University of Minnesota  Procedure

Student Conduct Code Procedure - Morris

Sidebar

Expand all

Sidebar

Table of Contents

TOC placeholder

Questions?

Please use the contact section in the governing policy.

Introduction and purpose

  • This procedure implements Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code (PDF) and explains the Morris campus's process for actions initiated against students or student organizations by the University under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code. Procedures governing resolution of student-initiated complaints against the University are provided pursuant to Board of Regents process encourages informal resolution of complaints where appropriate.
  • Student development is emphasized. The student conduct process emphasizes the educational purpose in student discipline, including helping students understand and accept responsibility for their own behavior.
  • Community interests are met. While the emphasis of the student conduct process is on responsible student self-development, the nature of the offense may require, in fairness to the community, the imposition of student conduct outcomes.
  • Students receive fair treatment. Most student conduct matters are resolved informally, with the agreement of the student. When the people involved are unable to reach agreement, however, Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code requires that students have the opportunity to receive a fundamentally fair hearing and a campus-wide appeal. Any materials used as part of a hearing or the case will be provided in an accessible manner to any of the parties who request it. This would include captioning videos, providing written materials in alternative formats, and language interpreters if needed. To request accommodations for this student conduct process, please contact the Secretary of the Student Behavior Committee or contact the Disability Resource center at 320-589-6178 or [email protected].

Different student conduct processes: Morris campus

The University of Minnesota Morris has a campus-wide student conduct process, managed by Office of the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs and the Student Behavior Committee (SBC) that handles most complaints under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code. In certain circumstances, discipline follows another process.

  • The campus addresses complaints of scholastic dishonesty (which is a violation of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code) through the Committee on Academic Integrity, a subcommittee of the Scholastic Committee.
  • The Division of Education and other academic programs may maintain program specific codes of conduct for their students.
  • Certain academic administrative units, specifically Residential Life, Student Activities, Intercollegiate Athletics and the University of Minnesota Learning Abroad Center, also may maintain student conduct processes for violations of their rules of conduct.

Regardless of the process, Student Affairs and the Student Behavior Committee are a resource in handling student conduct matters.

Complaints of violations of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code

Complaints of violation of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code may issue from the SBC, a responsible administrator under the program specific code of conduct of an academic program, a responsible administrator under the student conduct processes of an appropriate administrative unit (i.e., Residential Life, Student Activities, or the Learning Abroad Center), or an instructor in the case of a grade sanction for scholastic dishonesty. In any case, students are entitled to notice identifying the alleged violations and explaining the basis for the allegations. Complaints should be made as soon as possible after the event takes place.

Academic and Administrative Resolutions

It is desirable that some complaints regarding possible violations of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code be settled directly within the appropriate administrative unit. These persons and agencies investigate allegations of misconduct and work with the concerned parties to reach an administrative resolution of the dispute whenever possible.

  • If at any time the accused party requests a formal hearing process, the issue can be referred to the Student Behavior Committee (SBC). Where student conduct action taken by administrative units is involved, the student can request a formal hearing by the SBC.
  • For academic integrity complaints, if the accused party requests a formal hearing process, the issue will be referred to the Committee on Academic Integrity.
  • Cases involving alleged violations of Section IV, subdivision 9, Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Stalking, and Relationship Violence of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code will be addressed as described in Administrative Policy: Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Stalking and Relationship Violence.

The offices and administrators that resolve complaints under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code are:

  • Student Behavior Committee (SBC)

    The Student Behavior Committee (SBC) handles complaints of violations of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code other than scholastic dishonesty and sexual misconduct, and may be involved in resolving complaints of scholastic dishonesty, especially when other misconduct under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code could be involved. The Student Behavior Committee also handles complaints that fall within an administrative unit's rules but are so serious as to warrant a University, rather than unit, response.

    The SBC Chair will meet with the accused student; review related reports and evidence; and consult with other affected individuals. In most cases, the Chair will then determine whether a finding of responsibility for a violation of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code is appropriate and if so develop a proposed resolution, including outcomes, which will be presented to the accused student. An accused student may accept the Chair's proposed resolution or may choose to request a hearing before the SBC. The SBC Chair may choose to send a complaint directly to a hearing.

  • Record Hold. Students who refuse to respond to the SBC upon receiving a complaint of violation of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code will have a hold placed on their record, preventing them from registering or obtaining a transcript until they respond to the complaint.
  • Instructors for scholastic dishonesty complaints

    Allegations of scholastic dishonesty frequently are first raised by the affected instructor and are often resolved simply by the assignment of a grade or other academic consequence in the class and the acceptance of that grade or consequence by the student. Instructors should report all cases of scholastic dishonesty to the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, even if the matter is resolved. The Office of the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs is the central repository for all reports of scholastic dishonesty violations. The procedures are detailed in the Student Academic Integrity Misconduct Procedures - Morris.

  • Responsible administrator in the Division of Education or an academic program
    The Division of Education and other academic programs may maintain program specific codes of conduct for their students. Administrative resolution will be offered for reported violations, including appropriate notice, appeals, and due process.

  • Administrative unit

    Some administrative units (Residential Life, Student Activities, Intercollegiate Athletics, and the University of Minnesota Learning Abroad Center) have their own student conduct processes, which overlap with Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code, and may issue and resolve complaints of their rule violations through their own process. If at any time the accused student requests a formal hearing process, the issue can be referred to the Student Behavior Committee (SBC). Where student conduct action taken by administrative units is involved, the accused student can request a formal hearing before the SBC.

    Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code complaints that are so serious as to warrant outcomes beyond the authority of the particular administrative unit, however, should be forwarded by the unit to SBC for handling, which may include a hearing before the SBC.

Formal resolution

If a complaint under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code is not resolved administratively, the accused student is entitled to a hearing. The hearing procedure varies depending on the circumstances and the nature of the complaint. Cases involving alleged violations of Section IV, subdivision 9, Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault Stalking, and Relationship Violence or Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code will be addressed as described in Administrative Policy: Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Stalking and Relationship Violence. The UMN Morris hearing bodies are:

  • Student Behavior Committee (SBC)
    The Student Behavior Committee (SBC) is a campus-wide hearing body comprised of faculty, P&A staff and students that hears and decides complaints under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code. On the Morris Campus, formal student conduct action is the responsibility of this faculty-student committee of the Student Affairs Committee. The chair of the Student Affairs Committee appoints an SBC consisting of two faculty chairs, at least 5 students and at least 4 faculty or P&A staff members. At least two administrative Secretaries are appointed by the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs.
    See Administrative Procedure: Student Behavior Committee Hearing Procedures: Morris. The SBC has authority to hear all types of complaints under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code, including:
    • complaints of scholastic dishonesty referred by Committee on Academic Integrity (i.e., complaints involving a student that are accompanied by non-scholastic complaints under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code) and
    • any other complaints under Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code that are referred to the Student Behavior Committee by an administrative office.
  • Committee on Academic Integrity
    The campus addresses complaints of scholastic dishonesty (which is a violation of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code) through the Committee on Academic Integrity, a subcommittee of the Scholastic Committee.
    If a satisfactory resolution in a case of academic integrity between the instructor/supervisor and accused student cannot be reached, or if the accused student contests the accusation and/or action of the instructor, the matter may be referred by any of the parties to the Committee on Academic Integrity (CAI) for resolution.
    The CAI also provides hearings to resolve persistent violations, in collaboration with the SBC:
    • Any student found responsible for two or more violations of academic integrity is considered to have persistent violations. The Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs will contact the Scholastic Committee Chair to initiate a hearing of the CAI.
    • Any student found responsible for one or more violations of academic integrity AND one or more behavioral violations of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code is considered to have persistent violations. The Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs will contact the Chair and Secretary of the SBC, the Chair of the Scholastic Committee and CAI representative. Outcomes will be determined via a hearing of the Student Behavior Committee.
  • See Administrative Procedure: Student Academic Integrity Misconduct Procedures - Morris, for complete listing of procedures.
  • Student Behavior Committee and Committee on Academic Integrity Hearings
    In all cases, hearings on violations of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code must be fundamentally fair. What constitutes fundamental fairness in a University hearing depends on a number of factors, including the seriousness of the potential penalty. However, a fundamentally fair hearing process usually allows for students or student organizations to:
    • be notified in writing of the alleged violation and the underlying factual allegations; the time, date, and place of the hearing; and the range of possible outcomes;
    • receive a prompt hearing;
    • present their case, including witnesses;
    • hear all evidence against them;
    • question adverse testimony;
    • be confronted by their accusers (subject to reasonable procedures to address concerns for safety or well-being);
    • be accompanied or represented by an advocate of their choice;
    • be found responsible only if the information as a whole shows that it is more likely than not that the student's conduct violated Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code;
    • receive a written student conduct decision following the hearing; and
    • receive notification of the procedure for a campus-wide appeal of the student conduct decision.
  • A formal record, an electronic recording, or a transcript of the hearing procedure must be kept for appellate purposes. Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code hearings are not court cases, and court rules of process, procedure, or evidence do not apply.

Possible outcomes for violation of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code

Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code outlines the range of outcomes for violation of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code. Colleges, programs, and administrative units may further define the applicable outcomes under their processes. When hearing cases of violations of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code, the Student Behavior Committee and Committee on Academic Integrity are authorized to apply the full scope of outcomes available to the University, including expulsion from the University. Academic or administrative units enforcing their own codes or student conduct rules generally limit their outcomes to those that fall within the reach of the program or administrative unit. Cases that may warrant a broader sanction should be referred to or coordinated with the Student Behavior Committee.

Appeal

A student found to have violated Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code is entitled to a campus-wide appeal of student conduct decisions made in the hearing process.

Grounds for Appeal

The following are the grounds for appealing a student conduct decision.

  • There was significant procedural error sufficient to affect the outcome (e.g., lack of notice, opportunity to be heard, or opportunity to challenge information). A procedural error is not a basis for sustaining an appeal unless it was significant enough to affect the outcome.
  • The rule found to have been violated was misapplied, misinterpreted, or contrary to law.
  • New evidence exists that was not previously available to the appealing party and that is sufficient to affect the outcome.
  • The sanction was grossly disproportionate to the offense.
  • The student conduct decision was not based on substantial information. Substantial information means relevant information that a reasonable person might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. In making this determination, the appellate officer must respect the credibility determinations of the Student Behavior Committee hearing panel and must not substitute the officer's judgment for the hearing panel. Rather, the appellate officer must determine whether the hearing panel’s student conduct decision was unreasonable (i.e., arbitrary) in light of the information presented.

Nature of Appellate Review

A student found to have violated Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code has the right to appeal the student conduct decision. Appellate review generally is a review of the record to determine whether a serious error occurred in the original proceeding that resulted in unfairness. Appellate review respects the credibility judgments of the hearing panel and respects the hearing panel’s determinations as long as there is any evidence to reasonably support them.

Appellate Officer

The appellate officer makes the final University decision regarding student discipline. The Chancellor serves as the appellate officer, unless the Chancellor authorizes another administrator who holds a position of campus-wide scope to serve as the appellate officer in the Chancellor’s place.

Parties and Advisors

The parties to an appeal are the 1) appellant and 2) the chair of the original hearing panel. The appellant is the student found to have violated Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code. The appellant may be represented by an advisor (e.g., a campus advocate or an attorney). If the appellant is represented by an attorney, the chair of the panel will be represented by an attorney from the Office of General Counsel. Unless the appellate officer decides otherwise, the appeal needs to be a written submission and can be submitted by the appellant or their advisor.

Procedure for Filing an Appeal

To appeal a student conduct decision, a student found to have violated Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code must submit a notice of appeal to the Chancellor's Executive Assistant within five (5) days of receipt of the original student conduct decision. (Address: Office of the Chancellor, 309 Behmler Hall, 600 East 4th Street, Morris, MN 56267 or call 320-589-6020 to request an email address the appeal.) The appellant is then provided an additional five (5) days for submission to the Chancellor’s Executive Assistant of a written statement specifically identifying the ground(s) for the appeal, explaining why the ground(s) for appeal are met, and providing any supporting documentation.

Review of Information

To consider an appeal, the appellate officer reviews the written appeal submitted by the appellant and may review any or all portions of the record as appropriate to decide the appeal. The appellate officer also has discretion to seek further information to assist in deciding the appeal, including one or more of the following:

  • additional written information from the appellant, including citations to key portions of the record;
  • a written response from the respondent;
  • written responses to questions from the appellant, the respondent, or other parties involved in the hearing;
  • oral presentations from the appellant, the respondent (or their advocate/attorney) which will be recorded.

Appellate Decision

The appellate officer makes the final University decision. The appellate officer may accept, modify, or reject the student conduct decision of the hearing panel, or return the matter for further proceedings. The appellate officer will provide a written decision to the appellant and the chair of the hearing panel.

Outcomes Pending Appeal

Academic (grade) outcomes by the hearing panel are implemented immediately, even pending appeal. student conduct outcomes affecting the student's status/attendance at the University generally are stayed pending appeal, unless the Provost or delegate determines that outcomes should be immediately implemented because the underlying offense involved serious harm to another person or the student otherwise presents a continuing risk of harm or disruption to the community. All other student conduct outcomes are generally stayed pending appeal.

Related Administrative Procedures

Approved by the Student Behavior Committee, Student Affairs Committee, and Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, Spring Semester 2014. Revised to reflect updated Administrative Policy: Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Stalking and Relationship Violence, December 2020.