Types of Resolution Processes

This page will detail the differences between our resolution processes: Administrative Hearings, Conduct Board Hearings, and Resolution Panels.

Administrative Hearings

An Administrative Hearing is a one-on-one meeting with a Hearing Officer. A Hearing Officer is a professional staff member appointed by the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee. The Administrative Hearing is scheduled by the Hearing Officer at a mutually convenient time between the Hearing Officer and the Respondent that does not conflict with the Respondent’s academic schedule. The Respondent shall typically receive at least 48 hours notice of the time and location of the hearing. The College reserves the right to proceed with the hearing whether or not the Respondent appears at the hearing.

During the Administrative Hearing, the Hearing Officer will review all reported Community Standards violations with the Respondent. The Respondent will be provided the opportunity to acknowledge responsibility or contest the reported violations as well as present relevant information in response to the reported information. The Respondent will have the opportunity to present the names and contact information of up to five witnesses that the Hearing Officer can interview outside of the Administrative Hearing. The Hearing Officer will then consider all relevant information, including other information presented by Emerson and/or non-Emerson community members concerning the reported violations, to determine if it is more likely than not the Respondent violated the Community Standard. If the Respondent is found responsible for violating a Community Standard the Hearing Officer will assign a sanction(s) to the Respondent. 

Should a Respondent believe that the Hearing Officer is unable to fairly review the matter because of a conflict of interest, the Respondent may request that a different Hearing Officer be assigned to the hearing. Such requests may result in the delay of the Respondent’s hearing. Requests must be made in writing to the Assistant Dean for Campus Life detailing the reason(s) the Hearing Officer should not participate in the hearing. Notification must be sent 24 hours prior to the hearing. The Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee will provide the Respondent with a written response to the request prior to the hearing. If there is no change in the Hearing Officer, the Respondent is expected to attend the hearing at the time listed in the hearing notification letter unless directed otherwise by a member of the Office of Community Standards. Should there be a change in the Hearing Officer, the name of the new Hearing Officer and information about a new Administrative Hearing will be provided in writing to the Respondent. Should the Respondent identify a conflict of interest with the new Hearing Officer, this process will be repeated until a Hearing Officer is selected. 

Conduct Board Hearings

A Conduct Board Hearing is a hearing before a panel of three to five Emerson community members typically consisting of faculty, staff, and/or students. During the Conduct Board Hearing, the Conduct Board members will review all reported Community Standards violations with the Respondent. Faculty and staff Conduct Board members are appointed by the President and student members are appointed by the Assistant Dean for Campus Life. The hearing is supervised by a non-voting Hearing Administrator from the Office of Community Standards. During the hearing, the Hearing Administrator will present all reported information, including any information obtained through an investigation; ensure hearing procedures are orderly; and advise the Conduct Board during deliberations.

The composition of Conduct Boards is at the discretion of the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee. Typically Conduct Boards will be composed of five voting members (3 faculty/staff and 2 students), however, during summers and intersession periods or for sensitive cases, the Conduct Board may be composed of only 3 voting faculty/staff members. The Conduct Board Hearing is scheduled by the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee at a mutually convenient time between the Conduct Board, the Complainant (if applicable), and the Respondent, that does not conflict with the Complainant’s or Respondent’s academic schedule. The Complainant and Respondent shall receive in writing, at least five business days notice of the date, time, and location of the hearing. A Complainant or Respondent may request consideration for the five day notice to be waived. The College reserves the right to proceed with the hearing whether or not any of the parties appear at the hearing.

The Complainant (if applicable) and Respondent will be provided with the names of the community members serving on the Conduct Board prior to the hearing.  Should the Complainant or Respondent believe that a Conduct Board member is unable to fairly review the matter because of a conflict of interest, the Complainant or Respondent may request that a different Conduct Board member be assigned to the Conduct Board. Such requests may result in the delay of the Conduct Board process. Requests must be made in writing to the Assistant Dean for Campus Life, detailing the reason(s) the Board member should not participate in the scheduled Conduct Board Hearing. Notification must be sent 72 hours prior to the Conduct Board Hearing. Should such a request be made, the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee will provide a written response to the request prior to the Conduct Board Hearing.  If there is no change in the Conduct Board member, the Conduct Board Hearing will remain at the time listed in the Conduct Board notification letter unless rescheduled by a member of the Office of Community Standards. Should there be a change in the Conduct Board member, the name of the Conduct Board member and scheduling information about the Conduct Board will be provided in writing to the Complainant (if applicable) and Respondent. Should the Complainant or Respondent identify a conflict of interest with the new Conduct Board member, this process will be repeated until a Conduct Board is selected.    

At the conclusion of the Conduct Board Hearing, the Conduct Board will consider all information presented at the hearing to determine if it is more likely than not the Respondent violated a Community Standard. If the Respondent is found responsible for violating a Community Standard, the Conduct Board will recommend sanctions to the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee. The Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee will, at their discretion, accept, reject, or modify the sanctions recommended by the Conduct Board.

Please refer to Section 12 Conduct Board Procedures for more information on Conduct Boards.

Resolution Panel

Should a Respondent select or be referred to a Conduct Board Hearing, the Respondent may acknowledge in writing that they assume responsibility for all reported violations of the College’s Community Standards and proceed to a Resolution Panel for sanctioning, foregoing the Conduct Board Hearing.  A Resolution Panel will be composed of three community members that have been appointed to the Conduct Board. Members typically include two (2) administrative/faculty members and one (1) student member. During summers and intersession periods, or for sensitive cases, the Resolution Panel can comprise three (3) administrative/faculty members. The Resolution Panel process is supervised by a non-voting Panel Administrator from the Office of Community Standards. The Panel Administrator also serves as an advisor to the Panelists. 

The Resolution Panel is scheduled by the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee at a mutually convenient time between the Resolution Panel and the Respondent that does not conflict with the Respondent’s academic schedule.  The Respondent shall receive at least five business days written notice of the time and location of the Resolution Panel proceeding. The Respondent may request consideration for the five-day notice to be waived. The College reserves the right to proceed with the Resolution Panel whether or not the Respondent appears to the Resolution Panel. 

During a Resolution Panel:

1. All participants will sign a statement of confidentiality and nondisclosure and the Respondent will administrator sign a statement of honesty.
2. The Panel will not challenge or re-examine the facts documented in an incident/police report or the Respondent’s acknowledgment of responsibility. The Panel may ask questions to the Respondent about the incident to the extent of gaining incident context. The Panel will focus their review and deliberations solely on the issue of what, if any, sanctions they believe are most appropriate to be assigned to the Respondent.
3. The Respondent will be able to provide an oral or written impact statement to the Panel. Impact statements can include information, circumstances, or thoughts that the Respondent feels the Panelists should take into consideration. The Panel may ask the Respondent questions about the information presented in their impact statement.
4. At their discretion, the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee may provide the Panel impact statements from the Complainant and/or any relevant witnesses. The Complainant and witnesses are not required to submit impact statements.

When opting for a Resolution Panel, the Respondent waives the right to:            

1. Have their matter reviewed via an administrative or Conduct Board Hearing.
2. Present witnesses, question witnesses, and question the Complainant(s).
3. Review Complainant or witness impact statements.
4. Receive a copy of the incident and/or police reports associated with the matter. At the discretion of the Office of Community Standards, a Respondent may receive a redacted copy of the incident and/or police report associated with the matter.

The Respondent will be provided with the names of the community members serving on the Resolution Panel prior to the Resolution Panel proceeding. Should a Respondent believe that a Panel member is unable to fairly review the matter because of a conflict of interest, the Respondent may request that a different Panel member be assigned to the Resolution Panel. Such requests may result in the delay of the Resolution Panel process.  Requests must be made in writing to the Assistant Dean for Campus Life, detailing the reason(s) the Panel member should not participate in the Respondent’s Resolution Panel.  Notification must be sent 72 hours prior to the Resolution Panel. Should such request be made, the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee will provide the Respondent with a written response to the request prior to the Resolution Panel.  If there is no change in the Panel member, the Respondent is expected to attend the Resolution Panel at the time listed in the Resolution Panel notification letter unless directed otherwise by a member of the Office of Community Standards.  Should there be a change in the Panel member, the name of the Panel member and scheduling information about the Resolution Panel will be provided in writing to the Respondent. Should the Respondent identify a conflict of interest with the new Panel member, this process will be repeated until a Resolution Panel is selected.     

At the conclusion of the Resolution Panel, the Panel will consider all materials provided to them to recommend sanctions to the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee. The Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee will, at their discretion, accept, reject, or modify the sanctions recommended by the Resolution Panel. The Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee may reject or modify the Panel’s sanction recommendation if the Assistant Dean for Campus Life or designee believes that the sanction recommendation:

• Does not appropriately address a violation;
• Is fundamentally unfair;
• Is inconsistent with sanctions imposed for other violations of comparable seriousness;
• Contradicts the mission of the Office of Community Standards or College;
• Current resources or policies prevent the sanction from occurring;
• Presents a significant risk to the Respondent or College community;
• Lacks clarity; and/or
• Does not appropriately consider the Respondent’s disciplinary history.