This paper examines the justification for using a mixed-methods research approach in designing and evaluating youth drug prevention programs, with a focus on high-school students. It outlines the goals and objectives of an Outreach Worker Service (OWS) program, including building therapeutic relationships, developing student assets, providing education, and empowering communities. The paper then presents Positive Youth Development (PYD) as the conceptual framework underpinning the OWS, highlighting the alignment between the two on universality, strength-based approaches, systems focus, and asset promotion. The 40 developmental assets identified by the Search Institute are discussed as a measurable evidence base for reducing risky behaviors and enhancing youth wellbeing.
Although scientific methods have been endorsed in drug prevention services, some programs are implemented before the establishment of evidence-based objectives and goals. This paper seeks to share what counselors, teachers, and other relevant stakeholders can do to support drug abuse prevention among high-school students. First, the need to set clear project objectives and goals cannot be overstated. Students at risk also need to be identified using a scientifically proven framework. Through the mixed-methods research approach, overarching project objectives and goals were established among the various stakeholders (Dell et al., 2013).
Project Goals
1. To support communities, youth, and schools by bolstering the development resources that young people can access, thereby preventing the deviant tendencies of alcoholism, drug abuse complications, and mental health issues — achieved through building therapeutic relationships, education, asset development, and community empowerment.
2. To embed in the school culture by engaging with youth, the community, and families. These efforts include community development projects, while acknowledging that Outreach Worker Service (OWS) communities vary in their stages of engagement.
Outreach Worker Service Objectives
1. Build therapeutic relationships by:
i. Committing at-risk students to structured tasks through an outreach worker.
ii. Promoting counseling programs targeting at-risk students, using caregivers where needed.
iii. Applying the necessary therapeutic instruments to enhance student wellbeing.
iv. Identifying client needs and channeling them to appropriate referrals.
v. Cooperating with school staff on treatment processes for at-risk students.
vi. Supporting the community as needs arise and time permits.
2. Develop and use student assets by:
i. Creating life-skills programming.
ii. Creating opportunities to apply life skills through experiential learning.
3. Provide education through:
Staff:
i. Helping staff meet their health curriculum needs.
ii. Helping staff meet outreach worker/staff-determined student needs.
Youth:
i. Engaging students and their families directly to share information on mental health and substance abuse concerns based on individual assessment findings.
ii. Creating awareness among students in face-to-face group sessions in class.
iii. Operating as an educational and informational resource for both students and their families.
Community:
i. Mobilizing the community on student health issues.
4. Build community — there is a need for concerted effort to construct a philosophy for children by promoting effective networks and wellbeing among community members.
A mixed-methods approach will be applied, beginning with asking stakeholders to state the program objectives and goals and to identify the targeted learner population. The alignment of theoretical guidelines will be determined by reviewing OWS activities to date. Collecting and analyzing data from the project's evaluation will shed light on: (i) determining the most urgent goals and objectives of the project; (ii) identifying the youth learner population and the degree to which OWS engages with them; and (iii) determining and aligning the Outreach Worker Service with scientifically designed Positive Youth Development theoretical guidelines. Data collection will draw from a range of sources from the outset, using a mixed-methods approach. Some researchers have favored the mixed-methods approach because it helps address all stages of program evaluation and is well suited to evaluating programs targeting substance and drug abuse (Dell et al., 2013).
It is necessary to draw on expert knowledge to develop drug prevention planning for youth. Attention should also be paid to professional services in their declining phases, using evidence-based solutions to revive and sustain them. If evidence-based goals are not established at the onset of a program, insight can be drawn from program personnel, school staff, and administrators. These perspectives can help establish theoretical linkages after program implementation, forming the basis for evaluating the success of an intervention (Dell et al., 2013).
Positive Youth Development (PYD) is a theory that cuts across multiple disciplines. It recognizes the positive aspects of youth and the settings they come from, with the objective of promoting the continued growth and development of youth development initiatives. PYD has a special focus on adolescents and has had success in addressing substance abuse (Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, 2010). PYD aims at reducing high-risk behavior as a means of enhancing wellbeing among young people. It is built on three tenets: universality, strength, and a focus on systems. It holds that all youth can benefit from the program, and its reach extends across individuals, families, and communities — treating youth as a resource (Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, 2010).
PYD also seeks to enhance developmental resources, synthesizing the systems approach and the strength component of the theory into a measurable evidence base with a clear structure. The Search Institute has identified assets focused on enhancing youth wellbeing, commonly regarded as foundational building blocks for healthy adolescent and child development (Benson, Lerner, & Silbereisen, 2007). The developmental asset framework is grounded in resiliency concepts, protective factors, and research identifying 20 internal and 20 external assets. These have been confirmed to: (1) stop risky behaviors, (2) promote positive outcomes, and (3) build resiliency among youth. Research shows that the more developmental assets a young person can access, the greater their chance for positive development. PYD places strong emphasis on these protective factors for young people (Dell et al., 2013).
Using expert knowledge in the creation of drug prevention plans is critical. Evidence-based practice must be used to evaluate programs, and addiction programming and mental health interventions should be linked to theoretical foundations, as these serve as effective tools for measuring intervention success and program evaluation (Glanz, Rimer, & Viswanath, 2008). PYD was identified as a potential evidence base for OWS. When OWS and PYD are compared systematically, there is near-identical alignment across the dimensions of universality, strength base, systems focus, and asset promotion.
"Systematic comparison of OWS and PYD principles"
Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse. (2010). Building on our strengths: Canadian standards for school-based youth substance abuse prevention, Version 2.0. Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.
Benson, P. L., Lerner, R. M., & Silbereisen, R. K. (2007). Approaches to positive youth development. Developmental assets: An overview of theory, research, and practice, 33–58.
You’re 65% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.