Background checks on faculty as well?

Colleges and universities ought to run criminal background checks on prospective faculty as well, given that an increasing number of assaults and murders of students both on- and off-campus are committed by them. Too many students enter these institutions with no idea just how much danger they are in.

AB, at 8:10 am EDT on May 18, 2006

Oh boy........

Joseph, I agree that AB should give some examples, but his/her underlying point still has validity. Faculty/Staff should be held to the same standard as students. If we are running background checks on students, shouldn’t we being doing the same for Faculty and Staff? That, of course, begs the question, how much higher do we want college tuition to go? Can you imagine the costs involved in doing background checks on EVERY student, faculty and staff member at even small colleges?

Befuudled, at 9:20 am EDT on May 18, 2006

Evidence

Befuddled, yesterday here at IHE I read that plagiarism is endemic among American college faculty and today I learn that we are also routinely committing assaults against our students. I’d just like to see some evidence that American faculties are really such a vast criminal enterprise.

As for background checks, universities are not police departments & should not be expected to behave like police departments.

Joseph Duemer, Professor at Clarkson University, at 9:50 am EDT on May 18, 2006

already here in FL

I (as staff/adjunct faculty) was suprised to learn that if I didn’t comply w/a mandatory fingerprinting that I would be subject to dismissal. Isn’t anyone (at least slightly) disturbed by the “big brother"-ish leanings that are becoming so glaringly obvious in our (so called) society. Did I miss the memo on the repeal of the fourth amendment?

slackdaemon, it’s in there... at Manatee Community College, at 10:20 am EDT on May 18, 2006

Doesn’t it seem fair to require universities to state plainly

“We assume no responsibility for your child’s safety.”

Max, at 12:05 pm EDT on May 18, 2006

It seems to me that the university does have a responsibility when it provides housing: students given school housing should personally fill out a (confidential) form revealing problems with the law and medical/psychiatric conditions; perhaps the form might allow individuals to express their personal concerns also. Screening might be appropriate too.

However, the point is well made that a murderer more likely would come from the outside than the inside. This implies that dorm “floor monitors” (or what ever they are called at a given institution) have to perform at a standard level in surveillance as in counseling. And they should have assistants who fill in when they are away. This can help against all kinds of victimization as well as fire.

In the 1960s, when dorms were becoming increasingly coed and mores were changing rapidly, universities largely made a choice not to be surrogate parents. But the university dorms that I have visited (UCLA and elsewhere) have a high level of “front-door” security, implying that they are willing-to-take/recognize some responsibility for safety from without. A reexamination of safety from within would be a minimal way of protecting students without more widely challenging everyone’s personal freedom.

Donald Nierlich, Prof. Emeritus at UCLA, at 12:50 pm EDT on May 18, 2006

Education for all

I have to disagree with AB and support the statement by Nissirian.

It is the responsibility of the judicial branch to decide who is dangerous and who is safe, not a college or university. This applies to faculty and staff as much as students. A police record does not make you a bad or unsafe person. I can think of numerous current examples as to why.

I have known plenty of colleagues that were just plain creepy eventhough they had no criminal record. I suspected that they were dishonest, violent, drunkards, druggies, and/or sexual predators. No one would bar them from a university campus, though maybe they should.

At the same time I know many people who at some point in their lives did something that got them a police record. Some are past or present students, some are friends. Some have done jail time. One spent several years in a federal penitentiary. Charges ranged from rather petty to very serious. Some of them were doing things that I consider honorable (engaging civil protest, eg.) others were not. More important than the dubious character of some of my acquaintances, I can’t think a single one of these people who doesn’t deserve whatever benefits they can derive from our educational system.

The dangers of blocking many of these people from the system could/would have disasterous long-term consequences.

Think about it. Do we really want to tell the person who hit an early downward spiral and landed in jail that it doesn’t matter whether or not they get sober, get clean, and stay on the straight and narrow, they can’t have a college degree or any of the benefits of that degree? Is higher-ed to be only for the squeaky clean and those with good lawyers?

Large numbers of inmates in the US come from poor and working class families and have little or no secondary education. To bar them from further education or even employment within the academy could make their sentences of however many years into a kind of life sentence.

JB, at 3:00 pm EDT on May 18, 2006

JB

JB, the is the very least we could do is keep them as far away from law-abiding, productive individuals as possible. I would gladly pay for a backround check on every myself as part of my college application if I knew that it also applied to all other students, faculty, administrators, staff etc.

Kevin, Undergraduate, at 9:10 pm EDT on May 18, 2006

Background checks

Of course it is feasible, and necessary, to do criminal background checks on students. The cost is $25 and it should be passed through to the student. While they are not 100% accurate (only surrounding states can be done, not the entire 50), it is still better than pretending that it is not possible, or necessary. This will still not protect your student population from psychologically unbalanced perpetrators, or those who have not acted, or been caught in their crimes of violence, it is a start...

Robert Wilder, VP at Arizona, at 10:25 pm EDT on May 18, 2006

a school’s obligations

Kevin, I don’t want to break it to you, but not all college students are productive. Many of them are not law-abiding. For the life of me, I don’t see why colleges need to provide people with anything more than landlord services. In the real world (which all college students should be handle, or they are just too immature for school) it is likely that people will live near, work near, or taking public transportation near, a sex offender.

Of course, many people are dangerous and just lack a criminal record. Are we you suggesting that, say, fratboys be mentally profiled to see if they fit the profile of someone that might hurt women? Or that members of a male or female sports team might abuse each other?

Larry, at 7:35 am EDT on May 19, 2006

Fingerprinting

Slackdaemon writes:"I (as staff/adjunct faculty) was suprised to learn that if I didn’t comply w/a mandatory fingerprinting that I would be subject to dismissal.”

I think you’ll have to get over it. Many states, well Georgia and Texas at least, now require fingerprinting just to get a driver’s license.

Andrew, at 6:15 am EDT on May 21, 2006

I work at a college, and consider myself a liberal in many ways .... but I feel more conservative on this issue as I disagree with many of these comments.

I do think that it is the place of many institutions (but not all) to be selective as they admit students. Most would agree that a college/university could deny someone admissions due to lack of academic credentials (bad grades, no diploma, etc.). I also think that an institution could deny enrollment if they feel that someone’s behavioral cerdentials are not there. I think that it is entirely reasonable to do so.

We don’t leave it to others to tell us if a student has the graded to be admitted. WE make those decisions. Why use the judgment of the courts (or some other authority) to judge other types of fitness or readiness? Colleges seem less and less willing to set and establish standards anymore (no proof of this — but I sense it), and I think that private colleges and selective state-funded institutions should establish — and celebrate — the standards they set for their campuses.

JB, at 9:05 pm EDT on June 1, 2006