1. Basic rights.  The following enumeration of basic rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights and privileges retained by students in their capacity as members of the student body or as citizens of the community at large:
    
   1. The right of free inquiry, expression, and/or assembly.
       
   2. The right to pursue educational goals and appropriate opportunities for learning in the classroom, on campus, and online.
       
   3. The right to be secure in their persons, living quarters, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
       
   4. The right to retain ownership of class projects/assignments authored by a student and submitted to fulfill requirements of a course, except as provided by section 3345.14 of the Revised Code.
       
2. Basic responsibilities.  Students, as members of the university community, shall have the following responsibilities which are inherent in the basic rights delineated in this paragraph:
    
   1. To maintain standards of academic performance as established by their faculty.
       
   2. To be responsible for acting in such a manner as to ensure other students the basic rights enumerated in this policy.
       
   3. To be responsible for their actions with respect to, and to follow, all university regulations and policies.
       
   4. To be responsible for their actions with respect to provisions of local, state, and federal law.
       
   5. To conduct themselves in a manner which helps to create and maintain a learning atmosphere in which the rights, dignity, and worth of every individual in the university community are respected.
       
   6. To have in their possession a valid university identification card when on university premises.
       
   7. To be responsible for adhering to the university policy 3356-7-20, “Drug-free environment” (rule 3356-7-20 of the Administrative Code).
       
   8. To ensure adherence to all university board of trustees’ policies that apply to students.

The student conduct process aspires to develop and maintain conduct standards in support of character, civility, and community.  This section of “The Student Code of Conduct” provides a set of expectations regarding student conduct in support of the university community.

A student or student group/organization may be charged with violating any student conduct standard.  In cases where a violation is committed by a member of a student group/organization, the entire group/organization may be held responsible, in addition to the student, when those members of the group/organization not directly involved participate in the activity by encouraging, witnessing, or condoning the act in any manner.  The following behavior is subject to disciplinary action under “The Student Code of Conduct”:

1. Academic integrity.  Violations of academic integrity include:
    
   1. Plagiarism, which includes the use by paraphrase or direct quotation of the published or unpublished work of another person without full and clear acknowledgment, the unacknowledged use of materials prepared by another person or agency engaged in the selling of term papers or other academic materials, or the misrepresentation of another person’s work as one’s own.
       
   2. The use of any unauthorized assistance or tools, including artificial intelligence (AI) language programs, prohibited by faculty:
      
      (i) In taking quizzes, tests, assignments, or examinations;
      
      (ii) When completing assignments, solving problems, or carrying out other assignments as detailed in the course syllabus or in other instructions by the instructor.
       
   3. The acquisition, without permission, of tests or other academic material belonging to a member of the university faculty or staff.
       
   4. Engaging in any behavior specifically prohibited by a faculty member in the course syllabus or class discussion.
       
   5. Inappropriate collaboration, including working together on assignments or projects to an extent not permitted by the instructor.
       
   6. Multiple submissions of the same work, including submitting the same or parts of the same assignment for multiple classes without permission from the instructor.
       
   7. Fabrication of data, including presenting fictitious data relating to experiments, changing of data obtained from sources, and citing non-existent sources.
       
   8. Bribes, threats, or intimidation, including exchange of payment for assignments or parts of assignments, and threats to entice others to engage in violations of the academic integrity policy.
       
   9. Impersonation, pretending to be another person in the completion of a quiz, exam, or other assignment.
       
   10. Altering or destroying the work of others unless given permission.
        
   11. Lying to obtain an academic advantage, which includes falsification of documents or other information used to request makeup work.
        
   12. Assisting another person in any of the behaviors mentioned above is itself academic dishonesty.
        
   13. Asking others to engage in any of the behavior described above is academic dishonesty;
        
   14. Attempting to engage in any of the above behaviors is academic dishonesty.
        
2. Alcohol.
    
   1. Use or possession of alcoholic beverages, except as permitted by law and university policy.
       
   2. Public intoxication.
       
   3. Manufacturing or distribution of alcoholic beverages to any person under twenty-one years of age except as permitted by law.
       
3. Bullying and harassment.  Unwelcome or unreasonable behavior that harasses or intimidates people, either as individuals or as a group, and is sufficiently severe or pervasive from both a subjective (the complainant’s) and an objective (reasonable person) viewpoint.  Bullying and harassing behavior is often persistent and part of a pattern, but it can also occur as a single incident.  It is usually carried out by an individual but can also be an aspect of group behavior.  See university policy 3356-2-03, “Discrimination/ harassment” (rule 3356-2-03 of the Administrative Code) for prohibited conduct based on an individual’s sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression, disability, or veteran/military status, or any other basis protected by law.  See also university policy 3356-4-21 “Campus free speech”(rule 3356-4-21 of the Administrative Code) for harassment that is severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive).
    
4. Complicity.  Allowing or enabling a violation to occur, failing to report a violation, or concealing, condoning, supporting or encouraging a violation or an attempted violation.
    
5. Student conduct system.
    
   1. Failure to obey the summons of a student conduct body or university official to appear for a meeting or hearing as part of the student conduct process.
       
   2. Falsification, distortion, or misrepresentation of information before a student conduct body.
       
   3. Institution of a student conduct proceeding knowingly without cause.
       
   4. Attempting to discourage an individual’s proper participation in, or use of, the student conduct system.
       
   5. Attempting to influence the impartiality of a member of a student conduct body prior to and/or during the student conduct process.
       
   6. Unwelcome or unreasonable behavior that harasses or intimidates a member of a student conduct body, participants, or witnesses prior to, during or after a student conduct proceeding, and is sufficiently severe or pervasive from both a subjective (the complainant’s) and an objective (reasonable person) viewpoint.
       
   7. Failure to comply with the sanction(s) imposed by a student conduct body.
       
   8. Influencing or attempting to influence another person to commit an abuse of the student conduct system.
       
   9. Disruption or interference with the orderly conduct of a student conduct proceeding.
       
6. Disorderly conduct.  Conduct which obstructs teaching, research, administration, or university activities or functions.
    
7. Drugs.
    
   1. Use, possession, manufacturing, or distribution of marijuana, narcotics, or other controlled substances in either refined or crude form, including the use of drug-related paraphernalia.
       
   2. The misuse of materials as an intoxicant.
                  
   3. Use of prescription drugs in any way other than as prescribed.  Distribution of prescription drugs to anyone other than the person to whom they are prescribed.
       
8. Failure to comply.  Failure to comply with directions and/or oral or written instructions which are given by any university official, student, faculty member, or staff who is acting in an official university capacity and/or failure to identify oneself to these persons when requested to do so.
    
9. Financial obligations.  Failure to meet all financial obligations to the university.
    
10. Gambling.  Gambling or wagering of any form except as expressly permitted by law and/or university policy.
     
11. Hazing.  Hazing means doing any act or coercing another, including the victim, to do any act of initiation into any student or other organization or any act to continue or reinstrate membership in or affiliation with any student or other organization that causes or creates a substantial risk of causing mental or physical harm to any person, including coercing another to consume alcohol or a drug of abuse, as defined in section 3719.011 of the Revised Code.
     
12. Information technology.  Theft or other abuse of information technology and resources, including, but not limited to:
     
    1. Unauthorized entry into a file to use, read, or change the contents, or for any other purpose.
        
    2. Unauthorized transfer of a file.
        
    3. Unauthorized use of another individual’s identification and password.
        
    4. Use of computing facilities and resources to interfere with the work of another student, faculty member, or university official.
        
    5. Use of computing facilities and resources to send unwelcome or unreasonable messages that harass or intimidate individuals or groups that are sufficiently severe or pervasive from both a subjective (the complainant’s) and an objective (reasonable person) viewpoint.
        
    6. Use of computing facilities and resources to interfere with the normal operation of the university computing system originating from an on-campus or off-campus source.
        
    7. Use of computing facilities and resources in violation of copyright laws.
        
    8. Any violation of the university policy 3356-4-09, “Acceptable use of university technology resources” (rule 3356-4-09 of the Administrative Code).
        
13. Dishonesty.
     
    1. Furnishing false information to any university official, faculty member, or office.
        
    2. Forgery, alteration, or misuse of any university document, record, credit card, or instrument of identification.
        
    3. Tampering with the election of any university recognized student organization.
        
    4. Deliberately misleading or intentionally failing to maintain correct address and telephone information with the registrar.
        
    5. Misrepresenting enrollment status and/or achievement at the university to non-university officials and/or on non-university documents.
        
14. Obstruction of traffic.  Obstruction of the free flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic on university premises or at university sponsored or supervised functions.
     
15. Endangering behavior.
     
    1. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causing physical harm to another person or their property or engaging in conduct which threatens or causes a reasonable apprehension of harm to the health, safety, life, or property of a person, including one’s self.
        
    2. Entering false fire alarms, bomb threats, or tampering with fire extinguishers, alarms, smoke detectors, or other safety equipment.
        
16. Property damage.  Any action which damages or could reasonably damage property of the university, or property of a member of the university community, or other personal or public property on or off campus, or acts of vandalism even if this behavior does not cause damage.
     
17. Published university policies.  Violation of published university policies, rules, or regulations, including those available electronically on the university website.
     
18. Sexual harassment.  Conduct on the basis of sex that satisfies one or more of the following categories:
     
    1. An employee conditioning the provision of an aid, benefit, or service on an individual’s participation in unwelcome sexual conduct (i.e., quid pro quo).  An individual does not have to submit to the conduct for quid pro quo sexual harassment to occur.
        
    2. Unwelcome conduct determined by the reasonable person’s standard to be so severe and pervasive that it effectively denies a person equal access to an education program or activity (i.e., hostile environment).
        
    3. Sexual assault as defined in the Clery Act (which includes rape, fondling, incest, or statutory rape as defined below).
       
       (i) Rape (except statutory rape).  The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person without the consent of the victim.  See university policy 3356-2-05 “Title IX sexual harassment policy” for definitions of consent, coercion, force, and incapacitation.
       
       (ii) Fondling.  The touching of the private body parts of another person for sexual gratification without the consent of the victim, including instances where the victim is incapable of giving consent because of their age or because of their temporary or permanent mental incapacity.
       
       (iii) Incest.  Sexual intercourse between persons who are related to each other within the degrees wherein marriage is prohibited by law.
       
       (iv) Statutory rape.  Sexual intercourse with a person who is under the statutory age of consent.
        
    4. Dating violence, domestic violence, or stalking pursuant to the Violence Against Women Act (also defined below).
       
       (i) Dating violence.  Violence committed by a person who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the victim.  The existence of such a relationship shall be determined based on a consideration of the length of the relationship, the type of relationship, and the frequency of interaction between the persons involved in the relationship.
       
       (ii) Domestic violence.  Felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence committed by a current or former spouse or intimate partner of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is co-habitating with or has co-habitated with the victim as a spouse or intimate partner, by a person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction, or by any other person against an adult or youth victim who is protected from that person's acts under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction.
       
       (iii) Stalking.  Engaging in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to fear for their safety or the safety of others, or suffer substantial emotional distress.
        
    5. Sexual misconduct.  Conduct of a sexual nature that is nonconsensual or is carried out through force, threat, or coercion.  Sexual misconduct includes, but is not limited to, sexual exploitation and voyeurism.
       
       (i) Sexual exploitation.  Sexual exploitation occurs when a person takes nonconsensual or abusive sexual advantage of another for their own benefit or advantage or to benefit or advantage anyone other than the person being exploited, and that behavior does not otherwise constitute another form of sexual misconduct.  Examples of sexual exploitation include, but are not limited to, prostituting another, nonconsensual video or audio taping of sexual activity, permitting others to secretly observe or record consensual activity or engaging in voyeurism.
       
       (ii) Voyeurism.  Voyeurism occurs when a person, for the purposes of sexual arousal or gratification sexual purposes, surreptitiously invades the privacy of another.  Voyeurism can occur in person or through recording or electronic means.
        
    6. Sex offenses.  See Chapter 2907. of the Revised Code which defines sex offenses under Ohio law.
        
19. Theft.  Attempted or actual theft, including possession of stolen property.
     
20. Unauthorized entry.
     
    1. Unauthorized entry to or use of university premises, including access to residential spaces other than one’s own assigned space.
        
    2. Unauthorized possession, duplication, or use of keys to any university premises.
        
21. Unauthorized recording.
     
    1. Unauthorized use of electronic or other devices to make an audio or video record or photograph of any person while on university premises without their prior knowledge or without their effective consent when such a recording or photograph is likely to cause injury or distress, except as otherwise permitted by law.
        
    2. Unauthorized distribution or dissemination of an audio or video recording or photograph of any person without their prior knowledge or consent, even if the recording or photograph originally had been produced with the person’s consent, when such a recording or photograph is likely to cause injury or distress, except as otherwise permitted by law.
        
22. Violation of law.  Behavior which would constitute a violation of federal, state, or local law that adversely affects the university community or interferes with the university’s mission or its educational objectives and programs.
     
23. Weapons.  Illegal or unauthorized possession of firearms, fireworks, explosives, other weapons, or dangerous chemicals on university premises or use of any such item, even if legally possessed, in a manner that harms, threatens, or causes fear to others.
     
24. Sexual harassment as defined in Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 as set forth in university Title IX sexual harassment policy.  (See rule 3356-2-05 of the Administrative Code and university policy 3356-2-05, “Title IX sexual harassment policy.”  Students, faculty, employees, volunteers, third parties, campus visitors and other individuals should refer to the Title IX policy referenced above for processes and procedures under Title IX).  The complaint, adjudication, resolution, and appeal process for an allegation of a Title IX violation, as well as possible sanctions, is delineated in university policy 3356-2-05, “Title IX sexual harassment policy.”

1. Grievance process.
    
   1. Time frame.  The process outlined below is expected to occur within ninety calendar days from the date a complaint is filed.  The Title IX coordinator, or designee, may extend this time period by providing written notice to the parties citing the reason(s) for the extension.  The complainant or respondent may request a temporary delay of the grievance process for good cause by written request to the Title IX coordinator.  Good cause includes, but is not limited to, the absence of party, a party’s advisor or a witness, or the accommodation for disabilities.
       
   2. Report.  Information, however received, alleging sexual harassment, as defined in this policy, and provided to a person with the authority to initiate corrective action.  A report may lead to further action, including the filing of a formal complaint, depending on the alleged facts and circumstance.
       
   3. Formal complaint.  A formal complaint is a verbal or written account which alleges a conduct which could violate this policy and is made to a person with authority to initiate corrective action.  A complaint may be submitted by mail, email, in person, by telephone or electronically at TitleIX@ysu.edu.
       
2. Notice.
    
   1. Upon receipt of a formal complaint, the university shall provide the following written notice to the parties who are known:  notice of this grievance process, including any informal resolution process; and notice of the allegations of sexual harassment as defined above, including sufficient details known at the time and with sufficient time to prepare a response before any initial interview.
       
   2. If in the course of an investigation the university decides to investigate allegations about the complainant or respondent that are not included in the notice provided, the university shall provide notice of the additional allegations to the parties whose identities are known.
       
   3. Notice to the university staff listed below of sexual harassment or allegation of sexual harassment constitutes actual notice to the university and triggers the university’s obligation to respond.
        
      (i) Title IX coordinator and deputy Title IX coordinators.
      
      (ii) Director of equal opportunity and policy development.
      
      (iii) Vice presidents and associate vice presidents.
      
      (iv) Academic deans and chairpersons.
      
      (v) Supervisors/managers.
      
      (vi) Coaches and assistant coaches.
       
3. Consolidation of formal complaints.  The university may consolidate formal complaints as to allegations of sexual harassment against more than one respondent, or by more than one complainant against one or more respondents, or by one party against the other party, where the allegations of sexual harassment arise out of the same facts or circumstances.
   
   Where a grievance process involves more than one complainant or more than one respondent, references in this policy to the singular “party,” “complainant,” or “respondent” include the plural, as applicable.
    
4. Dismissal of formal complaint.  The Title IX coordinator shall dismiss formal complaints that do not meet the following criteria.
    
   1. Mandatory dismissal.
      
      (i) Would not constitute sexual harassment as defined in this policy even if proved.
      
      (ii) The alleged sexual harassment did not occur in the university’s education program or activity.
      
      (iii) The alleged conduct did not occur in the United States.
       
   2. Discretionary dismissal.
      
      (i) Complainant notifies the Title IX coordinator in writing that they would like to withdraw the formal complaint.
      
      (ii) The respondent is no longer enrolled or employed by the university.
      
      (iii) Specific circumstances prevent the university from gathering sufficient evidence.
       
   3. The dismissal of a formal complaint shall be done simultaneously and in writing to the parties.
       
   4. A dismissal of a formal complaint may be appealed pursuant to paragraph (F)(10) of this policy.
       
   5. A formal complaint which is dismissed pursuant to this policy may be considered under a different university policy, such as policy     3356-2-3, “Discrimination/ harassment” or 3356-7-04, “Workplace and off-campus violence, threats, and disruptive behavior,” or under “The Student Code of Conduct.”
       
5. Informal resolution.  At any time prior to reaching a determination regarding responsibility, the university may facilitate an informal resolution process, such as mediation, that does not involve a full investigation and adjudication.
    
   1. Both parties’ voluntary, written consent to the informal resolution process is necessary.  At any time prior to agreeing to a resolution, any party has the right to withdraw from the informal resolution process and resume the grievance process with respect to the formal complaint.
       
   2. Informal resolution is not an option for resolving allegations that an employee or faculty member sexually harassed a student.
       
6. Investigation.  The Title IX coordinator or designee is responsible for investigating formal complaints which meet the criteria of this policy. 
    
   1. The burden of proof and the burden of gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination regarding responsibility rest on the investigator and not on the parties.
       
   2. The respondent is not considered responsible for the alleged conduct until a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the grievance process.
       
   3. The university shall not access, consider, disclose, or otherwise use a party’s records that are made or maintained by a physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, or other recognized professional or paraprofessional acting in the professional’s or paraprofessional’s capacity, or assisting in that capacity, and which are made and maintained in connection with the provision of treatment to the party, unless the university obtains that party’s voluntary, written consent to do so for a grievance process under this section or as permitted by law.
       
   4. The parties shall have an equal opportunity to present witnesses, including fact and expert witnesses, and other inculpatory and exculpatory evidence during the course of the investigation.  All parties are free to discuss the allegations under investigation or to gather and present relevant evidence.
       
   5. All parties shall have the same opportunities to have others present during any grievance proceeding, including the opportunity to be accompanied to any related meeting or proceeding by the advisor of their choice including an attorney.  However, the advisor may not speak during any interview or proceedings, with the exception of the cross-examination portion of any hearing.
       
   6. Any party whose participation is invited or expected shall receive written notice of the date, time, location, participants, and purpose of all hearings, investigative interviews, or other meetings with sufficient time for the party to prepare to participate.
       
   7. Both parties shall receive an equal opportunity to inspect and review any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in a formal complaint so that each party can meaningfully respond to the evidence prior to conclusion of the investigation.
       
   8. Prior to completion of the investigative report, the investigator shall send to each party and the party’s advisor, if any, the evidence subject to inspection and review in an electronic format or a hard copy, and the parties shall have ten calendar days to submit a written response, which the investigator will consider prior to completion of the investigative report.
       
   9. The investigator shall make all evidence subject to the parties’ inspection and review available at any hearing to give each party equal opportunity to refer to such evidence during the hearing, including for purposes of cross-examination.
       
   10. The investigator shall create an investigative report that fairly summarizes relevant evidence and shall provide a copy, in electronic or hard copy format, to the parties and their advisors at least ten calendar days prior to any hearing.  Either party can submit a written response to the investigator during these ten days.
        
7. Hearings.  Formal complaints that are not resolved informally or dismissed will result in a live hearing.
    
   1. The hearing will be scheduled by the office of student conduct and will be held before a Title IX decision-maker.  Where the complainant and respondent are both employees and/or faculty members, the Title IX coordinator will convene the hearing.
       
   2. Live hearings may be conducted with all parties physically present in the same geographic location, or participants may appear at the live hearing virtually, with technology enabling participants simultaneously to see and hear each other.
       
   3. The decision-maker shall permit each party’s advisor to ask the other party and any witnesses all relevant questions and follow-up questions, including those challenging credibility.  Such cross-examination at the live hearing shall be conducted directly, orally, and in real-time by the party’s advisor of choice and never by a party personally.
       
   4. At the request of either party, the hearing may occur with the parties located in separate rooms with technology enabling the decision-maker(s) and parties to simultaneously see and hear the party or the witness answering questions.
       
   5. Only relevant cross-examination and other questions may be asked of a party or witness.  Before a complainant, respondent, or witness answers a cross-examination or other question, the decision-maker shall first determine whether the question is relevant and explain any decision to exclude a question as not relevant.  Parties may not challenge the relevancy determination of the decision-maker, except on appeal.
       
   6. Questions and evidence about the complainant’s sexual predisposition or prior sexual behavior are not relevant, unless such questions and evidence are offered to prove that someone other than the respondent committed the conduct alleged by the complainant, or if the questions and evidence concern specific incidents of the complainant’s prior sexual behavior with respect to the respondent and are offered to prove consent.
       
   7. If a party does not have an advisor present at the live hearing, the university shall provide, without fee or charge to that party, an advisor of the university’s choice to conduct cross-examination on behalf of that party.
       
   8. If a party or witness does not submit to cross-examination at the live hearing, the decision-maker(s) shall not rely on any statement of that party or witness in reaching a determination regarding responsibility, provided, however, that the decision-maker cannot draw an inference about the determination regarding responsibility based solely on a party’s or witness’s absence from the live hearing or refusal to answer cross-examination or other questions.
       
   9. Credibility determinations shall not be based on a person’s status as a complainant, respondent, or witness.
       
   10. Parties are not required to divulge any medical, psychological, or similar privileged records as part of the hearing process.
        
   11. The decision-maker shall create an audio recording for a live hearing and an audiovisual recording for a virtual live hearing.  Such recording will be available to the parties for inspection and review upon written request to the convener.
        
8. Findings.
    
   1. The hearing decision-maker shall issue a written determination simultaneously to the parties regarding responsibility/policy violation(s) and sanctions/discipline when responsibility/policy violation is found to have occurred.  To reach this determination, the preponderance of the evidence standard (whether it is more likely than not that the alleged conduct occurred) will be used.
       
   2. The determination regarding responsibility and sanction(s)/ discipline becomes final either on the date that the university provides the parties with the written determination of the result of the appeal, if an appeal is filed; or if an appeal is not filed, the date on which an appeal would no longer be considered timely.
       
   3. The written determination shall include:
      
      (i) Identification of the allegations potentially constituting sexual harassment.
      
      (ii) A description of the procedural steps which were followed starting with the formal complaint and continuing through determination.
      
      (iii) The finding of facts that support the determination.
      
      (iv) A conclusion applying the appropriate definition of the university’s policy to the facts.
      
      (v) A rationale for the result of each allegation regarding the determination of responsibility.
      
      (vi) For respondents who are students, the hearing decision-maker shall consult with the dean of students or their designee regarding sanctions.  For respondents who are employees or faculty members the hearing decision maker shall consult with the chief human resources officer, or their designee, regarding discipline.
      
      (vii) Information regarding whether remedies designed to restore or preserve equal access to the university’s education program or activity will be provided to the complainant.  The Title IX coordinator is responsible for effective implementation of any remedies.
      
      (viii) The procedures and bases for the complainant and respondent to appeal the determination.
       
9. Sanctions/discipline.
    
   1. Students.
      
      (i) Possible sanctions for student respondents:  warning, conduct probation with or without loss of good standing, restitution, educational sanctions, residential suspension, university suspension, residential expulsion, university expulsion, revocation of admission and/ or degree, withholding degree, and fines.
      
      (ii) Serious misconduct is defined as any act of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, stalking, sexual exploitation, or any assault that employs the use of a deadly weapon, as defined in division (A) of section 2923.11 of the Revised Code, or causes serious bodily injury.  Students found responsible for violations of the serious misconduct policy will face, at minimum, a sanction of conduct probation with loss of good standing for one calendar year, preventing the student from participating in any extracurricular functions including athletics, student organizations, and student employment.  After one year, students may petition the dean of students, or designee, for permission to participate in extracurricular activities and employment.
      
      Students returning from a sanction of suspension will automatically be placed on conduct probation with loss of good standing for one calendar year, preventing the student from participating in any extracurricular functions including athletics, student organizations, and student employment.  After one year, students may petition the dean of students, or designee, for permission to participate in extracurricular activities and employment.
       
   2. Possible sanctions/discipline for employee or faculty respondents:  employment probation, demotion or reassignment, suspension with or without pay for a specific period of time, termination of employment, ineligibility for rehire, and/or other sanctions or remedies as deemed appropriate under the circumstances.
       
10. The appeal process.
     
    1. Filing an appeal.
       
       (i) Appeals are not a re-hearing of the allegation(s).
       
       (ii) Only a complainant or respondent (referred to as party or parties) may request an appeal.
       
       (iii) An appeal must be submitted in writing to the Title IX coordinator within five working days from receipt of a decision using the “Title IX Appeal Request Form” and include all supporting material.
       
       (iv) A party may appeal the determination regarding responsibility, sanctions/discipline and/or the university’s dismissal of a formal complaint or any allegations therein.  
       
       (v) There are four grounds for appeal:
       
       (1) Procedural irregularity that significantly impacted the outcome of the matter (for example material deviation from established procedures).  The appeal request must cite specific procedures and how they were in error; and/or
       
       (2) New evidence that was not reasonably available at the time the original decision was made that could have affected the outcome.  A summary of this new evidence and its potential impact must be included in the request.  (Note:  Failure to participate or provide information during an investigation or hearing, even based on concern over a pending criminal or civil proceeding, does not make information unavailable during the original investigation or hearing); and/or
       
       (3) The Title IX coordinator, investigator(s), or decision-maker(s) had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual complainant or respondent that affected the outcome of the     matter.  The appeal must cite specific examples of how the bias affected the outcome.
       
       (4) The discipline/sanction(s) imposed are substantially outside the parameters or guidelines set by the university for this type of violation or the cumulative conduct record of the responding party.
        
    2. Title IX appellate review officer (hereinafter referred to appellate review officer).  Upon receipt of a request for appeal, the Title IX coordinator will designate a Title IX appellate review officer as follows:
       
       (i) Appeals where the respondent is a student, the appellate officer will be either the dean of students or their designee or a deputy Title IX coordinator who did not participate in the investigation or hearing.
       
       (ii) Appeals where the respondent is a faculty member or employee, the appellate officer will be either the chief human resources officer or their designee or a deputy Title IX coordinator who did not participate in the investigation or hearing.
       
       (iii) The appellate officer cannot be the investigator, Title IX coordinator, or the person who acted as the decision-maker regarding the determination of responsibility/policy violation, or dismissal.
        
    3. Appeal procedures:
       
       (i) Generally, within five business days after receipt of the request for appeal by the appellate review officer, the appellate review officer will conduct an initial review of the appeal request(s) to determine whether the appeal is timely and satisfies the grounds for appeal.
       
       (ii) If the appeal request is not timely or does not satisfy the grounds for appeal, the appeal request will be denied, the parties will be notified, and the finding and sanction or responsive action/remedies will stand.  The decision not to accept an appeal request is final and is not subject to further appeal.
       
       (iii) If the appeal request is timely and meets the ground for appeal, the Title IX coordinator will notify the parties that the appeal has been accepted and will notify the non-appealing party that they may file a response within three business days from notification.
       
       (iv) The appellate review officer will then review the issues presented in the appeal and any response(s).  
       
       (v) The standard on appeal is whether there is relevant evidence/information such that a reasonable person would support the decision(s).
       
       (vi) The appellate review officer can take one of the following actions:
       
       (1) Affirm the original findings;
       
       (2) Remand the case to the original investigators or hearing panel for consideration of new evidence or to remedy a procedural irregularity;
       
       (3) Remand the case to a new investigator in a case of bias. The appellate review officer, may order a new investigation with a new investigator or hearing panel; or
       
       (4) Administratively alter the finding if bias, procedural irregularity or new evidence, unknown or unavailable during the original investigation, substantially affected the original finding, and the associated sanctions or responsive action.
       
       (vii) Decisions rendered by the appellate review officer or actions taken following the decisions appellate review officer’s decision are final and not subject to further appeal.
       
       (viii) Cases that are sent back to the investigator or hearing panel are not eligible for a second appeal.

1. General.
    
   1. Academic honesty is essential to the educational process and serves to protect the integrity of the university community.  Therefore, all members of the university community have a responsibility for maintaining high standards of honesty and ethical practice.  Cheating, plagiarism, and other forms of academic dishonesty constitute a serious violation of university policy, as outlined in paragraph (D) of this policy.  Students should consult with the faculty member if they are not sure what may constitute a violation of the academic integrity policy.
       
   2. Students suspected of violations of the academic integrity policy may be charged with a violation of university policy under the student conduct standards as outlined in paragraph (D)(1) of this policy.  Cases of alleged violations of the academic integrity policy shall be resolved as outlined in this paragraph.
       
   3. The process outlined in this paragraph is the only approved process by which faculty members can address alleged violations of the academic integrity policy.  Failure to follow this process or use of any process other than this will result in nullification of any charges against the student and nullification of any sanctions levied against the student.  If, following nullification of the charges and sanctions, the faculty member refuses to rectify the impacted grades or assignments, the student has the right to file a grievance against the faculty member.  Any internal college, departmental, or program processes used to address alleged violations of policy or concerns about student conduct are secondary to the processes outlined herein.
       
2. Academic integrity conference.
    
   1. After the faculty member has gathered evidence of a possible violation, they shall notify the student within two university working days in writing, via university email, of the allegations and invite the student to participate in an academic integrity conference.  The faculty member and student may hold the conference without written notification.  This academic integrity conference shall occur within five university working days of the written notification to the student.
       
   2. The academic integrity conference is the first step in this process, and serves to provide the student with the opportunity to discuss the allegations made by the faculty member.  During this meeting, the student should have the opportunity to address the allegations, and to review all relevant information and documentation to the allegations.
      
      In situations where the course is taught primarily online and/or where the student is unable to physically present for the academic integrity conference, the meeting may be conducted via email, phone, or video conference, as appropriate. The faculty member may consult with the judicial chair of the academic grievance subcommittee or the office of community standards and student conduct for direction in such situations.
       
   3. If, after meeting with the student, the faculty member determines that no violation of the academic integrity policy occurred and/or the student is not responsible for a violation of the academic integrity policy, the faculty member can dismiss the charges by not filling out the academic integrity form.
       
   4. If the faculty member concludes that the student is responsible for a violation of the academic integrity policy, the faculty member shall select an appropriate sanction, as outlined in paragraph (F)(3) of this policy, and will complete the academic integrity form.  While the student may sign the form immediately, they have up to five university working days to do so.  The student has the option to accept the charge but contest the sanction, or they can agree to both the charge and sanction.
       
   5. If the student signs the academic integrity form, acknowledging responsibility for the alleged violation and accepting the sanction, the decision is final and there is no appeal process.
      
      (i) The student will return the form to the faculty member.  The faculty member will sign the form, and will submit copies of any documentation or statements with the academic integrity form.
      
      (ii) The faculty member will forward the form to the departmental chairperson for their signature, acknowledging the case has been brought to their attention.  The chairperson has the option to submit a written statement to be included with the academic integrity form.  
      
      (iii) The chairperson will then forward the form and all documents to the dean for their signature, acknowledging the case has been brought to their attention.  The dean has the option to submit a written statement to be included with the academic integrity form.  
      
      (iv) The dean will then forward the form and all documents to the office of community standards and student conduct to be placed in the student’s file.  
      
      (v) The dean of graduate studies will be notified and provided a copy of the form and all documents for cases involving graduate students.
      
      (vi) No further action is required unless the recommended sanction includes program removal, suspension, or expulsion.  In cases where one of these sanctions is recommended, the case will be forwarded to the judicial chair of the academic grievance subcommittee for review.
       
3. Failure to appear, respond or sign.
    
   1. If the student fails to respond to the faculty member’s request for an academic integrity conference, or fails to attend an academic integrity conference within five university working days of notice by the faculty member, the following will occur:
      
      (i) The faculty member will complete and sign the academic integrity form without the student’s signature.  They will then submit the form along with copies of any documentation or statements to the chairperson for their signature, acknowledging the case has been brought to their attention.  The chairperson has the option to submit a written statement to be included with the form.
      
      (ii) The chairperson will then forward the form and all documents to the dean for their signature, acknowledging the case has been brought to their attention.  The dean has the option to submit a written statement to be included with the form.
      
      (iii) The dean will then forward the form and all documents to the office of community standards and student conduct to be placed in the student’s file. The office of community standards and student conduct will then forward the academic integrity form and all documents to the judicial chair of the academic grievance subcommittee for further action.
      
      (iv) The dean of the college of graduate studies will be notified and provided a copy of the form and all documents for cases involving graduate students.
       
   2. If the student declines to accept responsibility for the charges and/or declines to accept the sanctions selected by the faculty member, the faculty member should complete the form as outlined in this paragraph.
       
4. Academic grievance subcommittee referrals.
    
   1. If the student declines to accept responsibility for the charges, and/or declines to accept the sanctions selected by the faculty member, the case will be referred to the office of community standards and student conduct and forwarded to the judicial chair to initiate a hearing before the academic grievance subcommittee.
       
   2. Regardless of whether the academic integrity form is signed, in cases where program removal, suspension, or expulsion is recommended by the faculty member, the case will be referred to the office of community standards and student conduct and forwarded to the judicial chair to initiate a hearing before the academic grievance subcommittee.  A representative from the office of community standards and student conduct must be present at all such hearings to serve in an advisory capacity.
       
5. Academic grievance subcommittee structure.
    
   1. Judicial chair.  Vice provost for academic administration or designee appointed by the provost.
            
   2. Faculty members are appointed by the academic senate and serve a two-year term.  One faculty member shall be selected from each of the six colleges.  At least three of these appointees will have graduate faculty status.  In cases involving graduate matters, only graduate faculty will be appointed.  Six faculty members with graduate faculty status will be appointed by graduate council to hear cases involving graduate students.
       
   3. Undergraduate student members are appointed by the dean of students, or designee, and may serve up to three years on the subcommittee.   In addition, six graduate students (preferably one from each college) will be appointed by the graduate council to hear cases involving graduate students.
      
      (i) Students must complete an application available through the office of community standards and student conduct.
      
      (ii) At least one undergraduate student member is selected from each of the six colleges.
      
      (iii) Students must have a minimum GPA of 2.5 for undergraduate students and a 3.0 for graduate students.
      
      (iv) Students must not have a previous student conduct record.
      
      (v) Students should be sophomore status or above.
       
6. Academic grievance subcommittee hearing procedures.
    
   1. In cases where the student failed to respond to a request from the faculty member for an academic integrity conference, cases where the student failed to return the signed academic integrity form to the faculty member within the given timeframe, cases wherein the student disputes the charges or sanctions, or in cases when the faculty member recommends program removal, suspension, or expulsion, a hearing by the academic grievance subcommittee is initiated.
       
   2. Within five university working days of receiving the academic integrity form and any supporting documentation of evidence from the faculty member, the judicial chair, or designee, shall contact the student involved and request a statement and any documentation or evidence they would like to have considered in the hearing.  The student will have five university working days to submit these items to the office of community standards and student conduct.
       
   3. Within two university working days of receiving the statement and evidence, the judicial chair, or designee, shall distribute copies of the academic integrity form and any documentation or evidence produced by the student and faculty member to the academic grievance subcommittee members, the student, faculty member, department chairperson, and appropriate dean.  The academic integrity form, course syllabus (submitted by the faculty member, student, or both), and any documentation or evidence produced by the student, faculty member, chairperson, or dean compose the academic integrity hearing packet.
       
   4. A hearing date, time, and location for the academic grievance subcommittee hearing will be established by the judicial chair, or designee.  Academic grievance subcommittee members shall have a minimum of three university working days to review all written materials in the academic integrity hearing packet.  The hearing notice shall be sent to the parties directly involved in the grievance procedure, excluding advisors and witnesses.  Parties directly involved include:
      
      (i) Faculty/student.  The party who files the academic integrity form and the party who is alleged to have violated the academic integrity policy.  If either party cannot or refuses to attend the hearing, they may provide written or recorded statements to be submitted for evidence.  Faculty members are permitted to have a substitute who will exercise all the rights and responsibilities of the absent faculty member.
      
      (ii) Department chairperson.  The chairperson of the department in which the faculty member resides.  The chairperson’s attendance is optional.  If the chairperson is in attendance they will be brought in to speak with the hearing panel after the presentation of information by the faculty member and student and without the faculty member or student present.  The chairperson’s role in the hearing is to provide information on any knowledge they have of the case as well as to provide insight into and clarify any questions regarding the culture of the department or expectations of students in the department.
      
      (iii) Dean.  The dean of the college in which the faculty member’s department is housed.  The dean’s attendance is optional.  In addition, the dean of graduate studies has the option to attend in cases that involve graduate students and graduate faculty members.  If the dean is in attendance, they will be brought in to speak with the hearing panel after the presentation of information by the faculty member and student and without the faculty member or student present.  The dean’s role in the hearing is to provide information on any knowledge they have of the case as well as to provide insight into and clarify any questions regarding the culture of the department or expectations of students in the department.
      
      (iv) Academic grievance subcommittee hearing panel members.  Derived from the membership of the student academic grievance subcommittee of the academic senate.  At minimum, each hearing panel consists of three faculty members, three undergraduate students, and the judicial chair.  In hearings involving allegations against a graduate student, graduate college representatives will form the hearing panel.  The hearing panel conducts the formal hearing and renders a decision.  No member of a hearing panel will hear a case directly involving themselves.
      
      (v) Advisors.  The student and the faculty member may each avail themselves of the services of an advisor throughout the academic integrity process.  An advisor may be drawn from within or outside the university community.  Advisors may not present testimony or speak on behalf of the party whom they are advising.  They are permitted, however, to give notes or whisper instructions/advice to the party whom they are advising.  Examples of advisors include a parent/guardian, attorney, clergy, other faculty member, or coach.  The advisor may not be the chairperson or dean for the college in which the faculty member or student is housed.  In situations where a graduate assistant is considered the instructor of record and is the party who submitted the academic integrity form, the chairperson may serve as an advisor to the graduate assistant and is permitted to stay throughout the hearing.
      
      In cases in which the student is a dully enrolled high school and university student (through the Youngstown early college or the college credit plus program), the student may have both a parent/guardian and a secondary advisor present for the hearing.
      
      (vi) Witness(es).  Witnesses who have something to add to the hearing either in support of the faculty member or student are permitted.  While the number of witnesses is not limited, the number of witnesses that present repetitive testimony may be limited at the discretion of the judicial chair.
       
   5. If the student or faculty member is unable to be physically present for the hearing, then both the faculty member and student will be made available for the hearing through the same electronic means to provide equal treatment to all parties.  This may include either teleconference or video conferencing platforms, as deemed appropriate by the judicial chair.
          
7. Rights of hearing parties.
    
   1. The following rights are guaranteed to the student and the faculty member:
       
      (i) The right to be present.
      
      (ii) The right to be accompanied by an advisor of their choice.
      
      (iii) The right to speak in support of their argument.
      
      (iv) The right to bring witnesses in support of their case.
      
      (v) The right to present any relevant information directly supporting their written items in the academic integrity packet, including oral testimony.
      
      (vi) The right to refute information presented.
      
      (vii) The right to consult with the judicial chair or the office of community standards and student conduct regarding the hearing, their testimony or the presentation of any testimony in support of their case.
       
   2. The judicial chair has the right to:
      
      (i) Limit the amount of time testimony is presented by any given individual;
      
      (ii) Remove disruptive individuals from the room;
      
      (iii) Ensure that only the members of the hearing panel, student, and faculty member are present in the room;
      
      (iv) Ensure that all witnesses remain outside the hearing room and are brought in and dismissed after their testimony is presented;
      
      (v) Extend the timeline for the hearing process.
       
8. Deliberation and findings.
    
   1. The hearing panel shall meet in closed session to review the information presented and reach a decision.  The hearing panel shall vote using secret ballots tallied by the judicial chair.  The judicial chair will only vote in circumstances of a tie among the hearing panel members.
       
   2. If the hearing panel determines that the student is responsible for a violation of the academic integrity policy, the hearing panel may consider previously resolved cases (on file with the office of community standards and student conduct) involving the student when assigning an appropriate sanction.  The judicial chair will present such information to the hearing panel only after a determination of responsibility on the case in question has been reached.
      
      The standard of proof utilized in all university student conduct proceedings shall be a preponderance of evidence.  Preponderance of the evidence is known as the balance of probabilities, met if the proposition is more likely to be true than not true.  Effectively, the standard is satisfied if there is greater than fifty per cent chance that the proposition is true.
       
   3. Both parties shall be informed of the hearing panel’s decision in writing within three university working days.  This statement shall be prepared and signed by the judicial chair and forwarded to the office of community standards and student conduct, the graduate school dean when appropriate, the provost and all parties directly involved in the hearing, except advisors and witnesses.
      
      (i) Notice of the hearing panel’s decision ends the academic grievance subcommittee's involvement in the disposition of the case.
      
      (ii) A file of all pertinent documents for all academic integrity hearings shall be kept by the office of the provost and the office of community standards and student conduct.
      
      (iii) Any change of grade as a result of the hearing panel’s decision should be made by the faculty member and signed by the respective chairperson and/or dean within five university working days.  If the faculty member, chairperson and/or dean refuse to sign the grade change form, then the provost will do so.
       
9. Appeals.
    
   1. Only students may appeal the decision of the academic grievance subcommittee regarding for cases involving alleged violations of the academic integrity policy.  The appeal can only be based on procedural violations and must be submitted within five university working days from the date on which the student was notified of the hearing panel’s decision.  The request for an appeal is submitted in writing to the judicial chair.
       
   2. The judicial chair will forward the written appeal to the academic senate executive committee within two university working days.
      
      (i) If the academic senate executive committee determines that no procedural violations occurred or that any procedural violations were minor and did not affect the original hearing panel’s decision, the original hearing panel’s decision is upheld and the case is closed.
      
      (ii) If the academic senate executive committee determines that procedural violations may have occurred and were potentially substantive enough to have affected the hearing panel’s decision, the case will be referred to a three-person appellate hearing panel consisting of one student and two faculty members.  This appellate hearing will take place within twelve university working days of receipt of the written appeal.
       
   3. Appellate hearing panel.
      
      (i) No member of the appellate hearing panel will hear a case directly affecting themselves.
      
      (ii) Prior to the appellate hearing, members of the appellate hearing panel shall review all relevant documents.
      
      (iii) The chair of the appellate hearing panel shall inform both parties of the decision as soon as reasonably possible.  A written statement of the decision shall be prepared and signed by the chair of the appellate hearing panel, forwarded to the student, faculty member, the office of community standards and student conduct, and office of the provost within five university working days of the decision via university email.
      
      (iv) A file of all pertinent documents for all appeals shall be kept by the office of community standards and student conduct and/or the office of the provost.
      
      (v) The decision reached by the appellate hearing panel is final and may not be appealed.
       
   4. At the discretion of the chair of the appellate hearing panel, the timeline under the appeal process may be extended.
       
   5. If the appeal results in a grade change, the grade change form should be completed by the faculty member and signed by the respective chairperson and/or dean within three university working days.  If the faculty member, chairperson, and/or dean refuse to sign the grade change form, then the provost will do so.
       
10. Sanctions.  Sanctions for violations of the academic integrity policy may include, but are limited to, the following:
     
    1. Issuing an official warning.
        
    2. Lowering the grade on the exam, paper or assignment in question.
        
    3. Lowering the final grade for the course.
        
    4. Requesting additional action from the academic grievance subcommittee, including removal from a course, removal from an academic program, university suspension, or expulsion.
        
    5. Other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the faculty member.  The faculty member may consult with the judicial chair, the office of community standards and student conduct, chairperson or dean regarding appropriate sanctions.
        
11. Role of the student conduct administrator (SCA).  The student conduct administrator, or designee, has the following responsibilities with regards to all cases involving alleged violations of the academic integrity policy.
     
    1. To create/maintain a student conduct file containing the completed academic integrity form and supporting documents.
        
    2. To expunge all records as outlined in this policy.
        
    3. In cases where the academic integrity form is completed by all parties, they will acknowledge receipt of this form by emailing the student, faculty member, chairperson, and dean with a letter that details the resolution of the case.
        
    4. In cases where the student has already been found responsible for a previous academic integrity violation, any additional violation will result in a review of all cases by the office of community standards and student conduct for possible additional charges and sanctioning.

Youngstown state university is committed to an educational environment that promotes the safety, responsible decision-making, and social and intellectual development of all students.  Furthermore, the university is concerned with taking a proactive approach in regards to students who may be experiencing problems with alcohol or other drugs.  It is the policy of Youngstown state university to notify parents of students under twenty-one years of age if such students have been found responsible for violating institutional policies regarding alcohol or other drugs, to create a positive support network for students.

1. Parameters.
    
   1. This policy will be applied in situations where students under the age of twenty-one have been found responsible for a violation of university policies regarding drugs or alcohol.
       
   2. The office of community standards and student conduct shall be responsible for administering all procedures of the parental/guardian notification policy.
       
2. Procedures.
    
   1. Parents/guardians shall be notified when the underage student is found responsible for a violation of the drug or alcohol policies.
       
   2. The dean of students, or designee, may make an exception to the parental/guardian notification policy if in their judgment it is determined that harm would come to the student because of parental/guardian notification.
       
   3. The notification will be provided in writing from the office of community standards and student conduct and will be mailed to the student’s home address.
       
   4. The notification letter will inform parents or guardians that their student has been found responsible for a violation of an alcohol or drug policy.  Included with the letter will be answers to frequently asked questions.  Parents or guardians will be encouraged to discuss the incident with the student.
       
   5. The office of community standards and student conduct will be responsible for responding to questions from parents/guardians.  If a parent or guardian is interested in reviewing their student’s conduct file, the student generally must sign a waiver to release this information.  There are exceptions to this that will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Any question of interpretation or application regarding “The Student Code of Conduct” shall be referred to the student conduct administrator for final determination.

“The Student Code of Conduct” shall be reviewed every three years under the direction of the student conduct administrator.  Any member of the university community may recommend a change to “The Student Code of Conduct” to the dean of students, or designee.  The dean of students, or designee, shall distribute the recommendation to the appropriate areas and gather feedback.  If the change is endorsed by the dean of students, or designee, the change shall be presented to the board of trustees for adoption.

1. The term “due process” is an assurance that all accused students will receive notice of charges, notice of the evidence to be used against them, and the opportunity to participate in a hearing prior to the deprivation of any educational property interest.
    
2. The term “academic grievance subcommittee” is a group of university students and faculty selected and trained to adjudicate hearings wherein a student has allegedly violated the academic integrity policy for the university.  Each hearing has a hearing panel consisting of at least six members from the academic grievance subcommittee.
    
3. The term “appellate hearing panel” shall mean any person or persons authorized on a case-by-case basis by the student conduct administrator to consider a request for appeal from a student conduct body’s determination that a student has violated “The Student Code of Conduct” or from the sanctions imposed by the student conduct body.
    
4. The terms “can,” “may,” or “should” specify a discretionary provision of “The Student Code of Conduct.”
    
5. The term “complainant” shall mean any party harmed by the actions of a student who allegedly violated “The Student Code of Conduct.”
    
6. The term “deputy conduct officer’ shall mean a university official authorized on a case-by-case basis by the student conduct administrator to review complaints, determine responsibility, and impose sanctions upon students found to have violated “The Student Code of Conduct.”
    
7. The term “faculty member” shall mean any person employed by the university to conduct classroom or teaching activities or who is otherwise considered by the university to be a member of its faculty.  In certain situations, a person may be both “student” and “faculty member.”  One’s status in a situation shall be determined by the relevant circumstances.
    
8. The terms “file” or “records” mean information relating to a current or former student which is stored in a fashion that facilitates recovery of that information by reference to the individual in whatever form or medium such gathering of information is created, kept, or maintained.
    
9. The term “function” shall mean all student activities or events occurring at the university or sponsored by registered student organizations, groups, or members of the academic community.
    
10. The term “group” shall mean a number of students who are associated with each other and who have not complied with university requirements for registration as an organization.
     
11. The terms “hearing panel” or “hearing panel members” shall mean individuals who have been selected or assigned to adjudicate a hearing.  These individuals are selected from a trained body, including the student conduct board and the academic grievance subcommittee.
     
12. The term “hearing panel advisor” shall mean the student conduct administrator, or designee, or appointee.  The hearing panel advisor has responsibility for ensuring that policies and procedures within this document are adhered to within any student conduct process.  The hearing panel advisor may be involved in any part of the student conduct process, and may provide input or answers, or otherwise answer questions asked by any parties.
     
13. The term “may” is used in the permissive sense.
     
14. The term “member of the university community” shall include any person who is a student, faculty member, university official, any other person employed by the university, or any person lawfully present on university premises.
     
15. The term “organization” shall mean a university-registered student organization which as complied with formal requirements of official registration.
     
16. The term “policy” shall be defined as the written regulations of the university as found in, but not limited to, “The Student Code of Conduct,” “Resident Handbook,” the university website, undergraduate/graduate catalogs, university policies, and board of trustees’ policies.
     
17. The term “respondent” shall mean any student accused of violating “The Student Code of Conduct.”
     
18. The terms “shall,” “must,” “will,” or “is required” specify a mandatory requirement of the code.
     
19. The term “student” shall include all persons registered for courses, seminars, and workshops at the university, either full-time or part-time, pursuing undergraduate, graduate, professional studies, or continuing education programs.  Also included are those individuals accepted for admission or living in the residence halls, whether enrolled at the university.
     
20. The term “student conduct administrator” is the dean of students, or designee, who shall be responsible for the administration of the code and the university student conduct process.
     
21. The term “student conduct board” is a group of university students, staff, and faculty selected and trained to adjudicate hearings wherein students have allegedly violated university policy.  Each hearing has a hearing panel consisting of three members from the student conduct board.
     
22. The term “student conduct body” shall mean student conduct officer, any deputy conduct officer, or any hearing panel of the student conduct board authorized by the student conduct administrator to determine whether a student has violated “The Student Code of Conduct” and to recommend imposition of sanctions.
     
23. The term “student conduct officer” is the assistant dean of students for community standards, advocacy, and conduct who is the university official assigned to serve as the primary charging administrator by the student conduct administrator to review complaints, determine responsibility, and impose sanctions upon students found to have violated “The Student Code of Conduct.”
     
24. The terms “university” or “institution” mean Youngstown state university and collectively those responsible for its operation.
     
25. The term “university premises” shall be defined as all land, buildings, facilities, and other property in the possession of or owned, used, or controlled by the university including adjacent streets, sidewalks, and parking lots.
     
26. The term “university official” shall mean any person employed by, appointed to, authorized to act on behalf of or performing administrative or professional work for the university.
     
27. The term “university working day” refers to any day of the week excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or official holidays.
     
28. The term “weapon” shall have the same meaning as in university policy 3356-7-03 concerning weapons on campus (rule 3356-7-03 of the Administrative Code).
     
29. All other terms have their natural meaning unless the context otherwise dictates.