The
Judicial Meeting: Suggestions For Newer Professionals
By Mark Bauman,
Assistant Director of Student Standards and Area Coordinator, Bloomsburg
University
As a residence
life professional, resolving student conduct issues is an important
component of your position. While variations among institutions are
common, most staff members will resolve at least minor policy violations
(i.e. noise, low level harassment, first time alcohol incidents) in
accordance with residential policy. Many institutions will also allow
and/or encourage residence life staff to assume a more active role in
judicial affairs (i.e. non-residential) by serving on conduct boards
or as a University mediator.
Regardless
of your exact involvement in student discipline, resolving student conduct
issues is an excellent opportunity to build relationships. The primary
vehicle for building these relationships is the disciplinary meeting
– a one on one discussion between you, as the hearing officer,
and the student alleged to have violated policy. Sometimes these meetings
can provoke a touch of anxiety, especially in newer professionals. While
understandable, I believe it’s more useful to regard this experience
as an opportunity to begin a relationship with the student sitting across
from you. Over the years, I have developed a general style that I adapt,
contingent upon the situation and the student. It has served me well
and disbanded many of the feelings frequently associated with an experience
students might describe as “going to the principle’s office.”
Below
are some suggestions regarding the disciplinary meeting. Keep in mind
that each situation is unique and should be regarded as such. These
suggestions represent general ideas that you can adjust based on your
personality, style and the situation at hand.
1.
Do the unexpected.
Students
may arrive at your disciplinary meeting expecting a less than pleasant
experience. They know why they have been called to your office and are
expecting the resultant meeting to immediately address alleged poor
conduct. Don’t. Take a few minutes to simply talk with
the student about college, classes, their roommate, where they are from,
what their plans are upon graduation. Build a relationship in those
few minutes concentrating on the whole student. When it’s time
to discuss the real reason for the appointment, use a transition that
works for you. I usually say something along the lines of “Ok,
we should talk about why we’re here today.” At this point
your student is likely more relaxed and comfortable compared to when
they first arrived.
Simple,
but effective, shaking hands immediately establishes rapport. It also
indicates your acknowledgement of a student’s adulthood. Furthermore,
shaking hands, in my view, shows that you are accepting of the student
before you. In other words, it’s not the person you’re challenging
– rather it’s their conduct.
3.
Ask insight-generating, open-ended questions.
For
example, asking a student “did you do this?” or “are
you guilty” is not only a one word generating answer, it provides
no insight to you or the student regarding the incident. One of my frequent
choices is “what do you think about all this…” which
essentially asks a student to reflect on their conduct and being in
my office for less than positive reasons. I often ask students what
they would do differently or what they learned as a result of this experience.
I almost always ask if “people at home…” are aware
of this situation and “what they think about it…”
(the reason I don’t ask about ‘parents’ is because
some students are estranged from, or have otherwise poor relations with,
their parents). Regardless of the exact questions you use, be sure they
stimulate thought and reflection in your student. Not only are these
types of questions more insightful, they also support the learning mission
of higher education.
4.
Allow the student to tell his or her story.
Discipline
procedures vary by institution. Consider a standard alcohol incident.
At some institutions, the procedure is to inform the student of the
disciplinary consequences. If s/he desires to challenge this automatic
finding of responsibility they must initiate the requisite procedure.
In this scenario, the opportunity to build relationships is limited.
Furthermore, students lack the opportunity to tell their story. Thus
this suggestion – “allow the student to tell his or
her story” – can be a significant diversion from established
practice. Often, students know they have violated policy; they simply
want to be heard. In following this suggestion, even if a case is open
and closed, you should still give the student a full opportunity to
speak their mind.
5.
Continue the relationship.
It might
be easy – indeed it might even be the norm – for your judicial
meeting to mark the end of interactions with a given student. Consider
the following scenario: You hold a judicial meeting; a student receives
their sanction, completes the imposed requirements accordingly, and
is released from the probationary or warning status. These scenarios
do, of course, occur, even with the most enthusiastic student life administrator.
However, these should be the exception and not the norm. In my view,
judicial meetings should be regarded as the beginning of a relationship
with a student. Depending on your college’s size and/or your role
on the campus, you will likely see this student again. It is, for example,
quite common for me to see students later that same day: in the dining
hall, in the student recreation center, at a sporting event. Take these
opportunities to continue the good foundation created during your initial
meeting: say hello, ask a few easy questions, and, most importantly,
use their name. The positive message you send in this brief interaction
is important in solidifying a sound relationship.
This
is standard procedure for resident advisors and it should be for professional
staff as well. Make an appointment at the mid-way point in the student’s
sanction to assess their progress, answer questions, and provide guidance
where necessary. As before, don’t begin this meeting with questions
specific to their sanction. Inquire first about them as a person –
their classes, their summer plans, and their involvement with the University.
Ask questions that connect information from your first meeting to the
present: “When we first met, you talked about changing your major…any
movement on that.” Demonstrate that you’re concerned with
them as a person, and not simply as someone who violated policy. After
a while, be sure to ask about the progress with the sanction and direct
the conversation accordingly. For example, if you assigned service,
inquire about their hours, where they did them and what they thought
about the experience.
7.
Hold students accountable.
It’s
important to establish a culture where students placed on university
sanction know they will be held accountable. Each sanctioned student
will, of course, interact with other students. If s/he is allowed to
drift and does not complete requirements in a timely manner, word will
likely spread. The converse is also true: through follow up meetings
and clear expectations, students know they will be held accountable.
This sentiment gets communicated to other students in his/her network.
If no progress has been made, be firm. Just because you’re building
a relationship with the student doesn’t mean you’re a pushover.
Give them clear time limits (i.e. “I’d like to see 5 of
your service hours completed and documented by March 30, 2005”)
and then arrange a follow up meeting. While establishing this culture
will take time, the benefits for all involved are significant.
8.
Positive reinforcement.
Students
who complete requirements in a timely fashion should be supported; ask
them what they learned, what insights they gained, and how this could
apply to future scenarios. If you’ve learned about the student,
suggest that they get involved in a club or organization that appears
to match their interests or educational future. I believe in being very
open with students; as such, I’m more than willing to speak about
how pleased and proud I am of their resolution. I also believe that
turning a negative situation into a positive outcome is the best way
to deal with these sorts of incidents. By completing sanctions, and
not engaging in similar behavior, students do exactly that.
Student
codes of conduct, residential policy and procedures etc. all vary by
institution. Today’s students are well informed and have ready
access to this information. Do not allow yourself to enter a meeting
where a student may have legitimate policy and/or procedural questions
to which you do not have answers. Know your institution’s policies
and procedures thoroughly before you enter your first judicial meeting;
follow your institution’s procedures precisely and take thorough
notes both during and after your meeting.
Conclusion
Judicial
meetings are not an exact science. There are many subtle nuances that
you will learn with time, experience and through professional development.
While the suggestions in this article work well in my professional practice,
I would encourage you to find your own style. Talk to your judicial
affairs office or more seasoned residence life staff for their insights.
Ask to sit in on more complicated meetings so that you might learn the
challenges presented in these scenarios; read judicial affairs articles
and consider attending a regional drive-in workshop on this topic. Take
each of these experiences as an opportunity to learn and craft your
own unique approach to resolving student conduct issues.
About the
Author
Mark Bauman
has worked student affairs for almost 10 years at Bloomsburg University,
beginning first as a resident director. Since 2000, he serves as assistant
director of student standards and area coordinator as a live in staff
member. Mark has a BA in sociology, MS in instructional technology and
an MA in psychology; and is in his sixth semester at Penn State, working
toward a PH.D. in higher education administration.
Please
send questions or comments to: mbauman@bloomu.edu
|