editorial

Author: [no author name found]

'Study drug' use on campus requires closer look

An unscientific Campus poll this week indicated that 22 percent of students have used Ritalin, Adderall or other study drugs without a prescription. With concerns about the ethics of such drug use cropping up in columns by Campus ethicist-in-residence Amanda Greene '09 and opinions columnist Doug Sisson '07.5, it is clear that it is time for the College to formally address the use of these so-called "study drugs" on campus. While some students are using these drugs recreationally, a great many rely on stimulants like Adderall to complete coursework.

Research done by the National Institute of Drug Abuse shows that stimulant use is more prevalent at more competitive institutions - Middlebury being a prime candidate for such drug abuse. The Department of Public Safety, however, explained recently that drug offences on campus - as cited by their office - are limited exclusively to marijuana. Policing study drug use is, after all, all but impossible. The telltale smell of pot smoke leaking out from under a student's door is one thing. Public Safety officers are not patrolling the carrels of the New Library to root out frazzled students in the same way they roam the halls of dormitories, and with understandable reason.

The use of such drugs on campus is not only dangerous but also ethically ambiguous. Would banning the use of study drugs under the College's Honor Code put an end to their use on campus? Perhaps not. But clarifying the language of the Honor Code to forbid the use of drugs like Ritalin and Adderall without a prescription just might encourage students to self-police dangerous, dishonest behavior. Appealing to students' famed respect for that very Honor Code could prove more effective than any amount of drug enforcement by College administrators.


College must acknowledge reciprocity in town-gown relations

The recent announcement of the College's affiliation with the Town Hall Theater (THT) in downtown Middlebury signifies an important partnership between the town and the College that should, in years to come, only encourage the general goodwill perceived between the two bodies. The College's decision to invest so significantly in the THT is commendable and exciting. Engaging our neighbors in town through performances during the school year and summer language schools will only provoke lively cultural exchange, and students and faculty will benefit from the added space for theatrical and musical pursuits.

This partnership should remind members of the College community of just how lucky we are to belong to an even larger community. Careful consideration must be employed when reaching out to our neighbors, however. Reciprocity in this relationship is vital. As work continues on the biomass facility, hopes for generating business in Addison County by encouraging the sustainable harvesting of wood chips, for instance, signify promising opportunities for economic growth. The THT should promote cultural opportunities reaching far beyond the College's own campus.

Allegations from employees at the Vermont Book Shop of meddling from College officials, however, act as a stark reminder of the sometimes negative impact that the actions of College students and administrators have on our neighbors down the road. In the case of the THT partnership, this impact should yield nothing but goodwill. The Book Shop incident is startling and disappointing, and we, hope, an anomaly in an otherwise strong partnership.