The Importance of Peer Leaders in a Health Promotion Program in Norwegian Secondary Schools; Interviews with Multiple Informants

Reviewing the research on school based interventions where peers are used as the main agents, the field has several approaches depending on the scope of the program. Despite its potential, research from several investigations on both one-to-one peer mentoring and peer delivered health education in the classroom, demonstrates that the results are very modest (Rhodes & DuBois, 2008; Herrera et al., 2007; Harden, Oakley, & Oliver, 2001; Mellanby, Rees, & Tripp, 2000). E.g., in a health promotion effectiveness review, the EPPI-Centre (1999) found some evidence to suggest that more of the sound peer delivered school programs were effective than they were ineffective.

The aim of the present study is to add to current knowledge on the contribution of and the significance that adolescence as peer leaders and mentors may have in the school context. We will through interviews with multiple informants; teachers, principals and the peer leaders themselves explore the various experiences of being a peer leader or using peers as leaders in the Dream school program. The current investigation is part of a pilot evaluation of the program in Norway. The Dream School program is a universal intervention in lower and upper secondary schools that aims at creating good psychosocial learning environments and positive mental health to strengthen students’ empowerment and motivation to stay in school.

Five secondary schools who had implemented the Dream school program for one year took part in the study. We conducted five focus group interviews with peer leaders (n=25), five focus group interviews with main teachers (n=23), and five interviews with principles. The peer leaders were aged 14-15 (lower secondary) or 18-19 (upper secondary). The interviews were semi-structured and followed an interview-guide. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and analysed according to a thematic framework analysis.

The analysis from interviews with peer leaders, teachers, and principles revealed four main categories, ‘The peer leaders’ gains’, ‘Someone their own age’, ‘Impact on peers’, and ‘Barriers in implementation’, each group with respective subcategories. More of the findings were related to gains for the peer leaders themselves than on the impact the peer leaders had on the younger peer group. One important barrier in the implementation of the program was that the peer leaders experienced role confusion- and some lack of collaboration with the teachers.  

The results are discussed in relation to a Positive Youth Development perspective, an empowerment perspective, and implications for further development of the program in Norway.