EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR WOMEN

[In these minutes: Reports, Student Committee on Committees discussion, Student Conduct Code discussion, Travel Reimbursement discussion, Student Senate Chair as a voting member of SCC]

STUDENT SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE (SSCC) MINUTES

DECEMBER 12, 2002

[These minutes reflect discussion and debate at a committee of the University of Minnesota Senate or Twin Cities Campus Assembly; none of the comments, conclusions, or actions reported in these minutes represent the views of, nor are they binding on, the Senate or Assembly, the Administration, or the Board of Regents.]

PRESENT: Judy Berning, (chair), John Amble, Nick Cecconi, Yev Garif, Kelsi Holland, Kari Lindeman, Ryan Osero, Nathan Saete, Tom Walsh.

REGRETS: Scott Ferguson, Dan O’Connor, Jasen Peterson, Eric Steinhoff.

GUESTS: Matt Dewerff, James Rothenberger.

1. WRITTEN REPORTS

CROOKSTON

Nate Saete reported:

-Our 1st Annual UM-Crookston Holiday Tour last Friday night was a huge success. We set up lights around the mall of our campus. The first night we raised about 100 lbs. of food for the Crookston Food Shelf, collected approximately $200 for Toys for Tots, and had a turn-out of about 200 cars drive through our first night.

-It's been great working with all of you this semester and I'm looking forward to another semester!

-Happy Holidays from Crookston!

EDUCATIONAL POLICY

Scott Ferguson, student representative to Educational Policy Committee, submitted this report:

Well, there was not a lot of policy issues this week. The majority of the time was spent hearing a wonderful report on academics in athletics. Many different areas of academics were looked at, with graduation rates of course coming first followed by GPA towards the end. The report given to us was a test run before they presented to the Board of Regents. A quick overview of the report showed that Minnesota athletes are at the bottom of the Big Ten as far as graduation rates; however, all Minnesota students are at the bottom of the Big Ten for graduation rates. The woman athletes actually did quite well, and found themselves in the middle of the Big Ten in some categories while having above a 3.00 cumulative GPA. A couple little side-stories are that the study only took athletes who got a scholarship the day they stepped onto the University. Also, the new Athletic Director, Joel Maturi, is doing a great job, and there seems to be hope towards a better future!

Next semester will be interesting as we will continue to look at graduation rates and seeing what we can do to assist in the process of graduating. Contact me on all question, comments, or concerns (phone: 612-709-8340, e-mail: ferg0112@umn.edu).

There were no reports from Duluth, Morris, GAPSA, MSA, or Finance and Planning.

2. STUDENT COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES DISCUSSION

Matt Dewerff, Chair of the Student Committee on Committees (SConC), said that the committee has been meeting since the end of August, mostly to appoint students to committees. The students have also met with the faculty at bi-monthly meetings to discuss issues pertinent to both groups.

In terms of student appointments, submissions of applications are received via a web site and are then reviewed by the committee. At this time, there are few coordinate campus students serving on committees, and the overall student participation is lower than expected.

The SConC is looking at ways to advertise open positions on the Twin Cities campus. For the coordinate campuses, SConC must depend on the student association presidents and SSCC representatives to advertise and recruit students.

There have been several other issues that SConC has dealt with this year in addition to appointments. The committee reviewed the faculty and student ratios on committees and has recommended increases in student members on Finance and Planning and Research, which would allow a more diverse segment of students to serve. Another item has been a review of the Equity, Access, and Diversity Committee. The review will be a joint faculty-student effort to start next semester and finish the following fall. The committee also discussed committee chair removals, involvement in appointments to the Twin Cities Recreational Sports Advisory Board, and making decisions via email.

Members then thanked Matt Dewerff for his report and invited him to report back to SSCC spring semester.

3. ORAL REPORTS

SSCC CHAIR
Judy Berning said that everything that she has been dealing with appears on today’s agenda. During the break, she and Ryan Osero will be having a meeting with President Bruininks to discuss the SSCC, Student Senate, and thoughts on the Student Legislative Coalition.

4. STUDENT CONDUCT CODE DISCUSSION

James Rothenberger, Instructor in the School of Public Health and member of the Student Conduct Code Revision Committee, joined the meeting to discuss the changes that have been proposed to the Student Conduct Code (SCC) and provide background on the revision process. He said that Vice President Robert Jones appointed the task force a year ago to review the SCC. The last time the SCC has been revised was 1971, when it was created. James Rothenberger said that he was one of the original members of the first SCC Committee.

During the 1950’s and 1960’s, the University was supposed to serve as ‘en loco parentis’ or in place of the parents in terms of a student’s well-being. All discipline was handled by a dean of students and a disciplinary council and covered on and off-campus violations. In the late 1960’s the concept of the University changed to a business model and there was not the concern for what students did off-campus. The original SCC was developed from these ideas.

During the revision process, the committee felt that the University and its students should have more than a business relationship. The SCC also needed to be revised to address several issues that were lacking, including classroom disruptions and problems associated with technology. Most other changes to the SCC are editorial to update the language.

Several of the items dealing with riots were also collapsed into a single reference. The committee made this determination prior to the hockey riots last spring, but did not feel that the items needed to remain separate, as long as each violation is still covered by the SCC. He then noted that while the President wanted to prosecute students for their involvement in the riots, this was not done since the SCC only covers on-campus violations.

Jurisdiction was an area that the committee spent considerable time discussing, since the court and public do not always see the distinction. The decision was made to leave the language amorphous. Therefore the University would need to show why it has an interest in an off-campus violation before a student could be prosecuted for it. An example for this would the Greek system which can be considered part of the University, but clearly the Greek houses reside off-campus and are not covered by the SCC.

Q: Why was jurisdiction left unresolved in terms of the University’s interest?

A: It would be impossible to describe every possible type of jurisdiction. It was left unresolved so that it can be determined on a case-by-case basis and be defined by the courts and federal laws.

Q; Is it not in the best interest of the University to protect the reputation of its students and advocate for students?

A: The University has a department, Student Legal Services, which represents students and their interests in legal matters.

Q: Who determines the level of sanctions for students?

A: On the Twin Cities campus, if the violation is academic, the sanction is determined at the departmental level. If the sanction is non-academic or cross-colleges, the Conduct Code Coordinator reviews the evidence and determines the SCC violations. The student is then sent a letter and asked to meet with someone from Student Judicial Affairs. After this meeting, a sanction is determined. The student can accept this sanction or request a hearing with the Campus Committee on Student Behavior. The University also has a level of appeal with the President’s Student Behavior Review panel. Each coordinate campus has a separate procedure.

At Duluth, parents are notified of alcohol violations. Until three years ago, this notification was not permitted under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Then, due to several alcohol related deaths across the country, the law was amended to allow colleges to share alcohol-related disciplinary information with parents.

Q: Would a Twin Cities student who violated alcohol rules at Duluth have their parents notified?

A: Probably not since the student attends school in the Twin Cities.

Q; Is a study abroad student covered by the SCC?

A: The student is covered by the SCC if they are receiving credit from the University.

A committee member said that some classes are held off-campus due to space needs and because of distance education. His concern was for the range intended in this policy. Guidelines should be developed for general University jurisdiction.

James Rothenberger said that few areas in the law are clear, including jurisdiction. The seven points are used to give some examples, but not specify every possible situation.

He then asked each member to discuss the SCC and the jurisdiction issue with their constituencies and bring back any concerns.

Judy Berning said that each members should have their campus assembly/association review the SCC prior to SSCC and Senate approval spring semester.

5. TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT DISCUSSION

Judy Berning noted that cost estimates for travel for one person to a meeting were distributed for information. It was noted that the current policy is for travel expenses related to committee service to be reimbursable while travel expenses for University Senate meetings is not. The rationale is that senators are elected by their college or campus to represent that body, and therefore the college or campus should reimburse the senator for travel expenses. Committee service, however, is considered to be a personal service, and therefore the Senate Office reimburses committee members for their travel expenses to attend committee meetings.

It was then stated that there have been problems in the past with travel reimbursement which leads to wasted funds. In one case a car was rented at a campus for Thursday, but the student did not return it until Monday which to a rental cost of 4 times what was expected. At other times, senators ask to have a hotel room reserved for them, and then do not show up for the meeting or call to have the room cancelled.

Committee members made the following comments: