Code of Conduct EDITORIAL

Student Code of Conduct Changing – Let Your Voice be Heard

EDITORIAL

Peter Solie, Journalism Advisor

Barton Community College

Great Bend, Kan.

First Published 16 April 2014

There is a lot of good information in the Student Code of Conduct. It contains clearly stated rules and expectations for student behavior and performance while attending Barton Community College. The proposed changes are available to every student on campus. If you have comments in support of or against the proposals you are welcome to speak to the Student Government Association on Wednesday, April 16, 2014 at 6:30 p.m. in the Student Union.

When I first became aware of the proposed changes to the Student Code of Conduct several months ago, I pointed out some additional changes that I believed were necessary and many of those suggestions are recognized in the current proposal. For example:

I recommended that a person must KNOWINGLY be in possession of stolen property in order to be held accountable.
I questioned the language of the document which banned “Immoral behavior, including all forms of sexual misconduct or harassment.” I suggested that the language of the document was too vague to be useful. I asked, “Whose morality? The student’s mother? The College? The State of Kansas?” The morality language has been removed. I believe that we must have high moral standards and conduct, but as a public college it would simply be impossible to agree upon what those moral standards should be. With the removal of the moral standard, the laws of the State of Kansas and United States will be the standard for sexual misconduct and harassment.
I suggested that military personnel that must carry a firearm on campus should not have an exemption limited to the Grandview/Fort Riley or Fort Leavenworth campuses. That limitation has been removed and now applies to all campuses.

Unfortunately, not all of my recommendations were addressed to my satisfaction in the current proposal. To be clear, I understand that there are differing views on these issues and that my opinion should not and will not prevail in all cases. Fortunately, the Student Government Association will be hearing concerns from students on this proposal and you have an opportunity to voice your opinion on any issue covered by the Student Code of Conduct.

Two issues that I believe need further consideration are:

Regarding firearms, the following language has been added, “any weapon designed to fire any projectile (i.e. paintball guns, bb guns, air rifles, air pistols, pellet guns, etc.) as well as the associated paraphernalia.” I understand the school’s concern with the newly excluded items. I believe, however, that in their concern they are failing to recognize or balance any positive benefits that will result from students forming friendships, exercising, building leadership skills and many other positive benefits that may result from the organization and competition of paintball games.

There is no doubt in my mind that the President of the College never wants to make a phone call to a parent expressing sorrow that their child had been shot by a public safety officer who mistakenly believed that their paintball or airsoft gun was the real deal. Unfortunately, that door is opened when paintball and airsoft guns are on campus. These legal and fun tools, however, should not be subjected to an unbalanced evaluation. I strongly believe that these non-lethal weapons are a tool that can build camaraderie, release tension and provide real exercise in an unstructured environment.

Although not new language, I also disagree with the firearms ban on campus and believe that the “facsimile weapons” language opens the school to media ridicule when enforced. For example, a 7-year-old Maryland second grader was suspended from school for chewing his Pop-Tart into the shape of a gun. Does the Barton Administration really want to make the news because they had suspended a student for using his straw as a spitball delivery device or for shaping her toast into a facsimile of a knife or a gun? I think not.

In my role as a Journalism and Communications instructor the language expressed in Unacceptable Behavior numbers 15 and 16 is of great concern to me. Both of these definitions utilize sweeping language designed to foster a supportive environment where “dignity and respect” are valued and “hatred, contempt and ridicule” are forbidden. I agree with these goals as a general principle. However, I am very concerned that vigorous debate, passionate defense of one’s political views or simply discussing one’s religious beliefs could be easily interpreted as a violation of this code.

A college campus should be a place where issues and concepts are vigorously debated. I expect my students to question the rationale behind any statements I make. A common question in my classroom is “How do you know that?” As an institution we need to be preparing our students to defend their knowledge and their beliefs. If any challenge to one’s belief system is construed to be “hostile” or “disrespectful” then we are doing them a great disservice by failing to prepare them for the academic and life challenges that will surely come.

I have outlined a couple of concerns I have with the proposed changes to the Student Code of Conduct. I do not expect universal agreement with me on any issue or concept. I do, however, expect students to understand that the Student Code of Conduct contains protections and restrictions that directly and immediately affect them.

I strongly encourage students to read the document and discuss it with their friends. Even better, debate it with your friends! If you have a concern about these codes or you want to express your support for the new language please speak to the Student Government Association on Wednesday, April 16, 2014 at 6:30 p.m. in the Student Union.

Respectfully submitted,

Peter Solie, Journalism and Communications Instructor