In the early nineties, the University of Rhode Island (URI) had one of the highest rates of binge drinking in the United States, and the school was experiencing the negative consequences of this type of behavior. It was plagued with drunk driving injuries and deaths, sexual assaults, injuries related to alcohol and drug use, vandalism, hazing, suicides and a high dropout rate. In 1993 and 1994, URI was named the No. 1 party school in the nation. The problem was so bad, in fact, that the institution had the unflattering nickname “U R High.”
Things had to change, and URI President Emeritus Dr. Robert Carothers spearheaded efforts to reform the culture of his institution. He outlined URI’s successful strategy at Security On Campus’ Proceeding in Partnership: The Future of Campus Safety, which took place Sept. 29 at Lehigh University.
“What I discovered was that our [academic] work was being undermined by both the reality of the alcohol abuse around campus and the external perception of ‘U R High,’” he told attendees. “We found that there were deep and broad roots of alcohol [abuse] throughout the campus community.”
Policies Support School’s Mission and Vision
Carothers decided to approach the problem as an academic issue so that faculty could understand how their work was being negatively affected. He and other officials developed new policies that were tied to URI’s mission and vision. Staff and students were trained so they would buy into the changes.
One of the first, and most challenging, steps was keeping alcohol from being served at any event on campus.
“One of the toughest things we did was ban alcohol from homecoming,” says Carothers. “That resulted in a much smaller event. [Prior to the ban] every year we were sending 50-60 kids to the emergency room due to alcohol poisoning. Now homecoming has come back, but it is more of a family event.”
Fraternities, athletes and summer home residents living off campus were targeted, and freshmen received education on drug abuse, high-risk drinking and sexual assault.
“If you are coming here to have a good time and abuse drugs and alcohol, please do us all a favor: go somewhere else,” Carothers and other URI officials told freshmen during their orientations. “We don’t want you here. You won’t be happy.”
For those with drug and alcohol problems, support mechanisms were developed, including screening, interventions, support groups and referrals to off-campus professionals. A three-strikes enforcement policy was also created. The consequences of a first violation were a fine and alcohol education. For the second violation, a larger fine and probation. For the third, suspension.
With the implementation of these steps, the culture slowly began to change at URI, but not quickly enough in the fraternities and sororities. Young fraternity alumni were particularly opposed to the changes. To address this challenge, eight of the fraternities had to be shut down, and four of those eight were bulldozed.
In 1999, URI also began parental notification, despite concerns that there could be privacy violations.
Policy Changes Resisted at First
Initially these changes were not supported by everyone on campus. Even the police department resisted.
“We discovered that they were all making a lot of money in overtime in guarding these parties at fraternities and elsewhere,” he says. “They didn’t want to give up that money.”
The admissions department, which marketed URI as a fun place to attend, believed the change in policy would discourage people from coming to the school. The development department resisted the change too, believing alcohol had to be served at alumni events in order for attendees to have a good time and make donations to the institution.
Even some of URI’s neighbors were opposed to the changes, arguing that the new policies would just push the problem into the neighborhoods. According to Carothers, however, the rate of alcohol and drug abuse did not go up or down off campus after the new policies were implemented.
Carothers, as well as other speakers at the Security On Campus conference, discussed additional ways that colleges and universities can address high-risk drinking and alcohol abuse, such as population-level interventions and social norming. Working with the surrounding community to limit the number of events that drive down the price of alcohol (like happy hour and ladies night) is also an effective strategy. Most of the presenters at the event agreed, however, that scare tactics are not effective ways of managing alcohol and substance use in the campus community.
Education Efforts Must be Ongoing
Although the situation at URI has greatly improved since the early nineties, Carothers warns that alcohol and drug abuse education, prevention, intervention and enforcement efforts must be done every year. “If you think you have it solved, you have a problem.”
