With only slight modifications, the changes proposed to the University Alcohol and Drug Policy in January have the official approval of the president and provost, effective today.
Restriction of registered parties to public spaces and away from private spots like bedrooms, greater host vigilance at parties and increased alcohol risk training for members of student organizations are the main modifications to the policy.
The changes were first proposed by the Alcohol Response Team, a group of students, faculty and administrators assembled to review the drinking culture at Penn.
The group met several times over the course of the school year and for the first time following the Sept. 19 two-story fall of College junior Matthew Paris at a Psi Upsilon party.
After a "for comment" period lasting nearly a month, during which the administration sought feedback from the University community, the finalized version of ART's recommendations will officially be adopted.
According to Interim Provost and ART Chairman Peter Conn, the finalized changes are consistent with the "fundamental thesis in the [ART] report, to depend as much as possible on students themselves for leadership as opposed to top-down mandates and coercion."
One proposal launched during the "for comment" period that was not included in the final version of the changes was the InterFraternity Council's suggestion to allow hosts of registered parties to serve alcohol until 1:30 a.m., as opposed to the current cutoff of 1 a.m.
The suggestion was meant to keep students in a closed environment with the same bartender for a longer period of time, rather than having students venture off to bars --- which close at 2 a.m. -- and new bartenders unfamiliar with how much alcohol students have consumed.
Stephanie Ives, Penn's director of alcohol policy initiatives, said that the proposed change was omitted because it required more "intense discussion," though she did not rule out its implementation in the future.
Some ART members felt that "a party needs an hour to run down and for people to sober up," she said. "If there is an emphasis on the social part of the party, the dancing, the DJ, then you won't have a flight the second the alcohol is cut off."
IFC President and College junior Spencer Scharff would not comment about the omission of the clause, but he said he was pleased with the overall revisions.
"The idea [behind the process] was culture changing," he said. "There are not going to be overnight changes, but I believe things will be changed while I am still here."
Conn said that the administration got responses during the "for comment" period mainly from the IFC and the Alcohol and Other Drug Task Force, which both endorsed the effort and made some additional suggestions.
Conn also said that he received a "half dozen e-mails, principally from students."
He said that the relatively small volume of comments did not surprise him, since the process had been collaborative from the start.
"We spent a lot of time both in [ART] meetings and outside the meetings consulting with as many relevant groups and individuals as we could, so we were quite gratified to get even a handful of thoughtful, detailed responses."
