Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T10:40:21.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

School mental health best practices institute; capacity building of teachers in mental health literacy in Pakistan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2021

Maria Khan*
Affiliation:
The Aga Khan University Hospital
Aisha Sanober Chachar
Affiliation:
Alleviate Addiction Suffering Trust
Wamiq Ali
Affiliation:
Dow University of Health Sciences
Ayesha Mian
Affiliation:
The Aga Khan University Hospital
*
*corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

Mental health disorders in children are largely unrecognized in low- and middle-income countries like Pakistan. Teachers, due to their interactions and time spent with children, are important elements in promoting child mental health. Despite this, little importance is given to school mental health (SMH) in the country, and teachers’ training in SMH is almost non-existent. With less than ten child and adolescent psychiatrists, recruiting teachers is vital to provide mental health care to children and adolescents, the majority of the country's population. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a SMH training intervention for teachers in Pakistan.

Method

A 3-day training intervention was planned for school teachers in collaboration with International Association of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Allied Professions. The School Mental Health curriculum by the World Health Organization and Stan Kutcher's Mental Health Literature were adapted after literature review and discussions with experts, and administered as Blended Learning. The intervention was evaluated using pre-workshop, post-workshop and overall feedback surveys. SPSS 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y., USA) software was used for descriptive analysis. For open ended questions, central themes were identified, tabulated, and analyzed descriptively.

Result

A total of 63 participants registered for the workshop. The participants’ mean age was 36.0 years, with 86% women and 14% men. Participants were mostly teachers, however, principals, administrators and counsellors also attended. Participants’ reasons for attending were that they wanted to ‘increase their knowledge’ and learn ‘practical management’ of mental health issues. When asked about student wellbeing, 43% participants said it was a neglected area. Overall, 86.9% of participants felt the objectives were met well or very well and 87.61% stated there was adequate time for discussion. In addition, 90.47% participants responded that facilitators explained concepts well and 94.39% said facilitators answered questions well. Half of all Blended Learning activities were viewed by more than 50% of participants. Activity views decreased by 63.41% from the pre-workshop activities to day 3 activities. Improvements suggested by participants included taking a more problem-solving approach and focusing on the local context.

Conclusion

Evidence-based SMH interventions that train teachers are much-needed in the local resource-constrained settings. This intervention met its objectives effectively, however, Blended Learning was not well-received. We have studied learning analytics and identified the potential learner's profile of teachers as students. Adult learning principles should be implemented in future endeavours. This is a flagship project for future international collaborations between mental health professionals for cross-cultural knowledge exchange.

Type
Education and Training
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.