Marcusdsavage.weebly.com



Mammoth State University Case Study6 December 2016Brian Deal, Corinne O’Connor, Marcus Savage, & Amy SeagrenTable of ContentsAbstract…………………………………………………………………………………………....3Developmental Considerations……………………………………………………………………4Disciplinary Considerations……………………………………………………………………….6Policy Considerations……………………………………………………………………………10Environmental Considerations…………………………………………………………………...16References………………………………………………………………………………………..22AbstractThe Mammoth State University case study consists of several developmental, disciplinary, and policy issues in relation to students and the campus environment. In order to address each issue, this Task Force has been charged to research and create methods for resolving all of the mentioned issues by utilizing theories, understanding previous studies, and creating a plan for changing the culture of celebration. Mammoth State University understands the importance of our basketball team (and other athletic programs) to our students, faculty, and staff. However, the college also knows that in order to prevent these problems from happening again, all parties involved must come together to create short-term and long-term solutions.Developmental ConsiderationsMammoth State University has a proud athletic basketball tradition that has been the heart of recruiting and campus life for the institution. Winning the national basketball championship is cause for celebration until alcohol turns celebrating into unsafe conditions for students and community members. Recent events on Mammoth State’s campus have called into question the policies and procedures for celebrating our athletic achievements in a healthy way for all students. When considering the property damage, violence, and sexual assaults committed after heavy drinking in response to the basketball win, the first place to seek understanding is in the developmental issues for students as well as current resources available, and future resources needed.Undergraduate students find themselves in the transition from childhood to adulthood in the course of their development. Most students find themselves in Erickson’s fifth stage of development of Identity vs. Identity Diffusion in determining what their autonomous identity may be without the direction of any authority figures telling them what to do (Patton, Renn, Guido, & Quaye, 2016). Students have the difficult process of determining exactly who they are and want to be during their undergraduate experience. As Chickering and Reisser’s vectors of development explain, students are working on developing their competencies, managing emotions, establishing identity, and developing purpose and integrity during their learning on campus (Evans, 2011). The college experience is riddled with confusion and new learning opportunities to understand what a student believes to be the answer to the psychosocial question, “who am I?” There are also moral development questions that Kohlberg describes as individuals move from recognizing that their actions cannot be self-focused but need to move toward following the rules outlined in society before ultimately understanding an individual’s own determined principles and values to make decisions by (Evans, 2011). As students are in the midst of this transition to mature adulthood, their decisions can be caught in the ravine of confusion with what is in line with who they are/want to be and what is morally acceptable. Hence, alcohol abuse is such a problem on college campuses. As Crawford and Novak (2010) describe in their article, Beliefs about Alcohol and the College Experience as Moderators of the Effects of Perceived Drinking Norms on ' Student Alcohol Use, “Given their interstructural position, they are viewed as temporarily exempt from the standards of conduct that govern behavior among more mature adults. Thus, they feel free to abuse alcohol and behave in ways while intoxicated that would be considered highly inappropriate for members of other social groups” (p. 71). With these developmental issues in mind, counseling services and community service activities are two ways to help address student’s development. Ensuring that students have access to counseling services for all problems as well as alcohol abuse will aid their self-reflection journey and help them progress to identity development. Community Service initiatives will also serve as a catalyst to moral development in helping students see the interconnectedness of all people and the community in which they are living.The current resources that Mammoth State University has in place to address the developmental issues of alcohol abuse include many offices on campus. The university has a Counseling Center, Women’s Center, and Campus Housing offices that are able to work individually with students to help them understand what may be an issue and give suggestions on how to solve problems. There are also Greek Life specific resources to be able to reach that specific population of student. There is also the assumption that the institute has a Campus Health facility in order to provide medical attention for alcohol abuse and provide education materials on the effects alcohol has on the body.In order to fully combat the alcohol abuse from a developmental perspective on Mammoth State’s campus, an additional resource is necessary. The university needs to institute or ensure that the Counseling Center and Health Centers are trained in Brief Motivational Interviewing (BMI). The definition of motivational interviewing is “directive, client-centered counselling style for eliciting behavior change by helping clients to explore and resolve ambivalence” (Rollnick & Miller, 1995, p. 325). This type of intervention for alcohol abuse on college campuses has been proven to help reduce binge drinking. In A Systematic Review of Interventions Aimed at Reducing Binge Drinking among College Students, the authors conducted a literature review of articles in English, research studies aimed at prevention intervention of binge drinking, published between 2010 and 2015, with a sample size greater than 100. The resulting 18 articles from PsycInfo, PsyArticles, PubMed, and ERIC had 14 utilizing BMI techniques. The authors concluded, “The body of research on BMI provides substantial evidence of the implementation and effectiveness of BMI as an intervention in reducing and eliminating binge drinking/heavy drinking among college students” (Bridges & Sharma, 2015, p. 31-32). With the extent of current research showing BMI is an effective tool at curbing heavy drinking, Mammoth State University needs to ensure that the technique is being utilized in the Counseling and Health Centers.Disciplinary ConsiderationsLooking forward, the actions that took place after the game cannot go unnoticed and appropriate discipline will ensue. For all the students that were under age drinking or publicly intoxicated, due to the large scope of this event, it will be impossible to bring them all in for discipline. It will be now our job heading forward to make sure that it does not happen again and that it will be addressed in our policies. However, for the students who committed crimes (destruction of public property, theft, violent behaviors, and sexual assault), they will be brought in immediately to meet with the Director of Student Conduct to discuss the events that occurred and what the consequences will be for each of them. For the students who destroyed public property, theft, and conducted violent behaviors, they will be assessed by the Director and assigned to the Restorative Justice Program. It is important that the students receive the punishment that they deserve, yet at the same time continue their development as college students (Lipka, 2009). They will all meet with the police officers involved with the incident, the owners of the cars that were ruined, and the stores that were broken into and stolen from. Each student will recount the events that happened that evening as well as listen to the other stakeholder’s point of view to empathize what they experienced that evening. Then each student will come up with an agreement with the person(s) they harmed in how to properly move forward with this event (Lipka, 2009). This could be additional community service, volunteering at the store, being a part of a community outreach program where the student(s) go out into the community and discuss the consequences of alcohol abuse and educating people to drink responsibly.Restorative justice is an up and coming trend in higher education and is in line with administrators who genuinely believe in college student development (Lipka, 2009). It seeks to resolve a conflict by identifying the harms caused and devising, with suggestions from both victims and offenders, an agreement to repair them” (Lipka, 2009). This allows there to also be consequences, but also coincide with MSU’s mission statement of developing students. Students who abide by this program, actually end up with a longer list of consequences, but as a result are less likely to offend (Lipka, 2009). It is a challenging, yet supportive measure to ensure that these students learned their lesson and never do it again. This disciplinary action will be in conjunction with any consequences handed down by the court for their crimes. With that being said, the students involved in sexual assault will be held to a different standard because that is in direct violation of our Code of Student Conduct and it is violent behavior towards another student. The University of Michigan’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Awareness Center recommend sanctions against sexual assault perpetrators. When making a decision, it is important to keep in mind a) the healing of the victims and securing their safety on campus; b) protecting the campus community; c) and holding the perpetrators accountable for their actions (Recommended Sanctions). Any combination of the following should be in consideration when deciding which combination of sanctions should be in place: The Violence Risk Appraisal Guide and the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal guide will be assessed in order to understand the likelihood of the student becoming a repeat offender. Students will then go through an intensive treatment process where studies suggest that completion of the intervention is necessary in order for it to be effective. The assessment and the treatment should be conducted by the school therapist.Long term intervention should be in place to ensure that repeat offenses do not happen. Programs such as the one provided by Alternative to Domestic Abuse are recommended. The program is 52 sessions and those who complete all the sessions are less likely to repeat. A temporary suspension or warning of suspension upon completion of the treatment by the therapist or the intervention. This is also contingent upon whether or not the student is declared safe by the therapist. If the student is not safe to have on campus and/or does not complete the treatment or intervention then that student will absolutely be suspended; even if the student does complete the intervention or treatment that does not mean that student is exempt from suspension. If the student has any scholarships, then it is the university’s right to relinquish that student of his or her scholarship either immediately or starting the following semester. The sexual assault can be placed on the students’ transcript which would inform anyone who sees that individual’s transcript that he or she is a risk to the greater community. Lastly, that student can be held accountable for any and all costs that the victim had to pay during his or her treatment. Further options for sanctions include removal from university housing, restriction of university employment, a no contact order, removal of courses, and expulsion. Any mix of these sanctions can take place upon the decision of the conduct board (Recommended Sanctions). In order to make these disciplinary procedures happen, MSU will need full compliance with everyone that was involved: the police, local businesses, perpetrators, and the victims. We will need an active and committed conduct board who will be dedicated to work on these cases diligently. This is not a matter that this institution wants to take a long time addressing and MSU understands that the community will want to hear about these disciplines as soon as possible. Presented are options as sanctions for the offenses that occurred. The final decision will not be decided by the conduct board in partnership with the VPSA. Policy ConsiderationsSexual Assault Policy IssuesBackground on IncidentTwo sexual assaults were reported to the police the day after the basketball team won the national championship. ?This brings the total to 12 reported sexual assaults this academic year.History of Federal Policy Changeo ??In 1972 Title IX was added to the Higher Education Act of 1965 – “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefit of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance”o ??1992 Supreme Court Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public School recognized sexual harassment could fall under Title IXo ??1992 the Clery Act required colleges to disclose information about crime on or around campus. ?Each school must keep a public crime log, with each crime added within 2 days of incident. ?Unfortunately this does not require reporting of off campus sexual offenses, so the number of incidents is potentially higher than what is listed.o ??2001 Office of Civil Rights (OCR) announced that to comply with Title IX, schools must adopt a sexual harassment policy, have a Title IX Coordinator, and provide grievance procedures for sexual harassment victims.o ??2011 OCR sent the “Dear Colleague Letter” which asked schools to take proactive steps to end sexual violence on campus. ?Each campus should have a designated employee to coordinate Title IX compliance and publish a list of grievance procedures for students. ?Schools should use a preponderance of evidence standard in disciplinary proceedings, and provide sexual assault orientation programs to staff and students.o ??2013 the Campus Sexual Violation Elimination Act (Campus SaVE Act) stated schools must include domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking in annual crime statistics reports, as well as develop plans to prevent sexual assault violence (Humphrey, 2016).Available ResourcesThe Title IX Coordinator is the top resource to have to review policy regarding sexual assault. ?As dictated in federal policy, the Title IX Coordinator, or their assistant, is responsible in making sure school policy is in compliance. ?Other stakeholders in the policy creation and review would be the Vice President of Student Affairs or designee, as well as the Dean of Students. ?The Director of the Women’s Center would also have valuable feedback on the policies and procedures dealing with sexual assault. ?Finally, the legal team would also be required to review any changes made, to ensure the transparency and compliance. ?Finally, the 2014 Not Alone Report, which stresses the idea of consent, has a checklist for sexual misconduct policies that should be consulted and used as a resource: ResourcesA campus wide initiative is needed to promote sexual assault prevention policies. ?Below are some valuable options, based on scholarly literature. ?Each would require a cross departmental committee, funding, blessing of the legal department, and administration approval. ????It’s On UsIn 2014 the Federal Government put together videos, available here , to stress that it’s on everyone to prevent sexual assault. ?They have also included a toolkit to help each campus organize their own campaign. ?This includes sample Tweets, downloadable videos, directions on how to make personal videos, and dialogue ideas. ?The campaign also suggests holding at least one event, with given ideas, as well as participating in the National Week of Action (It’s On Us, 2016).Five Level Social-Ecological FrameworkA plan of action that aims at all five levels of the social-ecological model should be implemented (Potter, 2016). ?On the individual level, there needs to be an increased awareness of sexual assault and situations in which it may happen, such as when alcohol is involved. ?On the relationship level, the topic should be addressed by involving bystanders to stop attacks, and training friends and loved ones on how to respond if someone discloses an assault. ?At the community level, partnerships should be created across campus and the outside community, to help prevent sexual assault, as well as support victims. ?At the institutional level, the school needs to continue to enforce federal policy. ?Finally, at the societal level, we all need to challenge rape myths and culture (Potter, 2016).Engaging College MenStatistics show that 99% of campus sexual assault is committed by men (Barone, Wolgemuth, & Liner, 2007). ?Due to this high number, many colleges are focusing their efforts on engaging men in the topic of sexual assault prevention. ?It has been found that a one-time approach is not as effective as a multi-pronged approach. ?The Men’s Project, a ten week training program, had men meet two hours each week to engage in discussion on gender socialization, privilege, sexual assault prevention and bystander intervention strategies. ?Participants reported they learned a new way of looking at the world, especially how women may feel in certain situations. ?They were better able to identify the use of sexist language, as well as signifiers of sexism, and make efforts to change their own behaviors. ?Many reported instances of challenging friends and even strangers on their sexist language and behaviors. ?Participants were able to work through the ideas of masculinity, and pressure for men to dominate relationships. ?Finally, the Men’s Project empowered participants to use bystander intervention strategies (Barone, Wolgemuth, & Liner, 2007).Rape Prevention ProgramThe Men’s Program is an all-male sexual assault peer education program. ?They conduct one hour presentations on sexual assault, including describing a male-on-male rape experience. ?This particular example has been shown to be effective as it is designed to teach men what the experience may feel like. ?The programs are presented to all male audiences, as research has indicated this setting is more likely to change behavior than that of a coed audience (Foubert, Tatum, & Godin, 2010, p. 708). ?After seven months of completing the program, two thirds of participants reported attitude or behavior change towards sexual assault, the willingness to intervene, or stopping themselves from engaging in risky behavior (Foubert, Tatum, & Godin, 2010, p. 710).Bystander Intervention Workshops“Bystander-type programming is one of the most promising forms of sexual violence prevention education” (Senn & Forrest, 2015, p. 607). ?A top product for workshops is Bringing in the Bystander – BITB. ?One option for the workshop is a three hour workshop, led by undergraduate peer educators. ?Workshops are offered to small groups of under twenty-five students, same sex, co-facilitated by male-female pairs. ?Student participants from this study reported a shift in readiness, which is necessary for change to occur. ?They felt the workshop had helped remove some barriers they felt were in the way of them possibly intervening in a situation. ?Without a booster program, the results were sustained to two months. ?When a booster program was included, effects went as long as twelve months (Senn & Forrest, 2015).Alcohol Policy IssuesAnalysis on IncidentAs this was the second major incident involving excessive drinking, the last of which resulted in a death due to alcohol poisoning, it’s clear that there is not a strong enough alcohol policy on campus. ?“…the lack of control policies may have contributed to an atmosphere that permitted sports events to be a drinking occasion on ‘heavy drinking’ campuses” (Nelson et al, p. 1866). ?Unfortunately this event is not that uncommon. ?Research indicates ?“...from 1995-2003 a total of 37 sports related campus riots on 24 different campuses occurring with increasing frequency” (Kaplowitz & Campo, 2004, p. 501).Scholarly LiteratureAlcohol use and abuse is a very important subject that campuses need to focus on. ?600,000 college students a year report being hurt or injured due to alcohol (Creemens, Usdan, Talbott-Forbes, & Martin, 2013, p. 1). ?Even students who don’t drink can experience secondhand effects of others drinking alcohol. ?This can include physical assaults and unwanted sexual advances (Mitchell, Toomey, & Erickson, 2005). ?In addition, alcohol issues also have a negative effect on the surrounding community in the form of increased crime, litter, and property damage (Creemens et al, 2013).Scholarly literature demonstrates there is a type of double standard on campus when it comes to alcohol. ?For example, there may be strong anti-alcohol policies in place, but then the schools accepts advertising dollars from local bars or alcohol companies. ?In a 2013 study, 95% of the campuses studied allowed advertisements for off campus bars and clubs in the campus newspapers (Creemens et al, 2013, p.4). “Policies may reduce alcohol consumption and high-risk alcohol use among college students by affecting where, when, and how alcohol is distributed and consumed on or near campus” (Mitchell, Toomey, & Erickson, 2005, p. 149). ?Campus policies can include a complete ban on the use and possession of alcohol, offering activities and housing that restrict the use of alcohol, and even limiting how many businesses can serve alcohol around campus (Mitchell et al, 2005). ?For example, a 2013 analysis of colleges found that 24% of campuses prohibited the use of alcohol on campus. ?29% had policies prohibiting alcohol use in Greek organizations. ?85% of campuses prohibited alcohol use at intercollegiate sports events on campus (Creements et al, 2013, p. 3-4).Available ResourcesThere is a wealth of resources available on campus. ?First is the VP of Student Affairs, who should have a strong pulse on the campus community and activities. ?As the policies are aimed at the students and possible disciplinary issues may occur, the Dean of Students is a strong stakeholder. ?The Health Center should be involved. ?As policies may be aimed directly at Greek Life, the Director of Greek Life should offer up some ideas. ?With any policies, the Legal department should be involved. ?If possible changes regarding advertising are being considered, Public Relations/Marketing will have feedback. ?Finally, a very strong resource available to all campuses is the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) Part 86, which provides the minimums of what should be included in every alcohol policy released by an Institution of Higher Education – ResourcesIn order to reinforce policies, as well as enlighten students on the negatives of alcohol use, a strong alcohol education program is needed. ?A separate task force is needed to evaluate existing programs and implement it. ?This, of course, requires additional funding. ?Administration would also need to decide if the program should be mandatory for all students.Environmental ConsiderationsMammoth State University strives not only for student development in the realm of academic, but also progression in the social lives of students. As a result, students will be exposed to numerous, positive experiences outside of the classroom as it relates to social development. Particularly in the case of Mammoth State University’s basketball program, the school has achieved great success in the field of athletics. Likewise, students, faculty, and staff alike will feel the need to celebrate the accomplishment of the team as a method of celebrating what it truly means to be a member of this great college.However, in participating in celebratory activities, the entire institution must understand how to be responsible in their actions no matter what event is being celebrated. This concern is further amplified once alcohol consumption is added into the equation, especially for MSU students. Traditionally college-aged students are more likely to meet the criteria for alcohol abuse compared to people of the same age who are not in college (Marchell et al, 2013). This statement is supported by the fact that the collegiate environment has several potentially alcohol-related events for traditionally aged-college students (especially at a residential campus) such as: 21st birthdays, Homecoming, Spring Break, end-of-semester/year celebrations. Campuses are charged with creating an environment where students are encouraged to celebrate, but doing so responsibly.With Mammoth State University being a residential school and having 94% of the student population being 18-24, it has to focus on ways to prevent underage and irresponsible drinking behaviors that could lead to other unfortunate events. Specifically, the numerous sexual assaults that occurred on campus as well as the alcohol poisoning death of a freshman fraternity member are the most alarming occurrences. As a result, we challenge Mammoth State University to implement a long-term process of changing the culture of alcohol consumption in a way similar to Cornell University did with their “Slope Day” event. Although Mammoth State University is not directly referring to an annual event such as “Slope Day,” the success of our basketball program (among other reasons to celebrate) can ensure numerous times a year where we will be celebrating the success of our school, which could lead to alcohol-related problems.Slope Day at Cornell UniversitySlope Day is a day that occurs on the last day of spring classes at Cornell University. It is celebration where students, faculty, and staff get together at a place called “the Slope” and participate in a day filled with food, entertainment and events. The event started in 1901 before becoming defunct at the end of the 1950s. 20 years later, the university reintroduced Slope Day in the spring of 1979. Once Slope Day was brought back, the day included concerts from notable entertainment acts, food, games, performers, and parades. From 1979 to 1985, the university also provided beer. At that particular moment in time, the event had “an atmosphere of celebration with student misconduct not being a focal point” (Marchell et al, 2013).In 1985, New York changed the drinking age from 18 to 21, which led Cornell University to eliminate the sale of beer to students. Likewise, students began to bring their own alcohol in non-alcohol bottles (water and soda bottles). This shift led the campus to see an increase of alcohol-related problems such as vomiting, fights, alcohol poisoning and a decrease in civility (Marchell et al, 2013). In 1990, the university tried to eradicate the event by scrapping the concert and food portions of it, but students reacted negatively. They showed up on the day of the now unofficial Slope Day, several drinking alcohol. The event transformed from an official celebration to an unofficial gathering of students who drank alcohol excessively. Cornell tried to fix the problem by charging police to have a strong presence, providing portable toilets, and gathering volunteers to help maintain peace, but the efforts were futile.Banning the event was out of the question, so the President decided to enforce a long-term plan to solve the issue (Marcell et al, 2013):Phase One (1999) – Introduce a festival with music, games, and food in a courtyard across from the Slope. The event had half of the original Slope’s attendance numbers, but increased student interest in having a day that was not revolved around alcohol.Phase Two (2001) – Establish a committee (Council on Alcohol and Other Drugs) consisting of students, staff, and faculty who would create a 2-year plan for remodeling Slope Day.Phase Three (2002) – Cornell and student government worked together in cosponsoring Slope Day. They wanted to limit the amount of alcohol that could be brought to the event by implementing a “cans only” policy and a six-can limit. This proved to be difficult police since the event was physically open to the public. There was also an accident with alcohol poisoning for a 15-year-old.Phase Four (2003) – The University decided to regulate alcohol itself, no longer allowing students to bring their own alcohol. The committed to creating a temporary one mile fence around the event, starting the concert at 1:30 PM, allowing dining services and local vendors to provide food, relocated the carnival back to the Slope, limited access to students and approved guests, and limited beer and wine sold.Impacts of Changing CultureThe biggest issue with the numerous changes of Slope Day at Cornell University was student pushback. Many of students who were accustomed to the alcoholic culture of the celebratory day were upset with the changes and regulations of the University. Students even argued that changing the rules would increase problematic drinking due to an increase in “pregaming” (drinking before attendance) (Marchell et al, 2013). Marchell et al did find this to be true, but they also found a significant decrease in drinking for all students at the actual Slope Day event overtime (down from 55% to 4% at the most recent survey). The decrease in drinking during the event outweighed the increase in drinking before the event. Marchell et al (2013) say this in reference to the pushback that can come with changing the culture of drinking on a college campus:“Researchers believed that the initial increase in drinking levels during the years when the policy change was first implemented suggests that psychological reactance may have been operative. Reactance can occur when individuals feel that a policy is taking away or limiting their choices, consequently motivating them to engage in behaviors that are contrary to those intended by the intervention.”Implications for Mammoth State UniversitySimilar to Cornell University, MSU can expect to have pushback when making such a significant change in multiple policies that have a relationship with alcohol consumption. Referring back to Chickering’s Seven Vectors (1993), it can be assumed that select students will be unable to know how to appropriately respond to such changes and may deem them to be unfair. In turn, students can react radically as several of the students at Cornell did by participating in excessive drinking as a way to “get back” at the institute for implementing a new policy. At this vector of “Managing Emotions” students will have to learn to control their emotions, with the assistance of several campus resources (if needed) including counseling, judicial affairs, and student government. The goal in implementing a long-term solution to this issue is to make current students within the cohort the understand the purpose for changing such policies while grooming the next cohort of students to as to why these policies are in place.Ideally, students will be successful in “Developing Integrity,” in relation to Chickering’s Seven Vectors (1993), by forming their own system of values as it relates to responsible alcohol consumption and behavior during celebratory school events. The goal is for students to not only have a good time, but to be socially responsible when representing themselves and the university, particularly at events such as an exciting sporting event. Will all students be able to understand the changes successfully? No, but the goal is to place students in a knowledgeable position of success.With athletics being the focal point of this particular event, MSU understands that most student can identify with participants in athletics being the “face of campus.” It is important that this initiative receives the backing and support of our athletics department. While it can be questionable to have student athletes involved in this initiative given their status and future, coaches and administrators can potentially be an excellent resource in support of changing these policies. They can serve as a method of validation for the university in the eyes of the average student.As far as regulating and controlling the distribution of alcohol, with Mammoth State University being a institution with an excellent athletics program, banning alcohol at certain events is undesirable. In a study of colleges that sold alcohol had athletic events, most schools had alcohol control policies in place, including checking age identification, limiting the amount of time alcohol was sold during events, and prohibiting alcohol from being brought into sports events (Nelson et al, 2010). These attempts at control may play a factor in the reduction of alcohol consumption and related problems in MSU’s events, including sporting events.ReferencesBarone, R., Wolgemuth, J., & Linder, C. (2007). ?Preventing sexual assault through engaging college men. ?Journal of College Student Development, 48(5), 585-594.Bridges, L. S. 1., & Sharma, M. (2015). A systematic review of interventions aimed at reducing binge drinking among college students. Journal of Alcohol & Drug Education, 59(3), 25-47.Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Crawford, L. A., & Novak, K. B. (2010). Beliefs about alcohol and the college experience as moderators of the effects of perceived drinking norms on student alcohol use. Journal of Alcohol & Drug Education, 54(3), 69-86.Creemens, J., Usdan, S., Talbott-Forbes, L., & Martin, R. (2013). ?Assessment of campus alcohol policies: implications for college administrators. ?American Journal of Health Studies: 28(1), 2013.Evans, N. (2011). Psychosocial and Cognitive-Structural perspectives on Student Development. In J. H. Schuh, S. R. Jones, & S. R. Harper (Eds.), Student Services: A Handbook for the Profession, 5th Ed. (pp. 168-186). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Foubert, J., Tatum, J., & Godin, E. (2010). ?First-year male students’ perceptions of a rape prevention program 7 months after their participation: Attitude and behavior changes. ?Journal of College Student Development, 51(6), 707-715.Humphrey, W. (2016). Let's talk about sex: Legislating and educating on the affirmative consent standard. University Of San Francisco Law Review, 50(1), 35-73.Kaplowitz, S. & Campo, S. (2004). ?Drinking, alcohol policy, and attitudes toward a campus riot. ?Journal of College Student Development, 45(5), 501-516.Lipka, S. (2009). With ‘Restorative Justice,’ Colleges Strive to Educate Student Offenders. Chronicle Of Higher Education, 55(32), A26-A28.Marchell, T. C., Lewis, D. D., Croom, K., Lesser, M. L., Murphy, S. H., Reyna, V. F., Frank, J., Staiano-Coico, L. (2013). The slope of change: An environmental management approach to reduce drinking on a day of celebration at a US college. Journal of American College Health: 61(6), 324-334.Mitchell, R. J., Toomey, T. L., & Erickson, D. (2005). Alcohol policies on college campuses. Journal Of American College Health: 53(4), 149-157.Nelson, T., Lenk, K., Xuan, Z., & Wechsler, H. (2010). ?Student drinking at U.S. college sports events. ?Substance Use & Misuse, 45, 1861-1873.Patton, L. & Renn, K, Guido, F. M. & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Student Development in College: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3rd Ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Potter, S. (2016). Reducing sexual assault on campus: lessons from the movement to prevent drunk driving. American Journal Of Public Health, 106(5), 822-829Recommended Sanctions. Retrieved from: , S. and Miller, W.R. (1995) ‘What is Motivational Interviewing?’, Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 23(4), pp. 325–334. doi: 10.1017/S135246580001643X.Senn, C. Y., & Forrest, A. (2016). And then one night when I went to class...: The impact of sexual assault bystander intervention workshops. Psychology Of Violence, 6(4), 607-618. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download