Prevention Science

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 33–40

The Prevalence of Evidence-Based Drug Use Prevention Curricula in U.S. Middle Schools in 2005

  • Chris Ringwalt
  • Amy A. Vincus
  • Sean Hanley
  • Susan T. Ennett
  • J. Michael Bowling
  • Louise Ann Rohrbach
Article

Abstract

Since the promulgation of its Principles of Effectiveness in 1998, the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools of the U.S. Department of Education has promoted the use of evidence-based drug prevention programs in the nation’s schools. We report the results of a survey, conducted in 2005, of a nationally representative sample of 1,721 schools with middle school grades. Respondents comprised the staff member in the school identified as most knowledgeable about the school’s drug prevention programs. The total response rate was 78%. Respondents answered questions concerning which drug use prevention curricula they used, and, if they used more than one, which one they used the most frequently. Three federally-sponsored registries were used to specify which curricula were considered evidence-based. Findings from 2005 were then compared to earlier estimates based on a similar 1999 survey. We found that 42.6% of the nation’s schools with middle school grades were using an evidence-based curriculum, an increase of 8% from our 1999 estimate. The two most prevalent curricula in use, at 19% each, were Life Skills Training and Project ALERT. We note, however, that only 8% of Life Skills Training users and 9% of Project ALERT users reported using those curricula the most, and that only 23% of respondents overall reported that they used an evidence-based curriculum the most. More information is needed as to why over three-quarters of the nation’s schools with middle school grades continue to administer curricula that have not been identified as effective.

Keywords

Evidence-based practice Substance use prevention Curricula Middle schools 

References

  1. Anderson, P., Aromaa, S., & Rosenbloom, D. (2007). Prevention education in America's schools: Findings and recommendations from a survey of educators. Retrieved November 21, 2007, from http://www.jointogether.org/resources/2007/prevention-education-in.html.
  2. Center for Substance Abuse and Preventon (CSAP). (2001, December 12). CSAP's prevention portal: Model programs. Retrieved May 18, 2001, from http://www.samhsa.gov/centers/csap/modelprograms/default.cfm.
  3. Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence. (2006). Blueprints for violence prevention overview, 2007, from University of Colorado, Boulder (CO) Web site http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/model/criteria.html.
  4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2000, May 4). Guidelines for school health programs to prevent tobacco use and addiction, Feb 24, 1994. Retrieved May 18, 2001, from http:/www.cdc.gov.nccdphp/dash/ptuaaag.htm.
  5. Crosse, S., Burr, M., Cantor, D., Hagen, C., & Hantman, I. (2001). Wide scope, questionable quality: Drug and violence prevention efforts in American schools. Report on the study on school violence and prevention. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service Web site, http://www.ed.gov/offices/OUS/PES/studies-school-violence/wide-scope.pdf.
  6. Drug Strategies Inc (1999). Making the grade: A guide to school drug prevention programs. Washington, DC: AuthorGoogle Scholar
  7. Fagan, A., & Mihalic, S. (2003). Enhancing the adoption of school-based prevention programs. Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 235–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gandhi, A. G., Murphy-Graham, E., Petrosino, A., Chrismer, S. S., & Weiss, C. H. (2007). The devil is in the details: Examining the evidence for "proven" school-based drug abuse prevention programs. Evaluation Review, 31, 43–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Glasziou, P., & Haynes, B. (2005). The paths from research to improved health outcomes. Evidence-Based Medicine, 10, 4–7.Google Scholar
  10. Hallfors, D., Pankratz, M., & Hartman, S. (2007). Does federal policy support the use of scientific evidence in school-based prevention programs? Prevention Science, 8, 75–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hallfors, D., Pankratz, M., & Sporer, A. (2001). Drug free schools survey II: Report of results. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina.Google Scholar
  12. National Center for Education Statistics. (2004). Public elementary/secondary school universe survey data, 2002–03 [Data file]. Retrieved February 21, 2007, from Common Core of Data Web site, http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubschuniv.asp
  13. National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2003). Preventing drug use among children and adolescents: A research-based guide (2nd ed.). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse (No. 04-4212(B)).Google Scholar
  14. National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices. (2004). SAMHSA model programs. Retrieved June 4, 2004, from http://modelprograms.samhsa.gov.
  15. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. (2002), Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat 1425.Google Scholar
  16. Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using evidence: How research can inform public services. Great Britain: Policy.Google Scholar
  17. Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). (2007). National drug control strategy - FY 2008 budget summary. Retrieved August 15, 2007, from http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/policy/08budget/
  18. Petrosino, A. (2003). Standards for evidence and evidence for standards: The case of school-based drug prevention. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587, 180–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pope, D., Vincus, A., & Hanley, S. (2007). Using a multi-mode design to maintain response rates. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association of Public Opinion Research, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
  20. Quality Education Data Inc. (1998). QED national education database: Data users guide, version 4.6. Denver, CO: Author.Google Scholar
  21. Ringwalt, C. L., Ennett, S., Vincus, A., Thorne, J., Rohrbach, L. A., & Simons-Rudolph, A. (2002). The prevalence of effective substance use prevention curricula in U.S. middle schools. Prevention Science, 3, 257–265.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  23. Safe, Disciplined, and Drug-Free Schools Expert Panel. (2001). Exemplary programs. Retrieved 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/exemplary01/sddsguid.pdf and http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/ORAD/KAD/expert_panel/2001exemplary_sddfs.html.
  24. SAS [computer program]. (2003). Version 9.1.3. Cary, NC: SAS Institue Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Schon, D. (1967). Technology and social change: The new Heraclitus.. New York: Delacorte.Google Scholar
  26. Simons-Rudolph, A., Ennett, S., Ringwalt, C., Rohrbach, L., & Vincus, A. (2003). The principles of effectiveness: Early awareness and plans for implementation in a national sample of public schools and their districts. Journal of School Health, 73, 181–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. U.S. Department of Education., Safe and Drug-free Schools Program: Notice of final principles of effectiveness. (1998) Federal Register, 63, 29902–29906.Google Scholar
  28. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000). Healthy People 2010: Educational and community-based programs (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office Retrieved August 15, 2007, from http://www.healthypeople.gov/document/html/objectives/07-02.htm.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chris Ringwalt
    • 1
  • Amy A. Vincus
    • 1
  • Sean Hanley
    • 1
  • Susan T. Ennett
    • 2
  • J. Michael Bowling
    • 2
  • Louise Ann Rohrbach
    • 3
  1. 1.Pacific Institute for Research and EvaluationChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Department of Health Behavior and Health EducationThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  3. 3.Department of Preventive Medicine, Institute for Prevention ResearchUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations