Monitoring the Life Skills Training Programme in Primary education: teachers’ and teacher-trainers’ perspective

Proposal Information This contribution presents the findings of a qualitative study conducted as part of a monitoring process of the implementation of the Life Skills Training Programme (LSTP) in primary education, aimed at understanding how this validated and structured life skills intervention is translated into everyday school practice and which factors influence its effectiveness. LSTP is a preventive programme in the socio-health field, designed to reduce the use of substances such as alcohol, tobacco, and drugs and to prevent violent behaviours by addressing the main social and psychological factors that contribute to the initiation of substance use and other risk behaviours (Botvin et al., 1995; Botvin et al., 2003). The programme aligns with international policies promoting the development of socio-emotional skills in school settings, recognised as essential for inclusion, equity, and student well-being (WHO, 1992; OECD, 2021). In this perspective, LSTP is structured around three main components: the development of personal self-regulation skills, the enhancement of social competencies, and the strengthening of resistance to substance use, including health education content and the promotion of pro-health attitudes. These components are organised into instructional units that can be implemented within the classroom context and integrated into the school curriculum (Botvin et al., 2015). Originally developed by Gilbert J. Botvin, LSTP is grounded in Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) and Problem Behaviour Theory (Jessor & Jessor, 1977), which conceptualise risk behaviours as shaped by social learning processes, group norms, and individual self-regulation skills. Extensive empirical evidence supports the programme’s international effectiveness in reducing substance use, violence, and other problematic behaviours, with both short- and long-term benefits (Botvin & Griffin, 2004; Griffin et al., 2023). The robustness of the model is further confirmed by its widespread adoption: LSTP has been implemented throughout the United States and in 39 countries worldwide. The programme was first validated in the United States for lower secondary education and later adapted for primary education (Botvin et al., 1995; 2003). LSTP was introduced in Italy in 2010 in the Lombardy region as a preventive intervention in lower secondary schools, following an adaptation to the national context whose effectiveness has been empirically demonstrated (Velasco et al., 2015; 2017). Through a process of adaptation, the programme was later extended to primary schools to enhance its preventive potential within the vertical curriculum of comprehensive institutes, culminating in the development, from the 2021-22 school year, of the LSTP Primary, implemented from third to fifth grade. In this context, teachers implementing the LSTP in their classrooms participate in a preparatory training pathway combined with ongoing methodological support prior to programme delivery. This training is jointly conducted by regionally accredited health professionals and teacher-trainers, who are in turn trained by authorised health and socio-health professionals. As mentioned above, this contribution forms part of the LSTP monitoring activities carried out in primary schools under an agreement between the Health Protection Agency (ATS) of the Metropolitan City of Milan and the University of Milano-Bicocca. This paper examines the implementation of the LSTP in Lombardy, Italy, and related training processes, highlighting the perspectives of teachers and teacher-trainers involved. Specifically, the research explores how the programme is translated into everyday school practice and the meanings, perceived changes, and critical issues that emerge from the experiences of those involved in its implementation and training. In this regard, the study contributes to ongoing international discussions on the promotion of life skills within educational systems. Methodology or Methods/ Research Instruments or Sources Used This study is situated within the ecological paradigm (Mortari, 2007) and adopts a fourth-generation evaluation approach (Lincoln & Guba, 1989), inspired by the principles of participatory evaluation (Bezzi, 2010). The evaluation process is oriented towards valuing participants’ subjectivity, fostering reflective dialogue, and producing evidence useful for programme redesign. The action develops along three main dimensions: analysing perceived effectiveness and critical issues with teachers and teacher-trainers; identifying changes observed by teachers and teacher-trainers in students and themselves; and defining guiding principles for improving and consolidating the programme and its training. The study involved primary school teachers and teacher-trainers. In the first phase of the investigation, four focus groups were conducted (N = 39 teachers), involving participants who voluntarily responded to an open call addressed to the entire target population. The subsequent phase consisted of three focus groups (N = 22 teacher-trainers), who were likewise recruited on a voluntary basis through an open call. At the end of the focus group analysis process, two meetings were organised with teachers and teacher-trainers to share and validate the results. The focus groups were conducted remotely (on the Google Meet platform) and were audio-recorded, with the participants' consent, and then transcribed verbatim. The study was conducted in accordance with international ethical principles (World Medical Association, 2013), ensuring the protection of participants and the compliance of all procedures throughout the research process. Data were analysed using a qualitative content analysis approach (Krippendorff, 2018), supported by a coding system inspired by the constructivist approach of Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2016; Tarozzi, 2008). During the initial phase of open coding, codes remained closely aligned with the teachers’ own words, following an analytic process of data “naming” (Tarozzi, 2008, p. 84). The codes were subsequently grouped into categories representing the different units of meaning identified. A key element of the analytical process was intersubjectivity among the researchers: by first coding the data independently and then engaging in systematic comparison and discussion, the researchers progressively refined the coding system through a productive exchange of interpretations. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Findings from focus groups with teachers show that the LSTP strengthens the personal and social competences, supporting students’ well-being and sense of belonging at school, both in and out of the classroom. In particular, the programme fosters group cohesion within classes and improves the classroom relational climate, promoting self-awareness and the development of metacognitive skills to support the management of critical situations, as experienced during the programme. Teachers describe the programme activities as an 'inclusive space', offering opportunities for expression and recognition to more vulnerable pupils, while enabling teachers to gain a deeper understanding of their students and their relationships. Active teaching methodologies and structured practices that can easily be transferred to the classroom emerge as key elements, as they provide teachers with opportunities for direct experimentation and consolidation of professional practices. Teachers report greater effectiveness when the programme is integrated into the curriculum and implemented continuously, rather than delivered as individual units. Alongside these positive aspects, however, several critical issues have emerged. These include the perceived rigidity of the model, difficulties in engaging families, and the need to update programme content to better respond to contemporary educational contexts. Focus groups with teacher-trainers further emphasise the importance of the discussed topics and the value of training as a platform for dialogue among professionals and across regions. Nevertheless, they also highlight the complexity of the dual role of teacher and trainer, as well as challenges in the relationship between teacher-trainers and healthcare professionals. Finally, issues related to programme continuity across school levels arise, particularly regarding implementation in lower secondary education. This results in primary schools shouldering a disproportionate amount of educational responsibility, alongside organisational challenges highlighting the need for stronger structural support. Within this framework, the university emerges as a strategic mediator between the education and health sectors.