiss P. (1994).

The effect of two types of teacher training on implementation of Smart Choices: a tobacco

prevention curriculum. J Sch Health. Oct;64(8):334-9.



Battistich V, Hom A, (1997). The relationship between students' Sense of their School as a

community and their involvement in problem behaviors, American Journal of Public Health,

87(12):1997-2001.



Battistich, V.; Solomon, D.; Watson, M.; and Schaps, E. Caring school communities.

Educational Psychologist 32(3):137–151, 1997.



Bauman, K.E.; Foshee, V.A.; Ennett, S.T.; Pemberton, M.; Hicks, K.A.; King, T.S.; and Koch,

G.G. The influence of a family program on adolescent tobacco and alcohol. American Journal

of Public Health 91(4):604–610, 2001.



BC Ministry of Education, (1996), Investing In All Our Children: A Handbook of Social Equity

Programs, Victoria, BC.



Beauvais F. (2001). Do school-based drug and alcohol abuse prevention programs work in

American Indian communities? In: Trimble JE ; Beauvais F (eds.). Health Promotion ad

Substance Abuse revention Among American Indian and Alaska Native Communities: Issues

In Cultural Competence. (CSAP Cultural Competence Series 9.) Rockville: Center for

Substance Abuse Prevention, pp. 203-214. (ADAI bk) HV 5824 E85 O44 v.9.



Beauvais, F.; Chavez, E.; Oetting, E.; Deffenbacher, J.; and Cornell, G. Drug use, violence, and

victimization among White American, Mexican American, and American Indian dropouts,

students with academic problems, and students in good academic standing. Journal of

Counseling Psychology 43:292–299, 1996.

214

215



Beck J. (1998). 100 years of "just say no" versus "just say know". Reevaluating drug education

goals for the coming century. Eval Rev. Feb;22(1):15-45.



Becker BJ. (1997). Meta-analysis and models of substance abuse prevention, Found in William

J. Bukoski, Meta-Analysis of Drug Abuse Prevention Programs NIDA Research Monograph

170. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health, National

Institute on Drug Abuse.



Becker MH. (1974). The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Education

Monographs, 2:324-473.



Bell B, Joly K. (1997). Health Promotion in Canada: A Case Study, Ottawa. Ottawa, ON:

Health Canada.



Bell RM, Ellickson PL, Harrison ER. (1993). Do drug prevention effects persist into high

school? How project ALERT did with ninth graders. Prev Med, 22:463-483. (ADAI rp 06228) .



Bellis MA, Hughes K, Lowey H. (2002). Healthy nightclubs and recreational substance use.

From a harm minimisation to a healthy settings approach. Addict Behav. Nov-Dec;27(6):1025-

35.



Benard, Bonnie. (1991). Fostering resiliency in kids : Protective Factors in the Family, School,

and Community. Portland, OR : Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, August. 27 p.

[BF 723 R46 B4 1991].



Berkovitz IH, Sinclair E. (2001). Training programs in school consultation. Child Adolesc

Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2001 Jan;10(1):83-92.



Berman S. (1997). Children‘s social consciousness and the development

of social responsibility. (SUNY series: Democracy and education). Albany, NY: State

University of New York.



Beyers J (2001) The effectiveness of health promotion interventions in the workplace.

Hamilton, ON, Effective Public Health Practice Program.



Billig S. (2000). The impact of service learning on youth, schools, and communities: research

on K-12 school-based service learning, 1990-1999. Available

from:http://www.learningindeed.org/research/slreseaerch/slrschsy.html.



Birch DA, Duplaga C, Seabert DM, Wilbur KM. (2001). What do master teachers consider

important in professional preparation for school health education. J Sch Health. Feb;71(2):56-

60.



Black DR, Tobler NS, Sciacca JP. (1998). Peer helping/involvement: an efficacious way to

meet the challenge of reducing alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use among youth? J Sch

Health. Mar;68(3):87-93.



Blaze-Temple D, Lo SK. (1992). Stages of drug use. A community survey of Perth teenagers.

British Journal of Addictions, 87(2):215-25.



Blum RW, Beuhring T, Wunderlich M, Resnick MD, (1996), Don't ask, They won't well: The



215

216

quality of adolescent health screening in five practice settings. American Journal of Public

Health, 86(12):1767-1772.



Bodgen JF. (2003). How Schools Work and How to Work with Schools. A Primer for

Professionals Who Serve Children and Youth. Alexandria, VA:National Association of State

Boards of Education. http://www.nasbe.org.



Bond L, Thomas L, Coffey C, Glover S, Butler H, Carlin JB, Patton G. (2004). Long-term

impact of the Gatehouse Project on cannabis use of 16-year-olds in Australia. J Sch Health.

Jan;74(1):23-9.



Bond L, Glover S, Godfrey C, Butler H, Patton GC. (2001). Building capacity for system-level

change in schools: Lessons from the Gatehouse Project. Health Education & Behavior, 28(3).



Bonomo Y, Bowes G. (2001). Putting harm reduction into an adolescent context. J Paediatr

Child Health. Feb;37(1):5-8.



Bosker & Scheerens. (1994). Alternative models of school effectiveness put to the test.

International Journal of Educational Research. 21, 159-180.



Bosworth K, Yoast R. (1991). DIADS: computer-based system for development of school drug

prevention programs. J Drug Educ. 21(3):231-45. (ADAI jl).



Bosworth K. (1998). Assessment of drug abuse prevention curricula developed at the local

level. J Drug Educ. 28(4):307-25.



Botvin GJ, Botvin EM. (1992). School-based and community-based prevention approaches. In:

Lowinson JH, Ruiz P, Millman RB, Langrod JG. (eds.) Substance Abuse: A Comprehensive

Textbook. (2nd edition) Baltimore : Williams & Wilkins, pp.910-927. (ADAI bk) RC 564 S826

1992 [REF HAND]



Botvin GJ, Botvin EM Ruchlin H (1998) School-Based Approaches to Drug Abuse Prevention:

Evidence for Effectiveness and Suggestions for Determining Cost-Effectiveness. Cost-

Benefit/Cost-Effectiveness Research of Drug Abuse Prevention: Implications for Programming

and Policy NIDA Research Monograph, Number 176



Botvin GJ, Epstein Jam, Baker E, Diaz T, Ifill-Williams M. (1997). School-based drug abuse

prevention with inner-city minority youth. J Child Adolesc Subst Abuse 6(1):5-19. (ADAI jl).



Botvin GJ, Baker E, Dusenbury L, Tortu S, Botvin EM (1990). Preventing adolescent drug

abuse through a multimodal cognitive-behavioral approach: results of a 3-year study. J Consult

Clin Psychol. Aug;58(4):437-46.



Botvin GJ, Botvin EM, Ruchlin H. (1998). School-based approaches to drug abuse prevention:

evidence for effectiveness and suggestions for determining cost-effectiveness, found in William

J. Bukoski, Ph.D.,Richard I. Evans, Ph.D. (Eds). Cost-Benefit/Cost-Effectiveness Research of

Drug Abuse Prevention: Implications for Programming and Policy, NIDA Research

Monograph 176. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health.



Botvin GJ, Griffin KW, Diaz T, Ifill-Williams M. (2001). Drug abuse prevention among

minority adolescents: post-test and one-year follow-up of a school-based preventive

intervention. Prev Sci. Mar;2(1):1-13.



216

217

Botvin GJ, Griffin KW, Diaz T, Ifill-Williams M. (2001). Preventing binge drinking during

early adolescence: one- and two-year follow-up of a school-based preventive intervention.

Psychol Addict Behav Dec;15(4):360-5. (ADAI jl).



Botvin GJ, Griffin KW, Diaz T, Scheier LM, Williams C, Epstein JA. (2000). Preventing illicit

drug use in adolescents: long-term follow-up data from a randomized control trial of a school

population. Addict Behav. Sep-Oct;25(5):769-74.



Botvin GJ, Griffin KW. (2002). Life skills training as a primary prevention approach for

adolescent drug abuse and other problem behaviors. Int J Emerg Ment Health. Winter;4(1):41-

7.



Botvin GJ, Schinke SP, Orlandi MA. (1989). Psychosocial approaches to substance abuse

prevention: theoretical foundations and empirical findings Crisis. Apr;10(1):62-77.



Botvin GJ. (1995). Drug abuse prevention in school settings. In: Botvin GJ, Schinke SP,

Orlandi MA. (eds.) Drug Abuse Prevention with Multiethnic Youth. Thousand Oaks, CA:

SAGE Publications, pp. 169-192. (ADAI bk) HV 5824 Y68 D7713 1995.



Botvin GJ. (2000). Preventing drug abuse in schools: social and competence enhancement

approaches targeting individual-level etiologic factors. Addict Behav. Nov-Dec;25(6):887-97.



Botvin GJ.(1996). Preventing drug abuse through the schools: Intervention programs that work.

In: National Conference on Drug Abuse Prevention Research, September 19-20, Washington

DC.



Botvin, G.; Baker, E.; Dusenbury, L.; Botvin, E.; and Diaz, T. Long-term follow-up results of a

randomized drug-abuse prevention trial in a white middle class population. Journal of the

American Medical Association 273:1106–1112, 1995.



Boyce W, Doherty M, Fortin C, MacKinnon D. (2004.) Canadian Youth, Sexual

Health and HIV/AIDS Study. Toronto, ON: Council of Ministers of Education,

Canada.



Bradley BJ. (1997). The school nurse as health educator. J Sch Health. Jan;67(1):3-8.



Brener ND, Everett Jones S, Kann L, McManus T. (2003). Variation in school health policies

and programs by demographic characteristics of US schools. J Sch Health. Apr;73(4):143-9.



Brenman AJ. (1989). The Influence of Health Belief on Eating Behaviour in Children and

Adolscents, Harvard University Press.



Broadfoot P. (1994). Teachers and educational reforms: Teachers' response to policy changes in

England and France, Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the British Educational

Research Association. Oxford, England, Sept 8-11,1994, ED380463.



Brock GC, Beazley RP. (1995). Using the health belief model to explain parents‘ participation

in adolescent at-home sexuality education activities. Journal of School Health, 65(4):124-126.



Brown JH. (2001). Youth, drugs and resilience education. J Drug Educ. 31(1):83-122.



Brown JH, D‘Emedio-Caston M, Pollard J. (1997). Students and substances: Social power in

drug education, Educational Evaluation and 217Policy Analysis, 19 (1): 65-82.

218



Bruvold WH. (1990). A meta-analysis of the California school-based risk reduction program. J

Drug Educ. 20(2):139-52.



Bullock LF, Libbus MK, Lewis S, Gayer D. (2002). Continuing education: improving

perceived competence in school nurses. J Sch Nurs. Dec;18(6):360-3.



Burger MC, Spickard WA. (1991). Integrating substance abuse education in the medical

student curriculum. Am J Med Sci. Sep;302(3):181-4.



Bynum AB, Cranford CO, Irwin CA, Denny GS. (2002). Participant satisfaction with a school

telehealth education program using interactive compressed video delivery methods in rural

Arkansas. J Sch Health. Aug;72(6):235-42.



Calvert M, Zeldin S, Weisenbach A. (2002). Youth Involvement for Community,

Organizational and Youth Development: Directions for Research, Evaluation and Practice 2002

University of Wisconsin-Madison and Innovation Center for Community and Youth

Development/Tides Center.

http://www.atthetable.org/images/Details/04260214593275_At%20the%20Table%20Research

%20Agenda%20-%20FINAL.pdf



Cameron R, Brown KS, Best JA, Pelkman CL, Madill CL, Manske SR, Payne ME. (1999).

Effectiveness of a social influences smoking prevention program as a function of provider type,

training method, and school risk. Am J Public Health Dec;89(12):1827-31. (ADAI jl).



Camiletti, Y, Huffman, MC. (1998). Research utilization: evaluation of initiatives in a public

health nursing division. Canadian Journal of Nursing Administration, 11, 59-77.



Canadian Association for School Health, (1995). Selected Case Studies of Youth Involvement

in Public Decision-Making. Final Report, Surrey, BC.



Canadian Association for School Health. (1996). Reducing Tobacco Use, Promoting Health:

Informing, Educating, Involving and Empowering Parents Through Schools. Surrey, BC:

Author.



Canadian Association for School Health. (1991). Comprehensive School Health: A National

Consensus Statement. Surrey, BC: Author.



Canadian Association for School Health. (1992). Making the Connections: Comprehensive

School Health. Surry, BC: Author.



Canadian Association for School Health (1992), Working With Parents: Training, Supporting

and Empowering. Some Evidence and Issues, Canadian Association for School Health, Surrey,

BC.



Canadian Association for School Health. (1997). Food for thought: Schools and nutrition. The

CAP Journal, 7(1), 11-14.



Canadian Association of Principals, Canadian Association of School Administrators, Canadian

Association for School Health, (1996), Reducing Tobacco Use, Promoting Health. Teaching

Strategies and Resources. Surrey, BC: Canadian Association for School Health.



Canadian Association of School Administrators. (1992), Peer Helper

218

219

Programs. Surrey, BC: Shannon & McCall Consulting.



Canadian Association of School Administrators. (1990). AIDS/ HIV Education: Developing

Policies and School-community Partnerships. Oakville, ON: Canadian Association of School

Administrators.



Canadian Cancer Society. (1995). A Comprehensive School and Community Approach to

Preventing and Reducing Tobacco Use Among Youth: Strategic Project Planning Guide,

Toronto, ON.



Canadian Public Health Association. (1990). Community Health - Public Health Nursing in

Canada. Preparation & Practice. Ottawa, ON.



Capper SA, Duncan WJ, Ginter PM, Barganier C, Blough N, Cleaveland P. (1996). Translating

public health research into public health practice outcomes and characteristics of successful

collaborations. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 12(4 Suppl):67-70.



Caputo T, Weiler R, Anderson J. (1997). The Street Lifestyle Study. Ottawa, ON: Office of

Alcohol, Drugs and Dependency Issues, Health Canada.



Caputo T, Weiler R, Green L. (1996). Peer Helper Initiatives For Out of the Mainstreaming

Youth. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada.



Carlini-Cotrim B, de Carvalho VA. (1993). Extracurricular activities: are they an effective

strategy against drug consumption? J Drug Educ. 23(1):97-104.



Carnegie Corporation on Adolescent Development, (1992). Task Force on Youth Development

and Community Programs, New York, NY:Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development

.

Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989). Turning Points: Preparing American

Youth for the 21st Century, report of the Task Force on Education of Youth Adolescents.



Carr R. (1996). Mobilizing Peer Resources to Assist in Tobacco Reduction. Ottawa, ON:

Tobacco Reduction Program, Health Canada.



Carroll JJ. (2000). Counseling students' conceptions of substance dependence and related initial

interventions. J Addict Offender Counseling 20(2):84-92. (ADAI jl).



Cassidy CA. (1997). Facilitating behavior change. Use of the trans-theoretical model in the

occupational health setting. AAOHN Journal, 45(5):239-46.



Catalano RF, Hawkins JD, Berglund ML, Pollard JA, Arthur MW. (2002). Prevention science

and positive youth development: competitive or cooperative frameworks? J Adolesc Health.

Dec;31(6 Suppl):230-9.



Catania JA et al. (1990). Towards an understanding of risk behaviour: An AIDS risk reduction

model. Health Education Quarterly; 17(1): 53-72.



Caulkins J, Pacula J, Paddock S, Chiesa JR (2002) School-Based Drug Prevention: What Kind

of Drug Use Does It Prevent? Santa Monica, CA, RAND Corporation,

http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1459/index.html



Caulkins Jonathan P, Rydell C Peter, Everingham Susan S, Chiesa James,

219

220

Bushway Shawn. (1999), An Ounce of prevention, a pound of uncertainty : The cost-

effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs. (MR-923-RWJ) Santa Monica, CA :

RAND Drug Policy Research Center, xxxiii, 194 p. [HV 5824 Y68 C22 1999].



Center for Media Education. (1998). Alcohol Advertising Targeted At Youth on the Internet:

An Update. Author. http://tap.epn.org/cem/981218/alcrep.html.



Center for Mental Health Services. (2000). Addressing Barriers to Student Learning &

Promoting Healthy Development: A Usable Research-Base. November. Substance Abuse and

Mental Health Services Administration.



Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. (1997). Division of Knowledge Development and

Evaluation. Selected Findings in Prevention: A Decade of Results from the Center for

Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP). (DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 97-3143) [Rockville]:

Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, ix, 63 p. [HV 5825 C39 1997].



Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. (1999). Youth popular culture: What we need to know.

Technical Assistance Bulletin. Washington, DC: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services.



Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. (nd). Integrating Knowledge About Youth Popular

Culture Into Substance Abuse Prevention Communications. Washington, DC: Author.



Centers for Disease Control. (1994). Guidelines for school health programs to prevent tobacco

use and addiction. J School Health 64(9):353-360. (ADAI rp 06862).

Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. (1999). Alcohol and Drug Prevention Programs for

Youth: What Works? Toronto, ON: Author.



Centers for Disease Control. (2001). School Health Policies and Programs Study 2000. Journal

of School Health Supplement. volume 71, number 7, September.



Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2003). Promising Practices in Chronic Disease

Prevention and Control. Atlanta GA: CDCP.



Centers for Disease Control. (2003). Building a Healthier Future through School Health

Programs. Atlanta, GA: Author,

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/promising_practices/pdfs/SchoolHealth.pdf.



Centre for Health Promotion. (1998). Overview of Health Communication Campaigns, 104.

Toronto, ON: University of Toronto.



Centre of Excellence for Youth Engagement. (2003). Youth Engagement and Health

Outcomes: Is There A Link? Review of Research Literature Linking Youth Engagement and

Health Outcomes. http://www.engagementcentre.ca/litrev2.htm.



Centre on Addictions and Mental Health. (1999). Alcohol and drug prevention programs for

youth: What works? Best Advice. Toronto, ON: Author.



Chatterji P, Caffray CM, Jones AS, Lillie-Blanton M, Werthamer L. (2001). Applying cost

analysis methods to school-based prevention programs. Prev Sci. Mar;2(1):45-55.



Chen K, Kendal DB. (1995). The natural history of drug use from adolescence to the mid-

thirties in a general population sample. American Journal of Public Health, 85:41-47.

220

221



Chen WW. (1991). A comparison of self-reported health education competencies among

selected school health educators in the United States and Taiwan, R.O.C. J Sch Health.

Mar;61(3):127-30.



Chomik TA. (2001). The Population Health Template: Key Elements and Actions That Define

A Population Health Approach, Strategic Policy Directorate, Population and Public Health

Branch, Health Canada http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hppb/phdd/pdf/discussion_paper.pdf.



Chou SP, Pickering RP, (1992). Early onset of drinking as a risk factor for lifetime alcohol-

related problems. British Journal of Addictions, 87(8):1199-1204.



Chou, C.; Montgomery, S.; Pentz, M.; Rohrbach, L.; Johnson, C.; Flay, B.; and Mackinnon, D.

Effects of a community-based prevention program in decreasing drug use in high-risk

adolescents. American Journal of Public Health 88:944–948, 1998.



Christenson CL. Havsy LH.( 2003). Family-school-peer relationships: significance for social,

emotional, and academic learning. In: Zins JE, et al., eds. Building School Success on Social

and Emotional Learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.



Cliska D (2001) Peer Health Promotion Interventions for Youth Hamilton, ON, Effective

Public Health Practice Program.



Ciliska D, Hayward S, Dobbins M, Brunton G, & Underwood J. (1999). Transferring public

health nursing research to health system planning: assessing the relevance and accessibility of

systematic reviews. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 31, 23-36.



Clapper RL, Lipsitt LP. (1992). Young heavy drinkers and their drinking experience. Predictors

of later alcohol use. International Journal on Addictions, 27(10):1211-21.



Cloetta B, Bisegger C. (2000). Differential learning effects in preventive drug education by

peer group members Soz. Praventivmed. 45(1):52-9.



Cochrane Reviewers Handbook 4.1.4. (2001). In M.Clarke & A. D. Oxman (Eds.), The

Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software.



Cocking L (2002) The effectiveness of school social work from a risk and resilience

perspective, Hamilton, ON, Effective Public Health Practice Program.



Cohen J., ed. (1999). Educating Minds and Hearts: Social Emotional Learning and the Passage

into Adolescence. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.



Coleman J. (1990). Foundations of social theory, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.



Coleman P, Collinge J, Tabin Y. (1995). The coproduction of learning: Improving schools from

the inside out. In B. Levin, W.J. Fowler & H.L. Walberg (Eds.), Advances in Educational

Productivity: Vol. 5: Organizational Influences on Educational Productivity (pp. 141-174).

Greenwich CT: JAI Press.



Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2002). Safe and Sound: An

Educational Leader‘s Guide to Evidence Based Social and Emotional Learning Programs.

Chicago, I: Author.



221

222

Comer J P., et al., eds. (1999). Child by Child: the Comer Process for Change in Education.

New York, NY: Teachers College Press.



Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. Predictor variables associated with positive

Fast Track outcomes at the end of third grade. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

30(1):37–52, 2002.



Connell DB., et al. (1986). School health education evaluation. International Journal of

Educational Research. vol. 10, p. 245–345. Tarrytown, NY.



Cooke, D. (2001) It‘s All About Improvement Ontario Task Force on Effective Schools,

http://www.saee.bc.ca/2002_1_3.html.



Coleman EA, Honeycutt G, Ogden B, McMillan DE, O'Sullivan PS, Light K, Wingfield W.

(1997). Assessing substance abuse among health care students and the efficacy of educational

interventions. J Prof Nurs 13:28-37. (ADAI rp 07462).



Collingwood TR, Sunderlin J, Reynolds R, Kohl HW 3rd. (2000). Physical training as a

substance abuse prevention intervention for youth. J Drug Educ. 30(4):435-51.



Collins D, Cellucci T. (1991). Effects of a school-based alcohol education program with a

media prevention component. Psychol Rep 69:191-7. (ADAI rp 05004).



Connell D et al. (1985). Summary of findings of the school health education evaluation: Health

promotion effectiveness, implementation and costs. Journal of School Health, 55(8).



Connell DB, Turner RR. (1985). School health education evaluation. The impact of

instructional experience and the effects of cumulative instruction. J Sch Health. Oct;55(8):324-

31.



Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (1996). Public Policy and School Reform: A

Research Summary, ERIC Clearinghouse in Assessment and Evaluation, ED399625.



Contento IR. (1991), Skiss, and attitudes: Measurement issues", Journal of School Health,

61(5):208-211.



Corvo K, Persse L. (1998). An evaluation of a pre-school based prevention program:

longitudinal effects on children's alcohol-related expectancies. J Alcohol Drug Educ 43(2):36-

47. (ADAI jl).



Costa FM, Jessor R, Turbin MS. (1999). Transition into adolescent problem drinking. The role

of psychological risk and protective factors. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 60(4):480-90.



Costello-Wells B, McFarland L, Reed J, Walton K. (2003). School-based mental health clinics.

J Child Adolesc Psychiatr Nurs. Apr-Jun;16(2):60-70.



Covello Vincent. (1995), Risk perception and communication. Canadian Journal of Public

Health, 86(2):78-9.



Crichton A. (1981). Health policy-making: Fundamental issues in the US, Canada, Great

Britain, and Australia, Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press.





222

223

Crighton JV. (1987). School district policy guide, Vancouver, BC: British Columbia School

Trustees‘ Association.



Crockett SJ, Mullis RM, Perry CL. (1987). Parent nutrition education: A conceptual model.

Journal of School Health,58(2):53-57.



Cuijpers P. (2002). Effective ingredients of school-based drug prevention programs. A

systematic review. Addict Behav. Nov-Dec;27(6):1009-23.



Cuijpers P. (2002). Peer-led and adult-led school drug prevention: a meta-analytic comparison.

J Drug Educ. 32(2):107-19.



Cuijpers P, Jonkers R, de WI, de JA. (2002). The effects of drug abuse prevention at school:

The 'Healthy School and Drugs' project. Addiction. Jan;97(1):67-73.



Cuijpers P. (2002) Peer-led and adult-led school drug prevention: a meta-analytic comparison. J

Drug Educ. 32(2):107-19. (ADAI jl).



Cuijpers P, Jonkers R, de WI, de JA. (2002). The effects of drug abuse prevention at school: the

'Healthy School and Drugs' project. Addiction. Jan;97(1):67-73.



Cunningham PB, Henggeler SW. (2001). Implementation of an empirically based drug and

violence prevention and intervention program in public school settings. J Clin Child Psychol.

Jun;30(2):221-32.



D‘Emidio-Caston M, Brown JH. (1998). The other side of the story. Student narratives on the

California drug, alcohol and tobacco education programs. Evaluation Review, 22(1):95-117.



Davis M. (2003). Addressing the needs of youth in transition to adulthood. Adm Policy Ment

Health. Jul;30(6):495-509.



Day D. (1990). Young Women in Nova Scotia: A Study of Attitudes, Behaviour and

Aspirations. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Advisory Council on the Status of Women.



Dembra R, Pilaro L, Burgos W, DesJarlais DC, Schmeidler J. (1979). Self-concept and drug

involvement among urban junior high school youths. International Journal of Addiction,

14(8):1125-44.



Dembo MH et al (1985), "An Evaluation of Group Parent Education: Behavioural, PET and

Adlerian Programs", Review of Education Research, 55(2), 155-200.



Dent CW, Sussman S, Hennesy M, Galaif ER, Stacy AW, Moss M, Craig S. (1998).

Implementation and process evaluation of a school-based drug abuse prevention program:

Project towards no drug abuse. J Drug Educ. 28(4):361-75. (ADAI jl).



Dent CW, Sussman S, Stacy AW. (2001). Project towards no drug abuse: Generalizability to a

general high school sample. Prev Med. Jun;32(6):514-20.



Derzon JH, Wilson SJ, Cunningham CA. (2002). The Effectiveness of School-based

Interventions for Preventing and Reducing Violence. Center for Evaluation Research and

Methodology, Vanderbilt University 1999; 182 p. http://harmfish.org/pub/arss99sd.pdf.



DeVries H, Backbier E, Dijkstra M, VanBreukelen G, Parcel G, Kok G. (1994). A

223

224

Dutch social influence smoking prevention approach for vocational school students. Health

Educ Res 9(3):365-374. (ADAI rp 06667).



Dewalf MW. (1992). The Relationship Between Youth Group Paarticipation and the Use of

Tobacco and Drugs. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational

Research Association. San Francisco, CA. April 20-24.



Dewit D, Akst L, Braun K, Lefebrve L, McKee C, Rye BJ, Shain M, (2002). Sense of School

Membership: A Mediating Mechanism Linking Student Perceptions of School Culture with

Academic and Behavioural Functioning, Toronto, ON: Centre for Addiction and Mental

Health.



DeWit D, Offord DR, Wong M. (1997). Patterns of onset and cessation of drug use over the

early part of the life course. Health Education and Behaviour, 24:746-758.



DeWit DJ, Braunk, Steep B, Ellis K, Rye BJ, Silverman G, Smythe C, Stevens-Lavigne A.

(1997). Evaluation of an In-School Drug Prevention Program for At-Risk Youth. Toronto, ON:

Centre on Addications and Mental Health.



Dielman TE, Kloska DD, Leech SL, Schulenberg JE, Shope JT. (1992). Susceptibility to peer

pressure as an explanatory variable for the differential effectiveness of an alcohol misuse

prevention program in elementary schools. J Sch Health. 62(6):233-237. (ADAI rp 05562).



Diez Roux AV. (2002). Invited commentary: Places, people, and health. American Journal of

Epidemiology, Vol. 155, No. 6, 516.



Dignan M, Block G, Skeckler A, Howard G, Cosby M. (1986). Locus of control and smokeless

tobacco use among adolescents. Adolescence, 21(8):388-81.



Dijkstra M, DeVries H, Parcel GS. (1993). The linkage approach applied to a school-based

smoking prevention program in the Netherlands. J School Health. 63(8):339-342. (ADAI rp

06668).



DiLorenzo TM, WeltonGL, McCalla TL, Finer WW, Brownson RC, Van Tuinen M. (1991).

Underestimates of student substance use by school personnel: A cause for concern? Journal of

Behavioral Medicine, 14(4):397-407.



Dishion TJ, Kavanagh K, Schneiger A, Nelson S, Kaufman NK. (2002).Preventing early

adolescent substance use: a family-centered strategy for the public middle school. Prev Sci.

Sep;3(3):191-201.



Dishion TJ, Kavanagh K. (2000). A multilevel approach to family-centered prevention in

schools: process and outcome. Addict Behav. Nov-Dec;25(6):899-911. (ADAI jl).



Dishion, T.; McCord, J.; and Poulin, F. When interventions harm: Peer groups and problem

behavior. American Psychologist 54:755-764, 1999.



Dobbins M, Lockett D, Michel I, Beyers J, Feldman L, Vobra J, Micucci S. (2001). The

Effectiveness of School-based Interventions in Promoting Physical Activity and Fitness Among

Children and Youth. A Systematic Review, Effective Public Health Practive Project, Public

Health Research, Education and Development Program. Hamilton, ON.



Donahew L, Lorch E, Palmgreen P. (1991). Sensation seeking and targeting of televised

224

225

anti-drug PSA‘s . In L. Donahew, HE Sypher & WJ Bukeski, eds., Persuasive Communications

and Drug Abuse Prevention, 209-226. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.



Donaldson SI, Graham JW, Hansen WB. (1994). Testing the generalizability of intervening

mechanism theories: understanding the effects of adolescent drug use prevention interventions.

J Behav Med. Apr;17(2):195-216.



Donaldson SI, Thomas CW, Graham JW, Au JG, Hansen WB. (2000). Verifying drug abuse

prevention program effects using reciprocal best friend reports. J Behav Med. Dec;23(6):585-

601.



Donnermeyer JF. (2000) Parents' perceptions of a school-based prevention education program.

J Drug Educ. 30(3):325-42.



Dryfoos JG, Brindis C, Kaplan DW. (1996). Research and evaluation in school-based health

care. Adolesc Med. Jun;7(2):207-220.



Duncan DF, Nicholson T, Clifford P, Hawkins W, Petosa R. (1994). Harm reduction: an

emerging new paradigm for drug education. J Drug Educ. 24(4):281-90.



DuPont RL. (1998). Addiction. A new paradigm. Bulletin of the Menniger Clinic, 62(2):231-

42. Rockville, MD: Institute for Behavior and Health.



Durlak JA, Wells AM. (1997). Primary prevention mental health programs for children and

adolescents: a meta-analytic review. Am J Community Psychol. Apr;25(2):115-52.



Dusenburg L, Botvin GJ. (1992). Substance abuse prevention. Competence enhancement and

the development of positive life options. Journal of Addictions and Disorder, 11(3):29-45.



Dusenbury L, Brannigan R, Falco M, Hansen WB. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of

implementation: implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Educ Res.

Apr;18(2):237-56.



Dusenbury L, Falco M, Lake A. (1997). A review of the evaluation of 47 drug abuse prevention

curricula available nationally. J Sch Health. Apr;67(4):127-32.



Dusenbury L, Falco M. (1995). Eleven components of effective drug abuse prevention

curricula. J Sch Health. Dec;65(10):420-5.



Dusenbury LA, Hansen WB, Giles SM. (2003). Teacher training in norm setting approaches to

drug education: a pilot study comparing standard and video-enhanced methods. J Drug Educ.

33(3):325-36.



Early TJ, Vonk ME (2001) Effectiveness of School Social Work from a Risk and Resilience

Perspective. Social Work in Education, 23(1): 9-31



Edmundson E, Parcel GS, Feldman HA, Elder J, Perry CL, Johnson CC, Williston BJ, Stone

EJ, Yang M, Lytle L, Webber L. (1996). The effects of the Child and Adolescent Trial for

Cardiovascular Health upon psychosocial determinants of diet and physical activity behavior.

Journal of Preventive Medicine, Jul-Aug;25(4):442-54.



Effective Public Health Practice Project. (2001). The Effectiveness of the Health Promoting



225

226

Schools Approach and School-based Health Promotion Interventions Public Health Research

Education, Hamilton, ON.



Effective Public Health Practice Project (2001) The Effectiveness of the Health Promoting

Schools Approach and School-based Health Promotion Interventions Public Health Research

Education, Hamilton, ON.

Effective Public Health Practice Project (2003).

http://www.hamilton.ca/PHCS/EPHPP/default.asp.



Eggert IL, Herting JR, Thompson EA. (1996). The drug involvement scale for adolescents

(DISA). Journal of Drug Education, 26(2):101-30.



Eise M, Zellman GL, Massett HA, Murray DM. (2002). Evaluating the Lions-Quest "Skills for

Adolescence" drug education program: first-year behavior outcomes. Addict Behav. Jul-

Aug;27(4):619-32.

Eisen M, Zellman GL, Murray DM. (2003). Evaluating the Lions-Quest "Skills for

Adolescence" drug education program. Second-year behavior outcomes. Addict Behav.

Jul;28(5):883-97.



Elias MJ. (2003). Academic and Social-Emotional Learning. Educational Practices Series.

Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education, Publications Unit.

http://www.ibe.unesco.org/International/Publications/EducationalPractices/EducationalPractice

sSeriesPdf/prac11e.pdf.



Elias MJ, et al. (1997). Promoting Social and Emotional Learning: Guidelines for Educators.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.



Elias MJ, Gara MA, Schuyler TF, Branden-Muller LR, Sayette MA. (1991). The promotion of

social competence: longitudinal study of a preventive school-based program. Am J

Orthopsychiatry. Jul;61(3):409-17.



Elias MJ, Kress JS, Gager PJ, Hancock ME. (1994). Adolescent health promotion and risk

reduction: cementing the social contract between pediatricians and the schools. Bull N Y Acad

Med. 1994 Summer;71(1):87-110.



Elias MJ, Tobias SE. (1996). Social Problem Solving Interventions in the Schools: curriculum

materials for educators. Distributed by National Professional Resources: www.nprinc.com.



Elias MJ, Tobias SE, Friedlander BS. (2000). Emotionally Intelligent Parenting: How to Raise

a Self-disciplined, Responsible, Socially Skilled Child. New York, NY: Random House/Three

Rivers Press.



Elias MJ, Weissberg RP. (2000). Primary prevention: educational approaches to enhance social

and emotional learning. J Sch Health. May;70(5):186-90.



Ellickson PL, Bell RM, Harrison ER (1993). Changing adolescent propensities to use drugs:

results from Project ALERT. Health Educ Q. Summer;20(2):227-42.



Ellickson PL, McCaffrey DF, Ghosh-Dastidar B, Longshore DL. (2003). New inroads in

preventing adolescent drug use: results from a large-scale trial of project ALERT in middle

schools. Am J Public Health. Nov;93(11):1830-6.



Emshoff JG, Price AW. (1999). Prevention and intervention strategies with children of

226

227

alcoholics. Pediatrics. May;103(5 Pt 2):1112-21.



Ennett ST, Ringwalt CL, Thorne J, Rohrbach LA, Vincus A, Simons-Rudolph A, Jones S.

(2003). A comparison of current practice in school-based substance use prevention programs

with meta-analysis findings. Prev Sci. Mar;4(1):1-14.



Ennett ST, Tobler NS, Ringwalt CL, Flewelling RL. (1994). How effective is drug abuse

resistance education? A meta-analysis of Project DARE outcome evaluations. Am J Public

Health. Sep;84(9):1394-401.



Epling JW, Morrow CB, Sutphen SM, Novick LF. (2003). Case-based teaching in preventive

medicine: rationale, development, and implementation. Am J Prev Med. May;24(4 Suppl):85-9.



Epstein JL. (2001). School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Preparing Educators and

Improving Schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.



Epstein JA, Griffin KW, Botvin GJ. (2000). Role of general and specific competence skills in

protecting inner-city adolescents from alcohol use. J Stud Alcohol. May;61(3):379-86.



Erickson PG. (1999). Introduction: the three phases of harm reduction. An examination of

emerging concepts, methodologies, and critiques. Subst Use Misuse. Jan;34(1):1-7.



Erickson F, Schultz J. (1992). Students‘ experience of the curriculum. In P. Jackson (Ed.),

Handbook of Research on Curriculum (pp. 465-485). New York: Macmillan.



Farel A, Umble K, Polhamus B. (2001). Impact of an online analytic skills course. Eval Health

Prof. Dec;24(4):446-59.



Federal-Provincial-Territorial Council on Social Policy Renewal. (1999). Appendix b:

Developmental stages and environmental influences. A National Children‘s Agenda:

Developing a Shared Vision. Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada.



Feldman L, Harvey B, Holowatz P, Shortt L. (1999). Alcohol beliefs and behaviours among

high school students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 24(1):48-58.



Fernandez S, Nebot M, Jane M. (2002). The evaluation of effectiveness of scholastic programs

in the prevention of consumption of tobacco, alcohol and cannabis: what do meta-analyses tell

us? Rev Esp Salud Publica. May-Jun;76(3):175-87.



Fertman CI, Fichter C, Schlesinger J, Tarasevich S, Wald H, Zhang X. (2001). Evaluating the

effectiveness of student assistance programs in Pennsylvania. J Drug Educ. 31(4):353-66.



Fetro et al. (1989). Formative evaluation of classroom implementation and immediate impact of

AIDS education. Paper presented to 65th Annula Conference of the American School Health

Association.



Fetterman DM, Kaftarian SJ, Wandersman A. (1996). Empowerment evaluation: knowledge

and tools for self-assessment and accountability. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.



Finke L, Williams J, Ritter M, Kemper D, Kersey S, Nightenhauser J, Autry K, Going C,

Wulfman G, Hail A. (2002). Survival against drugs: education for school-age children. J Child

Adolesc Psychiatr Nurs. Oct-Dec;15(4):163-9.



227

228

Finlay J. (2004). Healthy Schools: The Need for a Pan-Canadian School Health Strategy.

Victoria, BC: BC Ministry of Health Services and Planning.



Fisher WA. (1990). All together now: An integrated approach to preventing adolescent

pregnancy and STD/HIV infection. Part III: Healthy adolescent and sexual development.

SIECUS Report. 18(4):1-11.



Flannery DJ, Torquati J. (1993). An elementary school substance abuse prevention program:

teacher and administrator perspectives. J Drug Educ. 23(4):387-97.



Flay BR. (2002). Positive Youth Development Requires Comprehensive Health Promotion

Programs Newsletter of the American Academy of Health Behaviour. Prepared for acceptance

of the Research Laureate Medallion from the American Academy of Health Behavior, Annual

Conference, Napa, California, March 25th, 2002.



Flay BR ; Koepke D ; Thomson SJ ; Santi S ; Best JA ; Brown KS. (1989). Six-year follow-up

of the first Waterloo school smoking prevention trial. Am J Public Health 79:1371-1376.

(ADAI rp 03845).



Flay BR, Allred CG, Ordway N. (2001). Effects of the Positive Action program on

achievement and discipline: two matched-control comparisons. Prev Sci. Jun;2(2):71-89.



Flay BR. (1985). Psychosocial approaches to smoking prevention. A review of findings. Health

Psychology, 4:449-488.



Flay BR. (1986). Mass media linkages with school-based programs for drug abuse prevention. J

School Health 56(9):402-06. (ADAI bk) HV 5825 C644 1986.



Flay BR. (2000). Approaches to substance use prevention utilizing school curriculum plus

social environment change. Addict Behav. Nov-Dec;25(6):861-85.



Flisher AJ ; Brawn A ; Mukoma W. (2002). Intervening through the school system. In: Miller

WR ; Weisner CM (eds.). Changing Substance Abuse Through Health and Social Systems.

New York : Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, 2002, pp.171-182. (ADAI bk) RC 564

C470 2002.



Flynn BS, Worden JK, Secker-Walker RH, Badger GJ, Geller BM, Costanza MC. (1992).

Prevention of cigarette smoking through mass media intervention and school programs. Am J

Public Health, 82(6):827-834. (ADAI rp 05385).



Fralick PC. (nd). Summary of Youth, Substance Abuse and the Determinants of Health. What

Determines Health? Ottawa, ON: National Forum on Health.

www.nfh.hwc.ca/publicat/execsumm/fralick.htm.



Fromme K, Ruela K. (1994). Mediators and moderators of young adults‘ drinking. Addiction,

89(1):63-71.



France-Dawson M, Holland J, Fullerton D, Kelly P, Arnols S, Oakley A (1994) Review of

effectiveness of workplace health promotion interventions London, GB, Social Science

Research Unit



Frank J, Di Ruggiero E, Moloughney B. (2003). The Future of Public Health in Canada:

Developing a Public Health System for the 21st Century, Institute of Population and

228

229

Public Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

http://www.cpha.ca/coalition/future_e.pdf Accessed on March 7, 2004



Fullan M. (1991). The New Meaning of Educational Change, Toronto, ON: OISE University

Press.



Fullan MJ. (1991). The New Meaning of Education Change. Toronto, ON: OISE Press,

University of Toronto.



Funk RS. (1991). A policymakers checklist. The American School Board Journal, July.



Furr-Holden CD, Ialongo NS, Anthony JC, Petras H, Kellam SG. (2004). Developmentally

inspired drug prevention: middle school outcomes in a school-based randomized prevention

trial. Drug Alcohol Depend. Feb 7;73(2):149-58.



Gall G, Pagano ME, Desmond MS, Perrin JM, Murphy JM. (2000). Utility of psychosocial

screening at a school-based health center. J Sch Health. Sep;70(7):292-8.



Gall GB. (2002). Comprehensive risk assessment for adolescents in school-based health

centers. Nurs Clin North Am. Sep;37(3):553-64.



Gardner H. (2000). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the21st Century. New

York, NY: Basic Books.



Gatehouse Project. (nd). Project Web Site

http://www.rch.org.au/gatehouseproject/project/theprogram/index.cfm?doc_id=397 .



Geiger BF, Petri CJ, Myers O, Lan J, Binkley D, Aldige CR, Berdebes J. (2002). Using

technology to teach health: a collaborative pilot project in Alabama. J Sch Health.

Dec;72(10):401-7.



Gerstein, D.R.; and Green, L.W., eds.; Preventing Drug Abuse: What Do We Know?

Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1993.



Giles SM, Harrington NG, Fearnow-Kenney M. (2001). Evaluation of the All Stars Program:

student and teacher factors that influence mediators of substance use. J Drug Educ. 31(4):385-

97.



Gilham SA, Lucas WL, Sivewright D. (1997). The impact of drug education and prevention

programs. Disparity between impressionistic and empirical assessments. Eval Rev.

Oct;21(5):589-613.



Gillmore MR, Wells EA, Simpson EE, Morrison DM, Hoppe MJ, Wilsdon A. (1998).

Children‘s beliefs about drinking. American Journal on Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 24(1):131-

51.



Gingiss PL. (1992). Enhancing program implementation and maintenance through a multiphase

approach to peer-based staff development. J Sch Health. May;62(5):161-6.



Giroux HA. (1997). Channel surfing: Race talk and the destruction of today‘s youth. New

York: St. Martin‘s.



Gliksman L, Allison K, Adlaf E, Newton- Taylor B. (1995). Toward comprehensive

229

230

school drug policy in Ontario. J Drug Educ. 25(2):129-38.



Glynn TJ. (1989). Essential elements of school-based smoking prevention programs. J Sch

Health 59(5):181-8. (ADAI rp 03679).



Goldberg L, Elliot DL, MacKinnon DP, Moe E, Kuehl KS, Nohre L, Lockwood CM. (2003).

Drug testing athletes to prevent substance abuse: background and pilot study results of the

SATURN (Student Athlete Testing Using Random Notification) study. J Adolesc Health.

Jan;32(1):16-25.



Goleman D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. New York,

NY: Bantam Books.



Golub A, Johnson BD. (1994). The shifting importance of alcohol and marijuana as gateway

substances among serious drug abusers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 55:607-14.



Good TL, Wiley AR, Thomas RE, Stweart E, McCoy J, Kloos B, Hunt G.D, Moore T,

Rappaport J. (1997). Bridging the gap between schools and community: Organizing for family

involvement in a low-income neighborhood. Journal of Educational and Psychological

Consultation, 8(3).



Goodlad J. (1984). A Place Called School. New York: McGraw-Hill.



Goodstadt MS, Cook G. Magids S, Gruson V. (1978). The Drug Attitudes Scale (DAS): Its

development and evaluation. International Journal on Addictions, 13(8):1307-17.



Goodstadt MS. (1989). Substance abuse curricula vs. school drug policies. J Sch Health.

Aug;59(6):246-50.



Gordon LV, Haynes DK, (1982). Parental participation in nutrition education homework.

Journal of American Dietetic Association, Oct;81(4):445-8.



Gorman DM. (1995). Are school-based resistance skills training programs effective in

preventing alcohol misuse? J Alcohol Drug Educ 41(1):74-98. (ADAI jl).



Gorman DM. (1995). On the difference between statistical and practical significance in school-

based drug abuse prevention. Drugs Educ Prev Policy. 2(3):275-283. (ADAI jl).



Gorman DM. (1996). Do school-based social skills training programs prevent alcohol use

among young people? Addict Res. 4(2):191-210. (ADAI jl).

Gorman DM. (1998). The irrelevance of evidence in the development of school-based drug

prevention policy, 1986-1996. Eval Rev. Feb;22(1):118-46.



Gosin MN, Dustman PA, Drapeau AE, Harthun ML (2003). Participatory Action Research:

creating an effective prevention curriculum for adolescents in the Southwestern US. Health

Educ Res. Jun;18(3):363-79.



Gottfredson DC, Wilson DB. (2003). Characteristics of effective school-based substance abuse

prevention Prev Sci. Mar;4(1):27-38.



Graham A (2003). Organizations-theory and definitions, SPS 809AB – 2003, School of Policy

Studies, Queens University.



230

231

Granheim M, Kogan M, Leithwood K. (1990). Evaluation as policy making: Introducing

evaluation into a national, decentralized school System, London, UK: Jessica Kingsley.



Grebow PM, Greene BZ, Harvey J, Head CJ. (2000). Shaping health policies. Educational

Leadership, 57(6).



Green LW, Kreuter AW. (1991). Health Promotion Planning: An Education and Environment

Approach. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.



Greenberg MT, Weissberg RP, O'Brien MU, Zins JE, Fredericks L, Resnik H, Elias MJ.

(2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social,

emotional, and academic learning. Am Psychol. Jun-Jul;58(6-7):466-74.



Griffin KW, Botvin GJ, Nichols TR, Doyle MM. (2003). Effectiveness of a universal drug

abuse prevention approach for youth at high risk for substance use initiation. Prev Med.

Jan;36(1):1-7.



Griffin KW, Botvin GJ, Scheier LM, Epstein JA, Doyle MM. (2002). Personal competence

skills, distress, and well-being as determinants of substance use in a predominantly minority

urban adolescent sample. Prev Sci. Mar;3(1):23-33.



Griffin KW, Scheier LM, Botvin GJ, Diaz T. (2001). Protective role of personal competence

skills in adolescent substance use: psychological well-being as a mediating factor. Psychol

Addict Behav. Sep;15(3):194-203.



Grossman DC, Neckerman HJ, Koepsell TD, Liu PY, Asher KN, Beland K, Frey K, Rivara FP.

(1997). Effectiveness of a violence prevention curriculum among children in elementary

school. JAMA. 277:1605-1611. (ADAI rp 07681).



Gruber E, DiClemente RJ, Anderson MM, Lodico M. (1996). Early drinking onset and its

association with alcohol use and problem behavior in late adolescence. Preventive Medicine,

25(3):293-300.



Grunbaum JA, Kann L, Williams BI, Kinchen SA, Collins JL, Baumler ER, Kolbe LJ. (2000).

Surveillance for characteristics of health education among secondary schools--school health

education profiles, 1998 MMWR CDC Surveill Summ. Aug 18;49(8):iv-41.



Grunbaum JA, Kann L, Williams BI, Kinchen SA, Collins JL, Kolbe LJ. (1998).

Characteristics of health education among secondary schools--School Health Education

Profiles, 1996. Mor Mortal Weekly Rep CED Surveill Summ, Sep 11;47(4):1-31.



Guay M, Clouatre AM, Blackburn M, Baron G, De Wals P, Roy C, Desrochers J, Milord F.

(2003). Effectiveness and cost comparison of two strategies for hepatitis B vaccination of

schoolchildren. Can J Public Health. 2003 Jan-Feb;94(1):64-7.



Guernsey BP, Pastore DR. (1996). Comprehensive School-Based Health Centers:

Implementing the Model. Adolesc Med. Jun;7(2):181-196.



Gunja F, Cox A, Rosenbaum M, Appel J, (2004). Making Sense of Student Drug Testing Why

Educators are Saying No American Civil Liberties Union, New Haven, CT

http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/drug_testing_booklet.pdf.



Hacker K, Wessel GL. (1998). School-based health centers and school nurses: cementing

231

232

the collaboration. J Sch Health. Dec;68(10):409-14.



Hahn EJ et al. (1996). Cues to parent involvement in drug prevention and school activities.

Journal of School Health, 66(5):165-70.



Hahn EJ, Hall LA, Simpson MR. (1998). Drug prevention with high risk families and young

children. J Drug Educ. 28(4):327-45.



Hahn EJ, Noland MP, Rayens MK, Christie DM. (2002). Efficacy of training and fidelity of

implementation of the life skills training program. J Sch Health. Sep;72(7):282-7.



Hall GE, Hord SM. (1987). Change in school. Facilitating the process. State University of New

York, Albany.



Hallfors D, Godette D. (2002). Will the 'principles of effectiveness' improve prevention

practice? Early findings from a diffusion study. Health Educ Res. Aug;17(4):461-70.



Hansen WB. (1992). School-based substance abuse prevention: a review of the state of the art

in curriculum, 1980-1990. Health Educ Res. Sep;7(3):403-30.



Hansen WB, Graham JW. (1991). Preventing alcohol, marijuana, and cigarette use among

adolescents: peer pressure resistance training versus establishing conservative norms. Prev

Med. May;20(3):414-30.



Hansen WB, McNeal RB Jr. (1999). Drug education practice: Results of an observational

study. Health Educ Res. Feb;14(1):85-97.



Hansen WB, O‘Malley PM. (1996). Drug use. In Diclemente RJ, Hansen WB, Ponton LE,

Handbook of Adolescent Health Risk Behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press.



Hansen WB. (1992). School-based substance abuse prevention: a review of the state of the art

in curriculum, 1980-1990. Health Educ Res 7(3):403-430. (ADAI rp 05629).



Hansen WB. (1993). School-based alcohol prevention programs. Alcohol Health Res World.

17(1):54-60. (ADAI jl).



Harden A, Oakley A, Peersman G (1999) A review of the effectiveness and appropriateness of

peer-delivered health promotion interventions for young people. London, UK, Social EPI-

CENTRE, Science research Unit, Institute of Education



Harrington NG, Giles SM, Hoyle RH, Feeney GJ, Yungbluth SC. (2001). Evaluation of the All

Stars character education and problem behavior prevention program: Effects on mediator and

outcome variables for middle school students. Health Educ Behav. Oct;28(5):533-46.



Harvey-Berino Jean, Weing JF, Flynn B, Wick JR. (1998). Statewide dissemination of a

nutrition program: Show the way to 5-a-day, Journal of Nutrition Education, 30(1):29-36.



Harvard Graduate School of Education. (2003). The Evaluation Exchange.

Cambridge, MA:www.gse.harvard.edu/hfrp/eval/archives.html.



Hausman AJ, Ruzek SB, (1995). Implementation of comprehensive school health education in

elementary schools: focus on teacher concerns, Journal of School Health, Mar;65(3):81-6.



232

233

Hawe P. (1998). Making sense of context-level influences on health. Health Educ Res.

Dec;13(4):i-iv .



Hawe P, Wise M, Nutbeam D. (2001a). Policy- and system-level approaches to health

promotion in Australia. Health Educ Behav. 2001 Jun;28(3):267-73.



Hawe P, Riley T, Shiel E. (2001b). Understanding programs within their context: use of inter-

organisational network analysis within a community intervention trial. International Union for

Health Education and Health Promotion Conference . Paris, 16th-20th July



Hawkins JD, Catalano FR, Miller JY. (1992). Factors for alcohol and other drug problems in

adolescence and early childhood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological

Bulletin, 112:64-105.



Hawkins JD, Graham JW, Maguin E, Abbott R, Hill KG, Catalano RF. (1997). Exploring the

effects of age of alcohol use initiation and psychological risk factors on subsequent alcohol

misuse. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 58(3):280-90.



Hawkins, J.D.; Catalano, R.F.; Kosterman, R.; Abbott, R.; and Hill, K.G. Preventing adolescent

health-risk behaviors by strengthening protection during childhood. Archives of Pediatric and

Adolescent Medicine 153:226–234, 1999.



Hawkins, J.D.; Catalano, R.F.; and Arthur, M. Promoting science-based prevention in

communities. Addictive Behaviors 90(5):1–26, 2002.



Hay DI, (2002). A Literature Review of the Effectiveness of School-Based Services School-

Based Program Review Ministry of Children and Family Development, Victoria, BC.



Haynes NM. (2002). Addressing students' social and emotional needs: the role of mental health

teams in schools. J Health Soc Policy. 16(1-2):109-23.



Hays RD, Stacy AW, DiMatteo MR. (1987). Problem behaviour theory and adolescent alcohol

use. Addictive Behaviors, 12(2):189-93.



Hayward S, Ciliska D, Mitchell-DiCenso A, Thomas H, Underwood J, Rafael A. Public Health

Nursing and Health Promotion: background paper,

http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/ohcen/groups/hthu/93-2.htm.



Health & Welfare Canada. (1986). Achieving Health for All: A Framework for Health

Promotion. Ottawa, ON: Health and Welfare Canada.



Health and Welfare Canada, Enhancing Prevention in the Practice of Health Professionals.

Strategies for Today and Tomorrow, Ottawa, ON.



Health Canada (199 ) Heart Health, Heart Health Equality. Mobilizing Communities for

Action, http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hppb/ahi/hearthealth/pubs/equal/eqa01.htm.



Health Canada. (1997). Health promotion interventions to promote healthy eating in the general

population - a review, Health promotion effectiveness reviews Summary bulletin 6-1997,

http://www.hea.org.uk/research/download/ereview6.html.



Health Canada. (2003). Taking Action on Healthy Living: Background Information on the

Integrated Pan-Canadian Healthy Living Strategy. Ottawa, ON.

233

234



Health Canada. (1996). Towards a Common Understanding: Clarifying the Core Concepts of

Population Health, Ottawa, ON, Author.



Health Canada. (1993). Selected attitudes among youth aged 11-17 concerning

smoking/alcohol and drug use. Canadian Youth and Drugs. A Health Promotion and Social

Marketing Resource Guide. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada.



Health Canada. (1996). Other Drugs & Alcohol. Executive Summary. Ottawa, ON: Author.



Health Canada. (1996). Out of the Mainstream Youth. Executive Summary. Ottawa, ON:

Author.



Health Canada. (1999). Communicating with Canada‘s Youth. A paper presented to a

conference in Ottawa, March 30, 1999. Ottawa, ON: Program Promotion Division, Health

Canada.



Health Canada. (nd). Still Making A Difference: Interim Report: The Impact of the Health

Promotion Directorate‘s Social Marketing Campaign 1992-93. Ottawa, ON: Program

Promotion Division, Health Promotion Directorate.



Health Canada. (nd). Youth Public Opinion Research Study: Secondary Analysis of Current

Market Research on Youth Ages 7-19. Ottawa, ON: Author.



Health Canada. (1994). Strategies for Population Health Investing in the Health of Canada's

Advisory Committee on Population Health. Ottawa, ON, Author.



Hearn MD et al (1992), "Involving Families in Cardiovascular Health Promotion: The CATCH

Feasibility Study", Journal of Health Education, 23(1), p.22-31.



Hecht ML, Marsiglia FF, Elek E, Wagstaff DA, Kulis S, Dustman P, Miller-Day M. (2003).

Culturally grounded substance use prevention: an evaluation of the keepin' it R.E.A.L.

curriculum. Prev Sci. Dec;4(4):233-48.



Hern MJ, Gates D, Amulung S, McCabe P, (1998). Linking learning with health behaviours of

high school adolescents. Pediatric Nursing, Mar-Apr;24(2):127-32.



Hirischi T. (1969). Courses of Deliquency. Berkely, CA: University of California Press.



Holtgrave DR, Tinsley BJ, Kay LS. (1995). Encouraging risk reduction: A decision-making

approach to message design. In E Maibach & RL Parrot, eds., Designing Health Messages:

Approaches from Communication Theory and Public Health Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.



Hootman J, Houck GM, King MC. (2002). A program to educate school nurses about mental

health interventions. J Sch Nurs. Aug;18(4):191-5.



Hopper CA, Gruber MB, Munoz KD, Herb RA, (1992). Effect of including parents in a school-

based exercise and nutrition program for children, Res Q Exerc Sport, Sep;63(3):315-21.



Hord SM, Rutherford WL, Huling AL, Hall GE. (1988). Taking charge of change. Alexandria,

VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.



234

235

Horn K, Kolbo JR. (2000). Application of a cumulative strategies model for drug abuse

prevention: exploring choices for high risk children. J Drug Educ. 30(3):291-312.

http://www.nida.nih.gov/pdf/monographs/monograph170/096-119_Becker.pdf.



Huang L, Gibbs J. (1992). Partners or adversaries? Home-school collaboration across culture,

race, and ethnicity. In:Christenson, S; Close Conoley, J., eds. Home-school Collaboration:

Enhancing Children‘s Academic and Social Competence, p. 81–110. Silver Spring, MD:

National Association of School Psychologists.



Hundert J, Boyle MH, Cunningham CE, Duku E, Heale J, McDonald J, Offord DR, Racine Y.

(1999). Helping children adjust--a Tri-Ministry Study: II. Program effects. J Child Psychol

Psychiatry. Oct;40(7):1061-73.



Hyndman, B., Libstug, A., Giesbrecht, N., Hershfield, L., & Rootman, I. (1993). The Use of

Social Science Theory to Develop Health Promotion Programs (Rep. No. 4). Toronto: Centre

for Health Promotion, University of Toronto.



Ialongo, N.; Poduska, J.; Werthamer, L.; and Kellam, S. The distal impact of two first-grade

preventive interventions on conduct problems and disorder in early adolescence. Journal of

Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 9:146–160, 2001.



Igra V, Irwin CE Jr, (1996). Theories of adolescent risk-taking behaviour, Handbook of

Adolescent Health Risk Behavior, New York, NY: Plenum Press.



Independent Inquiry Into Inequalities in Health. (1998). Chapter on Education, London:

National Health Service. http://www.archive.official-

documents.co.uk/document/doh/ih/part2b.htm



Ionnotti RJ, Bush PJ, Weinfort KP. (1996). Perceptions of friend‘s use of alcohol, cigarettes

and marijuana among urban school children. A longitudinal study. Health Educatin and

Behavior, 24(3):287-99.



Irwin CE Jr, Igra V, Eyre S, Millstein S, (1997). Risk-taking behavior in adolescents: the

paradigm, Ann NY Acad Sci, May 28:817-35.



Irwin CE, Millstein SG. (1986). Biopsychosocial correlates of risk-taking behaviors during

adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 7:825-965.



Irwin CE. (1987). Adolescent social behavior and health. New Directions for Child

Development, 37:1-12.



Israel BA, Checkoway B, Schultz A, Zimmerman M. (1994). Health education and community

empowerment: Conceptualizing and measuring perceptions of individual, organizational and

community control. Health Education Quarterly, 21(2):149-70.



Jackson C, Henriksen L, Dickinson D, Levine DW. (1997). The early use of alcohol and

tobacco. Its relation to children‘s competence and parents‘ behavior. American Journal of

Public Health, 87(3):359-64.



James WH, Wabaunsee R. (1995). At-risk students : Drug prevention through

afterschool/latchkey programs? Drugs Educ Prev Policy 2(1):65-75. (ADAI jl).



Janosz M, Georges P, Parent S. (1998). L'environnement éducatif à l'école secondaire

235

236

: un modèle théorique pour guider l'évaluation du milieu. Revue Canadienne de Psycho-

Éducation, 27(2), 285-306.



Janz WK, Becker (1984). MH. The Health Belief Model: A Decade Later, Health Education

Quarterly 11: 1-47.



Jenkins JE, (1996). The influence of peer affiliation and student activities on adolescent drug

involvement. Adolescence. 31(122):297-306.



Jennings J, Pearson G, Harris M. (2000). Implementing and maintaining school-based mental

health services in a large, urban school district. J Sch Health. May;70(5):201-5.



Jepson L, Juszczak L, Fisher M. (1998). Mental health care in a high school based health

service. Adolescence. Spring;33(129):1-15.



Jessor R. (1993). Successful adolescent development among youth in high-risk settings.

American Psychologist. vol. 48, p. 177–216. Washington, DC..



Jessor R, Jessor R. (1977). Problem Behavior and Psychosocial Development. New York, NY:

Academic Press.



Johnson DW, Johnson RT. (1994). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, Competitive,

and Individualistic Learning. .Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.



Johnston, L.D.; O‘Malley, P.M.; and Bachman, J.G. Monitoring the Future National Survey

Results on Drug Use, 1975–2002. Volume 1: Secondary School Students. Bethesda, MD:

National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2002.



Jones ME, Clark D. (1993). What school nurses really do--a study of school nurse utilization,

Journal of School of Nursing, Apr;9(2):10-17.



Joost JC, Grossman LS, McCarter RJ, Verhulst SJ, Winsted-Hall D, Mehl R, (1993). Predictors

of frequent middle school health room use. Journal of Developmental Behavior Pediatric,

Aug;14(4):259-63.



Jourdan D, Piec I, Aublet-Cuvelier B, Berger D, Lejeune ML, Laquet-Riffaud A, Geneix C,

Glanddier PY. (2002). School health education: practices and representations of primary school

teachers Sante Publique. Dec;14(4):403-23.



Joyce BR, Showers B. (1988). Student Achievement through Staff Development. Longman,

New York.



Kalafat J, Illback RJ, A qualitative evaluation of school-based family resource and youth

service centers. American Journal of Community Psychology, Aug;26(4):573-604.



Kam CM, Greenberg MT, Walls CT. (2003). Examining the role of implementation quality in

school-based prevention using the PATHS curriculum. Promoting Alternative Thinking Skills

Curriculum. Prev Sci. Mar;4(1):55-63.



Kandel DB, Logan JA. (1984). Patterns of drug use from adolescence to young adulthood.

Periods of risk for initiation, continued use and discontinuation. American Journal of Public

Health, 74:660-666.



236

237

Kandel DB, Yamaguchi K, Chen K. (1992). Stages of progression in drug involvement from

adolescence to adulthood. Further evidence of the gateway theory. Journal of School Health,

53:447-457.



Kantor GK, Caudill BD, Ungerleider S. (1992). Project Impact: teaching the teachers to

intervene in student substance abuse problems. J Alcohol Drug Educ. 38(1):11-29.



Kaplan DW, Brindis C, Naylor KE, Phibbs SL, Ahlstrand KR, Melinkovich P. (1998).

Elementary school-based health center use. Pediatrics. Jun;101(6):E12.



Kealey KA, Peterson AV Jr, Gaul MA, Dinh KT. (2000). Teacher training as a behavior change

process: principles and results from a longitudinal study. Health Educ Behav. Feb;27(1):64-81.



Keefe K. (1994). Perceptions of normative social pressure and attitudes toward alcohol use,

changes during adolescence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 55(1):46-54.



Kelsey KS, Campbell MK, Vanata DF, (1998). Parent and adolescent girls' preferences for

parental involvement in adolescent health promotion programs. Journal of American Dietetic

Association, Aug;98(9):906-7.

Keyl PM, Hurtado MP, Barber MM, Borton J, (1996). School-based health centers. Students'

access, knowledge, and use of services., Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. Feb; 150(2):175-80.



Kessler R. (2000). The Soul of Education: Helping Students Find Connection,

Compassion, and Character at School. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and

Curriculum Development.



Kim S, Crutchfield C, Williams C, Hepler N. (1998). Toward a new paradigm in substance

abuse and other problem behavior prevention for youth. Youth development and empowerment

approach. Journal of Drug Education, 28(1):1-17.



King KA, Wagner DI, Hedrick B. (2001). Safe and drug-free school coordinators' perceived

needs to improve violence and drug prevention programs. J Sch Health. Aug;71(6):236-41.



Kinsman SB, Romer D, Furstenberg FF, Schwartz DF. (1998). Early sexual initiation: The role

of peer norms. Pediatrics, 102(5):1188-92.



Kolbe LJ, Iverson DC. (1981). Implementing comprehensive health education, educational

innovations and social change. Health Education Quarterly. 8(1).



Kolbe LJ, Kann L, Brener N.D. (2001). Overview and summary of findings: School health

policies and programs study 2000. Journal of School Health, 71(7), 253-259.



Komro KA, Perry CL, Williams CL, Stigler MH, Farbakhsh K, Veblen-Mortenson S. (2001).

How did Project Northland reduce alcohol use among young adolescents? Analysis of

mediating variables. Health Educ Res. Feb;16(1):59-70.



Komro KA, Toomey TL. (2002). Strategies to prevent underage drinking. Alcohol Res Health.

26(1):5-14.



Konu A, Rimpela M. (2002). Well-being in schools: a conceptual model. Health Promot Int.

Mar;17(1):79-87.



Kosterman, R.; Hawkins, J.D.; Spoth, R.; Haggerty, K.P.; and Zhu, K. Effects of a

237

238

preventive parent-training intervention on observed family interactions: Proximal outcomes

from Preparing for the Drug Free Years. Journal of Community Psychology 25(4):337–352,

1997.



Kosterman, R.; Hawkins, J.D.; Haggerty, K.P.; Spoth, R.; and Redmond, C. Preparing for the

Drug Free Years: Session-specific effects of a universal parent-training intervention with rural

families. Journal of Drug Education 31(1):47–68, 2001.



Kozolanka K. (1993). Beyond Integrated Curriculum Student Voice & the Nature of

Engagement. Unpublished master‘s thesis Kingston, ON: Queen‘s University.



Kriete R, Bechtel L.( 2002). The Morning Meeting Book. Greenfield, MA:

Northeast Foundation for Children.



Kubiszyn T. (1999.) Integrating health and mental health services in schools: psychologists

collaborating with primary care providers. Clin Psychol Rev. Mar;19(2):179-98.



Kumar R, O'Malley PM, Johnston LD, Schulenberg JE, Bachman JG. (2002). Effects of

school-level norms on student substance use. Prev Sci. Jun;3(2):105-24.



Kumpfer K et al. (1991). A Community Change Model for School Health Promotion", Journal

of Health Education, 22 (2).



Kumpfer KL, Alvarado R, Tait C, Turner C. (2002). Effectiveness of school-based family and

children's skills training for substance abuse prevention among 6-8-year-old rural children.

Psychol Addict Behav. Dec;16(4 Suppl):S65-71.



Kumpfer KL, Alvarado R, Whiteside HO. (2003). Family-based interventions for substance use

and misuse prevention. Subst Use Misuse. Sep-Nov;38(11-13):1759-87.



Labonte R. (1994). Health promotion and empowerment: Reflections on professional practice.

Health Education Quarterly, 21(2):253-68.



Ladd GW, Mize J. (1983). A cognitive social-learning model of social skill training.

Psychological Review. vol. 90, p. 127–57. Washington, DC.



Lamarine RJ. (1993). School drug education programming: in search of a new direction. J Drug

Educ. 23(4):325-31.



Lambert NM, McCombs BL, eds. (1998). How Students Learn: Reforming Schools Through

Learner-centered Education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.



Lancman H, Pastore DR, Steed N, Maresca A. (2000). Adolescent Hepatitis B vaccination:

comparison among 2 high school-based health centers and an adolescent clinic. Arch Pediatr

Adolesc Med. Nov;154(11):1085-8.



Lansdowne G. (2003). Youth Participation in Decision Making - Chapter 10 of the World

Youth Report 2003 The global situation of young people United Nations Publications.

http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/wyr/documents/ch10.pdf



Langer JH. (1976). Guidelines for school-police cooperation in drug abuse policy department. J

Sch Health. Apr;46(4):197-9.



238

239

Lantieri L, ed. (2001). Schools with Spirit: Nurturing the Inner Lives of Children and Teachers.

Boston, MA: Beacon Press.



La Table Provinciale de Concertation sur la Violence, les Jeunes et le Milieu Scolaire. (2000).

La Présence Policière dans les Établissements Scolaires.

http://www.wl.csvdc.qc.ca/Sitepolice/default.html.



Lazebnik R, Grey SF, Ferguson C. (2001). Integrating substance abuse content into an HIV

risk-reduction intervention: A pilot study with middle school-aged Hispanic students. Subst

Abuse. 22(2):105-117. (ADAI jl).



Levinson-Gingiss P, Hamilton R. (1989). Evaluation of training effects on teacher attitudes and

concerns prior to implementing a human sexuality education program. Journal of School

Health, vol 59, 156-160.



Li C, Pentz MA, Chou CP. (2002). Parental substance use as a modifier of adolescent substance

use risk. Addiction. Dec;97(12):1537-50.



Lia-Hoagberg B, Nelson P, Chase RA. (1997). An interdisciplinary health team training

program for school staff in Minnesota. J Sch Health. Mar;67(3):94-7.



Leiberman A. (1995). Practices that support teacher development. Phi Delta Kappan vol. 76, p.

591–96. Bloomington, IN,



Lewis CC, Schaps E, Watson MS. (1996). The caring classroom‘s academic edge. Educational

leadership. vol. 54, p. 16–21. Alexandria, VA.



Lilja J, Wilhelmsen BU, Larsson S, Hamilton D. (2003). Evaluation of drug use prevention

programs directed at adolescents. Subst Use Misuse. Sep-Nov;38(11-13):1831-63.



Liontos LB. (1991). Involving the Families of At-Risk Youth in the Educational Process.

Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management.



Lisnov L, Harding CG, Safer LA, Kavanagh J. (1998). Adolescents' perceptions of substance

abuse prevention strategies. Adolescence. Summer;33(130):301-11.



Lister-Sharp, D., Chapman, S., Stewart-Brown, S., & Sowden, A. (1999). Heatlh promoting

schools and health promotion in schools: two systematic reviews. Health Technolog

Assessment, 3, 1-6.



Louis MR & Sutton RI. (1991). Shifting cognitive gears: From habits of mind to active

thinking. Human Relations, 44:55-76.



Lowe JM, Knapp ML, Meyer MA, Gall GB, Hampton JG, Dillman JA, Roover ML. (2001.)

School-based health centers as a locus for community health improvement. Qual Manag Health

Care. Summer;9(4):24-32.



Luepker RV, Murray DM, Jacobs DR Jr, Mittelmark MB, Bracht N, Carlaw R, Crow R, Elmer

P, Finnegan J, Folson AR, et al, (1994), Community education for cardiovascular disease

prevention: Risk factor changes in the Minnesota Heart Health Program. American Journal of

Public Health, Sep;84(9):1383-93.





239

240

Lupton D. (1994). Consumerism, commodity culture and health promotion. Health Promotion

International, 9:111-118.



Lytle LA, Ward J, Nader PR, Pedersen S, Williston BJ. (2003). Maintenance of a health

promotion program in elementary schools: Results from the CATCH-ON study key informant

interviews. Health Educ Behav. Aug;30(4):503-18.



Macbeth A. (1980). School boards: From purpose to practice, Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish

Academic Press.



McCallum DB. (1995). Risk communication: A tool for behaviour change. Research

Monographs, 155:65-89. Washington, DC: National Institute on Drug Abuse.



Maccoby N. (1990). Communication and health education research. Potential sources for

education for prevention of drug abuse. Research Monograph, 93:1-23. Washington, DC:

National Institute on Drug Abuse.



MacDonald MA, Green LW. (2001). Reconciling concept and context: the dilemma of

implementation in school-based health promotion. Health Educ Behav. Dec;28(6):749-68.



MacDougall C. (2004). School Health Committees. Perceptions of Public Health Staff.

Doctorial Thesis. Toronto, ON: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of

Toronto.



MacKesy-Amiti ME, Fendrich M, Goldstein PJ. (1997). Sequence of drug use among serious

drug users. Typical vs atypical progression. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 45:185-196.



Mackie W, Oickle P. (1996). Comprehensive school health: The physician as advocate. Journal

of the Canadian Medical Association, 156: 1301-5.



MacKinnon DP, Johnson CA, Pentz MA, Dwyer JH, Hansen WB, Flay BR, Wang EY. (1991).

Mediating mechanisms in a school-based drug prevention program: first-year effects of the

Midwestern Prevention Project. Health Psychol. 10(3):164-72.



MacLean Dr. (1996). Positioning dissemination in public policy. Canadian Journal of Public

Health, 87-(Suppl.2)540-43.



Mangham C (1992), Family Empowerment as an Approach in Substance Abuse Prevention, A

paper prepared for the Alcohol and Drug Unit, Health Promotion Directorate, Health and

Welfare Canada.



Mangham C et al. (1994), Resiliency in Health Promotion: Annotated Bibliography, Detailed

Analysis, Ottawa, ON: Health Canada.



Mangham C. (1995). Resiliency: Relevance to Health Promotion. Discussion Paper. Ottawa,

ON: Alcohol and Drug Program, Health Canada.



Marbach E, Holtgren DR. (1995). Advances in public health communication. Annual Review

of Public Health, 16:219-38.



Marlatt GA, Larimer ME, Mail PD, Hawkins EH, Cummins LH, Blume AW, Lonczak HS,

Burns KM, Chan KK, Cronce JM, La Marr CJ, Radin S, Forquera R, Gonzales R, Tetrick C,

Gallion. (2003). Journeys of the Circle: a culturally congruent life skills intervention

240

241

for adolescent Indian drinking. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. Aug;27(8):1327-9.



Mason MJ, Wood TA. (2000). Clinical mental health training within a multidisciplinary

school-based health clinic. J Health Soc Policy. 11(3):45-65.



McBride N. (2003). A systematic review of school drug education. Health Educ Res.

Dec;18(6):729-42.



McBride N, Farringdon F, Midford R, Meuleners L, Phillips M. (2004) Harm minimization in

school drug education: final results of the School Health and Alcohol Harm Reduction Project

(SHAHRP). Addiction. Mar;99(3):278-91.



McBride N, Midford R, Cameron I. (1998). An empirical model for school health promotion:

The Western Australian School Health Project model. Health Promotion International, 14, (1),

pp. 17-25. [RJ214].



McCall D, Beazley R, Doherty-Poirier, Lovato C, MacKinnon, Otis J, Shannon M. (1999).

Schools, Public Health, Sexuality and HIV: A Status Report. Toronto, ON: Council of

Ministers of Education, Canada.



McCall D. (1990). Substance Abuse Prevention: Policies and programs for School Boards,

Colleges and Universities, BC Council for Leadership in Education and Administration.

Alcohol and Drugs Program, Ministry of Labour and Consumer Services, Brtistish Columbia.



McCall DS, (1995). Youth-Led Health Promotion: A Framework for Investigating

Effectiveness and Creating an Inventory of Tobacco and Other Program, Canadian Association

for School Health.



McCall D. (1997). A Research Agenda on Community and School Health. Surrey, BC: Centre

on Community and School Health, Canadian Association for School Health.



McCall DS. (2002). Understanding and Monitoring Youth Social Behaviours, Social

Environments and Relevant School, Agency and Community Policies, Programs and Practices

A Report on a Meeting of Experts, Officials and Practitioners, Analysis of Existing Ongoing

Surveys and Recent Studies And Suggested Collaborative Actions to Collect and Share Data.

Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, Justice Canada, Canadian Association of

Principals.



McCall DS. (2004) Developing a Research Agenda, Program and Network on School-based or

School-linked Health Promotion, Paper to the Joint Workshop on School Health, Vancouver,

BC, February 12-14.



McCallum DB. (1995). Risk communication: A tool for behaviour change. Research

Monographs, 155:65-89. Washington, DC: National Institute on Drug Abuse.



McCannell. (2000). Too many laps? Try this approach and they‘ll be back for more! Strategies,

14(2), 16-18.



McClanahan KK, McLaughlin RJ, Loos VE, Holcomb JD, Gibbins AD, Smith QW. (1998).

Training school counselors in substance abuse risk reduction techniques for use with children

and adolescents. J Drug Educ. 28(1):39-51.



McCord MT, Klein JD, Foy JM, Fotergill Km. (1993). School-based clinic use and

241

242

school performance. Journal of Adolescent Health, Mar;14(2):91-8.



McCormick LK, Steckler AB, McLeroy KR. (1995). Diffusion of innovations in schools: A

study of adoption and implementation of school-based tobacco prevention curricula. Am J

Health Promotion. 9(3):210-219. (ADAI rp 08260).



McCracken G. (1992). Got a Smoke? A Cultural Account of Tobacco in the Lives of

Contemporary Teens. Toronto, ON: Ontario Ministry of Health.



McDonald L, Sayger TV. (1998). Impact of a family and school based prevention program on

protective factors for high risk youth. Drugs Society. 12(1/2):61-85. (ADAI jl).



McDowell I. (nd). Scientific Paradigms in Population Health. Ottawa, ON: University of

Ottawa.



McGuire W. (1972). Social psychology. In PC Dodwell, ed., New Horizons in Psychology.

Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.



McGuire W. (1981). Theoretical foundation of campaigns. In Rice RE and Paisley WE, eds.,

Public Communication Campaigns, 41-70. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.



McGuire WJ. (1985). Attitude and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E Arenson, eds., Public

Communities Campaigns (2nd edition), 43-65. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.



McGuire WJ. (1989). Theoretical foundations of campaigns. In RE Rice and CK Atkin, eds.,

Public Communications Campaigns (2nd edition), 43-65. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.



McKenna, M.L. (2003). Implementing school nutrition policies. Canadian Journal of Dietetic

Practice and Research, 64(4), 208-213.



McKenzie D. (1999). Under the Influence. The Impact of Alcohol Advertising on Youth.

Toronto, ON: Association to Reduce Alcohol Promotion in Ontario.



McLaren P, Leonardo Z, Perez X. (2000). Commentary on the school as a setting for health

promotion in Poland BD, Green LW, Rootman I, Settings for Health Promotion. Linking

Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.



McLaughlin RJ, McClanahan KK, Holcomb JD, Gibbins AD, Smith QW, Vlasak JW, Kingery

PM. (1993). Reducing substance abuse risk factors among children through a teacher as

facilitator program. J Drug Educ. 23(2):137-50.



McLennan JD, Shaw E, Shema SJ, Garnder WP, Pope SK, Kelleher KJ. (1998). Adolescents‘

insight into heavy drinking. Journal of Adolescent Health, 22(5):409-16.



Mellanby AR, Rees JB, Tripp JH. (2000). Peer-led and adult-led school health education: a

critical review of available comparative research. Health Educ Res. Oct;15(5):533-45.



Merini C, de Peretti C. (2002). External partnerships and prevention relative to psychoactive

substances: what should be the position of the school and its partners? Sante Publique.

Jun;14(2):147-64.



Micucci S, Thomas H, Vobra J. (2002). The Effectivenss of School-based Strategies for the

Primary Prevention of Obesity and for Promoting Physical Activity and/or Nutrition,

242

243

the Major Risk Factors for Type 2 Diabetes. A Review of Reviews. Toronto, ON: Ontario

Public Health Association.



Midford R, Munro G, McBride N, Snow P, Ladzinski U (2002). Principles that underpin

effective school-based drug education. J Drug Educ. 32(4):363-86.



Migneault JP, Palloneu VE, Velior WF. (1997). Decisional balance and stage of change for

adolescent thinking. Addiction and Behavior, 22(3):339-51.



Ministry of Health of Ontario Public Health Branch. (1997). Mandatory Health Program and

Services Guidelines Toronto, Ontario: Queen's Printer for Ontario.



Ministry of Health Ontario. (1996). Healthy Lifestyles Model Program. Public Health &

Epidemiology Report Ontario, Special Issue 96-1.



Mintz J, Laporte J. Really me social marketing case study. In S. Shapiro, WD Perrault, EJ

McCarthy, eds., Basic Marketing: A Global Managerial Approach. http://www.hc-

sc.gc.ca/hppb/socialmarketing/publications/reallyme.htm.



Mintz J. (1989). Social marketing. New weapon in an old struggle. Health Promotion,

Winter:6-12.



Moon, D.; Hecht, M.; Jackson, K.; and Spellers, R. Ethnic and gender differences and

similarities in adolescent drug use and refusals of drug offers. Substance Use and Misuse

34(8):1059–1083, 1999.



Morgan M, Hibell B, Andersson B, Bjarnason T, Kokkevi A, Narusk A. (1999). The ESPAD

Study: Implications for prevention [European Schools Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs].

Drugs Educ Prev Policy. 6(2):243-256. (ADAI jl).



Morris S et al. (1991). Evaluating the Effectiveness of School Drop-out Prevention Strategies,

Some Suggestions for Future Research. Toronto, ON: Canadian Education Association.



Murray DM, Short B. (1996). Intraclass correlation among measures related to alcohol use by

school aged adolescents: estimates, correlates and applications in intervention studies. J Drug

Educ. 26(3):207-30. (ADAI jl).



Mutchler SE, Pollard JS. (1994). Linkages among education, health and social services systems

that are creating new governance structures. Paper presented to the American Education

Research Association Annual Meeting, April 4-8. New Orleans, LA.



Myers-Clack SA, Christopher SE. (2001) Effectiveness of a health course at influencing

preservice teachers' attitudes toward teaching health. J Sch Health. Nov;71(9):462-6.



Nader PR, Broyles SL, Brennan J, Taras H. (2003). Two national surveys on pediatric training

and activities in school health: 1991 and 2001. Pediatrics. Apr;111(4 Pt 1):730-4.



Nader PR, Sellers DE, Johnson CC, Perry CL, Stone EJ, Cook KC, Bebchuk J, Luepker RV.

(1996). The effect of adult participation in a school-based family intervention to improve

Children's diet and physical activity: the Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health.

Journal of Preventive Medicine, Jul-Aug;25(4):455-64.



Nation M, Crusto C, Wandersman A, Kumpfer KL, Seybolt D, Morrissey-Kane E,

243

244

Davino K. (2003). What works in prevention. Principles of effective prevention programs. Am

Psychol. Jun-Jul;58(6-7):449-56.



National Commission on Drug-Free Schools. (1990) Toward a drug-free generation : a nation's

responsibility, final report, September 1990. Washington DC: National Commission on Drug-

Free Schools, 1990. xiii, 98 p.



National Commission on Service Learning. 2002. The Power of Service

Learning. Newton, MA: NCSL.



National Institute on Drug Abuse (2003) Preventing Drug Use among Children and

Adolescents, A Research-Based Guide for Parents, Educators, and Community Leaders,

Second Edition, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2003.



National Research Council. (1989). Improving Risk Communication: National Research

Council Committee on Risk Perception and Communication. Washington, DC: National

Academy Press.



National School Boards Association. (1981). The School Board and the Instructional

Program, Washington, DC: National School Boards Association.



New Brunswick Department of Education. (2001). Guidelines for Professional Practice for

School Psychologists, Fredericton, NB: Author.



Newfoundland Department of Education. (2000). Student Activity Survey: Grade 12. St.

Johns, NF: Author.



Newmann FM. (1986). Priorities for the future: Toward a

common agenda. Social Education, 50, 240-250.



Newmann FM (1989). Student engagement and high school reform. Educational Leadership,

46(5), 34-36.



Newmann FM, Wehlage GG, Lamborn SD.(1992). The significance and sources of student

engagement. In Newmann, F.M. (Ed.), Student Engagement and Achievement in American

Schools (pp 11-39). New York: Teachers College Press.



Neylon J. (1993). School nursing: health promotion for school children, Nurs Stand, Apr;14-

20;7(30):37-40.



Ni Mhurchu C, Margetts BM, Speller VM. (1997). Applying the stages-of-change model to

dietary change. Nutrition Review, 55(1):10-16.



Noam GG, Hermann CA. (2002). Where education and mental health meet: Developmental

prevention and early intervention in schools. Dev Psychopathol. Fall;14(4):861-75.



Noddings N. (1992). The Challenge to Care in Schools: An Alternative Approach to Education.

New York, NY: Teachers College Press.



Norland S, Eichar D, DiChiara A. (1996). Curricula, competition and conventional bonds: the

educational role in drug control. J Drug Educ. 26(3):231-42.



Nova Scotia Department of Health. (2002). When Drugs Come to School. s

244

245



Novick B, Kress J, Elias MJ. (2002). Building Learning Communities

with Character: How to Integrate Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. Alexandria, VA,

ASCD.



Nutbeam D, St Leger L. (1996). Effective Health Promotion: Towards Health Promoting

Schools, National Health and Medical Research Council.



Nutbeam D, St. Leger L. (1997). Priorities for Research into Health Promoting Schools in

Australia. University of Australia, Australia Health Promoting Schools Association



O‘Callaghan FV, Chang DC, Call VJ, Baglioni A. (1997). Models of alcohol use by young

adults: An examination of various attitude-behaviour theories. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,

58(5):502-7.



Odden AR. (1991). Education policy implementation, Albany, NY: State University of New

York, Albany NY.



O'Donnell J, Hawkins JD, Catalano RF, Abbott RD, Day LE. (1995). Preventing school failure,

drug use, and delinquency among low-income children: Long-term intervention in elementary

schools. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 65(1):87-100. (ADAI rp 06876).



Oetting, E.; Edwards, R.; Kelly, K.; and Beauvais, F. Risk and protective factors for drug use

among rural American youth. In: Robertson, E.B.; Sloboda, Z.; Boyd, G.M.; Beatty, L.; and

Kozel, N.J., eds. Rural Substance Abuse: State of Knowledge and Issues. NIDA Research

Monograph No. 168. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, pp. 90–130, 1997.



Oetting ER, Beauvais F. (1987). Peer cluster theory, socialization characteristics and adolescent

drug use: A path analysis. Journal of counseling Psychology, 34:205-213.



O‘Neil J. (1997). Building schools as communities: a conversation with James Comer.

Educational Leadership. vol. 54, p. 6–10.



Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. (1997). Mandatory health program and

services guidelines. Toronto, Ontario: Queen's Printer for Ontario.



Osganian SK, Parcel GS, Stone EJ. (2003). Institutionalization of a school health promotion

program: background and rationale of the CATCH-ON study. Health Educ Behav.

Aug;30(4):410-7.



Osterman KF. (2000). Students‘ need for belonging in the school

community. Review of Educational Research.vol. 70, p. 323–67.



Paetsch JJ, Bertrand LD. (1997). The relationship between peer, social and school factors and

deliquency among youth. Journal of School Health, 67(1):27-32.



Paglia A. (1998). Tobacco Risk Communication Strategy for Youth: A Review. Ottawa, ON:

Tobacco Reduction Division, Health Canada.



Palinkas LA, Atkins CJ, Miller C, Ferreira D. (1996). Social skills training for drug prevention

in high-risk female adolescents. Prev Med. Nov-Dec;25(6):692-701.



Palmer RF, Graham JW, White EL, Hansen WB. (1998). Applying multilevel analytic

245

246

strategies in adolescent substance use prevention research. Prev Med. 1998 May-Jun;27(3):328-

36.



Palmer RF, Graham JW, White EL, Hansen WB. (1998). Applying multilevel analytic

strategies in adolescent substance use prevention research. Prev Med. May-Jun;27(3):328-36.



Parcel GS (1984), Theoretical models for application in school health education research.

Health Education, 15 (4).



Parcel GS, Kelder SH, Basen-Enquist K. (2000). The school as a setting for health promotion

in Poland BD, Green LW, Rootman I, Settings for Health Promotion. Linking Theory and

Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.



Parcel GS, Perry CL, Kelder SH, Elder JP, Mitchell PD, Lytle LA, Johnson CC, Stone EJ.

(2003). School climate and the institutionalization of the CATCH program. Health Educ

Behav. Aug;30(4):489-502.



Parcel GS, Simons-Morton B, O'Hara NM, Baranowski T, Wilson B, (1989). School promotion

of healthful diet and physical activity: impact on learning outcomes and self-reported behavior.

Health Education Quarterly, Summer;16(2):181-99.



Parcel, G.S., Perry, C.L., Kelder, S.H., Elder, J.P., Mitchell, P.D., Lytle, L. A., Johnson, C.C.,

and Stone, E.J. (2003). School climate and the institutionalization of the CATCH Program.

Health Education and Behavior, 30 (4), August.



Park J, Kosterman R, Hawkins JD, Haggerty KP, Duncan TE, Duncan SC, Spoth R. (2000).

Effects of the "Preparing for the Drug Free Years" curriculum on growth in alcohol use and risk

for alcohol use in early adolescence. Prev Sci. Sep;1(3):125-38.



Pasi R. (2001). Higher Expectations: Promoting Social Emotional Learning and Academic

Achievement in Your School. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.



Pastore DR, Juszczak L, Fisher MM, Friedman SB. (1998). School-based health center

utilization: a survey of users and nonusers. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. Aug;152(8):763-7.



Pastore DR, Techow B. (2004). Adolescent school-based health care: a description of two sites

in their 20th year of service. Mt Sinai J Med. May;71(3):191-6.



Pateman, B. (2003). Healthier students, better learners. Educational Leadership, 61(4).



Patton GC, Glover S, Bond L, Butler H, Godfrey C, Di Pietro G, Bowes G. (2000). The

Gatehouse Project: A systematic approach to mental health promotion in secondary schools.

Aust N Z J Psychiatry. Aug;34(4):586-93.



Pavis S, Cunningham-Burley S. (1999). Male youth street culture: Understanding the context of

health-related behaviors. Health Education Research, 14(5):583-96.



Payton JW, Wardlaw DM, Graczyk PA, Bloodworth MR, Tompsett CJ, Weissberg RP. (2000).

Social and emotional learning: a framework for promoting mental health and reducing risk

behavior in children and youth. J Sch Health. May;70(5):179-85.



Peele S, Brodsky A. (1997). Gateway to nowhere. How alcohol come to be scapegoated for

drug abuse. Addiction Research, 5:419-426.

246

247



Peele S. (1985). The Meaning of Addiction: Compulsive Experience and its Interpretation.

Toronto, ON: Lexington Books.



Peersman G, Harden A, Oliver S (1998) Effectiveness of of health promotion interventions in

the workplace.A Review. London, GB, Health Education Authority



Peleg A, Neumann L, Friger M, Peleg R, Sperber AD (2001). Outcomes of a brief alcohol

abuse prevention program for Israeli high school students. J Adolesc Health. Apr;28(4):263-9.



Pentz MA. (1998). Costs, Benefits, and Cost-Effectiveness of Comprehensive Drug Abuse

Prevention found in William J. Bukoski, Ph.D.Richard I. Evans, Ph.D. (Eds) Cost-

Benefit/Cost-Effectiveness Research of Drug Abuse Prevention: Implications for Programming

and Policy, NIDA Research Monograph 176 1998 U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services, National Institutes of Health.



Pentz MA. (2003). Evidence-based prevention: characteristics, impact, and future direction. J

Psychoactive Drugs. May;35 Suppl 1:143-52.



Perkins HW, Berkowitz AD. (1986). Perceiving the community norms of alcohol use among

students. Some research implications for campus alcohol education programming. International

Journal on Addictions, 21(9-10):961-76.



Perkins HW, Merlman PW, Leichliter JS, Cashin JR, Presley CA. (1999). Misperceptions of

the norms for the frequency of alcohol and other drug use on college campuses. Journal of

American College Health. 47(6):253-8.



Perry CL et al. (1989). Parent involvement with children's health promotion: A one year

follow-up of the Minnesota Home Team. Health Education Quarterly, 16(2):171-180:171-180.



Perry CL, Jessor R. (1985). The concept of health promotion and the prevention of adolescent

drug abuse. Health Education Quarterly. vol. 12, p. 169–84.



Perry CL et al (1990), "Parent Involvement in Cigarette Smoking Prevention: Two Pilot

Evaluators of the Unpuffable Program", Journal of School Health, 60(9), 443-447.



Perry CL, Komro KA, Veblen-Mortenson S, Bosma LM, Farbakhsh K, Munson KA, Stigler

MH, Lytle LA. (2003). A randomized controlled trial of the middle and junior high school

D.A.R.E. and D.A.R.E. Plus programs. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. Feb;157(2):178-84.



Perry CL, Williams CL, Veblen-Mortenson S, Toomey TL, Komro KA, Anstine PS, McGovern

PG, Finnegan JR, Forster JL, Wagenaar AC, Wolfson M. (1996). Project Northland: outcomes

of a communitywide alcohol use prevention program during early adolescence. Am J Public

Health. Jul;86(7):956-65.



Perry CL. (2000). Commentary on the school as a setting for health promotion in Poland BD,

Green LW, Rootman I, Settings for Health Promotion. Linking Theory and Practice. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.



Petchers MK, Hirsch EZ, Bloch BA. (1987). The impact of parent participation on the

effectiveness of a heart health curriculum. Health Education Quarterly, Winter;14(4):449-60.



Peterson FL, Cooper RJ, Laird JM. (2001). Enhancing teacher health literacy in school

247

248

health promotion: a vision for the new millennium. J Sch Health. Apr;71(4):138-44.



Phelan P, Davidson AL, Cao H. (1992). Speaking up: Students‘ perspectives on school. Phi

Delta Kappan, 73, 695-704.



Pidwirny MJ. (nd). Introduction to Systems Theory, Ph.D., Department of Geography,

Okanagan University College.



Piran, N. (1995). Prevention: Can early lessons lead to a delineation of an alternative model? A

critical look at prevention with school children. Eating Disorders: The Journal of Treatment &

Prevention, 3, 28-36.



Plotnick RD. (1994). Applying benefit-cost analysis to substance use prevention programs. Int

J Addict. Feb;29(3):339-59



Poland BD, Green LW, Rootman I. (2000). Reflection on settings for health promotion in

Poland BD, Green LW, Rootman I, Settings for Health Promotion. Linking Theory and

Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.



Potvin L, Paradis G, Laurier D, Masson P, Pelletier J, Lessard R. (1992). Intervention

framework of the Quebec Healthy Heart Demonstration Project. Hygie, 11(1):17-23.



Poulin C, Elliott D. (1997). Alcohol, tobacco and cannabis use among Nova Scotia adolescents:

implications for prevention and harm reduction. CMAJ. May 15;156(10):1387-93.



Powell DR (1990), Parent Education and Support Programs, ERIC Clearinghouse on

Elementary and Early Childhood Education, Urbana, ILL.



Power TJ, Shapiro ES, DuPaul GJ. (2003). Preparing psychologists to link systems of care in

managing and preventing children's health problems. J Pediatr Psychol. Mar;28(2):147-55.



Price JH, Yingling F, Dake JA, Telljohann SK. (2003). Adolescent smoking cessation services

of school-based health centers. Health Educ Behav. Apr;30(2):196-208.



Prochaska JO, Redding CA, Harlow LL, Rossi JS, Velicer WF. (1994b). The transtheoretical

model of change and HIV prevention: A review. Health Education Quarterly, 21(4):471-86.



Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Rossi JS, Goldstein MG, Marcus BH, Kakowski W. Fiore C,

Harlow LL, Redding CA, Rosenbloom D. (1994a). Stages of change and decisional balance for

12 problem behaviors. Health Psychology, 13(1):39-46.



Prochaska JV, Velicer WF. (1997). The transtheoretical model of behavior change. American

Journal of Health Promotion, 12(1):38-48.



Pruitt BE, Kingery PM, Mirzale E, Heuberger G, Hurley RS. (1991). Peer influence and drug

use among adolescents in rural areas. Journal of Drug Education, 21(1):1-11.



Puskar K, Sereika S, Tusaie-Mumford K. (2003). Effect of the Teaching Kids to Cope (TKC)

program on outcomes of depression and coping among rural adolescents. J Child Adolesc

Psychiatr Nurs. Apr-Jun;16(2):71-80.



Putting Research to Work for the Community: Presentations, Papers and Recommendations.



248

249

(1998). Rockville: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1998, pp. 43-56. (ADAI bk) HV 5825

N42 1998.



Ramirez AG, Gallion KJ, Espinoza R, McAlister A, Chalela P. (1997). Developing a media-

and school-based program for substance abuse prevention among hispanic youth: A case study

of Mirame!/Look at me! Health Educ Behav. 24(5):603-612. (ADAI rp 07815).



Ramirez AG, Gallion KJ, Espinoza R, Chalela P. (1999). Developing a media- and school-

based program for substance abuse prevention among Hispanic youth: a case study of

Mirame!/Look at Me! Nicotine Tob Res. (1 Suppl 1):S99-104.



Rappaport, J. (1997). Community psychology: Values, research and action. New York: Holt,

Rinehart, and Winston.



Renaud L, Chevalier S, Dufour R, O"Loughlin J, Beaudet N, Bourgeois A, Ouellet D. (1997).

Evaluation of the implementation of an educational curriculum: Optimal intervention for the

adoption of an educational program of health in elementary schools. Canadian Journal of Public

Health, Sep-Oct;88(5):351-3.



Renaud L, O'Loughlin J, Dery V. (2003) The St-Louis du Parc Heart Health Project: A critical

analysis of the reverse effects on smoking. Tob Control. Sep;12(3):302-9.



Resnicow K, Botvin G. (1993). School-based substance use prevention programs: Why do

effects decay? Prev Med. 22:484-490. (ADAI rp 06216).



Resnicow K, Allensworth DD. (1996). Conducting a comprehensive school health program.

Journal of School Health 66(2), 59-63.



Richards-Colocino N, McKenzie P, Newton RR. (1996). Project Success : Comprehensive

intervention services for middle school high-risk youth. J Adolesc Res 11(1):130-163. (ADAI

rp 08092).



Riessma, F. (1988). The next stage in educational reform: The student as consumer. Social

Policy, 18(2), 2.



Riley D. (1993). The Harm Reduction Model: Pragmatic Approaches to Drug Use from the

Area between Intolerance and Neglect, Ottawa, ON: Centre on Substance Abuse,



Ringwalt CL, Ennett S, Vincus A, Thorne J, Rohrbach LA, Simons-Rudolph A. (2002). The

prevalence of effective substance use prevention curricula in U.S. middle schools. Prev Sci.

Dec;3(4):257-65.



Ringwalt CL, Ennett S, Johnson R, Rohrbach LA, Simons-Rudolph A, Vincus A, Thorne J,

(2003). Factors Associated With Fidelity to Substance Use Prevention Curriculum Guides in

the Nation‘s Middle Schools Health Education & Behaviour, Volume 30, Issue 3: June.



Roberts A, Gerber L. (2003). Nursing Perspectives on Public Health Programming in Nunavut,

Department of Health and Human Services,



Roberts G, McCall DS, Stevens-Lavigne A, Anderson J, Paglia A, Bollenbach S, Wiebe J,

Gliksman L. (2001). Preventing Substance Use Problems among Young People - A

Compendium of Best Practices. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, Office of Canada‘s Drug

Strategy.

249

250



Rohrbach LA, Graham JW, Hansen WB. (1993). Diffusion of a school-based substance abuse

prevention program: predictors of program implementation. Prev Med. 22:237-260. (ADAI rp

06072).



Romano JC. (2001). The complicated task of managing school health programs. J Sch Nurs.

Jun;17(3):126-30.



Romano JL. (1997). School personnel training for the prevention of tobacco, alcohol, and other

drug use: issues and outcomes. J Drug Educ. 27(3):245-58. (ADAI jl).



Romano JL. (1999). Prevention training of paraprofessionals in the schools: an examination of

relevancy and effectiveness. J Drug Educ. 29(4): 373-86. (ADAI jl).



Rones M, Hoagwood K. (2000). School-based mental health services: a research review. Clin

Child Fam Psychol Rev. Dec;3(4):223-41.



Ronson BG, Stanton C, (2003). Active Healthy School Community Models From Around the

World Literature Review. Toronto, ON: Ontario Physical Education and Health Association.



Room R. (1994). Adolescent drinking as a collective behavior and performance. In R Zucker, G

Boyd and J Howard, eds., The Development of Alcohol Problems: Exploring the

Biopsychosocial Matrix ofRisk, NIAAA Research Monograph No. 26. Rockville, MD:

National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Addictions.



Rooney BL, Murray DM. (1996). A meta-analysis of smoking prevention programs after

adjustment for errors in the unit of analysis. Health Education Quarterly, 23:48-64.



Ross C, Richard L, Potvin L. (1998). One year outcome evaluation of an alcohol and drug

abuse prevention program in a Quebec high school. Canadian J Pub Health 89(3):166-170.

(ADAI rp 08471).



Rudd RE, Walsh DC. (1993). Schools as healthful environments: Prerequisite to

comprehensive school health? Prev Med. Jul;22(4):499-506.



Rudduck J, Chaplain R, Wallace G. (1996a). Reviewing the conditions of learning in school. In

J. Rudduck, R. Chaplain & G. Wallace (Eds.), School improvement: What can pupils tell us?

(pp. 172-178). London: Fulton.



Rudduck J, Chaplain R, Wallace G. (Eds.). (1996b). School Improvement: What Can Pupils

Tell Us? London: Fulton.



Rutter M. (1989). Pathways from Childhood to Adult Life. Paper presented to the Annual

Conference of the Association for Child Psychology and Psychiatry, London, July 1.



Ryan C, Matthews F, (1995). A National Directory of Exemplary School-Based Police

Programs To Combat Youth Violence, Ottawa, ON: Solicitor General of Canada.



Ryder D. (1996). The analysis of policy: understanding the process of policy development.

Addiction. Sep;91(9):1265-70.



Rye BJ, Humpartzoomian R, Steep B. (2001). Feedback from participants and leaders in an



250

251

intervention program: the 1997-1998 opening doors process evaluation. J Drug Educ.

31(2):185-206.



Sadoway DT, Plain RH, Soskoline L (1990. Infant and preschool immunization delivery in

Alberta and Ontario. A particle cost-minimization analysis. Can J of Public Health. 81 (2):

146-51.



Salovey P, Sluyter D. eds. (1997). Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence:

Educational Implications. New York, NY: Basic Books.



Santi SM, Best JA, Payne ME, Brown KS, Cameron R. (1992). A comparison between

instructional experience and performance of teachers and nurses delivering a smoking

prevention program. Can J Public Health. Nov-Dec;83(6):433-6.



Saskatchewan Education. (1996). Curriculum evaluation report: Health education, 7, 8, & 9.

Regina, SK: Department of Education.



Satcher D, Tudor Bradford M. (2003). Healthy schools, healthy kids. American School Board

Journal, 190(3), 22-25.



Schall E, (1994). School-based health education: what works? American Journal of Preventive

Medicine, May-Jun;10(3 Suppl):30-2.



Scheier LM, Griffin KW, Doyle MM, Botvin GJ. (2002). Estimates of intragroup dependence

for drug use and skill measures in school-based drug abuse prevention trials: an empirical study

of three independent samples. Health Educ Behav. Feb;29(1):85-103.



Scheier, L.; Botvin, G.; Diaz, T.; and Griffin, K. Social skills, competence, and drug refusal

efficacy as predictors of adolescent alcohol use. Journal of Drug Education 29(3):251–278,

1999.



Schmid TL, Pratt M, Howze E. (1995). Policy as intervention: Environmental and policy

approaches to the prevention of cardiovascular disease. American Journal of Public Health,

85:1207-1211.



School Mental Health Project. (2001). Comprehensive & Multifaceted Guidelines for Mental

Health in Schools, Addressing Barriers to Learning. Vol 6, No 4,



Scileppi, J.A. (1984). A systems view of education: A model for change. Lanham, MD:

University Press of America.



Scott DM, Friedli D. (2002). Attendance problems and disciplinary procedures in Nebraska

schools. J Drug Educ. 32(2):149-65.



Seabert DM, Pigg RM Jr, Weiler RM, Behar-Horenstein LS, Miller MD, Varnes JW. (2002).

The influence of preservice instruction in health education methods on the health content taught

by elementary teachers in Indiana. J Sch Health. Dec;72(10):422-8.



Shamai S, Coambs RB. (1992). The relative autonomy of schools and educational interventions

for substance abuse prevention, sex education, and gender stereotyping. Adolescence.

27(108):757-770.



Shannon & McCall Consulting Ltd. (1993). Canada‘s school systems: An overview of

251

252

their potential role in promoting reproductive health and understanding of new reproductive

technologies. New Reproductive Technologies and the Science, Industry, Education and

Social Welfare Systems in Canada, Volume 5, Research Studies. Ottawa, ON: Royal

Commission on New Reproductive Technologies.



Shannon & McCall Consulting Ltd (1996) Youth-led Health Promotion A Framework for

Investigating Effectiveness and Creating an Inventory of Tobacco and Other Programs,

Tobacco reduction Program, Health Canada



Shannon & McCall Consulting Ltd. (1998), Selected Case Studies of Youth Involvement in

Public Decision-Making, Childhood & Youth Division, Ottawa, Health Canada



Shannon & McCall Consulting Ltd. (2000). The Feasibility of Collaboration in Collecting and

Sharing Data on Youth Social Behaviours, Environments and Relevant School & Community

Programs. A Discussion Paper Prepared for a Meeting of Experts, Officials and Practitioners

October 15-16, Hull, Quebec. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, Justice Canada,

Canadian Association of Principals.



Shannon & McCall Consulting Ltd. (2001). Schools as Safe Places to Learn: Current Practices

in Monitoring the Safety of Schools. A Report to the Canadian Education Statistics Council.

Toronto, ON: Council of Ministers of Education, Canada.



Shannon & McCall Consulting Ltd (2001) The Feasibility of Collaboration in Collecting and

Sharing Data on Youth Social Behaviours, Environments and Relevant School & Community

Programs A Discussion Paper Prepared for a Meeting of Experts, Officials and Practitioners October

15-16, Hull, Quebec. Canadian Association of Principals, Council of Ministers of Education, Canada,

Justice Canada



Shannon DM, James FR. (1992). Academic intervention for at risk students with substance

misusing backgrounds. J Alcohol Drug Educ. 38(1):73-85. (ADAI jl).



Shannon M, McCall DS. (1991). Active & Healthy Living. A Dialogue on Teacher Training.

Ottawa, Health Canada. Fitness Unit.



Shannon MM, McCall DS. (2001). Schools as Safe Places to Learn: Current Practices in

Monitoring the Safety of Schools. A Report to the Canadian Education Statistics Council.

Toronto, ON: Council of Ministers of Education, Canada.



Shannon MM, McCall DS, (2002). The Feasibility of Collaboration in Collecting and Sharing

Data on Youth Social Behaviours, Environments and Relevant School and Community

Programs. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Association of Principals.



Shope JT, Copeland LA, Kamp ME, Lang SW. (1998). Twelfth grade follow-up of the

effectiveness of a middle school-based substance abuse prevention program. J Drug Educ.

28(3):185-97. (ADAI jl).



Shope JT, Elliott MR, Raghunathan TE, Waller PF. (2001). Long-term follow-up of a high

school alcohol misuse prevention program's effect on students' subsequent driving. Alcohol

Clin Exp Res. Mar;25(3):403-10. (ADAI jl).



Silver Gate Group. (2001). Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Prevention 2000: Moving

effective prevention programs into practice. Princeton, NJ : Robert Wood Johnson Foundation,

September 2001. 30 p. (ADAI bk) HV 5825 S32 2001.

252

253



Simons-Morton BG, Crump AD, Haynie DL, Saylor KE. (1999). Student-school bonding and

adolescent problem behavior. Health Education Research, 14(1):99-107.



Simons-Norton BG, Donahew L, Crump AD. (1997). Health communication in the prevention

of alcohol, tobacco and drug use. Health Education and Behaviors, 24(5):544-54.



Simons-Rudolph AP, Ennett ST, Ringwalt CL, Rohrbach LA, Vincus AA, Johnson RE. (2003).

The principles of effectiveness: early awareness and plans for implementation in a national

sample of public schools and their districts. J Sch Health. May;73(5):181-5.



Simpson DD. (2002). A conceptual framework for transferring research to practice. J Subst

Abuse Treat. Jun;22(4):171-82.



Skara S, Sussman S. (2003). A review of 25 long-term adolescent tobacco and other drug use

prevention program evaluations. Prev Med. Nov;37(5):451-74.



Sleeter C, Grant C. (1991). Mapping terrains of power: Student cultural knowledge versus

classroom knowledge. In C. Sleeter (Ed.). Empowerment Through Multicultural Education.

(pp.49-67). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.



Smart RG, Stoduto G. (1997). Interventions by students in friends' alcohol, tobacco, and drug

use. J Drug Educ. 27(3):213-22.



Smith WJ, Butler-Kisber L, LaRocque LJ, Portelli JP, Shields CM, Sparkes CS, Vibert AB.

(2001). Student Engagement in Learning and School Life: National Project Report Ed-

LexPublications.

http://ed-lex.law.mcgill.ca/Pub-SE.htm#_Toc324170



Smith WJ, Butler-Kisber L, LaRocque LJ, Portelli J, Shields CM, Sturge Sparkes C, Vibert A.

(1998). Student engagement in learning and school life: National project report. Montréal:

McGill University, Office of Research on Educational Policy.



Smith WJ, Donahue H, Vibert A. (Eds.). (1998a). Student engagement in learning and school

life: Case reports from project schools (Vol. I). Montréal: McGill University, Office of

Research on Educational Policy.



Smith WJ, Donahue H, Vibert A. (Eds.). (1998b). Student engagement in learning and school

life: Case reports from project schools (Vol. II). Montréal: McGill University, Office of

Research on Educational Policy.



Snow DL, Tebes JK, Ayers TS. (1997). Impact of two social-cognitive interventions to prevent

adolescent substance use: test of an amenability to treatment model. J Drug Educ. 27(1):1-17.



Soldana C, Markell G, (1997). Parent involvement in health concerns for youth: the issue of

adolescent immunization. Journal of School Health, Sep;67(7):292-3.



Spoth RL, Redmond C, Trudeau L, Shin C. (2001). Longitudinal substance initiation outcomes

for a universal preventive intervention combining family and school programs. Psychol Addict

Behav. Jun;16(2):129-34. (ADAI jl).



Spoth, R.; Guyull, M.; and Day, S. Universal family-focused interventions in alcohol-use

disorder prevention: Cost effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses of two interventions.

253

254

Journal of Studies on Alcohol 63:219–228, 2002a.



St Leger L, Nutbeam D. (2000). A model for mapping linkages between health and education

agencies to improve school health. J. Sch Health, Feb. 2000, Vol 70, No 2: 45-49.



St. Leger, L, Nutbeam, D. (1996). Settings 2 - Effective School Health Promotion. Towards

Health Promoting Schools. National Health and Medical research Council, NHMRC Health

Advancement Standing Committee. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.



St.Leger LH. (1999). The opportunities and effectiveness of the health promoting primary

school in improving child health – a review of the claims and evidence. Health Education

Research, 14, 15-69.



Staff M, March L, Brnabic A, Hort K, Alcock J, Coles S, Baxter R. (1998). Can non-

prosecutory enforcement of public health legislation reduce smoking among high school

students? Aust N Z J Public Health. 22(3 Suppl):332-5.



Stanhope M, Lancaster J. (1996). Community health nursing promoting health of aggregates,

families and individuals. (4 ed.) Toronto, ON: Mosby.



Stark C, Gibson H, Travers K, Gardner B. (2000). Drug action team strategies in Scotland.

Health Bull (Edinb). 2000 Jan;58(1):53-7.



Stephens, Thomas, Murray J. Kaiserman, Douglas S. McCall, Carol Sutherland-Brown. (1996).

The Costs and Potential Economic Benefits of School-based Smoking Prevention in CANADA.

Working Paper. Ontario Tobacco Reduction Unit.



Stephens T, Kaiserman MJ, McCall DS, Sutherland-Brown C. (2001). School-based Smoking

Prevention: Economic Costs Versus Benefits , Canadian Journal of Public Health. 92: 89.



Stewart M, Michelin LR, Dunkeley, G. (2003). School Health Benchmarking: General Report,

Public Health Research, Education, Development-Ottawa, Ottawa, ON.



Stokes H, Mukerjee D. (2000). The nature of health service/school links in Australia. Journal of

School Health. 70(6), 255-56.



Stokols D. Establishing and maintaining healthy environments. Toward a social ecology of

health promotion. Am Psychol 1992 Jan;47(1):6-22.



Stokols, D. Translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community health

promotion. Am J Health Promotion 1996; 10: 282-98.



Strong R, Silver H,.Robinson A. (1995). What do students want? Educational Leadership, 53,

8-12.



Sturges & Rogers. (1996). Cited in Paglia A. (1998). Tobacco Risk Communication Strategy

for Youth: A Literature Review. Ottawa, ON: Tobacco Reducation Division, Health Canada.



Summers LC, Williams J, Borges W, Ortiz M, Schaefer S, Liehr P. (2003). School-based health

center viability: application of the COPC model. Issues Compr Pediatr Nurs. Oct-

Dec;26(4):231-51.



Sussman S, Simon TR, Dent CW, Stacy AW, Galaif ER, Moss MA, Craig S, Johnson CA.

254

255

(1997). Immediate impact of thirty-two drug use prevention activities among students at

continuation high schools. Subst Use Misuse. Feb;32(3):265-81. (ADAI jl).



Sussman S, Dent CW, Stacy AW. (2002) Project towards no drug abuse: a review of the

findings and future directions. Am J Health Behav. Sep-Oct;26(5):354-65.



Sussman S, Galaif ER, Newman T, Hennesy M, Pentz MA, Dent CW, Stacy AW, Moss MA,

Craig S, Simon TR. (1997). Implementation and process evaluation of a student "school-as-

community" group. A component of a school-based drug abuse prevention program. Eval Rev.

Feb;21(1):94-123.



Sussman S, Simon TR, Dent CW, Stacy AW, Galaif ER, Moss MA, Craig S, Johnson CA.

(1997). Immediate impact of thirty-two drug use prevention activities among students at

continuation high schools. Subst Use Misuse. Feb;32(3):265-81.



Sussman S, Sun P, McCuller WJ, Dent CW. (2003). Project Towards No Drug Abuse: two-year

outcomes of a trial that compares health educator delivery to self-instruction Prev Med.

Aug;37(2):155-62.



Swider SM, Valukas A. (2004). Options for sustaining school-based health centers. J Sch

Health. Apr;74(4):115-8.



The Alberta Tobacco Reduction Strategy. (2003) Supporting Tobacco-free Schools Creating

Policy for Tobacco-free Schools Edmonton, AB: Alberta Alcohol & Drug Abuse Commission,

Edmonton, AB.



Thomas H, Siracusa L, Ross G, Beath L, Hanna L, Michaud M, Moore P, Partington B,

Voorberg G (1999) Effectiveness of school-based Interventions in reducing adolescent risk

behaviour: A systematic review of reviews. Hamilton, ON, Effective Public Health Practice

Program.



Thombs DL, Wollertt BJ, Farkash LG. (1997). Social context, perceived norms and drinking

behavior in young people. Journal on Substance Abuse, 9:257-67.



Thompson EA, Horn M, Herting JR, Eggert LL. (1997). Enhancing outcomes in an indicated

drug prevention program for high-risk youth. J Drug Educ. 27(1):19-41.



Tobler NS (1986), "Meta-Analysis of 143 Adolescent Drug Prevention Programs: Quantative

Outcome Results of Program Participants Compared To A Control Group or Comparison

Group", Journal of Drug Issues, 16(4), 537-567.



Tobler NS, Lessard T, Marshall D, Ochshorn P, Roona M. (1999). Effectiveness of school-

based drug prevention programs for marijuana use. School Psychol Int 20(1):105-137. (ADAI

rp 08666).



Tobler NS. (1997). Meta-analysis of adolescent drug prevention programs: results of the 1993

meta-analysis. NIDA Res Monogr. 170:5-68.



Tobler NS, Stratton HH (1997) Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs. A

meta-analysis of the research. Journal of Primary Prevention. 18(1): 71-129



Topping K. (2000). Tutoring. Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau



255

256

of Education and the International Academy of Education. [Educational practices series,

booklet no. 5, see: www.ibe.unesco.org].



Topping KJ, Bremner WG. (1998). Promoting Social Competence: Practice and Resources

Guide. Edinburgh, UK: Scottish Office Education and Industry Department.



Tricker R, Davis LG. (1988). Implementing drug education in schools: an analysis of the costs

and teacher perceptions. J Sch Health. May;58(5):181-5.



Tubman JG, Soza Vento R. (2001). Principal and teacher reports of strategies to enforce anti-

tobacco policies in Florida middle and high schools. J Sch Health. Aug;71(6):229-35.



Turner GE, Burciaga C, Sussman S, Klein-Selski E, Craig S, Dent CW, Mason HR, Burton D,

Flay B. (1993). Which lesson components mediate refusal assertion skill improvement in

school-based adolescent tobacco use prevention? Int J Addict. Jun;28(8):749-66. (ADAI jl).



Underwoord J. (2003). The Value of Nurses in the Community. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Nurses

Association.



United States Department of Health and Human Services. (nd). Media Literacy Skills as a

Substance Abuse Prevention Strategy. Washington, DC: Author.

http://www.health.org/medltnew/wklyrd/index.htm.



Urberg KA, Degirmencioglo SM, Pilgrim C. (1997). Close friend and group infleunce on

adolescent cigarette smoking and alcohol use. Developmental Psychology, 33(5):834-44.



Utne O‘Brien M, Weissberg RP, Shriver TP. (2003). Educational leadership for academic,

social, and emotional learning. In: Elias MJ, Arnold H, Hussey C, eds. EQ + IQ = Best

Leadership Practices for Caring and Successful Schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.



Valois RF, Hoyle TB. (2000). Formative evaluation results from the Mariner Project: a

coordinated school health pilot program. J Sch Health. Mar;70(3):95-103.



Van Nelson C et al. (1991). The Effect of Participation in Activities Outside the School and

Family Structure on Substance Use by Middle and Secondary School Students. Paper presented

to the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL. October

17.



Vertinsky PA, Mangham C. (1996). Making It Fit: Matching Substance Abuse Prevention

Strategies. Vancouver, BC: British Columbia School Trustees Association.



Wallerstein N, Sanchez-Merki V. (1994). Freiran praxis in health education: Research results

from an adolescent prevention program. Health Education Research, 9(1):105-18.



Wallerstein N. (1992). Powerlessness empowerment and health: Implications for health

promotion programs. American Journal of Health Promotion, 6(3):197-205.



Wang LY, Crossett LS, Lowry R, Sussman S, Dent CW. (2001). Cost-effectiveness of a

school-based tobacco-use prevention program. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. Sep;155(9):1043-

50.



Wang LY, Davis M, Robin L, Collins J, Coyle K, Baumler E. (2000). Economic evaluation of

Safer Choices: A school-based human immunodeficiency virus, other sexually

256

257

transmitted diseases, and pregnancy prevention program. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.

Oct;154(10):1017-24.



Wang LY, Yang Q, Lowry R, Wechsler H. (2003), Economic analysis of a school-based

obesity prevention program. Obes Res. Nov;11(11):1275-7.



Wang MC, Haertel GD, Walberg HJ. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning.

Review of Educational Research, 63, 249-294.



Warren CW, Kann L, Small ML, Santelli JS, Collins JL, Kolbe LJ. (1997). Age of initiating

selected health risk behaviors among high school students in the United States. Journal of

Adolescent Health, 21(4):225-31.



Wartella E, Middlestadt S. (1991). The evolution of direct effects limited effects, information

processing, and affect and arousal models. In L. Donahew, HE Sypher & WJ Bukoski, eds.,

Persuasive Communication and Drug Abuse Prevention. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage.



Webster-Stratton C, Taylor T. (2001). Nipping early risk factors in the bud: preventing

substance abuse, delinquency, and violence in adolescence through interventions targeted at

young children (0-8 years). Prev Sci. Sep;2(3):165-92.



Webster-Stratton, C. Preventing conduct problems in Head Start children: Strengthening

parenting competencies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 66:715–730, 1998.



Webster-Stratton, C.; Reid, J.; and Hammond, M. Preventing conduct problems, promoting

social competence: A parent and teacher training partnership in Head Start. Journal of Clinical

Child Psychology 30:282–302, 2001.



Weeks K, Levy SR, Gordon AK, Handler A, Perhats C, Flay BR. (1997). Does parental

involvement make a difference? The impact of parent interactive activities on students in a

school-based AIDS prevention program. AIDS Educ Prev. Feb;9(1 Suppl):90-106.



Wehrmann KC, Shin H, Poertner MS. (2002). Transfer of training: an evaluation study. J

Health Soc Policy. 15(3-4):23-37.



Weijck KJE. 1982. Administering education in loosely-coupled schools. Phi Delta Kappan,

63:673-76.



Weiler RM. (1997). Adolescent perceptions of health concerns. An exploratory study among

rural midwestern youth. Health Education and Behavior, 24(3):287-99.



Weinsten NB, Rothman AJ, Sutton SR. (1998). Stage theories of health behavior. Conceptual

and methodological issues. Health Psychology. 17(3):290-9.



Weissberg RP. et al. eds. (1997). Healthy Children 2010: Establishing Preventive Services:

Issues in Children‘s and Families‘ Lives, Vol. 9. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.



Weissberg RP, Kumpfer KL, Seligman ME. (2003). Prevention that works for children and

youth. An introduction. Am Psychol. Jun-Jul;58(6-7):425-32.



Weist MD, Lowie JA, Flaherty LT, Pruitt D. (2001). Collaboration among the education,

mental health, and public health systems to promote youth mental health. Psychiatr Serv.

Oct;52(10):1348-51.

257

258



Weist MD, Nabors LA, Myers CP, Armbruster P. (2000). Evaluation of expanded school

mental health programs. Community Ment Health J. Aug;36(4):395-411.



Weist MD. (2001). Toward a public mental health promotion and intervention system for

youth. J Sch Health. Mar;71(3):101-4.



Wenter DL, Ennett ST, Ribisl KM, Vincus AA, Rohrbach L, Ringwalt CL, Jones SM. (2002).

Comprehensiveness of substance use prevention programs in U.S. middle schools. J Adolesc

Health. Jun;30(6):455-62.



Werch CE, Carlson JM, Pappas DM, DiClemente CC. (1996). Brief nurse consultations for

preventing alcohol use among urban school youth. J School Health. 66(9):335-338. (ADAI rp

07346).



Werch CE, Anzalone D. (1995). Stage theory and research on tobacco, alcohol and other drug

use. Journal of Drug Education, 25(2):81-98.



Werch CE, Diclemente CC. (1994). A multi-component stage model for making drug

prevention strategies and messages to youth stage of use. Health Education Research, 9(1):37-

46.



Werch CE, Meers BW, Farrell J. (1993). Stages of drug use acquisition among college

students. Implications for the prevention of drug abuse. Journal of Drug Education, 23(4):375-

86.



Werch CE, Owen DM, Carlson JM, DiClemente CC, Edgemon P, Moore M. (2003). One-year

follow-up results of the STARS for Families alcohol prevention program. Health Educ Res.

Feb;18(1):74-87.



Werch CE, Young M, Clark M, Garrett C, Hooks S, Kersten C. (1991). Effects of a take-home

drug prevention program on drug-related communication and beliefs of parents and children. J

Sch Health. Oct;61(8):346-50.



Whelage GG, Rutter RA et al. (1989), Reducing the Risk: Schools As Communities of Support,

The Falmer Press, Philadelphia, PA.



White K.R. et al (1992) "Does Research Support Claims About the Benefits of Involving

Parents in Early Intervention Programs", Review of Educational Research, 62(1).



White MD, Fyfe JJ, Campbell SP, Goldkamp JS. (2001). The school-police partnership.

Identifying at-risk youth through a truant recovery program. Eval Rev. Oct;25(5):507-32.



Whitehead PC, Gliksman L. (1984). Parent Education: A Review and Analysis of Drug Abuse

and General Programs. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada.



Whitman CV, Aldinger C, Levinger B, Birdthistle I. (2000). Thematic Study on School Health

and Nutrition. Education Development Center, Collaborating Center, WHO.



WHO Expert Committee on Comprehensive School Health Education and Promotion. (1997).

Promoting Health Through Schools, Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.



Wilks J, Callan VJ, Austin DA. (1989). Parent, peer and personal determinants of

258

259

adolescent drinking. British Journal of Addiction, 84(6):619-30.



Wilks J. (1992). Adolescent views on risky and illegal alcohol use. Drug and Alcohol

Review.11:137-143.



Williams CL, Perry CL, Farbakhsh K, Veblen-Mortenson S. (1999). Project Northland:

comprehensive alcohol use prevention for young adolescents, their parents, schools, peers and

communities. J Stud Alcohol Suppl. Mar;13:112-24. (ADAI jl).



Wills, T.; McNamara, G.; Vaccaro, D.; and Hirky, A. Escalated substance use: A longitudinal

grouping analysis from early to middle adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Psychology

105:166–180, 1996.





Willis E. (2000). School-based/school-linked health centers expanding points of access. WMJ.

2000 Jan-Feb;99(1):44-7.



Wilson E & McCall D, (1996). Comprehensive School Health. Canadian Perspectives,

Canadian Association for School Health, Heart & Stroke Foundation of Canada.



Winkleby MA, Feighery EC, Altman DA, Kole S, Tencati E. (2001). Engaging ethnically

diverse teens in a substance use prevention advocacy program. Am J Health Promot. Jul-

Aug;15(6):433-6, ii.



Witte K. (1995). Fishing for success. Using the persuasive health message framework to

generate effective campaign messages. In E. Mailbach & RL Parrott, eds., Designing Health

Messages: Approaches from Communications Theory and Public Health Practice. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.



Wood RJ, Drolet JC, Fetro JV, Synovitz LB, Wood AR. (2002). Residential adolescent

substance abuse treatment: recommendations for collaboration between school health and

substance abuse treatment personnel. J Sch Health. Nov;72(9):363-7.



Woodward G, Manuel D, Goel V. (2004) Developing a balanced scorecard for public health.

Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), Toronto, Ontario, 2004.



World Health Organization. (1997). Expert Committee on Comprehensive School Health

Education and Promotion. Promoting Health Through Schools, Geneva, Switzerland: World

Health Organization.



World Health Organization. (2003). Rapid Assessment and Action Planning Process (RAAPP)

A Method and Tools to Enable Ministries of Education and Health to Assess and Strengthen

Their Capacity to Promote Health through Schools Department of Non-communicable Disease

Prevention and Health Promotion Division of Global School Health Initiative.



World Health Organization . 1991. Comprehensive School Health Education. Suggested

Guidelines for Action. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.



World Health Organization. (1998). Health Promotion Glossary, Geneva, Switzerland.



World Health Organization. (1997). Improving the performance of health clinics in district

health centres: Report of a WHO Study Group. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health

Organization.

259

260



World Health Organization. (nd). What is a health promoting school?

http://www.who.int/school_youth_health/gshi/hps/en/ Accessed on March 5, 2004



Wyn J, Cahill H, Holdsworth R, Rowling L, Carson S. (2000). MindMatters, a whole-school

approach promoting mental health and wellbeing. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. Aug;34(4):594-601.



Wyrick D, Wyrick CH, Bibeau DL, Fearnow-Kenney M. (2001). Coverage of adolescent

substance use prevention in state frameworks for health education. J Sch Health.

Nov;71(9):437-42.



Yaffe MJ. Developing and supporting school health programs. Role for family physicians.

Canadian Family Physician, Apr;44:821-4, 827-9.



Yamaguchi K, Kandel DB. (1984). Patterns of drug use from adolescence to young adulthood

(II and III). Sequences of progression. American Journal of Public Health, 74:668-681.



Yamaguchi R, Johnston LD, O'Malley PM. (2003). Relationship between student illicit drug

use and school drug-testing policies. J Sch Health. Apr;73(4):159-64.



Young M, Rausch S. (1991). Be a winner: Arkansas' approach to involving law enforcement

officers in drug education. J Drug Educ. 21(2):183-9.



Young TL, Ireson C. (2003) Effectiveness of school-based telehealth care in urban and rural

elementary schools. Pediatrics. 2003 Nov;112(5):1088-94.



Younoszai TM, Lohrmann DK, Seefeldt CA, Greene R. (1999). Trends from 1987 to 1991 in

alcohol, tobacco, and other drug (ATOD) use among adolescents exposed to a school district-

wide prevention intervention. J Drug Educ. 29(1):77-94.



Zapert K, Snow DL, Tebes JK. (2002). Patterns of substance use in early through late

adolescence. Am J Community Psychol. Dec;30(6):835-52.



Zavela KJ. (2002). Developing effective school-based drug abuse prevention programs. Am J

Health Behav. Jul-Aug;26(4):252-65.



Zins JE. et al. eds. (2003). Building School Success on Social and Emotional Learning. New

York, NY: Teachers College Press.



Zollinger TW, Saywell RM Jr, Muegge CM, Wooldridge JS, Cummings SF, Caine VA. (2003).

Impact of the life skills training curriculum on middle school students tobacco use in Marion

County, Indiana, 1997-2000. J Sch Health. Nov;73(9):338-46.









260

261

F. Appendix One – Theories & Questions Underlying this Review of Research



This assessment study is based on the application of evidence-based theory and conceptual frameworks

on population health, comprehensive school health promotion, ecological and systems theory and

organizational capacity. This brief summary describes the elements or principles inherent in such

approaches. These frameworks will guide the development of questions for the focus groups, surveys,

literature reviews, interviews and related work in this assessment.



Population Health Principles



The principles of a population health approach (Chomik, 2001) deemed to be relevant in this assessment

are:

1) Focus on determinants and interactions among them to identify more vulnerable populations.



Determinants such as economic status, educational attainment, gender, culture and genetic

make-up will not be directly modified but can be alleviated through public health and school

health programs. (Other interventions such as tax policy, legislation etc can be used to

modify these determinants but these are outside the scope of school-based or school-linked

health promotion.)



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does the evidence suggest that there are sub-populations within the youth

population that are more vulnerable to problem substance use?

 Does the research indicate which of the determinants of health most affect the

substance use patterns habits of children and youth? How do they have those

effects? Are there any combinations of determinants that are demonstrably more

influential, either positively or negatively?



2) Balanced different perspectives when selecting a focus among populations, health issues and

settings.



For the most part, public health programs are driven by urgent health issues and the needs of

at-risk populations while school programs tend to be aimed at equal opportunity for all

school-aged children. Although the school setting is of shared interest to the two sectors and

the educators ―effective school‖ is close to that of the health professionals ―healthy schools‖,

these divergent perspectives between the two systems about the choice to focus on a sub-

population (vs all children), an issue (vs all development challenges faced by children) or a

setting (vs all settings in the community( may be seen as a barrier to sustained cooperation

between the two systems. (See St‘ Leger & Nutbeam (2000) for further discussion of

differing perspectives between the two systems.)



This principle leads to questions such as:





 Does the evidence suggest that interventions aimed at the population of school-aged

children and youth will result in changes to substance use patterns that lead long-term

health outcomes? Does the effect last long enough to create a life-long effect?



3) Understand the impact of social and physical environments/settings.



There is growing interest, reflected in Canadian policy development (Advisory

Committee on Population Health and Health Security, 2003), and research funding in

the impact of selected contexts or environments in which people live, learn, work and

play. Obviously, schools are one of these environments. This project portrays the school

environment as a series of micro-environments (classrooms, hallways, cafeterias,

playgrounds, sports teams, etc.) that can offer a discontinuous experience for children,

or even for the same child in the same day. This project also sees these micro-

261

262

environments as interacting with other environments such as the home, recreation and

after school programs, local neighbourhoods, restaurants and stores.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does the evidence suggest that the setting of the school is an effective place to

deliver education, preventive health services, social support and a protective,

healthy environment that prevent addictions?

 Does the research describe which of the sub-populations or which of the specific

addictions/substance messages that can be reached or conveyed through school-

based or school-linked programs? How many children/youth of school age are truly

not present in school during the day? Which messages are more credible coming

from teachers, counsellors, peer helpers, coaches, parent volunteers, principals etc.

Which are more credible if they come from parents? From public health nurses? Etc

 Does the research indicate that certain characteristics of the school environment (eg.

practices, staff, programs and services) interact with the characteristics of the

families (eg. Substance use habits, parenting practices, socio-economic status, race,

religion etc), communities (resources, norms, services/programs)or children

(genetics, intelligence, skills etc) in ways that promote or discourage substance use?

 Does the research indicate to what extent those determinants can be influenced by

the school environment, as well as school, municipal, police and public health

policies, programs, services and practices in a sustainable way?



4) Select your population or sub-population carefully.



For program effectiveness and clarity of policy outcomes, health promotion programs should

clearly identify the target populations.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does the evidence suggest that there are sub-populations within the children/youth

population that would benefit more from school-based or school-linked policies,

programs and services?



5) Integrate your approach with other health issues.



The integration of health-promoting messages across various health issues (eg nutrition and

physical activity, addictions and mental health) needs to be carefully considered. Recently in

Canada and in other countries, we have seen a convergence and linking of substance abuse

with life skills and more recently, mental health.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does combining the prevention of substance abuse/addictions with other health issues

such as social skills, life skills, mental health, tobacco or within a risk/social behaviour

framework lead to enhanced intervention outcomes on addictions or overall health?



6) Select/frame your focus on the health issue – promotion or prevention, holistic or problem-

specific.



Public health programs and strategies need to select a focus that captures the attention of the

target audience and decision-makers, but that focus also needs to be durable and stable over

the long term. For example, the current public concern over marijuana laws can be useful in

promoting a drug prevention in agenda, but if it is perceived to be too narrow in focus, it will

be resisted by educators. As well, attention/funding may be drawn away once public concern

about the issue fades. By not acting with a holistic view of addictions, life skills and mental

health as well as not addressing other problems (tobacco, gambling, misuse of medications.)

and linking those multiple sub- issues to programs in health education overasll, we

262

263

may lose more than we gain.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Are there different impacts for programs based on different approaches (eg delay of

experimentation, abstinence, moderation or harm reduction) for all school-aged

children/youth or sub-populations within the children/youth population?

 Does an approach based on life skills/social skills/social influences work more

effectively?

 Does an approach based on specific resistance skills have an impact?

 Should programs focus on so-called ―gateway drugs‖ such as tobacco or marijuana?

 Should a program focus on addictive behavours? alcohol? all drugs? Illicit drugs?

Emerging drugs?



7) Coordinate multiple interventions across systems at all levels.



The premise of this population health principle is that there is a need for mandates, time and

other resources to coordinate school, public health, recreation and other systems. Such

coordination is possible, especially when using the school as a hub, but it is often difficult,

especially if such coordination is overly dependent on a crisis or the individual efforts of a

single agency or charismatic person.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does the research indicate that a conscious, explicit and sustained effort to use a

wide range of multiple evidence-based interventions (using the school as a hub) to

influence the conditions and behaviours will lead to better health, social and

educational outcomes?

 Does the research indicate that active and sustained coordination of these multiple

interventions will be cost-effective and economically beneficial?

 Does the research tell us the most effective ways to coordinate across sectors and

systems?



8) Reorient systems towards prevention



For the health system, this re-orientation means a shift of resources from treatment and

emergency responses to prevention and promotion. Within public health, the shift is away

from the medical model of focusing on individual behaviours towards interventions that

affect environments, settings, policies, programs and services. This means more public health

activity in advocacy, coordination, delivery and access to preventive services, empowerment

of youth, parents and others and inspection of physical environments.



For school systems, this means a shift away from a narrow interpretation of the academic

function of schools in order to recognize that health education is a legitimate academic

discipline that leads to satisfying careers.



As well, a re-orientation of the school systems means a broadening of the socialization and

custody functions of schooling. Any such broadening of these two functions will require a

greater contribution from other sectors such as public health and social services or increased

funding to the school systems.



For both systems, this re-orientation means a greater attention should be paid to the psycho-

social environment of the school, as it is this environment that is often linked to health

outcomes, school retention/achievement and social behaviours.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does the research indicate that a conscious, explicit and

263

264

sustained effort to shift health programming resources ―upstream‖ (i.e. re-

orientation of health services and health professionals to be more preventive) and to

have public health, schools and others to focus more on the psychosocial

environment of the school and several systems to seek improvements in the

physical environment of the school) will prevent specific conditions or behaviours

that most strongly affect the health and substance use of children and youth?

 Does re-orienting schools to focus on the psychosocial climate (including school

improvement and effective schooling) have an impact on health and social

behaviours as well as learning?



9) Involve/empower individuals, groups and communities.



For schools and public health, the principle means paying greater attention to parent

involvement, education and support programs/resource centres, youth engagement in

decision-making, peer, leadership, community service and extracurricular programs,

involving volunteers and staff in decisions and better coordination between schools and

community agencies.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does the research indicate that the involvement of parents, youth and the local

community in school-based and school-linked policies, programs, services and practices

will lead to better health, social and educational outcomes? Does the research describe

how youth, parents and community can be empowered and involved?



 Does the research indicate that youth, parent, staff and volunteer involvement in

decision-making have a positive impact on health and learning outcomes?



10) Focus on public policy and advocacy.



This principle suggests that public policy related to school health promotion is required from

health and education ministries, from school boards, from regional health authorities and

from other agencies, from local schools and from professional certification and related

authorities. Those policies should address specific issues as well as require and encourage

coordination and cooperation at all levels in several systems. Effective public policy-making

includes implementation and evaluation as well as a written statement of goals, programs,

procedures and practices.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does the research indicate that legislation/regulation interventions can be used

effectively generally in society as well as with schools/children to be effective in

influencing g behaviour or conditions that determine substance use? Does the

research also describe how proponents can successfully advocate for such policies?

 Does the research indicate the ―school policies‖ (ie policies adopted by education

ministries, school boards, or schools, health ministries, regional health authorities

or local health authorities) are actually implemented, evaluated and enforced?

 Are there studies that describe whether appropriate policy-making (that includes

managerial support, consensus development for implementation, adequate

resources, implementation timelines, reporting requirements) are being employed?



11) Build resilience and healthy behaviours in individuals.



Health education (formal and informal) is the primary means for individuals to acquire

functional knowledge about nutrition, substance abuse and overall health, develop coping

and general skills, learn new attitudes/beliefs and self-knowledge, improve their access to

social support, acquire greater awareness and use of health, nutrition and addiction services

and gain experience in developing personal nutrition/health action plans. Awareness,

264

265

information and knowledge may not be sufficient to change behaviours, but these attributes

may well be pre-requisites to behaviour change within individuals.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Has the research described programs that are based on stages of change and behavioural

theories?



 Has the research described the key individual resilience characteristics and coping skills

needed? Functional knowledge needed? Attitudes and Beliefs Needed? Self-knowledge

Needed? General Skills and Specific Skills Needed? Awareness and Use of Health

Services Needed? Awareness and Skills needed to Access to Social Support from

friends, parents, others?



12) Develop and use surveillance, monitoring and regular health assessments.



The surveillance of substance use status and behaviours of school-age children and youth,

and an ongoing monitoring of policies and programs is an essential part of a population

health approach. Regular assessments of the national, provincial/territorial and local

situations are a necessity to effective health promotion.



This principle leads to questions such as:



 Does the research tell us how relevant determinants can be described and monitored

through a system of reliable Indicators related to the school environment that can be

used to measure health, social and educational outcomes as well as the context,

inputs, processes and outputs of school and public health systems? Are there such

Indicator systems currently being used or contemplated?

 Does the research tell us to what extent are current policies, programs, services and

practices in the two systems based on research evidence? Can we identify and

describe ministries or agencies that have consciously made decisions about major

school-based or school-linked programs or services based on such evidence?

 Does the research indicate the nature of a minimum number of the most appropriate

measures to surveil and monitor substance use and related behaviours/status, FPT

policy and program status and local agency/community capacity that can be used to

report on system accountability?



This assessment will determine the organization current capacity of education and health ministries to

employ these principles of a population health approach.









265

266

Comprehensive Approach to School Health Promotion



Our knowledge about comprehensive school health promotion (Nutbeam & St. Leger, 1996;

Allensworth et al, 1997; World Health Organization Expert Committee on Comprehensive School

Health, 1997; Effective Public Health Practice Project, 2001; Micucci et al, 2004; Cuijpers et al, 2002 )

suggests that this assessment needs to address the elements of such an approach as described briefly

below:



1) Employs a comprehensive approach that views health in a holistic way, that integrates a wide

range of health and social issues and provides promotion, prevention, protection, assistance

and reintegration policies, programs and services from a variety of agencies.



Consideration of this element leads to questions such as:



 Does the research indicate that school-based and school-linked programs are based

on recognized behavioural and environmental/determinants theories and

approaches?

 Does the research evidence truly suggest that taking a holistic view of the child,

recognizing that substance abuse is usually part of a larger health, social or

developmental problem is more effective?



2) Describes the capacity of the school, both in terms of its potential and its limits, in working

with public health, addictions and nutrition agencies as well as with parents and youth groups

to influence the health status, behaviours and school-related influential factors/conditions.



Consideration of this element leads to questions such as:



 Does the research indicate that school systems, public health and nutrition systems

have established appropriate Indicators of system performance that include

defensible program logic, contextual, input, process and output indicators as well as

appropriate outcomes data that are truly related to the program logic model?

 Are there studies that describe systems that have established evidence-based

surveillance and monitoring systems relative to substance use among children and

youth?



3) Coordinates the interventions within the school and those linked to the school from other

agencies and deliver those interventions in sustainable ways and programs.



Consideration of this element leads to questions such as:



 Does the research indicate if such coordination and cooperation increases the

impact on health, social and learning outcomes?

 Does the research describe how the various interventions can be coordinated in a

sustained manner? Does the research describe effective models of school-

community programs and services that can be used to prevent problem substance

use? Does it describe how these can be developed and sustained in different

contexts?

 Does the research describe ―whole school‖ approaches that are effective in

addressing the health, mental health and addictions related behaviours of

children/youth?

 Does it describe how these can be developed and sustained in different contexts?

 Does the research indicate if certain combinations of such interventions are more

effective, cost effective, cost-beneficial?



4) Implements multiple, effective, cost-effective and sustainable interventions that can be

delivered in the school setting, including:



266

267

a). Policies and practices that regulate or influence health choices.



b) Coordination of interventions in school-based and school-linked programs



c). Curriculum and instruction.



d) Delivery of preventive health, addictions, mental health and police services.



e) Generating social support from parents, adults, peers, local media.



f) Maintenance of a healthy physical environment.



Consideration of these elements leads to questions such as:



 Does the research indicate which of the school-based and school-linked multiple

interventions listed below are effective?



 Cost-effective? Cost-beneficial?



 Does the research describe minimum dosage, duration, intensity, necessary qualities,

training required etc for these interventions?



5. Adapts programs and services to meet special needs and also ensures that the service

delivery is ―youth-friendly‖.



Consideration of this element leads to questions such as:



 Has the research described special programs that were able to influence the

substance use of various groups who may be at higher risk of problem substance

use of addictions? Are there comprehensive models that address specific addiction

issues such as FASD, children of alcoholics, drinking and driving, experimentation

with illicit drugs, abuse of prescription or medications etc?

 Has the research describe d the extent to which adolescents are aware of and make

use of preventive health and treatment services related to substance use? Does the

research indicate how such services can be made more ―youth friendly‖?



6. Establishes realistic outputs for school health programs and describes essential policies,

programs, practices and conditions.



Consideration of this element leads to questions such as:



 Does the research describe the roles of the three or four primary systems responsible for

preventing problem substance use through schools (ie education, public health,

addictions and police agencies)?



 Has the research describe realistic outputs for school-based and school-linked addictions

prevention programs that can be monitored over time? How do these outputs

(appropriate adolescent knowledge, skills, attitudes, changes to school environment,

access to services etc) relate to long-term health outcomes related to substance use?



 Does the research clearly delineate the two (outputs after 12 years of schooling vs life

long health, social and learning outcomes)?









267

268

Ecological Understanding of Physical and Social Environments



The understanding gained from an ecological perspective on environments suggests that we ask

questions about the interactions between the environment and the individual. There is a dynamic

interplay between individual characteristics/capacities and their physical, social and perceived

environments. The same environment will affect different people in different ways. There is an inter-

play between immediate and more distant environments. Settings have multiple dimensions that include

social cohesion and emotional well-being.



Stokols (1996) addressed the challenge of translating social ecological theory into guidelines for

community health programs.



6. Environmental settings have multiple dimensions such as social cohesion, emotional well

being, development maturation, and physical health status.



7. Environmental factors may affect people differently depending on such factors as personality,

health practices, perceptions of the controllability of the environment, and financial resources.



8. Understanding the dynamic interaction between people and their environment requires the

application of such principles from systems theory as interdependence, deviation amplification,

homeostasis, and negative feedback.



9. This principle recognizes the importance of the interconnections between multiple settings and

life domains, and the close interlinkage between the social and physical facets of those settings.



Social ecology analyses emphasize the integration of multiple levels of analysis (for example macro

level preventive strategies of public health and epidemiology with micro level individual strategies from

medicine) with diverse methodologies (epidemiological analyses, environmental recordings, medical

examinations, questionnaires, and behavioral observations).



This assessment will seek to determine the extent to which current organizational capacity and practices of

education and health ministries take such ecological theory into account in their ministry practices, programs

and policies.



Systems Theory and Change



Systems theory (Weijck, 1982, McCall et al, 1999; Pidwirny, nd, Graham (2003) can and should lead us to ask

questions derived from the characteristics of education, public health, police, mental health and addictions

systems. These characteristics are similar for all these systems.



1) These systems are open to influences at a variety of levels, from the provincial level right

down to the classroom teacher or public health nurse.



2) These systems are loosely-coupled, where decision-makers at the top are dependent upon

workers throughout the system operating from a shared set of values, common vision and

consistent ways of interacting with clients and with each other.



3) These systems are professional bureaucracies where knowledge and information is a valued

commodity and control is exercised through standardization of such knowledge and skills.

Expertise is a source of power in such systems and can be used to counteract authority based

on position.



4) Managers tend to spend time on disturbances to the system and on managing the boundaries

between the system and the outside world.



Further, other knowledge developed about education systems and education change (Fullan, 1991, Hord

et al, 1988) and similar knowledge about public health, nutrition and addictions systems need to be used

in the interpretation of our findings.

268

269

Organizational Capacity



The capacity of key organizations within such systems becomes very important. This is particularly true

of those in leadership positions within such systems (such as provincial/territorial ministries of

education and health).



This analysis will focus on seven different organizational capacities suggested by the World Health

Organization (2003) and by several other sources (McCall, 2004). The capacities that need to be present

within education and health ministries are:



1) Explicit policy and managerial support for coordination of school-based and school-linked

programs and services.



2) Adequate staffing/infrastructure at the provincial and local/regional levels to sustain

coordinated policies, programs and practices.



3) Formal and informal mechanisms to support coordination and inter-ministry, interagency and

interdisciplinary cooperation.



4) Adequate time/resources to gather, analyze and disseminate knowledge and promote the use

of best or promising practices.



5) Ongoing and adequate pre-service and inservice activities as well as work place health

programs to develop the capacities of the work forces in education, public health and

nutrition systems.



6) Timely, reliable and usable surveillance of the nutrition health status, behaviours and

determinants relevant to school-age children and youth and ongoing monitoring of the

policies, programs, practices of local agencies and professionals in order that

federal/provincial/territorial policies and programs are both accountable to and grounded in

the realities of local communities



7) Early identification and appropriate management of emerging issues. Health and education

systems need to have clearly identified priority issues. But they also need to identify

emerging issues and address those issues, otherwise they will go outside the established

process and push their way into the open, loosely coupled system in another way.



In our view, it is the use of ecological/systems theory and organizational capacity that brings a unique

quality to this assessment. Based on research related to population health and school health, we know

quite a few things about evidence-based interventions that work if they have adequate time, funding and

human resources. However, by applying systems theory and by measuring organizational capacity, we

learn much more about what is sustainable in the real world of competing priorities and scarce

resources.



Strategic Thinking



We also add a third unique lens for this assessment; strategic thinking and planning. Through these

types of analysis, we can also anticipate some of the opportunities and barriers that will accompany

every effort to prevent harmful substance use through the school setting. By strategic planning, we do

not mean good operational planning. Strategic thinking looks at the why in order to maximize our

profile, funding recruitment or influence.

 Why we do some things (and not others)

 Why we select some partners (and not others)

 Why we time some interventions and events to maximize their effect or chances of

success

 Why we do things in a certain way



Consequently, strategic thinking consistently:

269

270



1. Scans the internal and external environment for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and

threats.



2. Anticipates and manages emerging issues to maximize benefits to the organization.



3. Analyzes potential partnerships for their risks/benefits and potential two-way investments.



4. Worries constantly about cost-effects and cost-benefits.



5. Analyzes the positioning the issues and organizations.



There are several questions derived from the knowledge described above about the ecology of social

and physical environments, open systems, organizational capacity and strategic thinking. Some of those

questions were used to guide our literature review and are listed below.



1. Has the research identified and applied appropriate knowledge and theories about

organizations and systems to the prevention of addictions through schools? Have the

characteristics of ―open systems‖, ―ecological approaches‖, ―loosely coupled systems‖, and

―professional bureaucracies been applied to this issue?



2. Has the concept of ―organizational capacity‖ been applied to the prevention of addictions

through schools (This capacity would include explicit policy/leadership, adequate staff

infrastructure, formal and informal mechanisms for cooperation, ability to gather,

analyze and disseminate knowledge about best practices, health surveillance and program

monitoring, adequate workforce development and adequate strategic issue identification

and management processes.)



3. Have recognized theories about ―educational change and innovation‖, and ―diffusion‖ of

health promoting practices been applied to this issue? Are there studies that provide

descriptions of local agency roles and responsibilities, minimum and optimal staffing ratios,

health service delivery requirements, minimum instructional time for curriculum, etc? Are

there studies that have described successful or unsuccessful implementation and diffusion

strategies on school alcohol/drug programs?



4. Have theories related to government roles and levers to encourage or require cooperation

and coordination of polices and programs been applied to school alcohol/drug programs?

Have concepts such as shared vision, relationship building, continuum of cooperation,

strategies for promoting interagency cooperation, written protocols and formal committees

been examined? Have there been studies that describe the extent to which interministry,

interagency and interdisciplinary cooperation and coordination is occurring? Are there

examples of how governments have created and employed coalitions and councils to

develop, implement and evaluate programs?



5. Have there been studies on the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of policy-makers and

decision makers and the ―knowledge transfer‖ process relative to the prevention of problem

substance use through schools? Has there been work on concepts such as ―non-rational

decision-making practices in such systems that affect decisions about alcohol/drugs in

schools? Do we know if systems have adequate mechanisms to collect, analyze and

disseminate knowledge about alcohol/drugs, children/youth and schools in appropriate

formats and through appropriate media? Are there mechanisms for publishing and

promoting best practices and best policies on school alcohol/drug prevention programs?



6. Have there been studies of the current practices, qualifications and job roles as well as the

―concerns‖ of staff in implementing changes related to alcohol/drugs in schools? Have there

been studies that examined appropriate and inappropriate models of staff development?

Have there been studies that have described the status and effectiveness of college and

university programs

270

271

Does the research describe how systems can identify and act upon emerging issues related to addictions,

children/youth and schools? Are there planned or regular ways that the systems, ministries and

agencies? Are there examples of systems, ministries that have consciously chosen to focus on an aspect

of addictions and children and youth for a defined strategic reason rather than just convenience, urgency

or external funding? Are there studies that show how alcohol/drugs can successfully compete or

cooperate with other health issues being addressed by the school system?



Application of these Theories and Concepts in this Assessment



There is an overlap between the several conceptual frameworks described above that is captured in the

chart below. Our findings for this literature review have been tabulated and described to address these

overlaps in a way that is less repetitive to read. We also developed the other instruments for this

assessment in a manner consistent with this chart.



The reader will note that in the chart, there are additional aspects related to implementation and

diffusion of these approaches and programs within the school and other settings. These include

conceptual frameworks that describe system and organizational change, educational reform and

innovation, how decisions are made by individuals within organizations, the process and politics of

policy-making and implementation, stages of change within individuals when they adopt new health

behaviours and others. However, given that the focus of this assessment is only on organizational

capacity at the provincial/territorial ministry level, we have not elaborated on these concepts in this

report. They are, however, listed briefly in the chart on the next page.



As noted in the introduction, this assessment of the organizational capacity of education and health

ministries to promote health, prevent substance abuse and promote healthy eating among children and

youth started with the adaptation of the WHO Rapid Assessment and Action Process tool. As we

considered this tool, we realized that that our research reviews, focus groups, surveys and interviews

needed to be guided by a set of appropriate conceptual frameworks and evidence-based theories.



The practical application of population health and school health frameworks helps us clearly identify

what provincial/territorial ministries ought to be striving to achieve through their policies, programs and

practices. The use of ecological and systems theory illuminates several issues immediately. If we don‘t

understand how open, loosely coupled, professional bureaucracies (such as schools and public health

systems) really function, then we will not be looking at the key elements of the situation.



The clearly stated list of organizational capacities that has adapted the WHO instrument also clarifies

our inquiry. Our introduction of strategic thinking principles (that maximize profile, influence, resource

allocations, effective partnerships, sustainability etc) will also extend the WHO framework.



The other conceptual frameworks such as diffusion and educational change would also be very helpful

in further inquiries into the implementation of ministry polices and programs but are beyond the scope

of this initial assessment.



Together, these frameworks will ensure that this assessment is strategic, evidence-based, focused on

organizational capacity and powerful through its analysis based on ecological and systems thinking.









271

272

Implementation/

Population Health Comprehensive School Health Ecological/Systems Theory Organizational Capacity Strategic Thinking Systems Change

Social Change



1. Focus on determinants (poverty, 4e. Physical Environment & Social Change

gender, culture) to identify Resources Theories

vulnerable populations



2. Balance perspectives on issues-

populations –settings



3. Understand 2. Understand limits of school 1. Interaction between individual 1. Scan environments regularly.

environments/settings setting, Examine micro-environments and environments 2. Interactions

within school with other environments 3. Multiple

dimensions of environments



4. Select population or sub- 5. Adapt programs for special needs.

population Ensure youth friendly.



5. Integrate with other health 1. Holistic view of health. Integrate Managers protect systems from 7. Identify, manage emerging issues 2. Anticipate, manage issues

issues health issues. disturbances strategically.



6. Select your issue. 5. Position issue and your

organization.



7. Coordinate multiple 3. Coordinate school-based and 5. Systems are loosely coupled 1. Explicit policy/manager support for 3. Analyze partnerships for risk, Theories, knowledge

interventions across systems at all school-linked interventions. coordination 2. Staff time/ infrastructure benefits, investments. on cooperation,

levels for coordination 3. Formal, informal coordination, inter-

mechanisms for coordination disciplinary practice



8. Reorient health systems towards 4c. Provide health, social services in 6. Change in professional 4. Knowledge Transfer (Best Practices Diffusion/

prevention, improve/reform school or linked to schools and work place bureaucracies occurs through Guidelines to decision-makers, Education Change/

systems to include health, have health programs. shared vision, knowledge, skills practitioners Organizational

both systems focus on social and Change Theories,

physical environment 4d. Improve psychosocial 5. Workforce Development Adult learning

environment through peer, parent,

whole school.

4e. Physical Environment &

Resources



9. Involve/empower individuals or 4d. Involve students, parents,

groups volunteers and staff in decisions



10. Focus on public policy 4a. Develop, implement, evaluate 4. Systems are open to influences at 4. Knowledge Transfer to Decision- Policy-making

school and PH policies all levels makers Theory



11. Build resilience/ behaviours in 4b. Establish curriculum, support Stages of Change

individuals instruction Theories, Learning

theory



12. Maintain surveillance of 6. Describe realistic outputs for SH 7. System Managers often focus on 6. Timely, reliable, PT and local data for 4. Assess cost-effect, cost-benefit. Knowledge about

child/youth health outcomes and programs and monitor school/public boundaries. surveillance and monitoring valid Indicator

monitor policies, programs and health/other policies &programs systems





272

273

capacity









273

274









274


Related docs
Other docs by Doug McCall
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!