Drug testing is the key to a safe environment, by Rosie McCarthy, p. 60
Main contention: School should implement drug tests in order to protect the students.
Key argument points:
- Drug testing would help to prevent the scourge of illicit drugs among students which is among the highest in the developed world.
- Drug testing has proven to be a useful deterrent in other countries, and so is likely to be successful in Australia.
- Drug testing has also proven to be a successful deterrent in other industries.
Key persuasive and reasoning techniques (metalanguage):
- She begins and ends with her main contention: support for drug testing based on wellbeing concerns of the students; “tried and tested” option (alliteration); she includes a rebuttal-style attack
- She appeals to duty of care to build a cause-and-effect argument. She shows that drug testing (X) will lead to a reduction in drug-taking (a deterrent).
- justifies, defends her advice: understanding a young adult’s mindset and reflecting their key concerns:
- tone: resolute; determined; assertive; pragmatic
- evidence: professional/personal advice as a psychologist; statistics and US school reports: case study of Hunterdon High School : to shock readers and to shame those in a position of authority who are failing to take strict measures; to reassure members of the community that the drug testing can be implemented in a way that will protect students’ wellbeing.
- comparisons: Australian and American teenagers
- appeals: health and well-being; parental and school duty of care/responsibilities.
- Image: a young adult shows the “P”, which is often used for “probationary” drivers etc.; the “P” could also reflect the student’s achievement.
First body paragraph
(Argument statement) Ms McCarthy categorically supports drug testing because, she contends, it would help prevent the rise of illicit drug-use among students. Adopting a resolute and pragmatic tone, (evidence) the psychologist draws upon her professional background as well as statistics and comparisons to mount a convincing case for the implementation of such drug tests. (appeals) By appealing to health and wellbeing, and by seeking to understand the mindset of typical students, she thereby earns the trust of her school readership. (quotes) Her claim that the statistics reveal particularly high drug use (purpose) is likely to shock and alarm parents and make them feel powerless to counter such a dangerous trend. (technique/comparison) She further justifies her support through comparisons with other industries to show that drug testing can have useful consequences. Her alliterative statement that it is a “tried and tested” option among football and rugby players as well as among airline pilots (purpose) leaves parents and school administrators in no doubt that it would be a successful deterrent in a school environment.
Second body paragraph
Furthermore, Ms McCarthy also justifies drug testing on the grounds that it has proven to be a useful deterrent in other countries, and by extension, she believes that it is likely to be effective in Australian schools. To reinforce her statistical evidence, she also draws upon the successful school reports from more than 1200 schools in the United States, including the case study of Hunterdon High School to reassure all those who may be worried about the intrusive nature of the tests. (quotes) The fact that there was a real reduction among students from 13 to 4 per cent after two years, not only allays any concern parents may have, but also, she hopes, would empower them. Accordingly, by appealing to duty of care issues, Ms McCarthy shames those in a position of authority who are failing to take similar strict measures. She implies that such administrators are not doing enough to protect the well-being of all students.
(Comparison with the other article)
Contrastingly, Mr Shanahan opposes drug testing because he believes it would be a wasteful use of the school budget. If Ms McCarthy refers to the US school reports to justify the implementation of drug tests, he appeals to privacy concerns to suggest that such tests will be insensitive and may breach the trust between teachers and students. Specifically, he, too, refers to the US schools to question the truthfulness and encourage us to recognise that they may be manipulated by self-promotional and self-serving school. The fact that there is no independent evidence suggests that such reports cannot be trusted. The purpose is to isolate and marginalise these reports in order to steer the parents towards a more beneficial solution, which he believes would be more “comprehensive educational programs”.
Return to Exercise 21, Articles on Drug Testing
Return to Summary of Now turn to Exercises