Directors Meeting - March 9, 2021 Division of Student Affairs and Academic Support "Substance Misuse, Enforcement and Retention," presented by Aimee Hourigan, director, Substance Abuse Prevention and Education "Experience by Design," presented by Amber Fallucca, director of the Quality Enhancement Plan, and Lara Ducate, faculty executive director, Center for Integrative and Experiential Learning Remarks and Updates Dennis Pruitt, Vice President for Student Affairs

1. Division of Student Affairs & Academic Support
Directors and Friends Meeting
March 9, 2021

2. Substance Misuse, Enforcement,
and Retention
Aimee Hourigan
Director of Substance Abuse Prevention & Education
Boris Klarić
Coalition Coordinator

3. GOALS
• Discuss connections between retention, persistence to
graduation, and substance misuse.
• Analyze possible correlates between higher education
outcomes and alcohol enforcement in SC.
• Share recommendations to improve academic and health
outcomes by addressing substance misuse.

4. ACADEMIC IMPACT OF SUBSTANCE
MISUSE

5. WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH SAY?
About 25 percent of college students report academic consequences of their drinking,
including missing class, falling behind in class, doing poorly on exams or papers, and
receiving lower grades overall (White & Hingson, 2013).
Multiple studies have found negative relationships between grade point average and alcohol
use blackouts, and cannabis use, which remains significant using self-report or official
records (Suerken, et al., 2016; Meda, et al., 2017).
Alcohol and cannabis are both associated with lower GPA; when entered in same
regression, effects of alcohol became non-significant (Bolin, Pate, McClintock, 2017)
Students who moderate or curtail substance use improved GPA (Meda, et al., 2017)
Decreasing and frequent cannabis use over time is associated with less current enrollment
and being less likely to graduate on time (Suerken, et al., 2016)
Arria, A. M., et. al. (2013). Drug Use Patterns and Continuous Enrollment in College: Results From a Longitudinal
Study. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 74(1), 71–83. Bolin, Riane & Pate, Margaret & McClintock, Jenna. (2017). The
impact of alcohol and marijuana use on academic achievement among college students. The Social Science Journal. 54.
10.1016/j.soscij.2017.08.003. Meda, S. A., et. al. (2017). Longitudinal influence of alcohol and marijuana use on academic
performance in college students. PloS one, 12(3), e0172213. Suerken, C. K., Reboussin, B. A., Egan, K. L., Sutfin, E. L.,
Wagoner, K. G., Spangler, J., & Wolfson, M. (2016). Marijuana use trajectories and academic outcomes among college
students. Drug and alcohol dependence, 162, 137-45. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0172213. White, A., & Hingson, R. (2013). The
burden of alcohol use: excessive alcohol consumption and related consequences among college students. Alcohol research :
current reviews, 35(2), 201–218.

6. Compared to students who drink in a low-
risk way, college students who engage in
high-risk drinking are:
5.9 times more likely
to perform poorly on a
test or project as a
result of drinking
6 times more likely to
miss class
5 times more likely to
fall behind in school
More likely to drop out
of college
More likely to work in
less prestigious jobs
More likely to
experience alcohol
dependence 10 years
later
Allen, H. K., Calhoun, B. H., & Maggs, J. L. (2020). High-risk alcohol use behavior and daily academic effort among
college students. Journal of American College Health, 1-5. White, A., & Hingson, R. (2013). The burden of alcohol
use: excessive alcohol consumption and related consequences among college students. Alcohol research : current
reviews, 35(2), 201–218.

7. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CANNABIS USE &
ACADEMIC PERSISTENCE
Arria, A.M., Caldeira, K.M., Bugbee, B.A., Vincent, K.B., O’Grady, K.E. (2015). The academic consequences of
marijuana use during college. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 29(3), 564-575. doi: 10.1037/adb0000108
“Even accounting for demographics
and other factors, marijuana use
adversely affected college academic
outcomes, both directly and
indirectly through poorer class
attendance.”

8. ALCOHOL ENFORCEMENT &
ACADEMIC OUTCOMES
8

9. SPRING 2020 NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Funded by South Carolina
Department of Alcohol and Other
Drug Abuse Services
Goals:
• Establish a baseline of collegiate
on-campus resources for
substance misuse
• Learn about varying institutional
approaches towards substance
misuse at SC colleges
• Analyze possible correlates
between higher education
outcomes and alcohol
enforcement in SC
• Make recommendations to
address the gaps and build
community of collegiate
substance misuse services

10. STUDY METHODOLOGY
Eligibility
• Institutions of Higher Education in SC
• Offered 4-year degree programs or were a member of the UofSC system
Final Sample
• 21 schools – 58% response rate
• 57% public, 43% private
• 81% < 5,000 students, 9.5% 5,001 – 10,000 students, 9.5% 10,001+ students
• 3 HBCUs (8 total in South Carolina)
Supplemental data
• Alcohol Enforcement Team reports from DAODAS
• South Carolina Law Enforcement Division annual Crime in SC Reports (2014-2018)
• Commission On Higher Education 2019 Statistical Abstract
Data Analysis
• One-way ANOVA to identify statistically significant correlates; α = .05
• Pearson’s r to establish a general understanding of the nature and strength of the
correlation

11. INCLUDED IN THE CAMPUS SURVEY
• Drug-Free Schools & Communities Act Compliance
• Staffing: Professionals, Counselors, Peer educators
• Recovery: program, meetings, coaching, space, student organizations
• Individual Strategies: BASICS, SBIRT, required freshman education,
educational events, guest speakers, small group norms, parent
education
• Environmental Strategies: late night programs, social norms
campaigns, bystander intervention,
• Coalition/Community Engagement
• Data collection
• Philosophy: Abstinence, Harm Reduction, Awareness, Consequence
focus, Moderation

12. Substance Misuse Services & Retention
• Staffing
• Schools that employed at least one AOD-dedicated staff reported
retention rates 6.96% higher than institutions with no AOD-dedicated
staff.
• Among institutions that employ at least 1 AOD-dedicated counselor:
• year to year retention rates increased 4.25% per additional counselor.
• 150% graduation rates increased by 15.26% per additional counselor.
• Screening Tools (BASICS or SBIRT)
• Institutions that used at least one type reported an average of 4.62%
higher retention rates and 17.16% higher 150% graduation rates
compared to institutions that don’t use screening tools.
• Recovery
• Institutions which offer mutual support meetings reported 7.28%
higher retention rates and 48.3% higher graduation rates.
• Institutions which offer a recovery coaching program report 15.20%
higher retention rates and 31.84% higher graduation rates.

13. ALCOHOL ENFORCEMENT SCORE (AES)
• To quantify local alcohol enforcement for comparison to higher
education outcomes
• By county, included annual:
• Alcohol Enforcement Team attempted buys
• DUI arrests
• Liquor Law violation arrests
• Drunkenness arrests
• Not used as an indicator of an alcohol misuse problem but an
indicator of attempts to enforce alcohol laws.
• Dataset looked at FY 2014 -2018

14. ALCOHOL ENFORCEMENT & RETENTION
• There is a statistically significant positive correlation between
retention rates for local universities and colleges and the magnitude of
alcohol enforcement done in the county.
• There is a similarly strong positive correlation between degrees
awarded and alcohol enforcement.
• Also true for percentage of student graduating within 150% of their
program length.
• Counties that do more alcohol enforcement are home to schools
that report better year to year retention, on-time graduation rates,
and award more degrees.

15. ALCOHOL ENFORCEMENT SCORE (AES)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
AET Buys DUI Liquor Law Drunkenness

16. SC’S ALCOHOL ENFORCEMENT OVER TIME
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
1976 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2019
AET Buys DUI Liquor Law Drunkenness

17. Statewide
AET
Attempted
Purchases
DUI Liquor Law
Violations
Drunkenness
FY 2014 9000 17917 10475 11057
FY 2019 6540 10423 5930 6333
Net Change
(%)
-27.33% -41.83% -43.39% -42.72%
Richland
County
AET Attempted
Purchases
DUI Liquor Law
Violations
Drunkenness
FY 2014 469 1142 1022 936
FY 2019 208 387 275 125
Net Change
(%)
-55.65% -66.11% -73.10% -86.65%

18. NEXT STEPS
• Professional development opportunities for SC Higher Education staff
• Develop a state-wide network of higher education professionals working
on substance misuse services
• Collaborative opportunities: online recovery meetings
• Tailored presentations for participating campuses
• Share our research with higher education leaders

19. WHAT CAN YOU DO?
• Screening for students
• Those who are struggling (with anything)
• Student employees
• Peer Educators / Mentors / Leaders
• Training for staff
• Signs, symptoms and how to help
• Virtual Conferences on Substance Misuse
• Support community engagement efforts
• Carolina Community Coalition, April 1 at 4pm on Zoom
• Expand innovative partnerships and support businesses that
operate responsibly
Aimee Hourigan
Director of Substance Abuse Prevention & Education
ahouriga@mailbox.sc.edu

22. • UofSC’s Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) will focus on students with
lower retention and graduation rates at UofSC
• Pell-eligible
• Transfer Students
• Underrepresented Minority
• UofSC data shows these student populations are also less engaged
Engagement leads to Excellence

23. • QEP directly links to UofSC Strategic Plan
• Priority 1: Attract, inspire, challenge, and enable our students to become innovative
thinks and transformative leaders.
• Priority 4: Cultivate a more diverse, equitable and inclusive campus culture, where
every individual, regardless of background, has the full opportunity to flourish and
thrive.
• Background
• First QEP Successful: Graduation with Leadership Distinction
• Extensive outreach to faculty, staff, students
• Palmetto College Campus participation
• QEP Development Committee and Five QEP Subcommittees
• QEP Proposal and Onsite Visit

24. RESOURCES
• Solid infrastructure in place through CIEL
• Faculty Executive Director – budget, outreach, and implementation
• Director of QEP/Associate Director – outreach, implementation, assessment
• Administrative Coordinator – administration
• Experiential Learning Coordinator and Database Manager (new position)
• Outreach and Assessment Manager (new position)
• Graduation with Leadership Distinction
• Experiential Learning Opportunities

25. RESOURCES
• Funding plan:
• Marketing Experience By Design
• Support for Students
• Faculty and Staff Professional Development and Support
• Grants for new/revised courses and programs
• Seminars/Workshops
• Assessment Technology

26. STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
 SLO 1: Demonstrate informed decision-making through participation in Engagement (what
did students select to engage in and why; intention)
 SLO 2: Evaluate the fit between Engagements and their own personal, academic, and
professional goals (if/how engagement aligns with aspect of personal, academic, and/or
professional goals)
 SLO 3: Describe connections between Engagements and across learning environments, time,
or contexts (how engagement relates to another course, beyond the class experience, different
time/place/context—linkage to integrative learning and USC Connect Learning Outcome 3)
 SLO 4: Apply structured reflection principles to develop insights about educational pursuits
and lifelong learning (emphasis on how to reflect through identified structured reflection
model—DEAL Model; supports reflection as skill to facilitate lifelong learning)

27. DEAL
MODEL
*Societal and
Global Impact
Ash & Clayton (2009)

28. ASSESSMENT PLAN
 Tier 3. Institutional level assessments. Primary evidence collected through UofSC strategic plan
o Tracking retention, graduation and employment metrics (including success rate metrics);
tracking of engagement participation by student populations
 Tier 2. QEP Project level assessments. Primary evidence collected through integrative and
experiential learning faculty grants (e.g., development and/or expansion of engagements for
students); customized student engagement opportunities
o Student surveys, faculty/staff provider surveys
 Tier 1. QEP student learning outcome performance. Captured through direct measures of
student artifacts, surveys of providers/participants supporting engagements
o Sampling of student engagement artifacts from curricular and co-curricular environments with
application of QEP rubric by trained raters; student surveys of self-reported learning

29. STUDENT AFFAIRS SUPPORT
• Encourage participation in Experience by Design (upcoming trainings, marketing efforts, student
interest)
• Best practices for target student populations
• Promote DEAL model as means to support reflection across quality Engagements
• Participate in assessment processes
• Identification of Engagement experiences to be assessed
• Participate as a rater in review of artifacts
• Promote survey participation or other methods

30. NEXT-STEPS
• SACSCOC Visit (March 22nd-26th)
• Summer planning (onboarding, training, preparing for fall launch)
• CIEL will be completing outreach to SAAS offices in spring and summer (target
populations, Engagements, database entries)
THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR SUPPORT!!

31. QUESTIONS

32. Remarks and Updates
Dennis Pruitt
Vice President for Student Affairs