Creating Effective - circle.adventist.orgcircle.adventist.org/files/jae/en/jae201376020407.pdf · ubstance use on college cam - ... use has a significant impact on campus life, creating

Substance use on college cam-puses worldwide has been asource of ongoing concern formany years.1 Alcohol and druguse has a significant impact on

campus life, creating safety concerns andinterfering with learning. One of thefirst steps in crafting an effective preven-tion program is to develop clearly stated,well-reasoned, and consistently enforcedpolicies that address the challenges facedon each campus, including increasinglydiverse student bodies. In a Christian in-stitution, these policies must grow out of

and reflect the core mission of theschool. Carefully crafted and widely dis-seminated policies help institutionscommunicate predefined boundaries,integrate a redemptive and holistic ap-proach to student discipline, and helpensure the school’s accountability to itsconstituents. Well-crafted policies arecritical in helping students understandthe dangers of substance abuse andstrengthen their decision-making skills,which are essential to the maturationprocess.2

This article will address the role ofinstitutional policies in preventing sub-stance use, the way students’ percep-

tions shape their adherence to policies,and the role of redemptive values inpolicy implementation. Attention willalso be given to how to craft schoolpolicies based on the authors’ researchregarding the factors that protect andserve as a buffer against substance use. State and country laws, community

and religious standards, and type ofinstitution influence the manner inwhich substance-use policies are imple-mented and upheld. Seventh-day Ad-ventist and other conservative religiousinstitutions of higher education char-acteristically maintain a zero-tolerance

4

B Y J U D I T H B E R N A R D F I S H E R a n d O L I V I A T I T U S

The Journal of Adventist Education • December 2013/January 2014 http:// jae.adventist.org

substance-use

policiesfor Seventh-day Adventist

Campuses

Creating Effective

policy for substance use both on andoff campus, while state-funded publicschools and other secular institutionsoften adopt more lenient measures,such as a “drink responsibly” approach,which does not serve as a deterrent fora great majority of college students.

The Unique Position of Substance-Free Faith-Based InstitutionsFaith-based institutions, whose stu-

dent behavioral expectations are gener-ally more precisely defined than the ex-pectations of secular institutions, havea greater challenge in developing and

sities allow legal substances to be used orstored in on-campus housing, althoughmore recently, most higher educationinstitutions in the U.S. prohibit the useof tobacco on their campuses.3

It is interesting to note that manysecular universities now offer housingdesignated as substance-free. These fa-cilities do not permit alcohol, tobacco,smokeless tobacco, and other drugs,whether legal or illegal, to be stored orused on their premises. Most of thesesubstance-free buildings also prohibitresidents from being on-site while underthe influence, and do not allow any

versity is likely to face more severe con-sequences, including dismissal.5

Seventh-day Adventist institutions ofhigher education have carefully craftedtheir policies to clearly communicatethat the school cares about its studentsin a holistic way that extends beyondconcerns about substance abuse, by pro-moting a healthy lifestyle that encom-passes mind, body, and soul. Morespecifically, Adventist institutions adopta whole-person development approach,with most promoting residential cam-pus living where students are nurturedmentally, physically, emotionally, spiri-tually, and socially. Adult commutingstudents who drink socially off campuswith their family and friends create aspecial challenge for student-life admin-istrators. When there is a high concen-tration of those enrollees, administratorsmay need to create prevention initiativesgeared toward older students.Our schools’ policies on substance

use must take into consideration stu-dents’ developmental stages, while in-corporating both a disciplinary and aredemptive component. The policiesshould mesh with the church’s beliefsystem and embrace concepts of ac-countability and grace. This clarity ofintent by administrators, as well as anindividualized approach to studentcare and a student population thatlargely adheres to a religious lifestyle,appears to have contributed signifi-cantly to lower substance-use rates onour campuses, according to studies thathave been done regarding substanceabuse by students.6

Student Development andDecision Making

School psychologist and researcherArthur Chickering, whose identity-de-velopment model is widely regarded as acomprehensive description of the psy-chosocial maturation of college stu-dents, provides great insight on how col-lege students gradually progress fromfocusing on achieving competence tostriving for interdependence and in-tegrity. Chickering identifies seven vec-tors or developmental milestones thataffect decision making in college stu-dents.7 His theory suggests that as stu-dents achieve intellectual competence,

5

items, even in private residences, thatmay promote substance use, such asposters, clothing, and other parapherna-lia.4 The policies at these substance-freehousing facilities are often similar tothose at religious universities, but en-forcement may be quite different. A sec-ular university may require a studentviolating school policies in a substance-free campus residence hall to transfer toa different building, or resolve the issuein some other non-punitive manner;whereas the student who breaks therules at a substance-free religious uni-

http:// jae.adventist.org The Journal of Adventist Education • December 2013/January 2014

articulating policies. Policies at thosecolleges and universities need to notonly reflect institutional expectations,but also clearly communicate to stu-dents the distinctive beliefs promotedby the institution. Whereas secular higher education in-

stitutions generally establish policiesbanning illegal drugs from their cam-puses as well as the illegal use of alcoholand tobacco by minors, faith-based in-stitutions typically prohibit studentsfrom using alcohol and other drugs bothon and off campus property. With anolder student body no longer restrainedby age-of-use laws, many secular univer-

they draw from a larger frame of refer-ence and a wider scope of perspectives,which enables them to derive greatermeaning from their life experiences.8

However, this emerging enlightenmentoften stimulates a strong desire to ex-plore and test established boundaries ina quest for self-definition. During this stage of development,

young people also pursue greater auton-omy and self-sufficiency, and seek to as-sert their independence. Their decisionmaking is often characterized by a deter-mination to clearly declare themselves asemerging adults, asserting their new-found independence through an em-brace of new roles and lifestyles.Meanwhile, school administrators

must create and enforce policies thatsend a consistent message about insti-tutional expectations. Well-craftedpolicies attempt to erect boundaries,provide structure, and foster a senseof responsibility and accountability.These guidelines not only describe theschool’s expectations, but also help toshape the campus culture.9

Student Usage, Policies, andResponseHow effective are current substance-

use policies? And what kind of policiescan schools develop to promote a healthylifestyle and prevent the negative conse-quences of substance use? Smoking ratesamong the general adult population inthe U.S. have declined steadily over thepast decades and are currently estimatedby the Centers for Disease Control andPrevention at 18 percent. Increased pub-lic education and greater awareness onthe dangers of tobacco may have helpedto curb the incidence of smoking inAmerica.10 Studies have found that stu-dents who attend a school with policiesbanning the use of tobacco on campusproperty have lower smoking rates thanstudents who attend a school that allowsthem to smoke on campus.11 It appearsthat these smoke-free campus policies,reinforced by anti-smoking campaigns,have raised the levels of awareness ofU.S. students, strengthening preventionefforts.By contrast, the use of alcohol on col-

lege campuses continues to be alarm-ingly high. Most U.S. campaigns focuson harm reduction, rather than absti-nence, with their “drink responsibly inmoderation” messages. National cam-paigns that stress harm reduction maycause students to react negatively towardmore restrictive campus policies. A review of the literature clearly es-

tablishes the significant role of peers instudent development and decision mak-ing.12 As students seek greater auton-omy, moving toward independence, andattempting to establish an identity, theyoften adopt behaviors they perceive asaccepted by their peers. Consequently, ifthey think that their peers are drinking,they are more likely to consume alco -hol.13 Peer influence is also a significantfactor in students’ feeling at greater lib-erty to use substances when off campus,although they may heed their schools’guidelines and refrain from use while oncampus.14

Although students on Adventist cam-puses report significantly lower rates ofalcohol use than their counterparts atboth secular and other religious schools,as well as lower rates of other substanceuse, some of our youth are using dan-gerous substances.15 It is interesting tonote that students surveyed at Adventistcolleges and universities confirm that al-cohol use occurs primarily off campus,with significantly lower rates observedon campus.16 The presence of trainedresidence-hall staff and a strong partner-ship between academic and student-lifeprofessionals may contribute to theselower on-campus rates. In 2005, 43 percent of public college

students in the United States reportedheavy intermittent drinking.17 Onemight think this is because a number ofstudents reach the legal drinking agewhile enrolled in higher education, butlevels of underage drinking are almostas high.18 Many students regard drink-ing as a normal college experience.19

College-age students’ generally positiveview of substance use may also be acontributing factor.20 Becoming a partof the drinking culture is viewed bymany young people as a sign of theiremerging independence from restric-tive parental norms, as well as a way ofgaining peer acceptance.

Students surveyed at both publicand religious universities perceive sub-stance use by their classmates to be sig-nificantly higher than the actual usagelevels.21 The idea that “everyone isdoing it” is potentially one of thegreater threats to policy and recoveryprograms because of the large numberof students who hold that opinion andalso regularly use substances. Drinkingserves as a gateway to many other riskybehaviors, including the use of otherdrugs, increased sexual encounters, andincreased injuries.22

In 2001, a Harvard School of PublicHealth college alcohol-use study led byHenry Wechsler surveyed students at119 four-year colleges in 38 U.S. statesand the District of Columbia. The stu-dents in that study represented a na-tional cross-section, with 13 percent at-tending religiously affiliated colleges.This study concluded that the merepresence of formal substance-use poli-cies may reduce students’ substanceuse in a location where they might becaught, such as on campus, but it didnot seem to have any significant effecton whether or not students used thesubstance at all.23 The students sur-veyed were asked to identify policiesthat they felt were helpful in reducingalcohol consumption on their cam-puses. Among those they cited wereclarifying alcohol rules, providing morealcohol-free recreational and cultural op-portunities, and enforcing policies morestrictly. The researchers concluded thatstudents need to have a clear aware- ness of school policies, including well-defined disciplinary consequences andrehabilitative procedures. More than half of the students in

that study reported experiencing sec-ondhand effects of alcohol use, whichnegatively affected their sleep, theirstudy life, and their overall feeling ofwellbeing. The Harvard study’s conclu-sions about secondhand effects corre-late well with a 2005 study of universityfreshmen who participated in a lotteryroommate assignment project. Somestudents lived in substance-free hous-ing, while others were assigned room-mates with various drinking habits. Atthe end of the term, freshmen students

6 The Journal of Adventist Education • December 2013/January 2014 http:// jae.adventist.org

assigned to a roommate who drankprior to college had GPAs that had de-clined by more than a quarter point.24

These studies highlight the importanceof using peer influence in promotinghealthier lifestyles.The Harvard research results are

consistent with many other studies ex-ploring substance use by college stu-dents. Borsari, et al.’s 2007 study onpredictors of alcohol use among collegefreshmen25 also emphasized the needfor clear and consistently enforcedpolicies in reducing substance use, aswell as promoting a culture of healthand wellness. The study further notedthe importance of creating policies andprevention programs with specific stu-dent characteristics in mind. Some ofthese factors include developmentallymaturing freshmen students withhigher levels of sensation-seeking be-haviors26; male students, who tend todrink at higher rates than female stu-dents27; and Anglo-American students,who report drinking at higher ratesthan minority students.28

The Borsari study29 identified policiesand prevention measures that may miti-gate the use of alcohol among first-yearstudents, such as increased opportuni-ties for developing intrinsic religiosity,an internally motivated approach to liv-ing and making personal decisions based

on adopted religious values; partneringwith parents, whose influence continuesto impact their children’s decision mak-ing and moderate peer influence; offer-ing strategic screening opportunities toidentify students in need of help, espe-cially at the beginning of the academicyear; creating service-learning experi-ences, which provide students withmeaningful volunteer opportunities andreduce unstructured leisure time; anddisseminating accurate information tocounteract misperceptions about theprevalence of student substance use. Studies have shown that students

who believe that their peers have a neg-ative opinion of substance policies aremore likely to disregard those policies.If they believe their peers are drinking,they are more likely to do so as well.30

These studies suggest that social normcampaigns can have a significant effecton policy support, and possibly evenon off-campus substance use.31

In preparing to write this article, theauthors analyzed substance-use policiesfrom online student handbooks of 13Seventh-day Adventist colleges anduniversities in North America and 10more in other locations, includingMexico, Europe, and Australia, whichprovided a fairly accurate representa-

tion of the church’s higher educationsystem worldwide. It was evident fromthe results of this survey that the sub-stance-use policies of our colleges senda clear message of abstinence. As awhole, these schools have adopted sub-stance-use policies that incorporate agraduated response plan of action inorder to account for individual studentneeds. Disciplinary measures typicallyincluded the following actions:1. In-house suspension – Typically

consists of one or more of the following:citizenship warning; on-campus suspen-sion, which often entails restricted socialactivities for a determined time frame;referral for assessment and professionalhelp; and, for first-time offenders, en-rollment in a psycho-educational groupexperience, which provides educationwithin a therapeutic context, often of-fered through the institution’s counsel-ing services.2. Major suspension – This option is

typically reserved for significant prob-lems, including violations related to ille-gal substances. The student is often re-quired to enter into an agreement tocomplete either a drug awareness or re-habilitation program (usually off cam-pus), after which his or her enrollmentstatus may be reviewed. The suspensionmay result in the student’s banishmentfrom school property and all campus ac-tivities for one or more academic terms.This disciplinary measure is generallyimplemented after consultation withparents and community professionals.3. Expulsion – At this stage, students

usually have engaged in illegal activitiesthat violate school guidelines, or theymay be repeat offenders. All the institu-tions whose policies were reviewed in-clude this option. Although great careand attention are given to emphasizethe redemptive nature of the policies,students ultimately have the choicewhether to follow the rules and embracethe healthy culture of care promotedthroughout Adventist campuses world-wide.Most of the colleges and universities

surveyed also include in their policies anemphasis on substance-use education,which is often offered through the uni-versity’s counseling services. AvondaleAdventist University in Australia in-

7

tudies have shown that studentswho believe that their peers

have a negative opinion of substancepolicies are more likely to disregardthose policies. If they believe theirpeers are drinking, they are morelikely to do so as well.

s

http:// jae.adventist.org The Journal of Adventist Education • December 2013/January 2014

cludes in its student handbook a sectionon rehabilitative actions that includepsychological testing and counseling,pastoral counseling, and educationthrough reading, audio-visual presenta-tions, research, and lectures.32

Several institutions also maintain anactive prevention program. AndrewsUniversity’s prevention efforts includepresentations on targeted topicsthroughout each semester, health andwellness fairs, substance-abuse screen-ings, professional counseling, and psy-cho-educational group explorationswhere students participate in a class-likeexperience led by counselors. Students are also encouraged to vol-

untarily seek professional help from acounselor through the institution’scounseling services or from the faculty,residence-hall deans, and campus chap-lains. Students are also strongly urged toreach out for help by being given the in-centive that if they do so voluntarily andare faithful to the recovery plan designedfor their rehabilitation, they will not facedisciplinary action by the university.However, it remains a challenge to findways to encourage students to seek helpin spite of their fear. The university works closely with

students faced with substance use orabuse challenges to offer restorative op-portunities even when the policy callsfor separation from the campus. Evensuspension is regarded as openingrestorative paths that will enable the stu-dent to eventually achieve wholeness, re-turn to the academic environment, andultimately achieve God’s purpose for hisor her life. The restorative process is anintegral part of school policies, and theredemptive dimension of the learningenvironment is clearly a priority.The church’s U.S. college and uni-

versity campuses, which have a greaterconcentration of adult students, aresubject to state and federal guidelineswith respect to parental notification.These laws, which include the federalFamily Educational Rights and PrivacyAct (FERPA) guidelines,33 provide pa-rameters within which parents of adultstudents can be involved in disciplinaryand redemptive interventions. When

to demonstrate greater resiliency de-spite their risk exposure. Benard34 iden-tified three protective factors with re-spect to risk behaviors—caring andsupportive environments, high expec-tations, and opportunities for mean-ingful participation—from among themany researched factors associatedwith student resiliency. Since the early 1980s, the Institute

for Prevention of Addictions at An-drews University has conducted a quin-quennial risk-behaviors study that fo-cuses on identifying protective factorsfor college-age students. Although thestudy has yielded comparable findingsthroughout the years, a recent investi-gation emphasized two of the protec-tive factors found in Benard’s study35:

• Spiritual Commitment. Studentswith a meaningful relationship withGod, who attend Sabbath school andchurch services, and have a meaningfulprayer life have lower rates of alcoholuse. In fact, the greatest correlation withreduced alcohol use was weekly atten-dance at Sabbath school. This strongercorrelation may be explained as follows:Students attending Sabbath school mayembrace a culture that includes a strong

8

young adult students (ages 18 to 21) vi-olate campus guidelines with respect tosubstance use, FERPA laws permit dis-closure to parents. However, the olderadult learner (over the age of 21) usu-ally must make his or her own deci-sions, and may choose not to share per-tinent information with family.Most campuses collaborate with the

local police force regarding unsched-uled searches, with or without canineassistance, especially in residence halls.These interventions provide an extralayer of support to the schools’ effortsat maintaining drug-free campuses.

Consistent with our commitmentto Seventh-day Adventist education,the crafting of policies that reflect ourfundamental belief of redemptionthrough grace is a key element in mod-eling the forgiveness of Christ and theemphasis on both physical and emo-tional recovery.

Reducing At-Risk BehaviorA large number of U.S. studies focus

on factors that foster the developmentof resiliency in adolescents and youngadults, identifying conditions that willreduce the effects of risk. Students whoexperience protective factors are likely

Adventist school drug-prevention efforts include psycho-educational groups led byprofessional counselors.

The Journal of Adventist Education • December 2013/January 2014 http:// jae.adventist.org

commitment to an active spiritual life,thus significantly reducing behaviorsthat interfere with those activities. In ad-dition, students whose religious com-mitment led to their engaging in com-munity service also had lower rates ofalcohol use. When students are able toactively express their faith through con-crete activities such as giving of theirtime and energy in community service,their religious commitment becomesmore intrinsic, and they are less likely touse alcohol.

• Caring and Supportive Environ-ment. Students who have a close rela-tionship with their parents, who feel thatthey can openly communicate withthem, and who have strong family bondsalso have reduced rates of alcohol use.Family dinner moments seem to be espe-cially critical, providing young adultswith opportunities to connect with theirparents and other family members in arelaxed setting that facilitates the sharingof feelings and daily challenges. Ber -nard’s study also suggests that studentsin mentoring relationships with caringand supportive teachers have lower ratesof alcohol use. Since a great number ofstudents in our schools live on residen-tial campuses during the school year, in-teracting with faculty and staff on a dailybasis may enable them to remain con-nected with more experienced adultseven as they seek to become more au-tonomous.

• Commitment to Personal Health.Students who have a commitment tohealthy living are keenly aware of thehealth message associated with theirfaith and are concerned about theirhealth as well as that of their offspring,have lower rates of alcohol use. Clearly, a significant correlation ex-

ists between the lower rates of students’substance use on Adventist campusesof higher education and the protectivefactors identified in empirical studies.The seamless integration of religiousprogramming with academic life pro-motes a culture of spiritual nurturingin which students are given a plethoraof opportunities to strengthen theirspiritual commitment through activelyparticipating in uplifting activities suchas church services, residence-hall wor-ships, chapels, volunteer service oppor-

3. Develop campus-wide awarenessprograms, giving all students the opportu-nity to actively participate in small fo-rums and group experiences. This will en-able them to process information on theimpact of substance use and the benefitsof embracing a healthy lifestyle.4. Offer peer-led programming using

student leaders committed to a healthylifestyle who have been trained to effec-tively connect with their peers.5. Engage in marketing campaigns,

with the objective of providing studentswith accurate information in regard tothe levels of substance use by their peers.As information is disseminated acrosscampus through various media andopportunities are created for studentdiscussions and explorations, studentsare likely to develop more positiveviews of campus policies.6. While emphasizing redemptive val-

ues, create policies that clearly communi-cate institutional expectations, and en-force them consistently.As administrators of higher educa-

tion develop a vision of the culturethey wish to nurture on their campus,they will also need to craft policies toachieve those objectives. Clearly articu-lated policies provide guidance thathelps students achieve clarity of pur-pose and consistency within an envi-ronment conducive to academic learn-ing and a healthy lifestyle.

Judith BernardFisher is Directorof the Counselingand Testing Centerat Andrews Univer-sity in BerrienSprings, Michigan,where she coordi-

nates the university’s psychological andprevention services. She received her doc-torate in Counseling Psychology fromAndrews University and completed aclinical psychology internship at MercyHospital in Detroit, Michigan. Hertraining also included a pre-doctoral in-ternship and a post-doctoral fellowshipat the University of Notre Dame in Indi-ana. Dr. Fisher is a fully licensed psy-chologist in the state of Michigan, a 1995recipient of the Zapara Excellence in

�

tunities, Sabbath school gatherings,and vespers. Emphasis on prayer andpersonal devotion further enhances thepotential for a deeper one-on-one con-nection with God, thus providing amore substantial buffer against risk be-haviors like substance use. Moreover, smaller college campus

settings, with less-crowded classroomsand greater opportunities for teacher-student connections, promote a cultureof care and mentoring relationships, fos-ter a sense of community and genuinesupport, and contribute significantly tostudents’ decisions to adopt a lifestylefree of substance use. Greater awarenessof the church’s health message througheducation and interactive explorationsoffers an extra layer of protection asemerging young adults, still establishingtheir personal identity, are exposed tothe tenets of Seventh-day Adventist val-ues in a manner that allows them to em-brace those principles and assimilatethem into their personal lives.Although college students at Sev-

enth-day Adventist institutions experi-ment with tobacco, alcohol, and otherdrugs at significantly lower rates thanstudents on secular campuses and evenat other faith-based institutions,36 poli-cies aimed at further reducing the rate ofsubstance use at Adventist colleges anduniversities must draw from the identi-fied protective factors to provide stu-dents with an academic milieu whereexpectations and prevention programsare unmistakably interwoven in campuslife. As school administrators seek tostrengthen their policies in their quest topromote a culture of healthy and whole-some lifestyle, the following considera-tions may be helpful: 1. Create an attractive spiritual cul -

ture built around the worship experience.This will encourage greater student par-ticipation in church and other religiousservices, while encouraging them to alsodevelop a stronger intrinsic religiousexperience, which will foster in them astrong desire to embrace a lifestyle com-patible with their religious values.2. Develop and expand mentoring re-

lationships involving faculty, staff, churchcommunity, and alumni, especially forfirst-year college students.37

9http:// jae.adventist.org The Journal of Adventist Education • December 2013/January 2014

Journal of Research on Christian Education 13:1(Spring 2009):23-29.

7. Arthur Chickering and Linda Reisser, Educa-tion and Identity (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993).

8. N. Garfield and L. B. David, “Arthur Chick-ering: Bridging Theory and Practice in StudentDevelopment,” Journal of Counseling and Devel-opment 64 (1986):483-491.

9. Tim Urdan and Erin Schoenfelder, “Class-room Effects on Student Motivation: Goal Struc-tures, Social Relationships, and Competence Be-liefs,” Journal of School Psychology 44:5 (October2006):331-349.

10. Centers for Disease Control and Preven-tion, “Trends in Current Cigarette SmokingAmong High School Students and Adults, UnitedStates, 1965-2011” (n.d.): http://www.cdc.gov/ tobacco/data_statistics/tables/trends/cig_smoking/.Accessed March 31, 2013.

11. Adam Goldstein, et al., “Passage of 100%Tobacco-Free School Policies in 14 North Car-olina School Districts,” Journal of School Health73:8 (2003):293-299.

12. Chickering and Reisser, Education andIdentity, op. cit; Alexander W. Astin, What Mat-ters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited (SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993).

13. Kimberly A. Maxwell, “Friends: The Roleof Peer Influence Across Adolescent Risk Behav-iors,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 31 (August2002):267-277.

14. H. Wechsler, et al., “Alcohol Use and Prob-lems at Colleges Banning Alcohol: Results of aNational Survey,” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 62(2001):133-141.

15. Hopkins, et al., “Substance Use AmongStudents Attending a Christian University ThatStrictly Prohibits the Use of Substances,” op. cit.

16. Ibid. 17. Mitchell, et al., “Alcohol Policies on Col-

leges Campuses,” op. cit.18. O’Malley and Johnston, “Epidemiology of

Alcohol and Other Drug Use Among AmericanCollege Students,” op. cit.; Wechsler, et al., “Un-derage College Students’ Drinking Behavior, Ac-cess to Alcohol, and the Influence of DeterrencePolicies,” Journal of American College Health 50:5(2002):223-236.

19. H. Wesley Perkins, Michael Haines, andRichard Rice, “Misperceiving the College Drink-ing Norm and Related Problems: A NationwideStudy of Exposure to Prevention Information,Perceived Norms and Student Alcohol Misuse,”Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 66:4 (July2005):470-478.

20. H. Wesley Perkins, “Social Norms and thePrevention of Alcohol Misuse in Collegiate Con-texts,” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 14 (Septem-ber 14, 2002):164-172.

21. Alina M. Baltazar, et al., Executive Sum-mary: Andrews University Risk and Protective Fac-tor Survey (August 22, 2012); Deborah Prenticeand Dale Miller, “Pluralistic Ignorance and Alco-hol Use on Campus: Some Consequences ofMisperceiving the Social Norm,” Journal of Per-sonality and Social Psychology 64:2 (February1993): 243-256.

22. Baltazar, et al., ibid.23. Wechsler, et al., “Alcohol Use and Prob-

lems at Colleges Banning Alcohol: Results of aNational Survey,” op. cit.

24. Michael Kremer and Dan M. Levy, “PeerEffects and Alcohol Use Among College Stu-dents,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 22:3(Summer 2008):189-206.

25. Brian Borsari, et al., “Predictors of Alco-hol Use During the First Year of College: Implica-tions for Prevention,” Addictive Behaviors 32:10(October 2007):2062-2086.

26. Helene R. White, et al., “Increases in Alco-hol and Marijuana Use During the Transition Outof High School Into Emerging Adulthood: The Ef-fects of Leaving Home, Going to College, and HighSchool Protective Factors,” Journal of Studies on Al-cohol 67:6 (November 2006):810-822.

27. Paul E. Greenbaum, et al., “Variation inthe Drinking Trajectories of Freshmen CollegeStudents,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy-chology 73:2 (April 2005):229-238.

28. Frances K. Del Boca, et al., “Up Close andPersonal: Temporal Variability in the Drinking ofIndividual College Students During Their FirstYear,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychol-ogy 72:2 (April 2004):155-164; Nina Mounts,“Contributions of Parenting and Campus Cli-mate to Freshmen Adjustment in a MultiethnicSample,” Journal of Adolescent Research 19:4 (July2004):468-491; E. R. Weitzman, et al., “The Rela-tionship of Alcohol Outlet Density to Heavy andFrequent Drinking and Drinking-Related Prob-lems Among College Students at Eight Universi-ties,” Health and Place 9:1 (March 2003):1-6.

29. Borsari, et al., “Predictors of Alcohol UseDuring the First Year of College: Implications forPrevention,” op. cit.

30. Baltazar, et al., Executive Summary: An-drews University Risk and Protective Factor Survey,op. cit.

31. Denise Gottfredson and David Wilson,“Characteristics of Effective School-Based Sub-stance Abuse Prevention,” Prevention Science 4:1(April 2003):27-38.

32. Avondale College Student Handbook, 2013:http://avondale.edu.au/information::Policies/ display/?s=Mjk2.

33. Carolyn Palmer, et al., “Parental Notifica-tion: A New Strategy to Reduce Alcohol Abuse onCampus,” Journal of Student Affairs Research andPractice 38:3 (April 2001):325-338.

34. Bonnie Benard, Fostering Resiliency inKids: Protective Factors in the Family, School, andCommunity (Portland, Oregon: Western Centerfor Drug-free Schools and Communities, 1991).

35. Baltazar, et al., Executive Summary: An-drews University Risk and Protective Factor Survey,op. cit.

36. Herbert W. Helm, Jr., et al., “Comparisonof Alcohol and Other Drug Use Trends Between aProhibitionist University and National DataSets,” Journal of Research on Christian Education18:2 (August 2009):190-205.

37. For information on a freshman mentor-ing program, see “A Heart for Service: Why WallaWalla University Implemented a Mentor Pro-gram,” by Mel Lang in the April/May 2010 issueof the Journal: http://circle.adventist.org//files/ jae/en/jae201072042505.pdf.

10

Teaching Award, and a 2013 recipient ofthe J. N. Andrews Medallion for the Ad-vancement of Knowledge.

Olivia Titus gradu-ated from AndrewsUniversity in 2013with a Bachelor ofScience in psychol-ogy. While attend-ing the university,she participated in

several research projects sponsored by theBehavioral Science Department andworked as a research assistant, con-tributing to the collecting and inputtingof data for the Andrews University 2013Risk Study coordinated by the Institutefor the Prevention of Addictions. She iscurrently pursuing a Master’s degree inpublic health.

The authors acknowledge FrancesFaehner, Andrews University studentlife vice-president, for her special con-sultation on this article.

NOTES AND REFERENCES1. Frank Chaloupka and Henry Wechsler,

“Binge Drinking in College: The Impact of Price,Availability, and Alcohol Control Policies,” Con-temporary Economic Policy 14:4 (October 1996): 112-124; John Knight, et al., “Alcohol Abuse andDependence Among U.S. College Students,” Jour-nal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 63:3 (May2002):263-270; Patrick O’Malley and Lloyd John-ston, “Epidemiology of Alcohol and Other DrugUse Among American College Students,” ibid. 14(March 2002):23-39; Deborah Prentice and DaleMiller, “Pluralistic Ignorance and Alcohol Use onCampus: Some Consequences of Misperceivingthe Social Norm,” Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology 64:2 (February 1993):243-256; HenryWechsler, et al., “Alcohol Use and Problems at Col-leges Banning Alcohol: Results of a National Sur-vey,” Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 62(March 2001):133-141.

2. Leon Mann, Ros Harmoni, and ColinPower, “Adolescent Decision-Making: The Devel-opment of Competence,” Journal of Adolescence12:3 (September 1989):265-278.

3. Rebecca Mitchell, Traci Toomey, and DarinErickson, “Alcohol Policies on College Cam-puses,” Journal of American College Health 53:4(2003):149-157.

4. Ibid.5. See article by Curtis VanderWaal, et al. on

page 40 of this issue. 6. Gary Hopkins, et al., “Substance Use

Among Students Attending a Christian Univer-sity that Strictly Prohibits the Use of Substances,”

The Journal of Adventist Education • December 2013/January 2014 http:// jae.adventist.org