This study compared the perceptions of head athletic trainers (HATS) from NCAA member Divisions I, II, and III regarding current athletic department drug education policies in their institutions. A Web-based questionnaire collected responses from 353 HATS. Drug education programs focused more on providing information about the negative consequences of drugs than changing the attitudes and behaviors of students in relation to drug use. More Division I and II schools offered comprehensive ATOD education programs to their athletes compared to Division III schools; however, the majority of these programs were not scheduled on a regular basis. HATS in all divisions reported that the abuse of alcohol and other drugs by student athletes during and after athletic and social events was a significant concern and indicated the importance of scheduling drug education programs closer to such events. Majority of HATS did not view participating in the drug education programs as part of their professional duties; however, they expressed an interest to increase their involvement in these activities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
NCAA Drug-Education/Testing Surveys Year to Year Comparison, May 21, 2002.
2.
SchwenkT. L. and CostleyC., When Food Becomes a Drug: Nonanabolic Nutritional Supplement Use in Athletes, The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 30:6, pp. 907–916, 2002.
3.
DiacinM. J.ParksJ. B., and AllisonP. C., Voices of Male Athletes on Drug Use, Drug Testing, and the Existing Order in Intercollegiate Athletics, Journal of Sport Behavior, 26:10, pp. 1–16, March 2003.
4.
NCAA Research Staff, NCAA Study of Substance Use and Abuse Habits of College Student-Athletes, presented to The National Collegiate Athletic Association Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports, June 2001.
5.
MillerB. E.MillerM. N.VerheggeR.LinvilleH. H., and PumariegaA. J., Alcohol Misuse among College Athletes: Self-Medication for Psychiatric symptoms?Journal of Drug Education, 32:1, pp. 41–52, 2002.
6.
NelsonT. F. and WechslerH., School Spirits: Alcohol and Collegiate Sports Fans, Addictive Behaviors, 846, pp. 1–11, 2002.
7.
DowdallG. and WechslerH., Studying College Alcohol Use: Widening the Lens, Sharpening the Focus, Journal of Alcohol Studies, 14, pp. 14–22, 2002.
TrickerR. and ConnollyD., Drug Education and the College Athlete: Evaluation of a Decision-Making Model, Journal of Drug Education, 26:2, pp. 159–181, 1996.
10.
GrossmanS. J.GieckJ.FreedmanA., and CopelandJ., A.P.P.L.E. Athlete Prevention Programming and Leadership Education, Athletics Administration, 26:2, pp. 16–18, 1991.
11.
TrickerR. and CookD., The Current Status of Drug Intervention and Prevention in College Athletic Programs, Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 34:2, pp. 38–45, 1989.
12.
GrossmanS. J., Model Alcohol and Other Drug Peer Education Program for Student Athletes, Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 1:1, pp. 337–349, 1992.
13.
BlochS. A. and UngerleiderS., Targeting High-Risk Groups on Campus for Drug and Alcohol Prevention: An Examination and Assessment, International Journal of the Addictions, 23:3, pp. 299–319, 1988.
14.
ShiraziA., The Perceptions of Head Athletic Trainers in NCAA Division I, II and III Member Institutions toward the Status of Alcohol Tobacco and Other Drug (ATOD) Prevention and Education Policies, doctoral dissertation—Oregon State University, 2003.
15.
GonzalezG. M., Theories, Dominant Models, and the Need for Applied Research, in Research and Intervention Preventing Substance Abuse in Higher Education, GonzalezG. M. and ClementW. (eds.), U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C., pp. 3–24, 1994.
16.
DeJongW.WhitmanV.ColthrustT.CretellaM.GillbreathM.RosatiM., and ZweigK., Environmental Managment: A Comprehensive Strategy for Reducing Alcohol and Other Drug Use on College Campuses, Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention, Education Development Center, pp. 1–46, 1998.
17.
UpcraftM. and WeltyJ. D., A Guide for College Presidents and Governing Boards: Strategies for Eliminating Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse on Campuses, Journal of College and University Law, pp. 1–53, 1990.
18.
StokolsD., Translating Social Ecological Theory into Guidelines for Community Health Promotion, American Journal of Health Promotion, 10, pp. 282–298, 1996.
19.
Survey of Substance Abuse Policies and Programs in the Public Community Colleges in Illinois. Illinois Community College Board, Springfield, 1990.
20.
WallackL. and DeJongW., Mass Media and Public Health: Moving the Focus of Change from the Individual to the Environment, in The Effects of the Mass Media on the Use and Abuse of Alcohol, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Rockville, Maryland, pp. 253–268, 1995.
21.
PittayathikhunT.MattssonM., and DejongW., Complying with the Drug Free Schools and Campuses Regulations 134 CFR 86: A Guide for University and College Administrators, U.S. Department of Education, Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention, Washington, D.C., 1997.
22.
Presidents Leadership Group, Be Vocal, Be Visible, Be Visionary: Recommendations for College and University Presidents on Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention, Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention/EDC, Newton, Massachusetts, 1997.
23.
GullandE., Developing Effective and Legally Sound Policies, American Council on Education, Washington, D.C.; United Educators Insurance Risk Retention Group Inc., Chevy Chase, Maryland, 1994.
24.
Substance Abuse Policies in Ohio Schools, Information Analysis; Research/Technical Report, 1998.
25.
Survey of Substance Abuse Policies and Programs in the Public Community Colleges in Illinois, Illinois Community College Board, Springfield, 1990.
26.
GrossmanS. J. and SmileyE., APPLE: Description and Evaluation of a Substance Abuse Education and Prevention Program for Collegiate Athletics, The Journal of Primary Prevention, 20:1, pp. 51–59, 1999.
