Professor William Allan Kritsonis, PhD - Distinguished Alumnus, Central Washington University, College of Education and Professional Studies, Ellensburg, Washington.Dr. Kritsonis has traveled and lectured extensively throughout the United States and world-wide. Some international travels include Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania, Turkey, Italy, Greece, Monte Carlo, England, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Estonia, Poland, Germany, Mexico, the Caribbean Islands, Mexico, Switzerland, Grand Cayman, Haiti, St. Maarten, St. John, St. Thomas, St. Croix, St. Lucia, Puerto Rico, Nassau, Freeport, Jamaica, Barbados, Martinique, Canada, Curacao, Costa Rico, Aruba, Venezuela, Panama, Bora Bora, Tahiti, Latvia, Spain, Honduras, and many more. He has been invited to lecture and serve as a guest professor at many universities across the nation and abroad.

1. Student Drug Testing
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD

2. Vernonia School District v. Action
 The Student Athlete Drug Policy adopted by
School District 47J in the town of Vernonia,
Oregon, authorizes random urinalysis drug
testing of students who participate in the
District's school athletics programs. We
granted certiorari to decide whether this
violates the Fourth and Fourteenth
Amendments to the United States
Constitution.

3. Pottawatomie County et al. v. Earls
In the case of the Board of Education of
Independent School District No. 92 of
Pottawatomie County et al. v. Earls et al., the
U.S. Supreme Court upheld a drug-testing
program for students involved in competitive
extracurricular activities.

4. Bean v. Tulia I.S.D
 Tulia ISD has a policy of random drug testing for
students participating in athletics and other extra-
curricular activities for grades 7-12.
 Amos Bean, a student within the Tulia ISD, claimed
that the drug-testing policy violated his rights under
the U.S. and Texas constitutions. Under the U.S.
District Court ruling, Bean is now required to pay the
school’s taxable court costs. Alan Bean, father of
Amos, is currently undecided on appealing the ruling.

5. Why drug test students
 Drugs have far more serious adverse effects on
adolescents than on adults
 Some drugs can cause serious problems with
memory and learning, as well as difficulty in thinking
and problem solving
 may cause long-lasting damage to brain areas that
are critical for thought and memory.

6. Effects of drug testing
 Prevent dropout rates
 Provide a safer school env6ironment
 Prevent violence

7. Risk of drug test
 Not 100% accurate
 More than one test may need to take place
 Students drug test must remain confidential

8. Types of drug testing
 Urine
 Hair
 Sweat Patch
 Oral Fluids

9. When drug test are positive
 Not to be used for punishment but timely intervention
and appropriate treatment
 the school's crucial next step is to contact the
parents and help them stop their child's drug use
 refer the student to a trained substance-abuse
counselor, who can perform a drug assessment and
determine whether the child needs treatment or
other specialized help
 school will want to perform follow-up drug tests on
students with positive results to make sure they stay
drug free

10. Students beating the test
 Some drink large amounts of water
 Some add bleach, salt or vinegar to their
sample
 May use other drug free friends to leave
samples of urine

11. Conclusion
 The aim of drug testing is not to trap and punish
students who use drugs. It is, in fact,
counterproductive simply to punish them without
trying to alter their behavior. If drug-using students
are suspended or expelled without any attempt to
change their ways, the community will be faced with
drug-using dropouts, an even bigger problem in the
long run. The purpose of testing, then, is to prevent
drug dependence and to help drug dependent
students become drug free.