Student Conduct Hearing Board (SCHB)

Student Conduct Hearing Board (SCHB)

The SCHB hears cases in which an alleged violation of the Student Conduct Code may result in suspension or expulsion from the university. The SCHB may also hear cases of minor nature which have been referred by the OSC. The SCHB hears cases in boards of five persons each, at least two of whom are students. The SCHB makes its recommendation to the Dean of Students.

The SCHB is composed of ten faculty members nominated by the members of the university community or the Faculty Senate, ten staff members nominated by the Senior Vice President for Student Affairs, ten graduate students nominated by the Graduate and Professional Student Senate, ten students nominated by the Student Government and fifteen students nominated by the Dean of Students. All appointments are subject to the approval of the Senior Vice President of Student Affairs.

All appointments are for a two-year term and may be extended or reappointed if the member is willing to serve, unless the member has been removed by the appointing authority. If a vacancy occurs on the committee, the nominating authority will replace that member with an interim member to complete the term. All chairpersons (individual or joint) are approved by the Senior Vice-President for Student Affairs and are from members of the general faculty or the professional and scientific staff. This appointment shall be for a three-year term and may be extended or reappointed. Two faculty/staff and two students selected from the 45-member SCHB and the hearing board chair will constitute the hearing board for each case.

SCHB Hearing Format

The SCHB hearing is a formal meeting designated to follow a certain order and format. An general outline of the SCHB hearing is available on this website.

The SCHB Board decides all cases using the burden of proof of a preponderance of the evidence. The standard definition used by the Office of Student Conduct is below.

Preponderance of Evidence: The greater weight of the evidence, not necessarily established by the greater number of witnesses testifying to a fact but by evidence that has the most convincing force; superior evidentiary weight that, though not sufficient to free the mind wholly from all reasonable doubt, is still sufficient to incline a fair and impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other. [Bryan A. Garner, Editor, “Black’s Law Dictionary,” Second Edition, St. Paul, MN: West Group: 2001.]

In student disciplinary matters, this concept means both accounts of an incident are perceived evenly/equitably. Both students carry the burden of persuading the fact-finder that their claim is valid. This differs from a criminal case where the burden of persuasion always rests with the prosecution.

For more information related to the All-University Judiciary Hearing as outlined in the Student Disciplinary Regulations, please review Section 5.7.