Historique
Rapport
Drug testing in schools: evidence, impacts and alternatives
Auteur(s) :
A. M. ROCHE ;
K. PIDD ;
BYWOOD P. ;
DURAISINGAM V. ;
T. STEENSON ;
T. FREEMAN ;
R. NICHOLAS
Mention d'édition :
ANCD research paper n°16
Article en page(s) :
202 p.
Domaine :
Drogues illicites / Illicit drugs
Langue(s) :
Anglais
Thésaurus mots-clés
MILIEU SCOLAIRE
;
DEPISTAGE
;
METHODE
;
EFFICACITE
;
ETHIQUE
;
COUT
;
ENQUETE
Thésaurus géographique
AUSTRALIE
Résumé :
The National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (NCETA) was commissioned by the Australian National Council on Drugs (ANCD) in March 2007 to undertake an independent, comprehensive and critical examination of all relevant issues involved in drug detection and screening in the school setting. The results of the review are presented in this report.
Overall, the body of evidence examined indicates a strong case to be made against drug detection and screening strategies being utilized in the school setting. In essence, the key findings are:
1. Most drug tests are insufficiently reliable for testing in a setting such as schools.
2. The cost of testing was found to be very large and would represent a substantial impost on any education system’s budget.
3. A wide range of moral and legal issues act as serious concerns, if not impediments.
4. Prevalence of illicit drug use by schoolchildren has been declining for over a decade; current levels of regular use are very low, making detection a technically challenging task.
5. Highest prevalence of drug use occurs among high-risk and vulnerable groups of children, including the poorer academic performers and Indigenous students, indicating that punitive and inquisitorial methods of deterrence are ill-advised.
6. Evidence indicates that drug testing is an ineffective deterrence mechanism.
7. Two-thirds of submissions received from professionals were opposed to drug testing in schools.
8. The majority of survey respondents were opposed to testing in schools.
9. An effective array of school-based prevention interventions is now available to schools - interventions that focus on building positive relations and developing pupils’ sense of connectedness with the school.
10. Effective mechanisms exist to target and intervene in appropriate ways with highrisk students and/or their families.
Overall, the body of evidence examined indicates a strong case to be made against drug detection and screening strategies being utilized in the school setting. In essence, the key findings are:
1. Most drug tests are insufficiently reliable for testing in a setting such as schools.
2. The cost of testing was found to be very large and would represent a substantial impost on any education system’s budget.
3. A wide range of moral and legal issues act as serious concerns, if not impediments.
4. Prevalence of illicit drug use by schoolchildren has been declining for over a decade; current levels of regular use are very low, making detection a technically challenging task.
5. Highest prevalence of drug use occurs among high-risk and vulnerable groups of children, including the poorer academic performers and Indigenous students, indicating that punitive and inquisitorial methods of deterrence are ill-advised.
6. Evidence indicates that drug testing is an ineffective deterrence mechanism.
7. Two-thirds of submissions received from professionals were opposed to drug testing in schools.
8. The majority of survey respondents were opposed to testing in schools.
9. An effective array of school-based prevention interventions is now available to schools - interventions that focus on building positive relations and developing pupils’ sense of connectedness with the school.
10. Effective mechanisms exist to target and intervene in appropriate ways with highrisk students and/or their families.
Affiliation :
Australia
Exemplaires
| Disponibilité |
|---|
| aucun exemplaire |