Students' efforts to amend the discipline system lacked adequate explanation for University Senators.
At their Thursday meeting, the last for the school year, Senators tabled the students' legislation until university lawyers could inspect it.
The legislation amends the current Code of Student Rights and Responsibilities, which dictates how students will be sanctioned for misdeeds, said Michael Slang, the chairman of the Student and Campus Life Council.
The amendment would create parallel procedures between the discipline hearings of Recreation Services, Housing and Residence Life, dean of students and Student Organizations and Activities offices.
Each office would still maintain its own punishments and autonomy, said Rebecca Bergs, the secretary for the Senate's Student Rights, Ethics and Standards Committee.
But the hearing and appeals process would be similar, had the legislation passed, Bergs said. If the process were similar, Bergs said, students would go to one office to learn about their impending discipline, not four.
Students could also be spared the danger of double jeopardy, Bergs said. The legislation calls for better communication between the four offices.
David Fried, the associate dean of Student Services, said he hoped to pass the legislation at the Thursday meeting so administrators could implement it by the Fall Semester.
The current policy, Fried said, needed immediate repairs.
But the reasoning wasn't good enough for Senators.
"Just because it's bad doesn't mean we should put something in that could possibly be worse," said associate professor Fred Suppe.
Senators said they felt some of the language in the proposal was too broad -- particularly the harassment clause.
According to the proposal, harassment can be written, verbal, oral or physical speech that is "beyond the bounds of protected speech."
But journalism professor Mark Popovich, who teaches media law, said protected speech needs to be clarified. Popovich suggested changing the term to "fighting words" or using Indiana law to better define the concept.
"The term is really broad and has so many loopholes," Popovich said. "You could inadvertently limit someone's freedom of speech."
Jerome McKean, an associate professor in the Department of Criminal Justice, cautioned that some of the language could leave the university open for liability.
Professors also objected to a provision that would allow students' lawyers to attend disciplinary hearings, which they can do under the current code.
Lawyers, professors said, can hinder the hearings for both students and professors.
"Lawyers are very intimidating," Popovich said. "They'll put us on the defensive immediately. Give him his chance in his arena, and give us a chance in our arena."
However, the testimonies students give at these hearings could be used later in court. A lawyer can help students from incriminating themselves, said student Senator Joe Flores.
Flores also said the lawyer wouldn't be able to speak, and, thus, could not intimidate the faculty.
Though the lawyer debate was not settled, it will resurface this summer. Senators voted to allow the Senate agenda committee to approve the policy this summer, but only after acquiring the approval of Ball State's attorney.
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
