Christopher D. Valentino

Law, Policy, and Governance

 

Within the CSP program, I have gained exemplary knowledge on issues pertaining to higher education law, policy, and governance.  I first gained significant exposure to this competency area during my coursework in CSP 6010: Foundations and Functions of Student Affairs, during a site visit to Jackson College in Jackson, Michigan.  However, my experience and knowledge stems primarily from my coursework in HIED 7210: Law in Higher Education, and from my internship experiences as a Graduate Hall Director. 

 

One of the major group projects for CSP 6010 is a site visit to a college or university with a different structure and governing mission than any of the group’s undergraduate institutions.  As such, my group visited Jackson College (formerly Jackson Community College) in Jackson, Michigan.  Jackson College is a community college that recently changed its name to reflect the fact that it now offers several four-year baccalaureate degrees.  During this visit, my group met with administrators and students to discuss how state legislation has had a profound impact on the institution by permitting it to develop and offer baccalaureate programs.  Jackson College officials believed that the new state legislation would increase their enrollment and revenue as their new baccalaureate programs are unavailable at other nearby institutions. This conversation at Jackson College highlighted the ability of state legislation to have a dramatic influence on an institution’s ability to develop offer in-demand services and programs to students.

 

While at Jackson College, we also had a chance to meet with the college’s Director of Financial Aid, who was vocally opposed to current financial aid policy.  The director asserted that many of his students borrowed heavily but were not academically prepared for colleges classes.  As such, many students dropped out of school with significant amounts of student loans without any certificate or associates degree to show for their efforts.  Ultimately, the director did not want to set students up for financial difficulties if they were unprepared for the academic rigor.  However, as an open access institution Jackson College has a responsibility to accept any student regardless of their previous academic achievement.  Jackson’s open access mission to serve their students appears to be in conflict with their responsibility to ensure student success as well as an ethic of care displayed by the Director of Financial Aid.   Ultimately, my half-day site visit at Jackson College showed me the impact and influence of state and federal policymakers have on higher education and students. State legislatures and federal regulators have the ability to fundamentally alter the framework by which student affairs and higher education professionals operate under.

 

 During the fall 2014 semester I took Dr. Patrick Pauken’s doctoral course on higher education law, HIED 7210.  Through this course I was exposed to a wide cross-section of court cases that have dramatically influenced the manner in which educational institutions operate ranging from topics of academic freedom and free speech to institutional liability and athletics unionization.  For the course I researched and wrote a paper on the emerging legal concept of affirmed consent, and its compatibility with pre-existing interpretations of Title IX by the U.S. Department of Education.  Affirmed consent is a new legal standard employed by the state of California, and the State University of New York system in which sexual partners have to give affirmed consent to any sexual activity (Lovett, 2014).  Affirmed consent represents a departure away from the “no means no” concept and has profound implications for student affairs practitioners in systems that utilize the standard.  As affirmed consent implicitly and explicitly encourages institutions to educate students on consent (Lovett, 2014).  Additionally opponents of affirmed consent assert that the new standard, acting in tandem with contemporary Title IX regulations, raises due process concerns within the student conduct process (Hendrix, 2013).  As current Title IX and affirmed consent cases work their way through the federal judiciary, the new regulations may dramatically influence the manner in which student affairs professionals address issues of consent and issues of sexual assault.  Ultimately, my experiences in Dr. Pauken’s course taught me how to examine federal and state regulations from a legal perspective and assess their potential to influence student affairs practitioners and higher education. My experiences in the HIED law course directly connects with the NASPA/ACPA competencies by developing my ability to connect torts and negligence law to the daily practice of student affairs practitioners. Additionally, my research into Title IX issues gave me the ability to clearly articulate how issues of executive regulation and legislative statues directly influence the student experience (ACPA & NASPA, 2010). 
           

I also developed my law, policy, and governance competency through my internship experience in the Office of Residence Life.  As a Graduate Hall Director, I regularly deal with confidential information governed by the Federal Education Records and Privacy Act (FERPA).  As such, I have to be very aware of what information I can and cannot share with parents and other non-student stakeholders.  Additionally, I also learned firsthand how federal regulation impacts the ability of student affairs practitioners to support students.  For example, after responding to a reported sexual assault I witnessed how BGSU’s interpretation of Title IX impacted the survivor’s experience as Title IX requires student affairs practitioners to both support and empower the survivor while mandating that the incident be reported through proper institutional channels.  This inherently challenges a practitioner's ability to support a survivor as they have to balance institutional liability with the immediate and long-term needs of the survivor.

 

Additionally, my time working in the Office of Residence Life has also shown me the need for student affairs professionals to be aware of federal regulations.  For example, during a staff meeting a full time professional stated that they were afraid of getting sued because of a FERPA violation.  However, FERPA does not provide for a private action, meaning that an individual cannot sue a practitioner or an institution because of a FERPA violation.  FERPA’s enforcement instead comes from the Department of Education, which has the power cut off federal funds for FERPA violations.  Although this may seem like a technical difference, it is importance as a professional’s interruption of FERPA or other federal legislation may influence their decision making process in a crisis situation.  As such, practitioners need to have an accurate working knowledge of federal regulation to make informed decisions.

 

Ultimately, my experiences with Jackson College showed me how state legislation can dramatically influence state-supported institutions of higher education while my experiences in Dr. Pauken’s course highlighted the importance of the judiciary in higher education governance.  Additionally, my experiences as a Graduate Hall Director showed me how federal policy dramatically influences the student experience.  As I reflect upon my experiences in the CSP program, my exposure to issues of higher education law, policy, and governance has inspired me to pursue a career as a legal advocate for higher education.  I have attached a copy of my final paper for HIED 7210 below to serve as an artifact to support my exemplary rating in the law, policy, and governance competency area.