Interactive teaching/learning methodsThis is a featured page

This page discusses teaching and learning methods and strategies that are more effective in preventing subtance abuse and other addictive behaviours.

The element of drug education programs with the strongest base of research support is student interactivity,[i] [ii] [iii] [iv] having been found to be 2-4 times more effective than non-interactive programs.[v] Tobler and Stratton’s meta-analysis (1997) provided useful insight into the type of interactivity that is most effective. They found that programs emphasizing student-to-student, rather than student-to-teacher interaction, showed significantly more positive effects on student substance use. They assert that it is the structured and unstructured task-oriented peer interaction between classmates that is the important variable in effectiveness. In this process, students need to have the opportunity to interact in a small group context, to test out and exchange ideas on how to handle drug use situations and to gain peer feedback about the acceptability of their ideas in a safe environment. Tobler (2000) even goes so far as to suggest that it is the exchange of ideas and experiences between students, and the opportunity to practice new skills and to obtain feedback on skills practice that acts as a catalyst for change rather than any critical content of the program.

The role of the teacher/leader in these types of sessions is to set an open, non-judgmental atmosphere, manage the process as a facilitator (rather than as a presenter), and maximize the opportunity for peer interchange and skills practice. The teacher also plays an important role in correcting misperceptions that may arise, and in offering information as needed.[vi] The specific techniques that work well in this process are role-plays, Socratic questioning, simulations, brainstorming, cooperative learning, peer-to-peer discussion and service-learning projects.

[i] Tobler, N.S., & Stratton, H.H. (1997). Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs: A meta-analysis of the research. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 18(1), 71-128.
[ii] Cuijpers, P. (2002). Effective ingredients of school-based drug prevention programs: A systematic review. Addictive Behaviors, 27(6), 1009-1023.
[iii] Hawks, D., Scott, K., & McBride, M. (2002). Prevention of psychoactive substance use: A selected review of what works in the area of prevention. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://www.who.int/entity/mental_health/evidence/en/prevention_intro.pdf
[iv] McBride, N. (2003). A systematic review of school drug education. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 18(6), 729-742.
[v] Tobler, N.S., & Stratton, H.H. (1997). Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs: A meta-analysis of the research. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 18(1), 71-128.
[vi] McBride, N. (2003). A systematic review of school drug education. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 18(6), 729-742.


No user avatar
dmccall
Latest page update: made by dmccall , Apr 29 2008, 1:25 PM EDT (about this update About This Update dmccall Edited by dmccall


view changes

- complete history)
Keyword tags: None (edit keyword tags)
More Info: links to this page

Anonymous  (Get credit for your thread)


There are no threads for this page.  Be the first to start a new thread.