Principals Claim Testing Brings a Wealth of Benefits

Evidence suggesting the efficacy of random student drug testing as a tool to reduce drug use among youth is mounting. Results of a recent survey in Indiana corroborate what some educators and substance-abuse experts have maintained for years: drug testing is a promising drug prevention strategy.

Testing may not only reduce illicit drug use, the report suggests, it may also help improve the learning environment in schools by diminishing the culture of drugs. Principals participating in the survey indicated they believe drug testing has no negative effect on school morale or participation in sports or extracurricular activities, and that costs are minimal.

Published in the February 23 issue of West’s Education Law Reporter, “The Effectiveness and Legality of Random Student Drug Testing Programs Revisited” presents findings from an April 2005 survey of principals at 65 Indiana high schools. Of the 56 schools that responded to the written survey, 54 used drug testing as part of their substance-abuse prevention programs. Two-thirds of the principals responding to the questionnaire said they based their answers on written student surveys.

The report, written by Joseph R. McKinney, chairman of the Department of Educational Leadership at Ball State University, is a follow-up to a survey conducted at the same high schools in 2002-2003, a time when the schools had either just begun or resumed their drug testing programs. Several years earlier, schools across Indiana had been forced to halt all drug testing because a ruling by a state appeals court had declared them unconstitutional. A landmark decision in June 2002 by the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way by ruling that middle and high schools can conduct random drug tests of students participating in extracurricular activities.

The 2005 study is an attempt to learn about the effectiveness of drug testing programs by asking survey respondents what changes, if any, occurred in student drug use and other behavior at the target schools after nearly three years with testing programs in place. Its purpose, as stated in the report, is to shed light on two issues facing school districts trying to decide whether to test students for drug use: Are drug testing programs effective in reducing and preventing drug use, and are they legal?

McKinney is optimistic on both counts. “The Supreme Court has spoken,” he writes, “and so have several state and federal courts. Random student drug testing [RSDT] is legal with some limitations.” In McKinney’s opinion, “The research on RSDT also speaks volumes on the effectiveness of drug testing programs. RSDT programs are effective in deterring, reducing and detecting illegal drug use among students.”

While some indicators remained constant between surveys, almost every reported change in drug-use behavior or related activities was a change for the better. For example, more than half (58 percent) of the principals in the 2005 study who relied on written student surveys for their responses said student drug use had decreased since the previous study. The rest said levels of use remained the same. Additionally, 41 percent of the full group of principals reported that the positive drug-test result rate—the percentage of students testing positive for drug use—had decreased, while 56 percent said the rate had not changed since the previous survey.

Among the encouraging results to emerge from the McKinney survey is that in no case was drug testing seen to have a negative impact on the classroom. Despite critics’ concerns that drug testing erodes student morale, 100 percent of the responding Indiana principals whose schools have drug testing programs said their experiences showed these claims to be untrue. (One left the question blank.)

Reporting on data collected from the survey, McKinney also addresses charges that drug testing discourages participation in sports and other extracurricular activities and is too costly. More than half of the high schools with drug testing programs reported that levels of participation in athletic programs remained the same from 2003 to 2005. The rest said participation increased. None reported that participation levels had gone down. As for the expense, the overwhelming majority (91 percent) of schools with testing programs reported that the per-test cost was only $30 or less. Almost two-thirds said the drug tests cost no more than $20 each.

Although overall youth drug use has decreased by nearly 20 percent Nationwide since 2001, illegal drugs remain a significant threat to young people. A 2005 survey of teens by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University found that 62 percent of high schoolers and 28 percent of middle schoolers report that drugs are used, kept, or sold at their schools. According to the 2005 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, almost half of all students (47.6 percent) have used marijuana by the time they finish high school.

Results of the McKinney survey cannot, of course, be construed as a definitive measure of student drug use or attitudes, nor do they prove a causal relationship between drug testing and reduced levels of use. Still, taken as a whole, the survey data offer compelling evidence that random drug testing can be helpful in the effort to keep students drug free. The report bolsters the notion that random drug testing, used in conjunction with other methods as part of a comprehensive program for preventing and treating substance abuse, can be a useful and potentially effective drug abuse prevention tool.

Previous | Contents | Next