Recommendation for the Automatic Enforcement of a 24-Hour Visitation Policy

Prepared by Texas Tech University StudentsEnglish 3365-016, Fall 2008

Autumn LamphierJered Kubicek

Lynn LawrenceKaren Ross

November 25, 2008

Prepared for Residence Hall AssociationBen Bronson, President

1

Table of Contents Executive Summary.............................................................................................................3

Purpose & Goal..................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Current Voting Procedure..................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Issues with the Current Voting Procedure.......................................................................5Recommendation.................................................................................................................6

Steps of the Proposed Voting Procedure.......................Error! Bookmark not defined.Research...............................................................................................................................7

Voting History Since 2005..............................................................................................72005 Visitation Vote Results.....................................Error! Bookmark not defined.2006 Visitation Vote Results.....................................Error! Bookmark not defined.2007 Visitation Vote Results.......................................................................................82008 Visitation Vote Results.......................................................................................9

Options Chosen by Voters in All Residence Halls..........................................................9Analysis of Voting History................................................................................................11

Appendix I.........................................................................................................................12

Appendix II........................................................................................................................13

This is a sub-heading.....................................................................................................14This is the second sub-heading......................................................................................14

This is a third heading (if needed).............................................................................14

2

Executive Summary

We think the Texas Tech Residence Halls Association (RHA) should change the visitation hours voting procedure. We think it would be better for residence halls to automatically have a 24-hour visitation policy. If more than 50 percent of students choose to submit a form opting out of the policy, RHA could take a regular vote the following week.

We based our conclusion on the results of voting from 2005 to 2008. We noticed that:

Residence halls choose 24-hour visitation every year. In every case except two, more than 90 percent of residents chose 24-hour

visitation. On average, residents chose 24-hour visitation 18 times more often than all other

options combined. RHA only needed a second vote when less than 2/3 of residents voted.

Because of this, we think RHA should replace the annual vote with a more efficient and less time-consuming procedure with automatic 24-hour visitation.

3

The Goal of This ProposalThis proposal suggests that RHA asks University Student Housing to consider automatically enforcing 24-hour visitation in our residence halls without an annual student vote. It explains why RHA believes this solution is most effective.

This proposal contains a summary of current voting procedures and results. It also contains our policy recommendations and the procedure we suggest in case students do not wish to have 24-hour visitation.

Currently RHA is responsible for conducting and counting the vote each year. They feel that this process is time consuming and unnecessary. Therefore, we suggest an automatic 24-hour visitation policy.

4

Current Voting Procedure

Since 1999, the policy has required that the dorms hold a vote over the course of a week. They must fill out and submit a ballot containing the following visitation options:

Option 1: Sunday – Thursday, 11 a.m. – Midnight; Friday – Saturday, 11 a.m. – 2 a.m.

Option 2: Sunday – Saturday, 11 a.m. – 2 a.m. Option 3: Sunday – Thursday, 11 a.m. – 2 a.m.; Friday – Saturday, 24 hours Option 4: Sunday – Saturday, 24 hours

In order for the vote results to be valid, at least 2/3 of the complex’s population must vote. If either of these requirements is not met, a complex has the option to hold a second vote two weeks after the initial vote.

Issues with the Current Voting Procedure

There are two primary issues with the current voting procedure. First, it is time consuming. Second, the same result has been reached by all the residence halls between 2005 and 2008. Residence halls take the time each year to hold the votes to allow the residents to have a say in visitation hours. However, since the results never change, this actually wastes time and trouble.

We have a plan to give residents a say with less time and trouble.

5

Recommendation

We recommend that the policy should be changed to accommodate RHA’s concerns.

An automatic 24-hour visitation policy would be more effective. In the past, residents have always voted for a 24-hour visitation policy. Giving residents the opportunity to opt-out allows them to voice their opinion, while simplifying the process.

There are certain other policies that affect visitation but that are not affected by the 24-hour visitation policy. For instance, policies like having around-the-clock quiet hours during the week of finals would not change even if the visitation voting policy changes.

Here is the voting procedure RHA should implement to make sure all residents understand the policy and have the opportunity to “opt-out”. This procedure also describes when to hold a vote if more than 50 percent of student submit an “opt-out” form.

1. Residents would be informed of the voting procedure at freshman orientation. This gives them ample time to think about their decision and possibly talk it over with their parents.

2. Residents would be informed about the process again shortly after moving into the residence halls by their community advisors (CA’s). This reminds residents of their opportunity to opt-out and ensures that those students who did not attend freshman orientation are aware of the process.

3. Within the first month of school, opt-out forms and a sealed drop box would be placed outside the front office of each complex. It would be placed where residents always have access to it. The drop box would also be sealed so that submitted forms cannot be tampered with or removed.

4. Students would be given the first two weeks of school to submit an opt-out form.

5. If more than half the residents choose to opt-out, then a regular vote would take place during the following week. This timeline ensures that a visitation procedure is chosen within the first three weeks of school.

6

Research

We analyzed voting data from the years 2005 to 2008 in order to reach our recommendation. We looked at how many students voted and which option they chose.

We also talked to several people, other than students, who have an interest in 24-hour visitation. We interviewed a Texas Tech police officer, the Parent and Family Relations director, and a CA. We asked them about their concerns with problems that may arise with 24-hour visitation so we could address those issues in our report. These opinions can be found in Appendix 1.

7

Voting History Since 2005

The following tables show the outcome of voting in the years 2005-2008. The data used is taken from first-round votes. In every case that a second vote was taken, option 4 was passed.

Complex ResidentPopulation

2/3 of Population

Total # of Vote

s

Votes for

Option 1

Votes for

Option 2

Votes for

Option 3

Votes for

Option 4

Visitation Option Chosen

Horn/Knapp 529 352 417 4 2 10 401 24 HourWall/Gates 481 320 426 1 0 21 404 24 HourBledsoe/Sneed 516 343 401 1 4 14 382 24 HourStangel/Murdough 935 622 601 5 3 15 578 24 Hour*Coleman 448 299 365 7 1 19 338 24 HourChitwood/Weymouth

977 650 795 6 1 37 751 24 Hour

Hulen/Clement 697 464 555 4 1 13 537 24 Hour

2005 Visitation Vote Result

Complex ResidentPopulation

2/3 of Population

Total # of Vote

s

Votes for

Option 1

Votes for

Option 2

Votes for

Option 3

Votes for

Option 4

Visitation Option Chosen

Horn/Knapp 509 339 345 5 0 7 332 24 HourWall/Gates 668 445 501 6 2 13 477 24 HourBledsoe/Sneed 483 322 341 10 0 17 314 24 HourStangel/Murdough 880 586 546 11 0 14 516 24 Hour*Coleman 438 292 303 4 0 11 287 24 HourChitwood/Weymouth

1031 687 704 3 0 5 688 24 Hour

Hulen/Clement 632 421 478 4 2 26 445 24 Hour

2006 Visitation Vote Result

8

Complex ResidentPopulation

2/3 of Population

Total # of Vote

s

Votes for

Option 1

Votes for

Option 2

Votes for

Option 3

Votes for

Option 4

Visitation Option Chosen

Horn/Knapp 569 379 421 6 2 23 389 24 HourWall/Gates 766 510 356 0 2 20 334 24 Hour*Bledsoe/Sneed 558 372 209 5 2 17 174 24 Hour*Stangel/Murdough 950 633 773 5 0 24 729 24 HourColeman 527 351 338 1 2 11 324 24 Hour*Chitwood/Weymouth

1074 716 726 3 0 9 712 24 Hour

Hulen/Clement 702 468 508 6 2 28 468 24 Hour

2007 Visitation Vote Results

Complex ResidentPopulation

2/3 of Population

Total # of Vote

s

Votes for

Option 1

Votes for

Option 2

Votes for

Option 3

Votes for

Option 4

Visitation Option Chosen

Horn/Knapp 571 377 470 17 1 79 368 24 HourWall/Gates 703 464 485 5 0 17 461 24 HourBledsoe/Sneed 600 396 428 8 1 33 386 24 HourStangel/Murdough 955 630 696 5 1 34 656 24 HourColeman 524 346 360 3 0 18 338 24 HourChitwood/Weymouth

1055 696 736 8 1 29 694 24 Hour

Hulen/Clement 730 482 356 0 1 20 334

2008 Visitation Vote Results

9

Voting Distribution by Option for all Residence Halls

Students chose option 4 20 times more often than all other options combined in 2005, 22 times more often in 2006, 19 times more often in 2007, and 12 times more often in 2008. On average, option 4 was chosen 18 times more often than any other option combined.

2005 2006 2007 20080

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Option 1Option 2Option 3Option 4

The graph above shows the options chosen by voters in all residence halls for the years 2005 to 2008.

10

Analysis of Voting History

In every vote from 2005 to 2007, an overwhelming majority voted in favor of option 4 (24-hour visitation). The following table shows that more than 90% of students voted for option 4 in the first round of voting in every vote except one. In that vote, only 30% of residents voted in the first round, and 83% of those students voted in favor of option 4.

RHA only held a second vote because less than 2/3 of the hall population voted. From 2005 to 2007, the number of students that participated in voting declined each year. The second table on this page shows the percentage of residents that participated in the first round of voting each year and the average.

Complex Percentage of Voters that Voted for 24 Hour Visitation2005 2006 2007 2008

Horn/Knapp 96 96 92 78Wall/Gates 95 95 94 95Bledsoe/Sneed 95 92 83 90Stangel/Murdough 96 95 94 94Coleman 93 95 96 94Chitwood/Weymouth 94 98 98 94Hulen/Clement 97 93 92 94Average 95% 95% 93% 91%

The table above shows the percentage of residents that voted for 24-hour visitation. It also shows the campus-wide average of residents who voted for 24-hour visitation by year.

Complex Percentage of Residents that Voted in First Vote2005 2006 2007 2008

Horn/Knapp 79 68 74 82Wall/Gates 89 75 46 69Bledsoe/Sneed 78 71 37 71Stangel/Murdough 64 62 81 73Coleman 81 69 64 69Chitwood/Weymouth 81 68 68 70Hulen/Clement 80 77 72 49Average 79% 70% 63% 69%

The table above shows the percentage of residents in each hall that voted in the first round. It also shows the average first round participation percentage by year.

11

Appendix I

Preventive crime officer Jack Floyd of the TTU Police Dept met with Jered Kubicek on Monday, November 10th, 2008, to discuss 24-hour visitation policy.

-Officer Floyd would be most satisfied with no 24-hour visitation policy

-Officer Floyd believes that 24 Hour visitation tempts students and visitors to behave badly.

-Crime statistics on Campus do not change very much from year to year.

-A 24 hour visitation policy probably only has a minor effect on crime.

-Allowing 24 hour visitation might contribute to the “invincible” attitude that can get college students into trouble. A curfew might help remind students why certain rules are in place for their protection.

12

Appendix II

Here is where details on the A&M automatic 24 hour visitation procedure will be located.

13

This is a sub-heading

This is the first sentence of the first body paragraph. It will be formatted like this. Never less than two sub-headings. If a list is needed, then use standard bullets such as these.

Example of a list Example of a list

o Sub-section of a list Example of a list

This is the second paragraph of the body. Each section will also have a concluding paragraph to summarize the section.

This is the second sub-heading

This is the first sentence of the first body paragraph. It will be formatted like this. It will be formatted like this.

This is the second paragraph of the body if citations are needed they will be done like this.1 Notice they are footnotes at the end of each page and not the whole document. See “third heading” for instructions.

This is a third heading (if needed)

To enter a footnote, go to “insert” then click “footnote”. (Be sure when you do this that the curser is set at the end of the sentence you wish to site after the period. If there is a quotation mark then set it after the quotation mark.) Don’t change anything in the pop-up box and click “OK”.

This is the second paragraph of a sub-sub-heading. Lynn said, “it is set up in an automatic numbering format so whatever page you are on it will automatically place the footnotes in order.”2

1 References for now will be set in MLA format. When we start doing research we will modify footnotes to best fit our needs. 2 This is an example of where the second reference would be.

14