---

BY SARAH PETERSON

In print | February 14, 2008

Over the course of the past few weeks, the college administration’s investigations into alleged drug activity have resulted in three Swarthmore students taking sudden leaves of absence. According to a written statement released to The Phoenix by Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Garikai Campbell ‘90, this began when "substances believed to be drugs were found in a dorm room on campus and turned over to the Dean’s Office."

Following an investigation into the situation, the Dean’s Office decided to turn the substances in question over to the Swarthmore Borough Police. And according to the statement, “Moreover, these conversations ultimately led the Dean’s Office to three students whose alleged behaviors and activities warranted further discussion and scrutiny as possible violations of College policy.” These three students have been confirmed by Campbell as now having taken leaves of absence.

According to an account provided to The Phoenix via e-mail from the first student to leave campus, two administrators and a Public Safety officer entered the student’s dorm room with the student’s permission. These school officials found what they believed to be illegal substances.

Following a meeting with Associate Dean for Multicultural Affairs Darryl Smaw and Dean Campbell, and a longer meeting with the students’ parents in attendance, the student followed recommendations to take a leave of absence for the semester.

When initially contacted about the incident, Public Safety referred The Phoenix to the Deans’ Office for questions.

So far, there have been no College Judiciary Committee proceedings relating to the case. However, according to Dean Campbell’s statement, the college is still in the process of investigating the case, and is yet to decide whether and when there will be formal disciplinary proceedings.

Deans are also hoping to clarify any confusion that may be arising from speculation in the community regarding these incidents. According to Campbell’s statement, “there are many details that we cannot share for reasons including the need to protect the privacy of students involved.”

Associate Dean Myrt Westphal declined to comment on the specific case at hand, but spoke more broadly about the college’s policies and practices relating to drug activity among students.

“As people understand, our philosophy is that we don’t go out looking for misbehaviors or rule-breaking or law-breaking,” she said. “But if it comes to our attention we will definitely follow up on it.”

To some students, the fact that the Deans’ Office intervened in drug activity may come as a surprise, due to a misperception that this is something the administration doesn’t follow or care about.

“That’s a refrain I’ve heard a couple of times in the last week or two: ‘Well, the administration doesn’t care.’ Wrong,” she said. “This case brings to light that there are issues that students need to be aware of that might affect their behavior. While we are an educational institutiution, we also have rules and punishments if those roles are broken. Drugs are high up on the list of things that we will not tolerate.”

Without commenting on or indicating anything about the activity of the students who have left campus, Westphal explained that the Deans’ Office will take action against drug-related activity, particularly if it involves the dealing or distribution of illegal substances.

Westphal distinguished between the illegal distribution of alcohol to minors and the illegal distribution of drugs, insfoar as alcohol is illegal for some people, but drugs are “not legal for anyone.”

“We’re going to take a stronger stance … about any kind of distribution or selling,” she added. The associated dangers of dealing and distribution involve the kind of people that may be brought on campus by drug dealing, and whether anyone involved would inflict harm or theft, or what might happen if large amounts of money are owed to someone.

When following up on leads or evidence of drug activity, the deans walk a tight line between competing concerns for the privacy and educational experience of individuals involved, and the safety and integrity of the college community as a whole.

“One thing that may get lost every now and then is that Swarthmore is in a broader community, and we owe it to the larger community as well to take these matters seriously,” Campbell said in interview.

In certain cases, individuals come to the deans when they have knowledge of illegal activity that makes them fearful, and believe that authorities should step in. These individuals may remain anonymous, but coming forward still helps the deans prevent further problems, especially if they hear from multiple sources.

“I don’t think we in authority swoop down on somebody, but we do act reasonably, quickly and strongly, listening to other people’s sides of the stories,” Westphal said. “There’s tremendous amount of consultation among the deans about what we should do next: Who should do it? When should we do it? Who else should be included?”

If pursuing the matter involves entering a student’s room, this is within the deans’ powers. According to the Student Handbook, “any dean may enter and inspect a residence hall room without the resident’s consent if there is reason to believe that any college regulation is being or has been violated.”

In the case that a student is suspected of engaging in drug-related activity, how the administration proceeds can vary depending on the severity of the situation. “We would often strongly encourage someone who was just using to leave — particularly if other circumstances indicated that they weren’t going to class or they were causing a nuisance in the dorm, something like that,” Westphal said. “So it doesn’t have to just be distribution or the use of a felony drug.”

Westphal explained that, as in the case of all violations of school regulations -particularly with “big mistakes” such as academic dishonesty or sexual assault - there are two systems of adjudication within the administration: Adjudication by deans for minor infractions, or a hearing with the CJC for major infractions, according to the Student Handbook.

“The President or the Dean can put somebody off campus without a procedure if they feel like the student is a danger to themselves or others,” Westphal said. “There are two levels of justice: there’s meeting with a dean, and we can go all the way up to probation. But if somebody’s going to be expelled, they have to go through the CJC. That doesn’t mean that CJC wouldn’t do something like give a warning or give a probation.”

“If we’ve found evidence, and we know that somebody did something, we would have a conversation … And here’s where the education comes in: We would like the person to get treatment. We want this person to figure this out. We don’t want to just slap down a hearing on them.”

However, according to Dean Campbell’s statement, “A student who elects for personal reasons to take a leave does not avoid possible disciplinary consequences as those matters are held in abeyance and must be resolved if the student hopes or plans to return to the college.”

For students who leave and apply through the Dean’s Office to return to campus, there may be a CJC hearing waiting for them. Each case is considered individually, with special consideration given to how the student has spent their time away from Swarthmore — in treatment or counseling, in jail, taking classes. The nature of the original case, and the student’s involvement therein, would be considered as well. “We look at the individual and we look at the educational experience,” Westphal said.

In terms of making public reports, the college follows the requirements of the Clery Act, established in 1990. According to these requirements, most college officials must report within 24 hours to Public Safety if they have heard about an incident of criminal activity, whether that means sexual assault, drug use or possession or otherwise. “Those statistic are maintained by Public Safety,” Westphal said. “They are public, and they are published once a year.”

“This doesn’t mean that we’re soft on students who do this kind of stuff, because we don’t want them here,” Westphal said. "We don’t want them here at all. We want them away. And some of these people we will even ban from campus.

The first step in intervention, however, is education. Both deans stressed that informing students of the ramifications of their decisions was the best way to prevent further poor decision-making. “There can be a lot of factors around the decisions around such activity - drug activity - that people can be fairly naive about and not understand all the ramifications. I think we have an obligation to help students understand all the ramifications of their decisions was the best way to prevent further poor decision-making. "There can be a lot of factors around the decisions around such activity - drug activity - that people can be fairly naive about and not understand all the ramifications. I think we have an obligation to help students understand all the ramifications of the choices that they make. And not in a paternalistic way, but to really have some serious discussions about things that they may not be thinking about,” Campbell said.

“In Swarthmore,” Westphal said, “we will get further by doing it this way, by letting students know that we won’t tolerate this. And basically we don’t want it on campus, and we would rather it disappear than to punish it.”

“We will continue to gather information and to try to understand this situation, and will work with students and others to heal the damage that we feel this situation has brought to the community,” Campbell said in his written statement. The statement, in its entirety, may be found on The Phoenix’s Web site.

---

« RETURN TO NEWS

« PREV ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE »