|
Citation
|
Liu J, Butler R, Turncliff A, Gray C, Lynch S, Whittaker J, Iroegbulem V, Howell D, Schuster RM. J. Adolesc. Health 2023; ePub(ePub): ePub. |
|
Abstract
|
PURPOSE: There has been growing interest in reserving punishment as a last resort to address substance use in schools. However, there is significant variability in adoption of alternative approaches. This study reported school personnel's perceptions of diversion programs, identified characteristics of schools/districts that currently have diversion programs, and defined barriers of implementation of diversion programs.
METHODS: One hundred fifty six school stakeholders from Massachusetts' K-12 schools, including district administrators, principals and vice principals, school resource officers, guidance counselors, and nurses, completed a web-based survey in May-June 2020. Participants were recruited through e-mail distributed via professional listservs, direct school outreach, and community coalitions. The web survey queried beliefs, attitudes, and actions that schools take regarding substance use infractions as well as perceived barriers to implementing diversion programs.
RESULTS: Participants endorsed strong beliefs that punishment was an appropriate school response for student substance use, particularly for nontobacco-related infractions. Despite these personal beliefs, diversion programs were rated as more effective but less commonly used than punitive approaches (37% of respondents reported having diversion programs in their schools/districts vs. 85% used punitive approaches) (p <.03). Punishment was more likely to be used to respond to cannabis, alcohol, and other substances compared to tobacco (p <.02). Primary barriers of implementing diversion programs included funding, staff training, and parental support.
DISCUSSION: Based on school personnel perceptions, these findings lend further support for a transition away from punishment and toward more restorative alternatives. However, barriers to sustainability and equity were identified that warrant consideration when implementing diversion programs.
Language: en |