Life Context of Pharmacological Academic †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Life Context of Pharmacological Academic Management. Answer: Introduction Students are expected to perform well in schools after training for a certain period of time. The end results are the ones that determines students movement to the next level of academic ladder. It is a fact that so much money and other resources are invested in the education and so the end results have to be impressive to avoid wastage of the money used in the same. This have been a driving factor for students to use all means possible to achieve their academic goals. According to Hildt et al., (2014), substance abuse by students who perform poorly in schools started in high schools and the trend has since moved to colleges and universities. Learners have the pressure to perform well and look impressive. This pressure might come from their family members, academic staff, lecturers or friends. This is why nonmedical use of substances to boost academic performance or intellectual ability is on the rise. Students who are struggling academically tend to believe that their mental capacit y to perform well in schools can be adjusted by taking brain stimulants. The drugs are readily available in many colleges since students have their own external providers who come to schools to bring them the drugs. However, research reveals that this is a myth and that the students who o this always end up not getting the help intended. They, however, end up with disorders as a result of the use of the same stimulants. Tutors and all other academicians always reiterate that the only and sure way of achieving academic dreams is through doing academic duties the best way possible. Doing consultations from the tutors, researching from credible sources through the internet and many more, are the only sure ways of hitting the academic target. The authors of the two articles involve Hildt and Munro are drawn from the department of psychiatry and psychotherapy respectively. As research indicates, they work in university medical centres. Franke on the other hand, is a trainee while Hildt belongs to psychology department. Additionally, he is an expert in neuroethics at the same university. We are told that Bailey Munro together with Lisa Weyandt is the head of interdisciplinary neuroscience program manager. On the other hand, Marraccini E. M is based at Alpert Medical school, which is a research centre in the United States of America. To explore how the use brain booster stimulants among learners influence positively their academic performance. To identify the main reasons why the students use brain stimulants more often despite being taught or guided by their lecturers. This includes any other reason that makes students use drugs and their motives as well. To investigate the effects, either positive or negative, of the stimulants to the users. To explore the impact of pressure directed to the learners mostly by their family members, some of who invest all their money in school to make sure their child attend university (Hildt et al., 2014). Justification for the need of study The study need is justified in several dimensions throughout both articles. First, there was a need to know the main reason as to why there is a rise in the number of students who are taking drugs in schools (Munro, et al, 2017). It is true to mention that people have their own specific reasons for doing what they do, or behaving in a particular manner. The authors had the need to know other reasons behind abuse of brain stimulants by learners, apart from boosting academic performance management. According to Munro, et al, (2017) article, we are informed that most students use the drugs to give them energy and pleasure they need to perform their other activities. This clearly shows that the stimulants are not only used to boost brain activity so that the end results in academics can be influenced, but also it helps the learners in managing their schedules so that they do not miss class activities as well as their own planned activities outside class time. There is also the need to bo ost the attentiveness of the minds (Hildt, et al, 2014). Students need to be more active than they are naturally. This is why they sort other sources of being more attentive during the long lecture hours at the universities. Hildt et al., (2014) article also justifies his research study by wanting to known the side effects that come as a result of brain stimulant abuse. Medical research shows that any human being abusing any type of drug will at some point experience the negative side effects of the same (Munro et al., 2017). Authors utilized one main methodology in the study which involves qualitative research with a focus on interviewing as the main data collection method. From the reader perspective, we see several interviews conducted to different people. These includes students and the lecturers as well. However, the two groups are interviewed separately at different times. This is because there is a need to keep information from different people secret from public opinion but only revealed to the interviewers (Munro et al., 2017). The interviewees used placards. These were meant attract the attention of learners and compel them to respond to the same (Hildt, et al, 2014). However, the majority of those who responded were not drug users (Hildt, et al, 2014), but still the authors were able to receive recommended number who were later subjected to the interview panel. Questions Used During the Interview What was the reason behind you taking the stimulant while at the campus? After taking the stimulant drugs, were there any increase in overall mental performance or situation remained the way it was? Apart from increase or decrease in metal performance, were there improvement in the academics that can be said to be a direct influence of the drugs? During usage of the stimulants, were there side effects that have affected you either positively or negatively that you can mentioned or talk about? The interviewers employed some tactics to ensure that the information received from the interviewees is not lost or tampered with. For instance, the voice of the interviewees was recorded using a voice recorder (Munro et al., 2017). Besides recording, one of the interviewers noted down the answers given so that they can have a quick reference point is need be (Hildt et al, 2014). Participants and Reasons why methodology used was appropriate The method used in data collection was appropriate and a good volume of results came out. Interview was the best option since there was a need to get first hand data and information that has not been interfered with before. Again, talking to people face to face compels them to give true information due to the direct eye contact between the two. Since direct face to face interview was used to get the needed data, it was the most effective appropriate method that could be used to collect such sensitive and useful information (Munro et al., 2017). The participant in the study included the students (both those who use the brain stimulants medicines and those who do not use them), the lecturers, medical practitioners, and the researchers who conducted the study (Hildt et al., 2014). According to the study, the total turnout was small but still good to keep the exercise and research work going. As per the requirements on the placards, email addresses were used to by the students to contact the research centre. A total of twenty two were carried out in general. Out of the number, four participants tested positive of the ADHD as per Hildt statements. Results showed that fourteen of the remaining candidates had attempted to use ADHD drugs at some point in school. Reports points out clearly that the reaming four students used both the two, that is, the prescribed drugs and the illicit drugs to boost their academic outcome (Hildt et al., 2014). Intake of AMPH drugs makes one become active at some point, thus he or she is able to do so many things at the same time without feeling exhausted (Hildt et al., 2014). It also improves ones level of concentration. however, most students appreciated its effects to reduce the need to sleep, as this would make them have enough time to study thus improving their end academic results. It improves their ability to focus on details and the level of receptiveness. Students also feel good when they are re-energized. This allows them to be more and more active to do all the work that need to be done on time. The report points out several disadvantages that affect students who take the drugs. Students stay awake and do not feel like sleeping for ling hour. This affects their normal brain operation since it is a requirement that everyone should sleep at least eight hours a day. The drugs also make them feel restlessness thus affecting their normal day operations. According to Hildt et al., (2014), the side effects increases or decreases depending on the duration of the drug abuse. For instance, one of the students mentioned that a day after taking the drugs everything seems fines but its negative effects projects in after two to three days, making the user to feel shattered. Students also reiterated that they become tired due to consumptive nature of the drugs. This makes them not be in a position to take the drugs more than one within a single month. According to Munro et al., (2017), the students experiences, those who take the drugs on a daily basis are always weak and very exhausted. S o for the drugs to work properly as intended, the user needs to take small amount at a specified interval. The drugs also make students feel depressed and be in unhappy moods most of the time. This is due to the effects of MPH. As mentioned, the drug is a stimulus, and can trigger hormones that makes one have a change of moods and so on. Reports point out barriers that hinder the use of the finding in the report to bring changes in higher learning institutions. If the findings are used to prevent students from accessing brain booster drugs such as ADHD, then the affected people will barely find time to do their outside school work. We are also informed that mostly students use the illicit drugs during specific times like during the examination periods (Munro et al, 2017). Publishing the findings and attempting to stop the use of the same in institutions will make students attempt examinations without reading for them (Munro et al., 2017). This will reduce the performance of the learners plus the institutional grade. There is alignment of the questions in the study with the PICO requirements since the main issue which is drug usage is fully addressed and concluded. Conclusion It is evident that students are given too much work in schools. Among others, this is the reason behind usage of brain booster drugs by the learners. Students need extra time to attend to their own activities. Most of them have businesses to nurture while others do partying and socializing. Due to the pressure to perform in academics, they are forced to use other means to get more time. They also do this so that their brains can be boosted with more energy to enhance concentration in classes. However, research indicates that usage of the brain boosters is characterised with some negative effects. Most of the students feel dizzy and tiredness after consumption of these illicit drugs. Reports also shows that some of them contemplate suicide due to the side effects of the drugs. This is because the drugs affect the brain of the students or any other user. References Hildt, E., Lieb, K., Franke, A. G. (2014). Life context of pharmacological academic performance enhancement among university studentsa qualitative approach.BMC medical ethics,15(1), 23. Munro, B. A., Weyandt, L. L., Marraccini, M. E., Oster, D. R. (2017). The relationship between nonmedical use of prescription stimulants, executive functioning and academic outcomes.Addictive behaviors,65, 250-257.