I am writing in response to Fred Sontag’s letter (“Sontag Suggests J-Board Reforms,” 9/20/02). I am currently chair of the Student Affairs Committee, a position I held last year as well. The committee, which is responsible for overseeing student life policies including the student code, is comprised of five faculty members and five students. Last year Professor Sontag brought his list of concerns before the committee, and we spent the greater portion of the year addressing them. Below is a brief summary of actions taken on these matters:

1. Professor Sontag suggested we “never allow anyone to come to trial [hearing] without an advisor.” The committee agreed that students wishing an advisor should have access to one. With help from the Executive Committee of the Faculty, we created a pool of advisors comprised of four faculty members and three staff members. Further, provisions were added insuring that any student charged with a code violation would be informed of their right to have an advisor, selected either from this newly constructed pool or of their own choosing. The committee disagreed with the notion that students should be required to have an advisor if they didn’t wish to have one.

2. Professor Sontag expressed distress over the fact that “advisors cannot address the council directly.” The SAC debated this issue vigorously. There was concern that if allowed to address the hearing panel, the role of advisor would become more like that of a defense attorney. However, it was also noted that advisors might have important information to contribute. This dilemma was solved with the following compromise: although advisors are not permitted to address the hearing panel, they are now permitted to call a recess and confer with the J-Board chair.

3. Finally, Professor Sontag noted a “need for an established review system.” Such a system currently exists in that the president of the college has the authority to review and overturn any J-Board decision. Last year’s SAC felt it presumptuous to direct the president in this area.

Professor Sontag has long been the most active advocate for students facing disciplinary action at Pomona College, and I applaud his devotion. Without his thoughtful suggestions, the above reforms would not have occurred. Although I regret that the actions taken by last year’s SAC appear not to have been effectively conveyed to Professor Sontag, I do see value in informing the larger community about these issues.

Len Seligman
Professor of Biology
Chair, Student Affairs Committee