Students treated differently
Accountability process deemed impersonal
November 21, 2006
Lauren Thompson
The accountability process at Trinity Western University was called into question recently when two students experienced what they feel were unjust repercussions for breaking community standards.
The questions arose when two fourth-year students, who asked not to be named, were caught drinking one beer in their off-campus home. After receiving a letter in their mailboxes, they were required to meet with Student Life personnel to discuss their consequences.
They were concerned, not with the fact of the consequences, but by the discrepancies they saw in their punishment. For the same offense, one student, a Christianity and Culture major, was put on probation. The other, a Modern Languages major, must pay a $200 fine and attend monthly accountability meetings with a Student Life staff member. Since the first student has no financial aid and holds no leadership positions, which are usually revoked while on probation, her status carries essentially no consequences.
The two students were also bothered by the impersonal nature of the process, as both received identical letters expressing the same, seemingly personal, sentiments.
“It’s just about deterrent, not the interest of the well-being of the person,” commented one of the students, speaking on how the accountability process appeared to her.
When asked about the inconsistencies in the consequences, Kelvin Gartley, Assistant Director of Community Life, Resident Programs, told Mars’ Hill that “each case is handled individually, and in some cases there could be differences.” He admitted that different punishments are given, depending on how the consequences will affect the student.
Gartley also said that student leaders generally face harsher consequences.
“For example, when we’ve handled alcohol in the past, we are always more severe with an RA than with a regular student,” he said.
In response to the accusation that the process is impersonal, Gartley cited practicality and efficiency as reasons for this.
“[Accountability] is not our full-time job,” said Gartley, but added that the goal is to treat all students “with a mixture of grace and respect.”
He added that Student Life would “love to hear suggestions” on how to make the process feel more personal. Nothing major will change this year though, he said, because the procedures lie in the hands of upper administration, not Student Life.
“But a new president could mean changes,” Gartley noted.
Concerns over how Student Life catches offenders have also been raised this year. Gartley denied rumours that the department has been hiring students to attend parties and take down the names of TWU students who are present.
“To my knowledge, that has never happened,” said Gartley, but added that it is possible that students have come to Student Life on their own accord.
Gartley’s statement is in line with the position of President Jonathan Raymond, who noted during last Tuesday’s Presidents’ Forum that “the university is not interested in policing.”
Gartley did admit that Student Life will monitor students’ personal web pages, such as MySpace or Facebook, to check for incriminating photographs, but clarified that this is only done for students already involved in the accountability process.
Now you go...
Got something to say?