|
New Conduct Board Chair appointed |
Upon the recommendation of the Association of Student Representatives,
President Brazil has approved the appointment of Jonathan Perry as Student
Conduct Board Chairperson for the spring, 2005 semester. Jonathan replaces
Leslie Shaffer, who graduated in December.
|
Responsible friend policy gets results |
University staff was contacted on six occasions last fall about students
who had become dangerously intoxicated. While the University would prefer
that students didn’t drink to that level of intoxication, the staff is
pleased that students contacted helping professionals without fear of
facing disciplinary action. In all of theses cases the incidents were not
referred to the Conduct Board.
The vast majority of cases heard by the
Student Conduct Board in fall, 2004, involved alcohol, noise, parties, and
hosting. Gatherings which are noisy, which draw attention to themselves
because of the number of people involved, or which feature students
yelling “drink, drink, drink” will usually be approached by staff members.
Students are often curious about what number
of people it takes to constitute a party. The Conduct Board follows the
policy in the Student Handbook (and Board and Residential Agreement)
stating parties that are potentially disturbing
to others are prohibited. Theoretically a gathering of one or two people,
while probably a crummy party, may still be considered a party.
Conversely, a gathering of 15 21-year-old students, quietly sipping
glasses of white zinfandel in an upperclass residence hall room may not
necessarily constitute such an event.
The Conduct Board regularly hears from
students that they “just got there” moments before an event was broken up
by staff. As a general rule, students should understand that whether they
have been present for several hours, or only a few minutes, that the
Conduct Board will often only infer from their presence, that they were
part of the activity. That is, if students are in a room where a violation
of policy is occurring, they should decide right then and there if
they are willing to assume consequences for the violation. This is most
often an issue when there is a group of students with alcohol in a
residence hall room.
|
Reflections from the fall |
–
Students are responsible for their guests and for what happens in their
rooms. This is true if the residents of the room are present or not during
a violation of University policy. Students are also responsible for
securing their rooms when they are not present. If others bring alcohol to
a room – and leave it there – then the room residents are responsible for
that alcohol.
–Hard alcohol containers, even decorative
containers with fluorescent water inside, are not permitted. (Problems are
created for those enforcing policy if they are to determine old vs. new
vs. decorative containers.) Cardboard boxes are permitted.
–It is far better to cooperate with Campus
Safety and Residential Life staff than to become belligerent. Such action
accounts for the majority of the 13 disorderly conduct violations last
fall.
–Shooting any kind of projectile at another
room in order to meet students of the opposite sex is generally not a good
idea.
–The staff does not decide what policies
students may have violated. Those policies are identified by the Conduct
Board Chair and the Dean of Students.
| Like it or
not, parental notification proves effective. |
Parents are keenly aware of the costs of higher education and the risks of
excessive alcohol use, and thus have proven to be effective partners in
helping students avoid being suspended for third offense alcohol
violations. The University acknowledges that students may drink
unlawfully, and in violation of policy. First offenses are met with
educational sanctions. Since third offenses can result in suspension,
parents are notified when a second violation has occurred. There were 20
parental notifications this fall. No students with second offenses were
seen for subsequent alcohol offenses.
|
