Young people and alcohol – where’s the risk? Changing the focus of school-based prevention initiatives

Abstract

Research statistics highlighting the social costs of widespread excessive alcohol consumption have led to a proliferation of schoolbased prevention programmes that aim to give young people the skills and knowledge necessary to resist social pressure to drink alcohol and avoid potentially 'risky' consumption. Such interventions offer, however, limited evidence of long-term success. Drawing on a case study of a pilot programme developed by Alcohol Focus Scotland this paper illustrates the promotion of a critical social perspective motivating young people to consider instead the risk posed by the marketing techniques of the alcohol industry. It is argued that a pedagogical approach focusing on developing critical awareness rather than shaping individual behaviour has the potential to reframe our understanding of this type of preventive health education as a form of political literacy or citizenship education.

Teaching methods for critical thinking in health education of children up to high school: A scoping review

“…Most studies conducted in Europe concerned lifestyle, including both nutrition and/or physical activity interventions [ 7 , 9 , 11 , 22 , 24 , 46 , 91 , 97 , 103 , 106 , 109 , 126 , 134 ], public health [ 8 , 12 , 13 , 29 , 47 , 88 , 101 , 105 , 139 ], and psychoactive substance use [ 7 , 15 , 48 , 51 , 84 , 114 , 122 ]. Four papers concerned somatic health [ 22 , 30 , 97 , 125 ] and five–mental health [ 68 , 97 , 99 , 109 , 113 ].…”

“…Almost one in three studies published over the last 40 years tested substance use interventions (27%). Half of them discussed nicotine [ 50 , 51 , 53 , 58 , 61 , 67 , 70 , 74 , 75 , 80 , 83 , 85 , 95 , 114 ] and drugs [ 21 , 26 , 52 , 53 , 65 , 70 – 72 , 74 , 76 , 81 , 84 , 85 , 87 , 140 ] and four in ten concerned alcohol [ 15 , 48 , 53 , 71 , 72 , 83 , 85 , 92 , 117 , 122 , 137 ].…”

“…Pupils use “triggers” from a case study or scenario to define their own learning objectives. These methods include case study analysis [ 11 , 13 , 66 , 69 – 72 , 88 , 115 , 116 , 130 , 133 ], problem-based learning [ 89 , 110 , 122 , 123 , 125 ], collaborative scenario-based discussions [ 11 , 123 ], storytelling [ 84 , 110 ], debate [ 52 , 91 , 136 ], Socratic questions [ 52 , 95 ], brainstorming [ 7 , 13 , 14 , 64 , 84 , 133 ], and educational games [ 16 , 17 , 52 , 74 , 84 , 85 , 91 , 95 , 116 , 118 , 126 , 134 , 137 ].…”

“…Most frequently, the authors of the intervention used all methods simultaneously [ 17 , 69 – 72 , 74 , 94 , 120 , 130 , 137 ]. They also mixed the problem-solving and practice methods [ 24 , 30 , 73 , 85 , 89 , 91 , 122 , 126 , 141 ], less often problem solving, practice methods and exposition [ 32 , 84 , 113 , 140 ] or problem-solving and exposition [ 98 , 106 , 110 , 111 ] and the exposition and practice methods [ 12 , 27 , 102 , 103 , 121 ]. The patterns of applying various central teaching components in the intervention addressing various health issues were grouped into seven thematic categories and presented in Table 4 .…”

“…To facilitate the learning process, every fourth of the interventions provided educational materials [ 7 – 9 , 21 , 22 , 25 , 27 , 30 , 32 , 46 , 49 , 62 , 69 , 74 , 76 , 77 , 81 , 83 , 84 , 91 , 93 , 97 , 104 , 105 , 107 , 111 , 115 , 122 , 132 , 135 , 140 , 141 ], such as student activity books, brochures, fact sheets, activity sheets, handouts. In a number of interventions, audiovisual materials created specifically to support the teaching objectives were provided [ 20 , 74 , 90 , 115 ].…”