All these variables are viewed to have a direct effect on the student as an individual thus are important to consider.
There are variables that will be considered at school-level and these will be generated from the responses or data collected from the individual variables. The first variable in this case is the prevalence of rules or policy banning smoking in schools and this will be deduced from the responses given by the students as individuals and will indicate the average percentage of schools that have such rules.
Significance of the study
Currently there are many cases of school unrests caused by students through strikes which lead to disruption of activities and even destruction of property. Such actions have more often been associated to drug and substance use among students which include smoking, drinking and other modes of administering drugs. This has also led to the drastic reduction on performance levels of students. Since all these are undesirable happenings there has been constant search on the possible and most effective means of controlling and at best totally bringing to an end the use of drugs in schools and all educational institutions. Smoking ban in schools has been one of the recommendations that have been put forward but has faced several challenges with a lot of questions being raised on the effectiveness of such a move, this has really affected the implementation of this smoking ban policy. It is therefore very necessary that the arising questions be answered and put clearly to be understood so as to facilitate its implementation and the best way to find these answers is through research.
Given that this study will not only find out the importance of smoking ban on schools but also try to solve the puzzle on the effectiveness of such bans, it will be a very significant tool to the implementers of such policies. Through the use of the results of this research schools will be able to identify whether it is worth introducing such a policy, where they have not been, or maintaining the policy, in a case where they exist. At the same time, the concerned implementers will identify the right strategies to be used to enforce smoking ban policy in schools. Considering these benefits, it is obvious that this research will be significant to the community at large since it addresses an issue that is of great concern among the communities in all territories. Since it touches on the youth who are always looked upon for future prosperity of any nation, the significance will ultimately be felt all through the nation and even beyond borders.
This research is expected to take three weeks divided into three sections that are consecutive and each lasting a week. The sections will be the pre-study week, the intervention week, and the post-study week in that order. The pre-study week will be utilized by observing the smoking behaviors of individuals in all the targeted groups and their interaction with students, the intervention week will be for collecting the needed information through the means that have been identified, and the post-study week will be for analyzing the data collected and coming up with a report.
Abernathy, T.J. et al. (2002). Relationship between poverty and health among adolescents.
Adolescence 37:55 -- 67.
Aveyard, P. et al. (2004). Methodological and substantive review of the evidence that schoolscause pupils to smoke. Social Sciences Medicine 58: 2253 -- 65.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (1994). Guidelines for school health programs to prevent tobacco use and addiction. MMWR, 43:1 -- 18.
Conrad, K.M. et al. (1992). Why children start smoking cigarettes: Predictors of onset. Br Journal of Addict 87:1711 -- 24.
Darling, H. et al. (2006). Is there a relation between school smoking policies and youth cigarette smoking knowledge and behaviors? Health Education Research Theory and Practice 21:108 -- 15.
Fagan, P. et al. (2005).Parental occupation, education, and smoking as predictors of offspring tobacco use in adulthood: A longitudinal study. Addict Behavior 30:517 -- 29.
Fergusson, D.M. et al. (2007). Childhood social disadvantage and smoking in adulthood: Results
of a 25-year longitudinal study. Addiction 102:475 -- 82.
Harris, K.J. et al. (2009). Enforcing an outdoor smoking ban on a college campus: Effects of a multi-component approach. Journal of American college health, vol. 58, no. 02
Kumar, R. et al. (2005). School tobacco control policies related to students' smoking and attitudes toward smoking: National Survey Results, 1999 -- 2000. Health Education Behavior 32:780 -- 794.
Leatherdale, S.T. et al. (2005). Social modeling in the school environment, student characteristics, and smoking susceptibility: a multi-level analysis. Journal of Adolescents Health, 37:330 -- 6.
Lowry, R. et al. (1996).The effect of socioeconomic status on chronic disease risk behaviors among U.S. adolescents. JAMA 276:792 -- 7
Martin, M.W. et al. (2000). The association between severity of sanction imposed for violation of tobacco policy and high school dropout rates. Journal of School Health, 70: 327 -- 30.
Melanie, a. et al. (2000). Effect of restrictions on smoking at home, at school, and in public
places on teenage smoking: Cross sectional study. British Medical Journal, 321: 7257. 333-337
Moore, L. et al. (2006). School smoking policies and smoking prevalence among adolescents:
multilevel analysis of cross-sectional data from Wales. Tobacco Control 10:117 -- 23.
Pentz, M.A. et al. (1989). The power of policy: the relationship of smoking policy to adolescent smoking. American Journal of Public Health, 79:857 --…