© Child Trends 2003
|
Guide
to Effective Programs |
LIFE SKILLS TRAINING (LST)
OVERVIEW
Life Skills Training (LST) is a school-based drug use prevention program that was established in the late 1970s (Botvin, 1998). The program lasts for a total of three years, and incorporates interactive learning, social skills building, and specific drug use prevention-related information, it promotes anti-drug norms, and it fosters the development of personal self-management skills such as decision making, problem solving, goal setting and coping with anxiety (National Health Promotion Associates, Inc., 2002a). Experimental evaluations show that impacts of Life Skills Training include lower rates of participants’ cigarette, alcohol, and marijuana use than their peers who were not in the program. LST has been experimentally evaluated—and shown to be effective—for Hispanic, African American, and Caucasian student populations.
Target population:
LST has an elementary school version as well as a middle school version. As most evaluations of LST have been conducted at the middle school level, this description focuses on the middle school version of LST.
LST is designed for all students regardless of their previous drug use or risk level. The program lasts for three years—an initial program year followed by two years of booster sessions. The program is broken down into three major components. The first component teaches general self-management skills, including analyzing problems and reducing stress and anxiety. The second component covers general social skills such as overcoming shyness and communicating effectively. The final component of the program covers drug resistance skills, such as the ability to challenge misconceptions about drug use and the ability to resist media pressures to use drugs. The three components are covered in the first year of the program and reinforced through the second and third year booster sessions (Botvin, 1998; National Health Promotion Associates, Inc., 2002c).
A variety of instruction methods are used in delivery of LST. The skills are taught using both instruction and demonstration. Skills are broken down into steps and are demonstrated through a video or the instructor. Students are also given the opportunity to practice the skills they have learned. Feedback and encouragement are used to help the students improve their skill use. Finally, extended practice is used in the form of homework assignments (Botvin, 1998).
The program also features an optional violence prevention component that adds three sessions in the first year, two sessions in the second year and two sessions in the third year (National Health Promotion Associates, Inc., 2002b).
LST can be taught by health professionals from outside the school, older peer leaders, or regular classroom teachers. All program providers are trained during a one- or two-day workshop. The workshop may be provided using a videotape or live instruction. Workshops allow program providers to learn as well as practice the skills needed to provide the program. The LST program does not follow up with providers to ensure the program is administered with fidelity or provide booster training sessions (Botvin, 1998).
Number of children/teens in program: 25,000 classrooms in 3,000 schools use LST. In total, the LST program is currently serving approximately 1 million children in elementary and middle schools. (Numbers come from personal communication.)
Length: 30 sessions implemented over three years.
Intensity: Each lesson is approximately 45 minutes long. The length of time between sessions varies from one day to one week. The first 15 sessions are given in year one, the next 10 sessions are given in year two, and the last five sessions are given in year three.
Service delivery mode: The program is implemented in a classroom setting and can be linked to any classroom subject matter. It is most often taught by teachers; however, providers from outside the school and older peer leaders have also implemented LST.
Most evaluations of LST have been of the middle school program. In addition, nearly all program evaluations of LST have been conducted by the program developer, Dr. Gilbert Botvin. Four independent evaluations have been conducted of LST but only one has been published. Furthermore, only one evaluation has examined the full dosage of sessions per the three-year program model. In this section, we highlight some of the evaluations.
Evaluated population
3,597 predominately white former program participants in 56 New York schools. In total, 2,455 students were in the experimental groups and 1,142 students were in the control group. These students represented 60.4 percent of an initial sample of 4466 students from a 1985 program trial of LST.
Botvin and others (1995) surveyed 3,597 predominately white former program participants from 56 New York schools. Of the original 56 schools, 34 schools were randomly assigned to one of two experimental groups and 22 schools were randomly assigned to a control group. Both experimental groups used teachers to implement LST. One experimental group trained teachers through a one-day formal workshop and the other experimental group trained teachers through videotapes. Students from experimental schools in this study received a 15-session LST program in their seventh grade year (1985), 10 booster sessions in their eighth grade year and five booster sessions in their ninth grade year. The long-term effects data were collected at the end of the students’ twelfth grade year (in 1991). Data were collected through the mail, telephone or in-school surveys. The researchers found that participants in the two experimental groups had lower rates of cigarette use when compared to the control group. Experimental students also had lower rates of heavy drinking as well as lower rates of marijuana use than students in the control group. Overall, students in the experimental group were 44 percent less likely than control students to self-report using tobacco, alcohol or marijuana and 66 percent less likely to self-report using all three drugs. There were no major differences between the two experimental groups.
Evaluated population
281 eighth, ninth and tenth grade students in two suburban New York schools were randomly assigned to an experimental or control group
Another study examined the effectiveness of LST on preventing cigarette smoking. The experimental students participated in a 10-session LST program provided by allied health professionals. The researchers found that at the initial follow up immediately after program completion, students in the experimental condition were 75 percent less likely than control students to self-report having started smoking. At a three month follow-up, the experimental students were 67 percent less likely to self-report having started smoking (Botvin, Eng & Williams, 1980).
Evaluated population
1,311 mostly white, middle class, seventh grade students from 10 suburban New York schools.
Another study examined the effect of LST on both alcohol and marijuana use. The ten schools were randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions or to a control group. Four schools were assigned to an experimental group where the LST program was implemented by 10th, 11th and 12th grade students, four schools were assigned to an experimental group where the LST program was implemented by regular teachers, and two schools were assigned to a control condition. Students in experimental schools received a 20-session LST program over one year. Students were pre-tested at the start of the program and post-tested four months later through a self-report questionnaire. In addition, researchers collected saliva samples; they did not actually analyze the samples but thought that collecting saliva samples might induce more honest self-reporting. Results of the study show that, in comparison to the control group, participants in the experimental condition led by older students reported 71 percent less total (ever used) and 83 percent less regular (weekly or daily) marijuana use. Researchers also found students in the peer-led experimental group consumed less alcohol per sitting when compared to students in the control group. However, these results were not found for the experimental condition led by teachers. Students in this experimental group did not show significant differences from the control group (Botvin, Baker, Renick, et al., 1984).
Evaluated population
471 predominately Hispanic, seventh grade students in eight urban schools in northern New Jersey and New York City
Further, studies have found that LST works for minority students. Botvin, Dusenbury and others (1989) examined the effect of LST on 471 predominately Hispanic, seventh grade students in eight urban schools in northern New Jersey and New York City. Four schools were randomly assigned to an experimental group and four schools were randomly assigned to a control group. Students in experimental schools were given a 15-session teacher-led LST program focused on smoking prevention. Students in the control schools did not receive any special interventions above what was usually offered in the schools. Participants were given a pre-test consisting of a self-report questionnaire and a “bogus pipeline” breath test (to induce more honest self-reports). Three and a half months after the end of the 15-session program, students were given the same questionnaire and breath test as a post-test. The researchers found that students in the experimental condition had greater knowledge of smoking consequences and had less self-reported smoking behavior when compared to control students.
Evaluated population
608 predominately African American students in nine schools
Botvin, Batson, and others (1989) examined the effects of LST on 608 predominately African American students in nine schools. Schools were randomly assigned to either a control group or an experimental group. Students in the experimental condition were given a 12-session, teacher-led LST program focused on smoking prevention. The researchers found that experimental students were 56 percent less likely to self-report smoking within the last month at the end of the 12-session intervention.
Evaluated population
Seventh-graders in 36 randomly-selected rural schools in the Midwestern US
In the only published study of four independent LST evaluations, Spoth and others (2002) examined the effects of LST and the Strengthening Families program. The Strengthening Families program is an intervention program with a drug prevention component. Participants in this study were seventh graders in 36 randomly selected rural schools in the Midwestern US. Schools were matched and randomly assigned to one of three study groups. Twelve schools were randomly assigned to receive the LST program only, 12 schools were randomly assigned to receive the LST program and the Strengthening Families program, and 12 schools were randomly assigned to a control group. Students in the experimental groups were given a 15-session teacher-instructed LST program in seventh grade and five booster sessions in eighth grade. Students received a pre-test several months prior to the intervention and a post-test approximately one month after the intervention with a questionnaire and a “bogus pipeline” breath test. Results of the study showed that, compared to students in the control group, students in the experimental group that combined LST and Strengthening Families had 30 percent less alcohol initiation and students in the LST group had 4.1 percent less alcohol initiation.
3,597 predominately white 12th-grade students from across New York who had previously participated in the study in 7th grade.
In this 6 year follow-up study, Botvin, Baker and others (1995) studied the long-term effects of an earlier LST intervention. The schools in this intervention had been randomly assigned to a control group (N=22), or one of two treatment groups. Eighteen schools were assigned to participate in prevention program with a formal 1 day training workshop and implementation of feedback by staff; an attritional 16 schools were assigned to participate in the same prevention program through video tapes and no implementation of feedback. The intervention focused on teaching information and skills for resisting social pressures of drug use and general personal and social skills to promote the development of characteristics associated with decreased risk of drug use. Those in the two prevention groups received further instruction during their eighth (10 sessions) and ninth (5 sessions) grade years. A 6 year follow up assessment was completed among participants representing all three groups. This intervention had positive long-term effects on reducing drug use for both of the intervention groups. Monthly cigarette smoking was significantly lower for students in both intervention groups and also lower for weekly use among the intervention without feedback group compared with the control group. Heavy cigarette smoking and problem drinking were also significantly lower for both intervention groups.
Botvin, G. J. (1998). Preventing adolescent drug abuse through Life Skills Training: Theory, methods, and effectiveness. In J. Crane (Ed.) Social Programs That Work (pp. 225-257). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., Dunesbury, L., Botvin, E. M. & Diaz, T. (1995). Long-term follow-up results of a randomized drug abuse prevention trial in a white middle-class population. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273(14), 1106-1112.
Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., Renick, N. L., Filazzola, A. D. & Botvin, E. M. (1984). A cognitive-behavioral approach to substance abuse prevention. Addictive Behaviors, 9(2), 137-147.
Botvin, G. J., Batson, H.W., Witts-Vitale, S., Bess, V., Baker, E. & Dusenbury, L. (1989). A psychosocial approach to smoking prevention for urban black youth. Public Health Reports, 104(6), 573-582.
Botvin, G. J., Dusenbury, L., Baker, E., James-Ortiz, S., & Kerner, J. (1989). A skills training approach to smoking prevention among Hispanic youth. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 12(3), 279-296.
Botvin, G. J., Eng, A. & Williams, C. L. (1980). Preventing the onset of cigarette smoking through Life Skills Training. Preventive Medicine, 11(2), 199-211.
National Health Promotion Associates, Inc. (2002a). Frequently asked questions about the Life Skills Training program. Retrieved Aug 21, 2002 from http://www.lifeskillstraining.com/faq.cfm
National Health Promotion Associates, Inc. (2002b). Life Skills Training program structure. Retrieved Aug 21, 2002 from http://www.lifeskillstraining.com/program_structure1.cfm
National Health Promotion Associates, Inc. (2002c). Life Skills Training program description. Retrieved Aug 21, 2002 from http://www.lifeskillstraining.com/program_structure1.cfm
Spoth, R. L., Redmond, C., Trudeau, L. & Shin, C. (2002). Longitudinal substance initiation outcomes for a universal preventive intervention combining family and school programs. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16(2), 129-134.
Web Site: http://www.lifeskillstraining.com/
Hatcher, J. L. and J. Scarpa (2001). Background for community-level work on physical health and safety in adolescence: Reviewing the literature on contributing factors. Washington, DC, Child Trends.
Zaff, J. F. and J. Calkins (2001). Background for community-level work on mental health and externalizing disorders in adolescence: Reviewing the literature on contributing factors. Washington, DC, Child Trends.
KEYWORDS: School-Based, Substance Abuse, Drug Prevention, Social/Emotional Health and Development, Anxiety, Mental Health, Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, White or Caucasian, Middle School, Life Skills Training, Violence, Behavioral Problems, Middle School, High School, Tobacco Use, Marijuana Use, Alcohol Use, Illicit Drug Use, Suburban, Urban, Rural, Adolescence (12-17), Young Adulthood (18-24), Youth, Young Adult.
Program information last updated 10/24/08.
|
|
|
© Child Trends 2003 |