TDR Interview: Dean Thomas Crady

By Emily Esfahani-Smith and Christine S. Tian | Sunday, April 6, 2008

The Alcohol Policy

The Dartmouth Review: You’ve been meeting with many students, and we know that that was your top priority last term. What are the top three issues that students have been voicing to you on a recurrent basis?

Dean Thomas Crady: Well, first and foremost, the top thing that I hear from people is that students love Dartmouth. That comes through loud and clear. If I were to summarize the top three concerns that students have been voicing, they have to do with the following: people are concerned about the “Parkhursting” phenomenon, they are concerned about the Committee on Standards—how it is run and future reforms—and finally, students are worried about the policy on alcohol guidelines.

TDR: Let’s talk about alcohol guidelines, but as a transition question: we were doing a little bit of research and found that you did your Ph.D. dissertation on the use of alcohol in frats. You seem to conclude that the use of alcohol is inevitable and a college’s desire to strictly prohibit underage drinking is foolish and runs against the reality of the situation.

From a disciplinary level, do you think the College should enact strict disciplinary measures for students who consume alcohol underage?

Crady: I think that any alcohol policy ought to be fair, thoughtful, consistent, and safe. I would argue that if you have a really punitive alcohol policy on campus, students will probably drink elsewhere. That came through in my dissertation research. I think that to assume that students won’t drink on a college campus is probably incorrect. At any campus—even a dry campus, a significant number of which I’ve researched—it’s important to make sure we implement alcohol policies that that are easily understood and thoughtful.

At a very basic level, we have to follow the federal law implemented in 1989, the Drug-Free Schools Act, which also applies to students and employees. We need to construct policies around those concepts.

TDR: Given that you think the alcohol policy should be fair, thoughtful, consistent and safe, could you briefly tell us what Dartmouth’s alcohol policy is, and if you think it meets those standards?

Crady: Dartmouth’s alcohol policy meets the standard of the federal law I just mentioned, no question about that. In terms of the way it’s being administered now, I’ve just gotten some recommendations from a committee geared to reforming alcohol policies at Dartmouth, so I can’t say anything about it right now until I’ve had the chance to go over those recommendations. My concern, from what I’ve heard from students, was that they consistently felt the alcohol policy was too confusing and that it was very difficult to implement—the policy did not match what was happening on campus. I heard that very clearly in my discussions with students.

TDR: Can you give us an example?

Crady: For example, there’s a keg limit for a registered party—but you can have fifty-seven cases of Keystone Light in a frat basement if you can fit it in your car.

TDR: You say you’ve been getting recommendations: are these recommendations to change the alcohol policy?

Crady: There is a preliminary set of recommendations that I received yesterday—I haven’t read them yet. I’m going to read them on the airplane tonight, to be honest with you.

TDR: Given the cursory knowledge that you have of the alcohol policy, what are three changes that you think should be made to it?

Crady: Well, I think any time you have students getting reprimanded for alcohol infractions, there has to be a strong educational component. The other point comes from something I saw in my previous job at Grinnell working with students: there is increasingly a higher percentage of students who binge drink and a higher percentage of students who “extreme drink.” What concerns me the most is that extreme drinking area. Binge drinking is five or more drinks for a man, and four or more for a woman in one sitting; but extreme drinking can range from eight to fifteen drinks in one night. That’s something that I’m particularly concerned about.

TDR: If that is occurring excessively on a college campus, should the disciplinary measure be merely educational?

Crady: No. There has to be a component of education, but there also have to be policies that would try to get students help in a situation like that. So my number one concern is to make sure that a person is taken to Dick’s House, or if their BAC is above a .30, to have them taken to the emergency room at DHMC. When we try to deal with the alcohol policy, we want to be realistic about the way we apply it to students, and try to deal with the really extremely dangerous drinking proactively before it happens.

TDR: So in terms of the official policy, is your primary concern the safety of students, and not necessarily disciplining them, especially if they’re having a drink or two and are not twenty-one?

Crady: Well, my primary concern is safety; what we do later on would involve having someone sit down with them and talk about the implications of what they did. Federal law is really clear—students and employees who violate the College alcohol policy must have disciplinary sanctions, but those can range from warnings to expulsion. From my point of view, any alcohol policy should be fair and thoughtful, so we should start with a warning system—it ought to be progressive; if it continues, the disciplinary measures will get worse and worse and worse. My feeling is that we ought to be really thoughtful in getting students help, but if there are repeated violations where students keep on being in situations where they’re being hospitalized, I’m not sure they should be here.

SEMP

TDR: How does the reform process to change the alcohol policy work?

Crady: The recommendations I mentioned are looking at SEMP procedures. SEMP stands for Social Event Management Procedures; it determines party process procedures and determines how much alcohol can be at a particular event based on the percentage of students who are underage, and statistics like that. We look at what’s going on at the party and whether or not there are nonalcoholic beverages and food there, things to offset the effects of the alcohol. With SEMP, I still want to go back and read the policy for the third time, because I have some questions about it too.

Once I get the final recommendations from the committee to reform the alcohol policy, I’ll put them out for public comment for a couple of weeks, then listen to what students have to say. It wouldn’t surprise me if I had an open forum where I had the chance to listen to what students think about the recommended changes. Then ultimately it’s my job to make the decision about the policy. Since it’s so early in the process, it would be inappropriate to comment about what I’m going to do—I just don’t know yet.

TDR: Okay, but the buck stops at you, you make the final decision?

Crady: Yes.

TDR: A particular point of controversy seems to be the keg policy. Specifically, the issue is that a student group needs to have registered a party in order to have kegs. If a student group, like a fraternity, has an unregistered party with kegs, the group will be put on probation, correct?

Crady: Yes

TDR: But what about a situation where maybe they didn’t get the paperwork together to register the party, but it’s safer to have kegs because the brothers can control the amount of alcohol being given to people at the party rather than partygoers just grabbing Keystone and drinking themselves into an oblivion?

Crady: It’s too early for me to even comment about that. If you’re asking me ‘am I thinking about what you just said?’ The answer is, you bet.

TDR: But as far as you’re concerned, if they’re breaking SEMP policy, then that’s not good?

Crady: The policies were put into place long before I got here. One of the things I said I would do is really listen to students, really try to think thoughtfully about what’s going on, and try to make sure that what we have in place is what we said—thoughtful, fair, safe, and on the side of the law. So what I’m doing right now is really trying to listen to what students have to say, but the policies are in place—they have been for a while—and it would be inappropriate for me to condemn policies that I haven’t really had a chance to work with and that have been in place for a while. I’ve been here fifteen weeks; it’s premature for me to make any comments about where we are with SEMP right now.

TDR: The committee that’s working to reform SEMP is a five person committee, and the Dean of Residential Life, Marty Redman, is on it. Are you on that committee?

Crady: No, they just present their findings to me.

TDR: Hypothetically, if you disagree with what the recommendations are, how would that disagreement be resolved between you and Dean Redman?

Crady: That’s a good question. Most likely I would raise those kinds of concerns with the committee and ask them to reconsider it. But I think my primary concern is: first, I don’t assume that every student drinks on this campus. Every campus has a population of students who don’t drink. Second, I go back to student safety and making sure we comply with federal law, there’s no choice about that—our federal funding for the College hinges on that. So I have to make sure that what we do is really thoughtful for students, but also make sure it’s reasonable, easy to understand, and easy to implement. In some future time we have to evaluate it, run a survey. I want to have a good idea of what’s going on.

Greek Life

TDR: So a moment ago you briefly mentioned you worked at Grinnell College prior to coming to Dartmouth. There was no Greek scene there, so what is your opinion about Greek life, from what you hear about it, and what you’ve seen here at Dartmouth?

Crady: From my experience, students here find the Greek system to be a very strong experience for them. Something we’re specifically working on is looking for ways to close the gap between frats and sororities, in terms of number and treatment. For instance, we are currently looking to provide houses for sororities. We’re trying to achieve a better balance between what sororities have and what fraternities have.

There’s no question that Greek life is a really strong component of this institution. So, how can we strengthen that, how can we improve on that? That’s something we’re trying to do. We are trying to assist those Greek organizations in achieving goals to improve themselves. In my dissertation, the reason why I focused on alcohol in fraternities is because it was an area I hadn’t been working in and I wanted to learn about it. As a result, I was able to research Greek life pretty objectively, with no preconceived ideas about a Greek system, and do qualitative research.

Here at Dartmouth, I think we should really try to support Greek organizations and make sure that they have the ability to accomplish the goals they set out in their action plans, through the Office of Residential Life.

TDR: One more question about Greek life before we move on. In the past, I would say the administration was hostile towards Greek life to the point where it would have wanted it to be abolished from campus altogether. That was what the heated Student Life Initiative was about. Would you classify yourself as a proponent of Greek life or as a critic of it?

Crady: What I would say is this: I’m supporting what students want. It’s important for someone in my position to support where students are today. Where students are today is that there is a strong element of students involved in Greek life. I would support those students in their endeavors and everything else they would want to accomplish.

The Committee on Standards

TDR: Let’s move on to reforms being proposed for the Committee on Standards. There is also a committee overseeing this process. They are working right now to increase the burden of proof in various student cases, such as academic dishonesty and sexual assault. In cases of sexual assault, specifically, it’s allowing the accused to confront the accuser and it’s raising the burden of proof from a preponderance of evidence to clear and convincing evidence. What do you think of this specific reform?

Crady: It’s too early to say because the committee is deliberating these issues right now—I don’t even know where they are in terms of the particular level of evidence, whether it’s preponderance or clear and convincing. I don’t know what the recommendations are. I’ve worked with both standards of proof on a college campus: preponderance and clear and convincing. It’s just too early for me to know which standard is better for Dartmouth because Dartmouth has a different culture and a different organization. Plus, recently, there was an Office of Civil Rights case that was beginning to challenge Ohio State University on their position on clear and convincing evidence in rape cases. The Office of Civil Rights is with the U.S. Department of Education. I want to find out a little more about what happened there as well before I enact any specific changes to assault cases.

TDR: Perhaps this happened before you came here, but do you know what’s driving COS to even think about changing the standards now?

Crady: I know that it’s been raised by students as a concern in the past, so that’s what is prompting the discussion to reform it right now.

TDR: Do you think it’s been raised by students because there have been some unjust accusations and convictions under the lower standard of preponderance?

Crady: I would assume it’s symptomatic of a larger problem on this campus.

TDR: Like the SEMP policy reform, does the COS committee present its findings to you, and then you finally come up with the final decision?

Crady: Yes. That again will be put out for two weeks of comment later in the term, but I’m not on the committee, so I don’t know.

My feeling is that anytime we go though a major review of any policy in student life, students ought to be able to make comments about it and what’s being recommended.

As you know, I’m fairly out there talking to students. I hold office hours in Collis; I want to hear what students have to say and my goal is to be accessible. What I decided early on is that because my family won’t be here until June, that’s twelve weeks for me to meet with student groups, so I’ve been doing that since January. And then in the afternoons, I’ve been holding open office hours out of Collis. I’ve had a lot of students walk up with lists of issues they want to talk about—and I take work down there with me and work if people aren’t coming—but every week I have students coming down and asking me things.

TDR: Given that, you already have a reputation on campus as being the student advocate at Parkhurst. Like you said, we talk about Parkhurst in terms of being “Parkhursted.” Students tend to have a very negative image of Parkhurst. Though students see you as their advocate here, is your primary responsibility as the Dean of the College to students or to fellow college administrators?

Crady: Well, I think anytime someone is the Dean of the College—whose primary responsibility is to work with students—that person ought to act as an advocate, but that doesn’t mean we’re always going to agree. It does mean that what I will do is always listen to what students have to say about an issue. I’m willing to meet with anybody, including the biggest critics on campus, and listen to what people have to say. I like being out and available and visible: I wouldn’t do that if I wasn’t willing to be an advocate for students. There are times when it’s inevitable that there are policies on campus on which we won’t agree. Not every student’s going to agree with my position on a policy for sure, but it doesn’t mean that nobody’s going to get an opportunity to get any input. And they have had the opportunity to do that extensively over the past months, and so on. I think it’s important that if people disagree with me, they can associate the name with a face.

The Athletics Program

TDR: Many athletes have complaints about the preferential treatment the administration gives some teams as opposed to others. In some of the discussions you’ve hosted and led on campus, you’ve brought up the issue of athletics and have heard what students have had to say.

Let me recap some points that have come up: the swim team was cut in 2002 because of a lack of funding. It’s back now after that decision was reversed due to alumni outcry. Not funding related, former Dean of Admissions Karl Furstenburg endorsed, in a letter that was later publicly circulated, Swarthmore College’s decision to cut the football program. This generated controversy on campus for obvious reasons. Finally, many varsity and club sports are severely underfunded, and some disparity exists between who gets funding and who doesn’t. Given this, there seems to be a neglect of the athletic department by the administration, or at least that’s how students perceive it.

What steps would you take to address these issues within Dartmouth athletics?

Crady: I mentioned earlier that after this interview, I’m jumping on a plane to go to Iowa. The reason I’m going to Iowa today is because I’m going to Chicago for an athletic development event on Monday and Tuesday.

When I look at what’s important for providing an exceptional out-of-class experience, I think student athletes are a very important component of that, so it’s an area I spend a lot of time with the Athletic Director, Josie Harper, on. I go to many games because it’s important for students to feel supported. Also, it’s important to do what we can to provide equity between men and women in sports on campus. Right now I think there is equity, but I always worry about it. Athletics is reported to me, by students, as being an important component of their lives, and I support students, so I’m somebody who will certainly support athletics on campus, no question about it. Money is tight, there’s no doubt—so we are looking at that and possible solutions to that problem. That’s one of the reasons why we’re going on the road today. It’ll be Josie Harper, Football coach Buddy Teevens, and Chris Wielgus, the head coach of the women’s basketball team. We’re going to be talking to some alums about where we are with athletics.

Crady on the Administration

TDR Given that money is tight, do you think that there are too many deans on this campus?

Crady: [laughs] That question has been posed to me many times. I can’t say that I think there are a disproportionately large number of deans here at Dartmouth compared to other places. I came from a place where we were relatively lean, and we’re all very busy here. I just started having office meetings with different divisions right now. Do we have too many staff? I don’t think we do. Is the term “dean” used a lot here? I mean, there are a lot of deans in the various divisions. There’s a difference between how titles are used and the actual person-power we use to staff departments. Nobody’s sitting around twiddling their thumbs; I can tell you that my schedule is pretty much one twelve hour day after another. In fact, last night was the first night I didn’t have a night meeting in several weeks! I’ve heard the “too many deans problem” stated before, but I have to say the areas we support are areas that are typically supported on a college campus in student affairs. I think I come from a completely objective point of view—I’ve worked in the field for twenty five years, I’ve probably been on fifty campuses, and I’ve done external reviews for departments. A year ago I reviewed the Carleton student affairs program. We looked at whether or not there are thoughtful services for students on a college campus, and based on my findings there, I can’t say that we here at Dartmouth are overstaffed.

TDR: Given that President Wright is leaving, what qualities would you want to see in a new president?

Crady: That’s a good question. I’d like to see the person focus number one on academics.

There needs to be somebody who first and foremost values the academic program. I think that the current president has been very good about being a public figure and being available and visible on campus. I also think that it is very important for the person to be able to have administrative skills. I’ve worked for six presidents, and each has brought different strengths to the table and surrounds himself with staff to help, so hopefully the person will be like Jim Wright—open and available to people and willing to listen.

TDR: In your experience, as you’ve worked with many presidents, is it better for the president to come from within the institution or to be an outsider?

Crady: I don’t think you can say either way. It depends on the institution, the succession of presidents, and what the Board of Trustees think. The presidents I have worked with came from both within and from outside the institutions. The first president I worked with was a Grinnell graduate. He was a member of the Board of Trustees, had been the Dean of Colorado College, and was a Rhodes scholar—he was a Grinnellian all the way through though. Then the last president I worked for at Grinnell was the former Dean of the Cornell University Law School. What has to come first is to find the right person as defined by the search committee, and whether the person is an insider or outsider doesn’t make a difference. The search committee has to determine what the college’s priorities are, and which individual can best accomplish those goals I’m not privy to that information right now.

TDR: Any general remarks on the community?

Crady: I love it here.

TDR Interview: Dean Thomas Crady

Article Tools

Related Articles