Contents
Catalog Links

Student Conduct Resolution Process

Resolution Process

  1. Pre-Resolution Process - Investigation & Determination

    1. The responsibility for the investigative work necessary to substantiate a charge begins with the person reporting the alleged violation(s), and is continued in cooperation with the Student Experience Office, University Campus Safety, Academic Dean’s Office, and/or others as appropriate.
    2. Coker Campus Safety may wear on-body cameras that may record incidents they address. They may also administer breathalyzers to determine whether an individual has consumed alcohol.
    3. The Student Experience Office reserves the right to determine whether the information obtained during the pre-resolution process supports alleging charges of Student Code of Conduct violation(s) or should be dismissed from the Resolution Process.
    4. Prior to an Accountability Hearing, a Respondent alleged to have violated the Student Code of Conduct will receive Notice of the charges, a copy of the incident report and/or access to any other information pertinent to the case (including but not limited to body camera footage or breathalyzer results), and hearing details (date, time and location) at least two (2) business days in advance. Written statements to the Accountability Hearing Board provided by Complainants, Witnesses, or other Respondents may be provided to a Respondent with less than two (2) business days’ notice.
    5. Respondents and Complainants may request to have a Remediation or Accountability Hearing postponed for good cause. The decision to postpone is at the complete discretion of the University Campus Safety Office. Notice of the request for postponement must be made to the University Campus Safety Office no less than two (2) business days prior to the scheduled hearing time.

  2. Informal Resolution - Remediation

    1. Remediation is not a formal conduct process. Students who have only gone through the remediation process at Coker do not have a conduct record with the University.
    2. If a Respondent has a subsequent violation of the Student Code of Conduct, any prior Remediation does become part of the conduct record. If the subsequent violation is of a similar nature, it will be considered a second violation of the Student Code of Conduct for policies that have escalating Action Items.
    3. The University Campus Safety Office may choose to refer a Respondent to Remediation with a Conduct Official in the following situations:
      1. The Respondent agrees to the Remediation as opposed to an Accountability Hearing;
      2. The Respondent has not previously been referred to a Remediation for an alleged violation of the Student Code of Conduct or had an Amnesty hearing due to their own drug or alcohol use; and
      3. The Student does not have an existing conduct record from any university (including Coker prior to the adoption of this policy);
    4. The University Campus Safety Office has the discretion not to refer a Respondent to Remediation if the alleged violation(s) of the Student Code of Conduct are so severe as to warrant consideration of probation, suspension, or expulsion or where the Respondent’s dishonesty or failure to comply substantially interfered or inhibited the resolution of the conduct incident by a university official. Alleged violations not considered for remediation include, but are not limited to, hostile acts toward others, consumption or possession of drugs (including marijuana), accessory or distribution of drugs, firearm possession, theft, vandalism, or other actions that pose a significant threat or disruption to self, others, or University operations.
    5. In making the decision to refer a respondent to Remediation, the University Campus Safety Office may consult with the Chief of Police, a Complainant, or others.
    6. Remediation does not result in determinations of responsibility.
    7. Remediation allows for the Respondent and the Conduct Official to discuss the alleged incident so that they Respondent may uphold his/her responsibilities to the community and/or make choices that promote personal well-being and maturation.
    8. Remediation may result in mutually agreed upon action items by the Respondent and Conduct Official that are educational and/or restorative. Such action items include, but are not limited to, alcohol or drug assessment, alcohol or drug education, service hours, apology letters, meetings with University officials, etc.
    9. If the Respondent and Conduct Official are unable to mutually agree upon action items, the matter will be referred to an Accountability Hearing.
    10. If a Respondent under the age of 21 is referred to Remediation for alcohol or–in limited circumstances–drug violations, the University will provide Notice to parents or guardians.

  3. Informal Resolution - Alternative Resolution

    1. Alternative resolution (AR) processes such as mediation and facilitated dialogue allow individuals involved in a conflict to have significant influence over the resolution process and control of any outcome.
    2. Upon receipt of a formal notice of misconduct, all involved parties will receive notice of the specific misconduct being addressed. Both parties will be informed of the opportunity to resolve the matter through an AR.
    3. The following conditions must be met in order for an AR process to be utilized:
      1. All parties involved (i.e., complainant, respondent) in the alleged conflict agree in writing to consent to alternative resolution;
      2. The complainant and respondent are both students of the University; and
      3. The Conduct Official believes the process is an appropriate form of resolution.
    4. Alternative resolution is only appropriate in matters where the alleged behavior does not fall under the auspices of the University’s Sexual Misconduct Policy nor is the concerning behavior a repeat offense for the Respondent. ACR may not be selected for less than all of the misconduct alleged in the student conduct complaint.
    5. The University Campus Safety Office will designate a Conduct Official to serve as an Alternative Resolution mediator. The University Campus Safety Office may involve other persons or University administrators relevant to the resolution of the case.
    6. Notice will be provided to all parties of the date, time, and location of an Alternative Resolution. Notice will include a description of the alleged misconduct and an explanation of the requirements of the AR process.
    7. The Alternative Resolution (AR) facilitator will meet separately with each party to review the adaptable conflict resolution process and the allegations in the Complaint and to identify the outcome each party seeks from this process. The AR facilitator will provide written notice to the Complainant and the Respondent setting forth the date, time, and location of the alternative resolution meeting(s) (which will generally begin no more than ten business days, or as soon as reasonably practicable, following the conclusion of the facilitator’s initial meetings with the parties). At the request of either party or at the discretion of the AR facilitator, an adaptable conflict resolution meeting may occur with parties in different locations, or multiple alternative resolution meetings with parties may take place on different dates.
    8. Participation in an AR process is voluntary and may or may not result in an agreement or resolution. If either party fails to participate in the alternative resolution, and such party was provided proper notice of this resolution as set forth above, then absent extenuating circumstances, the University Campus Safety Office may direct that resolution of the Complaint be determined according to the applicable formal resolution process or may reschedule the alternative resolution.
    9. If a Respondent acknowledges that they caused harm to the Complainant (even if they do not accept responsibility for the policy violation at issue), the parties may elect for the University to incorporate restorative practices in the alternative resolution process.
    10. During the alternative resolution process, the parties may
      1. engage one another in the presence of, and/or facilitated by, the alternative resolution facilitator;
      2. communicate their feelings and perceptions regarding the incident and the impact of the incident (either by communicating directly with one another or by communicating indirectly through the alternative resolution facilitator);
      3. relay their wishes and expectations regarding the future; and/or
      4. come to an agreed‐upon resolution of the allegations in the Complaint.
    11. Any statements that the parties make during the alternative resolution process cannot be introduced in any other investigative or adjudicative proceeding at the University, including if the AR process is terminated and a formal resolution process resumes under this policy.
    12. During the alternative resolution, the AR facilitator will attempt to facilitate the parties’ resolution of the Complaint. Parties have access to all action items typically available in the student conduct process, in addition to any creative educational outcomes that meet the learning outcomes of the alternative resolution. All action items will be reviewed by the University Campus Safety office to ensure the action items are consistent with University practice and policy. Both parties will be notified of any concerns regarding action items and will have an opportunity to revise their resolution in order to be in compliance with University policy.
    13. When a mutually satisfactory resolution is reached by the parties, the case is resolved. Both parties may reach out to the University Campus Safety Office for any questions or future support navigating the outcomes of this process.
    14. If resolution is not achieved through the AR process and the matter remains pending, the matter will be resolved through a formal Accountability Hearing.
    15. The written record of the proceeding will be provided within three (3) business days of the conclusion of the AR process.
    16. Failure to complete agreed upon outcomes from an Alternative Resolution will result in formal disciplinary action, including but not limited to a charge of failure to comply.
    17. Alternative resolution does not create a formal student conduct record.
    18. The outcome of an alternative resolution (AR) constitutes final agency action regarding the complaint. The outcome is not appealable and shall not be reviewed through any other student conduct process.

  4. Formal Resolution - Accountability Hearing

    1. When a Respondent is not referred to Remediation, the University Campus Safety Office may convene an Accountability Hearing to make determinations of responsibility and, if responsible, action items; provided, however, that if the action items determined to be appropriate are suspension or expulsion from the University, those Action Items will be recommended to the University Campus Safety Office, who will make the final determination regarding their implementation.
    2. Notice of the scheduled time of an Accountability Hearing will be provided to Respondents and Complainants at least two (2) business days prior to the start.
    3. Respondents and Complainants must provide the Conduct Official with Notice of desired Witnesses for an Accountability Hearing along with a brief description of each proposed Witness’s connection to and/or knowledge of the issues in dispute no later than one (1) business day prior to a hearing. 
    4. Respondents and Complainants must provide the Conduct Official Notice of their Support Person no later than one (1) business day prior to the Accountability Hearing.
    5. An Accountability Hearing is conducted by a board composed of three students, one faculty or staff member, and a Conduct Official.
    6. The Conduct Official chairs the hearing. As chair, the Conduct Official will resolve any questions concerning procedure or the admission of information (including but not limited to its relevancy). The Conduct Official only votes on determinations of responsibility or Action Items when there is a tie between the other members of the board.
    7. An Accountability Hearing uses the Preponderance of the Evidence standard.
    8. The University may use any information and/or evidence in its possession or provided by Respondents, Complainants or Witnesses to make a determination of responsibility in an Accountability Hearing, with the exception of a student’s prior conduct record.
    9. Respondents will have the opportunity to provide information on their own behalf during an Accountability Hearing to address the alleged violation(s) of the Student Code of Conduct. Respondents may choose to submit a written statement to the Conduct Officer prior to the hearing.
    10. Respondents and Complainants will be given the opportunity to question all Witnesses that appear during an Accountability Hearing. The method for questioning will be determined by the Conduct Official.
    11. Respondents who fail to appear for an Accountability Hearing will have the determination of responsibility and Action Item(s) made in their absence based on all information available at that time. If the Conduct Official determines a decision cannot be made without the Respondent, the Accountability Hearing may be postponed.
    12. A Respondent who withdraws from the University prior to the formal resolution of misconduct under this Policy may be barred from University property and University activities and events and may be ineligible for re-enrollment.
    13. Accountability Hearings that have the potential to affect a student’s enrollment status (i.e. suspension or expulsion) will include audio recording of the hearing itself, but not deliberations. The recording will be made available for use only in case of an appeal and will remain the property of the University. At the conclusion of the appeal process, recordings will be destroyed. Respondents will receive Notice of the Accountability Hearing’s outcome, which includes determinations of responsibility, Action Items, and appeal instructions, within two (2) business days of the hearing.
    14. Notice of the Accountability Hearing’s outcome will be reported to the Athletic Department and ROTC program when a Respondent involved in student athletics and/or ROTC is found responsible.
    15. Complainants will receive Notice of the Accountability Hearing’s outcome, which includes determinations of responsibility, action items, and appeal instructions, as permitted by federal and state laws.

  5. Appeal Procedures for Student Code of Conduct Violations

    1. Remediation has no appeal option.
    2. Notice of appeal must be submitted to the Senior Director of Student Experience in accordance with instructions provided in the hearing outcome letter. The appeal must be submitted in writing no later than three (3) business days after receiving Notice of the outcome.
    3. The review of a Respondent’s appeal will not be a re-hearing of the original case and must be based on the one or more of the following grounds:
      1. Substantial new evidence can be provided related to the specific case which was not available at the time of the original hearing;
      2. A substantial violation of the hearing procedure occurred; or
      3. The Action Item(s) levied is excessive and does not follow the Student Handbook guidelines.
    4. The review of a Complainant’s appeal will not be a re-hearing of the original case and must be based on the one or more of the following grounds:
      1. Substantial new evidence can be provided related to the specific case which was not available at the time of the original hearing;
      2. A substantial violation of the hearing procedure occurred; or
      3. The Action Item(s) levied is insufficient and does not follow the Student Handbook guidelines. Minimum sanctions outlined in the Student Code of Conduct will be considered sufficient.
    5. Appeals by Respondents and Complainants that do not reasonably meet one of the aforementioned appeal grounds, as determined by the Senior Director of Student Experience, will not be given further consideration.
    6. Appeals that reasonably meet one of the aforementioned grounds will be heard by a board consisting of the Senior Director of Student Experience (Chair), a faculty or staff representative, and a student.
    7. In all cases, the decision by the appeals board is the final decision of the University.

  6. Special Considerations in the Resolution Process

    1. In cases where a respondent accepts responsibility for the charges and the violations would normally be resolved in an Accountability Hearing, the Student Experience Office may resolve the case administratively with Notice to the Student.
    2. In cases where a Respondent denies responsibility and the accountability hearing board is not in session (e.g., during the summer, between semesters, during exam periods, during the beginning and end of semesters), the Student Experience Office may appoint a panel of two to three faculty, staff, and/or student members to hear the case or may stay the hearing until the accountability hearing board is again in session. The Student Experience Office may appoint two to three faculty, staff, and/or student members to hear any subsequent appeal.
    3. In cases where the Respondent has been accepted and is not yet enrolled, the admission could be rescinded or delayed without a Remediation or Accountability Hearing.