Introduction
The reason for the mental health program’s essence is the current mental health of school students. Such programs are designed to help students achieve stability in their mental state. In order to comprehend the idea behind the intervention programs, three specific questions need solid answers:
- To what extent does the program participation improve self-reported anxiety symptoms and depression among school students?
- Considering the program’s effects on academic performance and attendance, is there a comparable rate between participating school students and non-participants?
- What are the perceptions about the program’s value from the perspectives of students?
Significant promises can be made, yet several factors still influence the efficacy of intervention programs.
Improvement from Program Participation
The efficacy of school-based interventions can mitigate anxiety symptoms and depression among school students. Castillo et al. (2019) conduct a critical examination of the study, elucidating the potential of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in a school environment. The study evaluated the effectiveness of a universal school-based CBT named FRIENDS (Castillo et al., 2019). The program is manualized, focusing on emotional regulation and problem-solving. It is facilitated by either trained school staff or designated health leaders.
In Castillo et al.’s (2019) study, forty-one schools were divided into three groups: a health-led FRIENDS group, a school-led FRIENDS group, and a comparison group that received Personal, Social, and Health Education (PSHE). The results illustrated that health-led FRIENDS were more successful in reducing social anxiety, generalized anxiety, and total scores on the Revised Children’s Anxiety and Depression Scale than school-led FRIENDS and PSHE (Castillo et al., 2019). However, no outstanding effects were observed on standardized assessment test scores in math or writing.
The significant role of school-based interventions is the central emphasis of the study. Such interventions play a firm role in addressing mental health concerns. Nonetheless, it also raises critical questions about the effective implementation of such interventions. While the health-led FRIENDS program markedly reduced anxiety symptoms, there was no discernible impact on academic performance (Castillo et al., 2019). This result entails a more nuanced comprehension of the connection between mental health interventions and academic outcomes.
Furthermore, Pilar et al. (2022) consider broader factors such as school policies, culture, and climate in delivering effective interventions. The sustainability of these interventions also poses a challenge, with experts highlighting the importance of establishing enduring academic-community partnerships. Therefore, future studies must explore more integrative, comprehensive, and sustainable approaches for their implementation.
Comparison of Participants and Non-participants
The FRIENDS research underscored the program’s benefits in mitigating anxiety and depression symptoms among high school students. However, the study found no substantial improvement in students’ academic performance. Contrarily, Jessiman et al. (2022) indicated high-stress levels among students that negatively impact mental health and attendance. This study, though, did not incorporate a mental health intervention. Its potential impacts on academic performance and attendance needing clarification were left.
It is not easy to discern if the program participants fare better academically or have improved attendance compared to non-participants. However, the South Korean study gives a more extensive side of the program’s impact on academic performance. Park et al. (2019) emphasize the crucial role of the school environment on student mental health. It reveals that schools with lower mobility or dropout rates exhibit better mental health among students (Park et al., 2019).
Further points could be made about the negative factor of shaming. It is revealed that many students will feel shamed once their direct connection with mental health is known to the school community (that would include school participants, educators, etc.) (Kotera et al., 2023). Such behavioral patterns accentuate the problem of hiding the mental state, which would affect those students from taking any initial actions toward participating in mental health programs. Nevertheless, whether the non-participation affects academic performance remains to be seen.
Student’s Perception
The issue of stress related to social relationships within the educational environment emerges as a critical theme. Several students reported experiencing significant stress connected to their peer interactions (Rosvall, 2019). Such a state was addressed during the mental intervention program. The initiative positively influenced some participants, allowing them to reassess their situations and make necessary changes. The intervention’s effect on long-term improvement remains to be determined, as its duration was short (Rosvall, 2019).
Nevertheless, initial feedback suggests a positive impact, as students reported feeling better and more comfortable interacting with their peers (Rosvall, 2023). Some participants accentuated the role of the teacher in promoting discussions around mental health. They suggested that classroom discussions about stress could create an open social and mental space for students to share their experiences and understandings (Rosvall, 2019). This advice reveals a perceived need for teachers to address school pressure, student stress, and peer relationships.
Conclusion
In conclusion, several factors impact the efficiency of mental health intervention programs. The overall school climate is present in the mental state of the youth at schools. Some programs brilliantly demonstrate the rate of successful interventions that ultimately resolve the anxiety problem to a minimum. Nevertheless, some studies highlight the complex nature of academic performance comprehension. The problem lies in the shame one has in revealing one’s mental condition. All things considered, the programs generally contribute to the positive state of youth mental health.
References
Castillo, E. G., Ijadi-Maghsoodi, R., Shadravan, S., Moore, E., Mensah, M. O., Docherty, M., Nunez, M. G. A., Barceló, N. E., Goodsmith, N., Halpin, L. E., Morton, I., Mango, J., Montero, A. E., Koushkaki, S. R., Bromley, E., Chung, B., Jones, F., Gabrielian, S., Gelberg, L.,… Wells, K. B. (2019). Community interventions to promote mental health and social equity. Current Psychiatry Reports, 21(5).
Jessiman, T., Kidger, J., Spencer, L., Geijer-Simpson, E., Kaluzeviciute, G., Burn, A., Leonard, N., & Limmer, M. (2022). School culture and student mental health: a qualitative study in UK secondary schools. BMC Public Health, 22(1).
Kotera, Y., Jackson, J., Kirkman, A., Edwards, A., Colman, R., Underhill, A., Jackson, J. G., Baker, D., & Ozaki, A. (2023). Comparing the mental health of healthcare students: Mental health shame and self-compassion in counselling, occupational therapy, nursing and social work students. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1–18.
Park, S., Lee, D., Jung, S., & Hong, H. J. (2019). Four-year trajectory of Korean youth mental health and impacts of school environment and school counselling: Aobservational study using national schools database. BMJ Open, 9(11).
Pilar, M., Jost, E., Walsh-Bailey, C., Powell, B. J., Mazzucca, S., Eyler, A. A., Purtle, J., Allen, P., & Brownson, R. C. (2022). Quantitative measures used in empirical evaluations of mental health policy implementation: A systematic review. Implementation Research and Practice, 3, 1–24.
Rosvall, P. (2019). Perspectives of students with mental health problems on improving the school environment and practice. Education Inquiry, 11(3), 159–174.