Advanced LifeSkills Training
Advanced LifeSkills Training (LST) is a school-based substance misuse prevention programme designed to help young people avoid tobacco, alcohol and drug abuse.
Advanced LifeSkills is a universal programme for all children and young people between the ages of 11 and 14.
Advanced LifeSkills Training is delivered to classrooms of children or young people by teachers, social workers or youth workers. The curriculum teaches children and young people personal self-management skills, social skills, and strategies for resisting tobacco, alcohol, and drugs.
EIF Programme Assessment
Child outcomes
This programme can affect outcomes for children in Active and healthy, physical and mental wellbeing.
According to the best available evidence for this programme's impact, it can achieve the following positive outcomes for children:
Preventing risky sexual behaviour & teen pregnancy
Reduced risk-taking
based on study 1a
- Statement: 8.5-point improvement on the Eysenck Personality Inventory (self-report)
- Score: 7
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
Preventing substance abuse
Reduced drunkenness frequency
based on study 1a
- Statement: 0.09-point improvement on the 9-point drunkenness frequency response scale (self-report)
- Score: 4
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
based on study 2b
- Statement: 0.13-point improvement on a single item self-report measure of drunkenness frequency
- Score: 4
- Timeframe: 9 years later
- Long term: 1
Reduced smoking frequency
based on study 1a
- Statement: 0.21-point improvement on the 9-point smoking frequency response scale (self-report)
- Score: 5
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
based on study 2b
- Statement: 0.17-point improvement on a single item self-report measure of smoking frequency
- Score: 5
- Timeframe: 9 years later
- Long term: 1
Reduced smoking quantity
based on study 1a
- Statement: 0.13-point improvement on the 11-point smoking index (self-report)
- Score: 7
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
Reduced drinking frequency
based on study 1a
- Statement: 0.22-point improvement on the 6 point ‘amount consumed per occasion’ scale (self-report)
- Score: 7
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
Reduced drinking quantity
based on study 1a
- Statement: 0.17-point improvement on the 9-point drinking quantity response scale (self-report)
- Score: 7
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
Reduced frequency of inhalant use
based on study 1a
- Statement: 0.05-point improvement on the 9-point inhalant use frequency response scale (self-report)
- Score: 3
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
Reduced current polydrug use
based on study 1a
- Statement: 0.09-point improvement on the current polydrug usage score (self-report)
- Score: 5
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
Reduced lifetime polydrug use
based on study 1a
- Statement: 0.18-point improvement on the lifetime polydrug usage score (self-report)
- Score: 7
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
Reduced binge drinking
based on study 1b
- Statement: 2.5-percentage point reduction in proportion of participants who are binge drinkers (measured using a one-item self-report measure assessing how much a participant drinks each time they drink)
- Score: 21
- Timeframe: A year later
- Long term: 1
- Statement: 3-percentage point reduction in proportion of participants who are binge drinkers (measured using a one-item self-report measure assessing how much a participant drinks each time they drink)
- Score: 21
- Timeframe: 2 years later
- Long term: 1
Reduced substance initiation
based on study 2a
- Statement: 0.18-point improvement on the Substance Initiation Index (self-report)
- Score: 7
- Timeframe: 5 years later
- Long term: 1
Reduced alcohol-related problems
based on study 2b
- Statement: 0.06-point improvement on Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index (self-report)
- Score: 5
- Timeframe: 9 years later
- Long term: 1
This programme also has evidence of supporting positive outcomes for couples, parents or families that may be relevant to a commissioning decision. Please see About the evidence for more detail.
Who is it for?
The best available evidence for this programme relates to the following age-groups:
Preadolescents Adolescents
How is it delivered?
The best available evidence for this programme relates to implementation through these delivery models:
- Group
Where is it delivered?
The best available evidence for this programme relates to its implementation in these settings:
- Primary school
- Secondary school
- Community centre
How is it targeted?
The best available evidence for this programme relates to its implementation as:
- Universal
Where has it been implemented?
- England
- Northern Ireland
- Scotland
- Wales
- Ireland
Ireland provision
Ireland evaluation
About the programme
What happens during the delivery?
How is it delivered?
- Advanced LST is delivered in 36 sessions of one hour’s duration each by one teacher, social worker, or youth worker to classrooms of young people. 17 of these sessions are delivered when the young people are between 11 and 12 years old (level 1). 12 sessions are delivered when they are between 12 and 13 (level 2), and a further seven sessions are delivered when they are between 13 and 14 (level 3) – these act as booster sessions so that key concepts and skills are reinforced and developed over time.
What happens during the intervention?
- The curriculum teaches children and young people personal self-management skills, social skills and strategies for resisting tobacco, alcohol and drugs.
- The curriculum is taught with a variety of techniques to include facilitation, coaching, assessment and behavioural rehearsal which are proven training methods.
- Young people receive a copy of their own workbook called the 'LifeSkills Magazine' which is full of activities and exercises which reinforce what they have learned in class.
- There are also letters available as part of the programme to send home to parents so they can reinforce the techniques being used.
What are the implementation requirements?
Who can deliver it?
- The practitioner who delivers this programme is a classroom teacher (or youth/social worker) with NFQ-7/8 level qualifications.
What are the training requirements?
- They have 14 hours of programme training. Booster training of practitioners is recommended.
How are the practitioners supervised?
- It is recommended that practitioners are supervised by one programme developer supervisor (qualified to NFQ-7/8 level).
What are the systems for maintaining fidelity?
- Training manual
- Other printed material
- Fidelity monitoring
- Huddle (collaboration software) facilitates discussions on the programme between LST facilitators
- In-class coaching support
Is there a licensing requirement?
There is a licence required to run this programme.
How does it work? (Theory of Change)
How does it work?
- Strong self-management skills protect children and young people from misusing tobacco, alcohol, and illegal drugs.
- LST teaches young people self-management skills such as decision making and dealing with stress, social skills such as effective communication and strategies for resisting peer pressure such as assertiveness.
- In the short term, children and young people have better awareness about the misconceptions associated with drugs, tobacco, and alcohol and are better able to communicate positively with others.
- In the longer term, children and young people have greater self-confidence, improved peer relationships, and perform better at school. Ultimately young people will be less likely to engage in risk-taking behaviours.
Intended outcomes
- Achieving in all areas of learning and development
- Active and healthy, physical and mental wellbeing
- Active and healthy, physical and mental wellbeing
- Active and healthy, physical and mental wellbeing
Contact details
Lauren Spiers
Barnardos
lauren.spiers@barnardos.org.uk
www.lifeskillstraining.com
www.barnardos.org.uk/lifeskills
http://www.episcenter.psu.edu/ebp/lifeskills
About the evidence
Advanced LifeSkills Training’s most rigorous evidence comes from three RCTs which were conducted in the USA.
The first study is a rigorously conducted RCT; this study identified statistically significant positive impact on a number of child outcomes. The second study is a rigorously conducted RCT; this study identified statistically significant positive impact on a number of child outcomes.
Study 1a
| Citation: | Botvin et al (2001a) |
| Design: | Cluster RCT |
| Country: | United States |
| Sample: | 5,222 children with an average age of 12.9 years |
| Timing: | Three-months post-intervention, one-year follow-up |
| Child outcomes: | |
| Other outcomes: | |
| Study rating: | 3 |
Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., Diaz, T., & Ifill-Williams, M. (2001a). Drug abuse prevention among minority adolescents: Posttest and one-year follow-up of a school-based preventive intervention. Prevention Science, 2(1), 1–13.
Available at
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1010025311161
Study design and sample
The first study is a rigorously conducted RCT. The study was a cluster RCT, with randomisation at the level of the school. Schools were randomised to either a 15-session LifeSkills Training programme in seventh grade, along with 10 booster sessions in eighth grade, or to a control group receiving business-as-usual services.
This study was conducted in the United States (New York) with a sample of 5,222 children who were 12.9 years old on average. The sample was predominantly composed of ethnic minority groups, and was economically disadvantaged (62% free school lunch).
Measures
The frequency and quantity of smoking cigarettes, smoking marijuana, alcohol consumption and the use of inhalants were measured using child self-reports on Likert-type scale items of frequency. The above measures were combined to produce two additional variables: lifetime polydrug use (ie the number of substances ever used, out of four) and current polydrug use (ie the number of substances used in the past month, out of four).
In addition, the study assesses a number of mediating variables including intentions to use substances, normative expectations relating to the prevalence of drug use and a set of social and emotional competencies: decision-making was assessed using the Coping Assessment Battery, assertiveness was assessed using the Gambrill and Richey Assertion Inventory, and risk-taking was assessed using the Eysenck Personality Inventory.
Findings
This study identified statistically significant positive impact on a number of child outcomes. At post-test, there were statistically significant differences between the intervention and control groups favouring the intervention group on frequency of drunkenness. At one-year follow-up, in terms of substance use outcomes, statistically significant differences favouring the intervention group were identified on: smoking frequency, smoking quantity, drinking frequency, drunkenness frequency, drinking quantity, inhalant frequency, as well as lifetime polydrug use and current polydrug use. Statistically significant effects were also identified on a range of mediating variables, including refusal skills efficacy and risk-taking.
Study 1b
| Citation: | Botvin et al (2001b) |
| Design: | Cluster RCT |
| Country: | United States |
| Sample: | 5,222 children with an average age of 12.9 years |
| Timing: | Two-year follow-up |
| Child outcomes: | |
| Other outcomes: | |
| Study rating: | 3 |
Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., Diaz, T., & Ifill-Williams, M. (2001b). Preventing binge drinking during early adolescence: One-and two-year follow-up of a school-based preventive intervention. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 15(4), 360–365.
Available at
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.533.3409&rep=rep1&type=pdf
This paper describes additional outcomes from study 1a described above. In this case:
- At a two-year follow-up, binge drinking was measured using a dichotomised version of a six-point scale assessing alcohol consumed per drinking occasion, identifying students who report that they drink five or more drinks per drinking occasion) (child self-report). Knowledge of drinking was measured using a 16-item scale of children’s knowledge relating to drinking (child self-report). Anti-drinking attitudes were measured using items adapted from the Teenager’s Self-test: Cigarette Smoking measure (child self-report). Finally, normative expectations of peer drinking were measured using a five-point scale assessing the extent to which child perceived the prevalence of substance use among peers to be high (child self-report).
- This study identified statistically significant positive impact on a number of child outcomes. At two-year follow-up, significant differences favouring the intervention group were identified on binge drinking and normative expectations of peer drinking.
Study 2a
| Citation: | Spoth et al (2008) |
| Design: | Cluster RCT |
| Country: | United States |
| Sample: | 1,831 families, with children between 12 and 13 years old |
| Timing: | Five years post-intervention |
| Child outcomes: | |
| Other outcomes: | |
| Study rating: | 3 |
Spoth, R. L., Randall, G. K., Trudeau, L., Shin, C., & Redmond, C. (2008). Substance use outcomes 5½ years past baseline for partnership-based, family-school preventive interventions. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 96(1), 57–68.
Available at
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0376871608000665
Study design and sample
The second study is a rigorously conducted RCT. The study was a cluster RCT, with randomisation at the level of the school. Schools were randomised to either a LifeSkills only group, a LifeSkills and Strengthening Families group (an intervention which aims to reduce substance use via improving parenting skills), or a minimal contact control condition (leaflets on teen development mailed to parents).
This study was conducted in the United States, with a sample of 1,831 children who were between 12 and 13 years old at the beginning of the programme. The children in the sample were predominantly white, and recruited from rural areas.
Measures
Up to five years after programme completion, the extent to which children have ever used alcohol, cigarettes, or marijuana was assessed using the Substance Initiation Index (child self-report). Two additional measures were used: a poly-substance use index (a self-report measure of whether alcohol, cigarettes, or marijuana were used in the past month), and an advanced poly-substance use index (a self-report measure of how many substances have been used in terms of alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana, with hierarchical weighting to indicate the extent of progression of substance use).
Findings
This study identified statistically significant positive impact on substance initiation.
Study 2b
| Citation: | Spoth et al (2014) |
| Design: | Cluster RCT |
| Country: | United States |
| Sample: | 1,831 families, with children between 12 and 13 years old |
| Timing: | Nine years post-intervention |
| Child outcomes: | |
| Other outcomes: | |
| Study rating: | 3 |
Spoth, R., Trudeau, L., Redmond, C., & Shin, C. (2014). Replication RCT of early universal prevention effects on young adult substance misuse. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 82(6), 949–963.
Available at
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ccp/82/6/949/
This paper describes additional outcomes from study 2a described above. In this case:
- Up to nine years after programme completion, drunkenness was measured using Likert-type items adapted from the Monitoring the Future study assessing the frequency of drinking until drunk (child self-report). Alcohol-related problems were measured using a short, modified form the Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index (child self-report). The frequency of smoking was measured using Likert-type scale items. Illicit substance use was measured using Likert-type scale items assessing the frequency of using illicit substances – marijuana, narcotics, cocaine, ecstasy, methamphetamine, amphetamines, barbiturates, tranquilisers, and LSD.
- This study identified statistically significant positive impact on a number of child outcomes. At the none year follow-up, significant differences favouring the intervention group were identified on drunkenness, alcohol-related problems, and frequency of smoking.