Summary - Department of Health and Ageing

Drug education attempts to reduce drug-related harm through the delivery of a structured
social-health curriculum within the school. It is delivered usually by classroom teachers
but in some cases by visiting professionals.
There is good evidence that these programs can produce changes in young people’s
knowledge about drug use and the consequences of drug use. Information alone appears
to be insufficient to change intention to use drugs or actual use, although it remains an
important element of prevention. Drug education programs based on social learning
principles have consistently shown short-term effects on intention and drug use but the
effects diminish by late high school years unless they are supplemented by other strategies
such as social marketing, community mobilisation or parent involvement.
Drug education can be a relatively low-cost way to delay or limit the use of tobacco,
alcohol, marijuana and other drugs but the effect sizes for most programs are small.
Despite many years of research, program failures are not uncommon and there remains
active debate regarding the critical program components.
The timing of programs and inclusion of social influence processes appear to influence
effectiveness; there can be benefits in involving peer leaders. Peer leaders can be important
where they model attitudes unfavourable to drug use but this will occur only if they are
carefully selected and well supported with management skills learned from professional
teachers.
Given the pressures on school curricula, there is an argument for generic rather than
single-drug programs; the most effective programs for reducing tobacco use may also be
effective in reducing cannabis and alcohol use. Transplanting successful programs from
one cultural context to another (e.g. United States to Australian high schools) can be
problematic and where this is done, further evaluation is essential to ensure successful
adaptation to the Australian context.
Secondary school programs in this category have a range of forms and aims including
better preparation for high school, encouraging positive interpersonal relationships at
school, ensuring effective discipline, maximising learning opportunities, and maintaining
drug-free environments. There is a growing body of US research that shows the benefits
of such interventions in primary schools but in secondary schools, the available research is
limited and inconclusive. What research there is does suggest that high school organisation
and behaviour management practices may influence youth drug use. Further research is
needed to establish the processes that make programs effective and develop a wider range
of program options.
Given the importance of peer influence in the development of young people’s drug use, it
would appear logical to attempt to use peer influence to reduce drug use. Peer educators
can be very powerful because they can model normative attitudes; however, in evaluations
of peer leadership in drug education, it has proven difficult to identify the specific
contribution of the peer intervention. There are some risks with peer interventions as
unless well implemented, they have the potential to reinforce attitudes and behaviours
favourable to drug use. It is essential that peer educators be carefully selected and well
supported with management skills from professional teachers.