Educating and Enlightening Citizens: Using Sanctions that Promote Ethical Decision-Making and Civic Responsibility

1. Educating and Enlightening Citizens: Using Sanctions that Promote Ethical Decision-Making and Civic Responsibility Rachel Linden, Assistant Director Tammy Knott, Assistant Director James Madison University Office of Judicial Affairs

2. Presentation Outcomes: Upon completion of this presentation, participants will be able to: • Identify sample learning outcomes for a variety of sanctioned programs. • Identify ways to “put ethics into action” in sanctioned programs through activities and discussions. • Identify ways to use theory in creating sanctioning options. • Identify several methods to assess sanctioned programs. • Identify successes and challenges of having a broad sanctioning menu.

3. James Madison University Mission Statement We are committed to preparing students to be educated and enlightened citizens who will lead productive and meaningful lives. Office of Judicial Affairs Mission Statement We are committed to promoting student learning, civic responsibility and, in partnership with others, developing the environment necessary for the university to best achieve its educational mission. Our Mission

4. JMU Public institution About 15,000 students In Harrisonburg, Virginia- rural, “college-town” (Population approx. 30,000) 5600 of students living on-campus Many “student” housing options off campus Off-campus adjudication for alcohol, drugs, or any felony Judicial Affairs Total number of students charged in 2002-03: 1,405 720 violations were alcohol and drugs 753 students were sanctioned to attend educational programs Judicial Process: Administrative option hearing officers Judicial council (faculty, staff, students) Resource center (in-house sanctions) Number of office staff: Professional: 5 Graduate: 3 Undergraduate: 11 A few notes about JMU:

5. We couldn’t do it without them… • Student employees • Manage outstanding sanctions • Set up for programs • Invoice students for programs • Facilitate programs • Collect assessment data • Volunteers help to facilitate/or “guest star”at programs • Health Peer Educators (undergraduate) • School and Community Counseling graduate students • College Student Personnel graduate students • Substance abuse intervention minors (undergraduate) • Harrisonburg Police and JMU police • Counseling center staff

6. Our sanctioning basics: • Three Strikes Strategy for alcohol and drug violations • We sanction based on: • the charge (precedent) • previous history • perceived student needs such as: • substance use or abuse • involvement on campus/work • attitude • student development theory (Chickering) • stages of change/transtheoretical model of change (Prochaska,DiClemente) • what do we want the student to learn?

7. Stages of Change in a nut shell… • Precontemplation • Not thinking of changing, not aware of a problem, behavior has more pros than cons, defensive, resistant to suggestions for change • Contemplation • Thinking of changing, wondering how my behavior affects others, thinking about consequences of changing, looking for relevant information about changing the behavior, evaluating problem • Preparation • Ready to change, intending to change soon, starting to regulate behavior. • Action • Making changes, seeking helping relationships, • Identifying possible roadblocks • Maintenance • Sustaining and strengthening changes

8. By the Numbers • Who: • first time, minor alcohol violations • precontemplators • Sample learning outcome: • Students will exhibit knowledge of the laws regarding alcohol use. • Program Basics: • Virginia laws, Harrisonburg community standards, JMU policies • Myths and Facts about alcohol • Alcohol and values • Low risk strategies • Community resources

9. By the Numbers • Values to Action… • “Values Planner”(adapted from Jim Lancaster) • What are your top values? • Most common responses: • Strong ties with family • Group of loyal friends • Fulfilling career • How could alcohol affect those values? • Most common responses: • Use- parents upset, argue with friend (say something you don’t mean under the influence), having a criminal record might affect getting a good job • Abuse – abuse family members, superficial relationships, lose job, not graduate on time because of three strikes

10. Calling the Shots • Who: • minor or major alcohol violations with high risk indicators • marijuana violations • multiple violations because of alcohol/drug influence (i.e. non-compliance, personal abuse) • Sample learning outcome: • Students will identify factors that influence their decision-making involving alcohol or drugs.

11. Calling the Shots • Program Basics: • Addresses student perceptions of alcohol and drug use • Why people use, what is considered substance abuse, etc. • Harrisonburg and/or JMU police panel • Identifying the Issue- who, what, when, where, why? • What factor influenced the decision that led you to a judicial charge? • Ethical Decision-making – considering ethics, goals and consequences • Alternatives to substance use (i.e. stress management techniques) • Reducing risk for harm to self or others (including legal trouble)

12. Calling the Shots • Ethics to Action… • “Ethics Checklist” • Is it legal? • Is it balanced (fair to all concerned)? • How does it make me feel about myself? • “Situations Ranking” • Which of these situations involving alcohol or drugs do you believe to be the least ethical? • Why? • Most severe legal consequences • Greatest harm to self (or goes against personal values) • Greatest harm to others/community

13. Back on Track • Who: • students with high risk indicators • repeated violations • major alcohol or drug violations • Sample learning outcome: • Students will differentiate between alcohol use, misuse, abuse, and addiction. • Program Basics: • Stages of change activities • AA/NA meeting attendance • Weekly decision making logs, final reflection paper* • Defining use, misuse, abuse, addiction and tolerance • Counseling center visit/assessment

14. Back on Track • Ethics to action… • “Pros and Cons” activity (decisional balancing) • What are the pros and cons of your substance use? • How important are each of these factors when making decisions about your use? • Some examples of student responses: • PROS: • Meet new people • Feel more relaxed • Forget about stress and schoolwork • CONS: • I make decisions I later regret • I disappointed my family/friends • I forget about important priorities

15. Values Clarification • Who: • minor offenses • student made a decision that they deem “out of character” • minor theft, falsification of official information, personal abuse • Sample learning outcomes: • Students will identify components of ethical decision-making. • Students will identify steps to living with integrity. • Program Basics: • defining and differentiating between values, integrity, and ethics • clarifying personal values, institutional values, and societal values • ethical principles and dilemmas – what would you do? • academic integrity

16. Values Clarification • Ethics to action… • “What has shaped your values?” • People, experiences, media • What do you value? What does JMU value? How do you negotiate the two? • Kitchener’s Ethical Principles* • Which is the hardest to follow? Why? • Ethical dilemmas • “Take a Stand” activity ---- let’s try it!

17. Take a Stand • Stand up if you agree, stay seated if you disagree with the statement. • Stealing is wrong. • Stealing bread for a starving child is wrong. • Lying is wrong. • Asking your roommate to say “you are not there” when he/she answers an unwanted phone call is wrong.

18. Civic Responsibility • Who: • violations impacted or could have impacted community • vandalism, disorderly conduct, dangerous practices • Sample Learning outcomes: • Students will identify their civic responsibilities within the JMU and Harrisonburg community. • Students will identify opportunities for and benefits of community service. • Program Basics: • Examine concepts of character, citizenship, community and service • Discuss Principles of a Civil Community (Boyer)*- does our university model these principles? • Process ethical dilemmas (including enabling) • Introduce local community service opportunities

19. Civic Responsibility • Ethics to Action… • Community Awareness activities • How do you know what the community expects? • What is important to the Harrisonburg community? • What is important to the JMU community? • Character • What do you want to be known for? • What character traits do you most want to exhibit? • What the decision that brought you here reflective of those traits? • Defining Citizenship • What does it take to be considered a good citizen? Do students have civic responsibilities to JMU and Harrisonburg? If so, what are they? • Contribution • How can you play a healthy role in the community? • What opportunities are available for students to contribute to the community? (Focus on small things as well as larger commitments) • What are the benefits of service?

20. Civic Responsibility • Specific activities: • Service presentation – students research local service organizations and present them to the group • Assigned reading- excerpts from Tuesdays with Morrie & discussion questions • 60 Minutes Video: “The Bad Samaritan”

21. “The Bad Samaritan” • Did David Cash have a civic responsibility in this situation? • (Afterall, he didn’t break any laws or personally harm anyone…) • Do we have a responsibility to report policy violations in our community? • What is enabling? Have you ever enabled someone to break a law or policy? (prime example– letting someone drink underage in your room/apt, or letting someone drive after drinking) • How would you feel if someone at our university did this? • Can you relate to David’s approach to handling the situation, or would you have done something differently? • It appears that David put the value of friendship/loyalty first in this situation… or did he? Could he have put this value first and still have a different outcome?

22. Service Learning • Who: • major or repeated violations • student not connected/involved (Astin’s Involvement theory) • student facing suspension on next violation • violation impacted community • Sample learning outcome: • Student will identify ways to make positive contributions to the university community. • Program Basics/Ethics to action: • Student works in on-campus site for designated number of hours • Meets with a peer mentor each week until completion of hours • Discusses what student has learned in site, benefits of doing service (I.e. meeting new people, feeling like they helped out with something important) • How student is doing at JMU- classes, involvement • Identifies resources for student’s success • Reflection papers turned in at completion of hours

23. Assessment Efforts • What are we trying to measure? • STUDENT LEARNING • Most programs have pre and post assessments with objective and subjective questions related to course objectives such as: • identification of low-risk strategies • knowledge of polices and laws • ability to differentiate between values, integrity, ethics • recognition of service opportunities • recognition of community standards • recognition of consequences for violations • recognition of social norms • recognize acceptable and unacceptable behavior according to community standards • ability to identify ways to increase likelihood of making an ethical decision

24. Assessment Efforts • BEHAVIOR CHANGE! • Recidivism rates • Reflection papers (Service Learning and Back on Track)* • Students self-report changes, if any • Back on Track- questions about substance use in assessment • Did use go up or down? Better, worse, same?* • Calling the Shots and Back on Track- Decision-Making Logs* • Are students incorporating what they are learning into daily decisions? • Did they lower their risk in any way during the past week? • SOCRATES • Stages Of Change Readiness And Treatment Eagerness Scale* • Based on Transtheoretical Model of Change • for alcohol and drug programs and Service Learning • Measures how open person is to change (comparing success of programs) • JMU in pilot stage of this assessment

25. Assessment Efforts • NEED FOR PROGRAM OR OFFICE IMPROVEMENT? • Facilitator and Program evaluations • What was most and least beneficial about the program? • What topics would you like to have covered that were not? • What questions do you still have? • Values comment cards • Based on JMU’s Student Affairs divisional values • Students comment on whether Judicial Affairs staff practiced or contradicted our stated values

26. Successes • The more programming options there are, the more specific the program is to individual needs and type of violation. We want to avoid “cookie cutter” sanctioning. • Programs have received positive responses from students such as: • students are surprised by non-judgmental, non-lecturing approach of facilitators • students report learning a lot from each other • student say they were exposed to new viewpoints • students felt they talked about topics they believed to be important and interesting • Student learning assessment results are desirable and recidivism rates continue to decline. • Some form of assessment is in place for each program.

27. Challenges • Training facilitators how to teach values and ethics! • Understanding that these topics are not “black and white” • A LOT of assessment! Students can get overwhelmed with all of the different instruments and feedback forms--- deciding what to assess and what not to assess each semester • Scheduling facilitators and classroom vs. student schedules • Filling classes vs. time lapse between hearing and program beginning • Finding the right assessment questions and instruments to measure change • Training new hearing officers and council members every year how to assign the appropriate sanction

28. Helpful Resources • Albom, Mitch. (1997).Tuesdays with Morrie. New York, NY: Broadway Books • Colby, A., Beaumont, E., Ehrlich, T. & Stephens, J. Educating Citizens: Preparing America’s Undergraudates for Lives of Moral and Civic Responsibility. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. • Evans,N., Forney, D., & Guido-DiBrito, F.(1998).Student Development in College. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. • Prochaska, J., Norcross, J. & Diclemente, C. (1994).Changing for Good. New York, NY: Avon Books Inc. • Velasquez, M., Maurer, G., Crouch, C. & Diclemente, C. (2001). Group Treatment for Substance Abuse. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. • www.cbs.com (to order 60 Minutes video) • Our website: www.jmu.edu/judicial