University officials are one step closer to expanding the Code of Student Conduct’s jurisdiction after the Senate Executive Committee approved the measure for a full senate vote yesterday, set for the body’s April 17 meeting.
If it passes the full senate, the proposal would expand the geographic reach of the Code of Student Conduct, meaning students could face university sanctions for misdemeanors or crimes committed off the campus.
“With the changes to the Code of Student Conduct, as we’ve proposed, it would allow the university to respond in serious cases of misconduct that directly impact the university,” said Andrea Goodwin, Office of Student Conduct director.
Goodwin originally proposed the expansion last October, and the Senate Student Conduct Committee was charged with its review. The expansion wouldn’t have specific geographic boundaries; rather, it would address student actions anywhere outside the campus that negatively affect the school, according to the committee’s report.
Although senators initially expressed concern about vague language in the bill, they noted legislation with similar wording is in place at several Big Ten schools. The bill would be a step forward in student safety and accountability, said Josh Ratner, the Student Government Association’s liaison to the College Park City Council.
“This is almost a way for the university to protect students from themselves,” Ratner said, “and for students to protect themselves from other students.”
Goodwin said the expansion is meant to help students, not hurt them. With the expansion, students who leave campus wouldn’t have to sacrifice protections from sexual assault and violence afforded by the code, although the university would be able to punish them for underage drinking and providing false identification. The Office of Student Conduct will evaluate referrals on a case-by-case basis — it aims to deal with more serious cases than an underage student caught drinking at a house party, officials said.
“If it’s a large party, and the students are not posing a threat to anybody, if it’s not disruptive, if it’s not something that’s repeated over and over where police have to respond,” Goodwin said, “then no, that’s not something we would even know about.”
Jason Speck, the Senate Student Conduct Committee’s chairman, said the expansion “mirrors a reality that we’re already living under,” as scores of students now live off campus and the traditional geography of the campus has less significance.
However, some university officials expressed concern over the proposal’s gray areas.
Under the proposed changes, the director of the Office of Student Conduct would have discretion over which referred cases merit disciplinary action. Currently, that responsibility would fall to Goodwin, but other directors down the road might have different standards.
“There may not always be the same director, and so the criteria used by different directors may not be consistent,” faculty senator Frank Alt said at the meeting.
The proposal’s current language mandates that directors base their judgments on three factors: whether a student’s conduct poses a threat to someone’s safety or wellbeing, if the action substantially disrupts university operations and if the action is “repeated” behavior that “negatively impacts the institution.”
While Ratner supports Goodwin’s authority and trusts her discretion, he said he finds the vagueness of the language concerning and potentially unfair to future students who might have a different director making the decisions.
“I think that the student body should be working with her to make sure that discretion is more defined than just ‘the director having discretion’ on certain things,” Ratner said.
The SEC asked the Student Conduct Committee to clear up other ambiguous language before the April 17 vote.
Goodwin said the committee strongly valued student input in crafting the legislation, although the senate body voting on the proposal largely comprises adult faculty and administrators. Only 37 of approximately 190 senators in the full body represent students, according to the senate website.
While that is a “huge concern,” Ratner said he expects the policy to pass with student support.
“This is a reasonable policy,” Ratner said. “I think it’s in line with a lot of our peer institutions, and I think it’s something that we should be proud of.”
