Evaluations of school curricular drug control efforts show they are only modestly successful because they are based on an inaccurate theory of drug taking. Social control theory is suggested as a better model of drug taking and drug resistance. Building strong bonds to school acts to decrease the likelihood of interaction with delinquent peers and thereby decrease delinquency and drug use. Yet schools are sites of stratification and competition, and strong bonds may be related to one's place in the school hierarchy. If schools are unable to produce sufficient positions in the hierarchy, those with low levels of academic success or commitment may turn to the drug subculture to find status and rewards. A number of future research questions are suggested.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HopkinsR. J.MaussA. L.KearneyK. A.WeisheitR. A., Comprehensive Evaluation of a Model Alcohol Education Curriculum, Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 49: 1, pp. 38–50, 1988.
2.
MaussA. L.HopkinsR. H.WeisheitR. A.KearneyK. A., The Problematic Prospects for Prevention in the Classroom: Should Alcohol Education Programs be Expected to Reduce Drinking by Youth? Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 49: 1, pp. 51–61, 1988.
3.
NorlandS.DiChiaraA.HendershottA., Teachers' Use of and Perceptions of a Drug Curriculum, Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 40:2, pp. 100–111, 1995.
4.
GlicksmanL.SmytheC., A Review of School-Based Drug Education Programs: Do We Expect Too Much? in Controversies in the Addictions Field: Volume One, EngsR. C. (ed.), Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque, pp. 124–135, 1990.
5.
GoodeE., Drugs in American Society (4th Edition), McGraw-Hill, New York, 1993.
6.
RayO.KsirC., Drugs, Society and Human Behavior, Times Mirror, St. Louis, 1990.
7.
ForsS., School-Based Alcohol and Drug Education Programs Can be Effective, in Controversies in the Addiction Field, Volume One, EngsR. C. (ed.), Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque, pp. 167–174, 1990.
8.
ToblerN. S., Meta-Analysis of 143 Adolescent Drug Prevention Programs: Quantitative Outcome Results of Program Participants Compared to a Control or Comparison Group, Journal of Drug Issues, 16:4, pp. 537–567, 1986.
9.
SchapsE.DiBartoloR.MoskowitzJ.PalleyC. S.ChurginS., A Review of 127 Drug Abuse Prevention Program Evaluations, Journal of Drug Issues, 11:1, pp. 17–43, 1981.
10.
MoskowitzJ. M., The Primary Prevention of Alcohol Problems: A Critical Review of the Research Literature, Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 50:1, pp. 54–88, 1989.
11.
HirschiT., Causes of Delinquency, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1969.
12.
HingelangM. J., Causes of Delinquency: A Partial Replication and Extension, Social Problems, 20:4, pp. 471–487, 1973.
13.
BurkettS. R.JensenE. L., Conventional Ties, Peer Influence, and the Fear of Apprehension: A Study of Adolescent Marijuana Use, The Sociological Quarterly, 16:4, pp. 522–533, 1975.
14.
KrohnM. D.MasseyJ. L., Social Control and Delinquent Behavior: An Examination of the Elements of the Social Bond, The Sociological Quarterly, 21:4, pp. 529–543, 1980.
15.
ElliottD. S.HuizingaD.AgetonS. A., Explaining Delinquency and Drug Use, Sage, Beverly Hills, 1985.
16.
MenardS.MorseB. J., A Structuralist Critique of the IQ-Delinquency Hypothesis: Theory and Evidence, The American Journal of Sociology, 89:6, pp. 1347–1378, 1984.
17.
KellyD. H., Status Origins, Track Position, and Delinquent Involvement: A Self-Report Analysis, The Sociological Quarterly, 16:2, pp. 264–271, 1975.
18.
CicourelA. V.KitsuseJ. I., The Social Organization of the High School and Deviant Adolescent Careers, in Deviance: The Interactionist Perspective, RubingtonE.WeinbergM. S. (eds.), Macmillan, New York, pp. 124–135, 1968.
19.
PolkK., Schools and the Delinquency Experience, Criminal Justice and Behavior, 2:4, pp. 315–338, 1975.
20.
SchaferW. E.OlexaC.PolkK., Programmed for Social Class: Tracking in High School, in Sociology: Windows on Society, HeerenJ. W.MasonM. (eds.), Roxbury, Los Angeles, 1992.
21.
OakesJ., Keeping Track, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1985.
22.
KellyD. H.PinkW. T., School Crime and Individual Responsibility: The Perpetuation of a Myth? in Criminal Behavior, KellyD. H. (ed.), St. Martin's Press, New York, pp. 136–151, 1990.
23.
PolkK.HalfertyD. S., Adolescence, Commitment and Delinquency, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 3:2, pp. 82–96, 1966.
24.
KellyD. H.BalchR. W., Social Origins and School Failure: A Reexamination of Cohen's Theory of Working-Class Delinquency, in Criminal Behavior, KellyD. H. (ed.), St. Martin's Press, New York, 1990.
25.
PhillipsJ. C.KellyD. H., School Failure and Delinquency: Which Causes Which? Criminology, 17:2, pp. 194–207, 1979.
26.
ElliottD. S., Delinquency, School Attendance and Drop-Out, Social Problems, 13:3, pp. 307–314, 1966.
27.
LiazosA., School, Alienation and Delinquency, Crime and Delinquency, 24:3, pp. 355–370, 1978.
28.
GreenbergD. F., Delinquency and the Age Structure of Society, Contemporary Crises: Crime, Law and Social Policy, 1:2, pp. 189–223, 1977.
29.
AkersR. L.CochranJ. K., Adolescent Marijuana Use: A Test of Three Theories of Deviant Behavior, Deviant Behavior, 6:4, pp. 323–346, 1985.
30.
CaliguriJ. P., Drug Education in the Schools—Does It Have a Future? Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 37:3, pp. 17–22, 1992.
31.
GardnerL.ShoemakerD. J., Social Bonding and Delinquency: A Comparative Analysis, The Sociological Quarterly, 30:3, pp. 481–499, 1989.
32.
GoodstadtM. S., Substance Abuse Criteria vs. School Drug Policies, Journal of School Health, 59:6, pp. 246–250, 1989.
33.
MarcosA. C.BahrS. J., Control Theory and Adolescent Drug Use, Youth and Society, 19:4, pp. 395–425, 1988.
