Roles of Professionals for Social Violations

  1. The Vice President for Student Life and Dean of Students (VPDS) or designee is responsible for investigating and coordinating a response to violations of social conduct. The VPDS or designee may also bring a complaint on behalf of the College and function as the “College’s voice” in hearings where no other complainant exists or is willing/able to participate. Suppose a party involved in a hearing submits an appeal. In that case, the VPDS will review the appeal to determine if the hearing body’s decision should stand or if the matter should be forwarded to a Student Conduct Council Appeals Board.
  2. The Conduct Officer is the Associate Vice President for Student Life (AVP) or designee who is responsible for initiating an investigation of possible College social policy violations, bringing charges for alleged policy violations, and coordinating the College’s response. The Conduct Officer determines whether a Student Conduct Council hears a case. During an investigation or hearing, the Conduct Officer may call additional witnesses on behalf of the College who may not have appeared at the parties’ request. The Conduct Officer can also serve as a Process Adviser (as determined by the VPDS or designee) for any cases in which they are not presenting as the Complainant for the alleged policy violation(s) in question.
  3. The Process Adviser is the AVP or designee who serves as the liaison to the Student Conduct Council regarding the conduct process. The Process Adviser attends the hearing and advises the SCC concerning precedent and procedures. Suppose the AVP is unable to serve as the Process Adviser. In that case, they will designate a colleague from within the Division of Student Life who is familiar with the conduct process to serve in this capacity. The Process Adviser will assist the Hearing Chair in preparing cases for a hearing. The Process Adviser will serve as a resource for the Respondent, Complainant, referring administrator, and Student Conduct Council regarding matters of procedure throughout the process.
  4. The Conduct Council Faculty Pool is a minimum of three faculty approved by the Faculty Nominating Committee for three-year, overlapping terms with the option of renewal after the term has ended. Nominations for this pool come from the Faculty Nominating Committee. Members of this pool function as faculty representation on Academic and Social Conduct Councils and all Appeals Boards. The selection process should strive to reflect the diversity of the Earlham community.
  5. The Conduct Council Student Pool is a minimum of four students approved by the Earlham Student Government Executive Council. Nominations for this pool come from Student Government in consultation with Student Life. Suppose Student Government cannot identify students to serve in the Conduct Council pool. In that case, Student Life personnel will identify students to train and serve as needed for any hearings. Students must have completed a minimum of two semesters at the College, be in and maintain good academic standing, and not subject to any conduct sanction in the semester for which they are nominated or during their tenure. Students may serve up to three one-year terms. Members of this pool function as student representation on Academic and Social Conduct Councils as well as all Appeals Boards. The selection process should strive to reflect the diversity of the Earlham community.
  6. Social Conduct Council (SCC) consists of two faculty members and two students. The Hearing Chair convenes the hearing and includes a Process Adviser. The names of Council members will be shared with the parties at least two days before any SCC hearing. The parties may object to any Council member based on conflict of interest.* If the AVP substantiates a conflict, the AVP will designate an alternate. The Council determines responsibility for alleged social violations and assigns sanctions and outcomes appropriate to the circumstances.
  7. The Hearing Chair for social violations is a Student Life administrative faculty member or a CC Faculty Pool member (present or former within the last five years), designated by the AVP or designee. In instances where there may be a conflict of interest, the Hearing Chair may remove themselves, at which time the AVP will designate another Hearing Chair. With administrative support from Student Life staff, the Hearing Chair oversees all matters regarding the SCC hearing portion of the conduct process, meets with the parties, and serves as a procedural resource for the parties and the Council but is not a member of the Council’s consensus decision. The Hearing Chair and the Conduct Officer have two distinct roles and shall not be the same person.
  8. The Conduct Investigative Team comprises Student Life administrative faculty members designated by the VPDS and often involves partnering with the Department of Public Safety. Investigations typically include but are not limited to: meetings with parties and possible witnesses, collecting physical evidence, and consulting with relevant reporting offices. For procedures related to an investigation under Title IX and/or sexual harassment, see
  9. Social Conduct Council Appeals Board (SCC-A) – convened if warranted as determined by the VPDS, who reviews all appeal requests resulting from an SCC hearing. It comprises one faculty member, one student member, and a Hearing Chair. They are assigned from their respective pools and did not participate in the original SCC hearing process. All decisions of the SCC-A are final.
  10. One Support Person for Each Party may accompany each party to any meeting related to the conduct process and the hearing. A Support Person may be a member of the College community or any individual selected by the participating party, excluding members of Earlham Counseling Services, Public Safety, and Residence Life staff. The role of the Support Person is to provide support, advice, or assistance to the person requesting their presence. The Support Person is to advise the student in preparing for the hearing and can offer nondisruptive consultation during the hearing. During a hearing, the Support Person serves as an

* The College is committed to ensuring that the resolution processes (i.e., investigation, conduct resolution, appeal, etc.) are free from actual or perceived bias and conflicts of interest that would materially impact the outcome. Any party who feels that bias or conflict of interest would materially impact the outcome may submit a written petition to the Associate Vice President for Student Life (AVP) to seek the person’s removal from the process. If a person wants to petition to remove the AVP, they should submit a written request to the Vice President for Student Life and Dean of Students (VPDS). The petition recipient will review the information and determine if a conflict of interest and/or bias exists. The petition should include specifics on the bias or conflicts of interest and why the petitioner believes the bias or conflict could materially impact the outcome. adviser to the student requesting their presence and may not address the Council unless the Council invites. The Support Person is not permitted to serve as a witness, examine parties or witnesses, or provide statements to the Council. For support person or adviser procedures related to Title IX and/or sexual harassment, please see