VI. Conduct Review Process

The Office of the Dean of Students is responsible for addressing incidents of student and student group misconduct. The Dean of Students (DOS) is the chief student conduct officer for the University and, as such, oversees the student conduct review process.

Any question of interpretation regarding the Code of Conduct and/or conduct review procedures shall be referred to the Vice President for Student Life (VPSL), DOS or designee, or Associate/Assistant Dean of Students for final determination.

A. Academic Matters:

See the academic integrity policy or refer to the Office of the Provost and Senior Vice President for additional information.

B. Non-Academic Matters:

1. Definitions:
   • a. Complainant – person who filed the complaint/report and/or the administrative officer assigned to serve as complainant in those instances where the report was written by a University staff member in the performance of their duties.
   • b. Respondent – a person accused of a violation that has entered the University’s conduct process.
   • c. Administrative hearing officer – an individual hearing officer (Community Living professional staff, Associate/Assistant Dean of Students, or Dean of Students).
2. Reports of Violations: Any individual may report a violation of the Code of Conduct. Individuals who wish to file a report concerning the behavior of a student, student group or student guest may do so by contacting the offices of Community Living, Public Safety or Dean of Students. Reports made to other offices should be referred to one of the outlined offices/individuals for  investigation. All reports alleging misconduct by a student or student group will be reviewed and investigated by the DOS or their designee.
3. Review of Complaints: If there is reasonable information that indicates that the Code of Conduct may have been violated, the DOS or designee provides notice of the complaint to the accused (respondent). The DOS (or their designee) assigns the case to a hearing officer (administrative hearing process) or Student Conduct Review Board (Student Conduct Review Board hearing process). Single incidents may involve reported violations of Code of Conduct and reported violations of the Sexual Misconduct Policy and/or Siena University Discrimination and Harassment Policy. In these cases, violation(s) will be resolved concurrently or separately through the Student Conduct Review process and the Sexual Misconduct Policy and/or Siena University Discrimination and Harassment Policy. Violation(s) will be resolved through their stated process and procedures. Siena University does not permit legal counsel to participate in administrative, Student Conduct Review Board or their appellate hearings. Complaints regarding Bias Related Harassment that have been investigated by the Title XI/EEO office may be referred to the DOS for assignment to the Student Conduct Review Board. 
4. Authority — Chief Conduct Officer: The DOS, in accordance with University policies, controls the review and resolution of a reported Code of Conduct violation, including, but not limited to, the manner (mediation, administrative hearing or Student Conduct Review Board hearing) in which the matter will be addressed by the University. The DOS may amend or reject the finding(s), sanction(s) or dispute resolution agreements of hearing officers or the Student Conduct Review Board. If the DOS rejects the recommendations, the DOS may reassign the case to a different hearing officer or Student Conduct Review Board for resolution.
5. Accommodation Requests: If you are a student with a disability who feels there is a need for an accommodation so you can fully understand and participate in the conduct review process, the student will need to contact the Dean of Students Office, who will work with the Office of Accessibility to review the student's accommodation request on a case by case basis.
6. Resolution of Complaints:
   • a. Mediation/Dispute Resolution: The DOS or designee may deem it appropriate to offer the parties involved the opportunity to use mediation and/or a dispute resolution agreement. In the event mediation/dispute resolution is offered:
     • i. Both parties must agree to attempt mediation or a dispute resolution agreement.
     • ii. Either party may elect to end mediation or the dispute resolution process at any time.
     • iii. Either party may request to have the case reviewed by the University, in which case the DOS will assign the case to a hearing officer or the Student Conduct Review Board.
     • iv. The DOS or designee may suspend disciplinary action in lieu of mediation or dispute resolution.
     • v. If mediation or a dispute resolution is successful, all parties must sign a written agreement outlining the resolution agreement to be approved by the DOS.
     • vi. Copies of the written agreement will be given to all parties, DOS and any appropriate University officials.
     • vii. The signed document will set forth the consequences for either party who fails to meet the terms to which all parties agreed.
   • b. Administrative Hearing Overview: When the case is assigned to a hearing officer (Community Living professional staff, Associate Dean of Students, or Dean Of
     Students):
     • i. The hearing officer may further investigate the incident.
     • ii. The hearing officer will provide a written notice of the charge of violation(s) of the Code of Conduct to the respondent.
     • iii. The hearing officer may enlist a member of the Student Conduct Review Board or another administrative hearing officer to assist during an administrative hearing to evaluate the information presented and determine a finding.
     • iv. The respondent may accept responsibility and/or has an opportunity to present any additional evidence deemed pertinent by the hearing officer. Should a student accept responsibility, the respondent and/or hearing officer may refer the case to the Student Conduct Review Board for a recommendation on sanctioning at the discretion of the DOS, or the hearing officer may determine the sanction.
     • v. If a student denies responsibility, the hearing officer will render a finding regarding responsibility based on the evidence using a “preponderance of the evidence” standard, which reviews whether it is more likely than not that a violation has or has not occurred. If a student fails to accept or deny responsibility, a plea of deny responsibility will be recorded and the hearing officer will render a finding regarding responsibility based on the evidence using a “preponderance of the evidence” standard, which reviews whether it is more likely than not that a violation has or has not occurred.
     • vi. Should a student fail to appear for a scheduled meeting with a hearing officer, a finding may be made in the student’s absence, based upon the evidence available and sanction(s) accordingly.
7. Student Conduct Review Board:
   • a. The Student Conduct Review Board is composed of ten to fourteen students and three to five faculty members. Student appointments to the board are made through a selection process administered through the Dean of Students Office. Faculty members are selected through a process determined by the faculty. Student board members must:
     • i. be matriculated and full-time students for at least one semester
     • ii. be in good academic standing
     • iii. be available to meet the time requirements of the Board
     • iv. not be under any type of probation, deferred sanction or suspension
     • v. not be a community assistant
   • b. The Board shall select one member to serve as chair and one member to serve as associate chair. The chair and associate chair may also serve on committees related to the review of the Code of Conduct and conduct review procedures.
   • c. The Associate Dean of Students or designee will serve as the advisor to the Student Conduct Review Board. The Associate Dean will assist with selection, training, and scheduling of hearings. They will serve as a non-voting advisor to the Student Conduct Review Board.
   • d. Advocate – Any member of the immediate Siena community (currently enrolled students, faculty, staff or administrators) may serve as a student advocate during the Student Conduct Review Board process. Advocates assist the respondent or complainant in preparing for their hearing, and may be present, but not participate or represent in the hearing. Failure to obtain an advocate is not cause for postponement of a scheduled hearing.
   • e. The Student Conduct Review Board will hear cases related to the Siena University Code of Conduct and referred by the DOS. These may include the determining/recommending sanctions and adjudication of appeals. The Board will also hear cases related to Bias-related Harassment that have been investigated by the Title IX/EEO Office.
8. Student Conduct Review Board Process:
   • a. Notice of the hearing date: The Dean of Students (DOS) or designee will provide the respondent and complainant with written notice of the hearing date, time and location. When the University is the complainant, the Dean of Students Office will appoint a member of the Community Living staff or the Assistant Dean of Students to serve this role. Hearings before the Board will normally occur within 10 business days after the notice of charges or submitted appeal. The DOS may make exceptions to this time frame.
   • b. A hearing or appellate board must comprise a minimum of three board members, student board members will constitute the majority of the panel. The hearing will proceed even if the respondent and/or complainant fail to appear, and a decision will be rendered based on the evidence presented.
   • c. Witnesses: Hearings are to occur in a manner that is as efficient as possible. Live witness testimony is preferred; however, written statements are acceptable, provided they have been notarized by a notary public or given as a formal statement to an Investigator from the Office of Public Safety. During the hearing, the chairperson may exclude irrelevant testimony and/or witnesses for reasons of conduct.
     Witnesses relevant to the actual incident are permitted; witnesses in support of character are not. Written character statements may be accepted, but may only be reviewed during the sanctioning portion of deliberation at the panel’s discretion.
   • d. Personal Bias: Hearing panel members are expected to excuse themselves from a hearing if personal bias or conflict of interest would prevent them from rendering an objective decision. Any party may challenge a member on the grounds of personal bias at the beginning of the hearing. It will be the decision by majority vote of the panel to determine if the challenged member should excuse themselves from the hearing.
   • e. Rules of Evidence: Hearings are intended to be informal in nature. Accordingly, formal rules of evidence do not apply. The chairperson is empowered to admit into evidence whatever is deemed as reasonably relevant and material to the issues of the case as well as deny overly redundant evidence.
   • f. Standard of Evidence: The hearing panel will render a finding regarding responsibility based on the evidence using a standard of “more likely than not.”
   • g. Representation: Hearings are closed. Respondents and complainants have the right to have an advocate from the Siena community be present during the hearing.
9. Student Conduct Review Board Hearing Procedure:
   • a. The chair of the hearing panel convenes the hearing and notes the date and time. The chair introduces themselves and asks the same of the board members, advocate(s), complainant(s), respondent(s), and any witness(es).
   • b. The chair reads the opening statement.
   • c. The chair asks the respondent(s) to respond to the following procedural question: “Do you have any questions regarding the procedure to be used during this hearing?” Any questions are answered at that time. Further questions may be asked at any time after being recognized by the chair.
   • d. The chair states the alleged violations or grounds for appeal in an abbreviated form In non-appellate cases, the respondent is asked to either accept responsibility, deny responsibility, or accept responsibility with an explanation for the violation. For appellate cases, the respondent will be asked if they are appealing a decision based on new evidence, with disproportionate sanctioning or procedural error.
   • e. An opening statement from the complainant is entertained.
   • f. An opening statement from the respondent is entertained.
   • g. Complainant case presentation
     • i. Introduction of evidence
     • ii. Questioning of witnesses called by the complainant:
       • a. Complainant
       • b. Respondent
       • c. Hearing panel members (Note: Hearing panel members may ask questions at any time throughout the hearing after being recognized by the chair)
       • d. Again, each witness is retained until there are no further questions
   • h. Respondent case presentation
     • i. Introduction of evidence
     • ii. Questioning of witnesses called by respondent:
       • a. Respondent
       • b. Complainant
       • c. Hearing panel members (Note: Hearing panel members may ask questions at any time throughout the hearing after being recognized by the chair)
       • d. Again, each witness is retained until there are no further questions.
   • i. The chair will ask hearing panel members if they have any further questions for the respondent or complainant.
     • i. A closing statement from the respondent is entertained.
     • ii. A closing statement from the complainant is entertained.
     • iii. The hearing panel will then adjourn for deliberation. The  complainant(s), respondent(s) and advocate(s) are excused.
   • j. The hearing panel then deliberates. Deliberations are held in private, with only the hearing panel members and advisor present. Generally, a finding of responsibility is to be made before the prior disciplinary record of the respondent is reviewed, unless the record is necessary to establish the offense. However, there may be exceptions, including, but not limited to, student self-disclosure of record, release of record establishes motive and alleged violations of sanction or restrictions. Final decisions of all hearings are determined by a majority vote of the hearing panel. The chair must write a detailed rationale for the recommended finding and proposed sanction(s). The finding and sanction(s) are then forwarded to the DOS or designee who may accept, amend or reject the recommendation.
   • k. The DOS or designee will normally inform the respondent(s) of the outcome in writing within ten business days of the conclusion of the hearing. This time frame may be adjusted by the University for unusual circumstances (such as, but not limited to: breaks, illness, weather, etc.)
   • l. Additional notes:
     • i. The hearing panel, at its discretion, reserves the right to reconvene for purposes of hearing from witnesses and/or reviewing additional information. When this occurs, the time frame may be adjusted
   • m. A hearing for purposes of sanction recommendations may be convened using an abbreviated form of the above procedure.
   • n. Cases involving bias-related harassment will be investigated by the TIX/EEO Office as described in the University’s Discrimination and Harassment Policy. Upon completion of the final investigative report, the TIX/EEO Office will refer the case to the Student Conduct Review Board. The board will conduct a closed hearing to determine responsibility (if the student has not accepted responsibility) using the same standard of evidence, more likely than not. Final decisions of all hearings are determined by a majority vote of the hearing panel. The chair must write a detailed rationale for the recommended finding and proposed sanction(s). The finding and sanction(s) are then forwarded to the DOS or designee who may accept, amend or reject the recommendation.