Underclassmen say disciplinary process unfair

Some students fear that underclassmen charged with minor infractions face disadvantages during the disciplinary process compared to their older classmates, two members of the USG told the Residential College Disciplinary Board (RCDB) during a meeting last Friday.

"For a long time students have felt that the process could be improved," Class of 2007 president Jim Williamson said in an interview.

The meeting — organized for USG officers to tell administrators about student suggestions for reform of the disciplinary process — focused on the way students are notified of infractions, the role of the residential college directors of studies and how the board handles alleged misconduct by Public Safety.

The RCDB, made up of the directors of studies and Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Hilary Herbold, deals with underclass infractions resulting in probation or campus service. Students have complained that the board's procedures are unfair because underclassmen do not represent themselves before the RCDB.

A major concern students have with the current system is that they are not informed of the charges against them before speaking with their director of studies, said Zach Squire '08, who is part of the USG's undergraduate life committee. "Students are left to incriminate themselves, and they deeply resent it."

Squire also said that students find the underclass disciplinary process to be impersonal and hostile. "You have a discussion that some people say feels like an interrogation with the director of studies, who takes it to the board, which is closed and they discuss it," he said. "Then the director tells you what your punishment is. Students are encouraged to submit a statement, but many worry that the director may not read it or may read it in a way that misrepresents them. You don't know how you're represented because [the meetings] are closed."

"It rubs students the wrong way," he added. But the suggestion of changing this policy "engendered the most ... hardcore resistance" from administrators during last Friday's meeting.

Herbold said in an email that the director of studies calls students in to "gather information about the incident" and ask them for their sides of the story.

"The director of studies will also share any relevant information from the [Public Safety] report with the student and give him or her a chance to respond to that information," she said. "In most cases it would not be appropriate for the director of studies immediately to announce the alleged infraction, because he or she has not yet had an opportunity to gather all of the information, and students are, after all, innocent until proven responsible."

The Committee on Discipline (COD), which deals with infractions that could result in suspension or expulsions, lets accused students present their own case to the committee, whether they are regarding minor or major infractions. Consequently, infractions adjudicated by the COD are generally seen as fair, Squire said.

For administrators, however, the issue is one of accommodating the greater volume of minor infraction cases.

"The RCDB hears a very large number of cases each year," Herbold said. "It is not possible in a practical sense for these infractions to be adjudicated in the way that more serious infractions are," such as with a scheduled hearing or an appearance before the entire board.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Squire added that since the majority of minor disciplinary cases are straightforward — where students simply admit to the charges levied against them — the outcomes of those trials would not be changed by a reform of the disciplinary process.

Students are also concerned with the way the RCDB handles accusations of misconduct on the part of Public Safety officers, Squire said. Such accusations are considered separately from the implementation of penalties — if the allegations against a student are based on evidence that may have been gathered inappropriately, for example, the disciplinary process proceeds regardless, he added.

Herbold said that the RCDB considers all claims that Public Safety improperly obtained information. "If RCDB then concludes that the student's claim has merit, then RCDB will make a judgment as to whether the information in question should be considered as part of the adjudication," she said.

She added that if the committee decides that the "issue is not material to the alleged infraction," such as involving "an officer's manner but not an actual matter of investigative procedure or access to evidence," then the student can report the concern to Public Safety.

Williamson and Squire stressed that they do not want to change the disciplinary system radically, but Williamson said administrators do not always see matters from students' perspective. "As a dean, you might feel that something is completely fair," he said, "but when you're the student being put on probation, you might have a completely different view of the process."

Dean of Undergraduate Students Kathleen Deignan, who hears appeals of the RCDB's decisions, was "not receptive" to the idea that directors of studies should be given guidelines to follow when conducting conversations with students regarding disciplinary matters, Squire said. "I think she sees this as telling professionals how to do their job."

Deignan did not respond to requests for comment.