Word: added
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1990-1999
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Currently, the guide to the Ad Board gives a set of specific sample cases and the corresponding punishments, as well as a numeric breakdown of the types of cases heard by the board in the past year...
...controversy surrounding the disciplinary board comes in the wake of the Ad Board's decision to place William L. Kirtley '97 on disciplinary probation for making a prank phone call...
Further, if a student has no way of determining whether his or her actions will be considered 'improper,' and consequently punishable, by the University, it is not appropriate to discipline the behavior with a permanent infraction on the student's record. Since the Ad Board can issue an 'admonishment,' a form of punishment not listed on any permanent record, the use of 'probation' in any case where wrong-doing cannot be known prior to disciplinary action is excessive...
...Ad Board publish a list of all unique infractions that merit any sort of disciplinary action. To maintain confidentiality, the names of the individuals involved would be omitted. This effort would make actions by the University, in specific cases, appear less arbitrary. Also, it would further the Ad Board's purpose in educating the University community, by allowing the students access to the rules that govern their lives...
...cases where a previous example or set of strict guidelines does not exist that could reasonably justify a decision in a particular case, the Ad Board will be restricted to issuing an 'admonishment.' This proposal would protect students from being disciplined excessively for actions that it was impossible to know were considered wrong. In general, this proposal would only apply to elastic clauses (e.g. 'improper conduct'), since there are guidelines or precedents for most serious infractions of University policy...