1. JUDICIAL AFFAIRS PROJECT RONALD ALEXANDER III

2. PURPOSE The purpose of this project was utilize theory and practice within the practicum site to gauge a more beneficial practicum experience. The purpose also aligns with research and gaining more experience to become a seasoned researcher in the field of higher education and student affairs. The purpose of this particular project is to see student experiences through the judicial affairs process and hearing process. Wanting to gauge how students felt about the process and how their outlook on UWG as a whole.

3. METHOD Conducted a survey that was sent out to 120 students who had recently been through the judicial process in the past year at UWG. These students were found responsible for their code of conduct violations which ranged from Alcohol, Drugs, False Information, Residence Hall Violations, etc. The students were sent this survey which was composed through surveymonkey.com http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/7FHJLXS We received 13 responses back from the survey after sending it out twice, which is a 11% respondent rate.

4. OVERVIEW OF RESPONDENTS The 13 respondents to the survey violated the violations listed below in the graph Some respondents had more than one violation

5. QUESTION 1 OF SURVEY Before this incident, what were you involved in (student organizations, community service, etc.) on the campus of UWG? Out of the 13 respondents to this question, most were involved with Greek Life, community service organizations, honor societies, and much more. Only 3 students reported that they were never involved in any student organizations or community service projects. An interesting note here is that the most involved students had the most serious violations of the code of conduct. One would think otherwise about involved students.

6. QUESTION 2 OF SURVEY Why did you choose UWG as your undergrad institution? This question was important to ask because it gave us sense of why they chose to make UWG their place of higher education and “home away from home” Students reasoning range from the cost of tuition, friends or family that have previously attended have given positive feedback, close to home. Other feedback ranges to the parents made the students go here, it was their only option, and 2 students only applied to UWG.

7. QUESTION 3 OF SURVEY How would you describe your judicial experience including your feelings about what happened? (i.e. was it a fair/clear process). This question was the most important aspect of the survey, it lead to the students feelings of their experience with judicial affairs. The initial results of this question was a divide between fair and unfair, the results fell both ways. The students who felt it was a fair process state the communication was clear and they understood the rationale behind their punishment. One student stated “Yes, I liked how they told me what was going. The information communication was good.”

8. QUESTION 3 OF SURVEY CONTD. Other students who felt the process was not fair made statements along the lines of already being deemed guilty, how the process doesn’t give options to how it is heard. Here some responses below. “It was very unfair. I had been accused of having drugs in my room but nothing was found. Then I came to get a friend that was smoking drugs and I got accused guilty because I had came in her office before. I told the lady that I didn't use drugs and wasn't using it then but she based her opinion off of her seeing me in her office before” “I thought that the process was not pleasant at all. There was an incident that happened and I was already facing punishment for my actions. Compounded more punishment and restrictions made me feel alienated from my own university. Furthermore, I felt that the University had assaulted me during my arrest. I had no one to assist me outside of a few professors in the History, and Theater Dept. I also thought that “anonymous name” comments were unprofessional during my hearing. She asked where I resided and after responding with River's Edge Apartments she then said, "You don't have to go very far to get your dope" (marijuana). There was a requirement that I speak to someone about my drug and alcohol consumption but no follow through was ever established. I felt as though the process was the first step in monitoring bad conduct in order to process out current students. In an academic community I felt this was an example of the University administration throwing a student under a bus when their are in need of support the most”

9. QUESTION 4 OF SURVEY What changes did the judicial process have on how you participate in campus life (e.g., get more involved, be sure to follow policies, more focused on education, etc.) This question was important in regards to their outlook on the university after going through the judicial affairs process. Surprisingly the responses to this question 78% positive with students saying it was a reality check, it put them on the right path, it was needed to make them realize their mistakes. One student stated “Even though I did not like the outcome, I realize that I needed this punishment wake me up and get on my work” The other 22% students made comments such as “It was stupid” or “The judicial affairs office can die”. A way to vent their feelings out was this aspect of the survey for them.

10. CONCLUSION Students feel the need to vent their experiences more If they feel that they were treated unfairly. More avenues of hearing cases can be a suggestion in this situation, building a team other than the main Dean of Students can be beneficial. In this particular sample, there wasn’t enough feedback to general conclusions on the entire Judicial Affairs process.