Meetings set college alcohol policies

By Ruby Gee     3/10/11 6:00pm

All residential colleges held mandatory meetings on Monday night to discuss each college's response to the recent campus-wide moratorium on hard alcohol and to inform students about the circumstances that led up to the administrative action.Each college was given the freedom to specify its own enforcement policies, definition of a private party and other aspects of moratorium that were mentioned in the letter from Dean of Undergraduates John Hutchinson on Feb. 24.

"I actually thought the e-mail was rather straightforward and direct," Martel College freshman Jon Hua said. "Dean Hutchinson made it clear that alcohol has been a recur- ring problem this year, and this fact was only proven further during the alcohol meeting, though I did think the alcohol meeting stated redundant points already mentioned before."

Although the length of the meetings varied, the format for the "alcohol talks" generally included a presentation of recent EMS statistics and the dangers of drinking. Lead by college cabinet members, the meetings also included a clarification of specific terms of the probation and a Q&A session.

---

---

"I didn't know [the meeting] was supposed to be a discussion ... it was definitely just a powerpoint and Q&A," McMurtry College junior Krishna Sajja said. "Students didn't have much if any input into the policy changes and, more importantly, didn't even know about the changes until seeing the e-mail before spring break."

All colleges emphasized the prohibition of serving hard liquor for minors and the importance of continuing to call EMS in the case of an alcohol-related emergency. At most meetings, student leaders also reiterated that under Texas state law, it is illegal for students under the age of 21 to consume alcohol in the first place.

At almost all of the meetings, the colleges' respective Residential Health Advisors informed students about blood alcohol content and drink serving sizes, passing out informative cards in the process. Some colleges, such as Lovett College, also had EMS members present for the alcoholic talks. In general, the colleges stated at their meetings that they would rely more on student cooperation and a "culture of care" rather than aggressive policing techniques to enforce the terms of the probation.

A common question that arose during the Q&A portion of the alcohol talks was in regards to how long the probationary period will last. While the administration has confirmed that the probation is only a temporary measure, there is no set end date for the period.

Jones College junior Lilla Pivnick said that although she thinks the probation is necessary due to the alarming number of alcohol related emergencies on campus, she thinks that the probationary period could cause a lot of problems since people may not necessarily know what rules they must follow.

"The idea is the same at each college: to end alcohol abuse at Rice University, especially amongst minors . the problem is that . each college has their own rules on how they are going to approach the probation," Pivnick said. "It is going to be very difficult to abide by all these new rules, especially since they are somewhat different at each college."

While all meetings technically mandated student attendance regardless of alcoholic consumption habits, enforcement of attendance varied from college to college. Students at Sid Richardson College who skipped the meeting received academic holds on their Esther accounts, while a fire alarm was pulled at the beginning of the McMurtry College meeting to ensure student attendance.

"I didn't know the severity of the problem until I got an e-mail about the mandatory meeting," McMurtry senior Victoria Doan said. "Maybe there's not enough upperclassmen to show [underclassmen] the ropes. A lot of upperclassmen who transferred live off campus, like myself."

---