Looking for leadership

OSCR director search needs improvement

The Office of Student Conflict Resolution "upholds the University's essential values in the Code of Student Conduct," according to its Website. The Code is supposed to help resolve disciplinary issues and conflicts among students. But the Code has numerous flaws and often steps on the legal system. As the OSCR Director's Search Committee looks for the office's new leader, changes to the director's position should occur to lessen the Code's impact if University President Lee Bollinger will not abolish it altogether.

The Code claims to afford student access to "University policies which affect them." But the Code does not give students any benefit; rather, it strips students of their rights. One of the Code's outrageous aspects gives the University power to punish students brought up on criminal charges. This amounts to double jeopardy, with a student potentially punished under the law and again under the Code. The Code itself admits to being "an imperfect human process that attempts very hard to be fair." So why have it at all? Clearly, the established courts system provides a better, legitimate alternative. The University must not tread on the legal system's responsibilities and students' rights.

In choosing a new OSCR director, the voices of students should play a large part. The individual nominated must possess a keen knowledge of student lives and problems that arise. Additionally, if the director is to maintain a decent level of governing power, he or she should not report to the dean of students and vice president for Student Affairs, who currently have the power to veto some Code decisions. The director should hold the responsibility of ensuring the consequences of actions are reasonable.

The current search procedure also hinders students. Only one student sits on the eight-person search committee. The committee includes members from Legal Counsel and University Housing. These members of the community do not possess the unique experiences a committee of current students could contribute. Students have first-hand knowledge of what they require from the OSCR. Ideally, the search committee would consist of a majority of students, if not completely.

The ideals of the code are not profitable to students. Additionally, the vast majority of faculty members on the search committee all but squelch student input. The fact that a committee's decision can be vetoed instantly exhibits the futility of the Code as a replacement for legal proceedings. The new director must recognize these flaws and be dedicated to preserving student rights while not contradicting the judicial system.

11-09-99