No abstract

In loco parentis had been the philosophical foundation of higher education policy and practice since 1913 when it was established as a legal doctrine in Gott v. Berea. The doctrine defined the relationship between colleges, students, and parents. That relationship has changed with the death of in loco parentis in Dixon v. Alabama Board of Education (1961), the cultural shifts of the past forty years, as well is an increase in litigation in higher education.New models including the constitutional model, contract model, fiduciary model, and the bystander model were put forth as replacements for in loco parentis to provide not only a philosophical foundation for higher education's policy and practice, but also to redefine the relationship between colleges, students, and parents. Recently, some scholars have argued that the increase of liability cases against colleges for student injuries indicates that we are experiencing a return to in loco parentis.By tracing the origins of in loco parentis through its beginnings and end as well as examining the many replacement models posited, this article suggests that there is not a regeneration of in loco parentis, but rather an 538 Gavin Henning is the director of student affairs planning, evaluation, and research at Dartmouth College in Hanover, NH. Rise of In Loco ParentisThe in loco parentis concept had its basis in English common law. As Sir William Blackstone writes, the father may also delegate part of his parental authority, during his life, to the tutor or schoolmaster of his child; who is then in loco parentis, and has such a portion of the power of the parent committed to his charge, viz. that of restraint and correction, as may be necessary to answer the purposes for which he is employed (Blackstone, 1765, p. 413).

Long considered separate in higher education, equity intersects with assessment to create a distinct form of assessment. This form of assessment goes by many monikers including culturally responsive assessment, socially just assessment, and equityminded assessment. Often considered the same, these concepts have nuanced differences although they fall within the same umbrella, which we call equitycentered assessment. In this article, we will provide an overview of equity-centered assessment, review the history of scholarship in the literature, outline a conceptual framework for equity-minded and equitycentered assessment, and provide suggested examples of practice that highlight how assessors can position themselves to effectively engage in this critical work.

In loco parentis had been the philosophical foundation of higher education policy and practice since 1913 when it was established as a legal doctrine in Gott v. Berea. The doctrine defined the relationship between colleges, students, and parents. That relationship has changed with the death of in loco parentis in Dixon v. Alabama Board of Education (1961), the cultural shifts of the past forty years, as well is an increase in litigation in higher education. New models including the constitutional model, contract model, fiduciary model, and the bystander model were put forth as replacements for in loco parentis to provide not only a philosophical foundation for higher education’s policy and practice, but also to redefine the relationship between colleges, students, and parents. Recently, some scholars have argued that the increase of liability cases against colleges for student injuries indicates that we are experiencing a return to in loco parentis. By tracing the origins of in loco parentis through its beginnings and end as well as examining the many replacement models posited, this article suggests that there is not a regeneration of in loco parentis, but rather an evolution of a new model that could be called in consortio cum parentibus—in partnership with parents. This model can be used as a foundation for policy and practice in higher education and help define the relationship between colleges, students, and parents. Assumptions, tenets, and applications of this model are discussed.

We all know the importance of student engagement to student learning. Gavin W. Henning argues that the upside doesn't end there … the institution as a whole also benefits.