The University Board on Student Conduct, which currently consists of students and faculty members, may see the addition of University staff members as early as this fall, according to Director of the Office of Student Development and Conduct Shawn McGuirk, who oversees the board."The University should be better represented in a hearing, and the University is made of not only students and faculty, but staff that students interact with on a regular basis," McGuirk said.

Students accused of violating university policy may accept responsibility and be sanctioned by a judicial administrator from the Office of Student Development and Conduct, or may deny responsibility and have their case heard before the board. Students may also accept responsibility and ask that the board determine their sanction.

McGuirk said that even with the new proposal to add staff, the ratio of students to employees would remain the same, as staff may only replace faculty members in some Board cases.

"We believe very much in peer judgment," McGuirk said. "There is not a desire to change the number of students that are at a particular hearing."

One student chairperson from the board, whose sensitive position requires anonymity, called the change, "an experiment undertaken by students [and] for students after extensive debates and significant consideration..."

He said that the initiative arose because of the "noticeable trend" that the board addresses both academic and social issues on the campus, all of which need to be recognized in non-academic hearings.

Ultimately, McGuirk said that he, the board and the deans of student life would have to reach an agreement on the proposal, but so far the reaction has been receptive. He also said he would be willing to hear any concerns raised by the student body.

McGuirk said that only "a handful of students" have raised concerns and that faculty or staff have voiced no opposition.

"As long as student representation remains the same post-change, and the addition of staff to UBSC hearing panels is merely a supplement, then the system of peer judgment that the Brandeis community so values will remain intact," Alissa Piasetski '05 wrote in an email to the Justice.

Piasetski is the academic dishonesty specialist for the Office of Judicial and Academic Advocacy, the student-run group that advises accused students in hearings before the UBSC.

According to McGuirk, objections are from students who feel some staff members are too involved in students' lives on a personal level and are unable to identify with them as well as faculty on academic issues.

In response to these concerns, McGuirk said that staff members who know the students involved in UBSC hearings would not be allowed to participate. The same policy currently applies to student and faculty board members.

Assistant Dean of Student Life Lori Tenser said the idea of adding staff members to the Board is "worthy of thorough consideration."

"Having worked directly with the conduct board for many years myself, I certainly believe it is time for the staff in [Student Development and Conduct] and the UBSC to engage in discussions about whether the current composition remains appropriate, or should be modified in some way," Tenser said.

McGuirk said that many colleges have staff members serving on similar conduct boards, and that discussion took place on the matter prior to his arrival at Brandeis two years ago.

Schools in the area with staff on their conduct boards include Boston College and Emerson College.

McGuirk said students could benefit from the inclusion of staff on the board because most staff members have graduate degrees, many in the area of higher education, and because most of a student's time is spent outside of the classroom where they interact with staff.

"Some staff people would just be fantastic additions to the conduct board, and I think we owe it to the students," McGuirk said.

According to McGuirk, the discussion about staff is taking place as UBSC cases are on the rise, resulting in a need for a larger pool of board members from which to draw. While 17 cases went to the board in the past two school years, McGuirk estimated that around 20 cases will go to the board this year.

McGuirk attributed the rise in cases to more students "exercising their ability" to use the board. Students go to the board either to deny responsibility or request a determination of sanctions.