As the result of a perceived need for some type of classroom attempt at approaching the subject of drug use in society, an interdisciplinary class was begun at the School of Pharmacy at the University of North Carolina. Using funding from Project SPEED, a NIDA contract with the Student American Pharmaceutical Association, and continuing then for a three year period, the program was able to substantiate both a significant change in the cognitive levels of knowledge about drugs and its effect in society, as well as significant changes in attitudes of students to that of a more accepting attitude toward drug users as well as greater desire for social change related to stereotypes and current social policy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SmartR.FejerD., The Effects of High and Low Fear Messages about Drugs, Journal of Drug Education, 4:2, pp. 225–236, Summer, 1974.
2.
WebbR. A. J., Fear and Communication, Journal of Drug Education, 4:1, pp. 97–104, 1974.
3.
HalleckS., The Great Drug Education Hoax, The Progressive, 34, pp. 1–7, 1970.
4.
StuartR. B., Teaching Facts about Drugs: Pushing or Preventing?Journal of Educational Psychology, 66:2, pp. 189–201, April, 1974.
5.
StuartR. B.SchumanM. C., Tripping and Taking in Mid-America: A Study of Teenage Drug Abuse in Four Michigan Communities, Office of Drug Abuse and Alcoholism, Lansing, Michigan, 1972.
6.
SwisherJ. D., Drug Education: Pushing or Preventing?Peabody Journal of Education, 49, pp. 68–75, 1971.
7.
RathsL., Values and Teaching, Merrill, Columbus, Ohio, 1966.
8.
SimonS., Values Clarification: A Handbook of Practical Strategies for Teachers and Students, Hart Publishing Company, 1972.
9.
BenderK. J., Drug Abuse Presentations and the Health Professional: His Options, Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 20:2, pp. 12–17, Winter, 1975.
10.
SmithB. C., Values Clarification in Drug Education: A Comparative Study, Journal of Drug Education, 3:4, pp. 369–375, Winter, 1973.
11.
CarneyR. E., An Evaluation of the Effect of a Values-Oriented Drug Abuse Education Program Using the Risk of Taking Attitude Questionnaire, Coronado Unified School District, Coronado, California, 1972.
12.
Drug Use in America: Problem in Perspective, Second Report of the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973.
13.
St. DennisC. D., Perspectives on the Development and Implementation of an Undergraduate General-University Class Dealing with Mind Altering Drugs Their Use in Today's Society, American Journal of Pharmacy Education, August, 1973.
14.
EddyJ.KnoderierB., Need for College Drug Education Courses, Journal of Drug Eduation, 4:4, pp. 385–388, 1974.
15.
SchreierJ., Drugs Should be Included in Business Education, Journal of Business Education, 49:5, pp. 207–208, February, 1974.
16.
BurkhalterP., Alcoholism, Drug Abuse and Drug Addiction: A Study of Nursing Education, Journal of Nursing Education, 114:2, pp. 30–36, April, 1975.
17.
StimmelB., Development of a Curriculum in Drug Dependency, Journal of Medical Education, 49:2, pp. 158–162, February, 1974.
18.
ValentineE. M., Project SPEED—Four Perspectives, Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association, 16:1, pp. 30–31, 46, January, 1976.
19.
SmartR. G., Drug Education: Current Issues, Future Directions, Addiction Research Foundation, Toronto, 1974.
20.
GoodstadtM., Research on Methods and Programs of Drug Education, Addiction Research Foundation, Toronto, 1974.
21.
AbramsL. A., Accountability in Drug Education—A Model for Education, Drug Abuse Council, Inc., Washington, 1973.
22.
HodappW. J., Social, Prescription, and Illicit Drugs: Topics in Interdisciplinary Health Education, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1976.
23.
RandallD.WongM. R., Drug Education to Date: A Review, Journal of Drug Education, 6:1, 1976.
24.
DornN., Notes on Prediction of Behavioral Change in Evaluation of Drug Education, Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 1:1, pp. 15–26, September, 1975.
25.
AnthonyJ.KurzmanM., Project SPEED Evaluation Program, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota.
26.
MillisJ. S., Pharmacists for the Future, The Report of the Study Commission on Pharmacy, University of Michigan, 1975.
27.
KurzmanM. G., Drug Education: Boom or Bust?Contemporary Drug Problems, 3:1, Spring, 1974.
