Denison: 2,250 undergrads
Conn College: 1,865 undergrads
Indiana U: 33,429 undergrads (at just Bloomington – total enrollment at all IU campuses 112,000)
If only large state flagships could operate like small private schools with large endowments. Reality can be tough sometimes I guess.
Even if no in-state kids participate in greek life (which seems incredibly unlikely – bordering in impossible), less than 1/2 of the OOS/international kids participate in greek life. Pretty sure greek life existed (and dominated social life on campus) long before the increase in OOS/international students.
Indiana joined the Big10 in 1899. Bobby Knight tossed a chair across the court long before any current students were alive (most at this point weren’t alive when he coached at IU).
Not sure how OOS/international students are driving either greek life or athletics on campus.
And I missed the statement on the site for the rock/boulder wall that only OOS/international students can use it. But maybe I missed it.
From what I have read (and in my own experience) there are fewer high school kids in the Midwest. As a result, they are poaching students from other states. You can refuse to participate in that I suppose but if everyone else around you is, you likely will have problems.
Not sure how the study authors will feel about the Penn party policy. It will reduce the number of parties which presumably the authors will like. Though fewer parties will give the easy party pathway kids more time to focus on academics which could be bad for non-party kids in terms of competition. Costs $25/hr for university approved bartender and $65/hr for two security guards if you are serving alcohol. That will no doubt favor the “wealthy” kids. This article indicates that the fraternity council will pay 50% of the costs for frat parties which will put a thumb on the scale for those evil greek life kids so that can’t be good for the authors.
Policy seems to me to be an enforcement nightmare. Restricting what happens on private property. Risks of selective enforcement which likely leads to claims of bias against certain groups of students. Planning 10 days out likely won’t happen in many instances. One because we are talking about 18-22 year olds. Two much of gatherings for people are spontaneous rather than planned (and certainly not 10 days out). Wonder if the policy is meant more for PR/optics than anything else?
@saillakeerie the authors wouldn’t have addressed Penn’s parties because it isn’t a public school with funding issues, like IU. And I agree that it’s going to be a problem for Penn to enforce (and IMO the idea is not a good one anyway).
I’m aware Conn and Denison are different from the IN flagship in many ways - size, endowment. As to endowment, Conn only funds one unpaid internship/research in the 4 years whereas a wealthier college like Amherst funds as many as you qualify for. I didn’t mean to compare the two to it as much as to say some schools do things like that and some don’t. And I do not expect IU to have the funds to do it.
It is, though, one more reason for those low income students who can, to choose a school that DOES have programs like that.
The article I read was not the DP article but the cover story in the current Philadelphia Magazine, written by a very savvy, respected local reporter. According to the story, there’s quite a bit of enforcement going on, and it’s creating a serious damper on parties. It wasn’t entirely clear (or I wasn’t reading especially carefully), but it looks like the Penn Police has recruited a set of paid monitors – some of whom may be students, it’s not clear – who report on parties going on, that the police then bust. They are also soliciting cooperation from landlords/property managers.
In any event, if the article is to be believed, it’s not a “show” policy, it’s a meaningful attempt to effect a radical change in student behavior. It can’t possibly be 100% successful, of course, but even 50% or 40% would have a huge impact over time.
Apparently, it started out as an anti-sexual-violence initiative, and a crackdown on de-certified fraternities that were still operating off-campus (where most of Penn’s students live, within easy walking distance of campus, in many cases closer than some of the official dorms), and that were seriously unreconstructed when it came to open sexual predation. But to avoid selective enforcement and to stay on solid legal ground, it morphed into anti-alcohol. Reading between the lines, they are trying to make it a lot harder for freshmen to get drunk. And maybe succeeding.
Second disappointment this week: just learned that despite enthusiastic reassurances to the contrary from the program director when D applied, D will not be receiving enough financial aid to enable her to attend the aforementioned summer program required for her major. While she has found a cheaper option at another institution, the small grant that the college did offer her to defray the summer program cost cannot be used for a program offered by another institution. This does bother me, because as an archaeology major she must attend a field school in order to graduate, and the only one offered by her school is really pricey. This is not just something for fun or cultural enrichment.
*Update: the supposed aid they portrayed as a grant, is actually a loan! So they just offered her two different loans.
“Could lead to a greater demand for fake IDs to go bar-hopping.
so many, many unintended consequences.”
Yup. In a city like Philly I am sure there are a few bars that would welcome the $$$$ with plenty left to take care any unwanted attention from the cops. Dumbest idea in 200 years at Penn.
“It is, though, one more reason for those low income students who can, to choose a school that DOES have programs like that.”
I mean, sure. But even Conn College and Denison are tougher to get in to than IU for in-staters and cost more for poor kids.
According to College Factual, the net price for those with income of 0-30K at Denison is $11.2K and at Conn College is $11.5K. At IU, it’s $5.9K (in-state).
The net price for those with income of 30K-48K at Denison is $11.3K and at Conn College is $17.6K. At IU, it’s $8.1K (in-state).
Poor IN kids can take out loans and work to make enough to attend IU. It seems that Denison and Conn College almost aren’t financially possible unless the family has managed to save a little bit before hand (and remember that half the country has zero net wealth; most of those are living paycheck to paycheck).
Basically it means those off campus parties, which would get very wild and could be risky for Freshmen, are now very closely monitored. It doesn’t mean there aren’t any dorm parties in freshman dorms.
Maybe I read their policy wrong. But it seems to me they will not allow alcohol to be served to freshmen (or sophomores or juniors who are under 21) at the monitored parties. I suspect that many of the under 21 students will pretty much lose all interest in going to parties where they cannot drink. And the students who are totally fine going dry at monitored parties likely weren’t the problem in the first place. But the under 21 kids who want to drink are likely going to be pushed underground/further off campus. Policy likely will give cover to the University in terms of legal liability. Students though may find themselves in situations that are worse from their own perspectives.
It gives the University a very defensible legal position (at a pretty high cost, both out of pocket and in terms of student morale). And while of course it will not eliminate undergraduate drinking, or underage drinking, it will make drinking much less convenient and somewhat more expensive, which – the economists tell us – is going to reduce the volume. Probably considerably.
The policy certainly permits dorm parties in freshman dorms – I don’t think there are any pure “freshman dorms” at Penn, but the dorms are mostly freshmen and sophomores – as long as there is registration, 10-day notice, and monitors present. Everyone can enjoy their soft drinks, I’m sure.
One pretty predictable effect of this is going to be to make alcohol consumption something that is very individual, not social. People will keep bottles in their rooms, and pre-game by themselves or with a roommate. They won’t spread their drinking out over the course of an evening, and there may not be a large friend group to help impose commonsense restraint.
The issue I had with the Paying for the Party book is the sample size was tiny and yet the authors attempt to generalize their findings. They interviewed 6 young women in a party-oriented dorm. They did not also interview 6 young women living in a non-party dorm or studying a more intensive major (as far as I recall). That is not to say that their findings don’t have merit, but they also seem to possibly have a biased sample. At a state flagship like IU there are kids there for the party, but there also have to be students there that are focused on their studies and working to pay for school. Those kids don’t necessarily have time or resources to join Greek life. It is also not clear to me that OOS students are the ones asking for the party. In-state students often attend these schools for the party atmosphere and the teams.
Also, Nakesha’s story was so very sad. I am not sure that even with an involved family it would have ended differently if she was resistant to getting help. A family may have been able to get her on a short hold, but could not force her to take medication or go into a shelter.
I am not arguing that going to Denison or Conn will be cheaper, but pointing out two examples of schools that offer things like funding for unpaid internships. I do understand that most state schools can’t afford that, given their current funding. Schools that WOULD be cheaper are extremely hard to get into (Amherst, Harvard etc).
However, these are things that can help and perhaps should be considered.
IU says it has about 8200 Greek students. That’s 25% of the 33,000 undergrads, not 17%. I can’t find data, but it’s a safe bet that the participation rate is higher than 25% among full-time traditional-aged students who start as freshmen and live on campus (in other words, CC kids).
Thanks for the correction. My reading of the article linked to above stated that none of the 6 low income women graduated within 5 years. I guess those are just the ones that stayed (some left for community college or directional colleges)? 53 includes both the well off and the lower income women, which is still a very small sample size out of 33,000 UGs (0.16%).
Yeah @mom2and it wasn’t meant to be a broad sample nor could it be. These researchers had a dorm room on the floor and actually lived in it. They did interviews over the 5 years. It was meant to be a deep but not broad study. In fact they intended it to be about sex, at first.
I’m a senior and I already see a bunch of class of 17 16 15s have failed out of huge public colleges and moved back home with their parents. Their snapchat stories were always full of partying and black out drinking. Even right now all these totally unprepared classmates who never study are bragging about going away to universities just because their parents can write a check or co-sign loans.
partying and greek life is fine if you are a strong somewhat responsible student. but it’s just trashy and ignorant and sad if you’re a bad student. idk why parents allow kids who’ve proven NOTHING to go off to party colleges for $30,000 a year. that’s so much money