Faculty Pass Misconduct Proposal

The faculty passed a new sexual misconduct review policy with a clear majority vote on Monday, Sept. 16, after extensive revisions to the previous process, such as the elimination of Principal’s Discretion. The policy was jointly developed by administrators, students and faculty this past summer.

The new policy states that after the Exeter Police Department (EPD) decides to close its investigation into a case of sexual misconduct, the Academy will launch an independent investigation. A separate “Misconduct Review Board” (MRB) will then determine appropriate disciplinary and educational responses based on findings from a trained, third-party investigator.

This committee will be chaired by the Dean of Students, currently Brooks Moriarty, and will consist of two additional deans from the Dean of Students’ Office as well as two faculty members chosen from a pool of current and former Community Conduct Committee members who have prior “commitment to and knowledge of sexual misconduct.”

During the investigation and deliberation, the reporting student will be assigned to a specific faculty member—typically the Dean of Student Well-Being, Christina Palmer—who will assist the student as an advisor and source of support. Palmer will also be responsible for making official reports to authorities.

Once they have consulted all findings, the MRB will engage in a preliminary vote and present their results to the Principal, Assistant Principal and General Counsel, with a summary letter explaining their rationale. After further discussion, the MRB will take a final vote.

Principal William Rawson, Assistant Principal Karen Lassey and Director of Equity and Inclusion Stephanie Bramlett began efforts to revise the Academy’s sexual misconduct review process last spring, in the wake of the three-hour student sit-in on May 9 protesting the Academy’s history of mishandling incidents of sexual assault. The protest, led by the class of 2019, was largely perceived as a culmination of student frustrations built up over years of experience with the Academy’s inadequate support for sexual assault survivors.

Grace Carroll ’19, a protest participant, reiterated some of the proposals outlined during and after the protest. “One thing we kept coming back to was the role of the Dean’s Committee and Principal as the arm of the investigation making the final call on its outcome,” she said. “We felt that this body should more closely resemble that of the Discipline Committee, [composed of] faculty members who had proved themselves to be empathetic, engaged educators who have relationships with students on a more individual level.”

A select group of students subsequently drew up a new sexual misconduct review process over the course of six meetings with Lassey, Bramlett and Rawson, two of which occurred in the school year and four during the summer. According to Lassey, these meetings “prompted and influenced” the administration’s recent proposal.

Several students from the group also maintained contact with Lassey into the 2019–20 year, checking in on the policy’s progress every two to three weeks via email and video chat. According to Exonians Against Sexual Assault co-head and senior Janalie Cobb, the group contributed by “reading over documents and offering our opinions in addition to proposing alternative or completely new changes.”

In the deliberation process, senior Kiki Aguilar called for “a clearer investigation process and making the process more survivor-focused,” adding, “We were focused to include parts of the policy that took care of the mental aspect of both parties’ safety.”

While Lassey sought to incorporate as many student suggestions as possible, some revisions were not incorporated into the proposal. “We didn’t want to be disingenuous that we were willing to entertain all of the points students mentioned,” she said, specifying two omitted components as the use of the word “persuasion” when describing affirmative consent and a request that students be able to appoint faculty members for the deciding body.

While this particular revision did not pass, the definition of affirmative consent was expanded over the summer to include the term “coercion” and added material to the bulleted list following the definition.

Senior Khine Win, a student contributor, emphasized the close collaboration between students and faculty. “We worked on every single step of the process with [Lassey],” she said.

Prior to the faculty vote, Lassey presented the policy to Student Council, the Community Conduct Committee and attendees at an open student forum last Sunday in an attempt to gather further community input. Senior and Student Council President Ayush Noori expressed gratitude for the administration’s transparency. “As the representatives of the student body, we were excited for the opportunity to confer with Principal Lassey and share this policy with as many Exonians as possible,” he said. “Voicing student feedback in these initiatives helps realize Student Council’s goal to foster a safer and healthier campus.”

Many alumni voiced their appreciation for different components of the proposal. “I am really optimistic about the addition of two faculty members to the MRB,” Carroll said. “I think the presence of faculty in the final deciding body of an investigation will hopefully make students feel more trust in the powers behind the reporting process, if there are teachers who they already know and trust involved in deciding the outcome.”

Ingrid Bergill ’19—an alumna highly involved in last year’s protest—similarly expressed high hopes for the MRB, but emphasized that diverse representation will need to be a priority. “I would be curious to know which deans and which faculty end up on the board to see the diversity represented there because in my opinion, if the board isn’t a diverse group of faculty, it doesn’t have the effect protesters last year had in mind,” she said.

While the recent revisions are a step in the right direction, the larger task will be cultivating a trusting community, Hillary Davis ’19 noted. “When I got to college, it struck me almost immediately how open and comfortable the entire community felt talking about sexual assault and the resources and reporting processes on campus,” Davis said. “Already, with my awareness of these resources, I know I would feel comfortable reporting or discussing sexual assault if I ever need, which is something that Exeter needs to instill in new students almost immediately so that the entire student body eventually shares this awareness and comfort.”

“I understand this transition will take time, but I am glad to see the administration making a concrete effort to improve following our conversations last spring,” Davis continued.

With faculty support, Lassey plans to work with the Dean of Students’ Office in upcoming weeks to incorporate the policy into the E Book. “We will make a midyear revision to the E Book and inform parents and students of the changes,” she said, clarifying that the policy is still open to further revisions and restructuring.

Palmer believes that the new protocol will improve the efficacy and sensitivity of the reporting process. “The Misconduct Review Process does recognize and is sensitive to the urgency needed for resolution, transparency in the process and acknowledges the impact of trauma associated with sexual misconduct,” she said.

“We still need to work on giving consent and not just learning but respecting each other and giving these learnings life,” Aguilar said. “I think Exeter views itself as a more liberal school, so we think that we know what sexual misconduct is, but it is not the truth.”