Disciplinary Committee Review, Revise Process Pending Vote
A committee consisting of eight faculty members, counselors and administrators was established earlier this term to review the Academy’s disciplinary process. Committee members have been conducting an extensive investigation of school policies by gathering community feedback, and will discuss potential revisions in the weeks ahead. Proposals will be submitted for a faculty vote in April.
The last disciplinary review took place more than twenty years ago, resulting primarily in changes to the probationary process. Committee Member and Classics Instructor Matthew Hartnett suggested that periodic assessments are necessary in all areas of Academy life to ensure fairness and efficiency. “This isn’t coming from any particular sense that there’s a problem. The disciplinary system is simply an important part of student life. We examine everything we do at this school to make sure that it’s functioning as well as possible,” he said.
Committee Member and Counselor Szu-Hui Lee agreed, saying, “We need to make sure policies and procedures are keeping up to date with any new research that informs our practice and relevant to current school trends and cultures.”
The written charge, established by committee members and approved by Principal Lisa MacFarlane, states that the committee “will evaluate the assumptions, history, strengths and weaknesses of our disciplinary system… [and] present a review of the system and propose possible changes to the faculty for discussion and vote.”
“I like the broad range of voices on the committee and I’m inspired by how thoughtfully folks are considering these questions. The stakes are high and upholding the community’s values is important.”
The committee is still in its early stages of review and has been gathering information by examining the disciplinary policies of various institutions and seeking community feedback. Religion Instructor Hannah Hofheinz explained that the extensive time and effort required for the process made the task more suitable for adults. “It’s an information-gathering process at this point. It will become a different type of conversation once we get to the analysis stage,” Hofheinz said.
Committee Chair and Dean of Residential Life Arthur Cosgrove affirmed that efforts have been made to adequately represent student voices in the reform process through surveys and focus group discussions. “These proposals will potentially shift the language of the E-Book around discipline so they’re ultimately faculty decisions. But once we determine what direction we’re going in, we’ll go back to the student body in some way to solicit feedback,” he said.
To make the investigation more efficient, members have been working in pairs to investigate specific aspects of the disciplinary system. Rabbi Jennifer Marx-Asch and Hartnett have been gathering input from students with previous experience in a disciplinary case about their sentiments before the incident, their experience during the process and its ultimate impact on their Exeter career.
Hartnett expressed that members have been careful to conduct their research with an unbiased outlook in order to complete an effective and comprehensive review. “This process isn’t really front-loaded with any presuppositions or any predetermined outcomes,” he said.
Several committee members, including Cosgrove and Marx-Asch, expressed that they have specific concerns which they would like to address, however, particularly concerning mental health. “The mental health piece has been the most troubling to me because I think that’s a very influential part of the discipline process. Part of it is just respecting student privacy. They shouldn’t have to disclose things they aren’t comfortable disclosing,” Marx-Asch said. “We also need to question how committee members would evaluate mental health since none of us are experts in that. I feel like that’s a big hole in the system right now and a huge piece we have to consider. It’s affecting students’ lives and their choices.”
Cosgrove was mindful of including diverse perspectives and expertise in the committee when he first reached out to a number of community adults, seeking their membership. Having completed her tenure on the Discipline Committee very recently, Marx-Asch considers it her responsibility to offer a first-hand account of the Academy’s disciplinary decision-making. “I feel very strongly about evolving the process,” she said.
Hofheinz, a new Academy instructor this year, believes he was asked to join the committee for his fresh and unbiased outlook on school policies. “It’s nice to have somebody who is new to the committee for this type of project,” he said. Hofheinz believes his previous work in “conflict management and resolution, community health and wellbeing processes” will also contribute valuable insight to the discussion.
Despite the breadth and complexity of their task, Hartnett is hopeful that the multitude of voices and commitment will fuel the committee’s success. “I like the broad range of voices on the committee and I’m inspired by how thoughtfully folks are considering these questions. The stakes are high and upholding the community’s values is important,” he said. “I take that as seriously as anybody and I feel like the other folks on the committee have been taking it seriously, too.”