discipline

The Columbia Community Health Compact will be tested this semester as the University welcomes approximately 1,800 undergraduates to campus, nearly double its on-campus student population from the fall semester.

Barnard and Columbia released their Annual Security and Fire Safety Reports on Tuesday. The reports, mandated by the Clery Act, a federal law that demands disclosure of public safety information, compile statistics on reported instances of crime and fire safety across the University campuses and surrounding areas over the past three calendar years.

The way in which Columbia handles student disciplinary issues has been an issue of concern for a while now. Both Columbia College and School of Engineering and Applied Science students accused of "behavioral or academic misconduct" have their cases handled through the Dean's Discipline process administered by the Office of Judicial Affairs. The system, under current guidelines, fails to include student voices in the decision-making process, thereby undermining student interests and serving as a non-transparent yet highly powerful entity within our community.

OK, so I didn't actually get written up. I was summoned for a "conversation" because Residential Programs had magically predicted the subject of my final Spectator column. Either that or I'd found another way to attract their attention. That's beside the point. Anyway, less than 24 hours after receiving the email that subpoenaed me to the office in Broadway where I imagined scary disciplinary hearings to take place, I found myself anxiously pacing in the associate director's entryway, reviewing my talking points. As early as grade school, I envisioned myself as a critic of authority and saw it as my duty to pose an educated challenge to the rules. The problem is, I chronically go limp in the face of actual authority. For me, the buck has always stopped at the principal's door, whereupon I give up my co-conspirators and lamely apologize for my misdeeds. But Darleny Cepin, an associate director of residential programs, could not have been further from an elementary school disciplinarian, with her sense of humor and thoughtful opinions. Our conversation was less about punishment and more about health, and we ended up speaking at length about the Columbia experience. Darleny made it clear that she considers it one of her main duties to look after student well-being in a stressful environment. Leaving her office an hour later, I realized that though it was the first time I had been "written up," it might be the last time an encounter with authority would be with someone who wanted feedback about my mental health. After college, if we get in trouble, it will be because we are thought to have committed a crime or perpetuated some other major wrongdoing. Those in charge of our case would have no interest in our happiness. In the work world, too, our satisfaction will not always come first. One of the most difficult transitions is losing the high level of feedback we get in college on how we are doing and whether we are satisfied. Here, every time we hand in an assignment or take a test, professors are giving us personal feedback on where we stand. Professors tend to encourage conversations about our progress and are open to discussing alternatives when we are not content. The pressure of grades can be frustrating, but even grades reveal an interest in our intellectual formation. Though Columbia is often described as an isolating environment, and each year manages to be rated among the top most stressful colleges—one can only imagine the dismal business of compiling the criteria—that has not been my experience. Yes, there is a lot of work, and usually, more than can reasonably be expected of a person who also has friends and sleeps. But I have found that no matter what, we have an incredible access to personal feedback. Anyone with a Columbia email address is likely to respond when we reach out to them, whether they are a dean or a famous professor. They are available to sit down and chat with us about coursework, but also about life outside of the lecture hall. "Authority figures" at Columbia are interested in our feedback, or at the very least, can basically identify with us as fellow human creatures whose searches for meaning have momentarily aligned. Once we leave these gates, "feedback" may take on a different meaning, as something formal and structured. It becomes the annual report detailing if we have been effective completing our tasks, the sum of how much revenue we have brought in, or whether or not we have gone "above and beyond." In the world outside of college, the expectations are not always clear, let alone how to exceed them. Friends who moved on to jobs from college last year have described feeling alienated in the office environment—not in a Marxist "alienation of labor" kind of way, so much as the feeling of having lost a degree of familial caring. After we graduate, it is likely that our feelings and impressions will never again be so important to the people in charge. Not that there is anything wrong with that. The ideal work environment is hardly a place where people constantly gush about their emotions. And yet, there is undeniably something lost in the transition between character formation and professional performance, something that I, at least, will miss. I think the most frustrating moments from going to school at Columbia, the most irksome people and encounters with bureaucracy, many of which I have picked over in my columns, will crystallize into nostalgia. Nostalgia is the true subject of this final column. Walking from Darleny Cepin's office to Butler—where a notebook and water bottle had dutifully spent the hour saving my high-demand nook—I realized that someday soon, I will miss being "written up." Amanda Gutterman is a Columbia College senior majoring in English. Senior Citizen, Junior Employee runs alternate Tuesdays. To respond to this column, or to submit an op-ed, contact opinion@columbiaspectator.com

There is an oft-heard complaint after a party gets broken up. "It's impossible to have fun here," Jules Colangelo, BC '12, said. According to the resident adviser who ended Colangelo's party before it had even begun, the number of people filling her Barnard suite exceeded the limit. "Everyone was forced to leave," Colangelo said. "We weren't even doing anything wrong." Many students say that Barnard's "War on Fun" has been brewing for years. They say that increased enforcement of rules and slight changes in policy have made it harder than ever to have fun on campus. Hilary Colenso, director of the Alcohol and Substance Awareness Program at Barnard, explained that the school's policies for alcohol and drugs have remained the same over the past few years, though they are re-evaluated every two years. What has changed is the enforcement, she said. Over the past three years, the number of student citations has increased. In the 2007 and 2008 school years, the numbers of citations for alcohol or drug violations was 36—but in 2009, that number rose to 51. The reason is not likely more drinking and drug use by Barnard students, but an emphasis on making RAs, public safety officials, security personnel, and administrators more cautious in restricting behaviors that violate policies, Colenso explained. That number continues to rise. Just this semester, 31 students have been reported for various violations, including 11 for going to the emergency room. Last year, 21 were cited for these violations, and only 17 the year before. Still, this number is relatively small compared to other schools—comprising less than one percent of the student body. The percentage of students at Barnard who report having more than five drinks on a night out is less than 20 percent. Colenso said those statistics reinforce the perception that "Barnard is not much of a party school." But students say that this reputation is instilled through practice, as the school cultivates a climate where it is difficult to have fun. "This would have never happened in a Columbia dorm," said Vanessa Trinidad, who attended Colangelo's party last weekend. "I have been at parties where there have been much worse offenses than too many people, and nothing has happened," she added. Grace Royer, BC '11, said that compared to the rules at other schools, "Barnard's are extremely harsh," adding that "everything is a problem, from having a guest, to how many people you have in your room, to how loud you are." Royer said Barnard wasn't always a place where parties go to die. During her sophomore year, she thought Barnard was really lax about social gatherings. "My friend used to throw parties almost every weekend, where I'm sure there were too many people. But our RA was really relaxed so it didn't matter," she said. But she said that in just a year, things have changed. "Within the first month, my suite and I were written up for noise complaints and other non-important violations," Royer said. "It's ridiculous. If we're smart enough to get in here, they should trust that we are smart enough not to partake in behavior that is extremely dangerous." Kara Freewind, BC '11, said that Columbia and Barnard express a mutual desire to foster a sense of community, but enforce rules that make that virtually impossible. One major fun-inhibitor, Freewind said, is the fact that Barnard and Columbia students must sign each other in to dorms. "How can we possibly truly form bonds when we are prohibited from each other's living spaces?" she asked. Dasha Jensen, BC '11, said that Columbia parties are a lot more lax, which is why she thinks few people choose to party on Barnard's campus. "The rules for signing in are the same, but the security attendants are a lot more lax about it, making it much easier for stuff to go on over at Columbia," she said. At Barnard suites—like the ones in Plimpton residence hall—students are limited to two guests per person, while in dorms at Columbia—like East Campus—students are allowed five guests per person. A 2004 study of college drinking by the Harvard School of Public Health found that the most drinking at Barnard occurs off campus—which seems to remain true today. Danielle Capozzoli, BC '12, explained that "It's just easier to have fun off campus. It's not worth the risk here." Schools across the country have similar rules when it comes to drugs and alcohol, but the means of enforcement vary, and the repercussions for drinking at Barnard tend to be lighter than those at other schools. A violation for alcohol use—whether it be for alcohol use in the dorms, coming back to dorms intoxicated, or going to the hospital for alcohol—consist of a meeting with Colenso, a project of some sort—such as an essay or community service event, and a meeting with the hall director, according to Steven Tolman, associate director of housing at Barnard . If one is caught with a drug like marijuana, the repercussions are the same but include a $100 fine. At bigger state schools like Texas Tech University, which is hailed for its partying, repercussions are much greater. Students are fined $50, they are put on disciplinary probation, and their parents are notified. Lilly Chagrin, a third-floor Hewitt RA, explained that RAs are instructed to use their judgment when it comes to possible policy violations in the dorms, and every RA has a distinct method. Although Colenso said that policies have been implemented more forcefully over the past few years, Chagrin explained that to her knowledge, RAs who had held the position in previous years were not instructed to become any harsher. Yet it seems the policies do serve to protect students from out-of-control situations. Tolman explained that the new guest policy at Barnard, which requires guests to stay with the Barnard student at all times, came from a number of incidents with guests violating college property. "One student punched a window in," Tolman said. When these damages occur, the Barnard student is required to pay, not the guest. And while some students say that the new policy is irritating—particularly because their guests can no longer use the spare bedroom located on the eighth floor of Brooks Hall—Tolman said that feedback on the new rule has been generally positive. "Students have said that they feel this change in the policy makes our residence halls more secure and makes them feel safer," he explained. In all of his years working at Barnard, Tolman said he has yet to hear a complaint about the strictness of the policies when it comes to alcohol, drugs, or housing in general. Sara Snedeker, BC '12 and Barnard Student Government Association member, added that in her two years at SGA no one has raised complaints about party policy. Jensen explained that the rules in place at Barnard, while annoying to most students, are "completely legitimate. It's their job to keep us safe." news@columbiaspectator.com

Better watch who you're rude to—Columbia students may soon have more say in their colleagues' disciplinary hearings. Members of the Columbia College Student Council, Engineering Student Council, and advisory board to the Office of Judicial Affairs have formed a Student Judicial Process Ad Hoc Committee to increase student involvement and raise awareness of the judicial process at Columbia. Currently, low-level behavioral offenses—such as noise violations or drinking in residence halls—are typically referred to the Office of Residential Programs. Higher-level behavioral offenses and academic infractions go through Dean's Discipline, the process by which administrators deals with student transgressions. Higher-level violations are those that could result in a misdemeanor or felony charge, and include drug dealing and acts of violence. Council members said they have been unsatisfied with the little influence they have in the process, other than through the Judicial Affairs Advisory Board, which was established last year. The advisory board is composed of student leaders, administrators, and representatives from Residential Programs, Judicial Affairs, the Center for Student Advising, CCSC, and ESC. "The main issue we have with it is that there's very little, or actually no student involvement or input," Nuriel Moghavem, CC '11 and CCSC vice president of funding, said. Moghavem is a member of both the ad hoc committee and the advisory board. The Office of Judicial Affairs and Community Standards was established in 2006 to streamline the University judicial system. In the past, academic and behavioral cases were handled separately in the Center for Student Advising and the Office of Residential Programs, respectively, while the OJA now addresses both. Students still complained of a lack of transparency in the Dean's Discipline process, a system that was seen by some as inaccessible. Former Dean of Student Affairs Chris Colombo set up a committee of students and administrators, which began meeting in 2008, to make recommendations to OJA. Kevin Shollenberger, current dean of Student Affairs, took the recommendations into consideration and created the advisory board. Currently, OJA fields complaints and decides whether Dean's Discipline is warranted, according to the University Web site. Students are informed in writing if complaints will go through Dean's Discipline and whether they may review their file before the hearing. "At least two members of the staff of the Dean of Student Affairs Office will administer the hearing. A student may not be accompanied by another person in the hearing, including a family member, a friend, or an attorney," the Web site explains, adding, "If the student is found responsible, the degree of seriousness of the offense and the student's previous disciplinary record, if any, will determine the severity of the sanction that will be issued. A student will be notified in writing of the outcome of the hearing." Sanctions can range from a disciplinary warning to expulsion. CCSC Vice President of Policy Sarah Weiss, CC '10, sits on the ad hoc committee, which she says is looking to the honor systems at Barnard and Princeton as possible models for change at Columbia. Barnard students who dispute charges brought against them by faculty, or students who admit guilt and choose not to use Dean's Discipline, go before the Barnard College Honor Board. The board, which typically includes eight students and three faculty members, meets once a month to promote the honor code by distributing newsletters and fliers and setting up tables to discuss the process with students directly. According to Yolanda Lannquist, BC '10 and chair of the honor board, keeping students involved in the hearings is important. "Students understand how students think," she explained. At a hearing, the chair first reviews the charge and evidence. The board then hears from anyone testifying on behalf of the student, and then from the student herself. The honor board decides whether the student is guilty and what sanctions should be imposed. A majority is needed to make a decision. According to Karen Blank, Barnard dean of studies and adviser to the honor board, most students who admit guilt do not choose to go before the board. From 2004 to 2009, 79 cases were referred to the Dean of Studies Office, but only four cases went before the honor board. The rest of the cases went before the same deans who originally handled them. "Unless they [students in question] feel that we perhaps wouldn't be fair I think they often decide that they would like to have this resolved as soon as possible," Blank said. Barnard has also formed a committee to explore handling behavioral cases through a system similar to the honor board. The committee has already created a community code similar to Barnard's honor code, but has yet to establish concrete plans for changing its behavioral judicial process. Because Columbia's committee was established earlier this semester, no concrete proposals or plans currently exist. "We really want to think about if students can be involved and how can they be involved, but we're still in a thinking-through process," Weiss said. But both she and Moghavem have praised OJA for their support and willingness to listen to students' concerns. "The OJA is really committed to re-evaluating the process," Weiss said. Some changes have already been made—there are now advisers on tap to guide students before their hearings, which was suggested by the committee. The board, which includes both students and faculty, continues to advise OJA, while the committee seeks to make bigger changes. This summer, OJA expanded training sessions for residential advisers to more clearly address the Dean's Discipline process. The Student Affairs staff also went through additional training, and have updated their Web site. "The Judicial Affairs Advisory Board continues to evaluate the success of the changes and consider additional modifications as needed to ensure a fair and transparent process," Shollenberger wrote in an e-mail. Moghavem said the committee aims to create a proposal by December and then send it to the student councils for approval. He predicted that the project will be completed in two years, though Weiss said it may be closer to three. "The wheels will really be moving fast once the semester is over and the process of actually making these changes, especially the short term ones, will definitely be in place by the end of the year, if not already done," Moghavem said. While details of the proposal are being discussed, the ad hoc committee's short-term goal is to teach students about the Dean's Discipline process. According to Moghavem, most students do not know about the judicial system. "I would dare to say maybe 98 out of 100 kids don't know the judicial process or the Dean's Discipline process," he said. Saketh Kalathur, CC '13, echoed that sentiment, saying, "I didn't even know we had an Office of Judicial Affairs." Weiss stressed the importance of students knowing "more about the judicial process before they get there by giving them proactive information, instead of them having a case and then learning about the judicial affairs process." Lannquist and Blank both advocated raising awareness as a deterrent to violations. "There tends to be less academic dishonesty at colleges and universities that have honor codes," Blank said. "I think we all need reminders in our lives of the values that are important to us." news@columbiaspectator.com

Last semester, the students involved in the Minutemen demonstration were punished by the University without having a chance to present their cases with a friend or family member present, an effective means of appeal, or even an explanation for why some students received harsher punishments then others. Columbia's disciplinary procedures have been long criticized as arbitrary, opaque, and unjust. Dean's Discipline—the procedure by which Columbia tries students who are accused of violating University policies—is long overdue for an overhaul, and should be replaced with a new system that respects students' rights.