<p>HiMom:</p>
<p>Your S is just not telling you what is going on locally. A friend's D is well entrenched in her 'SC dorm and says that her dormies went out drinking nearly every night for the first three weeks of school. It has calmed down a bit now, that reading and hw is starting to pile up. Or, perhaps the difference is that your S is in the Eng school and friend's D is in the liberal arts program?</p>
<p>Perhaps it might also depend on which dorm the student lives in. Don't have any info about what's going on in my S's dorm--he's not in English (his room mate is). My S is in engineering & I know he's up fairly late at night because he IMs his sister from time to time.
I'm pretty sure my S isn't into drinking because neither he nor my D like the "buzz" they get by taking their prescribed meds, so we have to fight with them to get them to take their meds. I think both of my kids find folks who drink rather foolish (of course I can't prove it at this point, but have definitely been given that impression).</p>
<p>Correction: Stanford absolutely does NOT have a dry campus; far from it, in fact!</p>
<p>The stated policy here is that students must comply with the law regarding drinking. The university's priority, however, is not enforcing the law but ensuring student safety. They recognize the fact that students are going to drink regardless of whether or not they're allowed to, and in light of this, they trade off enforcement in favor of safety. The fact is, if you don't create situations that encourage students to hide the fact that they're drinking, then it's going to be a lot easier to spot problems and deal with them. For example, no one here is afraid of RA's catching them drinking, so if something happens, we can go to an RA without hesitation for help.</p>
<p>Anyway, I'm not saying every school should do this, but it sure works for Stanford.</p>
<p>I am not sure what the policy is at Stanford. There is no alcohol at the university-sponsored parties, but there is plenty of alcohol and drinking on campus.</p>
<p>That is too bad, but typical. It seems that many colleges get their lawyers to write policies and then just ignore them.</p>
<p>This is a Stanford Daily article on the test.</p>
<p>My friend's son just graduated from Stanford -- and I know for certain fact that he partied a lot in college. Not saying they shouldn't have the policy or do the online education -- but it's safe to say they wouldn't be doing the online education program if the ban on alcohol was working.</p>
<p>Actually, I think colleges are doing the online education thing because their lawyers are advising them to do it. So down the line if they get sued because some kid drinks himself to death, they can show that they did all they could to try to prevent that sort of thing. It's not that AlcoholEDU works -- there is no real evidence yet as to what impact it has -- its that its availability leaves a college open to claims of negligence if it does NOT use that or some equivalent.</p>
<p>I personally don't think that AlcoholEDU by itself will have much impact. I think studies in other contexts show that follow through is important, and I also think that a computer course is too impersonal to have that much of an effect. I mean, it gets a message out -- but I think it is naive to assume that the message will stick without continual reinforcement over time. </p>
<p>Obviously, it does no harm for kids to participate in it (except for the concern I raised above about the privacy of survey information -- no students should be required to answer personal questions that they are uncomfortable with) -- so I certainly have no real objection to it. I just would not like to see it used as an excuse for a college to do nothing else.</p>
<p>Calmom, does it really matter that the schools offer it because they see te value of the program or feel compelled to dismiss potential lawsuit. Speaking about potential costs, I'm quite certain that they are more worried of having to settle contract disputes with their well-paid coaches than dealing with alcohol issues. </p>
<p>Could we not agree that every little bit helps, and that the more information is disseminated, the better we are? FWIW, how do we measure the effectiveness of a program? How do we measure saved lives? We barely keep track of the deaths, so let's be realistic that the near-deaths nor the avoided accidents are counted properly. </p>
<p>It is easy to be cynical: my friend Gordie Bailey DID take the test at CU-Boulder and scored a ... 96. He may have known what to do to .. others, but he could not help himself. The hope is that more and more students CAN recognize the early symptoms of alcohol poisoning. One year later, nine girls were rushed to the hospital after attending two frat parties. Not great news, but they all survived ... one optimist might want to think that someone recognized the problem and called 911 as opposed to let them "sleep it off."</p>
<p>What if the program is expensive? Well, what is expensive? $40,000? Isn't that the value of a SINGLE scholarship for a football player? How many minutes of the time of the football or basketball coach does $40,000 buy? What if the company is a "for-profit" organization? </p>
<p>What if the data is still incomplete? Do you know many other organizations that are TRYING to build such a database. Again, our country counts, collates, tabulates about every facet of our lives ... yet little to nothing is done. </p>
<p>Thus, my suggestion would be to consider the development of such programs as the MINIMUM. Schools that believe that this mere test will shelter them from the problems will be disappointed. It will require many more courageous decisions to eradicate this growing problem. At least, even if it represents an expensive baby step, this is a step in the right direction.</p>
<p>It's terribly cynical to think that schools are engaged in alcohol because they're worried about lawsuits. It's a constant topic of discussion - and there are many types of programs in place, not just online education. Universities would do almost anything if they thought it would have an impact on underage drinking -- and more specifically dangerous binge drinking. Huge amounts of money are being poured into alternatives to alcohol programming (social events to keep students busy in alcohol-free setting), alcohol education, enforcement, and counseling. Believe it or not, I think they really are just trying to stop the drinking.</p>
<p>Whatever people believe the motivation is, I'm just glad schools are trying different things to make attractive alternatives to drinking available for our kids. If it helps some kids (not expecting that any one approach will work for everyone), that is all to the good. I am glad it has given my S & his peers some options that weren't previously available & hope there will be even more options available for my D when she begins college in 2008.</p>
<p>I wonder if there'd be value in trying to get the parents to take the course as well. It might help emphasize and bring to the forefront the whole issue of drinking while at college and if nothing else, promote more discussion between the parent and kid on the subject. Of course, a much abbreviated version would be best.:)</p>
<p>Muhlenberg and ND have mandatory alcohol awareness programs, but I still read Muhlenbergs weekly SAFETY report-
( listed in the weekly school newspaper that is emailed to me)</p>
<p>I copy and paste the alcohol related incidents (ie those taken to the hospital) in addition, to other safety issues to my D. </p>
<p>It is a constant message I like to reinforce! Weekly!!!</p>
<p>Just copied and pasted the Stanford page in an email to them, too, because I found it very realistic and geared to 18 year old experiences.
Thanks for posting this !</p>
<p>USC offers the course on-line to the parents as an optional (required for students). I took it & S saw me plowing through the course, since my computer is beside his in the living room. The on-line course took over 4 hours for me to complete, but I found it interesting to see what was presented, resources available, how they tried to get students to consider situations they're likely to encounter, and some of the physiological consequences of drinking that are not well-publicized. Both my kids knew I took the course & I would mention topics & what was covered while I was going thru it (kids remained silent).
I'm glad USC offered the course to parents as an option & found it interesting (if a bit long).</p>
<p>HImom, I'm glad USC offered that opportunity. I think that would improve the impact of the course, because it provides an opportunity for parents to discuss the issues, both at the time the course is initially done and later down the line. At least where parents are involved, that would give the follow-through that I think is necessary for such programs to be anything more than a band-aid solution. </p>
<p>My skepticism comes from the fact that the program is produced by a for-profit company, and there is no independent data to show that it has any significant impact. I know enough about educational marketing to know that companies like to pick and choose their data in their p.r. -- the company that produces the program is going to present its data in whatever light is most favorable for its sales. </p>
<p>I also remember quite vividly Lucifer's posts on this board before he drank himself to death. He had completed AlcoholEDU or an equivalent program at Cornell, and he was quite adamant that he knew everything there was to know about how much alcohol was safe to consume and his own tolerance for alcohol. I wouldn't blame the program for his demise, but there is a possibility that he took what he wanted from the program and used that knowedge to rationalize his own belief that he was safe to drink more, because he followed whatever "rules" he had gleaned from the course. </p>
<p>The problem with halfway solutions or palliatives is that they often end up standing in the way of real reform or addressing the real underlying issue. If there was strong evidence that the program had an impact -- that would be great. But there isn't. All there is at this point are advertising claims. And money being spent by the universities that perhaps could be better spent in other ways -- such as money to support more on campus counseling services for drug & alcohol abuse, or money to provide RA's with better training in how to recognize issues and when to make some sort of referral. I don't know -- I don't have the answers -- I just have my doubts that this course by itself is making much of an impact and, as noted, in some cases it might backfire.</p>
<p>They say the best way to change behavior is to measure the behavior we want or that which we want to avoid. The RAs may be the final common pathway by which we can measure a program's success, but just the fact that the RA's are trained to observe and it is known that they are observing may have a greater effect on behavior. Even then as Will Rogers pointed out
"There are three kinds of men:
*The ones that learn by reading.
*The few who learn by observation.
*The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence."</p>
<p>calmom:</p>
<p>What's the Lucifer story? I'm not up on it.</p>
<p>Lucifer was a kid who posted regularly to cc last year. He was a student at Cornell and often rather boa****l of his drinking exploits. If challenged by a parent, he made it clear that he knew what he was doing and things were all under control. He had completed an AlcoholEDU and cited various facts he had learned from it that as part of the reason he was aware of whatever it was he needed to do to protect himself. Around the time of spring break, he went to visit friends at UVA and went to a frat party there. He was found dead of alcohol poisoning the following day. </p>
<p>You should be able to find old posts of his by searching for posts by "lucifer11287"</p>
<p>calmom:</p>
<p>Thanks for the background. It sounds awful.</p>
<p>I think more alcohol awareness is warranted and the AlcoholEDU program may be okay (but only my D took it - not me). I always question things like this when they're put on by a private, for-profit company though (just a question) but if there's some value in it, I'm glad my D took it. If nothing else, just knowing that all admits had to take a 3 hour course on it as a condition of admission might help emphasize what a problem excessive consumption is.</p>
<p>Lessons can be tough to learn regardless of how intelligent or educated the person is. We all know we shouldn't speed in our cars or get distracted driving while on the cell phone but most of us do it (and I'm sure many have had close calls as a result). We all know we shouldn't overeat, should eat the right things, and should exercise regularly but many don't. The list goes on. One of the inherent problems with drinking is that as one drinks, their inhibitions and judgment start reducing making it more likely they'll drink more when in a given social environment that's encouraging excess consumption - I'm not talking about a glass of wine or beer with dinner. Unfortunately, like unprotected sex, it takes only one incident for severe consequences to result.</p>