The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 37, No. 2 - 85

Resident Assistants as Rule Enforcers

to residents about acting professionally, stated that the rule enforcer role took precedence over their friendship role, and told friends who were residents that they would enforce policies, they invoked their authoritative status within the university’s organizational hierarchy. Moreover, while describing why they had no problems adhering to the prescribed protocol, they explicitly contrasted the rule enforcer role with residents’ implicit expectations for them to act as friends. The RAs’ statements suggested that the rule enforcer role justified (and, from their friends’ perspective, perhaps excused) their actions when confronting residents’ misconduct. Finally, the status differences between RAs and their residents and RAs’ inability to develop true friendships with their residents may have facilitated their ability to engage in role distancing. This study’s findings complement those of Schaller and Wagner (2007) and Rubington (1990), who uncovered the dilemmas that RAs face when trying to reconcile the contradictory demands of their dual positions as disciplinarians and peers/friends. However, unlike those studies, this one focused on a wide range of policy infractions, RAs across class levels, and RAs whose residents ranged from first-year students to seniors. Moreover, it used a somewhat larger sample, combined both quantitative and qualitative survey research methods, and addressed several questions about RAs’ role conflict arising from their simultaneous positions. Delimitating this analysis to RAs at only one university limits the generalizability of the findings. Yet, despite its limitations—specifically, its exploratory nature; its focus on one relatively small, private, residential university; and its reliance on a small, non-random

Those RAs who claimed to have no problem enforcing the rules, despite friendships with residents, engaged in role distancing as a way to handle the situation, by emphasizing their professional obligations over their personal relationships .

sample—this study offers valuable insights into what may be a common RA dilemma. It documents that, despite their status as authority figures in residence halls, RAs befriended their residents, and the incompatible expectations associated with their dual positions contributed to role conflict. RAs’ formal training sessions and materials are likely to overlook these aspects, a point Schaller and Wagner (2007) substantiated with their findings that RAs struggled to make and maintain friendships while enforcing policy and that they felt unprepared for their role as disciplinarians and for handling their residents’ rule violations. This study framed role conflict in terms of RAs’ positions within social structures and the incompatible expectations associated with them (Andersen & Taylor, 2008), not in terms of individuals’ characteristics or interpersonal dynamics per se. Hence, identifying, recruiting, and training the “right” types of undergraduate students to serve as RAs are not likely to alleviate the role conflict that is due to their simultaneous positions as rule enforc-

V o l u m e 3 7 , No. 2 • 2 0 1 1

85
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 37, No. 2

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 37, No. 2
