Pubdate: Fri, 08 Jun 2001
Source: Enterprise-Journal, The (MS)
Copyright: 2001 The Enterprise-Journal
Contact:  http://www.enterprise-journal.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/917
Author: Charlie Mitchell
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/dare.htm (D.A.R.E.)

TOO MANY INTRUSIONS ON SCHOOL DAY

Taboo until not too long ago was asking any question about D.A.R.E., 
an anti-drug program, or any other intrusion upon the school day.

People, and especially the press, have been expected to applaud any 
effort to do anything about young people and narcotics. Anyone who 
looked past the photo ops, T-shirts and posters to ask whether the 
programs were actually having any success was deemed a heretic.

"Heavens yes, we're having a positive effect," the response might come.

"But statistics show more youths experimenting with drugs, not 
fewer," a persistent parent might insist.

And then would come the standard spin: "Yes, but without our program, 
who knows how much higher those numbers would be?"

To make that argument, of course, is to say an increase in homicides 
doesn't mean a city has become more violent because, without such and 
so, the rate of increase might be even higher.

It's hooey as logic goes, but it generally shuts off questions.

Specifically for D.A.R.E., an acronym for the Drug Abuse Resistance 
Education program invented by Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl Gates in 
1983, the applause started fading about 10 years ago. Repeated and 
varied studies, some conducted by universities and some conducted by 
the federal government, showed that children just weren't moved by 
D.A.R.E.'s message.

There were good points. Starting in elementary schools, the programs 
were conducted by actual, uniformed officers and provided an 
opportunity for interaction between police and children in a 
non-emergency setting. Also, the officers assigned to D.A.R.E. duty 
were usually the most personable in the department. As such, they 
fostered the image of police as people who care and who help. That 
might have helped overcome the image of police as people to avoid, 
even if that fear was created innocently by a lead-footed parent who 
cringed upon sighting a cruiser.

But there were also bad points.

The basis of D.A.R.E. is not so much that drugs are bad, but 
empowerment of youths. Its theme is to let them know they have a 
"right" to say no to drugs. Some behavior experts said that to depict 
drug use as a choice is the same as teaching there's a "right" to say 
yes to drugs.

Other arguments have been that the program insults teachers and takes 
away instructional time.

States, including Mississippi, license teachers, test teachers and 
require four-year college degrees as a minimum to having them in 
classrooms to communicate information to students. Police officers 
assigned to D.A.R.E. duty have a script to follow, but are not 
licensed, tested or trained as educators.

And if it's true that well-rounded, self-confident people are least 
likely to fall prey to bad habits, including drugs, then minutes 
sacrificed from imparting the kind of academic knowledge that builds 
self-esteem should be authorized only on clear proof that the minutes 
are not being wasted.

Next, we come to the crux of D.A.R.E. and myriad other programs 
school officials put in place as part of what they often call their 
"social responsibility." All the materials in such programs are 
copyrighted, all such programs generate big bucks for their creators 
and, indeed, it's arguable whether profit margins are higher in 
telling children not to do drugs or in actually selling children 
drugs.

You name the program, D.A.R.E. or any other, and Mississippians are 
spending millions every year to fund them. It's only natural, then, 
that those with a vested financial interest would tend to defend 
their programs against criticisms and to work feverishly to discredit 
any study that says their programs don't work.

The core people to be pitied in this process are the kids. Whereas 
their parents and their parents' parents got out of English class 
once a year for "the speech" by a county health officer or someone, 
today's students seem to be out of class more than in.

In some districts, there are balloon launches for world peace, walks 
around the track to find cures for diseases and myriad other 
"awareness" events. There are programs on the dangers of smoking and 
dipping that dip into class time. There are programs such as D.A.R.E. 
And then there's the all-time classic - taking students out of class 
to lecture them on the importance of staying in school. Ah, the irony.

To their credit, the marketers of D.A.R.E. dropped a lot of their 
resistance and seriously examined the curriculum. Importantly, they 
agree that whether the program has measurable results is important.

That's progress.

Overcoming the taboo against asking whether a program is having the 
desired result is a major education reform. For schools to get better 
at what they're supposed to do, people have got to stop piling on 
change after change without checking back to see what works.

And getting rid of what doesn't.

Go to any school summit and all the talk will be about what needs to 
be added. Sorry, but subtraction would often be a better idea. And 
it's free.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Josh Sutcliffe