May 7, 2014
Brief Introductions Welcome! Thank you for serving. Around the room: What is your name? Why are you at the University? Why were you interested in serving on the Board? What is one thing you want people to know about you?
Language SCCS = Student Conduct and Community Standards OSA = Office of Student Advocacy UOPD= UO Police Department IR = incident report Residence Halls (dorms) Responsible (guilty) Not Responsible (not guilty) Sanctions (punishment) Accused Student (defendant) Complainant (The State)
SCCS: Mission The mission of the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards is to develop students’ academic and social responsibility. We value integrity, responsibility, community, multicultural competence, and accountability.
UO Affirmation of Community Standards
The University of Oregon community is dedicated to the advancement of knowledge and the development of integrity. In order to thrive and excel, this community must preserve the freedom of thought and expression of all its members. The University of Oregon has a long and illustrious history in the area of academic freedom and freedom of speech. A culture of respect that honors the rights, safety, dignity and worth of every individual is essential to preserve such freedom. We affirm our respect for the rights and well-being of all members. We further affirm our commitment to: Respect the dignity and essential worth of all individuals. Promote a culture of respect throughout the University community. Respect the privacy, property, and freedom of others. Reject bigotry, discrimination, violence, or intimidation of any kind. Practice personal and academic integrity and expect it from others. Promote the diversity of opinions, ideas and backgrounds which is the lifeblood of the university.
SCCS Philosophy: Educational Process SCCS makes its process educational for the student. Every incident is a learning opportunity for all
involved. SCCS always offers itself as a resource to the general community, complainants, and the accused students alike.
Why is this work important? As representatives of the University of Oregon can send a powerful message to students. Alcohol and other drugs are a major problem on
this and all college campuses (see next slide). Students’ quality of life and ability to complete degrees are at stake. Graduate schools, scholarship committees, employers, etc. should be able to make an informed decision about students.
Why is this work important? continued
Death: 1,700 college students between the ages of 18 and 24 die each year from alcohol-related unintentional injuries, including motor vehicle crashes (Hingson et al., 2005).
Injury: 599,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 are unintentionally injured under the influence of alcohol (Hingson et al., 2005).
Assault: More than 696,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 are assaulted by another student who has been drinking (Hingson et al., 2005).
Sexual Abuse: More than 97,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 are victims of alcohol-related sexual assault or date rape (Hingson et al., 2005).
Unsafe Sex: 400,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 had unprotected sex and more than 100,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 report having been too intoxicated to know if they consented to having sex (Hingson et al., 2002).
Academic Problems: About 25 percent of college students report academic consequences of their drinking including missing class, falling behind, doing poorly on exams or papers, and receiving lower grades overall (Engs et al., 1996; Presley et al., 1996a, 1996b; Wechsler et al., 2002).
More statistics at www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov.
SCCS Philosophy: Confidentiality One part of SCCS’s philosophy is confidentiality. SCCS keeps all student conduct records private unless
the student waives the right to privacy. (FERPA) All Hearings Board members (and participants) need to keep what happens in a Panel Hearing confidential. Panel hearings are closed hearings.
Student Conduct Code Overview Oregon Administrative Rules Definitions Jurisdiction
Violations by Individual Students Sanctions Student Rights
University Hearings Board (p. 19) University Panel Hearings (p. 24)
Brief Overview of Conduct Process See “Conduct Process Overview” flowchart. Important elements for Board: Student has due process rights. Student has a choice of hearings. Most of the time, administrative conferences and panel hearings have different limitations on sanctioning ability, as well as ability to appeal.
Allegations and Jurisdiction SCCS (or one of its designees) evaluates the report and determines which Student Conduct Code violations may have been violated. Typically, the University focuses on conduct inconsistent with the Code on campus, Universitycontrolled property, or University-sponsored activity. However, the University may have authority if the conduct “involved violence or produced a reasonable fear of physical harm.”
Basics: What is a Hearings Board? It is “comprised of persons authorized … to determine
if a student has violated the Student Conduct Code and to recommend sanctions when a violation has occurred.” It consists of 10 registered students and 8 faculty/staff members for a total of 18. Students serve a one-year term while others serve two years. Members can be re-appointed.
Basics: What is a Hearings Panel? A Panel is the actual body that hears a case and must
have at least four members of the Board. Of those four (or more) it must have at least one student, one faculty, and one staff. Both the Complainant and the Accused Student can present their stories. A Panel hearing is a scripted event and is audio taped. If the student is responsible, a Panel always has the power to apply the full possible range of University sanctions. Either party can appeal the Panel’s decisions.
Basics: What kinds of cases? The Panel may hear ANY violation of the Student Conduct
Code. Likely cases include:
Academic Misconduct
Cheating Plagiarism
Social Misconduct
Alcohol and other Drugs Disorderly Conduct Physical Contact Harassment and Unwanted Contact Weapons
Sexual Misconduct
More on this later!
Basics: Why a Panel hearing? Sometimes, SCCS refers the case to a Panel because of special concerns or the type of charge. The referral is often, but not always, based on the fact that the Panel can invoke the three most severe sanctions. Other times, the Accused Student wants the Panel because he/she wants to confront the Complainant, have the right to appeal, and for other reasons. Panel should not assume a case is “serious” because it is getting the case.
Basics: Does it have to go to Panel? If a student has been referred to Panel, but does not
want to go, there is another option: an administrative hearing with the full range of sanctions possible. In this case, the student waives the right to a Panel hearing. In these types of hearings, as in all administrative hearings, are not appealable.
Basics: Who is at the Panel hearing? Usually 4-5 Panel members and a Panel Chair, who
must have served at least one year. Complainant Accused Student Witnesses (they stay outside until called) Others, if the Accused Student allows it Advisors General Counsel Complainant Advisor Accused Student Advisor
Specifics: What happens before the hearing? SCCS sends a Notice of Allegations to the Accused Student. Student selects or is referred to Panel Panel selects a chair. The Chair must have served on the Board the previous year. Once scheduled, SCCS sends a Notice of Panel Hearing and a letter to participants, and the hearing takes place 20-30 days after the notification.
Specifics: Before the hearing continued Read and understand the Code as well as you can. Feel comfortable asking General Counsel or SCCS questions about it. SCCS will e-mail you hearing information (e.g. reports, statements, photos, etc.) about two days before the hearing. Please hard delete these files when done with the case. You may see “pre-hearing motions.” GC recommends you read them. They are considered at the beginning of the hearing, at which the Panel will either sustain or deny the motion.
Specifics: The Hearing Please refer to “Student Conduct Board Hearing Script”: Introductions Charges, answer to the charges Promising/swearing in (happens multiple times) Introductory remarks, questioning Witnesses, questioning Closing remarks Decision If responsible:
character witnesses, questioning Sanction considerations/request
Conclusion
Specifics: Asking Questions All questions are asked by or through the Panel. Asking questions is critical: If one wants to know, one needs to ask.
Be critical of answers. Ask follow-up questions. Ask open-ended questions whenever possible (avoid yes/no questions).
Chair/members may limit the testimony of witnesses, including character witnesses, especially on the basis of relevance.
Specifics: Standard of Proof The Panel’s standard is the “preponderance of evidence.” In other words, what “more likely than not occurred.” Another possibility: more than 50% belief that the violation occurred. Compare this with the criminal justice system’s “beyond a reasonable doubt.” When imposing expulsion, the Panel uses the “clear and convincing” standard.
Specifics: What kind of information? SCCS will do its best to make sure all relevant
information is available. Panel may ask for more information. Know that the student may have prior documentations and findings of responsibility and that information will only be presented if they are relevant to the case at hand.
Specifics: Evaluating information How relevant is the information? How did the person come to know this information? How much detail is the person giving?
Is the person’s information consistent with others? What biases may the person have when giving
testimony or other information?
Specifics: Making the Decision Consensus is preferred Next is majority vote, but Chair cannot vote Remember, it is the preponderance of the evidence
50% plus a feather… Practice: Decision Scenarios
Decision Scenario #1 hear music coming Housing reported staff could
from a room from at least four doors away and residents have complained. The room owner tells the panel that his music is no louder than what other people have played and that these residents are using the student conduct system to “bully” (his word) him. Housing staff tells the panel that the student has been warned on multiple occasions, and other residents tell the panel they have had enough of this student’s inconsiderate behavior.
Decision Scenario #2 DPS finds a student quickly walking away from a car on campus. The student in the car yells, “Hey, where are you going?” DPS asks the student in the car what is going on while observing a duffle bag on his lap. The student allows a search. In the duffle bag is a scale, $300 of cash in various denominations, multiple individually bagged marijuana (less than ounce total). Is the student responsible for drug distribution?
Decision Scenario #3 Both Residence Hall staff and DPS report a the smell of marijuana coming from a single-occupant room. A towel is stuffed into the bottom of the door. Nobody answers, and the door is locked. The student has had five nearly identical previous incidents but was found not responsible every time. Is the student responsible for drug use/possession?
Decision Scenario #4 A professor reports seeing a student take “long looks” at another student’s test three times during an exam. A GTF also reports observing the same thing. The student states she was merely taking a break and looking around the room. The student’s test does not appear to indicate that she copied anything from the nearby student. Is the student responsible for cheating?
Specifics: The Decision If the student is “not responsible,” there is no further
action (i.e. the Panel cannot assign sanctions). The student’s conduct record for this case will become “void.” If the student is “responsible,” the Panel assigns sanctions.
Specifics: Sanctions Students can change their behavior to be consistent with what the University expects. Educational sanctions can help a student learn
from their behavior and make better choices. Refer to the list of sanctions and their descriptions. This is your “tool box.” Be creative and use the principles of Restorative Justice, but make sure you serve the interest of the University community.
Specifics: Restorative Justice Restorative Justice is a philosophy as well as a process. Restorative Justice philosophy focuses on the affected party
and to heal the harm. Ways to do this: Paying close attention to how the Complainant and University was
harmed. Finding ways for the responsible student to make a direct restoration to the affected party by incorporating it into the sanction.
The Panel can also refer the student to the Restorative
Justice process, which includes interviews, a facilitated circle, and agreements.
Sanctions: “The Big Three” When should a Panel utilize “The Big Three”?: Suspension Expulsion Negative Notation on the Transcript
Ultimately, the Panel decides but can, and should, use the suggestions of the Complainant, the responsible student, and the expertise of GC and SCCS to arrive at when it is appropriate to apply them.
Sanctions: Alcohol and Other Drugs BASICS 1, BASICS 2, and BASICS 3 In: Charge! Marijuana In: Charge!
Drug and Alcohol Assessment (off campus) AA, MA, NA meetings (off campus) Reflection papers, interviews, posters, projects,
research, presentations, etc.
Sanctions: Others University service Community service Educational activities, especially those that help the
student engage with the University community more Loss of privileges (e.g. Rec Center, dining hall, athletic tickets, etc.) Grade penalty and academic integrity exercises (academic misconduct only)
Sanctions: About Counseling Panel cannot mandate counseling However, panel can encourage counseling BASICS 1, BASICS 2, and BASICS 3, run by the UCTC,
and the Men’s Skills group are not considered counseling
Student Conduct Records Different from academic record Most are kept for only five years from the incident date Effect is to allow inquirers to make an informed
decision Many schools, programs, employers, etc. do not even ask See examples
Sanction Scenario #1 Student admitted responsibility for underage alcohol use and disorderly conduct (noise) from a party in a residence hall room; this is her first offense.
Sanction Scenario #2
Same as above except student tells you during the hearing that she is recognizing that she is having difficulty managing her alcohol use, and is scared that she has blacked out on numerous occasions after using alcohol.
Sanction Scenario #3 Student found responsible for drug use/possession (smoking marijuana at the EMU amphitheater). She would not give DPS her ID and yelled insults at them during the incident. During the hearing the student said she thought the Panel was a waste of time and a joke; this is her first offense.
Sanction Scenario #4 Same as above, but this is the student’s fourth incident and has been found responsible three prior times for alcohol and/or drug violations. She has already completed BASICS 1, 2, and 3, eight AA meetings, and all the corresponding essays. The student is also on disciplinary probation.
Sanction Scenario #5
Student is found responsible for bringing unauthorized material (a page of notes) to a math final. The student was previously found responsible for plagiarism in a writing class, where he earned a F.
Specifics: Panel Chair Most important duties: All procedural questions are subject to final
determination by the Chair Keeping the hearing on track and on time Processing questions, consulting with Panelists and GC as necessary Making sure all parties get to share their information with the Panel Making sure advisors do not overstep their roles
Specifics: Advisors In order to preserve the educational tone of the hearing and to avoid an adversarial environment, advisors are generally not permitted to speak or participate directly in any hearing, except in one or more of the following specific ways: (A) An advisor may provide a written opening summary or statement. (B) An advisor may provide an oral closing summary or statement. (C) An advisor may be allotted a limited time-period to ask one or more questions of the Student the advisor is advising and to allow the Student to respond. Questions asked by an advisor are in addition to questions asked by the Hearings Panel. (D) An advisor may submit to the Hearings Panel in writing any suggested questions for the Hearings Panel to ask of any other participant who is giving information at the hearing. (E) The Hearings Panel may permit advisors to question a person providing information at the hearing, if both Complainant and Accused Student independently so request at the beginning of the hearing.
Specifics: Advisors continued Advisors can be another student, staff, faculty, family, friend, attorney, or a member of OSA. Advisors have a limited role in the hearing.
Know that SCCS may be assisting the Complainant as an advisor. The Panel has the right to ask an advisor to leave,
especially if the advisor is interfering with the process or not allowing the student to speak for himself/herself.
Sexual Misconduct Sexual assault is one of the most underreported crimes; sexual misconduct is likely one of the most underreported violations.
False reporting is rare. Most sexual misconduct occurs between students who know each other (compare with the stranger in the bushes). Do you now what constitutes sexual misconduct at UO?
More on Sexual Misconduct Avoiding victim-blaming can be difficult for some. If Panel were to hear a sexual misconduct case,
Director may make accommodations for Complainant and/or witnesses Developing appropriate sanctions for a foundresponsible student can be difficult.
Doing it for real: Scenario #1 Complainant: University Housing Accused Student: Alan Brady Incident Report: Residents told Resident Assistants that
Alan Brady had “sketchy” people visiting his room frequently. Brady consents to a search by DPS, and ¼ ounce of marijuana separated into small baggies, a marijuana pipe, a scale, and $300 cash are found on his side of the room. DPS also finds a small locked box that Brady would not allow to be opened. DPS noted the box was heavy, maybe 10 pounds. Charges: Drug distribution, drug use/possession, violation of the residence hall contract.
Complainant: Prof. Samantha Hardy #2 Doing it for real: Scenario
Accused Student: Colleen Santos Incident Report: Prof. Hardy prohibited students working in unauthorized groups for performing a chemistry experiment in her syllabus, the experiment instructions, and orally in class. Santos sent an e-mail to the entire class asking interested people to get together tomorrow at 3 p.m. to work on the experiment as “more heads are better than one.” Santos said she did meet with others, but they refused to work on that specific experiment with her. Charges: Academic Misconduct
Doing it for real: Scenario #3 Complainant: Gwen Huang Accused Student: Bob Mitchell Situation: Huang reported that she had known Mitchell for at least a term. They coincidentally went to the same party off campus where alcohol was served. Both stated they had drank at least five drinks each at the party. At around 1 a.m. Huang wanted to go home, and Mitchell volunteered to walk her back. When they arrived at her apartment, Huang said she consented to kissing Mitchell.
Doing it for real: Scenario #3 continued However, when Mitchell touched her breasts, she remembered moving his hands away. Then, she said she doesn’t remember what happened next, but she thought Mitchell pushed her to the floor. She also thought Mitchell got her pants off and penetrated her with his penis. Mitchell said he did walk Huang home but that all their sexual activities were consensual. He added he remembered Huang never said “no,” and they discussed whether she had birth control. There is no medical report because Huang never went to see a health professional. She waited five months to file the report with the University. Charges: Sexual misconduct, physical contact
Contact Information Rachel Basolo, Program Assistant 6-1140
[email protected] Sandy Weintraub, Director 6-1141
[email protected] Website: http://conduct.uoregon.edu
