Due Process in Student Discipline: A Primer

Nona Wood — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 14:00:00 GMT

DUE PROCESS IN STUDENT DISCIPLINE: A PRIMER

Nona L. Wood and Robert A. Wood

North Dakota State University

INTRODUCTION

In residence halls there inevitably are occasions when students come into conflict with university rules and regulations. Frequently, undergraduates assist in the adjudication of rule violations as Resident Assistants or members of student judicial boards. Graduate students also may assist as Hall Directors or Complex Managers. Undergraduates, in particular, may have little or no training in student judicial affairs when they assume their duties.

Because state colleges and universities are governmental entities (Williams v. Wheeler, 1913), any residence life employee acting officially is considered an agent of the state. As a result, it is important that all housing personnel involved in the student judicial function be aware of the procedures by which individuals are afforded due process protections.

In private institutions, rights tend to be contractual rather than Constitutional and are based on the private institutions= own documents (Holert v. University of Chicago, 1990; Melvin v. Union College, 1993). If those documents do not afford contract protections similar to due process, then the private institutions need not provide them. Decisions of private institutions, in general, may be subject to review only if they are arbitrary or capricious (Ahlum v. Administrators of Tulane Educational Fund, 1993; MU Chapter of Delta Kappa Epsilon v. Colgate, 1992). The courts also may assume jurisdiction when private, as well as public, institutions fail to follow their own policies and procedures (Gruen v. Chase, 1995; Melvin v. Union College, 1993; Smith v. Denton, 1995; Weidemann v. State University of New York College, 1992). Courts also may intervene if there is a violation of statutorily imposed duty (e.g., Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act [FERPA], Title IX) on the part of the institution.

At public institutions, observing due process meticulously serves several purposes. First, the chances that an appropriate sanction will be assigned are enhanced when proper procedures are followed. Second, strict adherence helps assure the university community that an appropriate response was made. Third, observance of due process helps reduce the risks associated with unfavorable external scrutiny by the public, the media, and the courts. Fourth, it is the law of the land.

Baker (1992) identified several additional purposes of due process, all of which are expressions of fundamental fairness: (a) to reduce the risk that a student has been wrongly accused; (b) to conduct an objective investigation; c) to provide administrator accountability; and (d) to balance countervailing interests.

The purpose of this article is to provide a basic primer for residence life administrators who must teach students the fundamental elements of due process and how these components are safeguarded in their student judicial systems. This article begins with a review of the theoretical underpinnings of due process and then moves to a discussion of specific procedural protections.

For the entire article: http://www.theasca.org/attachments/articles/255/Due Process 1996.pdf

6-Jul-06 9:00 AM

ASCA - Association for Student Conduct Administration - Articles

Due Process in Student Discipline: A Primer