The approach of the Diaz Memo
(CUNY, 1995) is based upon a concern for the legal requirement
of due process for students. It
attempts to have cases of suspected violations processed under
Article XV of the Borad of Trustees Bylaws dealing with Student
Disciplinary Matters.
However, utilizing a selection of court
cases the document presents a distinction that attempts to leave at
least some of the cases in the area of Academics using the idea of
“academic judgment” as the device in order to separate them from the other
cases left to the disciplinary process because the involve “questions
of fact”. The distinction is
dubious at best and at worst so troublesome that it has been largely
ignored.
The
CUNY procedure is to have cases distinguished and dealt with as follows:
Academic
judgments are to be so designated by a CAO and then handled by faculty and
departments
Judgments
of facts are to be so designated by the Office of Student Affairs and then handled
under Article XV, BOT Bylaws )
The
procedure requires the involvement of college officers in all cases of
suspected violations.
Cases may no longer be resolved within the confines of the classroom or
academic department.