With the information, or lack of information, that the administration currently holds on its Tufts in Ghana program, students should not be sent to Ghana for the spring semester. In fact, if serious structural changes aren't made in that program, they should never go back.
Since the program began in 1996, there have been four reported rapes of Tufts students on the Ghana campus. This number, by itself, is utterly unacceptable. Without a complete review of the entire program, sending students back after the first rape is questionable; the second, too risky; and the third, almost negligent. A review is now being conducted, but it must come to a complete finding that answers all open questions, including whether safety on the program can be guaranteed.
In the short term, Tufts has acted responsibly on this issue. Students were not allowed to go back on the program this fall because the University had serious concerns about their safety. And under pressure from many groups, it appears that the University has taken its time in gathering all the information and not rushing to judgment.
Based on administrative attitude and common sense, it is reasonably safe to assert that students will, sometime in the near future, be going back to Ghana, just not this coming semester. While Dean Kristine Dillon reports that there are only a handful of students who signed up for the spring semester (four to be exact), most of them have already made alternative plans. According to Study Abroad Coordinator Sheila Bayne, three of the four have either dropped out or made other arrangements.
One of the most significant factors inhibiting Tufts from protecting its students is that it has no University administrator in Ghana. The program director, Dr. Kweku Bilson, is both an employee of Tufts University and the Dean of Students at the University of Ghana. It could easily be argued that his loyalty is split between two institutions. And while both Dean Dillon and Vice President Bernstein say that Bilson is only one of our contacts within the program, he is the only person who is consistently on location to oversee the operations of the program.
The issue has more twists than just the program's administrative organization, which is a major problems. Distance and poor communication complicates security in a large way. Phones, fax, and e-mail are not reliable in Ghana and very often it is impossible to be in contact with the program's students. This leaves Tufts administrators very much out of the loop on many of the things happening with these students.
The counter argument to the safety issue is that people know the risk, but are still willing to go because of the incredible experience the trip affords them. Both administrators in contact with students who have been to Ghana, and the students themselves, say that the experience cannot be paralleled in a classroom setting.
The University, however, has a duty to its students, known as "en loco parenti," to act in students' best interests. Underage students like to drink in college, yet administrators bar such things for safety and legal concerns. The same is true in this case - the university must exercise its best judgment before sending students back to a place where four females have been raped. Protesters and activists on campus, right now, ask that administrators drop everything to provide a safe environment for students. The standard should be no different for students who are on Tufts programs abroad.
Contributing to the difficulty of this process is that after the first few rapes, the University changed its orientation program to include more information on sexual assault and rapes. The orientation clearly did not work because the problem reoccurred. If the first changes in the orientation program failed, Tufts' ability to be productive the second time around is questionable.
Other schools send students to Ghana for study abroad programs. These institutions have been consulted by Tufts to examine more student experiences, but Dean Dillon notes that "[the other schools'] relationships with students may not be as individualized as ours, so they aren't getting the kind of individual feedback that we are." Dillon correctly asserts that Tufts is a university with a small community feel; it rightfully holds itself to a higher standard.
If Tufts wants students back in Ghana, some simple, but necessary, precautions must be taken, no matter how costly. Tufts should send its own person, specifically from the University, to Ghana to oversee operations. While Tufts cannot tell Ghana how to run telecommunications, it must ensure better contact through a satellite phone or some similar method. Both of these put the University in direct, honest contact with Ghana and give Tufts the ability to deal with problems more efficiently.
Safety concerns also have to be investigated and contended with in a manner such that no ambiguity exists. The last time the changes were not effective in preventing further rapes. If the University chooses to send students back, new precautions must be effective ones.
Administrators certainly don't want to cancel the Ghana program. "But we will not put students in harms way," asserts Bernstein. While his goal is to reopen the program, and indeed he probably will, Bernstein understands that working out the problems so they do not reoccur, will take significant time. He would be justified in suspending the program for one more semester.
