Avoiding Party Schools

<p>About Rice, during our official tour there the student guide emphasized how "cool" the administration was about partying and how much fun he and his pals have drinking on weekends. He so helpfully explained about how the "official policy" was no underage drinking but not to worry, everyone does it and just be careful. The dorm room they showed us had a line up of liquor bottles and a margarita blender on the fridge, arranged neatly of course with all labels facing forward, since, after all, it was on the tour. There is no drinking problem at all, the entire social scene seems to revolve around it. This information was very useful to DS2 who does not like being around drinkers.</p>

<p>Here's the thing (and I'm not saying this is true of Rice--Rice may very well have too much drinking to appeal to your son--I have no idea the culture there):
An open and realistic admin policy is, in my opinion, better than a hardline one. My school's philosophy is: if you're going to drink, it's better you do it in the open and not in secret behind closed doors. They want to encourage people to get medical help if they need it without worrying about consequences and suffering in silence. Open drinking, I think, actually discourages binge-drinking. I can't say the correlation is direct, but my campus is known as having relatively little drinking.</p>

<p>There is a lot of drinking at Rice (D just finished her soph year there). There is a lot of drinking at almost all colleges. D says kids settle down after a year or so and the real obnoxious conduct is reduced. She and her friends do drink, but she has always been pretty responsible about it. She said her friends at other universities report similar levels of alcohol use on their campuses.</p>

<p>Depending on your definition, there is NOT a lot of drinking at all colleges. Colleges in big cities, commuter colleges, colleges with lots of low-income students, colleges in south, religious-affiliated colleges, generally speaking have signfiicantly lower drinking rates, and in many cases, lower than the adult population that surround them. The drinking myth serves neither parents nor students well, and it is about time we put it to rest.</p>

<p>But there are differences among schools, even those of similar selectivity, and they make a huge difference TO THE NON-DRINKERS on campus. At most of the prestigious schools, roughly 2-3 out of 10 students are complete non-drinkers. For the sake of argument, let's say 3 out of 10. If binge drinkers account for 3 of 10, it means that 4 out of 10 might be moderate drinkers. But if 5 out of 10 are binge drinkers, it means that only 2 out of 10 are moderate drinkers. In other words, moderate drinkers are a very small minority at such schools. HUGE difference in impact on campus culture.</p>

<p>But it's actually worse than that, at some schools. The standard definition of binge drinking is 5 or more drinks at one sitting. But there is unpublished research that I am privy to through my job (it will likely be published next year) that tested both student estimates of their own drinking, and how they are likely to measure the size of drinks. Generally speaking, in the 4 to 6 drink range, students underestimate by 1 drink - in other words, it is actually 5 to 7. But when they asked students to actually pour drinks, it was found that the average student drink was 1.75X what it would have been at a bar. In other words, the binge drinker who thinks he is drinking 5 drinks is likely be be drinking close to 10. There is also ongoing research regarding incidence - i.e., how likely is it that the student who reports bingeing at least once in two weeks is only doing so once. It turns out that this is relatively rare. </p>

<p>The point is that the differences between the 30% and 40% and 50% binge drinking schools are far more pronounced than the numbers would immediately suggest, and the effects of those differences on the non-drinkers or moderate drinkers (and on campus life as a whole) are likely to be profound.</p>

<p>I should have added that schools without fraternities, and low rates of intercollegiate sports participation also have lower drinking rates.</p>

<p>There is one other important factor which suggests why, for many students, the binge drinking rates underestimate the impact on campus culture, and why even 10% differences can make such a difference. And that is this: rates of binge drinking among minority students, especially African-American students, are much lower, by as much as 50%. And rates of non-drinkers are significantly higher. At the majority of campuses, white students (and often males) set the tone on the campus, and the published binge drinking rates often much underestimate binge drinking among white male students.</p>

<p>I agree with Mini. While a school with a 30% binge drinking rate will by no means feel like a temperance convention, there is a huge difference between 30% and 50%.</p>

<p>Regardless of any quibbles about the methodology of the binge drinking surveys, it is a universal standard that is monitored by virtually every college. Therere, this data provides a very useful tool for cutting through the BS and finding out which schools are the heavy drinking schools and which are not.</p>

<p>The other measure (that correlates with high binge drinking rates) is the incidence of alcohol poisoning hospitalizations. As an example, it seems that Rice had 19 EMT calls and 8 alcohol poisoning hospitalizations from the Night of Decadence Party in 2003. That's a red flag.</p>

<p>I applaud Rice's president for stepping up to the plate and handing out some pretty hard punishments in at least one case:</p>

<p><a href="http://the.ricethresher.org/news/2005/04/29/lacrosscaptainlawsuit%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://the.ricethresher.org/news/2005/04/29/lacrosscaptainlawsuit&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://the.ricethresher.org/news/2005/05/20/cahnsinjunctiondenied%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://the.ricethresher.org/news/2005/05/20/cahnsinjunctiondenied&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>What is most interesting about the Rice case to me is what the judge said:</p>

<p>Rosenthal interrupted to point out that in the students’ testimony Monday, many portrayed Rice as a community that accepts and encourages binge drinking.</p>

<p>“The Court heard testimony of a culture that virtually celebrates intoxication … as not only [an] accepted but [an] encouraged way to mark a number of occasions, to the extent of … students encouraging each other to drink in classes, to play games that revolve around drinking, [and] to mark a number of campus events … with severe degrees of widespread intoxication,” Rosenthal said."</p>

<p>I too wish the new President good luck. The students deserve better than they've gotten, or so it would seem. And without any question, Rice is a great school!</p>

<p>The judge also ordered the suspended student to pay $10,000 in court costs as a "lovely parting gift" for bringing the lawsuit against Rice attempting to overturn her suspension.</p>

<p>Rice doesn't have fraternities or a high percentage of the student body on intercollegiate sports teams..... Of course there are schools where drinking is less a part of the social scene. You might wind up with a binge-drinking roommate at those schools. The heaviest drinker at S's former private school (who was kicked out for alcohol-related offenses) will be a sophomore at Swarthmore this coming year and is a varsity athlete.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.securityoncampus.org/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.securityoncampus.org/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>This site has some good links to campus security depts as well as numbers of incidents on and off campus.</p>

<p>Could someone please list some top colleges that have substance-free dorms available or more strict alcohol policies so I could avoid a binge-drinking roommate? Thanks.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Could someone please list some top colleges that have substance-free dorms available or more strict alcohol policies so I could avoid a binge-drinking roommate?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would suggest Swarthmore as a college with a relatively mild drinking scene were you could easily avoid a binge drinking roommate, but you have tailored your question in such a limiting way that doesn't allow the recommendation.</p>

<p>The relatively low drinking rates at Swarthmore have nothing to do with strict alcohol policies. The policies are not strict at all. The school simply doesn't have a big binge drinking scene (by today's standards).</p>

<p>Because of a community-wide aversion to "theme" housing, virstully no students signed up for the "official" substance-free dorm when it was offered on a trial basis a couple of years ago. The students basically nixed the idea of theme housing of any kind with that "vote". Now, as a practical matter, that particular dorm has always been, and remains, a very quiet, essentially substance-free dorm.</p>

<p>You could avoid a binge-drinking roommate as a freshman for two reasons:</p>

<p>a) According to a spring semester COFHE survey, 30% of freshman had not drunk alcohol in the previous year. 43% had not drunk in the previous 30 days. There is drinking on campus, but there is also a lot of non-drinking on campus.</p>

<p>b) They take freshman roommate matching questionairres seriously. If you request a substance-free roommate, you will be matched up with a substance-free roommate and grouped on a hall with others who have requested a "quieter" dorm environment. The system works well except when incoming freshmen lie on the housing form because they don't want mommy and daddy to know they booze it up.</p>

<p>Most of the top LACs do have substance free dorms, or floors.</p>

<p>Do some of the LAC's that report lower alcohol consumption rates actually have higher drug consumption rates? I think I read that somewhere. (as reliable a source as any. LOL)</p>

<p>Swarthmore is a very good choice, as these things go. However, note that if you room with a white male at Swarthmore in your first year, it is 40-45% or more likely that he will binge drink at least once every two weeks, and likely more often. (Based on an overall percentage of 30% binge drinkers on campus, and over percentage for whites, for males, and for freshman.) But that is much, much better than you will find at some of their peer schools. </p>

<p>So if this is important to you, finding schools with substance-free dorms or floor is a better approach. Earlham is officially dry, which makes them somewhat "moist" - but there are NO drunken parties, no frats (even off campus).</p>

<p>"Do some of the LAC's that report lower alcohol consumption rates actually have higher drug consumption rates? I think I read that somewhere. (as reliable a source as any. LOL)"</p>

<p>From what I know of the data, that is true on the west coast only. For other schools, alcohol and drugs tend to move in tandem (except in the south, where drug use rates are lower, and schools with high percentages of African-Americans, with low alcohol and drug use rates.)</p>

<p>I'd actually like to see any valid data on drug use at some of the "eastern" LAC's. I doubt it exists. From what we hear, drugs are very abundant at many of the LAC's highly touted on cc............including one in PA.</p>

<p>If there is so much drinking at some schools, how do the school still have a good reputation for graduating qualified workers? </p>

<p>Does the Heisenburg Principle squew the numbers towards drinking because students perceive that drinking is cool where as the true number is somewhat less?</p>

<p>Or is the drinking rate high enough where the kids wash out at which the numbers would be reflected in retention rates?</p>

<p>Or is the college dumbing down the cirriculum to keep students enrolled?
(NCLB)</p>

<p>Probably late to mention this, but, generally, rural schools have more drinking than urban ones. If there is stuff to do (dinners out, movies, shopping, symphony, ballet, concerts, ice skating in the park, museums), then there is less of a "need" to drink as the only social life. Huge state schools also tend to be wild party places.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>The society as a whole has lots of drinkers. CDC estimates that "problem drinking" (i.e. drinking that affects productivity one way or the other, or family relationships) exists among 30% or so of the adult population; need for treatment rates are around 12-13%.</p></li>
<li><p>It's not Heisenberg Principle, but "social norms marketing" campagins are based on this assumption. It works in some schools where rates are actually relatively low to begin, but (as Wechsler points out) can actually have the opposite impact at schools where drinking rates are high. Students will often tell you that there are many "moderate" drinkers on campus (they will always claim to be among them) when both self-report and observed data indicate that, again especially among white males, they are a vanishing species on some campus.</p></li>
<li><p>Drinking rates impact productivity; but they don't make you unintelligent, or at least not immediately. Also, remember that higher drinking rates are seen among folks with higher incomes, who have higher retention rates to begin with.</p></li>
<li><p>Are colleges dumbing down curriculum? Hard to know. I do know that many "elite" schools seem to require less in the way of writing than they did 30 years ago, and many now require writing intensive courses because students - even elite ones - didn't learn how to write in high school. But that doesn't mean the students were better 30 years ago - only that the colleges have sat up and taken notice.</p></li>
</ol>