The Effectiveness of Discipline/Judicial Processes on Catholic Campuses as Measured by the Rate of Recidivism.
INTRODUCTION Since the founding of Harvard in 1636, the oversight of students has required as much focus on their behavioral patterns as their academic performance (Brubaker & Ruby, 1976). In the former category, it has been the aberrant behaviors exhibited by a small percentage of students enrolled in higher education that have caused concern for campuses. However, as higher education administrators are well aware, disruptive behaviors in the latter part of the Twentieth Century on college and universities campuses were increasing in both frequency and seriousness (Amada, 1994). Indeed, Amada (1994) reported that such incidents are not only increasing in number but are also increasingly a mirror of the problems society is experiencing. Carmody (1990) attributed the increase and seriousness of disruptive behaviors on college and university campuses to these factors: increased numbers of dysfunctional families, the upward mobility of the last decade of the Twentieth Century, increased stress from academic programs, and the impact of substance abuse. University and college campuses in the United States utilize disciplinary/judicial processes to help address student behavioral problems. This investigation revealed that institutions of higher education utilize various forms of discipline/judicial processes to help maintain a reasonably tranquil, safe, and productive campus environment. The discipline/judicial processes employed by the campuses included in the purposeful sample were administrative, majority-peer, and minority-peer processes. These three processes were the focus of this research. The people that carry out administrative, majority-peer, and minority-peer discipline/judicial processes are generally given the responsibility to address disruptive behaviors on the nations' college and university campuses. These discipline/judicial processes determine if there was a violation of the student conduct code and what discipline should be imposed for the violation. Administrative discipline/judicial processes are a hearing body or any person authorized by the college or university to determine first whether a violation of code of conduct occurred, and then to recommend and or impose sanctions (Paterson & Kibler, 1998). Majority-peer processes refer to those employing a judicial body or hearing board composed of faculty and/or staff, where students constitute fifty percent or more of this board's membership. Minority-peer processes also involve a judicial body or board composed of faculty and/or staff, yet here students constitute less than fifty percent of the board's membership. The individuals that are selected to comprise the discipline/judicial body are charged with the responsibility of addressing students' unacceptable behaviors by calling a disruptive student to be accountable for his or her actions. In addition, if a student is found "responsible" for the inappropriate behavior, then those involved in the discipline/judicial processes are charged with the responsibility of imposing a penalty designed--wherever possible--to restore the student to good standing with the community and to also educate the offender. These kinds of procedures are complex and time-consuming, and Carmody (1990) bemoaned the fact that increased numbers of students exhibiting inappropriate behavior were overwhelming campus discipline/judicial processes. Despite the complicated logistics of ensuring all discipline procedures are comprehensive, the work is important both to the campus and the offending students. Pavela (1985) asserted that calling a student to accountability is affirming his or her dignity, noting, "In reality, if the discipline is successful, then the student regains self-control and remains in the college and the college has one less disruptive student" (p. 47). To discipline a student is often a win-win situation for the student and the campus community, because the student potentially becomes a member of the student body again in good standing and likely also becomes a positive, contributing member of the campus community. …