<p>I was going to say, I-dad, again, stats say whatever you make of them. If you are comparing the residential population, age 24 and under (could even throw in the commuters under age 24) at the University, the binge rate would be probably closer to Penn State's - even given the Bible Belt and the 12% Af-Am. Definitely higher than D'mouth or Williams. Perhaps I should have said, I'll put the demographically similar population of Bama up against D'mouth or Williams any day.</p>
<p>Sybbie: you lost me. The survey you are citing is a survey given to incoming freshman, on the first day of orientation, at virtually all colleges. It's not a secret that overall high school drinking has declined steadily since the drinking age was increased from 18 to 21.</p>
<p>If anything, the survey you cite supports my contention that colleges have high drinking rates, in large part, because they (unwittingly) target, or at least attract, drinkers in their admissions profile. For example, using the first-year survey you cite, 44.8% of incoming seniors reported drinking beer occasionally or frequently during their senior year in high school. At Dartmouth, the figure was 57.0% of incoming students. So logically, if you start with an enrolled freshman class that drank more than the national average in high school, you would expect the drinking rate on campus to be above the national average as well. College is not generally a time when prior drinkers stop drinking!</p>
<p>I don't know why this causes such a ruckus. When I went to college in New England 30 years ago, it was no big secret that Dartmouth had a pretty robust drinking scene. It's not like people don't know that. What's the big deal?</p>
<p>Hi interesteddad and sybbie- For some time you have sought to engage each other on this topic. I have learned quite a lot from these posts and both of your perspectives were valuable in learning how to look carefully at schools, yes including Dartmouth and Williams which are featured in your debate, but all of the others as well. I am a little confused and curious as to the perspectives behind this debate. Would you mind sort of summarizing your own positions? </p>
<p>As a starting point, it seems that you both have given considerable thought to the topic of alcohol on campus. Interested dad has expressed concern and according to sybbie, has "very strong views when it comes to Williams, its athletes and drinking , along with Dartmouth, its greek system and drinking" (and the part about using them as examples when discussing this issue.) I'm using her words because it would take me so long to scan the threads and interpret, but I'd much rather hear it in your own words. </p>
<p>Sybbie, you have a daughter at Dartmouth? And you hold the view that problems with alcohol on campuses (across the board) have been overstated, at Dartmouth in particular?</p>
<p>Thank you for clarifying. This is an interesting topic.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Perhaps I should have said, I'll put the demographically similar population of Bama up against D'mouth or Williams any day.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ahhh, but I suspect demographics are what it's all about. No survey data, but I would be willing to bet a plate of Oysters Bienville that, if you looked at the demographics of the drinking centers at 'Bama (the frats), you would find the wealthiest, whitest, most suburban demographic group on campus. Not coincidentally, the closest demographic group to the elite private colleges.</p>
<p>That's why this issue is so puzzling. I mean, on the surface, you would think that the brightest, most high-achieving kids in the country would be among the lowest drinkers. And, there is probably some truth to that. I mean it's hard to get straight As and study for the SAT when you are drunk. But, the elite colleges (which cater so heavily to an affluent, white, suburban, pre-professional, preppie customer base) are swimming against a very strong demographic tide on the drinking issue. It's the polarization of the high-achievement, non-drinking kids like your daughter juxtaposed against the strong demographic tide that is causing the friction at the elite colleges. I think this disconnect is also why there is such a high level of denial in the elite college crowd.</p>
<p>PS- I avoid posting personal details, but full disclosure: my son did apply to Dartmouth. I'm serious when I say that both sides of this debate helped inform my research.</p>
<h1>64: keep going. I'm printing this out right now.</h1>
<p>curmudge - while you wait for cangel's response re sub-free dorms, I think (this is a hypothesis, as I have no first-hand experience) that an Honors/quiet dorm is another option which may (?) be less "away from the mainstream." S chose that option (sub-free was available) and I will report back in the fall (if he clues me in - questionable), but he did say that his overnight experience there made him feel that he will be able to continue his preferred location for studying - ie, in his room and won't require going to library or elsewhere.</p>
<p>
Are you practicing for your Bowdoin, Maine trip? Congrats on the achieved status!</p>
<p>"Perhaps I should have said, I'll put the demographically similar population of Bama up against D'mouth or Williams any day."</p>
<p>I'm also confused by interesteddad's data. As a Tuscaloosa native, I've never, and I mean NEVER, seen anything that even remotely compares to the legendary UA frat parties. They are absolutely unbelievable. And it's not just limited to the frats...even the honors dorms are loaded down with liquor. I've done a lot of traveling in my life and I've seen lots of universities, and I really find it hard to believe that any college campus in America has a significantly larger drinking culture than UA.</p>
<p>Okay: this is not speculation, this is not an hysterical mom, this is not memories of the "old days".</p>
<p>This is some info about my D's first year at a school she chose despite the "party" reputation that we brushed off because "all schools have drinking"----</p>
<p>Homecoming weekend was also Parents weekend. D asked us not to come. The entire school smelled like **** and vomit.</p>
<p>The only freshmen left to hang out with on frat party nights (thurs-sat) were very nice fundamentalists with whom she had not too much in common, but otherwise she'd have been on her own.</p>
<p>A common occurrence was drunks from the frat house across the street climbing up her dorm wall, banging on her window (third floor).</p>
<p>Not being falling down drunk, she was often the designated holder of heads over toilets.</p>
<p>When she looked for outside activities, she was often the only freshman, for instance at poltical groups, and the upper classmen already had social groups.</p>
<p>She was not fundamentally opposed to drinking, just wanted a fuller social scene, which she found when she transfered. Transfering was not initiated by controlling parents--it was her wish to find a place where she was enjoying herself, not gritting her teeth to get through it.</p>
<p>The school she went to was not dry, but the entire social culture, including the drinking aspects, was night and day different from the first school. And, full disclosure, she did drink after a while at the second school, which we did not try to control away. But the whole atmosphere was different, more accepting of difference, and without the "meat market" aspects of the first school.</p>
<p>I don't know how to explain any clearer that there is a difference, and again, it's an explanation of why "fit" is important. And it's not "weird" to think so.</p>
<p>Garland:</p>
<p>Great explanation. The key thing to remember is that for every one of your daughter, there are probably a hundred more who, while happy with their college, are forced into a position of having to go actively hunt for social opportunities and/or living situations to avoid the heavy drinking scene. </p>
<p>The reason that some of us even care is that we don't think the onus should be on the kids who don't drink or drink occasionally to have to consciously seek alternatives. One quote from freshman at a very prestigious college I heard lately is, "I've been having to look for some friends who don't drink so much".</p>
<p>I certainly don't expect, nor would I want, a dry campus. I'm simply concerned that there be a critical mass of non-heavy drinkers so that a kid isn't marginalized if he or she doesn't want to get rip-roaring drunk as a routine social event.</p>
<p>The way I see it is that either other people's kids are exaggerating b/c they just don't like their school and want to transfer out or I raised some very adaptable and tolerant kids who aren't easily swayed to the dark side. </p>
<p>When you think about it, what parent would say no if their child asked to be transferred out of a school because there was too much drinking going on.</p>
<p>I believe that there are schools out there that are very adamant about being labelled as appropriate for "non-drinkers", but some of these same schools may have other "dark sides". (ie: drugs, etc.)</p>
<p>I agree with Mcdeb1958. Maybe our kids do need to be more adaptable and tolerant. Many purported problem "issues" (such as drinking or drugs) may really pertain to a small minority of students on a particular campus. That does not have to define the campus culture for everyone. I do believe that "dark sides" can be found on all college campuses. That doesn't mean that our kids will be pressured to cross the line.............</p>
<p>Yes, Mcdeb, my conniving, dishonest D trumped up that story, because she had the kind of parents who who, controlling as they are, would never listen to any other reason for transfering.</p>
<p>I'm not sure wht you mean about saying no to transfering or not; isn't that a student decision?</p>
<p>1sokkermom:</p>
<p>Swarthmore has a long history of replacing federal aid dollars under such circumstances. In the 1950's, they pulled out of the federal student aid program entirely when Sen McCarthy passed legislation requiring students to sign anti-communist "loyalty oaths" in order to receive aid. </p>
<p>Swarthmore's Board of Managers promptly decided to pull all of its students out of the federal aid program and replaced the dollars with college funds, rather than even ask Swarthmore students to sign McCarthy's loyalty oaths. It is a matter of (very conservative, I might add) principle that the government should not be using federal aid dollars to dictate what students should think or do. The College rejoined the federal aid program after the McCarthy-era loyalty oath provisions were repealed.</p>
<p>As a practical matter, I doubt the policy has had much impact on Swarthmore's aid budget. In the most recent three years covered by the OPE federal crime reporting stats, Swarthmore had one drug arrest per year for a total of 3. No way to know if those three students were convicted of a drug offense or, if so, whether they received any federal student aid in the first place.</p>
<p>It might be more of an issue at a campus with more drug arrests. But again, there's no way to know if, for example, any of 82 drug law arrests over the same three year period at Duke resulted in a loss of federal student aid.</p>
<p>" Swarthmore had one drug arrest per year for a total of 3."</p>
<p>That is a meaningless statistic if the administration is "tolerant" of drug users. Is it possible that they are simply ignoring the problem in defiance of the federal drug laws?</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Ahhh, but I suspect demographics are what it's all about. No survey data, but I would be willing to bet a plate of Oysters Bienville that, if you looked at the demographics of the drinking centers at 'Bama (the frats), you would find the wealthiest, whitest, most suburban demographic group on campus. Not coincidentally, the closest demographic group to the elite private colleges.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>No argument about that (except it is not purely occurring in the frats, that's why I would include the under 24 commuter population) - and I think I know part of the reason, having observed these kids for the last 12 years - too much money and time, too little supervision and low expectations. Add an environment that is sometimes awash in alcohol (Mardi Gras). Many of DD's classmates that fall into this group have family businesses/professions to go back to, they don't have to make stellar grades, etc to excel - in fact the networking that goes on over the keg is probably more beneficial to their futures than a good grade in freshman English. The problem is none of that explains the compulsion to binge drink. Based on the definition of "binge" drinking that was a once a semester, maybe even once a college career experience when I was in college, not once a week. It is too "much" of everything plus immaturity, I guess.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>curmudge - while you wait for cangel's response re sub-free dorms<< Sorry, I thought I explained. I did not mean to imply that "substance free dorming" puts a kid out of the mainstream at a school, or, for that matter, at Dartmouth. What I meant was that at D'mouth, some perculiarities of the system, and the choices for sub-free, make it harder to just opt for the sub-free housing, even for someone who would cheerfully go sub-free at another school.</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>1sokkermom:</p>
<p>The operative word is "arrest"...as in local police. It is a different category in the OPE crime reporting stats from a college judicial/disciplinary action. It doesn't have much to do with the college administrators, who I think would all agree they have little control over the local constabulary.</p>
<p>It is absolutely true that drinking goes on at most colleges, but there are huge variations in degree. Some schools offer few social options other than drinking and attract heavy-duty partiers. Others have plenty of other choices and more of a cross section of people. Garland's D's experience is a good example of this.</p>
<p>I would suggest that finding a school with a climate of respect for individual choices is a good way to find a school where all will feel comfortable. Also a large enough school (or nearby town) offering many social options other than parties is a big help.</p>
<p>My D's friends run the gamut from teetotalers to active partiers. But for her, being a non drinker, it's nice to know other people who know how to have fun without being sloppy drunk. I am not concerned with partying per se, but I very much want her to be able to preserve that side of herself that does not "need" booze or pot to have fun. That's a muscle that without exercize can atrophy.</p>
<p>I'Dad:</p>
<p>My point was not to highlight the "problems" at any particular school. The point was to suggest that campuses that are not "stereotyped" as drinking schools may have other issues. I am sure your daughter is not a drug addict just because she goes to a school that may be more tolerant of drug users than some other institutions. </p>
<p>I tend to agree with Sybbie that your drunken-frat-athlete stereotype lecture is getting worn out. :)</p>
<p>McDeb, if your kids are easy-going and tolerant and therefore don't mind a roommate who pukes on your bed 2 or 3 times a week; who routinely has 12 friends over on a Thursday night to share a keg while you're trying to finish a paper, or who defecates on the floor because he's too drunk to find the bathroom that's great. You've really raised some terrific, broad minded teenagers who are models for the rest of us.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, some parents out there are working an 80 hour week to generate the income to pay the tuition, and the notion that some drunken loser who their kid randomly got assigned to live with in a 15 by 12 cave for a year could derail his education bugs them no end. Guess they just need a lesson in tolerance or something. </p>
<p>Sheesh. If you're lucky enough to have a kid who hasn't had to deal with a binge drinking roommate than just count your blessings. No need to be nasty to the parents who have had to listen to the aggravation that the situation entails. Sort of like people who are healthy *****ing about how self-centered people get when they start chemo. If you're lucky... just keep quiet.</p>