SCHOOL OFFICIALS NOT SURPRISED TO SEE OPPOSITION TO DRUG-TESTING
POLICY

Neither Enid Public Schools superintendent nor the board president were
surprised to learn some students are protesting the school's new drug
testing policy.

"I'm not a bit surprised," Superintendent Kem Keithly said, adding members
of the drug testing committee, made up of parents, students, teachers and
one administrator and board member, took its time studying the issue and
settled on what they thought was the best model for testing.

Board President David Meara also wasn't surprised at the timing of the
protests.

"It's America, we wait until we get slapped in the face," before we react,
he said.

The board commissioned a group to study the issue nearly a year ago and
asked for public input at a hearing in May. No one opposed to the policy
voiced an opinion or asked questions about the policy during the meeting.

This week, the district be-gan testing students involved in activities
governed by Okla-homa Second-ary School Ac-tivities Associa-tion -- about
1,300 eighth-through 12th-grade students in all.

Keithly and Meara both said administrators and board members have an
obligation to students to try and find the most effective method of helping
students deal with destructive behaviors.

"We've just got to keep trying," Keithly said. "I'm not sure it's going to
work for everyone."

Keithly said he also wasn't surprised to hear rumors of students trying a
number of tricks to "beat the test."

"We talked about it," he said. "There's not a whole lot you can do (about
that)."

Meara said the committee had great resources and talked to administrators
at schools already implementing a program before they settled on policy. He
said one administrator said his school saw a 50 percent reduction in
positive tests.

Meara said the district uses a number of drug prevention and education
programs in the classroom, but the new policy is "simply another tool to
employ to help these young people."

And, Meara said, he doesn't want to diminish the concerns of students and
parents. There are pros and cons to testing, and he said he understands the
difficulties associated with the policy and the method of testing.

But, he said he also believes the policy is important because many times
parents don't want to believe their child is doing drugs. The district is
simply trying another tool because the funds became available and the board
was willing to pursue the opportunity, he said.

But some parents are upset because they be-lieve the testing is
jeopardizing their children's futures.

Doris Longley said her daughter, Allura, 15, an A-plus student who is on
the speech and debate team, takes a number of medications that could make
her test positive. Her severe asthma is combated by daily doses of steroids.

"Her medicines are going to make her test dirty," Doris Longley said.

Longley said it isn't fair for only a select group of students to be tested
and wants all students tested if any at all. However, federal law only
allows testing students participating in the outlined extracurricular
activities.

The policy governs tobacco, alcohol, illegal and performance-enhancing
drugs use by students participating in extracurricular activities,
according to the policy. Just because the policy governs those drugs
doesn't necessarily mean the district is testing for those particular
drugs. Keithly said the first baseline test includes a nine-panel test.

Students can be tested up to 12 times per year. Punishment for a positive
drug test is suspension from participation in all scheduled games,
competitions, performances or scrimmages for 10 to 88 days.

First- and second-offense suspensions are subject to reduction if the
student adheres to certain conditions, including substance abuse
counseling. The third offense -- an 88-day suspension -- requires the
student's suspension in all activities, including meetings, practices,
performances and competition and may carry over to the next school year.

The district cannot require students to take counseling, Keithly has said,
but a student's suspension for first and second offenses can be reduced if
they agree to and follow through with counseling.

The policy this year is being funded by a $25,000 donation to the district
from Champlin Foundation.

Hiram Champlin, one of four Champlin Foundation trustees, has said he
realizes drug testing doesn't provide an end-all solution to the problem,
but it might add another excuse to the list of reasons students should stay
drug-free.

Students against the new policy contend research posted on Web sites such
as www.drugtestingfails.org and www.drugpolicy.org shows drug testing not
only doesn't work but it puts more students at risk.

Some students who are unhappy with the policy have said they feel like they
are being punished for something they haven't done.