The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

5.0 DRUG EDUCATION APPROACHES

This section examines the approaches to drug education employed in the observed lessons. Section 5.1 reports general patterns in approaches, while section 5.2 presents the approaches used in relation to specific packages and resources.

5.1 General Patterns

In examining the approaches adopted in the observed lessons we have found it useful to differentiate between approaches that are, in essence, concerned with modes of delivery, and approaches which are concerned primarily with the learning outcomes of drugs education.

5.1.1 Modes of delivery

Following Tobler ⁸, we were endeavouring here to observe the extent to which lessons (and specific learning activities within lessons) were delivered by the teacher or a visitor such as a community police officer, school nurse or health promotion worker in a didactic or interactive way.

'Didactic' and 'interactive' approaches may be conceptualised as the opposite ends of a continuum and if we do so then various modes of delivery which are commonly employed within drugs education can be positioned along that continuum. At one end is the presentation where the teacher or visitor does almost all of the talking, although they may also use powerpoint and DVD as well. Two lessons were observed which would come into this category. Both were delivered by community police officers. Also at the didactic end of the continuum were those lessons and activities where learning was mostly conducted by the teacher or visitor through a process of questions and answers. Where some of these questions were relatively open-ended and the teacher was eliciting the pupils' own knowledge, opinions, values, beliefs and experiences then this was coded as being less didactic than the use of closed-ended questions designed to check what has been learned so far. However, even where these modes of delivery involve some degree of interaction or participation it tends to be between the teacher and the individual pupil and it is mostly teacher-initiated. At the other end of the continuum are those modes of delivery which are highly participatory and involve pupil-pupil interaction, where pupils learn together and from each other through discussion, enquiry and brainstorming and the teacher concentrates on facilitating the appropriate learning environment rather than on transmitting to them what they should know.

Given that our observers were identifying a wide range of modes of delivery we found it useful to code them into three broad categories: those which were mostly didactic (even if there were some limited instances of open discussion); those which were mostly interactive (with a considerable amount of pupil-pupil participation, open-ended discussion, brainstorming and opportunities to develop and try out specific skills); and those modes of delivery which were partly didactic and partly interactive but combined them in almost equal amounts. The results are presented in Table C5.1.

Table C5.1. Main Modes of Delivery of Drugs Education in Different Types of School

As the table shows, only around one in ten of the lessons observed were coded as mostly didactic. Nearly a third of the secondary lessons which we observed were coded as mostly interactive, which is markedly higher than the proportion of primary lessons which came into that category. The patterns in the independent schools are not markedly different from the modes of delivery in the local authority schools. Most lessons offered a combination of didactic teaching and interactive activities. Of course, the numbers here are relatively large because this category conflates all the subtle differences identified by the observers which would have differentiated one activity from another along the didactic-interactive continuum.

However it is perhaps also worth pointing out at this stage that the literature on approaches to drugs education tends to examine modes of delivery in a vacuum devoid of the context in which teachers have to work: the pupils' stage of cognitive development, the degree of disruption in a lesson, the normal mode of delivery for all PSHE/ PSD lessons, and so forth. This is apparent at two levels.

First, much of the literature seems to focus on modes of delivery at the secondary stage. However, as this report shows, some drugs education, or work which is preparing the ground for later drugs education, is being undertaken even with the early years (P1-P3). The approaches which the teachers use for lessons on, for example, personal safety (including keeping safe around medicines, syringes, etc) are very similar to the approaches which they would adopt for any other topic. That is, a combination of question and answer, demonstration (e.g. safety caps on bottles), circle time with some open discussion and perhaps a relevant story. The approach will reflect the teacher's knowledge of the children's attention spans and respond to shifts in interest by varying activities to suit. In most instances the class teacher will also use opportunities as they arise to develop the children's language and communication skills as well.

Second, the approach to delivering drugs education which most of the teachers we observed were adopting was also consonant with their general approach to classroom management. So, for example, after a particularly interactive activity which may have involved pupils moving around the class, going from one group to another, undertaking tasks that were challenging and stimulating, teachers would "settle them down" again by a short question and answer session or a teacher-led input or a worksheet. This observation applies as much to the secondary lessons we observed as those we observed in primary and special schools.

When the data were analysed by year group it was found that most of the lessons which were categorised as 'mostly didactic' were delivered in S1/S2 lessons (64 per cent). On the other hand, 41 per cent of the lessons categorised as 'mostly interactive' were observed in S1/S2 lessons while a further 35 per cent were also observed in S3/S4 lessons. The lessons categorised as 'partly didactic-partly interactive' were evenly distributed across all year groups.

The didactic-interactive pattern was fairly similar across all of the local authorities in which the observations were conducted. However, there was one exception. Observed teachers in South Lanark schools were far more likely to have delivered lessons that were categorised as 'mostly interactive'.

Broadly speaking PSHE specialist teachers were more likely to adopt a 'mostly interactive' approach than class teachers, form tutors, teachers or visitors. Even so, only 40 per cent of the lessons delivered by the PSHE specialists were categorised as 'mostly interactive' and the six lessons delivered by PSHE specialists (30 per cent of the total) were categorised as 'mostly didactic'. In these latter instances the teachers provided the pupils with a great deal of information about drugs rather than either eliciting the pupils' existing knowledge or providing them with opportunities to seek out the information from resources. However, if we compare the teaching of those PSHE specialists who have also had some PSHE training with those who have not then the former group were much more likely to have delivered drug education lessons in a 'mostly interactive' way.

Interestingly, the visitors were the ones least likely of all of the professional groups we observed delivering drug education to employ a 'mostly interactive approach' (only 15 per cent). At first sight this finding seems surprising since most of the visitors, particularly community police officers, drug awareness officers and voluntary agency workers were likely to have received some training for this work. However, one of the challenges facing some visitors is that they have to quickly develop a rapport with a group they have not previously met and know very little about. A few visitors did this by encouraging the pupils to share their knowledge and experiences and then used this as a basis for the rest of the session. The others, however, tended to begin sessions by establishing their credentials and mostly did this by airing their knowledge. This was usually tailored to the age of the pupils but often meant that they were providing information in a didactic way about local street names for specific drugs, the places where teenagers go to pick up drugs, the going rate on the market, or talking in some detail about the different ways in which various drugs may be taken.

Teachers' responses to the delivery of the visitors were often interesting because they did not seem to apply the same criteria as they would to a supply teacher or less-experienced colleague. For example, one visitor, a community police officer, talked for over 75 per cent of the session (which covered an entire morning). The information was very interesting and he retained the pupils' attention and engagement for most of the time, although they did become restless after the mid-morning break. During the two hours there were three opportunities for participatory work. There was a short group activity in which half of the pupils were asked to list the names of drugs they had heard about and the other half were asked to provide a description of 'a typical drug dealer'. There was hardly any time given to feedback from the groups and the visitor mainly concentrated on providing further information about the drugs which they had named. The activity on the typical drug dealer was not followed up at all. At various points in the morning the visitor asked two young people to come out to the front and explained that one would be a drug dealer and the other would be a young person being encouraged to buy some illegal drugs for the first time. The visitor created a personal history for each character then proceeded to provide the dialogue for them while the young people just stood at the front silent and immobile and probably relieved that they did not have to act. The narrative which the visitor created was rich and full of information about how to avoid specific situations, what to do if approached, what happens to young people who get ensnared by dealers, and so forth. However, the opportunity for pupil participation in role play was not taken up and follow-up work was minimal. At the end of the morning session the visitor started to introduce a re-cap quiz only to be told by one of the teachers that the bell was about to ring.

The teachers present felt that this had been a very good session; he had retained the pupils' interest and clearly " knew his stuff". This perhaps illustrates what may be a wider concern for teachers who have had no specific training for drug education. They lack confidence because they feel that they do not know enough about drugs to teach it effectively and their experience and expertise in delivering PSHE/ PSD lessons is down-graded in relation to a non-teacher's superior knowledge of drugs and the drug scene. (Findings from the sample of young people consulted on their experience of drug education also highlighted their enjoyment of lessons delivered by visitors.)

5.1.2 Learning approaches

This section examines the observed lessons for evidence of approaches designed or intended to achieve or facilitate changes in the pupils' knowledge and understanding, attitudes and values, behaviour and skills. In coding the observations we found it useful to employ the following categories:

Information about Drugs: their proper names, street names, the legal classification, various categories of drugs, their specific effects and the potential physical, social and legal consequences of using and misusing them. This was the most frequently employed approach across virtually all of the age groups observed. Classified within this is a sub-type which we saw employed by two community police officers. This, in many respects, is a kind of citizenship approach: this is what will happen if you are found in possession of illegal drugs or caught supplying them.

Preparing the Ground: this is an approach which we found mainly in the early years, the mid-primary years and in two special schools: one a secondary for children with a variety of learning difficulties and the other a school which provides for children from 3 - 18 with profound and multiple disabilities and needs. A typical lesson here might not mention drugs at all but encourage the pupils to think about all the dangerous places in the home, the school and the local community and environment. However, there might be some references here to 'danger in the bathroom' and the medicine cabinet. Another typical lesson which comes into this category is pollution, including litter. Sometimes the teacher might mention the dangers of used syringes, half empty bottles of wine, discarded cigarettes or say that they would be looking at these dangers later.

Keeping Safe / Harm Reduction: In early years' lessons in primary schools the focus here was mainly on safe storage and who is responsible for giving them over-the-counter and prescription medicines. This was also an approach adopted with older children in some of the lessons we observed in special schools. In the secondary schools we saw hardly any examples of the harm reduction approach as defined in section 3.2.2 of the Literature Review.

Risk Assessment, Making Decisions and Choices: an approach which usually combines awareness raising with some opportunities to work through scenarios involving options.

Social Influences: where this was observed the approach usually focussed on peer pressure (rarely parental influences) or the various ways in which the mass media in general and advertising in particular, present desirable social images and create expectations.

Affective / Personal Development: any approaches which were either concerned with getting pupils to think about their attitudes towards drugs and how their attitudes and behaviour might be influenced positively or negatively by their personal values AND/OR were concerned mainly to enhance pupils' self esteem and self awareness.

Normative Education: here we were looking for examples of activities which were designed to address any erroneous perceptions which the pupils might have about the prevalence of drug use and misuse amongst their age group or within their community.

Resistance and Assertiveness Skills: any approaches which were concerned with helping children and young people to assert themselves and resist any social pressure to try cigarettes, alcohol, volatile substances or illegal drugs.

Table C5.2 presents a breakdown of the range of learning approaches adopted in the observed lessons. The table clearly demonstrates the prevalence of lessons (and activities within lessons) which aimed to help children and young people to acquire and build on their ' information about drugs' and their effects. In practice exactly half of the observed activities under this heading were concerned with informing the children and young people about the definition of drugs, proper and street names for specific drugs, categories and classifications. A relatively small minority of these lessons were concerned with exploring the pupils' existing knowledge. The rest of the observed activities under this general heading were concerned mainly with the physical effects of different drugs (i.e. as stimulants, depressants, hallucinogens). A small minority of these activities were concerned with the long-term physical consequences of using specific drugs and the potential social consequences.

Table C5.2. Range of Learning Approaches Adopted in Observed Lessons

The second most prevalent approach, ' Keeping safe', tended to feature mainly in lessons for P1-P5 and in special schools. We only observed two examples of what could be described as the ' harm reduction' approach . Two community police officers who focused on drugs and the law in their presentations (one to secondary pupils, the other to a P6 class) mentioned the possible risks to young people's careers and future lives generally if they were prosecuted for drug use or supply. There were no observed instances of teachers or visitors focusing on safe and unsafe drug use. Indeed one teacher in a post-observation interview intimated that he had thought about using a resource which did this but decided not to in the end on the grounds that it might prove controversial with the parents.

The third most prevalent approach, observed in only eight per cent of the lessons, is ' Preparing the ground'. This too tended to be adopted in the primary schools with pupils in P1-5 and in the special schools to a wider age range.

As the table clearly demonstrates, we only saw a limited number of instances of lessons or activities designed to develop 'decision making skills' or 'assertiveness and resistance skills'. Only about one-in-ten of the lessons we observed included any activities which aimed to develop such skills. In most instances these involved small groups working through scenarios. These approaches tended to be deployed with P6-7 in the primary schools and S3-S4 in the secondary schools. With the primary-aged pupils the topic was usually social drugs such as tobacco and alcohol. With the S3-S4s it was more likely to be illegal drugs. Nevertheless there may be an issue here about progression to which we will return later in the report.

Although we observed a few upper primary lessons which focused mainly on ' social influences' this tended to be taught, if at all, in the secondary schools and then mainly to S2, S3 and S4.

Most of the teachers we observed would argue that much of their work as class teachers or as PSE/ PSD specialists was concerned with developing self esteem and self awareness and would not regard this as a particular focus for drugs education alone. As a result most of the lesson activities which come into this category were concerned with helping the pupils to clarify their attitudes towards drugs and drug use. These activities often supported an activity designed to provide information about drugs, particularly illegal ones, but also alcohol and tobacco. However, the PSHE/ PSD element was particularly significant in the special schools where teachers were concerned about the vulnerability of some of their pupils to peer and adult influences. As such it tended to underpin activities which focused specifically on keeping safe.

As can be seen from the Table we saw no examples of normative education in practice. However, one observer did record an instance of a secondary teacher saying to his class that " Drug use is not as widespread out there as you think it is".

Of course, the drug education provided by most teachers will incorporate several approaches and even within one lesson there may be activities which reflect different approaches. For instance, an opening activity on social influences might then lead on to small group work on decision-making scenarios followed by discussion of a clip from a video where a character is trying to resist pressure from his friends to try a particular substance.

Observers were therefore asked to provide evidence of different approaches being employed during a lesson and these were then coded according to the extent to which a particular approach was the most dominant one in the lesson, or the second or third most dominant in the lesson. In almost every instance, one approach tended to predominate, although the lesson might include activities which incorporated up to three distinct approaches. In practice only two-fifths of the lessons we observed incorporated up to three distinct approaches. Most utilised only two.

As Table C5.3 shows, ' Information about drugs and their effects' is not only the approach which dominates the main part of most lessons, it also tends to be the second most dominant approach in over half of the lessons observed. As noted earlier, many of the lessons we observed either began with an activity on naming drugs and then went on to categorise them (either by their effects, level of social acceptability or legality) or it re-capped a previous lesson on drug names and then focused mainly on categorising.

The table also shows that where approaches aimed at developing skills, whether for decision making or resistance, they tended to be observed in supporting activities rather than as the main element of the lesson. The same point applies to the employment of the 'social influences' approach and the 'keeping safe' approach, which often supports activities which have been categorised here as 'preparing the ground'.

Table C5.3. Main Learning Outcomes of Approaches Adopted

A number of comments have already been made about the learning approaches adopted with different year groups and age ranges. Most of the observed lessons for early years and middle years in primary schools combined a focus on 'keeping safe' and 'preparing the ground' with 'information acquisition'. The older the pupils the greater the emphasis on 'information acquisition'. As noted earlier, not many of the observed lessons focused on social influences or skills development but where they did these tended to be either for P6-P7 or in secondary schools generally.

The patterns of use of these various approaches were very similar across all of the local authorities included in the observation exercise.

There were no major differences between the PSHE specialists and the other teachers and visitors in terms of the learning approaches adopted. However, one difference is worth mentioning. None of the admittedly small number of lessons which included resistance or assertiveness skills were delivered by PSHE specialists. The examples we saw were either delivered by visitors or form tutors and class teachers. Of course, they may have focused on skills development in lessons which we did not observe.

5.1.3 The relationship between modes of delivery and learning approaches

We have not included a table here which cross tabulates the didactic-interactive modes of delivery against the learning approaches. This is because the results are so dominated by the number of lessons where the learning outcomes approach is predominantly information acquisition. However, the following key points are worth noting:

• 78 per cent of the lessons where delivery was mostly didactic were concerned with transmitting information.
• 64 per cent of the lessons where delivery was mostly interactive were also concerned with information acquisition but here either the information was acquired through small group enquiry work or brainstorming activities were used to elicit the pupils' own knowledge.
• As noted above, the number of lessons focusing to any degree on decision making, risk assessment, resistance or assertiveness skills was small but almost all of them were delivered through an interactive approach or through a partly didactic-partly interactive approach. Typical here was some kind of stimulus resource such as a video or story, followed by a worksheet to get the pupils thinking and then small group work to develop strategies which the individuals in the video or story could use in such a situation.
• Affective and personal development approaches were usually delivered through an interactive mode or a combination of teacher-input, teacher-led work and pupil participation. But again not many lessons were observed which would come into this category. The relatively small number of lessons on social influences were delivered through all three modes in roughly similar proportions.

5.2 Approaches and Resources

5.2.1 Approaches employed by teachers using published packages

As previously highlighted, the most dominant learning approach across the observed lessons was that of 'information acquisition'. While many of the packages focus upon the provision of information, they also emphasise the development of skills and the importance of decision making. It was advisable then to examine whether or not the packages were being used in the ways in which they were intended.

However, a caveat is necessary. We observed a sample of lessons in each selected school. Consequently we were not observing the delivery of each package in its entirety. Clearly it is possible that a broader range of approaches was covered in other lessons which we did not observe. Nevertheless, from those observed lessons where the use of a package was observed, it is possible to see that information provision was the most commonly used approach (See Table C5.4 below). This was the case across all the packages, with the exception of the BBC Resource Pack Focus: Substance Misuse.

Table C5.4 Learning Approaches used with Specific Published Packages

In addition to the emphasis within the observed lessons on 'information acquisition' when using five of the above six packages, it was also interesting to note that there were so few instances of activities which engaged the pupils in 'making and reviewing decisions and choices', since this notion underpins a number of packages and decision making was frequently mentioned by the teachers as the main reason for providing the pupils with information about drugs.

Generally, the observed lessons using What's the Score? were seen to have encompassed all of the approaches, which is in keeping with the package guidelines which recommend a social learning approach balancing knowledge, attitudes, values and skills development.

Those lessons which used Glasgow's Health can be seen to have incorporated a mix of 'information acquisition', 'keeping safe' and 'preparing the groundwork'. These are in keeping with the recommended approach in the package. However, much of the emphasis in Glasgow's Health is on affective and personal development, with regular reference to feelings and emotions. This would appear to have been omitted from the lessons observed, suggesting that perhaps this aspect of the package is being overlooked by the teachers delivering it.

'Affective and personal development' is a major feature of The Police Box, as is 'information acquisition'. As Table C7.4 shows, in the observed lessons there was more emphasis on the former than the latter. It is also perhaps surprising that there were no observed instances of 'preparing the groundwork' given that The Police Box is a package designed for primary schools.

Lessons using resources and activities from the Drugwise packages also tended to employ an 'information acquisition' approach, but observers noted some elements of the other approaches as well. The one main exception to this pattern was that there was hardly any focus on 'making choices and decisions' even though this is highlighted as an aim of the package. However, once again it should be kept in mind that there was a lower number of Drugwise lessons observed in comparison with those using What's the Score? and Glasgow's Health.

Lessons using both the Delta packs and the BBC Resource pack appeared to stick fairly closely to the approaches underpinning the packages. The observed lessons using Delta employed a combination of information acquisition and making choices and decisions and both of these are key elements in the package. A third key element is affective and personal development but this did not feature strongly in the observed lessons.

The lesson utilising the BBC Resource Pack was observed to contain activities involving the 'making of choices', 'assertiveness and resistance' approaches, and 'affective and personal development', each of which are central aims of the package. However, since only one lesson was observed using this Pack it is difficult to infer too much from this observation.

5.2.2 Approaches by schools'/teachers' own resource banks

Resource banks made from parts of a number of packages and other published resources by schools and teachers were brought together in a coordinated fashion. (See section on Resources.) Other kinds of resource banks were brought together in a much less coordinated way. Both were just as likely to have 'information acquisition' as their main approach and were very similar in approach. (See Table C5.5 below.) The only main difference was that we observed slightly more instances of a 'keeping safe and harm reduction' approach being adopted in lessons where the teacher was using a less coordinated mix of resources.

Table C5.5. Learning Approach by Schools'/Teachers' Own Resource Banks

Generally speaking a reliance on the 'information acquisition' approach tended to be most marked in lessons where the teachers were using materials from their own or the school's own package or resource bank. When teachers used parts of published packages they tended to incorporate the 'information acquisition' approach into a wider range of other approaches.

« Previous | Contents | Next »