To the Editor:
I am writing in response to Michael Herman '07's op-ed, "Reevaluating the Fairness of COS Standards" (Oct. 17). I appreciate the work Student Assembly has done to begin a conversation about the Committee on Standards. I am concerned, however, that the proposals suggested by Herman do not address the concerns he raised.
Herman explains that the rise in disciplinary cases has prompted suggestions to improve the COS. I would like to point out that COS cases actually represent a small portion of incidents adjudicated by the College. Of the 318 cases that came through the College disciplinary system last year, only 19 involved COS hearings. Most cases are heard by a dean because they do not rise to the level of a possible suspension from the College, or because the student admits responsibility and requests a one-on-one hearing.
As a community, we should be concerned about the numbers of students who come to the attention of the College disciplinary system. In the Annual Report to the Community from 2005-06, we actually reported a significant decrease in the number of undergraduate disciplinary cases that came to the attention of the College. I encourage you to look at the annual report on the Undergraduate Judicial Affairs website for more information about the actual disciplinary caseload. Herman was accurate in stating that there were 537 cases that resulted in sanctions from 2004-05, but what he did not report was that in 2005-06, that number dropped to 318 cases. I believe that drop in cases is a result of decisions by students, not changes to the COS. More students called Good Samaritans for their friends, more students took the keys away rather than allowing someone to drive, and more students confronted peers and said, "You've had too much to drink."
Alcohol use and abuse is the source of the majority of disciplinary issues at Dartmouth. Almost all of the serious misconduct involved alcohol abuse, including violence toward other students, sexual assault, three or more violations of public intoxication, and driving a vehicle while intoxicated. In addition, 69 percent of the 427 students alleged to have violated College policy last year had been drinking alcohol. Of those, 181 students were cited for public intoxication, which meant that their blood alcohol contents were high enough to warrant medical care from Dick's House or trips to the emergency room to treat alcohol poisoning.
While I think that Herman's proposals certainly warrant further discussion, I do not believe that changing the COS standard of evidence or hearing procedures will have any impact on the numbers of students who come before the COS. If Student Assembly is serious about decreasing the numbers of cases that result in disciplinary consequences, I propose that we have more serious discussion about excessive alcohol use. Students should not have to accept vomit and damage in the community, fights at social events, intoxicated strangers entering bedrooms, or any of the other behavioral impact that excessive alcohol use has on our community. By holding each other to a higher standard regarding alcohol use, students can continue to decrease the numbers of disciplinary cases and perhaps eliminate the need for the COS.
