D.A.R.E.
Pros and Cons
Video exploring critical thinking and how it leads to great citizen involvement
Is the D.A.R.E. Program Good for America's Kids (K-12)?
Is the D.A.R.E. Program Good for America's Kids (K-12)?
D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) administers a school-based substance abuse, gang, and violence prevention program in 75% of US school districts and in 48 countries (as of 2013). Since 1983, 70,000 police officers have taught the D.A.R.E. program to over 200 million K-12 students worldwide – approximately 114 million in the United States alone.

Proponents say that D.A.R.E. has helped prevent drug use in elementary, middle, and high school students. They contend that D.A.R.E. improves social interaction between police officers, students, and schools, is the most prevalent substance abuse prevention program in the United States, and is popular with kids and parents.

Opponents say that dozens of peer-reviewed studies conclude the D.A.R.E. program is ineffective at preventing kids from using drugs. They contend that D.A.R.E. causes kids to ignore legitimate information about the relative harms of drugs, and that D.A.R.E. is even associated with increased drug use. Read more...

Did You Know?
Pro & Con Arguments
Top Pro & Con Quotes
Background
Video Gallery
Comments


D.A.R.E. ProCon.org is a nonpartisan, nonprofit website that presents research, studies, and pro and con statements related to whether or not D.A.R.E. is good for America's kids.
Did You Know?
  1. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama have all declared one day each year to be National D.A.R.E. Day. [15]

  2. The D.A.R.E. curriculum had been excluded from the US Department of Education's National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices because it did not have a "scientifically tested," "evidence-based" curriculum. In Aug. 2009, D.A.R.E. changed to a curriculum that is included in the registry. [16] [17]

  3. Since 1983, the D.A.R.E. program has been taught in all 50 states and in 48 countries, reaching over 200 million kids - approximately 114 million in the US alone. [1] [47]

  4. In 2001, economist Dr. Edward Shepard estimated that D.A.R.E. cost $1-1.3 billion annually (about $173 to $268 per student per year) to implement nationwide once all related expenses, such as police officer training and services, materials and supplies, school resources, etc., were factored in. [4]

  5. The original D.A.R.E. program was developed in 1983 as part of a joint effort between the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) to "to break the generational cycle of drug abuse, related criminal activity, and arrest." [18]
Adopt the DARE site and support ProCon.org

Teacher Survey
Pro & Con Arguments: "Is the D.A.R.E. Program Good for America's Kids (K-12)?"
PRO D.A.R.E. program

  1. The D.A.R.E. program helps prevent drug use in elementary, middle, and high school students. According to the US Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), participants in the D.A.R.E. program report lower alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use than students who did not receive the program. [29] 40% of participants who used alcohol at the beginning of the program reported reductions in alcohol use after receiving the curriculum, and 32% reported discontinuation of alcohol use altogether. Studies of D.A.R.E. by the Research Triangle Institute [32] and in the Journal of the National Medical Association [31] found that D.A.R.E. graduates are five times less likely to initiate smoking compared with non-D.A.R.E. control groups, and report lower levels of tobacco use in 5th and 6th graders in the one to two years following program graduation. A 2010 peer-reviewed evaluation of graduates from D.A.R.E's "Take Charge of Your Life" curriculum by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found that students who had used marijuana by the 7th grade were significantly less likely to use marijuana by 11th grade, compared with students in the control group. [30]


  2. D.A.R.E. improves decision making and attitudes toward drug use. Peer-reviewed studies show that D.A.R.E. has beneficial effects on student knowledge of drugs, attitudes about drug use, social skills, decision-making skills, attitudes toward the police, and normative beliefs about the prevalence of drug use by peers. [10] A 2002 study from the University of Akron concluded that overall decision-making skills for D.A.R.E. graduates were 6% higher than for students that did not enroll or graduate, including those that received other forms of prevention education. [8] D.A.R.E. graduates showed a 19% reduction in perceptions that their peers were using drugs and that such drug use was acceptable. According to SAMHSA, assessments of D.A.R.E. graduates 8 and 14 months after graduation show lower expectation of positive consequences of drug use, lower personal acceptance of drug use 2 and 8 months after graduation, and greater use of intervention strategies to turn down an offer to use drugs 2, 8, and 14 months after graduation. [17]


  3. D.A.R.E. improves social interaction between police officers, students, and schools. Results from a 2008 peer-reviewed study indicate that students who are taught by a police officer during the D.A.R.E. program have more positive attitudes toward the police following graduation.[23] Schools have reported D.A.R.E. officers as providing a "sense of safety and calm" in the wake of school shootings and street violence. According to a school official in Colorado, "police are often looked at as the bad guy, or the one that's going to come in and get you for being a bad guy, and I think that D.A.R.E. provides an opportunity for our young kids particularly to find out that officers can be a resource for protection, for answers for some questions, for direction and for care." Police officers report that D.A.R.E. has made them "seem more human in the eyes of children in the community." [10]


  4. D.A.R.E. is popular with kids and parents. A 2007 survey showed 95% of 5,376 kids surveyed felt the program helped them "decide against using drugs in the future" and 99% of 3,095 parents surveyed showed "very positive support" for D.A.R.E. and felt their children "benefited from the program." [24]


  5. Students who enroll in D.A.R.E. have better attendance in the classroom. A 2010 peer-reviewed study on the D.A.R.E. program found that students were more likely to attend school on days they received D.A.R.E. lessons. [33]


  6. D.A.R.E. is certified as an "evidence-based substance abuse prevention program" by the US Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Since Dec. 2006, the "Keepin' It REAL" curriculum (which D.A.R.E. adopted in 2009) has made SAMHSA's list of evidence-based drug use prevention programs. SAMHSA concludes that "no adverse effects, concerns, or unintended consequences were identified" with the program, and finds that D.A.R.E. is scientifically proven to improve four different student outcomes: alcohol, cigarette, and marijuana use; anti-substance use attitudes; normative beliefs about substance use; and substance use resistance. [29]


  7. D.A.R.E is the most prevalent school-based substance abuse prevention program in the United States. D.A.R.E. administers a school-based substance-abuse prevention and decision-making program in 75% of US schools districts and in 43 countries (as of 2013). [1] As of 2009, the program had trained over 50,000 police officers to teach its program every year to 36 million K-12 students worldwide and 26 million in the US alone. Every US President since 1988 has declared one day each year to be National D.A.R.E. day. [3]


  8. D.A.R.E. has great goals that should be pursued regardless of cost or efficacy. If D.A.R.E. can prevent even one child from becoming addicted to drugs or dying from a drug overdose then it is worth funding.
CON D.A.R.E. program

  1. The D.A.R.E. program does not help prevent drug use in elementary, middle, or high school students. A 2004 meta-analysis of 11 peer-reviewed studies concluded D.A.R.E. is "ineffective" at preventing drug use in students and D.A.R.E. graduates "are indistinguishable from students who do not participate in the program." [36] A 2011 study of all meta-studies of D.A.R.E found the program to be "ineffective in reducing illicit drug use among youths, especially in the long term." [38] A national study funded by the US Department of Justice concluded that D.A.R.E. has "small effects on drug use," and is "significantly" less successful at preventing drug use than other programs. [32] The Government Accountability Office concluded that the program had "no statistically significant long-term effect on youth illicit drug use," and the US Surgeon General cited D.A.R.E. as an "ineffective primary drug prevention program." [38] Studies evaluating the original D.A.R.E. curriculum, through D.A.R.E.'s "Take Charge of Your Life" curriculum, through the present "Keepin' It REAL" program, overwhelmingly conclude that D.A.R.E. does not prevent drug use. [37] [39] [40]


  2. D.A.R.E. is associated with increased drug use. A peer-reviewed, six-year study of D.A.R.E. from 1989 to 1996 concluded that suburban students who participated in D.A.R.E. reported a 3%-5% higher rate of drug use than suburban students who did not participate. [11] Suburban students reported higher use of alcohol in the previous 30-days, higher lifetime alcohol use, higher 30-day total drug use (including marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and smokeless tobacco), and higher lifetime total drug use. A 2009 peer-reviewed study of graduates from D.A.R.E's "Take Charge of Your Life" curriculum found a 3-4% increase in alcohol and cigarette use among 11th grade students who were not using either substance by seventh grade (at the beginning of the study) compared to those who never enrolled. [7]


  3. D.A.R.E. graduates do not show any long-term increase in knowledge of drugs, attitudes about drug use, social skills, or attitudes toward the police. According to a peer-reviewed meta-study, any of these short-term positive effects of the D.A.R.E. program disappear "typically within 1 to 2 years," and "the effect on drug use behaviors (measured in numerous ways) are extremely rare and when identified are small in size and dissipate quickly." [5] [36]


  4. D.A.R.E. causes kids to ignore legitimate information about the relative harms of drugs. Kids eventually ignore the D.A.R.E. program's zero-tolerance message when they see friends or family members using drugs such as alcohol, marijuana, or tobacco without any immediately adverse consequences. This causes kids to ignore genuinely useful information about the relative harms of different drugs. [41]


  5. D.A.R.E. is a "potentially harmful therapy" that violates the Hippocratic Oath. Scott O. Lilienfeld, PhD, Professor of Psychology at Emory University, states in the peer-reviewed journal Perspectives on Psychological Science that D.A.R.E. may increase intake of alcohol and other drugs, making it a "potentially harmful therapy (PHT)." D.A.R.E. "overestimates the number of children and adolescents who engage in drug abuse," and normalizes the use of substances like alcohol because of an "excessive focus on severe substances" such as cocaine and heroin. The program therefore violates the physician and psychologists's Hippocratic Oath to "do no harm." [43]


  6. Students respond negatively to the D.A.R.E. program. A survey of D.A.R.E. by the California Department of Education found that 40% of students told researchers they were "not at all" influenced by D.A.R.E., and nearly 70% reported neutral to negative feelings about those leading the program. [12] 33% of middle school students and 90% of high school students reported "negative" or "indifferent" feelings towards D.A.R.E. Students reported that the D.A.R.E. message is repeated so often at school that the concept has lost its meaning and becomes tedious. [42]


  7. D.A.R.E. lures parents into a false sense of security about their kids' drug use. Some parents become less involved with the education of their child in drug abuse awareness because they believe D.A.R.E. is doing it for them. According to Lance Miles, former fifth-grade teacher whose students took D.A.R.E. classes weekly: "A lot of parents aren't doing their jobs, and we're left to do that job [at school], telling them things they ought to be taught about at home... There's only so much that teachers and police officers can do before parents must take over." [14]


  8. The number of schools partnering with D.A.R.E. has steadily declined and revenues have fallen year after year, proving that teachers and administrators do not believe it works. According to a 2012 study, about 60% of school districts have eliminated D.A.R.E. since the mid-2000s in the 32 states where data were available. [35] D.A.R.E.'s 2011 annual report showed total revenues around $3.7 million, down from $9.7 million in 2000. [34]
Comment Comment
Background: "Is the D.A.R.E. Program Good for America's Kids (K-12)?"
Officer Steven Havens Oneonta Police Department teaching students D.A.R.E
(Click to enlarge image)
Officer Steven Havens of the Oneonta (NY) Police Department teaching students the D.A.R.E. program
Source: "D.A.R.E.," oneonta.ny.us (accessed Jan. 20, 2010)
D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) administers a school-based substance abuse, gang, and violence prevention program in 75% of US school districts and in 48 countries (as of 2013). [1] Since 1983, 70,000 police officers have taught the D.A.R.E. program to over 200 million K-12 students worldwide – approximately 114 million in the United States alone. [47]

Proponents say that D.A.R.E. has helped prevent drug use in elementary, middle, and high school students. They contend that D.A.R.E. improves social interaction between police officers, students, and schools, is the most prevalent substance abuse prevention program in the United States, and is popular with kids and parents.

Opponents say that dozens of peer-reviewed studies conclude the D.A.R.E. program is ineffective at preventing kids from using drugs. They contend that D.A.R.E. causes kids to ignore legitimate information about the relative harms of drugs, and that D.A.R.E. is even associated with increased drug use.

D.A.R.E., an international 501(c)3 nonprofit organization, is the most prevalent drug abuse prevention program in the United States, and is often referred to as the most prevalent drug prevention program in the world. [1] [2] The original D.A.R.E. program was developed in 1983 as part of a joint effort between the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) to "to break the generational cycle of drug abuse, related criminal activity, and arrest." [18] The original curriculum consisted of core elements such as resistance, skill training, and self-esteem building, supplemented with additional information on gangs and legal issues related to drug use. The program focused primarily on what it calls "gateway" drugs, such as tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, and inhalants, which allegedly lead to harder drug use.

During its first year of implementation, the program was delivered to approximately 6 million students at a cost of $750 million (costs of approximately $125 per child). [38] Following the initial implementation, with the help of funding from the 1994 Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act, D.A.R.E. dramatically expanded in the US and around the world. By 2001, economist Dr. Edward Shepard estimated that D.A.R.E. cost $1-1.3 billion annually (about $173 to $268 per student per year) to implement nationwide once all related expenses, such as police officer training and services, materials and supplies, school resources, etc., were factored in. [4]

The D.A.R.E. program is funded by both private and federal government sources. Its 2011 annual report showed total revenues around $3.7 million (down from $9.7 million in 2000 and $6.6 million in 2008). [34] Licensing royalties alone brought in $2.2 million in 2011 (59% of total revenues). [34] D.A.R.E.'s former president, Charlie Parsons, made an annual salary of $215,040 while four other executives also earned six-figure salaries. [18] [19] On Nov. 14, 2012, D.A.R.E.’s Board of Directors named Executive Director and Chief Operations Officer Francisco X. Pegueros as President and CEO. [44]

The original D.A.R.E. curriculum was designed for use with elementary-aged students only, but middle school and high school components were added in 1986 and 1988 respectively in order to broaden the reach of the program. Most students receive D.A.R.E. curricula in the fifth or sixth. The core D.A.R.E. curriculum is a one-semester course taught one hour a week for ten weeks by a trained, uniformed police officer, which ends in a D.A.R.E. graduation ceremony. All police officers who teach D.A.R.E. curricula must attend and graduate from a two-week training program that includes instruction on drugs, gangs, internet safety, and teaching techniques. All students participating in D.A.R.E. must complete a student workbook and a D.A.R.E. essay, have good attendance, follow D.A.R.E. and school rules, and "be good role models and citizens” in order to graduate from the program. [38]

Several events prompted D.A.R.E. to revise its original curricula. Studies published in the 1990s concluded that D.A.R.E. had little to no effectiveness in preventing drug use in elementary, middle, or high school students, and may actually lead to increased drug use. [11] [22] [32] [37] [40] Based on these studies, D.A.R.E. in 1998 failed to meet federal requirements that its program be "research based" and "effective" in order to receive federal grant money. [22] The Department of Education in 2001 excluded D.A.R.E. from its National Registry of Effective Programs "that promote safe, disciplined, and drug-free schools." [16] Federal funding to train D.A.R.E. officers was reduced as a result. [38]

Anti-D.A.R.E. protest at the Denver Public Schools Administration building
(Click to enlarge image)
Anti-D.A.R.E. protest at the Denver Public Schools Administration building
Source: "Activism Photos," www.kengorman.org (accessed Feb. 17, 2009)

In February 2001, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation awarded a $13.7-million grant to develop and test a new program for D.A.R.E. called "Take Charge of Your Life" (TCYL). [20] The eight-year pilot study tested TCYL’s effectiveness in improving "skills students need in order to act on their desire not to use drugs, alcohol and illicit drugs." The study concluded in June 2009 that D.A.R.E.’s TCYL coursework had a mixed impact for students. Students who had used marijuana by the 7th grade were significantly less likely to use marijuana by 11th grade, compared with students in the control group. However, the study also found that D.A.R.E. coursework led to a 3-4% increase in alcohol and cigarette use among 11th grade students who weren’t using either substance in 7th grade, compared to those students who were not enrolled in D.A.R.E. [7] [30]

Based on the results of this pilot study, in 2009 D.A.R.E. transitioned to a promising new curriculum called "Keepin’ it REAL." The program, developed earlier by researchers at Pennsylvania State University and Arizona State University, encourages students to "Refuse offers to use substances, Explain why you do not want to use substances, Avoid situations in which substances are used, and Leave situations in which substances are used." Since Dec. 2006, the Keepin' it REAL curriculum has made Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) list of evidence-based drug use prevention programs. [29] SAMHSA concludes that "no adverse effects, concerns, or unintended consequences were identified" with the program, and finds that D.A.R.E. is scientifically proven to improve four different student outcomes: alcohol, cigarette, and marijuana use; anti-substance use attitudes; normative beliefs about substance use; and substance use resistance. [29] The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network classified Keepin’ it REAL as a "model program" in 2009. [45] The Department of Justice, in an Apr. 2012 review of the program, determined that D.A.R.E.’s Keepin’ It REAL is "promising" because the program seemed to lower alcohol and marijuana use and improve resistance skills, but their review also found that these positive outcomes often fade over time. [46]

Video Gallery


proPennsylvania State Representative Steve Santarsiero discusses the importance of the D.A.R.E. program.
Source: PAHouseVideo, "Santarsiero Discusses the D.A.R.E. Program," www.youtube.com, June 21, 2011
conRadley Balko, senior editor for Reason Magazine and Reason.com, explains how D.A.R.E. causes kids to ignore legitimate information about the relative harms of drugs.
Source: TheAlyonaShow, "'D.A.R.E.' Wants Kids to Narc," www.youtube.com, Oct. 18, 2010  
proSt. Louis Park police officer Matthew Havlick in a public service announcement for D.A.R.E.
Source: ParkTV St. Louis Park, "2012 D.A.R.E. Program PSA," www.youtube.com, Jan. 16, 2013 
conThe city of West Haven, CT debates swapping D.A.R.E. with a more customized program for students.
Source: WTNH, "West Haven Considers Dropping D.A.R.E. Program", www.youtube.com, Aug. 13, 2012

Notices for D.A.R.E. and Other ProCon.org Information (archived after 30 days)

9/10/2014  NEW ProCon.org Website! – Should students have to wear school uniforms? - Our 51st website explores the pros and cons in the debate over mandatory school uniforms. Almost one in five US public schools required students to wear uniforms during the 2011-2012 school year, up from one in eight in 2003-2004. Proponents say that school uniforms make schools safer for students, create a "level playing field" that reduces socioeconomic disparities, and encourage children to focus on their studies rather than their clothes. Opponents say school uniforms infringe upon students' right to express their individuality, have no positive effect on behavior and academic achievement, and emphasize the socioeconomic disparities they are intended to disguise.

Archived Notices (archived after 30 days)


Last updated on 2/4/2014 10:56:29 AM PST

Please enter a valid email address to continue.
Privacy Policy Do not show again.
Visit the ProCon.org community on:

© 2014 ProCon.org, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit     |   233 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 200, Santa Monica, CA 90401    |    Tel: 310-451-9596   




Hide/Show