mas3619@wucec2.UUCP (02/15/86)
Recently, office of Housing and Residential Life announce that it now
expects RA's to report ALL incidents of drug use. They claim that this
is not a change in policy, but just a change in emphasis. The alchohol
policy here at Wash U is relativly liberal, both in the dorms and at
open parties. Ony beer and wine may be served at an open party and in
the dorms the only restriction is that RA's may not buy alchohol for
residents. The drinking age in Missouri is 21. Also, all the floors
are coed except for one (called the Convent).
There has been a moderate amount of protest on the editorial page of our
student newspaper but there have been no student marches or picket lines.
RLC (as the housing office is known) says that it is only trying to help
students. However, it also admits that in some cases the reports filed
by the RA's may be handed over to student counciling or the campus police.
Some RA's agree with the policy while others have reservations. Their
main objection is that it makes them feel like police. They say that
they will lose the confidence and trust of their residents if they are
forced to "act like spies.'
One point that has been raised is that RLC's policy is inconsistent. It
tries to eliminate drug use while not trying o prevent underage drinking.
My question to you people out in net-land is this: Have other universities
tried a policy like this? Have they been successful, or have policies like
this one fallen by the wayside? Let's here your opinion.
--
Marc Sarrel
6515 Wydown Blvd Box 4481 St. Louis MO 63105
...!{seismo,cbosgd,ihnp4}!wucs!wucec2!mas3619
The views expressed here are mine and not necessarily anyone else's.gerber@mit-amt.MIT.EDU (Andrew S. Gerber) (02/16/86)
In article <1353@wucec2.UUCP> mas3619@wucec2.UUCP writes: >Recently, office of Housing and Residential Life announce that it now >expects RA's to report ALL incidents of drug use. ... >My question to you people out in net-land is this: Have other universities >tried a policy like this? Have they been successful, or have policies like >this one fallen by the wayside? Let's here your opinion. > >-- >Marc Sarrel MIT does not ask hall tutors to report drug use. The hall tutor system at MIT is large, with about 50-60 hall tutors overseeing living groups of about 30-45 people each. The only thing the tutors are expected to act upon is "people who are having problems with school and how this relates to drug use". So if you keep a good GPA you're OK. The issue has come up in the past, and the idea of hall tutors acting as "policemen" has been shot down. However, it really depends on the living group. If someone complains about drug use accross the hall from them/by their roomate/etc, the hall tutor is likely to discuss this with the offending party. Also, any drug use in some living groups would be such a shock to everyone, the tutor included. Living groups which have a history of people who use recreational pharacuticals/herbs tend to attract hall tutors which this does not bother. Therefore the status quo remains the same from tutor to tutor. -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Andrew S. Gerber MIT '87 Visible Language Workshop | | gerber@mit-amt.MIT.EDU, gerber@mit-mc.lcs.mit.edu, gerber@athena.mit.edu | | UUCP: decvax!mit-eddie!mit-amt!gerber decvax!mit-eddie!mit-athena!gerber | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
matt@srs.UUCP (Matt Goheen) (02/18/86)
>In article <1353@wucec2.UUCP> mas3619@wucec2.UUCP writes: > >>Recently, office of Housing and Residential Life announce that it now >>expects RA's to report ALL incidents of drug use. >... >>My question to you people out in net-land is this: Have other universities >>tried a policy like this? Have they been successful, or have policies like >>this one fallen by the wayside? Let's here your opinion. >> >>Marc Sarrel > >MIT does not ask hall tutors to report drug use. ... >The only thing the tutors are >expected to act upon is "people who are having problems with school >and how this relates to drug use". So if you keep a good GPA >you're OK. RIT has a similar policy. RA's are not encouraged to "police" their floors (really shoots the RA/floor member relationship if you act as a policeman rather than a floor member). However, we were supposed to watch for substance "abuse" where drugs may be inhibiting the productivity of individuals. However, since the NY drinking age has just risen to 21 (as of this past Dec.), things may be a little different in the future. RSA's (Residential Safety Aids) are under fire at RIT for "policing", but that is another story...(which I may elaborate upon in the future if time permits). Matt Goheen S.R. Systems (RIT part-time, former RA) {seismo,allegra}!rochester!srs!matt
mark@nyit.UUCP (Mark Smith) (02/22/86)
> One point that has been raised is that RLC's policy is inconsistent. It > tries to eliminate drug use while not trying to prevent underage drinking. > > My question to you people out in net-land is this: Have other universities > tried a policy like this? Have they been successful, or have policies like > this one fallen by the wayside? Let's here your opinion. In my opinion, the State University of New York at Stony Brook has a greater emphasis on underage alcohol policies. I believe it to be a reaction to the new 21 law. As you may or may not know, NY state has just passed a new drinking age law. -- Mark Smith NYIT Computer Graphics Laboratory Old Westbury, New York ...{philabs,sbcs}!nyit!mark
blenko@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Blenko) (02/25/86)
In article <1353@wucec2.UUCP> mas3619@wucec2.UUCP writes: >Recently, office of Housing and Residential Life announce that it now >expects RA's to report ALL incidents of drug use. They claim that this >is not a change in policy, but just a change in emphasis. The alchohol >policy here at Wash U is relativly liberal, both in the dorms and at >open parties. Ony beer and wine may be served at an open party and in >the dorms the only restriction is that RA's may not buy alchohol for >residents. The drinking age in Missouri is 21. Also, all the floors >are coed except for one (called the Convent). >... >One point that has been raised is that RLC's policy is inconsistent. >It tries to eliminate drug use while not trying o prevent underage >drinking. >My question to you people out in net-land is this: Have other >universities tried a policy like this? Have they been successful, or >have policies like this one fallen by the wayside? Let's here your >opinion. 1. Would you rent an apartment in which the management adopted such a policy? I wouldn't. If you wish to be treated as an adult, you may have to insist that you be treated as an adult (and I hope you will also undertake to behave as an adult -- some of the time, anyway), and if you don't insist, you don't deserve to be. 2. There seems to have been a major change in the attitudes of both parents and students concerning the role of colleges and universities compared to when I first went off to college ten years ago. Parents expect the schools to take a stronger, authoritative, parental role, and the students, it seems, do as well. Having nothing very positive to say about this state of affairs, I'll say nothing at all except that I expect to see the situation swing in the other direction again. 3. The school is certain to be concerned both about its public image and its legal liability for student misadventures. How they choose to act on those concerns will vary from school to school, and will also reflect local student (customer) acceptance. 4. From one point of view the distinction between use of alcohol and use of other drugs is irrational. Nevertheless, I suspect that both the public relations and the legal risks associated with student use of alcohol are smaller (and better known) than risks associated with student use of other drugs, and the school's policies can be sensibly interpreted in that light. 5. Your school's policy may not be an attempt to act against offenders, but rather an attempt to reduce its own liability. If someone sues the school because there child gets drunk and falls out a window, the school can argue in that it (generically) recognizes the existance of alcohol or drug use/abuse and has a policy for dealing with it (outlawing it and providing a policing mechanism). The system isn't 100% effective, etc., but they do the best they can, etc. This might prove more credible in front of a judge or a jury than the monkey-no-see defense, or (what I am more sympathetic to) the argument that the student was of age and acting in his or her own right. My claim is that school policies reflect a not-too-far-out-of-date view of parental and student expectations, and those expectations (along with the institution's determination to survive) are the best explanation for the policies as a whole. If policy implementation is incorrect, there are factors which act to correct it. If your point of view is at odds with the policies, then either you're in the minority, or you have no effective voice. Tom
scco@ur-tut.UUCP (Sean Colbath) (02/25/86)
In article <214@nyit.UUCP> mark@nyit.UUCP (Mark Smith) writes: >> My question to you people out in net-land is this: Have other universities >> tried a policy like this? Have they been successful, or have policies like >> this one fallen by the wayside? Let's here your opinion. > > In my opinion, the State University of New York at Stony Brook > has a greater emphasis on underage alcohol policies. > I believe it to be a reaction to the new 21 law. As you may or > may not know, NY state has just passed a new drinking age law. >-- > Mark Smith > NYIT Computer Graphics Laboratory > Old Westbury, New York > ...{philabs,sbcs}!nyit!mark The University of Rochester has taken rather an interesting approach to drug and alcohol use in the dorms. They have adopted a "closed door" policy - whatever you do behind the closed door of your room is your business, and is regarded as being in your own home. The RAs will not come into your room if locked (although they have the key, for accidental lockouts), and neither will security - they won't check during fire alarms, etc. They do reserve rights in the case of bomb threat, actual fire, and other natural disasters, and did come in over Christmas break and unplug any electrical appliances. Therefore, you could be doing anything in your room from refining drugs to running a house of ill repute (however small :-)), and *as long as you kept your door closed*, your 'rights' would be respected. The same goes for alcohol - at the beginning of the year, the RA told us to keep it out of the hall, and if there was a keg on the hall, he wanted to know about it (he still could be held libel if someone got drunk and broke his neck falling down stairs, and it's kinda hard to ignore a quantity like that). Sean Colbath UUCP: ...allegra!rochester!ur-tut!scco BITNET: SCCO@UORVM
kaufman@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU (03/06/86)
I did my undergrad study at Wesleyan University in Middletown Connecticut, where they had a refreshingly healthy attitude on such matters. Most simply, their attitude was, you're college students; we think you can take care of yourself. Do whatever you want; it's your business. There was a line drawn, but usually someone had to be dumb enough to try selling drugs to townies to cross it. There was absolutely no problem with beer. Several campus facilities would offer it, and the dining hall would occasionally have a champagne brunch. Campus-sponsored parties would have kegs available. (I don't know what's happened since they jacked the drinking age up). A group even arose called WESober, whose purpose was to make sure that these parties also had NON-alcoholic drinks available. There was one single-sex dorm (male). Others were coed by floor, by hall, or by room. And there was nobody there to kick anyone out. If you wanted guests of any sex at any hour, that was your business. Freshman halls had RAs, but their purpose was to get people out of trouble - not into it. At the University of Illinois, on the other hand, I think what best sums up the place is its main gymnasium building which closely resembles a prison. I'm not kidding - bars on the windows, big metal gates with someone there to guard the flow. God forbid someone who forgot their id should try to enter! The situation in the dorms is not much better. There is one place where NOTHING with a Y chromosome is allowed in. (sorry, daddy, you can't see my room.) The people in charge of monitoring things take their roles seriously and often fanatically. They censor the walls, and if you get caught with a beer outside your room (or in it in the case of undergrad dorms) ... I am glad I moved out of the dorm system, though I still have to deal with neo-fascist elements at certain campus events. I've sometimes doubted that U of I administrators ever think of students here as human beings. Ken Kaufman (uiucdcs!kaufman) "The universe is permeated with the odor of turpentine."