(From Drug & Alcohol Findings UK) A cogent analysis of the limitations of school-based drug education is discussed in a blog post from this multi-partner knowledge exchange organization in the UK. The article suggests that school-based instruction is, almost by definition, constrained by the social forces surrounding and enshrined in schools. When adults, whose normative beliefs and practices encourage alcohol use, try to impose a delay in access to this popular pastime in the adult world on adolescents, the results are predictably limited. The article suggests a possible divorce of the "educational" aspects (empowering youth to make decisions) from the preventive aspects. Or, at least, the article suggests, that the goals of drug education should be modified to more limited objectives (harm reduction) or different objectives more compatible with schooling (character building, preventing school dropouts etc). Here is a brief except:
"School-based drug education was and for many remains the great hope for preventing unhealthy or illegal substance use. Across almost an entire age group it offers a way to divert the development of these forms of substance use before they or their precursors have taken root. Though promise is clear, the fulfilment is less so. Most disappointing for Europe and for the UK were results from the seven-nation EU-Dap European drug education trial and the English Blueprint trial. The former was the largest European drug education trial ever conducted and tested a sophisticated US-style social influence programme, yet the results were patchy – generally positive but modest and usually not statistically significant benefits relative to control schools. The multi-million pound Blueprint trial was the largest in Britain and featured advanced interactive teaching methods reinforced by parental and community-wide components. Its government funders expected the results to “trigger a fundamental assessment of the place of drug education” in UK drug policy. If it did, it would be to confirm that drug education in secondary schools makes little contribution to the prevention of problems related to drinking and illegal drug use, though the evidence in respect of smoking is stronger. By the end of the follow-up period, on none of the most relevant measures was there was any sign that Blueprint had retarded growth in substance use any more effectively than usual lessons in the non-Blueprint schools. What might lie behind such disappointments can be divided in to at least two possibly interrelated domains: contradictions in principle, shortfalls in practice. Among the first is the contradiction between the objectives of education and those of prevention: the former seeks to empower children to think for themselves and open up new horizons, the latter to channel thoughts, attitudes and actions in ways intended by programme developers and teachers. Then there are potential contradictions within prevention programmes themselves. Some aim to limit young people’s autonomy in their choice of friends and substances by extending autonomy in decision-making, to encourage conformity to non-drug use values by discouraging conformity to other young people, to develop team work and social solidarity without accepting that youngsters may express this by going along with their peers as well as deciding not to". Read more>>
"School-based drug education was and for many remains the great hope for preventing unhealthy or illegal substance use. Across almost an entire age group it offers a way to divert the development of these forms of substance use before they or their precursors have taken root. Though promise is clear, the fulfilment is less so. Most disappointing for Europe and for the UK were results from the seven-nation EU-Dap European drug education trial and the English Blueprint trial. The former was the largest European drug education trial ever conducted and tested a sophisticated US-style social influence programme, yet the results were patchy – generally positive but modest and usually not statistically significant benefits relative to control schools. The multi-million pound Blueprint trial was the largest in Britain and featured advanced interactive teaching methods reinforced by parental and community-wide components. Its government funders expected the results to “trigger a fundamental assessment of the place of drug education” in UK drug policy. If it did, it would be to confirm that drug education in secondary schools makes little contribution to the prevention of problems related to drinking and illegal drug use, though the evidence in respect of smoking is stronger. By the end of the follow-up period, on none of the most relevant measures was there was any sign that Blueprint had retarded growth in substance use any more effectively than usual lessons in the non-Blueprint schools. What might lie behind such disappointments can be divided in to at least two possibly interrelated domains: contradictions in principle, shortfalls in practice. Among the first is the contradiction between the objectives of education and those of prevention: the former seeks to empower children to think for themselves and open up new horizons, the latter to channel thoughts, attitudes and actions in ways intended by programme developers and teachers. Then there are potential contradictions within prevention programmes themselves. Some aim to limit young people’s autonomy in their choice of friends and substances by extending autonomy in decision-making, to encourage conformity to non-drug use values by discouraging conformity to other young people, to develop team work and social solidarity without accepting that youngsters may express this by going along with their peers as well as deciding not to". Read more>>
RSS Feed