Ben Berkman

Issue Brief
Bedell

Dare to Reform D.A.R.E.: Drug-Prevention Education in America
D.A.R.E. is an Ineffective, Potentially Detrimental Program
Amongst the most common platitudes espoused by politicians of all agendas and
citizens of nearly all backgrounds is the remark that keeping our nations children away
from drugs and alcohol is a top priority. Its a pretty agreeable statement: drugs are bad,
were taught, and at all costs should be avoided. By the time they graduate high school,
seventy-five percent of American students in public schools receive D.A.R.E. education,
a highly acclaimed program that gives kids the skills they need to avoid involvement in
drugs, gangs, and violence.
1
But D.A.R.E., in numerous studies conducted by copious
government and non-government organizations, has proven to be unsuccessful at
reducing drug use amongst the nations youth.
2
Not only is the program ineffective, it
may even be detrimental, as certain studies have found links to lowered self-esteem
throughout participants.
3
As such, in light of increasing teen death rates caused by hard
drugs, its time that D.A.R.E., and Americas drug education, is reformed.

What is D.A.R.E.?
Founded in 1984 by former Los Angeles Police Department chief Daryl Gates,
D.A.R.E. is an international education initiative that works to prevent drug and alcohol
abuse amongst teenagers. All D.A.R.E. participants sign a pledge, vowing to avoid illegal
drugs. Most D.A.R.E. programs are taught by a local police officer to a classroom of
elementary and middle school students. According to the programs site, 26 million
United States students are involved, and 36 million children participate worldwide.
4

Berkman 2
Unlike other education programs, D.A.R.E. stresses a just say no attitude to all
drugs, and alcohol for those underage. For example, instead of teaching responsible use
in regards to alcohol, the approach emphasizes that one must abstain from any use until
of age. In a similar manner, D.A.R.E. puts all drugs under one umbrella, asserting that all
are terribly dangerous and can ultimately lead to death or at the very least significant
physical, emotional, and financial detriments.
D.A.R.E. has reformed itself over the years, in some senses. Initially, said Athens
(OH) Police Department Chief Dave Williams, the concentration was about the drug
problem and included police and children interacting in a positive manner.
5
At its
naissance, the key phrase was To Keep Kids Off Drugs, but by the mid 1990s, in an
effort to curb gang violence, it changed to To Resist Drugs and Violence. By 2012, the
motto read, D.A.R.E. Keepin' it REAL; Be Safe and Responsible. Still, the curriculum
hardly changed.
6

Proponents of D.A.R.E. support the program for various reasons. Young students
find excitement in a police officer visiting their classrooms, talking about mysterious,
illegal substances. Police officers, who teach the classes, enjoy it because it supports
their agenda of promoting community policing and helping residents feel at ease with
them.
7
Many parents and teachers find solace in the fact that their children and pupils
are receiving drug-prevention education, and that burden has been relieved from them.
And administrators, even local politicians, love the program because it fulfills their
obligation to do something about alcohol and drugs.
8

Yet D.A.R.E. is more of an unpopular program than one held in high regard with
the majority of the population. Besides from the numerous finding that D.A.R.E. is
Berkman 3
wholly ineffective which will be addressed in the ensuing section opponents advocate
that D.A.R.E. glamorizes drugs by bringing students uniformed police officers
(sometimes with a gun) driving seized drug vehicles, handing out free goodies like
buttons, bumper stickers, tee-shirts, sodas, ribbons, diplomas and awards to capture kids'
interest.
9
Moreover, they argue, it sends a mixed message with harmful stereotypes by
equating dissimilar drugs and teaching students that once they try drugs they are losers
who will become addicts and ruin their lives
10
More than anything, critics state, its an
extension, even a form of propaganda, of the fruitless War on Drugs.

Why is D.A.R.E. Ineffective?
A highly scrutinized and studied enterprise, D.A.R.E. has been shown to be
ineffective by an array of researchers, in both private and public sectors. To begin, Bill
Coulson, Carl Rodgers, and Abraham Maslow world-renowned physiologists who
developed D.A.R.E.s founding principles admitted their theories were wrong and off-
base. Coulson concluded that the program is 'rooted in trash psychology.
11

A study of Houston, Texas
D.A.R.E. programs found a
shocking 29% increase in drug
usage and a 34% increase in
tobacco usage among students
participating in DARE.'"
12
And a
simple look at drug use in the
Berkman 4
D.A.R.E. generation points towards in increase in usage, not a decrease, as evidenced by
the data (above) compiled by the National Institute on Drug Abuse
13
.
An additional academic study looked to measure the effectiveness of D.A.R.E.
using meta-analysis, a method
that amalgamates previous
research. The effect size (or r-
score) of the study quantifies
how effective the program is:
In their conclusions, the
researchers noted, the effect size we obtained would have needed to be 20 times larger
to be considered even small. Given the tremendous expenditures in time and money
involved with D.A.R.E., it would appear that continued efforts should focus on other
techniques and programs that might produce more substantial effects.
14
A negative r-
score, as seen at the -.058 value point, proposes that the study was not only ineffective for
a certain participant, but in fact detrimental under the researchers variables.
Other studies have not only implied that D.A.R.E. is unsuccessful, but its in fact
disadvantageous to the students involved. A 1999 study titled Project DARE: No Effects
at 10-Year Follow-Up surveyed over 1,000 ten year-olds enrolled in D.A.R.E. classes,
asking students about drugs and self-esteem. A decade later, this sample group filled out
the same survey. The findings were grim: 20-year-olds who had D.A.R.E. classes were
no less likely to have smoked marijuana or cigarettes, drunk alcohol, used illicit drugs
like cocaine or heroin, or caved in to peer pressure than kids who never been exposed to
D.A.R.E.
15
But more disturbingly, the articles claims, D.A.R.E. status in the sixth grade
Berkman 5
was negatively related to self-esteem at age 20, indicating that individuals who were
exposed to D.A.R.E. in the sixth grade had lower levels of self-esteem 10 years later.
16

However, a different academic article reported no significant change in self-
esteem between D.A.R.E. and
non-D.A.R.E. high schoolers.
As the table to the right
measures, the self-esteem scale
and locus of control results
between the two sample groups.
The mean scores on each scale
are very similar for both
groups, the authors write. The t-tests indicate no significant differences. As such, the
authors argue, this further suggests D.A.R.E. leads to no long-term effects.
17

Additionally, D.A.R.E. is a drain on financial resources. While its managed by a
nonprofit organization in California, D.A.R.E. relies on local, state, and federal taxpayer
money to fund the program. While no precise calculation of the programs annual total
cost exists, estimates place the price tag around one or two billion dollars.
18
Its a massive
amount of money, and one that stifles other programs from existing. Said Joel Brown, a
drug-prevention education expert at the University of Oklahoma, The greatest success of
D.A.R.E. may not be in preventing young people from using drugs, but from its
organizational capacity to build and maintain its own organization.
19



Berkman 6
Potential Solutions to Reform or Eliminate D.A.R.E.
In light of rising drug use amongst teenagers, and a growing distrust in the
D.A.R.E. program and the War on Drugs in general, its clear that the kairotic moment to
reform drug-prevention education is already here. Theres no simple, one step solution to
simultaneously improve the education techniques and reduce drug use in the teenage
stratum. However, numerous philosophies do exist to ameliorate the issue.
Alcohol Abuse Prevention, an advocacy group fighting alcohol (and drug) abuse
suggests that improvements can be made in the marketing realms. The social norms
advertising technique relies on the fact the young adults believe those around them are
drinking more and using more drugs, which leads to more consumption in an effort to
feel included.
20
When credible surveys demonstrate the actual, much lower drinking
rates, and the results are widely publicized or marketed to this group, the imagined
social pressure drops and so does youthful drinking. The technique works with both
alcohol and drugs. Furthermore, in comparison to the expensive D.A.R.E., this is a much
less costly approach.
21

The United States Department of Education, which is not related to D.A.R.E., has
listed three potential replacements that have already been proven effectual when
administered to smaller audiences. Life Skills Training Program, Project ALERT, and
Strengthening Families Program all are restricted to a certain target group and come with
extremely high implementation costs, but, because they are effective, they are bargains
compared to the completely ineffective D.A.R.E. program.
22

So, how can we reform D.A.R.E. to better ready our nations children to resist the
temptations and curiosities of drugs and alcohol? Instead of destroying the program
Berkman 7
completely, we can use these previous findings to help reshape drug-prevention
education. For one, D.A.R.E. should focus more on alcohol and tobacco use, which many
students perceive as less dangerous because they are legal for most Americans. While
D.A.R.E. currently concentrates its efforts on harder drugs (LSD, cocaine,
methamphetamines), the majority of the teenage population is abusing alcohol, cigarettes,
and even painkillers. D.A.R.E. should adjust to address these trends. As a result, when
students begin college and experience the freedom that follows, its alcohol they most
saliently abuse; harder drug use is to a much lesser extent.
Furthermore, an academic study suggested that police officers should no longer be
the adults teaching this program: initially, the D.A.R.E. officer was a highly credible
source, and so was the message. With maturation, students dissociated the two, and the
importance of the message declined. Over time, students lost some of their faith in
police." Those affected by drugs, alcohol, and tobacco use would be more effective, the
authors argued, such as recovering addicts or lung-cancer patients.
23

Potentially the most promising reform in drug-abuse prevention education is the
keepin it REAL program, spearheaded by researchers at the Pennsylvania State
University. Funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, REAL stands for the
resistance strategies - Refuse, Explain, Avoid, and Leave - that teens can use to negotiate
drug offers.
24
Unlike D.A.R.E., this culturally grounded multimedia initiative consists
of ten school lessons and five videos developed by kids for kids. This peer-taught
approach is proving to be effective, and his already been implemented in 27 Phoenix,
Arizona middle schools. In 2009, D.A.R.E. in fact licensed keepin it REAL and is
undergoing pilot tests to further disseminate it.
25

Berkman 8
Grassroots movements, such as keepin it REAL, will be the source of change in
drug-prevention teaching. D.A.R.E. is not a government run, operated, or regulated
entity. As such, this isnt a project that can be petitioned through local or federal
branches. It starts with the advocacy of the concerned, and the research of the informed,
who will ultimately reach D.A.R.E. executives to work together in an open dialogue to
reform American drug-prevention education.

1
"Drug Abuse Resistance Education." D.A.R.E. America, http://www.dare.org/, Web. 30
Mar. 2014.

2
"Drug Abuse Resistance Education: The Effectiveness of DARE." Drug Abuse
Resistance Education: The Effectiveness of DARE. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2014.

3
Lynam, Donald. "Project DARE: No Effects at 10-Year Follow-Up." Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology 67.4 (1999): 590-93. Web.

4
http://www.dare.org/

5
Kight, Fred. "Anti-drug Program Dares to Change." The Athens News. N.p., n.d. Web.
10 Apr. 2014. http://www.athensnews.com/ohio/article-42128-anti-drug-program-dares-
to-change.html.

6
http://www.athensnews.com/ohio/article-42128-anti-drug-program-dares-to-
change.html

7
"Ineffective DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) Program Remains
Popular."Ineffective DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) Program Remains
Popular. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2014. www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/Controversies/

8
www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/Controversies/

9
DARE: Good Intentions, Bad Results." DARE Increases Drug Risk. The Family
Council on Drug Awareness, n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.
http://www.equalrights4all.org/fcda/dare.html.

10
http://www.equalrights4all.org/fcda/dare.html.

11
Barnes, Diane. DARE indoctrination fails to work and ends up endangering our
families. Detroit News, 4-2-00.

Berkman 9

12
Dineen, Tana. When it comes to drug abuse prevention programs, "just say no" to feel-
good, time-wasters like DARE.

13
http://www.equalrights4all.org/fcda/dare.html.

14
West, Steven. "Project D.A.R.E. Outcome Effectiveness Revisited." American Journal
of Public Health 94.6 (2004): 1027-029. Web.

15
Reaves, Jessica. "Just Say No to DARE." Time. Time Inc., 15 Feb. 2001. Web. 30 Mar.
2014. <http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0%2C8599%2C99564%2C00.html>.

16
Lynam

17
Wysong, Earl. "Truth and DARE: Tracking Drug Education to Graduation and as
Symbolic Politics." Social Problems 41.3 (1994): 448-72. JSTOR. Web.

18
www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/Controversies/

19
"[D.A.R.E.'s] Programs Cost Soars past $1 Billion with Little Accounting." CERD
DAREs Programs Cost Soars past 1 Billion with Little Accounting Comments. N.p., n.d.
Web. 30 Mar. 2014. http://www.cerd.org/press/d-a-r-e-s-programs-cost-soars-past-1-
billion-with-little-accounting.

20
Perkins, H. Wesley. The Social Norms Approach to Preventing School and College
Age Substance Abuse: A Handbook for Educators, Counselors, and Clinicians. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003. Print.

21
www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/Controversies/

22
www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/Controversies/
23
Dukes, R.L. et al. Long-term impact of Drug Abuse Resistance Education
(D.A.R.E.).Evaluation Research, 1997, 21, 483-500.

24
"Research." Keepin' It REAL. Pennsylvania State University, n.d. Web.
http://www.kir.psu.edu/research/index.shtml.

25
http://www.kir.psu.edu/research/index.shtml