Pubdate: Sat, 03 Jun 2006
Source: Fresno Bee, The (CA)
Copyright: 2006 The Fresno Bee
Contact: http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/lets-ed/send/
Website: http://www.fresnobee.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/161
Author: Michael Doyle, Bee Washington Bureau
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Test)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth)

GRANTS GO TO SEE WHETHER SCHOOL DRUG TESTS WORK

WASHINGTON -- More California schools, including some  in the Central 
Valley, may begin random drug testing of  students in order to answer 
one fundamental question:

Does it really work?

The Bush administration thinks it does, which is why  the White House 
wants a record $15 million to fund  random drug tests next year.

Already, federal funding has boosted drug testing this  year in the 
California towns of El Centro, Oceanside,  Paradise and Vista.

"The school that has started testing is very satisfied  with it," 
Rita Brogan, director of well-being programs  with the Imperial 
County Office of Education, said  Friday. "The community is very supportive.

"Of course, there are always one or two who will raise concerns."

The concerns, in fact, range from principled to  pragmatic. Some 
question the privacy precedent of  requiring urine specimens from 
cheerleaders and  student-body officers. Some doubt random testing 
cuts  drug use. Some worry about costs that can run upward of  $60 per test.

Still, even without federal support like the $300,000  grant provided 
the Imperial County schools, drug  testing has proliferated.

Schools in Valley and Mother Lode towns including  Angels Camp, 
Clovis, Kingsburg and Fowler have  initiated voluntary student drug 
testing. In Fresno,  the idea has sparked a running debate.

"I think if there were additional funding, more schools  would do 
it," said Tuolumne County Superintendent of  Schools Joe Silva.

Silva noted that drug testing of student athletes in  Nevada County 
- -- where he was living when his children  were in high school -- 
provoked considerable  controversy. So far, he said, "there have been 
no discussions" of initiating drug tests in Tuolumne  County schools.

Nationwide, an estimated 13% of high schools had  established 
drug-testing policies as of 2003 despite  some persistent skepticism.

In Modoc County, for instance, educators considered and  then 
rejected a mandatory drug-testing plan.

"The privacy interest in one's urine is significant,"  the 
libertarian-minded Cato Institute averred in a 2002 
friend-of-the-court brief. "The students here are  required to 
urinate into a cup while a teacher listens  outside the stall [girls] 
or behind them [boys] for  sounds of tampering. When it is produced, 
the teacher  feels the cup for temperature of the urine and holds 
it  up to the light to examine it ... this is all still 
a  significant intrusion."

Nonetheless, random drug testing of students involved  in 
extracurricular activities earned a legal green  light in a closely 
divided 2002 U.S. Supreme Court  ruling that underscored one crucial 
uncertainty.

"I do not know whether the school's drug testing  program will work," 
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the  case arising out of Oklahoma. 
"But in my view, the  Constitution does not prohibit the effort."

In hopes of answering Breyer's first point, the  Education 
Department's Office of Safe and Drug-Free  Schools has lit the fuse 
on a new plan.

More money is part of it. From $2 million in 2003,  federal grants 
for random school drug testing jumped to  more than $7 million this year.

The testing increases come even as Office of Management  and Budget 
auditors branded the federal Safe and  Drug-Free Schools grant 
program as "ineffective."  Citing the bad review, the Bush 
administration has proposed cutting the Safe and Drug-Free School 
grants,  which are different from the drug-testing grants.

Now, the Education Department has initiated what it  calls the "first 
large-scale national evaluation" of  mandatory random drug testing. 
In its latest offer of  federal grants, the department says top 
priority will  go to schools that agree to participate in the  evaluation.

First, up to 200 students will be surveyed next year in  each school 
that obtains federal drug-testing funds.  The schools will then be 
randomly divided: half will  start random drug testing, and half will 
hold off for a  year. After a year, follow-up surveys will compare 
drug  usage in the different schools. Then, drug testing  would be 
undertaken at all the schools.

Few can predict what the tests will show. In Imperial  County, for 
instance, Brogan said the testing program  initiated with $300,000 in 
federal funds so far has  found one student who tested positive.

"You don't want to do just student testing," Brogan said.

"Although it's somewhat of a deterrent, it's really a  deterrent when 
combined with other education programs."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman