Overexpressing the biosynthetic and regulatory genes of flavonoids can potentially increase their accumulation in C. sativa, though it is currently challenging to transform and propagate C. sativa plants. To this end, cell suspension and hairy root tissue cultures and heterologous expression systems have been developed for C. sativa, which can be utilized for the production of flavonoids and functional genomics of flavonoid metabolism. Adolescent illicit drug use is a top concern for school systems in the United States as early onset of use can have detrimental effects on academic performance and overall health outcomes. 1 Overall, adolescent alcohol and other drug use rates have steadily declined across the years. In 2011, 14.7% of 8th graders, 31.1% of 10th graders, and 40% of 12th graders reported last 12-month AOD use.2 Most recently in 2021, 10.2% of 8th graders, 18.7% of 10th graders, and 32% of 12th graders reported last 12-month AOD use.2 Despite these decreasing trends, it is crucial that schools and systems working closely with adolescents and pre-pubescent children remain vigilant in their substance use prevention and intervention efforts. The California Department of Education highlights the important role of schools in providing assistance programs for students to prevent or intervene on risky behaviors, like substance use. In an effort to address this, school systems have begun to implement alternative to suspension programs which is reflected in the expansion of restorative intervention programs to address disciplinary incidents. These programs have been found to be effective in reducing the number of incidents, improving school climate, and increasing academic success. Although the implementation of these programs is increasing, evaluative research to assess the effectiveness of such alternatives is limited. Furthermore, few if any of these programs, to our knowledge, provide substance use-specific services, weed drying room such as substance use and drug treatment and counseling, for students who have committed drug-related offenses.
The purpose of this project is to report findings from an intermediate evaluation of Nevada County’s Restorative Accountable Youth Solutions program. This evaluation seeks to assess potential program impacts on student AOD use behaviors, perceptions of AOD use, resource awareness, self-responsibility, and overall and drug related suspension counts at sites implementing the program. The focus will be on alcohol, vapes , and marijuana as the program being evaluated specifically addresses use of these substances in core educational and counseling intervention components. Findings from this evaluative report may be used to inform a formal evaluation of the RAYS program and contribute to limited research on school-based, restorative alternatives to suspension for drug related disciplinary incidents.Trends in alcohol use among adolescents in the United States have followed similar patterns to other substances; however, specific use behaviors, mainly binge drinking, have steadily increased in recent years.6 Among 8th, 10th, and 12th graders at the national level, 8.2%, 18.6%, and 30.2%, respectively, reported past 30-day alcohol use in 2018. 6 When asked about binge drinking behaviors, which the Monitoring the Future survey defines as having 5 or more drinks in a row in the past two weeks, 3.7% of 8th graders, 8.7% of 10th graders, and 13.8% of 12th graders reported binge drinking in 2018. 6 More recently, the rates for binge drinking were at 2.2%, 5.9%, and 12.6% for each respective grade level in 2022. Nonetheless, the proportion of adolescents who reported past 30-day alcohol use has slightly decreased in recent years, while binge drinking has stabilized. Findings from the 2022 wave of the MTF revealed that 6.0%, 13.6%, and 28.4% of 8th, 10th, and 12th graders, respectively, reported past 30-day alcohol use, with similar proportions of these age groups reported for previous MTF survey waves.
The use of combustible tobacco products has significantly decreased with 2.2% of 8th, 4.2% of 10th, and 7.6% of 12th graders reporting past 30-day cigarette use in 2018. 2 These rates have continued to drop to 0.8%, 1.7%, and 4.0% for each grade level, respectively, in 2022.2 Nationally, this particular group of adolescents reported a combined past 30-day cigarette use rate of 2.1%. 6 In California, which is known for having some of the strictest anti-tobacco laws in the nation, only 1.2% of this population reported past 30-day cigarette use in 2021. Other combustible forms of tobacco have also been relatively low across the years with the prevalence of large cigars and little cigars/cigarillos remaining below 10% across the years, more recently below 2% for either product. Smokeless tobacco use has also remained on a steady decline with 3.4% of adolescents reporting past 30-day use in 2018 to 2.3% in 2021. Looking at California specifically, only 0.6% of adolescents said that they had used a smokeless tobacco product in the last 30 days in 2021. Nonetheless, previous research has noted that smokeless tobacco use remains high in niche populations, mainly among non-Hispanic White male individuals who reside in rural areas. Driving the steady increase in overall tobacco use rates among adolescents are electronic cigarettes . These devices are used to vaporize nicotine-containing liquids and other chemical compounds, allowing for the inhalation of chemical vapors. In 2018, 19.2% of school-aged adolescents reported having vaped in the last 30 days, increasing to 22.5% in 2019 followed by a slight decrease to 17.0% in 2022. In California specifically, 8.2% of school-aged adolescents reported past 30-day use of a vape product. These high use rates are often attributed to the various flavors available for vape “juices” which may be enticing to school-aged youth. Findings released from the 2022 National Youth Tobacco Survey reported that among the middle and high schoolers who used a vape in the last 30 days, approximately 85% used a flavored product with fruit and candy or sweet flavors being the most popular.
Despite its status as a Schedule I substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act, several states across the nation have implemented policies permitting medicinal and/or recreational use of cannabis products. Some states have even gone the extra step of decriminalizing marijuana possession and use in an effort to reform the criminal justice system’s procedures surrounding cannabis. Adolescent cannabis use in particular, which remains illegal for individuals under 21 years of age in California, has seen fluctuations across the years. Overall rates of past 30-day use of marijuana/hashish products among school-aged adolescents in the United States were at 14.6% in 2018, followed by a slight decrease to 11.0% in 2021, and is now at 12.3% as of 2022. 6 Past 30-day marijuana vaping, as a modality, has increased among this population from 5.7% in 2018, to 10.1% in 2021, and current rates standing at 9.6% as of 2022. 6 Marijuana use rates in California, a state that legalized medicinal use in 1996 and recreational use in 2016, have increased among school-aged adolescents. During the 2019-2020 academic year, 31.2% of 8th, 10th, and 12th graders in California reported ever-using cannabis products, with 15% reporting past 30-day use. The most commonly used modalities for marijuana use among students in California were smoking at 50.6% among current users, drying rack for weed followed by vaping at 32.6%. Current California Education Code stipulates that all suspensions and expulsions are warranted if a student commits a “violent crime, possesses/uses drugs or weapons, steals, bullies, hazes, behaves obscenely, threatens to cause physical harm, or damages school property”. The decision to suspend or expel a student who has committed a suspendable offense is at the discretion of the principal or district superintendent. Since the 1980’s, most policies and guidelines surrounding discipline in California’s schools have been punitive in nature, with zerotolerance approaches being the norm. However, a shift to more restorative disciplinary methods has been seen in various districts not only in California, but throughout the United States. For drug-related disciplinary policies in particular, California Education Code states that students may be suspended or expelled if they are caught in possession, using, selling, furnishing, or under the influence of any controlled substance under Division 10 of the California Health and Safety Code . Controlled substances listed under this code include any forms of opiates, opium derivatives, hallucinogenic substances , depressants, and other “hard” drugs . The current California Education Code also classifies possession or use of tobacco products or alcohol as a suspendable offense. Nonetheless, a recent announcement from the California Department of Education instituted new guidelines for what may constitute a suspendable incident. Although policies for drug-related offenses remain in effect, guidelines for suspensions and expulsions for defiance related infractions have shifted. Students in grades K-8 can no longer be suspended for “willful defiance”, defined as being disruptive or acting in a way that defies authority. Research has found that punitive measures to address willful defiance have historically impacted students of color and sexual/gender minorities at disproportionate rates. State officials have emphasized that punitive measures such as suspension should be considered as a last resort, instead diverting students to necessary services and interventions as alternatives to suspension. These policies highlight a major transition from punitive measures which are more exclusionary in nature and tend to isolate students. The “alternative to suspension” approaches currently being proposed seek to improve behavioral and academic outcomes utilizing restorative justice and trauma-informed approaches. They also seek to provide individualized support in lieu of punitive discipline by providing additional academic, behavioral , and social support. The CDE has also encouraged schools to draw from existing mental health support and behavioral intervention strategies , an approach that some schools in California are already implementing. Recent studies have found positive impacts of these restorative practices on behavioral outcomes and suspension and expulsion rates, particularly for students of color – a subgroup of the student population that has been found to be disproportionately impacted by the negative effects of punitive measures.
Overall student suspension rates have remained at steady rates across the years. In the 2011-12 academic year, the state-wide suspension rates were at 5.8%, steadily decreased to 3.6% in 2016-17, and were most recently reported at 3.2% as of the 2021-22 academic year. 19 It is important to note that the 2018-19 academic year was the last full year of in-person instruction due to pandemic-related campus closures during the 2019-20 and 2020-21 academic years. As such, suspension and expulsion data provided for the period during campus closures may not be reflective of the actual number of students that may have committed suspendable offenses during this time. Nonetheless, as seen in Figure 1, a slight decrease in the total number of illicit drug related suspensions is evident between the 2014-15 and 2016-17 academic years, with a steady increase in 2017-18. The notable decrease in the 2020-21 academic year is reflective of the school closures and transition to remote learning between March 2020 and Fall 2021, during which the majority of students were not attending school in-person.One strategy for alternative-to-suspension programs is the incorporation of RJP approaches in disciplinary protocols. The philosophies embedded in RJPs are rooted in South Pacific and North American indigenous cultural values which emphasize the importance of community and interpersonal connectedness. Originally implemented in criminal justice systems, they are an alternative to punitive measures found to be successful in reducing repeat offenses and fostering reintegration for the offender. School systems in Australia began implementing RJPs in educational settings in the 1990’s with other nations following shortly thereafter, including the United States. RJP philosophies focus on “wound repair”, recognizing that entire communities are harmed when an individual commits an offense. Major components of RJPs tie in community cohesiveness, harm repair, and reintegration. In contrast to exclusionary discipline , RJPs bring stakeholders together for civil discussions in a “safe space”. Some critical components of RJPs that foster these “safe spaces” include restorative circles/restorative conferences, community-building circles, restorative conversations, and peer-to-peer mediations. The overarching aims of RJPs are to restore communities and repair any harm done, similar to punitive measures; however, the main difference being a focus on strengthening relationships and reintegration for the offender.Current methods for evaluating RJP programs and their respective components have mainly been implemented to assess impact and effectiveness on variables of interest. These variables include participant behavioral changes, knowledge, shifts in school climate, and impacts on discipline landscapes. Most recently, Acosta and colleagues assessed implementation fidelity of RJP program components and their impacts on school climate, staff involvement and overall engagement utilizing a randomized controlled trial design. Using these variables, investigators made comparisons to schools not implementing RJP programs. Other RCTs have examined differences in discipline rates, mainly suspension and expulsion rates, between nonRJP and RJP schools.