Guide for Advisors in the Student Conduct Process
The Oklahoma State University Student Code of Conduct stipulates that a student may select an advisor to advise him/her during student conduct proceedings. The following information is intended to inform advisors of their role in OSU’s student conduct process.
The role of an advisor in a conduct meeting is to:
- support the student.
- consult with the student during the meeting.
- suggest questions for the student to ask.
- assist the student in clarifying his/her response to questions.
The role of an advisor is not to act as a participant in the meeting, which comports with due process requirements. Students are allowed to have one advisor present with them during their meeting. Advisors are limited to advising the student and may not present information, ask questions or make statements during the meeting. An advisor may not speak for or on behalf of a student. During a meeting, an advisor may quietly converse with or write notes to a student. It is asked that the advisor be mindful that communication with the student does not disrupt the meeting.
A conduct hearing/conduct committee hearing differs from a conduct meeting as the respondent is facing possible suspension or expulsion from the university.
The role of an advisor in a hearing is to:
- Support the student.
- Consult with their student during the hearing.
- Suggest questions for the student to ask.
- Assist the student in clarifying his/her response to questions.
In a hearing, advisors may:
- Participate only to the extent and in the same manner as afforded to the student they are advising.
Advisors may not:
- Delay, disrupt or interfere with the proceedings.
- Present information not relevant to the issues being discussed at the hearing.
- Disrespect others in the hearing by badgering or harassing the other student(s) involved including, but not limited to, making victim blaming statements.
Advisors are expected to:
- Act in a professional and courteous manner.
- Be mindful that the Student Conduct process is educational in nature, not penal.
In conduct meetings, if an advisor does not act in accordance with the limitations set forth, then the conduct officer will warn him/her that if noncompliance persists, the advisor will be required to leave the hearing. If the advisor continues to act outside the limitations set forth, the advisor may be required to leave the meeting.
In conduct hearing/conduct committee hearings, participation is a privilege which, if abused, may be withdrawn by the hearing officer or hearing panel chair. If the privilege is withdrawn, the advisor may continue to advise the student, but may not participate directly in the hearing. If the advisor fails to act in accordance with hearing procedure and with the standards set forth herein, the hearing officer or hearing panel chair may require the advisor to leave the hearing.
The university’s philosophy on student discipline is educational in nature. Student Support and Conduct strives to help students learn from their choices in addition to holding them accountable for their behavior. The standards set forth by the university in the Student Code of Conduct are considered much higher than the obligations imposed by civil and criminal law for all citizens. The following chart depicts the main differences between the legal system and the university student conduct
| Legal System | University Student Conduct Process | |
|---|---|---|
| Prosecutes criminals who violate the law | Discipline students who violate institutional rules | |
| Higher standard of proof — “beyond a reasonable doubt” | Lower standard of proof — “more likely than not.” (Also referred to as the "preponderance of the evidence.") | |
| “Rules of evidence” often applied in state and federal courts | “Rules of evidence” do not apply to Student Conduct Meetings or Hearings. [1] The conduct officer, hearing officer or panel will weigh all evidence — including issues of credibility and relevance — when making a determination | |
| More severe punishment | Maximum consequence is expulsion | |
| Can imprison people | 67 West Fillmore Terrace | |
| State and federal laws set minimum standards for the safe and orderly operation of society | Set standards requiring ethical and moral behavior of students to create and maintain a productive University living and learning community | |
| Legal system may choose not to prosecute a certain action or behavior | Campus resolution may proceed before, during or after civil or criminal actions are concluded. Civil and criminal processes do not affect the Student Conduct process. | |
| Punishment | Action Plan/Assignments/Sanctions | |
| "Guilty" or "not guilty" | "Responsible" or "not responsible" | |
| "Plaintiff" and "Defendant" | "Complainant" and "Respondent" |
There is no formal discovery in the Student Conduct process. Both the complainant and respondent may review the hearing file in Student Support and Conduct office three days prior to the hearing. If the advisor would like to review the file they will need to either be accompanied by the student or have a signed record release from the student on file with Student Support and Conduct
Both the complainant and respondent have the opportunity to submit information and a witness list for the hearing file. This information must be submitted at least three university working days prior to the hearing to be included in the hearing file and addressed in the hearing.
[1] See Nash v. Auburn Univ., 812 F.2d 665 (11th Cir. 1987) (holding that “student disciplinary hearings follow flexible rules and need not conform to formal rules of evidence”); Boykins v. Fairchild Bd. of Educ., 492 F.2d 697, 701 (5th Cir. 1974); Wasson v. Trowbridge, 382 F.2d 807, 812 (2d Cir. 1967).