[Image] The Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention CATALYST Summer 1999 -- Volume 5, No.2 A Publication of the Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention FUNDED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION This document is also available in Acrobat and Text formats. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In this issue: Students Take the Lead in Campus Prevention, by Catherine Meikle Potts A Look Back, A Look Ahead, by William DeJong Alcohol Use by College Women: Patterns, Reasons, Results, and Prevention, by Cheryl Vince-Whitman and Maggie Cretella Point-Counterpoint: Using Industry Funding: A Mixed Message for Campus Culture? Viewpoints from: Debra F. Erenberg, J.D., Manager, College Initiatives, Center for Science in the Public Interest Cathy Neuman, Asst. Director, Dept. of Student Life, Judicial Affairs Office, Michigan State U. Edward H. Hammond, Ph.D., President, Fort Hays State University Jeff Becker, Executive Director, Beer Institute Intercollegiate Athletics and Alcohol and Other Drug Problems Network Committee Structure Up and Running Tribute to Outgoing Chair Welcome New Network Members Three Good Reasons to Join the NETWORK Book Review: The Rights and Responsibilities of the Modern University: Who Assumes the Risks of College Life? by Joel Epstein In Memoriam: Robert Dubick ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Students Take the Lead in Campus Prevention by Catherine Meikle Potts All too often students are considered to be the problem when it comes to campus alcohol and other drug concerns. But they can be part of the solution, especially when they assume leadership roles among their peers. The Higher Education Center invited teams from 14 colleges and universities to a training event in November 1998 to support student-led groups in providing leadership for alcohol and other drug policy change on their campuses and in surrounding communities. Called Seize the Moment: Student Leadership in Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention, this two-day meeting gave student leaders and their advisors an opportunity to share ideas and concerns about problems of high-risk drinking and other drug use, to brainstorm strategies and solutions, and to network with other student leaders about how they can make a difference. The interactive training agenda included sessions exploring student leadership and activism; student roles in campus prevention, with examples of successful student-involved prevention efforts; an introduction to "environmental management"; and how to build campus wide support for alcohol and other drug prevention. Using an environmental management approach is a way for students to expand prevention efforts beyond the influence of individual educational approaches to the institutional, community, and public policy context in which students make decisions about drinking and other drug use. For Mara Leventhal, a student leader from The Ohio State University, Columbus, the most interesting part of the training was learning about environmental management. "It was something I had never really heard of before. It is a concept that appeals, since it is about changing the conditions and surroundings enough that you also change people's behavior. And by changing the environment—by addressing alcohol ads and bar rules and procedures—we can make the campus and the neighborhood safer," she said. Leventhal and her teammate, sophomore Jaclyn Nowakowski, were the first students to join their campus alcohol policy subcommittee. Since the November meeting they have led the planning of several prevention activities, including Buckeyes and Booze: Is There a Problem?, a town hall meeting about alcohol issues and policies where students discussed alcohol policies with OSU president William Kirwan. "Alcohol has such a huge stigma surrounding it on campuses across the country, and at the first mention of alcohol, students are immediately turned off because they figure the message will be not to drink at all," explained Nowakowski. "The initial steps that we take right now are extremely important in the long run, though, because changes in students' drinking behavior will not occur overnight." University of Iowa student Dan Patterson has applied some of the program ideas he gathered at the training to his campus's Stepping Up Project, a university and community partnership to reduce high-risk drinking in Iowa City. "I think it was really beneficial for us to meet other students with similar problems from other schools and learn how they have dealt with similar programs, and what they wanted to see accomplished on their campus. It gave us ideas to bring back, and the energy to get it done." Following the training, Patterson and fellow student Sue Ann Johnson interviewed University of Iowa president Mary Sue Coleman about what the university is doing to reduce students' dangerous drinking and published the interview in Prevention File: Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drugs (Vol. 14, No. 2, Spring 1999). To provide students with a lively and interesting alternative to socializing at local bars, Patterson and Johnson helped organize and promote alcohol-free recreational Night Games, with free sports events and movies at the university's field house on Saturday nights, including free transportation. "The more people who know about alcohol-free alternatives the better," Patterson pointed out. "And, the more people who know, the greater the likelihood of getting more people involved and really making a difference." The fact that the majority of college students do not engage in dangerous drinking was an important point discussed at the November meeting—information that is often lost in media stories about college drinking. Robin Campbell, a sophomore at Northern State University, Aberdeen, South Dakota, now calls attention to actual student drinking norms in her alcohol and other drug prevention activities. "Many times students are turned off about learning about drugs and alcohol. They've experienced the approach that says 'no, no, no . . . drugs and alcohol are bad.' Now we're working to create safer alternatives to drinking and emphasize low-risk behavior—and we're pointing out how these are the norm." In February, Campbell and sophomore Eric Trelstad developed and coordinated a two-day leadership seminar to actively involve other students in identifying ways to make positive changes on campus. Motivated by the success of their seminar, this student team is now forming a campus organization to provide and promote healthy and safe recreational options involving arts, the outdoors, sports, music, and dance. Equipped with alcohol and other drug policy and program examples for fraternities, sororities, and athletes that they received during the November training, sophomores Celeste Jennings and Jordan Johnson, of Texas A&M University in Corpus Christi, participated in a campus alcohol and other drug task force on developing guidelines for that university's newly initiated Greek system and athletics program. "It's exciting to see the progress we've made on campus, especially considering this is our first year of experience with Greek life and athletics. We thought that alcohol-related problems came hand-in-hand with fraternities and sports, but it's great to see that this doesn't have to be the case," said Jennings. At the University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, sophomores Grisselle Betancourt Figueroa and Felipe Roman Morales share the ideas and information from Seize the Moment in trainings they've designed and delivered to other student associations on campus. In their presentations, Figueroa and Morales engage students in awareness-raising discussions about the extent of high-risk drinking and then describe environmentally focused strategies to combat the problem on their campus, including efforts involving social marketing and curriculum infusion. "The November training really opened our eyes to the importance of building coalitions for alcohol and other drug prevention—of working together to see results. We've been surprised and happy with how our own student coalition has gotten bigger and stronger as we've spread the word about what we are doing," said Figueroa. The Seize the Moment training event was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. For information about student leadership training in alcohol and other drug prevention, please contact the Center at (800) 676-1730. Catherine Meikle Potts is a research and development associate at the Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention. Editor's note: The student interview with University of Iowa president Mary Sue Coleman, in Prevention File, is available at the Center's Website at http://www.edc.org/hec/pubs/articles/prevfile9904.html#Anchor5. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A Look Back, A Look Ahead by William DeJong The past five years have brought significant changes in how college administrators seek to combat alcohol and other drug problems on campus. Perhaps the most important change is the level of concern that college presidents and other administrators express about the problem. National statistics based on a random sample survey of four-year colleges and students became available for the first time in 1994, with the widespread publication of Henry Wechsler's landmark study documenting widespread high-risk drinking by college students. In 1997 high-profile deaths of students at LSU, MIT, and the University of Virginia put the subject of college student drinking on the cover of Time. Pressure on colleges to do something about the problem mounted higher than ever. Another change is that college administrators are now looking beyond traditional educational programs to embrace a wide range of environmental management strategies. The list of options is vast: eliminating low-price alcohol promotions at local bars, improving enforcement of the age 21 law, increasing academic standards and faculty-student contact, providing recreational and housing options, making changes in the academic calendar, and many others. The Center's environmental management framework has made a significant difference in how people in higher education think about alcohol and other drug prevention—what causes or contributes to the problem, what kinds of campus-community infrastructure need to be in place to deal with it, and the range of environmental change strategies that can be brought to bear. The past five years have also seen a rapid growth in campus and community coalitions designed to bring about policy change. Community mobilization, involving a mix of civic, religious, and governmental agencies, is now widely recognized by college officials to be one of the keys to successful prevention. The University at Albany, SUNY, Western Washington University, and other institutions have shown how town and gown officials can work together to change community conditions, often working in collaboration with local bar, restaurant, and liquor store owners to eliminate irresponsible marketing, sale, and distribution of alcohol. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's "A Matter of Degree" initiative has also been an important example for other colleges to follow. Most recently, we have seen an explosion of interest in new state initiatives, which involve the simultaneous formation of several campus and community teams to develop new environmental management approaches to prevention. Ohio was the first state to launch such an initiative. We have widely publicized this effort, believing that a local, regional, or state initiative of this sort to be the ideal vehicle for advancing a prevention agenda, in particular the use of campus and community teams to create environmental change. Many other states have now followed Ohio's lead—Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington. Still more new state-level initiatives will come along in the next few years, each bringing new focus, new energy, and new resources to the fight against substance abuse. The Higher Education Center has been pleased to be in the forefront of these developments, and we look forward to helping still more colleges and universities adopt the environmental management approach. Looking ahead to the Center's next five years, we anticipate that our work will expand in three significant areas. First, the Center's purview has been expanded by the Department of Education to include violence prevention. The Center's trainings and publications have always highlighted violence, in particular sexual violence, as a major consequence of student alcohol and other drug use. Moving beyond alcohol and other drug prevention to bring new ideas for crime and violence prevention—physical and sexual violence as well as racial and sexual harassment and other hate crimes—to college administrators and other key sectors of campus life will be a critical component of the Center's next five years. The environmental management framework that the Center has espoused can easily be adapted to articulate a broader approach to violence prevention on campus. Second, the Center will greatly expand its focus on improving the state-of-the-art in program evaluation. The absence of good research continues to hamper our progress. Over the next five years, the Center will expand the number of evaluation tools available to the field, provide expert advice to individual campuses, and carry out our own research demonstration studies. Ultimately, campus-based prevention specialists have to show results, based on solid research, and the Center will lead the way in helping make this possible. Third, the Center will now devote greater attention to social marketing campaigns to change misperceptions of student drinking norms. Working from the ideas of Wesley Perkins, Ph.D., and Alan Berkowitz, Ph.D., several college prevention experts—first Michael Haines of Northern Illinois University and then Patricia Fabiano of Western Washington University, Koreen Johannessen of the University of Arizona, and Jeff Linkenbach, Ph.D., of Montana State University—have demonstrated the potential value of this approach in driving down the rate of students' high-risk drinking. Ideally, this approach should work in sync with policy-directed efforts, helping to create a climate where the wishes of the majority of students who want meaningful steps taken to reduce alcohol and other drug problems can be heard and acted on. Finally, I want to emphasize one aspect of the Center's work that will not change—namely, that the Center will continue to be a place of dialogue, not didacticism. We have seen the Center as a place where prevention experts can come together, share new ideas, explore new options, and develop new collaborations. We have never pretended to have all the answers. Indeed, the Center has made as much progress as it has because of what we have learned from other experts in the field. Truly, we are learning as we go. I hope we can continue to help you do the same. William DeJong, Ph.D., is the director of the Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Alcohol Use by College Women: Patterns, Reasons, Results, and Prevention by Cheryl Vince-Whitman and Maggie Cretella Women attending college in the United States today—who on many campuses make up more than half of the student body—have an unprecedented range of choices they can make about both career and family. They face another choice that also affects their future: whether to use alcohol, and, if so, where, when, and how much to drink. Although college women's alcohol consumption does not equal that of college men, drinking by women remains a cause for concern. The decision to drink has both short- and long-term consequences for women students' health and safety, their educational achievement, and their future career development. College women report many of the same adverse consequences related to drinking as do men, such as missed classes, hangovers, and social disruption. They also report incidents of sexual assault and rape, which are often associated with alcohol use by both partners, and are often a major reason why women drop out of college before graduation. The Higher Education Center has argued for a broader focus on environmental factors that affect alcohol use by college students. Within that framework, however, there is still a need for targeted educational and counseling approaches that meet the needs of different types of students. We need to be mindful that prevention programs that work for men may not work for women, and vice versa. Drinking Patterns Present societal norms seem to tolerate if not expect greater alcohol abuse by men. But lower consumption by women does not necessarily equate with less harm. Women's weight and physiology are different from men's, meaning that, on average, the same amount of alcohol has a greater impact on women. With that fact in mind, campus policymakers and prevention planners need to understand how the drinking behavior of college women is changing, what influences it, and what to do to reduce risks. Approximately 40 percent of women college students can be classified as what Henry Wechsler, Ph.D., and other researchers call "binge drinkers," meaning that they have had four or more drinks on a single occasion within the past two weeks (or five or more drinks, depending on the study). Sorority women are at special risk, with 57 percent of members and 80 percent of sorority residents classified as "binge drinkers." The number of frequent binge drinkers (i.e., those who binge drank three or more times within the past two weeks) is growing for both men and women. About 19 percent of women at four-year colleges are frequent binge drinkers, and about 48 percent say that getting drunk is an important reason for drinking. Why do college women drink? Of course, women drink for many of the same reasons as do men—to reduce stress, to relax, to fit in with the perceived norms on campus. Nancy Gleason of Wellesley College's Stone Center points to another reason: young women's desire for intimate relationships. Advertising capitalizes on this desire by juxtaposing alcohol with romance, intimacy, and sexual attractiveness. Ads directed to men exploit women as sexual objects, while ads directed to women use the allure and promise of romantic intimacy. The message to women is clear: to achieve happiness and success and to be attractive to men, use alcohol. Last year, Higher Education Center staff conducted focus groups with sorority women about alcohol. Reasons these women gave for drinking were consistent with these themes: "Drinking is cool and helps with stress." "The alcohol is available and easy to get. It dulls your inhibitions and gives you courage." Many of these sorority women raised the issue of wanting a "normal relationship" with one man as opposed to just hanging out with a lot of males on campus, which is the norm. One woman said, "We feel pressure to drink in order to hang out with the guys." "The men use alcohol to promote sex, and the women use it to approach men," added another. The first year of college seems to be a time of special risk for women students, due to many women's introduction to the drinking culture on campus and the risk of acquaintance rape. The problems don't end there. According to Wesley Perkins, Ph.D., women who begin to drink early in their college careers are more likely to drink excessively after college and with more frequent adverse consequences. Other college women who may be at higher risk for alcohol problems include lesbians, children of alcoholics, and women with eating disorders. Lesbian students may experience stress from declaring their sexual orientation and then dealing with possible disapproval from family and friends and feelings of isolation. Likewise, daughters of alcoholics often experience feelings of low self-worth, especially when their father is the alcoholic. Anxiety and depression also seem to play a role in eating disorders. Implications for Prevention Prevention specialists and higher education administrators need to ask themselves hard questions about campus policy and practice to ensure that steps are being taken to address the special needs of women students. In the assessment and planning phase, is adequate attention given to collecting data about what, where, when, and how women students drink? Do educational programs and social norms campaigns include messages that will appeal to women as well as to men? Do campus policies protect all students and faculty from sexual harassment and abuse? What are the disciplinary sanctions, and are they enforced? What support is provided to young women to encourage them to report incidents and receive appropriate services? Do curriculum infusion programs offer ways to analyze alcohol advertising and its portrayal of women? Is training available to improve communication between men and women students, including anger management and assertiveness training? Health and counseling services play an important role in campus life in identifying young women who may be at risk for drinking and drug problems due to abuse, growing up as a child of an alcoholic, or having an eating disorder. What types of early intervention, counseling, social and peer support groups might be created for these students to help them manage stress, heal from their past experiences, or recognize and bring about changes in other factors that may be driving them to engage in high-risk behaviors? So much is possible for women in the United States who have the opportunity to pursue higher education. Safeguarding and maximizing these opportunities, without limiting women's rights and freedom to participate in a broad range of activities, are key. Effective prevention on campuses requires a comprehensive approach that customizes strategies to meet the specific interests and needs of young women, with particular attention to identifying those places, times, life histories, and situations that place them at risk. Working with campuses across the nation to enhance their prevention efforts and ensure gender equity is the mission of the Higher Education Center. Cheryl Vince-Whitman, a senior advisor to the Higher Education Center, is the director of Health and Human Development Programs and senior vice president at Education Development Center, Inc. Maggie Cretella is the technical assistance manager for the Higher Education Center and works in partnership with the National Panhellenic Conference on developing leadership roles in prevention for sorority women. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Point-Counterpoint: Using Industry Funding: A Mixed Message for Campus Culture? The following viewpoints are from panelists at a town meeting on alcohol industry funding on college campuses convened at the U.S. Department of Education's 12th Annual National Meeting on Alcohol, Other Drug, and Violence Prevention in Higher Education in Washington, D.C., October 15-18, 1998. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Department or the Center. Debra F. Erenberg, J.D., Manager, College Initiatives, Center for Science in the Public Interest As alcohol-related problems plague campuses across the country, administrators struggle with entrenched student attitudes about drinking. Changing the heavy-drinking culture requires support from students themselves. Mixed messages about drinking undermine the potential to gain that support. Students are cynical. If administrators say drinking can be unhealthy, but accept money from an industry that tells them the opposite, they see hypocrisy. They believe officials promote pro-health messages only for the sake of appearances and to reduce the institution's legal liability for alcohol-related problems. They simply don't take them seriously. While brewers (and distillers) point to "alcohol awareness" campaigns, it's clearly not in their financial interests to persuade students to drink less. College students' purchases make up about 10 percent of total beer company sales. Young people develop brand loyalties—and sometimes addictions—that will stay with them for life. Alcoholic-beverage producers flood campuses, student publications, college stadiums, sports broadcasts, and Websites with ads that glamorize and normalize drinking. Those positive associations completely disregard the problems that accompany heavy drinking and provide students little reason to stop after 4 or 8 or even 12 beers. If alcoholic-beverage producers really cared about reducing student drinking, they would stop pushing their products to that largely underage group. Advertising already represents the primary source of "education" that students receive about alcohol. By allowing the industry to control so-called prevention messages as well, universities abdicate their own responsibility to promote sensible drinking practices and hand over students to the highest bidder. While the source of industry-sponsored messages creates an inherent conflict, the content of those messages is also problematic. Most often, the vague messages allow producers to gain positive public relations points without actually losing business. Slogans such as "Drink Responsibly," "Think When You Drink," and "Know When to Say When" assume that students will drink and provide no guidelines for determining how much they can safely consume. Most messages in educational materials produced by the alcoholic-beverage industry and industry-sponsored organizations place the blame squarely with the drinker. They focus on "personal responsibility" as if students make drinking decisions in a vacuum. While prevention experts advocate policy and program reforms, these materials don't mention the campus environment. Nor do they mention the role of alcoholic-beverage marketing in creating a climate that condones and encourages heavy drinking. Campuses may have to look harder for funding to replace readily available industry money, but that search brings the reward of demonstrating the administration's commitment to prevention and sending students a clear message about the role of alcohol in academic life. Cathy Neuman, Assistant Director, Department of Student Life, Judicial Affairs Office, Michigan State University In my six years as coordinator of the Alcohol and Other Drug Education Program at Michigan State University, I participated in numerous discussions about alcohol industry funding. Although my campus has not prohibited indirect alcohol industry dollars, it does have a long history of not permitting alcohol advertising and direct sponsorship of activities, and does not now accept industry funding nor allow alcohol advertising on campus. The original reasons for these decisions are unknown to me. But when considering indirect support, I ask myself how much are we, by inviting alcohol industry services, support, and programs to our campus, providing it with ammunition to counter societal programs or restrictions that are determined in the public interest? Several years ago, a statewide substance abuse coalition adopted a policy that encouraged all college campus members to decline direct alcohol funding. A short time later, at a campus meeting with staff from many departments to discuss that topic, a judicial affairs colleague shrugged and said: "The end justifies the means. I have great ideas for programs that would make a difference in prevention on our campus and no money. I don't see a problem in accepting it." A counseling center colleague responded by slamming his hand on the table and emphatically saying, "It's blood money and we have no business touching it. The products that these companies sell destroy people's lives!" Then a residence life staff member asked: "These companies are responsible for the problems their products create so why shouldn't they pay for the solutions?" Needless to say we did not reach consensus that day. When campuses accept money from the alcohol industry, they not only give it credibility when pointing to all that the industry does to respond to problems but we, as practitioners, are much less likely to support policy prevention initiatives. The Center for Science in the Public Interest report Paying the Piper: The Effect of Industry Funding on Alcohol Prevention Priorities (1996) describes a survey of citizens' groups and professional organizations from around the country. Some of the groups received alcohol industry funding and some received no industry funding. The study found that, in general, organizations that received alcohol industry funding were less likely to support alcohol policy initiatives, such as increases in alcohol excise taxes. Alcohol companies claim that they do not target college-age students, the majority of whom are underage, yet they pilot new products, such as the higher alcohol-content ice beer, in college communities like East Lansing, Michigan. They say they want to curb underage use of beer and then sponsor national college advertising contests with the ambiguous message "Know When to Say When," but no messages promoting nonuse. We shouldn't have believed the tobacco industry when its executives claimed they were not targeting children with Joe Camel and that tobacco was not an addictive substance. And we shouldn't believe the innocence proclaimed by the alcohol industry. Both industries earn money by selling their products and are profit motivated. So, when colleges consider accepting money from the alcohol industry, keep in mind its motives and ask the question: Will they come to the table if the message of your campus campaign supports nonuse? Edward H. Hammond, Ph.D., President, Fort Hays State University A major challenge facing American colleges and universities is the role of the alcohol beverage industry on our campuses. To deal with this challenge, we need to learn from history as well. Prohibition doesn't work. Reverend Edward A. Malloy, president of the University of Notre Dame, said in his article for the American Council on Education's magazine, The Presidency, that "at Notre Dame, and I expect elsewhere, there is not enough support from our constituencies to make a totally dry campus a feasible option. However, there is widespread support for strong action that encourages moderation." Most college and university presidents are in agreement with Father Malloy. So, then, what should be the role of the alcohol beverage industry as it relates to alcohol abuse on our campuses and in our environments? The answer again is best developed from a historical perspective. Every time a legal product is abused in our society, we demand the producers of that product take ownership and be a part of the solution. If the automobile industry produces cars that are being abused and driven too fast, those same companies are required to take necessary action to reduce risks and make them safer. If Du Pont or some other chemical company produces a product that is abused and inhaled, they are encouraged to alter their formulas or take steps to make such activity less desirable and in some cases downright sickening. It is for those reasons that I strongly believe that the alcohol beverage industry has to be part of the solution, that we should recognize their support of successful intervention programs and not ban them from participating in our prevention strategies. Henry Ford once said, "Coming together is a beginning; keeping together is progress; working together is success." Jeff Becker, Executive Director, Beer Institute America's brewers, with our nationwide network of independent wholesalers, dedicate hundreds of millions of dollars toward research, education, and prevention programs to finding and adopting creative and effective solutions to alcohol abuse. No reputable business benefits when its products are misused, and because the families affected by alcohol abuse are our friends, our neighbors, and our families, too. We are concerned about the communities we live in, and it's in our interest to combat alcohol abuse. The brewing industry is committed to helping combat underage drinking. We do not want people under 21 consuming our products. Our efforts to combat underage drinking fall into five categories: 1. Programs for the home and school to help build resiliency skills in young people and to encourage parent/teen discussion about making safe, legal, and responsible decisions about drinking 2. Programs for servers of alcohol beverages-techniques for serving alcohol responsibly by properly checking IDs, preventing drunk driving, and avoiding other alcohol abuse situations 3. Programs for the college campus that focus student attention on education and awareness and that emphasize the messages not to drink for those under 21 and to drink responsibly for those 21 and older 4. Programs that involve outside partners and community outreach 5. Broad-based brewing industry advertising campaigns, including "Let's Stop Underage Drinking Before It Starts" and "Twenty-One Means 21" I am happy to be able to say that it's working! Let me just quickly give you a [couple of] examples: * Binge drinking by high school seniors—3 percent lower in 1997 than in 1990, and down 23 percent since 1982 * College freshmen who say they drink beer frequently or occasionally—9 percent lower in 1997 than in 1990, and down 30 percent since 1982 On college and university campuses, brewers support such efforts as Boost Alcohol Consciousness Concerning the Health of University Students (BACCHUS). With nearly 700 chapters across the country, BACCHUS is a national peer network organization of students working with Greek houses, residence halls, education associations, and government officials to promote responsible attitudes toward alcohol beverages. The brewing industry also is a significant participant in National Collegiate Alcohol Awareness Week (NCAAW), a week-long focus held annually on more than 3,000 campuses nationwide to heighten alcohol education and awareness activities. In addition to funding local campus programs, the industry makes awards to colleges and universities with alcohol education programs. Another incentive-based program is accomplished by providing funding to the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) Foundation's Choices Grant Program. Grants are awarded to colleges and universities for student-initiated programs promoting alcohol education and awareness. As part of the Health Education Foundation's Training for Intervention Procedures by Servers of Alcohol (TIPS) server-training program series, TIPS for the University teaches students, dorm advisors, and servers on and off campus techniques for serving alcohol responsibly, intervening in a non-confrontational manner, and spotting false IDs. In campus marketing efforts, brewers support guidelines developed by the Inter-Association Task Force on Campus Alcohol Issues. The Guidelines for Alcohol Beverage Marketing on College and University Campuses help ensure that campus beer marketing activities are conducted responsibly, with the approval of appropriate campus officials. In conclusion, I would like to return to the first thing I said, which is that the brewing industry is most committed to reducing underage drinking. I cannot think of any industry that dedicates more effort to problems that can arise from the abuse of its products than this one. And we strongly believe that to understand what more can be done, there is much to be learned from our past successes on this issue. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Intercollegiate Athletics and Alcohol and Other Drug Problems College athletes are more prone to alcohol and other drug use and adverse consequences than are non-athletes on campus. And college athletics contribute to a range of alcohol and other drug problems for campuses and surrounding communities, according to participants at an invitational symposium convened in San Diego in March 1999 to explore ways to mitigate such problems. Describing findings on students involved in intercollegiate athletics from the Core Alcohol and Drug Survey based at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, researcher Philip Meilman, Ph.D., pointed out that weekly alcohol consumption goes up as a student progresses from noninvolvement in athletics, through being a team member, to being in a leadership position. The same progression is seen in rates of binge drinking, defined as five or more drinks on an occasion. "The disturbing part is that you would expect the leaders to be more responsible, if you will, than the non-leaders, and in fact that's not the case. They're drinking at about the same or higher levels than the team members. If you look at consequences—hangovers, missed classes, blackouts—it's exactly the same pattern," he said. It's not just a problem for those involved in intercollegiate athletics. According to Meilman, another study found a similar progression in alcohol use by students participating in recreational athletics. In addition to discussion of alcohol and other drug problems among athletes themselves, presentations stressed that the entire campus and surrounding community can also be influenced by pro-drinking advertising and sports sponsorships. Debra Erenberg, an attorney who directs the College Initiatives Project at the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington, D.C., looks at the environment in which students and athletes are drinking. She told participants that the challenge for prevention is to create "cultural change" on the campus. "One thing that's really important is getting students to buy in, having credibility with students, and getting them to see reasons to change a deeply embedded drinking culture," she said. "Students receive a mixed message when a university tells them not to drink or to drink less, and then takes money from brewers to put up advertising telling them to drink more. This is why Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala last year told the NCAA [National Collegiate Athletic Association] conference that the link between alcohol and college sports should be broken completely." Other problems are related to widespread alcohol consumption leading up to and during home game weekends, particularly at larger institutions with long-standing traditions such as pre-game parties, tailgating, heavy attendance by alumni fans, and post-game affairs. Nancy Matthews described her experience with the Campus-Community Coalition for Change at Louisiana State University at Baton Rouge. LSU draws more than 80,000 spectators to its football games. The stadium is legally dry, but fans show ingenuity in smuggling alcohol in. And the LSU chancellor announced in January 1999 that alcohol would be permitted in new luxury skyboxes when the stadium is expanded to hold 100,000 people, prompting complaints from students that there is a double standard in alcohol enforcement policies at the stadium. One possible effect is that students subject to disciplinary action for alcohol offenses may demand hearings challenging the process. Symposium participants agreed on the importance of reaffirming the educational mission as the top priority of colleges and universities. The school is, foremost, a place for students to learn and to develop ethical values, not an entertainment venue or business enterprise. Over the course of the two-day meeting participants developed a set of recommendations aimed at reducing alcohol and other drug problems associated with athletics (see the sidebar "What Colleges and Universities Can Do," above). The Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention convened this symposium with supplemental support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. To obtain a copy of the symposium proceedings report, call the Center at (800) 676-1730. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Network Committee Structure Up and Running The new committee structure of the Network continued to be productive at the Spring Regional Coordinators meeting in Newport, Rhode Island, April 26 and 27. The committees are member services, ways and means, public relations, and national meeting. The member services committee reported on the development of a new member orientation kit, which will be distributed at the fall meeting. This kit will give new members information they need in order to take full advantage of the services and opportunities offered by the Network, including contact information for other member institutions in the regions. Other items under development include a fact sheet for use in the recruitment of new institutions of higher education (IHEs) to the Network as part of a push to expand its reach. The committee has just started to work on developing a National Council of Advisors to advise the Network Executive Committee on future directions for the Network. The 18-member group of senior administrators and national organization leaders is intended to provide the same caliber of advice that the Network had received from the former Planning Committee, which was commissioned in the mid-1980s by the U.S. Department of Education. At the recommendation of Gina Poggione, University of Notre Dame, regional coordinators also voted to pursue "regular" Network membership in the Inter-Association Task Force. This organization is composed of major IHE-serving association representatives, such as the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the American College Health Association. The Network had been affiliated with the Inter-Association Task Force at one time. Robin Harris, of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, said that the committee recommended that the Network Standards (available on the Higher Education Center's Website) include greater recognition of services to students with alcohol and other drug problems. The idea is to recognize the kinds of student assistance provided on many campuses as a part of comprehensive prevention services. The regional coordinators agreed on a plan that would involve committee work between now and November, with recommendations coming to them at the fall meeting. Meanwhile, they agreed to reorganize the number of Network standard domains from four to five by adding "community and campus collaboration," a mainstay of current campus prevention. With this change the domains are policy, education, enforcement, assessment, and community collaboration. The public relations committee plans to take advantage of the National Meeting to introduce additional nonmember IHEs to the benefits of membership in the Network. Plans include an awards ceremony as well as a reception, similar to the well-attended reception held at the 1998 National Meeting in Washington, D.C. Other activities include the development of a public relations kit for regional coordinators to publicize the Network in their regions and recruit new Network members. It will include templates for recruiting and follow-up letters, regional newsletters, and a fact sheet highlighting member benefits. The contents of the kit will be posted on the Network Intranet (see below) in downloadable format so that Network members can readily assist with public relations and member recruitment. The materials will be available by the National Meeting. The Network chronology project is moving forward, with photographs and other memorabilia being collected by Connie Boehm, The Ohio State University, and then conveyed to Rob Hylton at the University of California, San Diego, for scanning and posting on the Network Intranet. The National Meeting committee reported that plans are well under way for this 1999 National Meeting and Senior Administrators Forum. Annann Hong, Northwestern University, chair of the Program Committee for the National Meeting, confirmed some plenary sessions, including a panel on the Higher Education Act amendments and a panel of IHE presidents. Regional coordinators will help to facilitate town meetings. Joe Marron, United States International University, reported that plans for the National Forum for senior administrators would follow the 1998 format. The agenda for the Regional meetings, which will be held on Sunday, November 7, from 4 to 5 P.M., includes the Network Website, Standards, regional events, IATF, biennial reports feedback, Higher Education Act amendments, legislation, and regional recruitment. Network Online While the Network has had a presence online since the inception of the Higher Education Center's Website, new pages will be added to make communication within the Network even easier. Center staff member Rob Hylton reported at the Spring Regional Coordinators meeting that the Network site, with its Intranet, will include a section for archives and coordinator-only references, such as the Network chronology. The site also supports regions in setting up their own region-specific sites. Gene Hakanson, Portland State University, worked with the Center to develop a common template that is available to each region. He encouraged coordinators to have their institutions host their own regional sites so that each Network region can provide up-to-date information on training events, new members, and other items of interest to that region. These regional pages can also support region-specific listservs to facilitate discussion and communication among Network members in each region. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tribute to Outgoing Chair At the spring meeting regional coordinators bid a fond farewell to Chuck Cychosz, who has chaired the Executive Committee for the last two years and served both as a member of the Executive Committee and co-regional coordinator for the Iowa-Minnesota-Wisconsin region for a number of years. In addition to his Network responsibilities, Cychosz is the manager of Crime Prevention, Research, and Training at Iowa State University in Ames. Members added their remarks in salute of his help in moving the Network forward and presented him with a clock with the logo "time to fish." Cychosz thanked the coordinators for their support and active participation in recent Network governance transitions, such as the move to the new committee structure. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Welcome New Network Members * The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC * Florence-Darlington Technical College, Florence, SC * Francis Marion University, Florence, SC * Georgia College & State University, Milledgeville, GA * McKendree College, Lebanon, IL * McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont. * Piedmont College, Demorest, GA * Shorter College, Rome, GA * Slippery Rock University, Slippery Rock, PA * State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY * Stony Brook State University of New York, Stony Brook, NY * Tallahassee Community College, Tallahassee, FL * University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Three Good Reasons to Join the NETWORK 1. Opportunities to Network Nearly 1,400 colleges and universities belong to the Network of Colleges and Universities Committed to the Elimination of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. In addition to the National Meeting, members have the opportunity to be informed in a timely manner of events, at both regional and national levels, relevant to alcohol and other drug problem prevention. The Higher Education Center maintains a Website (www.edc.org/hec/) for information, and members of the Network also contact one another for ideas, suggestions, and information relevant to prevention issues. 2. Regional Activities Perhaps most important is the division of the nation into regions, each with one or more regional coordinators. Regional coordinators are responsible for developing a cohesive network for information exchange, including regional conferences, regional newsletters and listservs, and regional membership lists. The U.S. Department of Education awards mini-grants to regions to facilitate the promotion of programs designed to advance the goals of the Network. 3. It's Free! An outstanding feature of the Network is that it is FREE! The Network is a voluntary organization that offers a chance for campus personnel to become involved at both the regional and national levels. How to Join the Network To join the Network, the president of your college or university must submit a letter indicating the institution's commitment to implement the Network's Standards on your campus. Please include the name, address, and phone number of the contact person for the institution. Mail or fax to: The Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention Education Development Center, Inc. 55 Chapel Street Newton, MA 02458-1060 Fax: (617) 928-1537 The Network is committed to helping member institutions promote a healthy campus environment by decreasing alcohol and other drug abuse. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Rights and Responsibilities of the Modern University: Who Assumes the Risks of College Life? [cat13-bkreview.jpg (11155 bytes)] By Joel Epstein The Rights and Responsibilities of the Modern University: Who Assumes the Risks of College Life?, an important new book by Stetson University College of Law professors Robert Bickel and Peter Lake, considers the evolving legal nature of the U.S. university in the final decade of the 20th century. Based on a detailed analysis of legal decisions from dozens of tort cases involving colleges and universities, Bickel and Lake describe the emerging judicial view of "the university as facilitator," where higher education officials help students navigate their way toward full independence and individual responsibility. While the doctrine of in loco parentis is dead, the alternative of the university as a passive bystander while students die or do themselves and others serious harm through unchecked (and often illegal) behavior is equally untenable. Bickel and Lake's work describes the evolution of the university/student relationship in a style that is scholarly yet easily understood by lay readers. In particular, Bickel and Lake are to be credited for taking on the all-too-common misperception that college student drinking is uncontrollable. Their strategy is to address the problems of alcohol danger and disorder directly, anticipate their displacement to the surrounding community following a campus clamp-down on underage and problem drinking, and work with the community to minimize the effects. "Strict community enforcement of underage drinking standards, with college involvement, can facilitate reducing the problem. And, the college is in the position to assess and discipline its problem drinkers, even those who drink off campus," they say. At the same time, however, the university should avoid dictating policy or restrictions to students. "Students," explain the authors, "will need to be involved in solutions to alcohol risks and in discussions and policymaking with regard to the problems." Bickel and Lake's fresh discussion of the challenge of balancing rights and responsibilities on campus is a welcome departure from the writing of many legal scholars, who confound lay readers with the use of inadequately explained legal jargon and concepts. Given the many ways in which the legal environment impacts the relationship between students and schools and town and gown, the reader comes away better informed and ready to more fully participate in discussion about what a school's drug and alcohol policy should look like and how schools should respond to underage drinking. The authors present a model closely aligned with the U.S. Department of Education's Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention's environmental management approach. As such, the book is a must read for every college and university administrator struggling with how to tackle the problems of high-risk student drinking and the disorder it creates. University legal counsel, deans of students, campus police, residence hall advisors, policy scholars, parents, and law students as well will find the book a refreshing, informative, and provocative view of the university/student relationship. With the high-profile deaths of students at Louisiana State University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and many other schools, higher education is mobilized as never before to address the problem of student drinking and other drug use. This book offers a timely and viable guide for positive action that can change the environment in which students make decisions about their alcohol and other drug use. Bickel and Lake's facilitator model is both an adaptable social vision for modern universities and a legal model for the courts and college administrators to follow. For the non-attorney or campus administrator, the book offers something just as valuable—a clear lens through which to view the sometimes murky issue of university/student relations. Joel C. Epstein, J.D., is an associate director of the Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention. To order a copy of the The Rights and Responsibilities of the Modern University: Who Assumes the Risks of College Life? by Robert D. Bickel and Peter F. Lake, write to Carolina Academic Press, 700 Kent Street, Durham, NC 27701. Phone: (919) 489-7486; Fax: (919) 493-5668; Website: www.cappress.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In Memoriam: Robert Dubick Center Associate Robert Dubick, Ph.D., died unexpectedly in May 1999. Family and friends, students, and colleagues, to whom he left a legacy of compassion and friendship, will miss him. Dr. Dubick was an associate professor in the College of Education at the University of Akron. Prior to joining the faculty in the College of Education, he served as associate provost and dean of student services at the university. He made many contributions to the field of higher education administration and alcohol and other drug prevention. He was the project director for the University of Akron's participation in Ohio's statewide initiative on college binge drinking. In 1991 he founded the Chemical Abuse Resource Education Center. He published many articles on topics related to prevention and higher education administration. Dr. Dubick consulted with the U.S. Department of Education for many years. He was the recipient of several grants to conduct research, served as chair of the Department's 1994 National Meeting for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention, and served as a Center Associate for the Higher Education Center for two years. Bob was highly regarded among his colleagues for his professionalism, collegiality, kindness, strong wit, and sense of humor. His genuine nature and warm personality made him a true mentor and friend to those who had the privilege of knowing him. He was proud of his alumnus status with the University of Notre Dame and found great pleasure in his passion for golf. Donations may be sent to the King Kennedy Community Center, P.O. Box 1006, Ravenna, OH 44266. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Our Mission The mission of the Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention is to assist institutions of higher education in developing alcohol and other drug (AOD) prevention policies and programs that will foster students’ academic and social development and promote campus and community safety. Get in Touch Additional information can be obtained by contacting: The Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention Education Development Center, Inc. 55 Chapel Street Newton, MA 02458-1060 Website: www.edc.org/hec/ Phone: 800-676-1730 Fax: 617-928-1537 E-mail: HigherEdCtr@edc.org How We Can Help The Center offers an integrated array of services to help people at colleges and universities adopt effective AOD prevention strategies: * Training and professional development activities * Resources, referrals, and consultations * Publication and dissemination of prevention materials * Support for the Network of Colleges and Universities Committed to the Elimination of Drug and Alcohol Abuse * Assessment, evaluation, and analysis activities Higher Education Center Training Opportunities The Center's two-day Team Training event brings together teams from IHEs and their local communities to address alcohol and other drug issues on their campus. Team members represent key campus and community systems such as AOD coordinators, senior administrators, faculty, other student service personnel, athletes, public safety/security, student leaders, community representatives, and others. The training provides an opportunity for teams to develop coalition-based action plans. Call the Center to participate in one of the following events. Dates and locations are subject to change, so please check our Website for up-to-date information. Upcoming Team Trainings * October 6-7, 1999, Augsberg, Minnesota * (Date TBA), Massachusetts * (Date TBA), Northern California ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Catalyst is a publication of the Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention funded by the U.S. Department of Education under contract number SS95013001. Views expressed are those of the contractor. No official support or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education is intended or should be inferred. Director of Publications: Karen Zweig Editor: Barbara E. Ryan Production Manager: Anne McAuliffe Graphic Designer: Kay Baker Illustrator: Jeanine Merrigan Center Director: William DeJong Other Staff: Elizabeth Collins, Tom Colthurst, Michelle Cook, Maggie Cretella, Laurie Davidson, Joel Epstein, Michael Gilbreath, Laura Gomberg, Theresa Hassen, Andrew Hill, Rob Hylton, Irma Iturralde, Linda Langford, Peter Leis, Michelle Maillet, Catherine Potts, Judith Robinson, Michael Rosati Funded by the U.S. Department of Education