[amartinsu13]

I thought the Daily had a good article on the new policy, and the comments are illuminating for how people are feeling on campus: http://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/08/22/...d-alcohol/

The policy change follows rumors of a ban spurred by a University meeting with resident fellows (RFs) last March, which was met by campus wide opposition. In a campus-wide referendum in April, 91.46 percent of voters opted against a hard alcohol ban, and approximately 1,720 people signed a petition against the proposal.

“We’re not necessarily looking at popularity, but rather functionality,” said Ralph Castro, director of the Office of Alcohol Policy and Education (OAPE), in an interview with The Daily.

According to Boardman, the new policy is the brainchild of a working group composed of administrators from the OAPE, Vaden Health Center and Residential Education (ResEd). The group convened early last school year to find potential solutions for binge drinking and what it identified as a social culture centered on alcohol consumption. Boardman said the group consulted with multiple voices, including undergraduates, RFs and resident assistants (RAs), while crafting the policy. Not all of them agreed with it — some RFs did not support a ban of any sort — but the administration decided to move forward.

I completely agree with poster who said that the administrators should tap into the excellent talent on campus in the psych/sociology departments to design a solution around changing the social norms around drinking.  I come from that type of background, so that's why my proposed solutions sounded like that.  I can think of a professor or two that I want to talk to right now about what they would do.

It sounds like a bunch of administrators, who don't know anything about behavior or attitude change, got together, "consulted" with the RAs/undergrads, and then completely disregarded what the RAs/undergrads wanted, and instituted their own idea of what would work. 

This is just another "cover our ass" policy in line with a lot of other recent policy decisions made by bureaucrats on campus in recent years.  I'm still clued in to undergrad via Facebook, and many students have been complaining about the administrators caring more about being sued than caring for students in recent years. 

[amartinsu13]

I thought the Daily had a good article on the new policy, and the comments are illuminating for how people are feeling on campus: http://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/08/22/...d-alcohol/

The policy change follows rumors of a ban spurred by a University meeting with resident fellows (RFs) last March, which was met by campus wide opposition. In a campus-wide referendum in April, 91.46 percent of voters opted against a hard alcohol ban, and approximately 1,720 people signed a petition against the proposal.

“We’re not necessarily looking at popularity, but rather functionality,” said Ralph Castro, director of the Office of Alcohol Policy and Education (OAPE), in an interview with The Daily.

According to Boardman, the new policy is the brainchild of a working group composed of administrators from the OAPE, Vaden Health Center and Residential Education (ResEd). The group convened early last school year to find potential solutions for binge drinking and what it identified as a social culture centered on alcohol consumption. Boardman said the group consulted with multiple voices, including undergraduates, RFs and resident assistants (RAs), while crafting the policy. Not all of them agreed with it — some RFs did not support a ban of any sort — but the administration decided to move forward.

I completely agree with poster who said that the administrators should tap into the excellent talent on campus in the psych/sociology departments to design a solution around changing the social norms around drinking.  I come from that type of background, so that's why my proposed solutions sounded like that.  I can think of a professor or two that I want to talk to right now about what they would do.

It sounds like a bunch of administrators, who don't know anything about behavior or attitude change, got together, "consulted" with the RAs/undergrads, and then completely disregarded what the RAs/undergrads wanted, and instituted their own idea of what would work. 

This is just another "cover our ass" policy in line with a lot of other recent policy decisions made by bureaucrats on campus in recent years.  I'm still clued in to undergrad via Facebook, and many students have been complaining about the administrators caring more about being sued than caring for students in recent years.