University Ombuds Office Annual Report
University of Kansas
March 1, 2006 – February 28, 2007
Interim University Ombuds, Kellie Harmon
Faculty Ombuds, Prof. Maria Orive
INTRODUCTION AND STAFF CHANGES
The University Ombudsman Office at the University of Kansas has a well- established
history beginning in 1977 as a response to internal concerns that began during
the strife and protests of the mid-1960s. These concerns primarily related
to the civil rights movement, the Vietnam War, and women’s issues. Student
involvement in campus government also grew during this time and there was a
movement away from in loco parentis to more individual student responsibility.
As a result of these and other cultural factors, the administration and University Senate agreed that establishing an Ombudsman Office would assist in a more open environment conducive to better communication between constituents and in serving the needs and interests of the campus community. Professor William Balfour, the first Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, was also appointed the first ombudsman in 1977. In 1985, the second ombudsman, Professor Robert Shelton, served in this capacity for eighteen years, followed by Professor Doug Whitman for three years. Currently, the Ombuds Office staff consists of one full-time Ombuds professional, Kellie Harmon, and one part-time Faculty Ombuds professional, Professor Maria Orive.
Professor Doug Whitman completed his three-year term as Ombudsman in July,
2006. We would like to thank him for his hard work and tireless effort. The
role of an Ombuds is a challenging and demanding position and we are thankful
for his expertise and insight while serving his three-year term.
In August, 2006, Kellie Harmon, formerly Assistant Ombudsman, was appointed
Interim University Ombuds. She began working in the Ombuds Office in
1993. In October, 2006, Maria Orive, Associate Professor of Ecology and
Evolutionary Biology, was hired as Faculty Ombuds and began her position in
January, 2007. In August, the titles were changed from "ombudsman," to "ombuds" to
reflect a gender-neutral title more consistent with other university Ombuds
offices in the United States (although not every university uses the term "Ombuds," the
term is used by the majority of such offices). At the University of Kansas,
the title "Faculty Ombuds" refers to the fact that the person in
that position is a faculty member yet serves beyond the faculty community. Both
the University Ombuds and the Faculty Ombuds serve the entire university community,
including students, staff, and faculty.
During fall 2007 and spring 2008, Professor Orive will be on sabbatical leave, and will return as Faculty Ombuds in the summer of 2008. During the interim, Stephen Grabow, Professor in the School of Architecture, will assist as Faculty Ombuds part-time. Professors Orive and Grabow attended Ombuds training sponsored by the International Ombuds Association during March, 2007, in Orlando, Florida.
All University of Kansas Ombuds (University Ombuds and Faculty Ombuds) adhere
to the International Ombudsman Association Standards of Practice and Code of
Ethics. Refer to,
http://www.ombudsassociation.org/standards.html for
more information.
ROLE OF THE OMBUDS OFFICE
The Ombuds Office at the University of Kansas provides confidential, informal,
and impartial services for faculty, students, staff, and administrators. We
are a neutral resource for those who have contact with the Ombuds Office. Most
of the university community knows that we are a valuable resource when one
has a conflict or complaint. It is important to note, however, that as
an informal office we do not keep records of complaints. If a visitor
decides to file a formal grievance, our office will clearly explain the policies
and procedures and will refer the individual to the appropriate person or unit.
The Ombuds Office, though, does more than help resolve grievances. An
Ombuds listens if a person just wants to “vent,” or brainstorm
ideas; we discuss strategies and options; explain policies and procedures;
serve as a resource for referral; and coach visitors on ways to respond or
address a dispute. For example, if a student has a conflict with a professor
and wants advice, a visit with an Ombuds can help the student identify strategies
for the student to communicate more effectively with his or her professor. On
the other hand, an Ombuds does not tell a visitor what to do; instead we offer
options, discuss strategies and make recommendations. Ultimately it
is up to the visitor to determine a point of action.
The Ombuds Office is voluntary; coming to the Ombuds Office is not required
for any purpose, either formally or informally. For more information
on the Ombuds role, please visit our website at www.ku.edu\~ombuds,
and University Senate Rules and Regulations, 6.2.1 – 6.2.2.2.
What the University Ombuds Does
What the University Ombuds Office Does Not Do
As previously stated, the Ombuds Office does not store records or any type
of identifiable information; however, the Ombuds Office keeps track of trends
or patterns so we can assist in positive change in the university’s organizational
system. One definition of the term “ombudsman,” means “a
person who has an ear to the people.” An Ombuds is the “ear” that
provides feedback to promote responsible systems change based on input we hear
throughout the year while maintaining visitor confidentiality.
The annual report is one way we provide feedback to the university community. This
report addresses some of the issues the Ombuds Office observed in the last
year, from March 1, 2006 – February 28, 2007.
STATISTICAL INFORMATION AND A FEW INTRODUCTORY NOTES
First, we will provide an explanation of definitions. Because of the
neutral role of an Ombuds, we prefer not to use the term “client,” as
that term commonly implies advocacy. Instead, we use the term “visitor.” Although
not a perfect term because sometimes we assist people over the telephone, it
more appropriately describes the nature of our contacts given our neutral role.
These numbers represent visitors who contacted the Ombuds Office either by
telephone, in person, or by e-mail. The contact is only counted once,
so if we consult with a visitor more than one time on the same issue, the contact
is not counted again. The time and response to visitors varies from
a brief consultation to a large amount of time involving other individuals
and campus units. The more complex the issue, the more time and additional
follow-up is needed.
Unlike previous years, this year we adopted a different classification system
to more accurately reflect the number of visitors we consult with. We
still count the visitor’s first contact, the “initiator,” but
now we also include “other participants”: individuals we
contact with the permission of initiators and spend time discussing issues
or concerns with. In addition, the Ombuds Office had contact with over 102 different
university units and departments.
Total # of first contacts: 434 %
Undergraduates (95)___________________________ (21.89%)
Graduate: (37) _______________________________ (8.53%)
University
Support Staff (42)_____________________ (9.68%)
Unclassified
Professional Staff (90)_______________ (20.74%)
Total: 434
MOST COMMON ISSUES FOR SEEKING OMBUDS OFFICE ASSISTANCE
(The most common issues are listed first.)
Students (both undergraduate and graduate)
Issues related more specifically to graduate students:
Faculty
Staff (both university support staff and unclassified professional staff):
Former students:
OBSERVATIONS AND DISCUSSION
I. Observation: Participation points, attendance, and group projects
Discussion: Often students come in confused or upset regarding
how participation points, group projects, and attendance affect their grades. Although
a syllabus is not a contract (which some students may not realize), it is still
wise to describe clearly on the syllabus how assignments, exams, participation
points and group projects are computed for the final course grade. Issues
regarding attendance and coming late or leaving early from class should also
be written on the syllabus. Questions and concerns ought to be discussed
before the assignments are given and when the semester course begins to avoid
potential future problems. The University Senate Rules and Regulations,
2.1.2. states,
2.1.2 Information about the basis for evaluating students' performance and
about the requirements that students must fulfill should be made available
to students, preferably in writing, within the first two weeks of class. Students
who are not in class when such information is provided are responsible for
knowing it. Students are also responsible for subsequent announcements about
course content and grading policies. This information should not be considered
a contract; the information may be revised as the course progresses, provided
students are given timely notice of such revisions.
II. Observation: More students are contacting the Ombuds
Office about academic misconduct issues.
Discussion: Some students contact the Ombuds Office for clarification
about the academic misconduct policy. What we have observed is that some students
are charged with academic misconduct without explanation on the part of the
faculty member on their due process rights or what to expect at a hearing or
other issues involved in the process. Some students express concerns
about feeling “guilty” before being proven “innocent,” or
how to defend themselves in situations that are more difficult to prove such
as a faculty member or GTA stating he/she witnessed the student glancing on
someone else’s exam.
Again, clarification and communication to students regarding the academic misconduct
policy can help prevent future problems and misunderstandings. University
Senate Rules and Regulations 2.6.4 states,
2.6.4 Every instructor shall make clear, at the beginning of each course, his
or her rules for the preparation of classroom assignments, collateral reading,
notebooks, or other outside work, in order that his or her students may not,
through ignorance, subject themselves to the charge of academic misconduct.
An instructor has the authority to set reasonable rules for classroom conduct.
When an instructor judges that a student's behavior is disruptive or obstructive
to learning, the instructor can request that the student leave the classroom.
Refusal to comply with a request to leave a classroom can itself be grounds
for a charge of academic misconduct.
For more information about the academic misconduct policy please review your
school’s policy in addition to the University Senate Rules and Regulations,
Section 6, 2.6.1 – 2.6.7. For more information on the hearing phase,
please see University Senate Rules and Regulations, Section 3, 6.3.1 - 6.3.2.3;
6.4.3.1 - 6.4.3.4.
A disconnect between students’ perceptions and faculty members’ expectations
may precipitate unnecessary escalation of conflict. A violation of academic
misconduct is not just punitive, but may also represent a good opportunity
for a “teachable moment,” especially if the student lacked information
on how to properly cite sources, for example. Although an instructor
cannot list everything on a syllabus, a discussion of academic misconduct and
expectations of behavior, while possibly uncomfortable, will benefit both faculty
and students in the long run.
III. Observation: Persistent Complainants or People Who “Can’t
Let Go”
Discussion: Although not a frequent occurrence, the Ombuds
Office hears from some staff and faculty about certain individuals who may
be “persistent complainers;” who go from office to office voicing
concerns with several staff and/or administrators. We also hear concerns
regarding an individual who may have difficulty letting go of a problem and
moving on. Sometimes these individuals are mentally ill and sometimes
they are not. Also, some individuals may be disruptive while others are
quite calm. This can be a very complex and sensitive issue that is inherently
difficult to deal with.
Staff and faculty concerns regarding these observations include the use and
priority of work time, to feeling uneasy or uncomfortable around the individual. Unfortunately,
there are no easy answers. The most common concern we hear is how to respond
to someone’s behavior that does not meet the criteria of an “imminent
threat.” One must be careful not to pre-judge or stereotype
an individual’s situation. A great deal depends on the particulars
of a given circumstance and the seriousness of the situation.
In some situations, just setting boundaries with a persistent complainant,
for example, is very helpful. Depending on the particulars of a situation,
referrals may be made to the Ombuds Office, Counseling and Psychological Services,
the chairperson of the department or director of a unit, Human Resources and
Equal Opportunity, and the Division of Student Success. The Threat Assessment
Team is another resource if someone feels fearful, uncomfortable, or uneasy.
The Threat Assessment Team can determine if there is a possible legitimate
threat. In the most serious cases, a call to the K.U. Public Safety Office
or 911 may be necessary. If a staff or faculty member is unsure where
to start because there is such a wide range of circumstances and possible referrals,
a talk with an Ombuds can help identify appropriate courses of action. Sometimes
it requires a discussion with an expert on campus such as the staff from the
offices listed above to avoid escalating the conflict and/or agitating the
individual further. Examining whether there is a systemic issue or university
policy that needs to be reviewed or revised is also useful.
IV. Observation: Mental Health Issues
Discussion: Occasionally, the Ombuds Office hears from faculty
and staff concerning how difficult it can be to cope with students who may
be mentally ill. Sometimes it coincides with issues discussed above in
Observation III but not always. The University Ombuds and the Faculty
Ombuds are not trained in mental health issues nor are we therapists or psychologists. However,
we understand that many staff and faculty feel powerless to intervene or even
provide referrals. For advice, please contact the staff at Counseling
and Psychological Services. For psychiatric disability questions, please contact
Mary Ann Rasnak of the Academic Achievement and Access Center. There
is an abundant amount of literature on the subject; one short article titled, “Critical
Incidents Involving Students with Psychiatric Disabilities: The Gap Between
State of the Art and Campus Practice,” by Holly A. Belch and Laura E.
Marchak, published in the NASPA (National Association of Student Personnel
Administrators) Journal, vol. 43, no. 3., 2006, is worth reading.
The Ombuds Office has a copy of the article if anyone wishes to read it.
E-MAIL COMMUNICATION AND THE OMBUDS OFFICE
The University Ombuds Office is confidential and we do not speak to anyone without the visitor’s permission. Given the confidential nature of the office and the fact that e-mail is not a confidential means of communication, we discourage the use of e-mail to contact us. We generally do not “consult” over e-mail. We are happy to visit with anyone over the phone or in person. If you would like to make a phone or in-person appointment, please give us a call at (785) 864-7261 to check our availability and set up a time to meet or talk.
OTHER OMBUDS ACTIVITES
Campus Dispute Assistance Services
Campus Dispute Assistance Services (CDAS) was established in 1997 as a response to revised grievance procedures. The Ombuds Office keeps a list of trained faculty and staff mediators who are available for this purpose. Although the Ombuds Office maintains the list and helps recruit mediation volunteers, the office itself is not involved in the mediation process as it is a formal course of action and we are an informal office. The list of mediators is not made public, but it is important to be aware that mediators are available and volunteer a considerable amount of their time and energy for this very important service.
Threat Assessment Team
The University Ombuds is a member of the Threat Assessment Team. This team of various staff members meets on occasion to review situations that potentially may be a threat of violence, but does not involve an immediate threat. For more information about this team, please visit the Human Resources and Equal Opportunity web page at http://www.hreo.ku.edu/emergency_procedures/workplace_violence.shtml.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FROM MARCH 1, 2006-FEBRUARY 28, 2007
Ombuds Harmon and Whitman attended the International Ombuds Association annual conference at La Jolla, California and the University of California, San Diego, April 2-5, 2006: Anchors Aweigh: Charting a New Course for Organizational Ombuds.
Professor Doug Whitman currently serves as a member of The Journal of the California Caucus of College and University Ombuds editorial board. He first joined the board in 2005. He also published an article along with Professor Murray Levin titled, “Untangling the Meanings of Mediation,” in The Journal of the California Caucus of College and University Ombuds, November, 2006, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 29-32.
Ombuds Harmon also participated in the Mediation Training Institute International, Self-as-Mediator Seminar: Certificate in Managing Workplace Conflict, 8 contact hours, Lawrence, KS, November 8, 2006 and in the New Manager Orientation workshop sponsored by the University of Kansas, October, 2006.
OMBUDS OFFICE EVALUATION SURVEY
The Ombuds Office is currently developing an on-line survey in association with the Office of Institutional Research and Planning to evaluate visitors’ experiences with the Ombuds Office. There will be a link posted on the Ombuds web site as well as the University Governance web page. This survey is confidential and is not administered through the Ombuds Office. A notice will be sent via e-mail to faculty, staff, and students inviting them to participate in the evaluation survey.
WHO AND WHERE WE ARE
The University Ombuds Office is located in room 34 Carruth O’Leary Hall, 1246 West Campus Road, Lawrence, KS 66045. Our telephone number is (785) 864-7261. Kellie Harmon, the Interim University Ombuds, is located in room 34 during normal working hours, and Maria Orive, the Faculty Ombuds, is located in room 28 on a part-time basis.
The office does not have a receptionist or administrative assistant on-site so if we are meeting with someone or away for a short-while, please leave a message and we will get back to you as soon as we can or if you feel more comfortable, please try again at a later time. To better serve university community members, we recommend scheduling an appointment ahead of time to make sure one of us is available to help a visitor when needed. We also gladly accept referrals from other staff and faculty. If you feel someone would benefit from our services, please feel free to refer them here.
A BRIEF WORD ON THE TRAGEDY AT VIRGINIA TECH:
Words cannot
express the sadness and grief felt over the lives lost and the impact violence
had on the entire Virginia Tech community and college campuses across the nation. Our
condolences go out to our colleagues and the Virginia Tech community. We
wish them peace and healing in the difficult times that lie ahead.
In the wake
of this tragedy, there are many questions and issues to consider involving
various units and campus members with no one simple answer. Issues include
re-examining our emergency procedures and the role of the Threat Assessment
Team; how the university can best communicate an emergency to the university
community; finding a way for the “pieces of the puzzle” to come
together so different units can communicate with each other; providing training
to faculty, chairs, deans, directors, other staff, and certain students (such
as Resident Assistants) to recognize early warning signs; educating about suicide
prevention; and many, many other issues too numerous to mention but worth reflection,
examination, and discussion. Many of these suggestions are already being
discussed and are in the process of being implemented on this campus. If
anyone has a concern either about this topic as a whole, or a specific individual,
please utilize the resources I mentioned above in Observations III and IV.
CONCLUSION
Conflict is a natural part of human existence. What we do with the conflict, how we respond, and what we learn is the most valuable lesson we can take from the experience. Although some people question why we do what we do on a day-in, day-out basis, the Ombuds Office staff truly enjoys assisting campus community members in informally managing and resolving conflicts and consulting with the university community on a variety of issues. At the University of Kansas, we are all part of a community of scholarship and learning. We learn much from our visitors during the dialogue and collaborative process that defines the Ombuds role. This role is immensely rewarding and it is a privilege to represent the Ombuds profession and serve the University of Kansas community.