No abstract

BACKGROUND School administrators and teachers face difficult decisions about how best to use school resources in order to meet academic achievement goals. Many are hesitant to adopt prevention curricula that are not focused directly on academic achievement. Yet, some have hypothesized that prevention curricula can remove barriers to learning and, thus, promote achievement. This study examined relationships between school levels of student substance use and risk and protective factors that predict adolescent problem behaviors and achievement test performance in Washington State. METHODS Hierarchical Generalized Linear Models were used to examine predictive associations between school-averaged levels of substance use and risk and protective factors and Washington State students’ likelihood of meeting achievement test standards on the Washington Assessment of Student Learning, statistically controlling for demographic and economic factors known to be associated with achievement. RESULTS Results indicate that levels of substance use and risk/protective factors predicted the academic test score performance of students. Many of these effects remained significant even after controlling for model covariates. CONCLUSIONS The findings suggest that implementing prevention programs that target empirically identified risk and protective factors have the potential to positively affect students’ academic achievement.

A number of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of environmental change strategies (ECS) in effecting community-level change on attitudes and behaviors related to underage drinking (Treno and Lee in Alcohol Res Health 26:35-40, 2002; Birckmayer et al. in J Drug Educ 34(2):121-153, 2004). Primary data collection to inform the design of these strategies, however, can be resource intensive and exceed the capacity of community stakeholders. This study describes the participatory planning and implementation of community-level surveys in 12 diverse communities in the state of Washington. These surveys were conducted through collaborations among community volunteers and evaluation experts assigned to each community. The surveys were driven by communities' prevention planning needs and interests; constructed from collections of existing, field-tested items and scales; implemented by community members; analyzed by evaluation staff; and used in the design of ECS by community-level leaders and prevention practitioners. The communities varied in the content of their surveys, in their sampling approaches and in their data collection methods. Although these surveys were not conducted using traditional rigorous population survey methodology, they were done within limited resources, and the participatory nature of these activities strengthened the communities' commitment to using their results in the planning of their environmental change strategies.