UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS

UNIVERSITY OMBUDS OFFICE

ANNUAL REPORT

March 1, 2004 - February 28, 2005

Professor Doug Whitman, Ombudsman

Kellie Harmon, Assistant Ombudsman

OMBUDS OFFICE CONTACTS WITH MEMBERS OF THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY

Attached is the statistical summary from March 2004 to the end of February, 2005. It lists the numbers of "first contacts" in the various areas of our work this past year. There is a slight increase in visitors this year compared to last year. The total number of contacts this year is 402 and last year the total was 334. The Ombuds Office has worked diligently to publicize the office more, and hopefully, the increase in numbers demonstrate that the added publicity is working.

The response to such first contacts varies from a brief conversation providing information to one person, to a much more extensive involvement with a number of persons. Initial contacts come by phone, or in many cases, by email and sometimes, in person.

Many problems reaching the office are highly complex and require considerable time and follow up efforts.

Tallying data is a sensitive and difficult task. Unofficial records must be kept in a manner that does not identify specific individuals who may have consulted with the office or who may have been involved in the concerns presented. At the same time, sufficient specificity is needed to allow the Ombudsman to utilize the complied data at the end of the year to effectively make suggestions to the Provost of needed policy and procedural changes and to generate this Annual Report. Categorizing the concerns of visitors is one of the most challenging aspects of the process because most individuals who consult our office have multiple types of concerns. For example, it is not uncommon for a student who disagrees with the grade in a course to also be upset with the professor's interpersonal behavior.

TABLE OF CONTACTS FOR THE YEAR

CONTACTS: 402 Total First Contacts

STUDENTS: 140
FACULTY: 62
STAFF : 164
OTHER: 36
TOTAL: 402

These contacts represent persons who initially contacted the Ombuds Office either by email, in person or by telephone.

A mere listing of the number of contacts does not adequately convey the intensity of feelings that arise in many of these disputes. Some visitors find themselves dealing with a high level of anger and frustration.

Quite often, a visitor to the Ombuds Office has exhausted all other remedies. The Ombuds Office is the last resort for some visitors thus intensifying the depth of feelings such people experience.

MOST COMMON REASONS FOR SEEKING OMBUDS OFFICE ASSISTANCE

Students

1. Grade issues
2. Academic misconduct
3. Withdrawal issues
4. Final exam issues
5. Other Instructor-Student Disputes (e.g., course management issues, interpersonal conflicts)
6. Conflicts with other students
7. Administrative policies and procedures

Faculty

1. Consult regarding student situations
2. Workplace conflict
3. Administrative policies and procedures consultation

Staff

1. Workplace conflict
2. Consult regarding student situations
3. Administrative policies and procedures consultation

Explanation of Most Common Categories

Workplace conflict
Includes, for example: disciplinary evaluations,
loss of a job, disputes between faculty members,
disputes between faculty members and
administrators, disputes between a supervisor and
an employee, harassment, discrimination, and
disputes between coworkers.

Administrative
Policies and procedures
This category includes non-academic bureaucratic
systems for students, staff and faculty. It includes
such matters as admissions, bursar, financial aid,
human resources, tuition classification, housing,
intellectual property rights and harassment.

Academic policies and procedures
Concerns about such matters as: withdrawals,
advising, academic misconduct, probation, dis-
missals, grade appeals and final examination rules.

Instructor-Student Disputes
Concerns about such issues as: faculty concerns
with student conduct in the classroom, student
concerns about the behavior of professors in the
classroom, any interpersonal conflict between a
faculty member and a student and improper
procedures in conducting student evaluations of
faculty members.

Conflicts with other students
Examples of issues that arise: residence hall
misconduct, roommate disputes and harassment.

TRENDS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

It is possible to dwell too much on the negative - especially after a year of dealing with staff, faculty and student conflicts in the Ombuds Office. When a person considers the tens of thousands of undergraduate and graduate students, and thousands of staff and faculty members, the total number of problems handled by this office is quite small.

When reviewing the trends for this year, one theme, civility, stands out from the rest. This issue involves all facets of the university community and encompasses many different situations such as disruptive behavior in the classroom, academic misconduct, harassment, and discrimination, among others.

The following trends will address one issue at a time briefly. For more information or further consultation on civility issues, or other trends described below, please contact the Ombuds Office.

Trend Observed: Disruptive behavior in the classroom

Recommendation: "Disruptive behavior" is sometimes in the eye of the beholder. Instructors should not assume students know what constitutes such behavior. Instructors should make clear at the beginning of the semester, preferably in the syllabus, what the conduct expectations are for the class. Disruptive behavior in the classroom is a violation of University rules. (See the "Academic Misconduct" link below.)

Trend Observed: Academic Misconduct

Recommendation: The Ombuds Office has seen more students who have been charged with academic misconduct. Instructors should make clear to students what constitutes academic misconduct and refer to the University's policy in the University Senate Rules and Regulations: http://www.ku.edu/%7Eunigov/usrr.html#art2sect6

Also, Student Success units may want to discuss academic integrity at orientation sessions, workshops, seminars, or other appropriate student events.

Trend observed: Sexual harassment and discrimination complaints

Recommendation: The University needs to make more information available so that everyone realizes what constitutes sexual harassment and discrimination and what the policies and procedures are related to those issues. More training in individual units might be useful.

Trend observed: Graduate student disagreements with their academic advisors.

Recommendation: Chairs need to make certain that no faculty member has so many advisees that the faculty member is unable to devote the time and energy that students expect.

Trend observed: Students' allegations that their instructors have not fairly graded their work because of political or interpersonal disagreements.

Recommendation: Instructors should be very careful to arrive at an evaluation of student work in an objectively defensible manner. This is particularly sensitive matter when the instructor publicly indicates he or she disagrees with the student's values.

Trend observed: Complaints regarding email

Recommendation: When communicating face to face, there is a much lower likelihood of miscommunication. Unfortunately, many people respond to emails without carefully considering how t
he recipients might interpret their words. It probably is a good idea not to impulsively dash off an email message, especially when providing notice of dismissal or other disciplinary actions.

Trend Observed: Instructors giving finals the last week of class. This issue arises every semester.

Recommendation: Department Chairs should go over the University's final exam policy with their faculty and gta's:
"Normally the last examination in a course - whether a comprehensive Final Examination or a Section Exam - is administered at the appointed time during the regularly scheduled final exam period. An exam may be given during the last week of classes ONLY if it is a Section Exam preceding a Comprehensive Final Examination; this Comprehensive Final Examination must be administered at the appointed time during the regularly scheduled final exam period. If neither a Section Examination nor a Comprehensive Final Examination is to be given, the class is not required to meet at its appointed time during the regularly scheduled final examination period. The above does not apply to assignments such as projects, performances, or papers. These may be due or take place during the last week of regular classes. Any exceptions to the above rules must be approved by the Calendar Committee. Petitions to the committee must be submitted at least three weeks before the last scheduled day of classes. Students' academic best interests shall be the criteria for the Calendar Committee's decisions on petitions. Students should report violations of the above to the appropriate department head or dean, or to the Provost" (US R & R, Article 1, Section 3.1.2.)

Trend Observed: A number of cases dealt with the interpretation of University rules. Sometimes the parties differed as to what the proper interpretation of the rule should be.

Recommendation: The more precise the wording of a rule, the less likely the parties are going to disagree what a given rule means. We should give
consideration to tightening up the language of all rules that are ambiguous.

Trend Observed: Problems arise when class requirements are not stated clearly in the syllabus (e.g., class participation points, absence policy).

Recommendation: Instructors should define what "class participation" entails, list course requirements and class policies on the syllabus and provide a clear statement of the grading system. For further suggestions see "Suggestions for Compiling a Course Syllabus," /~ombuds/syllabussuggestions.html.

A SAMPLING OF MATTERS BROUGHT TO THIS OFFICE

§ In high stress situations, such as the loss of a job, some visitors find it difficult to locate the University rules that apply to their situations.
We can assist people in answering the question: What policies apply to my situation and how should these policies be properly interpreted?

§ Interpersonal conflicts between superiors and subordinates can lead to friction. We can help coach either party to reduce the possibility of conflict.

§ The enormous size and complexity of the University makes it difficult to determine which office or person needs to be consulted to resolve a problem. We can assist in this task.

§ Some students experience interpersonal conflicts with their professors. They need coaching on how to effectively deal with their instructors in light of the power differential that exists between them.

CAUSES OF CONFLICT

Many factors contribute to conflict. One source of conflict is structural. To illustrate this point, consider the parking situation behind Carruth O'Leary Hall at the University of Kansas. Fewer parking spaces exist than people who seem to want to park behind Carruth. This can lead to friction when two persons make a claim on the same space. A solution to prevent such conflicts is to increase the parking area in this vicinity.

It frequently pays to examine structural factors that may be creating friction.

In conflicts, emotions can run very high. A person's relatives, friends and/or associates frequently encourage a party to fight. This makes it very difficult to back down without losing face. If such a person visits an attorney, the attorney may encourage proceeding with a suit.

While going to trial or filing a formal grievance may sometimes make sense, a person really needs to avoid being pressured into any course of action. Other equally effective means of resolving the dispute may exist.

Quite frequently, a person engaged in a conflict can find it quite helpful to discuss the dispute with an impartial third party. By impartial, we mean someone with no vested interest in the outcome. Some people need a safe person to consult with about their situation. The visitor to an Ombuds office can safely review, without being subjected to pressure one way or the other, issues and options with the Ombudsman. The visitor can make up his or her own mind
how best to proceed.

CAMPUS DISPUTE ASSISTANCE SERVICES

The creation of our Campus Dispute Assistance Services group has, among other things, provided quick access to experienced mediators who have been utilized in the mediation portion of various university grievance procedures. Although the names of these people are not publicized, it is important that the campus community know that such faculty members do devote a considerable amount of time and energy to this very important function of dispute management and resolution.

STUDENT PEER MEDIATION GROUP

In addition to the Campus Dispute Assistance Services, we have moved in the direction of creating a student mediation group. This group will deal with disputes between students. When a dispute arises between students, we will have a pool of student mediators who can provide assistance and at the same time gain experience mediating conflicts. This organization is currently registering as a student organization. If you know anyone interested in participating in this group contact Michele Kessler, 864-5665, or Kellie Harmon, 864-7261.

INFORMAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION COMMITTEE

In order to enhance the general knowledge of administrative personnel regarding issues associated with dispute resolution, and to give them a chance to meet with one another to discuss the best fashion in which to resolve conflicts that arise within the University, we created the Informal Dispute Resolution Committee - a group composed of administrative personnel throughout the University. It meets throughout the school year.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Both Professor Whitman and Ombuds Harmon attended a joint conference of the University and College Ombuds Association and The Ombudsman Association in Tucson, Arizona, in April, 2004.

In November, Professor Whitman presented an article at the annual meeting of the California Caucus of College and University Ombuds. The article he presented will appear in the forthcoming issue of The Journal of the California Caucus of College and University Ombuds. Professor Whitman also wrote a book review for the UCOA newsletter. Starting in January of 2005, Professor Whitman joined the editorial board of The Journal of the California Caucus of College and University Ombuds.

Professor Whitman also attended an advanced mediation seminar conducted by the Dispute Resolution section of the American Bar Association in October, 2004 and presented a paper at the annual meeting of the Pacific Southwest Academy of Legal Studies in Business in February, 2004.

WHO AND WHERE WE ARE

The University Ombuds Office is located in rooms 28 and 34 in Carruth O'Leary Hall, 2246 West Campus Road, Lawrence, Kansas 66045-7505. The Office has one full time staff member, Kellie Harmon, Assistant Ombudsman. Professor Doug Whitman is the University Ombudsman. We can be contacted at 785-864-7261. Email address: ombuds28@ku.edu.

If you wish to review the role of the ombuds office, please view our website at www.ku.edu/~ombuds.