Talk:Drug Abuse Resistance Education

More recent criticism research?

Do we have an evaluation of the effectiveness of the new curriculum? The New York times article referenced states that DARE is going to develop a new curriculum, targeting older children. What are the results of that change? What about the studies of the new system? Dare.org seems to show that the program is in full swing, and they claim that studies have proven its effectiveness. What do critics say?

Move criticism of Original Program into Main Text

Now that DARE has accepted the ineffectiveness of its original program, it seems that we can move that information into the main text, together with a comment that DARE has developed a new program. Seems like since DARE accepted it (finally) it's now Neutral.

Fond memories

Ah, back in the days. . . I remember going through D.A.R.E. several times during elementary school. We kids thought it was the funniest name for a class: all you have to do is expand the acronym as "Drug Abuse [and] Resistance [to] Education"! Many years later, my college buddies and I shared memories of our D.A.R.E. experiences. One young woman, studying to be a mathematician, said that the program had been very counterproductive for her. She had not thought at all about drugs before experiencing D.A.R.E., but she left rubbing her chin and thinking, "LSD, you say?" Anville 09:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

D.A.R.E. Turned Me On

There were only three things I (and, I think, everyone in my class) took away from the D.A.R.E. Program:

1. D.A.R.E. told us not to do it. In high school, they told us to stop doing it...

2. Second of all, the officers gave us a tour of their entire (confiscated) stash, the street names for all the shit, and where they (and we) could get all of 'em...

3. They tried to brainwash us with all the cancerous lungs and death statistics (which were collectively depressing enough to drive a man to drink; which it did...); and we fooled around with the drunkgoggles was fun...

Oops, I lied; there was one more thing:

4. They also gave us each an entire order supply's worth of merchandise--D.A.R.E. tshirts, coffee mugs, tote bags, full stationary sets, stickers, and gift certificates...

Basically, the program's totally defunct and a joke beyond belief. Like I said at the beginning, they're turning more kids on to the stuff than off... — Preceding unsigned comment added by WAS (talk • contribs)

• Yeah. DARE is very stupid. I'm in school now and all I am actually learning about drugs is how they are made, where we can find them and how to use them. Drug abuse resistance education. Sheesh.Irish rover 01:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality

I highly question the neutrality of this section. For example: "Many have speculated that police strongly support the program not because it is effective, but rather that police enjoy the interruption of the monotony of other police work." This is evidently a case of original research (see WP:NOR). Where have parents said that there are skits in which kids pretend to be high? Try to find citations for these things. And also, let's make this talk page about improving the article, and not relating about how DARE got you into buying acid. Bibliomaniac15 18:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you that this article is not neutral, but only marginally so. I also agree that it is unreasonable, in an encyclopedia, to accuse police of escaping boredom and offering no citation for this opinion. Although the person who wrote his personal experience on this talk page expressed his views with hints of radical disgust with the program as well, you are trivializing the insight of his point of view. His radical disgust for the program is by no means uncommon amongst his cohorts--opinions from the the x and y generations, who are the future leaders of the United States and therefore the future source of potential funding for the program -- are grossly more often negative than the relatively conservative views of the baby-boomer generation. If you are going to revise this article, please do not entirely omit all criticisms from the very people that D.A.R.E. did not reach. Rather, state them in a more formal manner and try to derive meaning or substance from their comments. Offer citation to the origin of these comments. Just because these comments are unprofessional does not mean that they came from nowhere. After all, deliberate disregard for these points of view is what has led to decades of reliance on controversial "junk science" or otherwise "marginally sufficient" statistics that, in my opinion, are an excessive attempt to prove what is already obvious to many. Believe me, to those that claim D.A.R.E. was ineffective or counter-effective to their own drug use, the nation's reluctance to acquiesce into the shortcomings and criticism of D.A.R.E. is, indeed, a laughing matter--so many of the voices from that point of view too often express themselves bluntly or humorously. --Devin Keane; the Florida State University College of Social Sciences (12:50 AM EST Mon, Feb. 12, 2007)

I'll work on trying to deal with this problem.In the meantime, why don't you add some favorable material to the page.ThanxJames Halliday 19:05, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

This needs NPOV and a criticism section. 72.224.4.157 03:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that there are far too many weasel words and such in the article, so I added an NPOV tag to the article. I wrote a DARE research paper back in my freshman year, and I'll see if I can dig it up. --Nick2253 23:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I am with you on the NPOV. I tried to shore up some of it, but it seems that the prevailing POV is that DARE is bad. There certainly is plenty of criticism. I added the section about funding to tell why it is under attack. I had changed lots of "children" to "students" and made other revisions as the article at that time seemed to describe A Clockwork Orange and 1984. My guess is that there are a large number of Wikipedia editors that do not like the authoritarianism aspect of the program and need a kinder, gentler approach. Also, as students get older there is a certain amount of cynicism and a feeling of indestructibility. So perhaps the program is no longer effective for teens, they have already made their choices. Certainly there are a large number of parents in our school district who are blissfully unaware that their kids are bogarting their stash or committing crimes to buy meth. Group29 15:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Date is Wrong

The article says that the DARE Program was founded by LAPD Chief Gates in 1994. Gates was no longer Chief in 1994. The DARE website mentions 1984 as the founding of DARE in Los Angeles.

Kingpervis 05:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)kingpervis

I'd also like to add that the citation for the "In 2003, the department of education concluded that dare was ineffective..." part is from 2001, two years before the article could have known what was going to happen... Kami5909 06:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Opinions

It actually works. I went through it in 5th grade, and I've stayed well awayfrom the HARMFUL drugs. Even if you've never thought about drugs before, it WARNS you about the negative effects. I actually am now warned about using harmful substances. Besides, it warns 5th graders about things that may kill them. Dragonlady :)

Speak for yourself. I went through DARE in 5th grade and I love illegal drugs. SockMonkeh 16:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Fifth Grade?

The beginning of this article states that DARE is for students only in fifth grade, there are references to high school curriculums later on —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.174.118.196 (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

In high school you voulenteer to teach 5th graders if you graduated DARE back in 6th grade and stayed drug-frree.