The policy committee of Jefferson City Public Schools' Board of Education continued talking about a drug testing policy Thursday.
Under the district's current policy, students suspected of being under the influence during the school day are sent to their building's office and suspended until they can get tested; traveling to take the test and paying for it are students' responsibilities.
"The concern was that we have some of these students who don't have the capacity to get there (to a testing site) or the money to take the test, and so it was causing more days out of school than what we wanted," JCPS Chief of Learning Brian Shindorf said Thursday.
Concern students are facing undue burdens was enough to prompt board member Michael Couty to ask the policy committee to look into the matter. The committee talked about it at its December meeting and revisited it Thursday after Shindorf was asked to find out how prevalent of a situation it is.
He shared that so far in the 2017-18 school year, only about four students have found themselves in this situation - regardless of the results of their tests.
"I don't know necessarily that the number of kids should impact whether we think this is a good practice or not," he said.
The drug tests at issue are different than the tests students involved in activities sometimes are asked to take.
Couty has talked with a company about what it would cost for the district to provide tests on the spot for students suspected of being under the influence at school, and a saliva swab test will cover testing for amphetamines, methamphetamines, cocaine, opiates, marijuana, PCB and alcohol.
The swabs come in cases of 25 for $162, meaning each individual test costs about $6.50 - "not a whole lot of money to be able to test on site as opposed to suspending them and (their) coming back being conditional," Shindorf said.
He thought the discussion should be less about the price and more about whether the district wants to take on the role of administering drug tests.
Committee chairwoman Pam Murray said benefits of the swabs are they don't require students to use restrooms - which precludes some potential opportunity for inappropriate behaviors of people doing the testing - and the test results are produced quickly, if not instantly.
"In the few minutes that it takes, it would be an opportunity to have a discussion with that child of why it is that they're suspected of being high, because it certainly may be indicative of some other problem. For example, they may be coming to school smelling like pot because they're in an environment where there is pot-smoking, and maybe that's something they want help with," Murray said.
If a swab test is negative, students could go back to class, she said - as opposed to having to be suspended and prove their innocence, as is the current policy.
The committee doesn't think it can make such an on-site test mandatory, but it could at least be an option offered for students.
Superintendent Larry Linthacum also wanted to be sure the district is being consistent about the protocol for suspecting a student is under the influence.
"We don't want to target," he said.
He wanted to "tighten up what it would look like if (students) choose not to (take an instant drug test)," and seek out advice from other schools that utilize the tests before codifying anything.
Shindorf said the district's policy is already pretty flexible, but agreed some language should be determined "whether it is going to be mandatory, what the process is and who administers it."
"I think, legally, we could literally do this now and still meet the needs, but for our own good, I think we should clarify who's going to administer (tests)," he added.
The committee will discuss the subject again at its next policy meeting.