Running head: FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

Functional Area Study: Inconsistences within the Student Conduct Process

Kristin Ramey
Loyola University Chicago

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

The Dean of Students office at higher education institutions encompasses a vast majority
of the student services that an institution provides. Working with multiple departments, the Dean
of Students is someone that I have always looked up to for their ability to serve an institution in
multiple capacities. When selecting a functional area I was interested in exploring, I recognized
that choosing the Dean of Students office would allow me to gain an understanding of several
departments within an institution. Currently working in Student Activities and Greek Affairs at
Loyola University Chicago, I know that I would be happy continuing to work with students in
this capacity but also recognize there are other areas in which I could continue to impact students
directly. By selecting the Dean of Students area, the ability to gain knowledge of other
university departments with a similar direct impact would be possible.
When selecting the professional to shadow, I recognized that finding a Dean of Students
who would be willing and able to carve out time in their schedule would be difficult. After
reaching out to several institutions, I decided to ask institutions in Kentucky that I have personal
relationships with. Northern Kentucky University, a public, four-year institution, is located only
15 miles from my childhood home. Additionally, my father has worked at the institution for 38
years and my sister is currently enrolled receiving her bachelors degree. Although I had never
had the opportunity to meet or interact with the Dean of Students, I continually heard about the
climate of change he was creating on campus. After contacting the office, I was able to schedule
a time to shadow Dr. Jeffrey Waple.
Shadow Study
Dr. Jeffrey Waple, Assistant Vice President of Student Engagement and Dean of
Students, has served in this role at Northern Kentucky University for six years. In the Dean of
Students Office, Dean Waple is accompanied by the Associate Dean of Students and Title IX

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

Coordinator, Associate to the Dean of Students, and an administrative assistant. This team of
individuals serve as direct advocates for students; providing information, advice, or help
concerning all aspects of student life. Alongside these individuals, the Dean of Students
oversees 11 departments within the university. These departments, African-American Programs
and Services, Campus Recreation, Conference Management, Latino Programs and Services,
LGBTQ Programs and Services, Fraternity and Sorority Life, New Student Orientation and
Parent Programs, Norse Violence Prevention Center, Student Leadership Development, Student
Union and Engagement, and University Housing, all serve to promote learning and personal
development among the student population (J. Waple, personal communication, October 10,
2014.). In addition to the collaboration and oversight of these departments, the Dean of Students
office is responsible for coordinating the resolution of issues through the student discipline and
student grievance process. Having copious responsibilities and individuals to supervise, Dean
Waple had a busy day scheduled for my arrival on campus.
Upon my arrival at Northern Kentucky University, Dean Waple had gathered his staff
and several department heads for a weekly lunch meeting. This meeting, which I anticipated to
be business related, was a time where everyone had the opportunity to provide an update about
their personal lives and plans for the weekend. Following the lunch meeting, Dean Waple and I
walked around campus. While receiving a tour of the student union, several students approached
Dean Waple to say hello or reminisce on a previous conversation. Upon arriving back to the
office, Dean Waple had two meetings scheduled which took place back to back. The first
meeting with Kim, the Vice President of Enrollment and Degree Management, discussed the
changes in Freshman Orientation and how that would alter the student experience. The goal in
this meeting was to navigate the change from a two day orientation to a one day orientation,

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

while keeping necessary information sessions for the students. As a new professional at the
institution, Kim had several questions for Dean Waple about how to advocate for the students
needs while navigating upper level administration. The second meeting was with the Student
Government Associations Academic Affairs committee chair, Julia. After meeting with the
Provost and Faculty Senate, Julia wanted to provide Dean Waple with the feedback received as
well as ask questions in moving forward with the committees plans. At the beginning of the
meeting, Dean Waple took time to check-in with Julia on a personal level. As the conversation
continued, he provided alternate routes to achieving the successful outcomes that the Student
Government Association anticipated.
While in the meeting with Julia, Dean Waple received a phone call from Campus
Recreation about a potential risk incident. Following the meeting, Dean Waple and I walked to
the Recreation Center to hear that the basketball court had standing water underneath the floor.
This standing water was seeping through the floor and causing students to slip. Dean Waple
made the decision to immediately close all of the basketball courts where the problem was
occurring and informed the Director of Campus Recreation, Matt, to resolve the situation as soon
as possible. After returning to the office, Dean Waple made several phone calls in relation to the
risk incident at the Recreation Center.
Following those conversations, I was interested in hearing about the student conduct
process related to risk incidents, as working in a conduct office is something that I envision
myself doing in my professional career. Dean Waple took the time to discuss the severity of
particular risk incidents as opposed to others. While the recreation centers floor was a simple
fix that did not result in student injury, the university is not always that lucky. He explained that
a particular incident occurred earlier in the week which resulted in a student conduct hearing.

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

Although that information remained confidential, the dean stressed the importance of following
risk management policies in order to alleviate severe risk incidents at the institution. He also
addressed the importance of appropriate and consistent student conduct processes, especially
with the Dean of Students office serving in that capacity at the institution.
The rest of the day was spent working on administrative tasks. Receiving 11 phone calls
during the two previous meetings and 54 emails throughout the afternoon, returning calls and
replying to emails was a priority. Additionally, Dean Waple was finalizing an assessment
project for the Dean of Students area. While in the office, Dean Waple had three students stop
by before leaving for their Fall Break, where he welcomed and engaged with them on a personal
level. As the work day came to an end, Dean Waple created a priority list for the following
week.
Following my time at Northern Kentucky University, I was able to ask and reflect about
the type of activities the Dean spent the majority of his time doing. According to Dean Waple,
an average day consists mostly of meetings with administrative work in between. The
breakdown of his schedule is usually 50% of the time working with students and 50% of the time
with administrators and directors (J. Waple, personal communication, October 10, 2014.). It was
clear through my interactions that Dean Waple prides himself on being personable and
professional with his students and staff. Making a point to be visible at all times, the number of
students and directors that stopped into the office to say hello was very surprising to me.
Throughout my time with him, Dean Waple exhibited the skills of communication, leadership,
delegation, and focus. It was also made very clear that the ability to be flexible in the Dean of
Students role is crucial for success. According to the dean, never plan to have the day thats on
your calendar (J. Waple, personal communication, October 10, 2014.).

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

As someone who wants to pursue a Dean of Students position at a four year institution,
this shadow study shed light onto what an average day could potentially look like in the future.
Additionally, hearing Dean Waples journey to Dean of Students position through various roles
at multiple institutions was extremely helpful in deciding what functional areas I may want to
pursue upon receiving my masters degree. Although I recognized the vast number of people
who a dean interacts with, I was unaware of how different each department may be that the dean
oversees. When thinking about my personal philosophy following this shadow study, I would
definitely want to include the importance of cultivating relationships with other staff members as
opposed to solely students. Recognizing the regularity of working with upper level
administration, department directors, and supervising staff, it is crucial to maintain positive
working relationships with other professionals at the institution. Additionally, Dean Waple
discussed the importance of maintaining a balanced lifestyle outside of the office. This
conversation sparked the importance of maintaining a good work/life balance that would be
necessary to include within my personal philosophy.
Having experience with Northern Kentucky University throughout my lifetime, I
expected to complete the shadow study without gaining any new knowledge about the university.
Much to my surprise, all of the information and knowledge I gained from the experience was
completely different. Personally, I was surprised by all of the initiatives that the institution was
completing within its many departments as well as the growth of a new student union and the
expansion of the recreation center. Professionally, I was most surprised that the student conduct
process takes place directly within the Dean of Students office. In my experience, the student
conduct and student grievance processes had its own staff. With the responsibility being given to

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

the Dean of Students office, the staff is responsible for completing their daily responsibilities
while addressing any concerns that may arise through these processes.
With all of this information in mind, the most significant thing I have learned throughout
this process is the importance of continued flexibility in this role. As mentioned previously,
instances will come up throughout the day that take precedence, altering your calendar and
priorities. When this occurs, it is necessary to move forward while prioritizing what is best for
the students and institution. This flexibility is especially important when risk management cases
occur, as it is the responsibility of the Dean of Students to navigate those obstacles in a timely
and efficient manner.
There are several core competencies that are necessary to be successful in this area, yet I
believe assessment is of upmost importance in determining what services are needed by the
student population while evaluating the effectiveness of different institutional areas. Mentioned
during my shadow study, Dean Waple and several of the departments that he oversees were
finalizing assessment that they had been working on over the course of the last two years.
Bresciani would advocate the completion of assessment more regularly, primarily utilizing
outcomes-based assessment (Bresciani, 2011). Outcomes-based assessment is implemented to
determine if professionals in the field are accomplishing their institutional and/or departmental
goals on a day-to-day basis. From outcomes-based assessment, strategic and action planning can
come as a result from suggested areas of improvement as well as provide information about the
proper allocation of the institutions funds. The implementation of assessment provides the
necessary information to continue to advance the institutions mission, making it a core
competency for student affairs professionals.
Issue Exploration

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

With the continued growth of higher education, it is the responsibility of student affairs
professionals to adjust our thinking and actions with the evolution of the field. With the goal of
creating a holistic student experience, the safety and development of students is a top priority
(American Council on Education Studies, 1949.). With direct impact to the safety and
development of collegiate students, managing risk is a pertinent issue at higher education
institutions. The issue I have selected for further exploration is student conduct at the
institutional level and how those processes which should aid in the safety and development of
collegians are often inconsistent. With the rise of student misconduct and risk incidents, the
policies and procedures related to the student conduct process have gained attention (Lowery,
2011). This attention, both positive and negative, has urged institutions to look at their conduct
processes to determine if they are effective in achieving student development. I will explore the
history of student conduct and the difficulties that institutions face in its implementation. I will
also look to the future to determine effective solutions to the issues surrounding these processes
and provide insight into the potential outcomes of their enactment.
Student conduct has been at the forefront of student affairs since the emergence of the
profession to higher education. With the growth of colonial colleges, college presidents and
faculty exercised complete control over students behavior and discipline, acting in loco parentis
(Lowery, 2011). Acting in place of the parent, institutions were able to exert their power over
students when determining the discipline for their actions. As the shift from in loco parentis
occurred following the Civil War, institutions began to recognize the need for a more
humanitarian and individualized approach to student discipline. This realization resulted in the
emergence of the field of student affairs. Harvard appointed the first student dean of higher
education in 1870, primarily creating the position to handle student unrest and discipline issues

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

(Dungy & Gordon, 2011). As such, the student affairs profession has always been linked to
student conduct and the processes that it entails. With the increase in college risk incidents and
student mental health concerns, student affairs professionals must expand their awareness,
knowledge, and skills when working effectively with student conduct (Reynolds, 2011). The
growing concern for students safety and development lends to the necessity of gauging the
effectiveness of the student conduct process.
Looking at the creation of the profession, it is clear why student conduct is an important
area of concern. For the Dean of Students office, student conduct cases could have both a direct
and indirect affect for the area. Whether or not the dean is directly responsible for student
conduct, as seen at Northern Kentucky University, the Dean of Students functional area could
oversee the department responsible for those cases. Considering student affairs professionals
goals include student development, it is their responsibility to respond to ethical issues by
providing whatever types of training and education that students may need to be successful
(Fried, 2011). In times of crisis, professionals in the field are responsible for helping students
understand and respond appropriately, while aiding in their learning and development from the
difficult situation. As stated in the American College Personnel Associations code of ethics,
Student development is an essential purpose of higher education. Support of this process is a
major responsibility of student affairs (American College Personnel Association, 2006).
Recognizing the large role that student affairs plays in student conduct, it is necessary to look
deeper into the processes to determine where the areas of contention arise so that we are able to
educate ourselves in making change.
Research Findings within Student Conduct Processes

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

10

According to John Lowery (2011) student conduct is a timely, complex, and

controversial subject (p. 196). As such, there are several contentions surrounding the
effectiveness of student conduct with the rising number of risks at institutions. In order to
understand the critical points within the arguments surrounding conduct, I will look at four
categories which represent important aspects of the student conduct process. These categories;
legality v. development, authority to discipline, physiological perspectives of fear, and the
changing environment, will shed light onto the issues institutions are currently facing.
Legality v. Development
Initially utilizing in loco parentis to reprimand students for their behavior, institutions
created an atmosphere of control and punishment. As this ideology changed from in loco
parentis to developmental theory, Dixon v. Alabama State Board of Education altered the
approach to a more formal, judicial process in determining appropriate sanctions (Baldizan,
2003). This case announced that the right to a state-supported education could not be taken away
from an individual without due process of law, receiving notice and a hearing. The concept of
due process in relation to student discipline provides individuals with fundamental fairness
(Baldizan, 2003; Lowery, 2011). Public institutions have several principles established to
maintain due process throughout their conduct process. These principles include: (1) making and
enforcing rules of student conduct to maintain discipline and order, (2) behavioral standards must
be consistent with the institutions lawful purpose and function, (3) rules must be constitutionally
fair and reasonable, (4) a code of conduct should be written and available for all to see, (5) the
constitutionally guaranteed rights of students can be limited to enable the institution to function,
and (6) rules created by the institution must be specific enough to give adequate notice of
expected behavior and to allow a student to prepare a defense against a charge under it (Lowery,

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

11

2011). The gain of students legal rights is one of the most prominent factors in the shift of the
student affairs profession, recognizing students as adults with individualized needs (GastonGayles, Wolf-Wendel, Twombly, Ward, & Tuttle, 2005). It is important to recognize that these
standards of due process for public institutions are not required by private institutions, as they are
not involved in state action and do not fall under the Fourteenth Amendment. Although the
relationships between students and private institutions are seen as contractual, many public
institutions provide due process protections for their students regardless (Dannells, 1997).
With the addition of due process and increased legality, many student affairs
professionals felt that the formalized approach to student conduct was not as beneficial to
students as an educational approach. This concept, which is still prevalent today, recognized that
these formalized processes allow student policy administrators to utilize legal rationale as
opposed to addressing the life and learning experiences that could lead to ethical and moral
outcomes (Baldizan, 2003). If student affairs professionals ignore the behaviors that are not
covered by the rules and regulations of the student conduct process, it would be a disservice to
the students that we are trying to provide a holistic experience for.
Student development theory provides student affairs professionals the ability to conduct
disciplinary processes which would aid in providing the intended holistic student experience.
Using student development theory during the conduct process, students are able to walk away
with gained knowledge and recognize their areas of growth. The common outcomes of utilizing
student development theory during conduct processes include: (1) insight and further growth in
the offender, (2) self-understanding or clarification of personal identity, attitudes, and values
for both the students in question and students who may sit on the judicial board, (3) goals of selfcontrol and responsibility, (4) the use of ethical dialogue in both confronting the impact of the

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

12

individuals behavior and the implications that it may have, and (5) moral and ethical
development in relation to contemporary social issues (Dannells, 1997; Lowery, 2011). These
outcomes, which represent the attempt to explain the process of human development in college
students, serves as the educational foundation of the student affairs professional (Reason &
Broido, 2011). This provides the argument that education through disciplinary action is critical
to institutional and student success.
With the move toward the use of development theory, the discussion of legal terminology
within an institutions code of conduct emerged (Martin & Janosik, 2004). Recognizing that the
rules in court do not always apply to student discipline procedures and that overly legal systems
diminish the placement of personal responsibility on the student, recommendations were made
that would remove legal terminology from institutional policies and procedures. While not all
institutions were included in this study, recommending appropriate substitutes for legal terms has
seemingly been successful.
The overwhelming shift to the educational approach has been viewed as successful, yet
this approach is now being questioned as institutions are pressed to take more responsibility for
their students (Pavela, 1992). The need for institutions to take greater responsibility for their
students behavior, whether on or off campus, has seemingly encouraged student affairs
professionals to revert back to a formalized, legal conduct process. When the profession seems
to decide on a method of approach, the pros and cons of legality and development seem to seep
back into their minds. This contention between approaches brings student affairs professionals
to the argument regarding whether they serve the institution as administrators or educators.
While every institution may be different, it is important as a profession that we are looking at this

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

13

issue and determining which approach and/or balance of approaches is best for our students and
institution.
Authority to Discipline
According to Stoner and Cerminara (as cited in Dannells, 1997), the legal relationship
between a college or a university and its students has never fit neatly within one legal doctrine
(p. 20). As such, an institutions authority stems from several theories and legal doctrines,
providing jurisdiction over students in disciplinary cases. These theories and doctrines; in loco
parentis, contract theory, educational purpose theory, statutory theory, constitutional theory,
fiduciary theory, and status theory, define the legal relationship between an institution and its
students (Dannells, 1997).
While a legal relationship may be present, it is important to determine the extent to the
institutions jurisdiction. In instances where both institutional rules and criminal law apply, the
behavior in question must directly relate to the educational mission or the welfare of the campus
community (Dannells, 1997; Lowery, 2011). The issue here is double jeopardy. Double
jeopardy is the action of being tried for the same offense twice, which violates the Fifth
Amendment of the Constitution. However, this only applies to successive criminal proceedings,
which would not include one criminal proceeding and one campus proceeding. In extreme cases
that contain evidentiary support, institutions are often advised to defer to criminal proceedings
(Dannells, 1997). In addition to the issue of double jeopardy, the other issue is the extent to
institutional jurisdiction related to student misconduct that refers off campus. Over time, this
concept of disciplining students for activities off campus has grown. The university does have
jurisdiction over student behavior if it directly relates to the educational mission or welfare of the
campus community (Dannells, 1997). This is an extremely contentious topics for students, as

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

14

many do not feel that their actions off campus relate to their lives as students. In my experience
working with sorority women, the idea of actions at non-chapter events being brought up through
the sororitys conduct process was a huge issue. Many women felt that if their actions did not
take place at an organizations event, they could not be reprimanded for it. Similarly to
institutional jurisdiction, actions which directly related to the organizations code of conduct
were able to be addressed regardless of where they occurred.
An institutions jurisdiction plays a large role in its ability to take action, but it is equally
as important to look at the constitutional rights of individuals to determine if the institution is
able to move forward with conduct processes. A public institution is unable to restrain students
First Amendment rights of freedom of assembly and expression, unless they are directly
interfering with the institutions educational and administrative duties (Lowery, 2011).
Institutions cannot restrict, prohibit, or censor the content of speech unless it is for compelling
reasons. Additionally, institutions are unable to discriminate against particular individuals or
participate in unreasonable searches and seizures as prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.
While these constitutional rights are in place, institutions have the ability to disregard
these rights when the institution or students could be at risk. This often walks a fine line
between what is appropriate and what is not. Recently, the media has reported several risk
incidents occurring on college campuses. These incidents, which reflect poorly on the
institutions they occur at, are brought up for public scrutiny and judgment. When this occurs, it
is important to recognize that societal pressure may play a role in determining the outcome of the
situation. As such, it is often the governing boards that focus on the immediate concern and
determine how to move forward (Carpenter-Hubin & Snover, 2013). We are able to see an
example of this decision in the recent allegations of gang rape at the University of Virginia.

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

15

When the article emerged from Rolling Stones interviewing a student that tells a story of how a
fraternity raped her at a party, the university had not heard the allegations prior and had to act
quickly to resolve the situation (Erdely, 2014).
When looking at authority in student conduct processes, recognizing the intersections
which take place between criminal laws and institutional rules is necessary to navigate the
system effectively. It is also important to understand that these systems are not set up in a way
which results in consistency for every conduct case. These issues are important to understand
when utilizing conduct processes so that improvements can be made.
Physiological Perspective of Fear
When dealing with risk management, the role of fear is prevalent. According to Pavela
(2013), certain aspects of our brain recognize and evaluate the seriousness of perceived threats.
These threats create an emotional response which evokes fear, making it difficult to think
rationally when decision making. As student affairs professionals, the implications of fear are
prevalent in our work with student conduct because particular events have the ability to trigger
our responses to risk incidents. These implications are varied yet important to note when in
these situations.
One implication of fear is that administrators attention to threats may limit their access
to information (Pavela, 2013). In this regard, institutions tend to worry about future dangers
when they may or may be real. By dwelling on these future dangers, institutions may act on
anecdotes or media reports that are not accurate. It is important for professionals to make a
deliberate effort to examine the information of the particular incident, so that there is not a rush
to make decisions which could end up hurting the institution in the long run.

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

16

Another implication of fear is when institutions lend attention to threats which could
result in an inaccurate interpretation of information (Pavela, 2013). It is important for
institutions to appropriately handle all information received so that they do not have increased
liability if a risk incident were to occur. It is equally as important that institutions do not allow
threats to consume their purview when other incidents may be occurring.
If our institutions allow fear to enter into the conduct process, there is a potential that it
will mask the necessary educational priorities (Pavela, 2013). In order to make sure that fear has
not entered the realm of student conduct, professionals must be disciplined, trained, and
prepared. As risk incidents become more prevalent at our institutions, it is important to
recognize that fear has the ability to alter our thinking and ultimately reflect negatively on the
institution. Balancing risk and educational objectives is necessary for institutional success,
which is why student affairs professionals must acknowledge the role that fear may play in their
decision making process to eliminate the potential implications that fear brings.
Changing Environment
The change in higher education has a large effect on the way our institutions perceive
their roles within the student conduct process. With the shift in higher education toward a
business model, professionals, students, and parents no longer feel that disciplinary procedures
are an institutions responsibility (Lowery, 2011). With this change, students want to be treated
like adults and fully understand the institutions expectations. This has influenced institutions to
dramatically reconsider their codes of conduct to reflect the changing tide of higher education
and the students which it serves.
As the demographics in higher education shift from traditional-aged college students to a
higher average age, it is necessary for institutions to prepare for these changes in both their

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

17

policies and procedures. With a higher average age for students, it is projected that fewer risk
incidents will occur overtime (Lowery, 2011). While fewer risk incidents may be in the future, it
is necessary that institutions continue to update their policies and procedures in order to navigate
those incidents if they do occur.
With the rise of technology and social media, student affairs administrators have
experienced a new form of risk incidents. As mentioned previously in an institutions
jurisdiction, institutions are able to enforce their standards online if they blatantly go against the
code of conduct and reflect poorly on the institution. The same protocols that apply to student
conduct and safety on campus also would apply in this new context. Rebecca Koenig (2014)
discusses the use of Yik Yak, a smart-phone application that allows individuals to post
anonymously while linking the posts to an institution, and the struggles that institutions have
faced with cyberbullying, racism, and threats of violence. As more institutions are becoming
aware of this application, many are making decisions to either block access to students, create
educational campaigns, or begin to utilize it in a positive way (Koenig, 2014).
With these changes and changes that will occur in the future, it is important for
institutions to remain informed so that they are able to navigate the situations that arise. The
evolving environment of higher education has proven to create some obstacles and will continue
to do so, making it necessary to be prepared when the issues arise.
Recommendations for Future Practice
With the many issues surrounding the student conduct process, it is easy to see the
inconsistencies which occur throughout our institutions. In order to alleviate those
inconsistencies surrounding the proper approach, an institutions authority, the role of fear, and

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

18

the changing environment of higher education institutions, it is important to look to the future in
determining what improvements can be implemented.
One way to alleviate these issues is through the use of proper assessment. As stated
within my shadow study, assessment is a core competency of the profession because it allows
professionals to determine if they are being successful in their endeavors. In terms of student
conduct, it is important to determine which policies and procedures provide the most positive
outcomes for students. Specifically, if proper assessment is completed each institution could
determine the effectiveness of the formal v. educational approach to conduct. According to
Baldizan (1998), James Rests Defining Issues Test (DIT) which determines the major
determinants of moral behavior would be a good addition to assessment in the area of student
conduct.
Educating students about the institutions code of conduct and the student conduct
process is extremely important in alleviating contentions regarding students legal rights. In my
personal experience, I never looked at the student code of conduct at my undergraduate
institution until I became a member of the Student Conduct Hearing Board. Even serving as a
student representative in the conduct process, I was completely unaware of my role and why
certain policies and procedures effected individuals differently. It is critical that institutions
share this information in a new student orientation or general education class so that students
understand their rights at the institution whether they are on or off campus. It is equally as
important to discuss the implications that particular actions could result in for students,
especially surrounding alcohol. By addressing the institutional rules and student action,
institutions would be able to provide students with the proper knowledge to inform their
decisions.

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

19

When educating the students, it is also important to utilize the problem-posing method
allowing education for the professionals as well (Freire, 2000). Several institutions are
considering team-taught, interdisciplinary subject matter that would increase knowledge and
effectiveness while challenging the student body (Lowery, 2011). This would provide more
understanding for students and also more efficient professionals who through their knowledge
understand how to navigate fear in risk situations.
The concept of continuing to engage in knowledge is important for professionals as
trends change within the field. While professional associations are often joined for networking
purposes, it is important to recognize the vast majority of associations that are related to the
disciplinary process on campuses. By utilizing these development opportunities, professionals
can gain further knowledge on the subject while understanding how to move forward as changes
in higher education occur (Lowery, 2011).
While some of these recommendations are being utilized by institutions already, it is
important that all institutions recognize the importance for consistency in their conduct processes
so that students safety and development are achieved. Personally, I believe that education is the
most important aspect in creating conduct processes that are consistent because of my
undergraduate experience with student conduct, experience with risk management in Greek life,
and hearing about processes at Northern Kentucky University.
Best Practices
While there are several issues related to the conduct processes, several universities are
taking action to implement change. After an act of violence at Virginia Tech in 2007, the
campus created the field of threat assessment and behavioral intervention in hopes to diminish

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

20

similar incidents in the future (Bennett, 2014). By creating a campus culture of reporting
warning signs, the institution is able to exhibit care to influence the conduct of others.
At the University of Georgia, educators provide support to students by being realistic.
Recognizing that alcohol consumption is a problem that could result in further issues, educators
are involved to be realistic while providing resources and opportunities to students.
Additionally, the wellness center understands the importance of working with other campus
partners and the community, approaching local bars to question them on their processes for over
consumption (Fisher & Hoover, 2014). This reflects best practices at universities as well
because they are educating students, exhibiting development opportunities, and working to
prevent risk incidents in the future.
These examples reflect best practices that are occurring at particular institutions, yet there
are several other practices that are important when addressing student conduct. Personally, I
think the most important practice when navigating the conduct process is the idea of creating a
holistic student experience which results in personal growth and development. The learning
resulting from student development is critical for the present but also the future of each student.
I also think it is important for institutions to understand the world we live in and the reality of
higher education today. With risk, comes student conduct. Recognizing this and having plans in
place which are consistent is important in relation to student development. Lastly, I feel that
student safety should be an institutions first priority. Whether it be through educational
workshops, assessment, or behavioral intervention, it is critical that institutions are doing what is
necessary to keep every student safe.
Conclusion

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

21

The issues that encompass the student conduct process have been present for many years.
Recognizing this, it is important to take action so that every student is able to have a collegiate
experience that results in student development. While change may not occur overnight, taking
small steps will lead to success in the conduct process which will result in a better environment
for both the students involved and the campus as a whole. Moving forward, student affairs
professionals must prepare for the changes that higher education will face. As mentioned by
Claire Bailey in our class dialogue, the only thing that is consistent is change (personal
communication, December 1, 2014.) and we must be prepared for it as we continue to advocate
for students in all facets of the institution.

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

22
References

American College Personnel Association (March, 2006). Statement of Ethical Principles and
Standards. Retrieved from http://www.acpa.nche.edu/ethics
American Council on Education. (1949). Student Personnel Point of View. Washington, DC:
Williamson et al.
Baldizan, E. M. (1998). Development, Due Process, and Reduction: Student Conduct in the
1990s. New Directions for Student Services, 1998(82), 29-37.
Bennett, L. (2014, April 15). Care & Conduct: The Heart of Threat Assessment and Behavioral
Intervention Teams. Retrieved from
http://www.naspa.org/constituent-groups/posts/care-conduct
Bresciani, M. J. (2011). Assessment and Evaluation. In Schuh, J., Jones, S., Harper, S., &
Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed., p. 321-334).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carpenter-Hubin, J. & Snover, L. (2013). Key Leadership Positions and Performance
Expectations. In Schloss, P. J., & Cragg, K. M. (Eds.), Organization and administration
in higher education (p. 27-49). New York, NY: Routledge.
Dannells, M. (1997). From Discipline to Development: Rethinking Student Conduct in Higher
Education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 25(2), 1-129.
Dungy, G. & Gordon, S. A. (2011). Assessment and Evaluation. In Schuh, J., Jones, S., Harper,
S., & Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed., p. 6179). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Erdely, S. R. (2014, November 19). A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for
Justice at UVA. Retrieved from

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

23

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/a-rape-on-campus-20141119
Fisher, K. & Hoover, E. (2014, December 1). A River of Booze. Retrieved from
http://chronicle.com/article/A-River-of-Booze/150221/
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
Fried, J. (2011). Ethical Standards and Principles. In Schuh, J., Jones, S., Harper, S., &
Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed., p. 96-119).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gaston-Gayles, J., Wolf-Wendel, L., Twombly, S., Ward, K & Tuttle, K. (2005). From
disciplinarian to change agent: How the civil rights era changed the roles of student
affairs professionals. NASPA Journal, 42(3), 263-282.
Koenig, R. (2014). Yik Yak and Yecch. Chronicle of Higher Education, LXI(6), A11.
Lowery, J. W. (2011). Student Conduct. In Zhang, N. and Associates (Eds.). (2011). Rentzs
student affairs practice in higher education (4th ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Martin, J. E. & Janosik, S. M. (2004). The Use of Legal Terminology in Student Conduct
Codes: A Content Analysis. NASPA Journal, 42(1), 36-51.
Pavela, G. (1992). Todays college students need both freedom and structure. Chronicle of
Higher Education, p. B1, B2.
Pavela, G. (2011). Selected Legal Issues. In Schuh, J., Jones, S., Harper, S., & Associates (Eds.),
Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed., p. 120-134). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Reason, R. D. & Broido, E. M. (2011). Philosophies and Values. In Schuh, J., Jones, S., Harper,
S., & Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed., p. 8095). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

FUNCTIONAL AREA STUDY

24

Reynolds, A. L. (2011). Counseling and Helping Skills. In Schuh, J., Jones, S., Harper, S., &
Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed., p. 399-412).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.