School-based substance use surveys are an important data source for prevention and evaluation researchers, but access to students has become progressively restricted by schools. Because almost all states and many districts conduct their own regular surveys, archived data are a potential resource for informed policy and practice decisions. In this study, substance use survey data were successfully collected from 69 of 105 targeted school districts located in 12 states. Results indicate the availability and quality of extant data currently limit their usefulness. Recommendations are made regarding how schools could be assisted to improve the value of their substance use surveys.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bachman, J. G.
, L. D. Johnston, P. M. O’Malley, and R. H. Humphrey. 1988. Explaining the recent decline in marijuana use: Differentiating the effects of perceived risks, disapproval, and general lifestyle factors. Journal of Health and Social Behavior29:92-112.
2.
Blanken, A. J.1993. Measuring use of alcohol and other drugs among adolescents. Public Health Reports108 (Suppl. 1): 25-30.
3.
Brandon, P. R.1992. State-level evaluations of school programs funded under the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act. Journal of Drug Education22:25-36.
4.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
. 2000. Youth risk behavior surveillance—United States, 1999. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report49 (S05): 1-96.
5.
Cohen, Jacob
. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement20:37-47.
6.
Cornell, D. G.
, and A. B. Loper. 1998. Assessment of violence and other high-risk behaviors with a school survey. School Psychology Review27:317-330.
7.
Ellickson, P. L.1994. Getting and keeping schools and kids for evaluation studies. Journal of Community Psychology, CSAP (Center for Substance Abuse Prevention) special issue, pp. 102-116.
8.
Esbensen, F.
, M. H. Miller, T. J. Taylor, N. He, and A. Freng. 1999. Differential attrition rates and active parental consent. Evaluation Review23:316-335.
9.
Everett, S. A.
, L. Kann, and L. McReynolds. 1997. The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System: Policy and program applications. Journal of School Health67:333-335.
10.
Gabriel, R. M.
, J. A. Pollard, and J. A. Arter. 1990. A consumer’s guide to alcohol and other drug surveys. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Microform.
11.
Hallfors, D.
, and D. Godette. Forthcoming. Will the “principles of effectiveness” improve prevention practice? Early findings from a diffusion study. Health Education Research.
12.
Hallfors, D., M. Pankratz, and A. Sporer. 2001. Drug free schools survey II: Report of results. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School of Public Health, Department of Maternal and Child Health.
13.
Hallfors, D., A. Sporer, M. Pankratz, and D. Godette. 2000. Drug free schools survey: Report of results. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School of Public Health, Department of Maternal and Child Health.
14.
Hallfors, D.
, M. Stirratt, and D. Rindskopf. 1997. Meta-analysis of school surveys to assess community prevention efforts. Paper presented at CDC and ATSDR: Statistical Bases for Public Health Decision Making: From Exploration to Modeling, January, in Atlanta, GA.
15.
Hallfors, D.
, J. L. Vevea, B. Iritani, H. Cho, S. Khatapoush, and L. Saxe. Forthcoming. Truancy, grade point average, and sexual activity: A meta-analysis of risk indicators for youth substance use. Journal of School Health.
16.
Hantman, I.
, and C. Crosse. 2000. Progress in prevention: Report on the national study of local education agency activities under the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary, Planning and Evaluation Service.
17.
Harrison, L.1997. The validity of self-reported drug use in survey research: An overview and critique of research methods. In The validity of self-reported drug use: Improving the accuracy of survey estimates(NIDA Research Monograph no. 167), edited by L. Harrison and A. Hughes, 17-36. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
18.
Hawkins, J. D.
, R. F. Catalano, and J. Y. Miller. 1992. Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin112:64-105.
19.
Johnston, L. D.1985. Techniques for reducing measurement error in surveys of drug use. In Studying drug abuse, vol.6 of Series in Psychosocial Epidemiology, edited by L. N. Robins, 117-136. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
20.
Johnston, L. D.
, and P. M. O’Malley. 1985. Issues of validity and population coverage in student surveys of drug use. In Self-report methods of estimating drug use: Meeting current challenges to validity(NIDA Research Monograph no. 57), edited by B. A. Rouse, N. J. Kozel, and L. G. Richards, 31-54. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
21.
Johnston, L. D.
, P. M. O’Malley, and J. G. Bachman. 2000. Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-1999. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
22.
Kaftarian, S. J.
, and W. B. Hansen. 1994. Improving methodologies for the evaluation of community-based substance abuse prevention programs. Journal of Community Psychology, CSAP (Center for Substance Abuse Prevention) special issue, pp. 3-5.
23.
Martin, E.1983. Surveys as social indicators: Problems in monitoring trends. In Handbook of survey research, edited by J. D. Wright and A. Anderson, 667-743. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
24.
Metze, L. 2000. PRIDE technical report: The PRIDE questionnaire for grades 6-12 validity and reliability study. Manuscript.
25.
Oetting, E. R.
, and F. Beauvais. 1990. Adolescent drug use: Findings of national and local surveys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology58:385-394.
26.
Rocky Mountain Behavioral Science Institute
. 1997. The American drug and alcohol survey. Ft. Collins, CO: Rocky Mountain Behavioral Science Institute.
27.
Saxe, L.
, E. Reber, D. Hallfors, C. Kadushin, D. Jones, D. Rindskopf, and A. Beveridge. 1997. Think globally, act locally: Assessing the impact of community-based substance abuse prevention. Evaluation and Program Planning20(3): 357-366.
28.
Search Institute
. 1996. Search Institute profiles of student life: Attitudes and behaviors. Minneapolis, MN: Search Institute.
29.
Skager, R.
, and G. Austin. 1997. Effects of active parental consent on response rates for a state-wide secondary school substance use survey and relationships with school level measures of student ethnicity, poverty and educational advancement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, March 27, in Chicago.
30.
U.S. Department of Education
. 1997-1998. Common core of data, agency universe. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Available from http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/.
31.
U.S. Department of Education. 1998. Notice of final principles of effectiveness. Federal Register63 (104): 29902-6.
