ANTI-DRUG PROGRAMS CALLED WEAK

School-based substance use prevention programs are a key tool in delivering
anti-drug messages to youngsters and adolescents. Although most of the
current programs across the nation focus solely on prevention, they tend to
lack effectiveness due to content and teachers' inability to convey the
urgency of the issue at hand.

At a panel hosted by the Duke Transdisciplinary Prevention Research Center
and the Center for Child and Family Policy, national and state-level
practitioners and experts and University-based prevention researchers
discussed possible approaches to strengthening the link between research and
community needs in terms of substance use programming.

Keynote speaker William Modzeleski, associate deputy undersecretary of the
U.S. Department of Education, spoke of the importance of addressing the
ineffectiveness in prevention programming in schools. "As times change, the
products need to change, as well," he said.

Modzeleski noted that there are 53 million students and 3 million teachers
in grade schools across the country. With such a large system, it is
difficult for current drug programs to have an impact. As a result, the need
for more effective programming becomes increasingly crucial. Modzeleski
emphasized holistic strategies--not just the implementation of individual
programs.

Susan Alexander, executive director of the Transdisciplinary Prevention
Research Center, and several of the other panelists said substance abuse
programming should not only be a school issue, as it requires the effort of
the entire community.

"Teachers have enough responsibility with a regular curriculum and the value
placed on test scores. They should not have to be the only ones responsible
for drug and alcohol education," Alexander said. "The issues need to be
reframed and new training to teachers may be necessary."

Another topic covered at the panel was that government legislation calls for
the funding of programs that are "scientifically-based." Research conducted
through experimental methods and rigorous data analyses should provide
evidence that the program to be used will reduce violence and illegal drug
use.

"Those who do the research and those who use the research have difficulty
communicating," said Jeffrey Valentine, adjunct assistant professor in the
Duke Department of Psychology and research scientist in the Program in
Education. "They don't connect often enough."

Researchers do not always know exactly what the practitioners need, so they
cannot design strong adolescent programming that is practical to implement,
Valentine said. In addition, the practitioners are not always updated on the
latest research findings. If the results are written in the manner of
traditional scientific research, the program coordinators may have
difficulty understanding them.

Senior Paul Novick, a member of Students for Sensible Drug Policy, said the
biggest problem with current drug policy is that many people do not
recognize the difference between prevention and education.

"In the U.S., programs are fear-based. We tell kids `don't do it' or `it
will kill you,' but we never honestly explain the effects or consequences of
the drugs," Novick said. "Teenagers are curious. We need a more balanced
education."