This document has been formatted for printing from your browser from the Web site of the Illinois Association of School Boards.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE -- This document is © copyrighted by the Illinois Association of School Boards. IASB hereby grants to school districts and other Internet users the right to download, print and reproduce this document provided that (a) the Illinois Association of School Boards is noted as publisher and copyright holder of the document and (b) any reproductions of this document are disseminated without charge and not used for any commercial purpose.
Illinois School Board Journal
March/April 2005
Testing will continue, despite lack of data
by Linda Dawson
Linda Dawson is IASB director of editorial services and Journal editor.
Both a University of Michigan study in 2003 and a joint study by the American Civil Liberties Union and Drug Policy Alliance in 2004 conclude that random drug testing is not as effective at deterring students from using drugs and alcohol as was initially hoped.
The Michigan study by research investigators and scientists concluded that "to prevent harmful student behaviors such as drug use, school policies that address these key values, attitudes and perceptions may be more important in drug prevention than drug testing."
The ACLU/DPA study went so far as to conclude that drug testing "does not effectively identify students who have serious problems with drugs" and "may lead to unintended consequences, such as students using drugs that are more dangerous but less detectable by a drug test, and learning the wrong lessons about their constitutional rights."
In addition, the 2002 "Youth Study on Substance Use" prepared for the Illinois Department of Human Services by Chestnut Health Services of Bloomington found a "dramatic decrease" among eighth-graders and 10th-graders as compared to similar studies conducted over a 12-year period. According to the 2002 study, alcohol was the number one choice of teens, followed by tobacco and then marijuana, and that "a great majority" or four-fifths of teens in Illinois never move past these gateway drugs.
All this information comes 10 years after the initial Supreme Court decision (Vernonia School District v. Acton) that legalized limited random drug testing of public school student athletes. And, so far, it is not deterring some Illinois schools that choose to test.
Random drug testing has become a part of the culture in a handful of districts, and those districts — often labeled "conservative"— believe they are doing the right thing for their students and their community. They have a gut instinct that more students are staying away from drugs and alcohol, and they feel in their hearts that they're making a difference.
A problem emerges, however, because they don't have many local statistics to back up those instincts. While they find a few "positive" test results, the numbers don't increase or decrease from year to year. And they lack any data on how many students they might have deterred from drug use because of a testing program.
Most of these schools test high school students involved in extracurricular activities — students who choose to participate in sports or music with the knowledge that they will be in the pool for random testing. Some schools also test behind-the-wheel driving students and those who are enrolled in classes that involve power tools.
In a small district, that could mean most high school students would be in the pool. In a larger district, a significant number might never be subjected to testing.
So with few positive results, do random drug testing districts plan to keep on testing?
Still testing
At Kewanee Community Unit School District 229 in Henry County, Principal Mike Kirkham says they plan to continue testing three times a week. Of the 120 students in athletics, marching band, cheerleading and pom pon squad who are tested each year, about five test results come back positive. That's the same number Kirkham reported in 2001 when the Journal interviewed him for "Where they're testing: Four districts share details on random drug testing."
Now, as in 2001, Kirkham doesn't believe high school students forego participation in extracurricular activities even though Kewanee's program has students agree to be tested any time during the year, not just during the season they participate in the activity.
Kewanee began its testing program in 1996 after administrators met with the student council and then the school board, which held two community meetings before adopting a policy to implement testing. Kirkham still says they have had no one in the community speak in opposition to the program.
While the impetus for testing in Kewanee was alcohol use by athletes, most of the positive test results have been for marijuana use.
Westville Community Unit School District 2 in Vermillion County has been testing every one or two weeks for seven years. They intentionally set their schedule to be irregular, which adds to its randomness. Like Kewanee, the testing turns up few positive results, according to Guy Goodlove, the high school principal.
In addition to testing athletes, this high school tests behind-the-wheel driving students and anyone taking a course that involves power tool use. Although it varies by class, Goodlove said, testing usually results in only two or three positive findings a year.
The district's former superintendent, James Cox, told the Journal in 2001 that he occasionally would hear some "grumbling" in the community from those who don't like the program. But Goodlove says that in the past four years, he's only had one parent who was "completely upset" by random drug testing.
"We wanted to let students know drug use wouldn't be condoned on school grounds and send a message that anyone using drugs had better watch out," Cox said in 2001.
That message is the same one that prompted River Bend CUSD 2 in Whiteside County to begin testing about three years ago.
As a relative newcomer to random drug testing, board president Wendy Ottens bristles at being labeled " too conservative" when what the district really wants to be is proactive. The district previously had required athletes to sign the Illinois High School Association contract for athletic participation, but that piece of paper seemed to mean little to students, she said.
"We don't want to catch students drinking or doing drugs," Ottens said, "we want to prevent their use."
Students are exposed to prevention information through fifth-grade D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) classes, she said, but no one ever follows through to reinforce those lessons in later grades.
While some might say that random drug testing sends a message to students that they aren't to be trusted, Ottens believes the opposite is true. She likes the idea that everyone is held accountable to a standard, rather than being afraid to look at the problem.
Next steps
Some districts, while not afraid to look at the problem, may be afraid to implement a drug-testing program, whether because of perceived community reluctance or questions of effectiveness and reaching the right students.
In looking at the problem, the ACLU/DPA study offers these alternatives to drug testing:
The IDHS study adds these next steps for prevention in the state: