College Discipline and the Disruptive Student

Spirited discussion in the classroom setting is often essential to effective teaching and learning at the community college.

When spirited discussion gives way to disruptive behavior by one or more students, however, the result can, at best, undermine the teaching and learning process. At worst, it might pose a threat to the safety of instructor and students.

While such incidents are usually not a frequent occurrence, they can nevertheless challenge the most seasoned teaching professional. In any situation where a real and imminent threat to safety exists, responsible college safety personnel should always be summoned.

But at other times, an actual threat may not exist, but student conduct might nevertheless all but destroy the academic setting. At those times, the Student Discipline Code puts some useful tools at the professional’s disposal.

The Code is a Maricopa administrative regulation. Most of its current language, however, stems from the original version that the Governing Board adopted years ago.

By its express terms, the Code’s purpose is to “help ensure a healthy, comfortable and educationally productive environment for students, employees and visitors.” It details a variety of prohibited conduct by students, including physical or verbal abuse, violation of District policies or regulations, and failure to comply with direction by college officials or law enforcement officers.

The Code also details due process that a student may invoke if he or she disputes a disciplinary finding by college officials.

“Disruption or obstruction of teaching . . . or college activities” is among the bases for student discipline.

Under the Code, “an instructor may remove a student from a class meeting for disciplinary reasons.” In such event, the instructor must notify “the appropriate dean”; if a resolution is not reached, however, the student may be “removed permanently pursuant to the appropriate due process procedures.”

The Code does not require, however, that the student be allowed to remain in the class pending a due process hearing. Instead, college officials “may impose an interim suspension prior to the hearing . . . .”

Such an interim suspension may be imposed to insure the safety and well-being of either the college community or the disruptive student, or “if the student poses a definite threat of disruption of or interference with the normal operations of the college.”

Throughout the term of the interim suspension, “the student shall be denied access to the college including classes and/or all other activities or privileges for which the student might otherwise be eligible,” as deemed appropriate by college officials who administer the disciplinary due process.

A college or university discipline code serves many purposes. Besides ensuring an appropriate learning environment for the Maricopa community, it also serves an educational function for any students who might be involved in any disciplinary matter.

Moreover, for public colleges and universities, it must satisfy requirements imposed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. For years, American courts have held that disciplinary proceedings must afford affected students due process of law.

The means afforded by Maricopa’s Student Discipline Code allow faculty and other college officials to honor that due process and, at the same time, adequately ensure that unduly disruptive students not jeopardize the safe learning environment.

Published in the Spring 2006 Edition of In Brief