A new revision of the Rensselaer Handbook of Student Rights and Responsibilities is slated for August 2006, when the current one expires. For the new edition, discussion is underway to clarify the distinction between the Institute’s on- and off-campus jurisdictions for handling violations of grounds for disciplinary action.
These talks, led by Institute Senior Judicial Administrator Travis Apgar, will likely replace the current policy and rephrase portions of the handbook. These talks may also revise the actual grounds for disciplinary action laid out in the handbook, as well. Currently, the language in the handbook that distinguishes how far the Institute’s jurisdiction extends is hazy at best. It denotes that all on-campus issues fall under the category, regulations regarding the off-campus violations are more vague.
“Off-campus misconduct will not typically be the basis for disciplinary action by the Institute,” states the handbook, but it also adds, “When such conduct may constitute a threat to person or property within the Rensselaer community or under other circumstances, it may result in disciplinary review and/or action.”
When dealing with the review process itself, the language of the handbook is equally vague. It mentions that jurisdiction extends to all on-campus offenses, but offers three exceptions that also affect off-campus offenses: “(1) The victim is a student or Rensselaer-affiliated individual or group, including the Institute itself. (2) The alleged violator has used his or her status as a student or Rensselaer group to facilitate the commission of the offense. (3) The violation is committed during a Rensselaer-sponsored or sanctioned event.”
According to Dean of Students Mark Smith, the pending change is necessary, for the sake of clarity. “I think it needs to be better defined than what it currently is,” he said. “It needs to be perhaps laid out in a way that clearly identifies … what we mean by on-campus and off-campus jurisdiction and what would fall into that. It’s pretty gray in terms of what is defined as off-campus jurisdiction.”
While Smith is not a major player in the process, he has input and ideas of what students and actions the new policy should entail. “If it’s a student here, and if their conduct would impugn the reputation of the Institute,” he said. “If incidents occur where conduct itself is a violation of grounds for disciplinary action, even though it may be in an off-campus venue, it still affects the Institute in terms of identifying that person as an RPI student.”
In early November, James Snow ’06 was arrested and charged with second degree vehicular manslaughter after his role in an accident that caused the hospitalization of two non-students. One died in the hospital shortly after the accident. Snow was allegedly under the influence of alcohol at the time.
Craig Pratka ’06 allegedly stabbed another man in front of I Love NY Pizza on Fourth Street on November 20.
While these two students faced felony charges, neither offense was a violation of the grounds for disciplinary action. Since the victims were not students or otherwise affiliated with the Institute, the activities did not meet the aforementioned exceptions.
Under the new policy, similar incidents could result in disciplinary action. In some extreme cases, depending on the gravity of the situation, explusion could potentially be considered.
“Whether it’s criminal or not, I don’t really care,” Smith said. “What does concern me is if it’s an RPI student that instigates or is involved in conduct that would normally be a violation of our grounds for disciplinary action.”
