Your school doesn't seem to be kicking kids out for drugs, but it does seem to be making an effort to identify kids with a problem, so that the problem can be dealt with. Parents will have to confront their children's behavior. Children will see that behavior has consequences, "I'd like to be on the team, but I failed my drug test."
I think this is a small step in the direct that schools should be going in. I applaud your school.
“One of the reasons I like private schools is because they can have local policies that kick out trouble-makers or kids who don’t want to learn. Public schools are generally unable to do that and so the problem kids remain in class and ruin the education experience for everyone else.
Your school doesn’t seem to be kicking kids out for drugs, but it does seem to be making an effort to identify kids with a problem, so that the problem can be dealt with. Parents will have to confront their children’s behavior. Children will see that behavior has consequences, “I’d like to be on the team, but I failed my drug test.”
I think this is a small step in the direct that schools should be going in. I applaud your school.”
What is more likely:
A)A kid with a drug problem will stop doing drugs in order to be more engaged with extra school activities.
B)A kid with a drug problem will quit extra activities in order to not be drug tested and will instead have more time to get deeper into drugs.
Active kids are NOT the problem. It would be more effective to require drug testing in order to NOT participate in extra-curricular activities. It’s 2008. I can’t believe these inane ideas keep getting recycled.
This, on a conservative forum...I'm speechless.
The problem with public schools is that the teachers and administrators don't want to have to identify the trouble makers and justify the need to drug test them, and then discipline those children.
A good part of that is likely because they risk being sued any time they point a finger at a student, even if they are justified. Therefore they take the path a least resistance by forcing all the students to submit to ridicules policies that they hope will either address the problems of the few, or will making it so glaringly obvious that there is a problem that they can safely act without fear of being sued or being accused of playing favorites by the kid's parents.
Your school doesn't seem to be kicking kids out for drugs, but it does seem to be making an effort to identify kids with a problem, so that the problem can be dealt with. Parents will have to confront their children's behavior. Children will see that behavior has consequences, "I'd like to be on the team, but I failed my drug test."
Good idea, wrong way to go about it. Why not instead introduce a policy of drug testing for kids that are repeatedly causing trouble. In that case there might at least be probable cause, and the kids being effected by the policy have at least done something to direct such suspicion their way.
The punishment of not being able to participate in extracurricular activities is still appropriate, just not the reasons for testing.
This isn't all the fault of the teachers and school boards. The courts have done a lot to remove the discretion of the teachers and administrators to address such problems. When a school board abuses it's discretion, it is appropriate that they are held accountable. However, the courts are so fickle that the school boards fear to use their discretion.
That would be all well and good, IF IT WERE THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB TO DO THAT. Parents in general only get more complacent with raising their kids with nonsense like this.