Social Rules and Relationships
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
“I don’t know why you say goodbye...” Perceived Relationship Rules on St Olaf Campus Dan Murphy, Ryan Trostrud and Elaine Atcheson Abstract This paper discusses perceived social rules on St Olaf campus. We were particularly interested in researching perceived social rules pertaining to relationships on campus. We interviewed a convenience sample of students on campus through personal interviews and larger focus groups. There was a wide representation of place of origin for the interviewees - we talked to in-state students, out-of-state domestic students, and international students. We found that there is a wide range in definitions of "acquaintances", "friends", and "Minnesota Nice"; the differences in opinion were not necessarily based on where the people were from. It is common for people to become friends through convenience (i.e. classes together, studying abroad, living near each other). There is a strong sense of a St Olaf community that is distinct from, but still a part of, the Northfield community. Setting St. Olaf College is a liberal arts college with approximately three thousand students. It is located in Northfield, Minnesota, just forty minutes south of Minneapolis. The college was founded in 1874 by Norwegian immigrants and is currently associated with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). Although the college has students from nearly every state across America and over thirty countries, a majority of students are from the Midwest and Minnesota. Like many other liberal arts colleges, classes are taught in a wide variety of disciplines. St. Olaf has an international reputation for its music program and is a leading college 1 in environmental science and sustainability. St. Olaf seeks to be as environmentally friendly and social-justice oriented as possible; this focus has led to it being a prominent and important player in the Northfield community. The college has been named as one of only six higher education institutions in Loren Pope's book "Colleges That Save Lives" and is the only Minnesota college mentioned in the book out of a total of forty colleges (St. Olaf Website). Northfield is home to two small liberal arts colleges: St. Olaf and Carleton. This study has only done research about St. Olaf students. St Olaf students and Carleton students are acknowledged to be different types of people: St Olaf students are stereotyped as "pretty, fun students", and Carleton students are "the smart students". Northfield is a town of about 17,000 which revolves, in some ways, around the prominence of both St. Olaf and Carleton. St. Olaf is located on a hill on the western side of town. The St. Olaf campus setting is a small, rural, college-community-based residential college, and is often seen as a distinct and separate community from to the town of Northfield. In comparison to other colleges like Carleton, St. Olaf is not an urban campus immersed into a larger city block or neighborhood of its host city. Northfield residents are quite receptive of and friendly to St. Olaf and Carleton students and try to help them out in the every possible way. The town of Northfield has a population of just over 17,000 people, including the students from both schools during the year. Being located on the Cannon River, as well as having the intersection of Highways 3 and 9 in town and National Interstate 35 nearby, makes Northfield a primary business center for Rice County. Minneapolis and St. Paul (the Twin Cities) are 40 miles north of the town and St. Olaf college, and is the closest large metropolitan center. St. Olaf's location in Northfield and in Minnesota is very important to our study due to the unique culture of Minnesota the Twin Cities; these specific cultures are often viewed as more accepting and 2 open minded than many other states in the Midwest and in the country as a whole, and the Twin Cities themselves are seen as more open-minded than the rest of Minnesota. Methodology We collected our information primarily through peer interviews and small focus groups. Participants were selected by each interviewer through convenience; a large number of interviewees were roommates and/or friends of the interviewer. Often, another person would overhear the interview or focus group and would ask if they could join in on the discussion. Again, these people were usually an acquaintance or friend of someone in the aforementioned group, either the interviewer or interviewee. When the interviewer had chosen who he/she wanted to interview, he/she would ask if they could discuss some topics and questions for their Ethnography class and would try to set up a time. Potential interviewees were assured that all information given would be anonymous and if they didn't feel comfortable answering a question they didn't have to. Most interviews were conversation based and didn't follow a very strict guideline. The interviewer would start by asking a question or two and then would let the interviewee respond however they wanted to the question(s). For clarification, often the interviewer would ask small questions in between responses which would sometimes take the interview in another direction. A very strong part of the interview process was the focus group. The focus group was particularly helpful because it allowed multiple people able to respond to one another and generate a more thorough response to questions asked. Interviewees would often realize things that they hadn't already noticed about social interactions, and everyone was able to build off each other through discussion. Oftentimes, the responses in focus groups were more three- 3 dimensional and covered a much broader spectrum than answers from one-on-one interviews did. The regular interviews also had a strong point in regards to more personal stories. Interviewees seemed more comfortable discussing longer and more detailed stories when with just the interviewer than they were in a group situation. It was easier in a one-on-one interview to get more finite and detailed responses to our questions. Weaknesses in the interviewing process came mostly from the way the group selected the interviewees. There was not a broad enough spectrum of people selected to be interviewed for our sample to be truly representative of the population, which may create a sort of bias in the results. The people that we're friends with may be very similar because all of the interviewers are sociology/anthropology majors, and may therefore be attracted to the same types of people. The many different locations of interviews, the mood of the interviewee (having an effect on how willing they are to give detailed responses/ how motivated they are to help), and differentiation on how questions were worded all had an effect on the results of the interviews/focus groups. Although these aspects of the interview process are often impossible to control, the group could work harder to make the setting of the interviews more constant. All interviewees' names have been changed to pseudonyms in this paper in agreement with interviewers and interviewees. Problem We have noticed that there seem to be interesting and often unspoken rules on St Olaf campus. Because the three of us have all come to Minnesota from other places (Boulder, CO; Chicago, Illinois; Hong Kong), we are particularly interested in what the social rules of campus seem to be. We realized as we began conducting interviews and talking amongst ourselves that 4 we are truly interested in social rules as they pertain to relationships. Relationship refers to any type of connection with anyone, whether it be someone a person meets once but doesn't acknowledge, or someone a person has been best friends with for years. We are interested in how people define "acquaintance" and "friend", how people meet acquaintances and friends, how they define "Minnesota Nice", and how Minnesota Nice plays into campus interactions, if it does at all. It has been difficult figuring out how to question people about "social rules" on campus. They are often consciously unaware of the rules that they subconsciously play into. In order to draw their opinions about social rules out, it is necessary to begin by discussing their "normal" and "abnormal" interactions and either lead them into drawing inferences about what the rules would be that guide those actions, or draw inferences on our own based on the interview and our own knowledge of the people that we interviewed. It has also been difficult to not bring our own prejudices into the interview/inferences. It is also impossible to know what the true "social rules" are, because everyone acts and interacts differently. However, we were able to find some common threads that run through many social interactions. The distinct open minded and tolerant culture that we have observed on campus goes hand in hand with the friendly attitude and kindness that has now been commonly referred to as Minnesota Nice. Philip Koski (2009) talks about the Minnesota Nice as "a shorthand term that describes the tendency of people in Minnesota to be polite towards others" (Koski 2009). A theory of why the Minnesota Nice exists points to a typical Minnesota winter which "encourages people to bind together in a community in order to survive the inclement weather" (Koski 2009). Whether or not this is the case there is an overwhelming perception of kindness and Good 5 Samaritan-like characteristics amongst Minnesota residents. This study must take into account Minnesota Nice as St. Olaf is in Minnesota and the state's cultures. Since St. Olaf is a residential college and a distinct community within the greater Northfield community, it is important to take into account the environment that the college is suited in.