University of Connecticut

Part IV: Student Conduct Policies

A. Allegations

  1. Any person may file a report regarding any student or registered student organization alleging misconduct. Reports shall be prepared in writing and directed to the Director of Community Standards or to a designee. Complaints regarding alleged misconduct by a student or registered student organization at a regional campus shall be directed to the Associate Vice Provost or designee. A report should be submitted as soon as possible after the alleged misconduct takes place.
  2. The Director of Community Standards or designee shall determine if a complaint alleges or addresses a potential violation of The Student Code and will notify the accused student of such allegations. The decision to continue a complaint through the conduct process is the decision of the Director of Community Standards or designee.
  3. Generally, the Director of Community Standards or designee will assign a student conduct officer(s) to the case who will investigate, schedule a conference with the accused student(s) and other individuals as deemed necessary and appropriate.

B. Administrative Conference

  1. The administrative conference is a meeting between an accused student and a student conduct officer to review a complaint/incident, explain the student conduct process, and possible options for resolving the matter.
  2. After reviewing the incident with the student, the student conduct officer will determine appropriate allegations, if any, and whether or not the situation may be resolved by way of an administrative agreement or by an administrative hearing. Students can also request an administrative hearing. A student who agrees to resolve any allegation(s) without an administrative hearing shall have no right to appeal.

C. Administrative Hearing Bodies

The Director of Community Standards or designee will assign either an administrative hearing officer(s) or an academic misconduct hearing board to conduct an administrative hearing depending on the nature of the matter.

  1. Administrative hearing officers: The Director of Community Standards designates and trains administrative hearing officers annually. Administrative hearing officers are University officials. They may conduct hearings on any type of alleged violation of The Student Code. Administrative hearing officers may impose any sanction as appropriate. Typically, a hearing will consist of one or two administrative hearing officers.
  2. Academic misconduct hearing board: Academic misconduct hearing boards for undergraduate academic integrity issues shall typically consist of two faculty members, two students, and one hearing advisor. They may conduct hearings on any alleged violation regarding Academic Integrity in Undergraduate Education and Research (Appendix A). The board may impose any sanction as appropriate. Academic consequences are determined by the instructor.

D. Administrative Hearing

Generally, an administrative hearing brings several people together in an effort to allow for the full consideration of an allegation that a student has violated The Student Code. The hearing participants may include the investigating student conduct officer, accused student(s), a complainant, witnesses, and a support person for each accused student or complainant, the member(s) of the hearing body, and a hearing advisor.

An essential component of any administrative hearing is the determination and the weighing of the facts that pertain to the allegation(s). Therefore, it is vital that personal statements and other information be presented clearly and factually. All participants are expected to be respectful of each other’s purpose in the hearing process and to conduct themselves according to the direction of the hearing body. In an effort to be as fair as possible to the complainant and accused student, student conduct procedures may be modified by Community Standards. In certain cases, such as those involving assault and harassment, support and privacy of all those potentially involved in the hearing process must and will be taken into consideration. This may include, but is not limited to, alteration of the hearing room setup, use of multiple rooms and video-conferencing equipment, or other electronic means.

  1. Normally, an administrative hearing will be conducted within fifteen (15) business days of the accused being notified of the hearing and allegations.
  2. The complainant, any alleged victim and the accused student shall each have the right to:
    1. Be notified of all alleged violations by means of the address (University e-mail, residence hall address, or permanent address) provided by the student via the Registrar’s Office.
    2. Review any written complaint(s) submitted in support of the allegation(s).
    3. Be informed about the hearing process.
    4. A reasonable period of time to prepare for a hearing.
    5. Request a delay of a hearing due to extenuating circumstances.
    6. Be notified of the proposed information to be presented and to know the identity of witnesses who have been called to speak at the hearing or provide written information for the hearing when such information is known by the Director of Community Standards or designee prior to the hearing.
    7. Be accompanied by a support person during the portions of the hearing in which the student is participating. A student should select a support person whose schedule allows attendance at the scheduled date and time for the administrative hearing because delays will not normally be allowed due to the scheduling conflicts of a support person.
    8. Be present at the pertinent stages of the hearing process as indicated by the Director of Community Standards or designee. The deliberations of the hearing body are private. Following the hearing, the hearing body shall advise the accused student in writing of its determination and of the sanction(s) imposed, if any. The Director of Community Standards or designee will disclose to the alleged victim of any crime of violence, non-forcible sex offense, or sexual harassment the results of the hearing in writing.
    9. Submit a written account or present a personal statement regarding the incident. The decision to not present information is not an admission of responsibility.
    10. Present information, incident witnesses, and incident witness statements when deemed appropriate and relevant by the hearing body.
    11. Respond to statements and other information presented at the hearing.
    12. Present a personal or community impact statement to the hearing body upon a finding of “Responsibility”.
  3. An administrative hearing shall be conducted by a hearing body in accordance with the procedures listed below. When a University official serves as the sole member of the hearing body, that official may also be referred to as the “chair”. Specific hearing bodies may adopt additional procedures that are not inconsistent with the provisions of The Student Code:
    1. Formal rules of process, procedure, and/or technical rules of evidence, such as are applied in criminal or civil court, are not used in these proceedings.
    2. A hearing shall be conducted in private.
    3. Admission of any person into the hearing room shall be at the discretion of the chair of the hearing body. The chair shall have the authority to discharge or to remove any person whose presence is deemed unnecessary or obstructive to the proceedings. Names of witnesses coming to the hearing should be presented to the chair of the hearing body at least two days prior to the hearing.
    4. When a hearing involves more than one accused student, the Director of Community Standards or designee may, at his or her discretion, permit the administrative hearings concerning each student to be conducted either separately or jointly.
    5. If an accused student, after receiving notification, does not appear for a hearing, the hearing will proceed without the student.
    6. Except as directed by the chair, the support person shall limit his/her role in a hearing to that of a consultant to the accused, to the complainant, or to the victim.
    7. The complainant, the accused student, the investigating student conduct officer, and the hearing body may arrange for witnesses to present pertinent information to the hearing body. The accused student, complainant, investigating student conduct officer, and any witnesses will provide information to and answer questions from the hearing body. Questions may be suggested by the investigating student conduct officer, accused student and/or complainant to be answered by each other or by other witnesses. This will be conducted by the hearing body with such questions directed to the chair, rather than to the witnesses directly. This method is used to preserve the educational tone of the hearing and to avoid creation of an adversarial environment. Questions of whether potential information will be received shall be resolved at the discretion of the chair.
    8. Pertinent records, exhibits, and written statements (including student impact statements) may be accepted as information for consideration by the hearing body at its discretion. Information presented by a student during a hearing that indicates a potential violation of The Student Code may be adjudicated at a future time.
    9. After the portion of the hearing concludes in which all pertinent information has been received, the hearing body shall determine whether the accused student has violated each section of The Student Code which the student is alleged with violating.
    10. The hearing body’s determination shall be made on the basis of whether it is more likely than not that the accused student violated The Student Code.
    11. When an accused student has been found “Responsible” on any violation, the hearing body shall review the student’s academic transcript and student conduct history, hear impact statements by both the accused student, complainant, investigating student conduct officer, and impose the appropriate sanction(s).
    12. All procedural questions are subject to the final decision of the chair or the hearing advisor of the hearing body.
  4. All administrative hearings will be recorded and the University will maintain the audio recordings as required by Connecticut state law and are the property of the University. Participants are prohibited from making their own recording. Upon written request, an accused student or complainant may review the audio recording and make appropriate arrangements for it to be transcribed on University premises. Arrangements for a transcriber and all associated costs involved in the transcription will be the responsibility of the requesting individual.

E. Sanctions

  1. The following sanctions may be imposed, individually or in various combinations, on any student found to have violated The Student Code. Please note this is not an exhaustive list of sanctions:
    1. Warning: A notice that the student has violated University policy and a warning that another violation will likely result in a more severe sanction which could include University Probation, University Suspension or University Expulsion.
    2. University Probation: University Probation is an indefinite period of time where the student is given the opportunity to modify unacceptable behavior, to complete specific assignments, and to demonstrate a positive contribution to the University community in an effort to regain student privileges within the University community. After six months from being placed on University Probation, the student may apply for a review of the student’s probationary status. The student will need to meet with the Probation Review Committee and demonstrate significant contributions, both of an academic and co-curricular nature, to the University community. The Probation Review Committee will determine if the student will continue on University Probation or if the University Probation is lifted. The decision of the committee is final and not subject to appeal. If it is decided that University Probation will continue the student may re-apply in six months after the committee’s decision. Due to the student’s conduct history there is the possibility of University Suspension or University Expulsion if the student is found responsible for a subsequent violation.
    3. University Suspension: University Suspension is separation from the University for a designated period of time after which the student shall be eligible to apply for readmission to the University. Readmission to the University is not guaranteed. Conditions for consideration of readmission may be specified. A student’s reacceptance into his/her school or college is at the discretion of the school or college. A student who is on suspension is prohibited from participating in any University activity or program. The individual may not be in or on any University owned or leased property without securing prior approval from the Director of Community Standards or designee. A notation of “Suspension” shall be placed on the student’s official transcript until graduation. However, the student may petition the Director of Community Standards for earlier removal of the notation upon completion of the suspension. The University of Connecticut will not accept credits earned at another institution during a period of suspension.
    4. University Expulsion: University Expulsion is permanent separation from the University. A student who has been expelled is prohibited from participating in any University activity or program. The individual may not be in or on any University owned or leased property. A permanent notation of “Expulsion” shall be placed on the student’s transcript.
    5. Additional Sanctions: The following may be given in conjunction with any of the above:
      1. Loss of Privileges: Denial of specified privileges for a designated period of time.
      2. Restitution: Compensation for loss of or damage to property or services rendered. This may take the form of appropriate service and/or monetary or material replacement.
      3. Removal from Housing: Separation of the student from University approved housing for a designated period of time after which the student shall be eligible to return. Removal may include loss of dining privileges. Conditions for readmission may be specified.
      4. UConn Compass: The UConn Compass program has a sanction component which is designed to promote student engagement through co-curricular involvement. UConn Compass facilitators will assist students in designing a customized involvement plan based on their individual interests and academic plans.
      5. Educational Initiatives: Projects; participation in health or safety programs (the student may be required to pay a fee); service to the University or to the larger community; seminars; and other assignments as warranted.
  2. The following sanctions may be imposed upon registered student organizations:
    1. Those sanctions listed above in Part IV, E.1, “a” through “e”.
    2. Loss of Recognition: Loss of all University privileges for a designated period of time. Loss of recognition for more than two consecutive semesters requires an organization to reapply for University recognition. Conditions for future recognition may be specified.
  3. Aggravated Violations: If a student is responsible for violation of any University policy that is directed toward an individual or group due to race, ethnicity, ancestry, national origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, physical or mental disabilities, including learning disabilities, mental retardation, and past/present history of a mental disorder the student conduct officer or hearing body may enhance the sanctions.

F. Appeals

  1. A decision reached by the hearing body or a sanction imposed by the hearing body may be appealed by the accused student(s) or complainant(s) to the next level of student conduct authority within five (5) business days of the decision. All appeals shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the designated appellate body. The decision reached as a result of an administrative conference may not be appealed.
  2. Except as required to explain the basis of new information, an appeal shall be limited to a review of the student conduct file. The audio recording of the administrative hearing shall be available for the appellate body for review as necessary. The review shall be for one or more of the following purposes:
    1. To determine whether the administrative hearing was conducted in conformity with prescribed procedures giving the complainant and investigating student conduct officer a reasonable opportunity to prepare and to present information that The Student Code was violated, and giving the accused student a reasonable opportunity to prepare and to present a response to those allegations.
    2. To determine whether the sanction(s) imposed were appropriate for the violation(s) of The Student Code which the student was found responsible.
    3. To consider new information, sufficient to alter a decision, or other relevant facts not brought out in the original hearing, because such information and/or facts were not known to the person appealing at the time of the original administrative hearing.
  3. If an appeal is upheld by the appellate body, the matter shall either be referred to the original hearing body for re-opening of the administrative hearing to allow reconsideration of the original determination or the appellate body will determine any change in sanctions. If an appeal is not upheld, the matter shall be considered final and binding upon all involved.

G. Accommodations for Students with Disabilities

  1. By federal law, a person with a disability is any person who: 1) has a physical or mental impairment; 2) has a record of such impairment; or 3) is regarded has having such an impairment, which substantially limits one or more major life activities such as self-care, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, or learning.
  2. A student requesting an accommodation in regard to an administrative conference, hearing, or probation review meeting must follow the appropriate process for requesting an accommodation through the Center for Students with Disabilities. The Center for Students with Disabilities will make a determination regarding the request and notify the appropriate parties.
  3. Reasonable accommodations depend upon the nature and degree of severity of the documented disability. While the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 requires that priority consideration be given to the specific methods requested by the student, it does not imply that a particular accommodation must be granted if it is deemed not reasonable and other suitable techniques are available.