by Josh Cooley
Despite Grinnell’s interest in promoting the health and well-being of its students, the college has yet to develop a cohesive student wellness program.
“The wellness options for students are not coordinated,” said Jen Krohn, dean for Student Life. “They are scattered in a number of places and I’m not aware of any movement to put those under one office. … [I]t makes sense to pull those pieces together,” she said of the different efforts on campus to contribute to the well-being of students.
“It’s really negligent of the college not to have a stronger student wellness program,” said Amy Dribin ‘04, a member of the Meantal Health Task Force.
Many of Grinnell’s peer institutions place a large emphasis on student wellness. Kenyon College has special wellness residence halls for first-years. Carleton College has a wellness center and student wellness advisors, SWA’s, who help students with their physical and psychological health. These students, trained to discuss issues such as stress management and relaxation, among others, conduct workshops for their peers in the dorms on various wellness topics.
“I’d love to see more student wellness, more wellness for staff and faculty ... more wellness in general,” said director of Health and Wellness Barbara Waite. “You’re rewarded many times over for everything you put into a wellness program, so it’s worth the effort.”
Sheree Andrews, assistant dean and director of Residence Life, echoed Waite’s sentiments. She believes that “wellness programs that encourage both student and faculty should be looked into.” However, seeking out effective parameters for such a program is a task in itself.
When attempting to define wellness, the mental health task force came across a survey conducted in Alameda County, Calif., which included a list of factors that increase a person’s wellness: eating breakfast, sleeping eight hours a day, snacking rarely, exercising regularly, limiting alcohol consumption. The survey concluded that those who modeled these practices also lived longer than their peers who did not.
A survey done here at Grinnell also attempted to discover important characteristics of wellness, though from quite a different angle. Last semester, students in “The Politics of Happiness,” a tutorial taught by David Ellis, Political Science, try to find factors that influenced a person’s happiness and well-being. Ellis split his class into two groups, each of which then designed its own survey.
The first group, which conducted an 84-person survey, found that a person has control over almost two-thirds of his or her happiness. The survey also found that the quality of a person’s friendships has the strongest impact on his or her happiness, constituting 31 percent of well-being. Other top factors that affect one’s happiness include success (13 percent), type of personality (12 percent) and extra-curriculars and hobbies (12 percent).
The survey results showed that students are more optimistic than pessimistic, that the average student is moderately stressed and that the negative and positive effects of the geographic location of Grinnell balance out among the student population. According to the survey, the average Grinnell student gets just over six hours of sleep a night, despite believing that he or she needs eight hours.
A survey of 161 students conducted by the second group in Ellis’ Tutorial looked for factors besides the quality of friendships that influenced happiness. This survey found that academic performance and the number of hours spent studying had the biggest effects on a student’s well-being. The survey found no correlation between students’ depression levels and the dorms in which they live. In addition, it found that the quantity of time which students spend interacting with their peers bears little effect on their happiness.
The administration measures wellness by conducting the “Student Health and Wellness Survey” at least every other year. Since last semester’s online survey was purchased from Outside the Classroom, a company which conducts surveys for colleges and universities nationwide, Grinnell could not control the majority of the questions asked. The survey focused on alcohol, tobacco and other drugs, sexual behavior, sexual assault, violence and safety, eating disorders, mental health and health-related programs and policies. Given the opportunity to add ten additional questions to the survey, Student Affairs chose to add questions addressing student alcohol consumption and the new mental health programs.
According to Krohn, the administration’s biggest concerns, with regard to the student wellness survey, are mental health and alcohol consumption. When planning programs based on the results of this survey, Student Affairs focuses on the responses relating to questions covering these issues. Krohn believes that is partially due to the college’s emphasis on “preventing life-threatening situations from occurring.” The student health survey does not ask any questions about diet, sleep or exercise, though Krohn admits that “diet, sleep, and exercise are probably related to both [mental health and alcohol consumption].”
“I don’t know if I can say why we don’t emphasize those other pieces. They are important pieces to staying well,” said Krohn.
The survey results are not available to the public, but Krohn says that the administration will post more statistics from the survey around campus later this semester. Last semester, Student Affairs posted signs around campus quoting statistics about student alcohol use that came from the survey.
Students have access to general nutritional information at both dining halls upon request, but Dining Services does not have specific nutritional information for any of its food. It has toyed with the idea of hiring a dietician who would work either as a part-time staff member or on a consulting basis, but it lacks the money to move forward with the project.
Dining Services Director Dick Williams believes that in the future Grinnell will purchase a nutritional module for their computerized food management system, which would then allow Dining Services to easily distribute nutritional information to students.
“I think we will get there, it will just take a couple of years,” said Williams, explaining that budget concerns have prevented the adoption of such a module, even though the idea was proposed two years ago. With training and implementation, the nutritional module would cost $24,000.
The Staying Well at Grinnell program is geared toward faculty and staff, not toward students. The program has been on campus since 1986 and between one-quarter and one-third of faculty and staff take advantage of one of Grinnell’s ongoing or special wellness programs, according to Waite.
But wellness does not come cheaply. Grinnell has paid almost $5000 in fee reimbursement to faculty participating in wellness programs so far this fiscal year, almost half of whom seek such reimbursement. According to Waite, however, the budget is large enough to accommodate student-faculty interaction in the wellness programs. According to Waite, lack of student funding, lack of student interest and the desire to put caps on classes has prevented this interaction from occurring.
“Parents, students, employees, administrators … everyone would love to see it grow,” said Waite of Grinnell’s wellness program. “Only a few key people have decided that it’s not as important as other things and that might change in the future.”
Waite would like to combine a student wellness program with the faculty and staff wellness program that already exists but time constraints limit such a move. Waite can only devote one-third of her time at work to the wellness program because of her other responsibilities in the Physical Education department.
Even without a student wellness program, students are able to participate in the physical education department’s 13 different activity classes. There are over 150 students enrolled in these classes this semester, with eighteen students taking areobics and nineteen taking conditioning. Other popular classes include tennis, rock climbing and swimming.
According to Tom Crady, dean of Student Affairs, the administration will not conduct another wellness survey next semester. “We decided that we’re just going to run a survey every other year,” said Crady. “The results don’t change very much from year to year.”
Instead, Grinnell will use the results of the survey conducted by David Lopatto’s (Psychology) Behavioral Medicine Class last semester on blackboard to plan future programs for student wellness. Focus groups will meet for two hours to discuss the results of the survey during the first week in March. After receiving reports from the focus groups, the Mental Health Task Force will prepare a report to submit to President Osgood regarding student wellness.
As for a unified Student Wellness Program, Krohn believes it’s not out of reach.
“It’s something that would come from SGA or the Committee on Student Life,” she said. “It’s not a topic that’s come up but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t.”
Arts | News | Opinion | Special Section | Sports | Archives | About Us