Student Conduct Code Procedure: Rochester

In general, the Rochester Student Conduct Code Procedure applies to students in programs administered by the Rochester campus.

In addition, in most cases, the Rochester Procedure also applies to students enrolled in Rochester based programs administered by other campuses. Exceptions may include violations of Section V, subdivision 1 (Scholastic Dishonesty) of the Student Conduct Code or alleged violations occurring on another University of Minnesota Campus. The Office of Student Conduct Violations (Coordinator of Student Conduct) will determine for each alleged violation if the Rochester process will be applied to the student or be referred to the student’s home campus after consulting with the student, administration in the student’s college unit, and the disciplinary office of the student’s home campus. In these instances the Rochester Office of Student Conduct Violations  will inform the student discipline office on the student’s home campus of complaints and resolutions. If a complaint is not resolved informally and a hearing is scheduled, a member of the student’s home campus will be invited to join the hearing body.

Complaints of violation of the Student Conduct Code may issue from the Student Conduct Team or an instructor in the case of a grade sanction for scholastic dishonesty. Students are entitled to notification of the alleged violations and explanation of the basis for the allegations. Complaints should be made as soon as possible after the event takes place.

The offices and administrators that informally resolve complaints under the Student Conduct Code are:

• Student Conduct Team (for most violations)

The Student Conduct Team seeks to informally resolve complaints of violations of the Student Conduct Code. Student Conduct Team administrators will meet with the student and consult with affected instructors, administrators, and community members to develop a proposed written resolution, including sanctions where appropriate. Students may accept the proposed informal resolution or may choose to go to a hearing. The Student Conduct Team may also choose to send a complaint to a hearing, rather than informally resolve it.

The Student Conduct Team typically handles complaints of violations of the Student Conduct Code other than scholastic dishonesty; however, the Student Conduct Team may be involved in resolving complaints of scholastic dishonesty, especially when those complaints involve repeat violations, other misconduct under the Student Conduct Code, or occur in multiple administrative units.

Students who fail to respond to the Student Conduct Team within five business days of receiving a complaint of violation of the Student Conduct Code will have a hold placed on their record, preventing them from registering or obtaining an official 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 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 or their units should report all cases of scholastic dishonesty to the Student Conduct Team, even if the matter is resolved. The Student Conduct Team is the central repository for all reports of scholastic dishonesty violations. In cases where the student has previous violations on record, a hearing will be called to determine appropriate sanctions.

If a complaint under the Student Conduct Code is not resolved informally, the student is entitled to a hearing. The hearing procedure varies depending on the circumstances of the complaint. The hearing body is the Committee on Student Conduct (CSC). For cases involving violations of sexual assault, sexual harassment, stalking, or relationship violence, a formal resolution is the only option for resolution.

The Committee on Student Conduct (CSC) is a campus-wide hearing body comprised of faculty, staff, and students who hear complaints and decide outcomes under the Student Conduct Code. See Appendix A: CSC Hearing Procedures. The CSC has authority to hear all types of complaints under the Student Conduct Code.

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 sanctions;

• 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 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 decision following the hearing; and

• receive notification of the procedure for a campus-wide appeal of the decision.

For cases involving violations of sexual assault, sexual harassment, stalking, or relationship violence, UMR’s disciplinary process will also:

• be conducted by officials who receive annual training on the issues related to sexual assault, sexual harassment, stalking, and relationship violence and how to conduct an investigation and hearing process that protects the safety of victims and promotes accountability;

• provide equitable access to an appeal by both the accused student and the reporting party;

• provide equitable access to a support person of their choice for both the accused student and the reporting party at any related meeting or proceeding;

• provide equitable access to an advocate, if permitted for either, for both the accused student and the reporting party at any related meeting or proceeding; and

• provide simultaneous written notice to both the accused student and the reporting party:

  • of the results of any disciplinary proceeding;

  • of the procedure for the accused student and the reporting party to appeal the results of the disciplinary proceeding;

  • of any change to the results prior to the time the results become final; and

  • when the results become final.

Fundamental fairness in a University hearing depends on a number of factors, including the seriousness of the potential penalty.

A formal record, audio or video recording, or a transcript of the hearing procedure must be kept for appellate purposes. Student Conduct Code hearings are not court cases, and court rules of process, procedure, or evidence do not apply.

The Student Conduct Code outlines the range of sanctions for violations. When hearing cases, the CSC is authorized to apply the full scope of sanctions available to the University, including expulsion from the University.

The chancellor may impose an immediate interim suspension on a student or student organization pending a hearing before the appropriate disciplinary committee (1) to ensure the safety and well-being of members of the University community or to preserve University property, (2) to ensure the student's own physical or emotional safety and well-being, or (3) if the student or student organization poses an ongoing threat of disrupting or interfering with the operations of the University. During the interim suspension, the student or student organization may be denied access to all University activities or privileges for which the student or student organization might otherwise be eligible, including access to University housing or property.

The student or student organization has a right to a prompt hearing before the chancellor on the question of whether the interim suspension should remain in effect until the full hearing is completed. The student must be informed in writing of the terms of the suspension, the reasons for it, and the opportunity to be heard on the limited questions described above. The underlying case will be heard and decided by the appropriate hearing body, and the case generally will take precedence over other cases pending before that body.

Students are entitled to a campus-wide appeal of disciplinary decisions made in the hearing process. The chancellor uses the Chancellor's Appeal Committee (CAC) to hear appeals and make recommendations. Students seeking an appeal should consult Appendix B: Chancellor’s Appeal Committee Procedures, which outlines the procedures governing the CAC including the grounds for an appeal, the procedures for filing and hearing an appeal, and the nature of appellate review. The chancellor is the final authority regarding student discipline.

Academic (grade) decisions by the hearing body are implemented immediately, even pending appeal. Disciplinary sanctions affecting the student's status/attendance at the University generally are stayed pending appeal.

• Advocate: Non-attorney chosen by the party who represents the party through the disciplinary process
• Attorney: An individual who has a law degree
• Support Person: For sexual assault, sexual harassment, stalking, or relationship violence case, a person chosen by the party who accompanies the party through the disciplinary process but does not speak or participate in the process
• Student Organizations: Student-led organizations that are registered and must follow campus policies

• Chancellor: Ensure the establishment and maintenance of appropriate disciplinary procedures of the UMR campus.
• Provost: Ensure the establishment and maintenance of appropriate disciplinary procedures on the Twin Cities Campus.