At many universities, this office is called Judicial Affairs, and is commonly thought of as the office that investigates infractions against the university’s standards of conduct and administers disciplinary sanctions against students found in violation of those standards. Even in the name CHECS, you can see that at CNU, this office is not focused solely on issuing sanctions to students who have acted in violation of the standards of conduct, but also views as central to its mission helping those students to be welcomed back in to the community. “Honor Enrichment” means educating students as to why the community values exist and providing strategies and support for acting in compliance with those standards, including working with students to examine why the violation occurred in the first place.
In short, CHECS is not the enemy of students who find themselves in violation of standards. It does protect the common values of our community, central to which are respect for self, others, and academic integrity, but it does not turn its back on students who violate those standards.
The CHECS process involves an investigation by an Assistant Director of the alleged infraction and a determination, based on the evidence presented in that investigation, of responsibility or a finding that the student is not responsible for violation of community standards. If the student is found responsible, they are provided with sanctions they must fulfill in order to be welcomed back in good standing into the CNU community. These sanctions may be a combination of restorative justice to redress harm to the community and education to support the student found in violation of standards to be successful moving forward. Any student found in violation can make an appeal to the Student Honor Council, who will review the evidence and sanctions, and make a recommendation with rationale as to whether to uphold or modify the original determination. Any student dissatisfied with this appeal process can further appeal to the Vice President of Student Affairs if new evidence has emerged or if there is evidence of a procedural error in the case.
Sanctions are not exclusively what we commonly think of as punishments– such as fines, probation, or suspension– but usually also include things like education courses, community service– where the student can collaborate in determining where those hours may be served, and using support services on campus that are beneficial to their own personal goals.
Faculty sometimes are hesitant to refer an academic integrity or other student conduct issue to CHECS, for fear the student will receive a sanction greater than what is warranted. Resolving this concern essentially boils down to trusting one's colleagues to make a fair determination using the evidence available. CHECS welcomes faculty input, while also distinguishing that it is faculty's sole discretion to determine the appropriate sanction to address the harm done within their class, while CHECS' role is to determine the appropriate sanction to address the harm done to the larger CNU community, as well as to consider how to best help the student personally reflect on and recommit to the values of the CNU community.
Neither student nor faculty interaction with CHECS is a one-way street. The office welcomes students' and faculty's collaborative participation in the process, and knowledge gained from collaborative conversations with students and faculty are factored into the determinations they make.
Bear in mind that a given faculty member who has identified a possible conduct infraction may not be aware of other infractions the student has been found responsible for, whereas CHECS is knowledgeable about any history of prior infractions. A given CHECS sanction may be based not only upon the current issue of concern, but will take into account any previous determinations of responsibility that suggest a pattern of disregard for the code of conduct or honor code. Sometimes if a sanction seems overly unwarranted for a given offense, it is because the cumulative record is being considered.
Another protection against an unfair outcome is the appeals process. Faculty can rest assured that any student can appeal the original CHECS determination to a trained Student Honor Council, and may subsequently be able to further appeal to the Vice President of Student Affairs.
Accountability is central to the CHECS process. The CNU community does not reject a student for making mistakes, but rather invests in helping students to recommit to the expectations of the CNU community. The process values students committing to owning up to mistakes and showing a willingness to learn how to make choices moving forward that reflect respect for oneself and one’s community.
CHECS will protect the privacy of a student's situation. They will not share information they have received with a student's parents or with anyone outside of relevant academic officials.