Learning from higher education

Abstract

revailing myths the contrary, inP stitutions of higher education are not always sedate enclaves of scholarly interaction. Ivory Tower, like all hierarchical organizations, is fraught with the day-to-day tug and pull of its members' needs, beliefs, feelings and misunderstandings. In short, there is often conflict on campus. Although colleges and universities have for some time been concerned over faculty/staff/administration disputes (t~pically involving contract or tenure issues), it is only within the last decade that attention has been given conflicts involving students. A survey of 741 colleges and universities (Folger and Shubert, 1981) found that over half of the institutions studied had implemented some type of procedure that used a third party in disputes invoMng students. These procedures, both formal and ad hoc, covered a wide range of student-related issues, including charges of discrimination, capricious or arbitrary enactment of rules or regulations, grade grievances, charges of sexual harassment, grievances about the quality of instruction, the adequacy of financial assistance awards, and issues centering around dormitory living. The results of that study provide descriptive information about what colleges and universities are doing in their use of third parties resolve conflicts affecting students. But the study does not provide insights about why the dispute resolution procedures were developed or how the}, have been implemented. Nor does the study make a W attempt assess the relative effectiveness of the various methods of third party intervention either in terms of individual disputes or larger institutional changes in policy or practice. The study reported here was undertaken in an effort provide answers the '~.L how~ and to v~taat effect questions of using third parties resolve disputes involving students.