A few weeks ago, a letter was published criticizing the transition of the Office of Judicial Affairs to the Office of Student Conduct (OSC). As I complete my second year as chief justice of the Student Conduct Board (SCB), I understand the frustration many students feel toward an office whose primary purpose is punishment. However, having been intimately involved with the office, both under Dr. Remelius, the former Judicial Affairs Officer, and Ms. Klucker, the Student Conduct Officer, I have more insight than the average student into the volume of cases the OSC adjudicates, and I would like to share some of that insight with you.
Dr. Remelius handled a huge number of cases as the single staff member for the Office of Judicial Affairs. She gathered a network of hearing officers and three boards made up of students, faculty and staff to assist her, but it was her job to filter all cases, from first-time alcohol up to sexual assault, into the appropriate venue. With a few large cases taking up a lot of energy at the end of last year, Dr. Remelius understandably accumulated some backlog. When she left her position over the summer, the office was moved under the umbrella of Housing and Residence Life, and the directors assumed her duties in the interim.
Ms. Klucker accepted her position in August and began work a week after first semester began. She and her graduate assistant, Ms. Ferrara, began work with the backlog of last year’s cases, cases that accumulated over the summer and all the incidents that occurred right at the beginning of the year, which is typically the Office’s busiest time.
Just how much have Ms. Klucker and Ms. Ferrara had to adjudicate this year? The OSC has received reports of 2,113 cases, and has resolved 91 percent of those. SLU’s Fast Facts report more than 7,000 undergraduates enrolled at the University; thus, the OSC’s caseload represents roughly one case for every three undergrads. (Please don’t take this to mean that almost a third of SLU’s undergrads are involved in breaking policies; the number of cases reported does not disclude repeat offenders.) The point is that one full-time staff person and one graduate assistant, assisted by staff members of Housing and Residence Life, six volunteer hearing officers and three volunteer boards of students, faculty and staff, have successfully resolved 1,931 conduct cases so far this year. Ms. Klucker and Ms. Ferrara are to be commended for the work they have done in managing their volume of cases while also focusing on assuring that our process is an educational experience for students.
One thing that surprised me this year, both in hearings and in the letter to which I am responding, is the apathy of many students who go through the conduct process. There have been several occasions this semester when a hearing has been organized for a student who requested one, and my board is gathered, along with a complaining party from the University and his or her witnesses, and the charged student chooses not to show up for his own hearing. My board is made up of eight busy students, who give of their time to attend hearings, and we are consistently shocked when students ignore the communication Ms. Ferrara has with them and blow off their hearings. Ms. Klucker and Ms. Ferrara contact students involved in the conduct process via their SLU e-mail accounts and MSC boxes, and also frequently by phone. When a student is going to have a hearing, every effort is made to meet with and prepare him for what is going to take place. Ms. Ferrara and Ms. Klucker can recommend advisers from the Residence Life staff who do an excellent job of helping students prepare their defense. However, some students still ask for a hearing and then choose not to attend, and in that case, the hearing is held without the student present. On other occasions, the charged students ignore Ms. Ferrara’s attempts to contact them, and arrive at the hearing completely unprepared for what is going to happen. In this case, the Board makes as fair a decision as possible, but a student who is involved in the process from the beginning and who works with the OSC to prepare for the hearing fares much better in our hearing process.
Before a student complains about the unfairness or disorganization of the OSC, perhaps he should try to be proactive and take some responsibility for the situation in which he is involved. The University’s policies are available in the student handbook, on the SLU Web site. When you arrive on campus in the fall, you are given a flier with the location of the handbook, and it is the students’ responsibility to peruse the handbook. Included in it are the rights a student has when going through the conduct process-the OSC works to protect the rights of all students, but many students haven’t taken the time to learn and understand their rights and responsibilities. I commend those students who have taken an active role in working with the OSC to resolve their cases. I would venture to guess that they have learned something about our policies and how to be a better member of the SLU community along the way. I also commend the hearing officers, Residence Life staff, members of the three conduct boards, and Ms. Ferrara and Ms. Klucker for their devotion to our students and to making the conduct process an educational one.
Those involved with the OSC urge all students, especially those residing on campus, to familiarize themselves with the handbook’s policies and students’ rights, and to contact the OSC or Residence Life to discuss questions regarding these policies or rights. To those students who currently have dealings with the OSC, and to those who may have dealings with the Office in the future, I highly encourage you to actively participate in resolving your case. You will be much more satisfied with the results if you do.
Meggie Fox is a senior in the College of Arts and Sciences and chief justice of the Student Conduct Board
