Gettysburg College Abandons Point System for Drug and Alcohol Violations in Favor of More Comprehensive “Community Standards”
By Katie Oglesby, Editor-in-Chief
Stine, a first-year residence hall (Photo Eric Lippe/The Gettysburgian)
At the beginning of the semester, Residential Education (ResEd) emailed students about move-in and noted that the conduct policy, which formerly included a point-based system for alcohol and drug violations, has changed significantly since the spring 2022 semester.
Director of Student Rights and Responsibilities Elizabeth Farner said there was a shift away from the code of conduct language to calling it “community standards.” She said this language shift pertains to the expectations the College has for students and students have for themselves and others as a community.
The policy document has been rewritten, broadening and renaming certain policies.
Instead of the point system, there are now “low-level,” “mid-level,” and “high-level” violations that are more comprehensive than the point system was before.
“The point system was created to create some transparency with students about alcohol and drug violations. And so the point system was just specific to alcohol and drug violations,” Farner said. “…In the new code, we had the opportunity to take every single violation that exists, and so we had the chance to take what is considered ‘low-level,’ so something like if you have a guest and the guest doesn’t follow the community standards…and we would have a conversation probably in an informal way, about what happened.”
She continued to explain that if level-one violations are repeated, students would move to level-two violations, which are violations that are more severe or have a larger impact on the community. Consequences for these could include probation, fines, or loss of privileges.
High-level violations would be actions such as physical assault or selling drugs on campus. Consequences would likely include suspension or expulsion.
Farner explained that the point system had been around for 16 or 17 years.
“At the time the point system was developed, a number of colleges and universities were all using point systems,” she said. “And when Dean Ehrlich came, we started having some conversations about best practices, what’s regarded in the field as the most educational…and ultimately what we want is education and changing behavior.”
In spring 2022, conversations began within the Student Life Committee about changing the policies. This committee included Vice President of College Life and Dean of Students Anne Ehrlich, Associate Vice President of College Life Jeff Foster, Vice Provost and Dean of Arts and Humanities Jack Ryan, faculty representatives, and students.
This summer, members of Student Senate met each week with Farner to discuss the policies and provide feedback.
Student Senate President Miranda Zamora ’23 enjoyed the opportunity to get involved in the process to change the conduct policy. Students had come to her with concerns about it, and it was something she said she had hoped to work on during her time as president.
“I think it is a big adjustment, but one that was needed,” Zamora said. “[The new policy] takes a more educational approach with a goal of providing opportunities to students for learning rather than punishing students and limiting what they can do on campus.”
“There was definitely a sense of confusion [and] apathy with the points system that Liz had recognized through [the Student Life Committee] and when she met with us over the summer we echoed that,” Student Senate Vice President Geoffrey Meadville ’25 said. “Points were not a tangible punishment.”
Farner said that the policy change was also meant to represent the most up-to-date policy in the field.
“The change has really been around trying to respond in a way that maximizes the student’s learning and development through the process,” she said.
With the change in this policy came the removal of the Student Conduct Review Board, as well.
Farner explained that the decision to remove the Student Conduct Review Board came from the understanding that students who experience harassment or bias did not want to discuss their experience with people they did not know nor did they want to be in the same room as the person who had harmed them.
“They have experienced a level of trauma associated with that,” Farner said. “Going back to ‘best practices,’ is there a better way for us to treat students and…honor their experience and not have them have to go through this where they’re telling all these people they’ve never met before intimate details about themselves?”
Meadville and Zamora expressed positive sentiments toward the new community standards, and the shift away from the point system.
“I feel a lot better about this policy, obviously I wish there was more progress made, but with the summer we really took great strides to setting the new system up. It’s something I feel like I can point to and say we have an almost perfect system in place,” Meadville said. “There’s still a lot to see about how it works off paper and if there’s areas of improvement but I’m happy with the place we are at for this year.”
As for the progress he wishes could still be made, Meadville pointed toward diversity, equity, and inclusion.
“The policy is fine as it is but I think there are areas it glosses over specifically we didn’t spend much time addressing bias incidents and hate crimes, obviously this area falls more into Dean Christina and DEI’s wheelhouse but I still feel that we can hold students accountable more than the school is willing to,” he said.
Since students have been on campus for around a month, Brandon Caban ’23, a Residence Coordinator noted that he has seen changes in how first-year students react to conduct expectations in the first few weeks.
“Because the code of conduct is so poorly defined, I feel like especially in the first few weeks that residents were more willing to go out to fraternity parties…or drink in their dorms because the violations weren’t laid out in a way that was easy…for them to understand what the repercussions for their actions were,” Caban said.
Caban explained, though, that he appreciates that the new community standards allow for more learning from mistakes.
“I do feel like the point system is more easily digestible, to both us as ResEd members, and to the residents. But I like that this builds the way for more of a discussion with the students and the staff members,” Caban said. “Because if someone gets caught drinking, that’s like already [two] points out of the ten point system. And…it gives them very little way to rebuild themselves after a violation. But this system gives them at least once or twice…[and] gives students a way to respond back and to really have a discussion and change the future behaviors.”
Zamora explained that she was grateful that the student body was involved in the policy changes discussion.
Zamora said, “Most importantly to me was how students would be involved in not only the discussion of the changes in policy, but how we can continue a discussion with students as we continue to see how the changes affect the student body.”
Farner echoed this sentiment. She said that if any students are confused about the policies or would like to discuss them further with her, they are more than welcome to reach out.
This article originally appeared on pages 3–4 of the September 2022 edition of The Gettysburgian’s magazine.
