EOL 469: Legal Basis of Educational Practice

David M. Stone, University Laboratory High School, Urbana, IL USA

Reflections Regarding

Karen Bennett and Michele Jacobs'

Employee Drug Testing Memo

I found this memo to be exceptionally well presented and well organized throughout. The memo, submitted to the local school board president, intelligently and thoughtfully presents a case for further examination of the need to adopt a teacher drug testing program and outlines potential adverse effects of adopting such policy on current teachers, candidates for future district teaching positions, and community perception of its public school teachers.

The proposed testing falls under the umbrella term of "suspicionless testing". Past efforts of this type has been challenged as violations of individual rights under the Fourth Amendment, which provides for security from unreasonable searches and seizures. Karen and Michele do an outstanding job of presenting landmark legal cases relating specifically to these type of events, making clear the fact that teachers positions are not "safety sensitive" positions as defined in past cases. Finally, Karen and Michele present four pertinent issues to consider prior to adopting any form of teacher drug testing policy. Each is briefly summarized below:

1. Rationale for drug testing and the required expenditures for drug testing must be clearly stated.
2. Current drug testing technologies have an unacceptable performance records in terms of percentage of false-positives and potential for falsifying test results. When one considers the high stakes of this type of testing and the potential impact of a false positive on the career of a teacher, the reliability is too low to justify in situations where there is no past record or suspicion of drug use.
3. Specifics as to type of test(s), location of testing, frequency of testing, etc. must be clearly decided and stated prior to pursing any drug testing policy development.
4. Impact of the testing on teacher morale, public perception of teachers and potential competitiveness in attracting top notch candidates must be balanced against the questionable value of performing the drug testing.

I personally find the topic to be interesting for a number of reasons. As a teacher at a school which is not part of a district and lacks any type of school board or union representation, I find the interactions that occur between these entities to be fascinating. As a teacher who doesn't utilize drugs, nor has never done so, the issue seems irrelevant at first. Upon further reflection, though, I don't think there is any rationale for drug testing unless there is suspicion that drugs are impacting performance in the classroom. If I were a candidate looking at a number of different positions I would have to wonder why a school district feels a need to perform the testing. Do those actions tell me there have been past problems in the district? Does the drug policy testing say something about a district's need to dominate and be made aware of all aspects of its employee's life? Does this policy tell us something about community public trust and respect of its public school teachers? I don't know that the policy itself will dissuade individuals from seriously considering employment in the district, though in combination with other factors, it would be difficult to imagine this type of policy not swaying some of the top potential candidates toward looking elsewhere in employment decisions.

I have difficulty imagining this type of policy ever developing at my school, a laboratory high school on the campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The higher education mentality and its emphasis on personal and educational freedoms tends to assume high personal and professional behavior standards. It seems that some school boards take a kind of perverse pleasure from taking control of its employees, making its contracted teachers appear less responsible and professional then I believe to be the case. The relationship between teachers (and their unions) with school boards is at times highly adversarial, at times to the degree that the adversity benefits neither.

When I hear and read about policies of this type I don't regret the fact that we lack a school board and higher public school administrative levels. I wonder sometimes just what additional impacts teachers could be making if they weren't forced to deal with situations like this one.

Created 11/25/99. Last modified 11/25/99.