Marcelle Mullings Student Leadership in Conduct

1. CRC Campus Chaplaincy, University of Toronto
Marcia Boniferro
Office of Student Conflict Resolution, York University
Marcelle Mullings

2. STUDENT LEADERSHIP MODELS
How are student leaders involved
in the conduct process at your
campus?

3. STUDENT LEADERSHIP MODELS
Student Conduct Boards
 Peer Conduct Boards
 Peer Appeal Boards
 Mixed Conduct Boards (Staff & Faculty)
Administrative Hearings
 Adjudicate cases
 Co-adjudicate with staff
 Student residence life staff able to assign sanctions
Advocacy/Advising
 Assist students to understand conduct process
 Provide support at hearings

4. STUDENT LEADERSHIP MODELS
Restorative Justice Processes
 Mediation
 Circles
Mentoring
 One-on-One Peer Support
 Two-on-One Models
Education/Awareness Campaigns

5. CROSS-CANADA SURVEY
Survey of 16 Canadian Universities shows…
 12 - Peer Conduct/Appeal Boards
 11 - Mixed Boards
 8- Peer Conduct Advisors
 4 - Student Residence Life Staff able to assign sanctions
 1 – Adjudicate cases
 1 - Education / Awareness

6. BENEFITS OF INCLUDING STUDENT
LEADERS IN CONDUCT PROCESS
What are the benefits of
including student leaders in the
student conduct process at the
University level?

7. BENEFITS OF INCLUDING STUDENT
LEADERS IN CONDUCT PROCESS
 More inclusive process if representatives of all
community members involved
 Shared responsibility for success of community
 Student engagement/investment in campus life
 Students may perceive that University is taking them
more seriously and that their views are valued

8. BENEFITS OF INCLUDING STUDENT
LEADERS IN CONDUCT PROCESS
 Encourages student self-governance
 Helps to rebut notion of us against them (staff versus
students/student organizations)
 Enjoyable for student conduct professionals to be
exposed to student leaders as well as struggling
students

9. RESEARCH STUDY
Chassey, Richard A. “Development of Critical Thinking Skills
among Student Judicial Board Members.” Journal of Student
Conduct Administration, 2009.
 Extensive review revealed only 3 studies on student board
members
 Chassey’s own research showed:
 Rapid change in cognitive and communication skills amongst
student board members
 Significant increase in their level of critical thinking ability over
academic year
 Increase in self-reported skills:
 Perspective taking
 Listening to others
 Working with others
 Improved confidence

10. RESEARCH STUDY
“…the correlations indicate that the increase in critical
thinking ability was more closely associated with
number of semesters of board membership than with
class year. This suggests it is membership on a board,
not a board member’s academic experience, that was
driving the increase in critical thinking ability.”
(Chassey, 2009)

11. RESEARCH STUDY
“Learning how to take the perspective of others and
how to listen effectively were consistent themes across
the responses to the survey. This suggests experience
as a board member breaks through the lingering
egocentrism sometimes found in late adolescents and
young adults.”
(Chassey, 2009)

12. CHALLENGES OF INCLUDING
STUDENT LEADERS IN CONDUCT
What are the challenges of
including student leaders in the
the student conduct process?

13. CHALLENGES OF INCLUDING
STUDENT LEADERS IN CONDUCT
 Lack of maturity to address challenging/complex cases
 Intimidated by student participants
 Scheduling
 High rate of turnover
 Inability to ask necessary/pertinent questions
 Tendency towards black/white thinking
 Gender imbalance

14. STUDENT LEADERSHIP
BEST PRACTICES
1. Learning Outcomes
2. Assessment/Evaluation
3. Training
4. Ongoing Professional Development
5. Encouragement/Affirmation

15. 1. Learning Outcomes
Perspective Taking Open Mind
Listening to Others Calm Emotions
Working with Others Responsibility
Critical Thinking Leadership
Confidence Persuasion
Communication Objectivity
Patience Empathy
(Chassey, 2009)

16. RESEARCH TOOL
Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher
Education (CAS). CAS Self Assessment Guide for Student
Conduct Programs. CAS: 2009.
 Suggested learning outcomes include:
 Knowledge acquisition, integration, construction and
application
 Cognitive complexity
 Intrapersonal development
 Interpersonal competence
 Humanitarianism and civic engagement
 Practical competence (ex. communication skills,
professionalism)

17. 2. Assessment/Evaluation
CONTENT
 Learning and development of student conduct board
members and advisers/mentors/educators
 Effects of educational programming/campaigns
 Effectiveness of student conduct boards targeting special
groups (e.g. residence and student organizations)
 Recidivism rates
FEEDBACK
 From student leaders about student conduct system
 From student participants in conduct processes
 From staff and faculty involved in conduct cases
 From persons harmed in cases

18. Assessment/Evaluation
 CAS suggests periodic performance evaluations of individual
hearing boards including:
 Whether student conduct boards accurately follow the institution’s
procedural guidelines
 General impressions of the student conduct system according to
students, faculty, staff and the community
 Developmental effects on students and student conduct board
members
 Annual trends in case load, rates of recidivism, types of offenses,
efficacy of sanctions
 Effects of programming designed to prevent behavioural problems
 Unique aspects of special function or special population student
conduct boards (eg. student organization boards, residence boards)
(CAS, 2009)

19. Assessment/Evaluation
 CAS suggests the assessment process include:
 Establishing a process and review team (staff, faculty
and students)
 Compiling and reviewing documentary evidence
 Judging performance
 Creating action plan for future improvements
(CAS, 2009)

20. 3. Training
Training for Student Conduct Boards could/should include:
Content
 Philosophy
 Critical Thinking
 Process
 Preparation
 Hearing Decorum
 Questioning Skills
 Evidence
 Standards of Proof
 Sexual Misconduct / Relationship Violence
Format
 Retreats
 Multiple Training Days
 Mock Hearings
(National Centre for Higher Education Risk Management, 2011)

21. Conduct Board Training
 An overview of all judicial policies and procedures
 An explanation of the operation of the judicial process at all levels
including authority and jurisdiction
 An overview of the institution’s philosophy on student conduct
 Roles and functions of all student conduct bodies and their members
 Review of constitutional and other relevant legal rights and
responsibilities
 An explanation of sanctions
 An explanation of pertinent ethics (ex. privacy, bias)
 A description of available personal counseling programs and referral
sources
 An outline of interactions which may involve
police, attorneys, witnesses, parents, media
 An overview of developmental and interpersonal issues likely to arise
amongst students
(CAS, 2009)

22. Other Training
Training for Advisers/Mentors/Educators could include:
Advising/Mentoring Philosophy
Communication Skills
Helping Conversations
Diversity
Citizenship
Communication Campaigns
 Enough is Enough

23. 4. Ongoing Professional
Development
 Asking Questions
 Writing Reasons
 Decision Letter Writing
 Restorative Justice
 Conflict Resolution
 LGBT Awareness
 Diversity
 Mock Hearings

24. 5. Encouragement / Affirmation
 Mid/End of year celebrations
 Certificates
 Awards nights/ceremonies
 Co-curricular transcript

25. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chassey, Richard A. (2009). “Development of Critical Thinking Skills among Student
Judicial Board Members.” Journal of Student Conduct Administration. Longwood
University.
Commission for Student Conduct and Legal Issues of the American College Personnel
Association (ACPA). (2010). Student Conduct Board Manual and Reference.
Retrieved from http://www2.myacpa.org/publications/internal-publications.
Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS). (2009). CAS
Self Assessment Guide for Student Conduct. Retrieved from
https://store.cas.edu/catalog/index.cfm
Dublon, Felice. (2008). “Demystifying Governance: The Influential Practitioner.”
Student Conduct Practice: The Complete Guide For Student Affairs Professionals.
James M. Lancaster and Diane M. Waryold, eds. Stylus.
Pavela, Gary. (2008). “Can We Be Good Without God? Exploring Applied Ethics with
Members of Student Conduct Hearing Boards.” Student Conduct Practice: The
Complete Guide For Student Affairs Professionals. James M. Lancaster and Diane M.
Waryold, eds. Stylus.

26. QUESTIONS?