DOES IT WORK?

A decision on drug testing in Norwalk schools is one step closer
after a divided discussion at Wednesday afternoon's work session.

The board met to discuss the findings of the exploratory committee on
random drug testing.

The board will vote on the issue at the next board meeting, April
17.

All members of the board agreed that educational efforts to reduce
drug and alcohol abuse need to be stepped up drug education at the
high school is minimal at best. When it came to random drug testing,
most board members seemed skeptical.

Janet Broz emerged as the main proponent and defender of drug testing
throughout the meeting. Her step-daughter, Stephanie Broz, a
recovering heroin addict, first suggested the program to the school
in October.

In responses ranging from the adamant to the emotional, Janet Broz
said the "bottom line" is the district needs to ask, "What can we do
to help? Parents and kids need help," she said.

But, Rob Ludwig responded, random drug testing "doesn't necessarily
help them."

Whether testing helps students and whether or not it actually harms
them was the central issue among the many issues and concerns the
board had.

"To me it's a deterrent," Broz said.

Some students, Ludwig said, will choose not to participate in
extracurriculars rather than submit to testing. So students have been
moved from the lower-risk population into the higher-risk population.

In the committee's report, Phil Charville described the social
control theory of criminology. "Elements that cause a youth to bond
with the dominant value system are attachment, commitment,
involvement, and belief. The stronger the attachment to family and
peers, clubs, school, and church, the less likely delinquency will
occur." Charville is the chief probation office at Huron County
Juvenile Court.

What about the distrust testing could create among students and
teachers? John Lendrum asked. Many students, he said, spend more time
with teachers than they do their parents. He's known many teachers
who got to a student before it's too late, what if it becomes a
"we-they thing walking down the halls?"

Students may do something even worse than the drugs trying to beat
the test, Superintendent Wayne Babcanec said. There is an entire
industry out there selling ways to beat the test and students have
dozens of home remedies. An Oklahoma parent walked in on her daughter
drinking bleach to beat a test, according to a story in USA Today
cited by the committee's report.

One way to beat the test is to switch from marijuana, which is
detectable up to 30 days, to a more serious drug, wrote Jean King,
executive director of the ADAMhs board. Stimulants can be detected
for one or two days, cocaine for two to four, and opiates up to
three, Charville said. Inhalants are untestable, he continued.

Even if they aren't beating it, is a test that tests a fraction of
half of the student body which is only a portion of the students in
area going to give a student a credible reason to say "no?" Lendrum
asked.

The largest nationwide study from the University of Michigan says it
does not. In surveys of 170,000 students, researchers at the
University of Michigan found that schools with both random and
suspicion-based drug testing showed no less drug use than those
without. In fact, schools with random drug-testing actually saw a
small increase in marijuana use. The study controlled for demographic
differences.

Broz criticized the study when Ludwig brought it up. That study is
flawed she said because it is mostly Michigan schools that were
studied, and those are very different than Norwalk, which is only
16,000 people and "primarily Caucasian."

Broz preferred to take principals' word for it. She preferred the
"Indiana Study" which surveyed 56 principals and asked them whether
they thought testing works. They said it does. Broz herself called
between 20 and 25 districts and found that most administrators agree
that it does work. "Just go up to Western Reserve and ask them," Broz
said.

The Reflector has spoken to administrators from the surrounding
districts and all say they believe testing works, though they can
cite nothing more than a general belief.

Most statements from the committee members sided with the Michigan
study.

Broz called it a "serious" problem.

"I'm all for the educational element," Ludwig said.

The board discussed new elements of current curricula, asking
teachers to encourage students to make good decisions immediately
before problem times weekends, between seasons, and breaks. They also
discussed hiring a drug counselor, and engaging in extensive outreach
to parents to give them the tools to help prevent drug use. Parental
action has been proven to be very successful in preventing teen drug
use, said King.

Members took umbrage when Broz said, "it would be naive to think it's
not in our schools."

"We're not naive," Lendrum said.

The issue appeared fraught with other issues, including: whether it
was appropriate for the schools to engage in testing at all; whether
the process of testing was something parents should feel comfortable
with the school doing; whether the school could afford the problem in
the long term; whether the school was likely to have to defend a
costly suit (even if it were eventually ruled in the district's
favor); and whether such a suit could be used to keep a student in
sports until the season ends, when the suit would be dropped.