April 5th, after Ryan McFadyen's infamous e-mail became public and increased the already overwhelming amount of national attention given to the lacrosse scandal, President Richard Brodhead commissioned five committees to evaluate major aspects of University life and determine areas that need improvement.
The committee members were given quite a task.
Comprised of a diverse array of administrators, students, alumni and trustees, the committees were expected to examine facets of the University's organization, social scene and culture. They were charged with proposing recommendations to stop alcohol abuse, sexual assault, violence and racial conflict-the problems that are blurring the lines between Tom Wolfe's fiction and Rolling Stone's facts and raising the toughest questions.
The Campus Culture Initiative, the largest of the five committees, is examining the culture of Duke students and athletes to try to identify the cause of the problems the national media's searchlight brought into the open.
The committee will look closely at four main issues: alcohol, race, gender/sexuality and athletics. From the onset, the committee's opinion was divided, with some members identifying alcohol itself as the primary problem, and others pointing only to alcohol-related consequences.
"We're struggling with the question of whether-in seeking to ameliorate sexual assault, vandalism, violence and the like-to take a prohibitionist stance and try to punish/limit drinking itself to stop those negatives, or whether to directly target those things and not take an ideological stance against drinking," says junior Elliott Wolf, Duke Student Government president and member of the committee.
Robert Thompson, dean of Trinity College of Arts and Sciences and chair of the committee, recognizes the difficulty of reaching a consensus-among the committee's students alone there is a variety of perspectives. More students-ones "articulate" and "not out in left field," Wolf says-are being asked to join the committee and its subcommittees to provide as much student input as possible.
This committee may recommend drastic measures to alter Duke's cultural scene more than it has been changed in the past. How it really changes depends on the students, though, and whether they will rise to the administration's requests.
"Changes to the campus will come about if students accept the report and can agree with its recommendations. One of the things students certainly can't all agree with is, 'Don't drink if you're under 21,'" Wolf says. "It's simply not feasible to force something on the students that they themselves adamantly oppose."
The CCI is one of the two committees that has not yet presented a formal report and whose findings and consequences are yet to be determined. The committee expects to report to the administration and make recommendations-probably regarding the alcohol policy-in December and again next May.
But no matter what they say, it'll probably mean big changes to Duke's social scene.
The other high-profile committee will only affect a small segment of the University's population, but its suggestions have already caused ripples. The Committee on the Investigation of the Men's Lacrosse Team presented its findings May 1 and determined the team had a higher rate of alcohol violations than other students on campus, but also maintained exemplary athletic and academic records.
The committee recommended that the team be reinstated for the 2006-2007 season under certain stipulations: an athletic code of conduct and a stricter, better organization of athletic oversight. When Brodhead reinstated the team June 5, he placed athletics under the jurisdiction of the president and stated the lacrosse team would abide by a self-imposed set of guidelines.
Two other committees investigated student judicial affairs and the administration's response to the lacrosse scandal. Like the other committees, they recommended streamlining and integrating the administrative structure, improving communication protocol, meshing academic and non-academic activities and implementing measures to change Duke's alcohol-abusing culture.
This last point, in the eyes of each committee, appears to be the common denominator, the root of the entire scandal. If students drink less, or drink more responsibly, they'll do fewer stupid things. It sounds good-even obvious-in theory, but how does Duke intend to put it into practice?
The waiting public knows as little as some of the committee members who are just beginning to throw around ideas, but one thing's for sure: after everything is over-the investigations, the trial by media, the "witch hunt," the bonfire of the vanities-the University will try its hardest to never let it happen again, and it will start by ensuring the alcohol policies never again become too lax.
No pun intended.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.