Running head: SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 1

Summer Conference Coordinator Practicum:

Ethical Dilemma
Chandler Mueller
Salem State University
Dr. Brossoit
August 4, 2017
SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 2

INTRODUCTION

The University of Chicago is a 4-year, Ivy Plus, private institution situated in the middle

of the Hyde Park neighborhood of Chicago, Illinois that has countless programs, both

educational and professional, that make up the community of the individuals on campus. One

program in particular is the ACUHO-I Internship Program within College Housing and

Residential Services where a collection of undergraduate and graduate students from all over the

country come together and work and gain professional experiences in summer conference

services. The hired staff, some interns and some coordinators, report directly to the Assistant

Director of Summer Conferences, live on campus, serve as the direct university liaisons for

conference groups, and are seen as seasonal, full-time professionals as they work a minimum 40

hours per week over the summer months.

Working as a Summer Conference Coordinator over the past two and a half months, I

have noticed several periods where my supervisor, the Assistant Director of Summer

Conferences, has breached some of the ethical standards outlined in ACPA’s Statement of

Ethical Principles and Standards. This document is a collection of professional standards

regarding ethical behavior for professionals working in higher education to “regulating their own

behavior by sensitizing them to potential ethical problems and by providing standards useful in

daily practice” (ACPA, 2006, p.1). This document has listed some common guidelines used by

faculty, staff, and administrators working at institutions of higher education to avoid generating

ethically questionable situations and scenarios such as “maintain and enhance professional

effectiveness by continually improving skills and acquiring new knowledge” and “abstain from

all forms of harassment, including but not limited to verbal and written communication, physical

actions and electronic transmissions” (ACPA, 2006, p. 2-3). The purpose of this document is to
SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 3

foster and sustain a level of professionalism amongst practitioners so that students are well

served and supported.

As I mentioned above, there were several instances where my direct supervisor had

infringed on these guidelines that resulted with myself being in an ethical dilemma; a situation in

which I had to make a decision(s) that, regardless of the which choice I made, the outcome

would be unfavorable. The behavior of my supervisor is unconventional within the scope of

student affairs professionals in regards to their approach to leadership, accountability,

expectations, and professionalism. They do not have an educational or professional background

in higher education or student affairs and are not familiar with the ACPA’s Ethical Principles

and Standards.

THE DILEMMA

As a Summer Conference Coordinator at the University of Chicago, it is my

responsibility to work directly with nine different conferences to coordinate their needs. From

housing to dining to reserving special event spaces, it is my job to try to meet all of those

requests. In addition to the responsibilities I hold in terms of serving our clients, I also have

expectations and roles that extend beyond my function as a campus liaison. For example,

supporting the staff of desk clerks and participate in their summer training, working with

residence hall managers and facilities teams to supply occupancy graphs, participate in an on-call

rotation, and directly supervise a Summer Conference Intern. Interns have similar responsibilities

as coordinators in regards to serving and supporting a handful of summer conferences as well as

participate in the on-call rotation as well.

SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 4

At the beginning of the summer and the first couple weeks of the coordinators and interns

training, we had a session focusing on the emergency response/on-call expectation scheduled for

about 2 hours. This training turned into a 45 minute “loose” discussion that glossed over several

of the incidents that whomever is on-call may receive. Some example incidents discussed

included “what to do if you receive a phone call from a desk clerk who has a student with a

lockout,” “if you get a call because a guest’s campus card is not working,” or “if there is a

lightbulb out in someone’s room.” These are all example scenarios we discussed in training as

well as are outlined in the summer conference handbook. The training or the handbook did not

included details on emergency protocols and procedures when there are incidents occurring in

our buildings relating to alcohol or drug use, unwelcome guests, or any role in a

lockdown/security alert situation. Although these questions came up, the general protocol was

simply for whomever is on call and receives reports related to these issues are to call their direct

supervisor for direction (interns > coordinators; coordinators>assistant director of summer

conferences). This information was also coupled with the context that emergency situations such

as these are few and far between during the summer session at the University of Chicago.

On the week of July 17th, 2017 the intern whom I directly oversee began their stint in the

on-call rotation. This week marks the fifth week of summer conference staff being on call and

has developed a wider understanding of the types of situations we will be responding to. At this

point in the summer, the statement that reports of emergency situations larger than the ones

outlines in the summer conference handbook would be few and far between was accurate. We

had only had several calls that required escalating the chain of command to the director of the

department as well as activating the Dean On-Call platform of emergency response. With that

being said, on one afternoon throughout the week, the summer conference on-call member
SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 5

received a report of the potential problem regarding a conference terminating a camp counselor

that resulted in the individual being excused from the position and instructed to pack their items

and leave campus. The alert was an informative call that was made so that the summer

conference staff member would be up-to-speed if the termination resulted to be anything less

than amicable. Later that same day, the on-call person received a call that informed them that the

situation had become more complex and that the individual was not leaving the residence hall in

which they were living and the conference director called campus police. At this point, the

summer conference staff member connected with me, as their direct supervisor, to talk over the

situation and receive further direction. I informed that intern that since university police had been

called, they also need to respond to the situation so that, for liability reasons, a representative

from College Housing and Residential Services was present. I had also mentioned to the on-call

member that I would reach out to the Assistant Director of Summer Conferences so that they

would be informed of the situation. After receiving the call, I connected with my supervisor and

had described the situation with the details given to me. I has also informed them that I instructed

the on-call team member to respond to the incident and report to the residence hall. My

supervisor disagreed with my decision to have the on-call member respond to the situation and

instructed me to call them back and tell them not to respond. Their decision to withdraw the staff

member from the situation was because my supervision did not “want to include ourselves in the

termination process of the organization.” I voiced my concern that it was important for our on-

call staff member to respond to the scene so that housing and conference staff has representation,

is able to give direction if needed, can appropriately document the incident if it escalates, as well

as meeting the basic expectations of an employee serving on-call. Although I did express my

concerns and reasoning for why the staff member should respond to the site, my supervisor
SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 6

remained steadfast to their original decision and that I direct my supervisee not to go to the

residence hall; thus placing me in an ethical dilemma.

This situation generated an ethical dilemma in a variety of ways. One way it is an ethical

dilemma was that there was a system standardized at the beginning of our employment that set

the expectation for the on-call platform and the sequential chain of command. In this situation,

the on-call staff member followed the protocol of reaching out to their direct supervisor for

further direction and, when looped into the situation and plan of action, my supervisor overruled

my decision to which I had to retract my original direction. A second way this placed me in an

ethical dilemma was that I do not agree with my supervisor’s rational or determination of why

our staff member should not respond. Their response was reactive, impulsive, and was cavalier

considering the nature of the incident and the parties involved (i.e. University of Chicago Police

Department). A third reason this placed me in an ethical dilemma was that their decision was not

congruent with our expectations regarding how we support our conferences. As outlined in the

University of Chicago Summer Conference’s webpage, part of our one-stop-shop model includes

“providing on-call assistance during the conference duration” (Summer Conferences, 2017).

All of these considered, I had to make the decision to either change the instruction I had

originally given the on-call staff member OR stay consistent with my original direction and

decide to go against the conclusion my supervisor had made. In either situation, I would be faced

with an unfavorable result. In the first situation, I would have to change my original direction of

our staff member responding to the situation, risking the potential problem escalating with

almost 150 minors in the building, having zero departmental representation, and ultimately not

living up to our mission as summer conference services. In the second situation, I would be
SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 7

disobeying the direction of my supervisor, risking being reprimanded, and potentially setting a

poor example for the summer conference interns including my supervisee.

DECISION PROCESS

Being in this situation was not easy and deciding between either conclusion was a

challenge. Ultimately, I decided to stay true to my original direction for the on-call staff member

to respond to the scene. I called them back and let them know what I had been told and that “we

are not to take part in any way of their termination process,” but that it was important for us to

have a presence and they should call me if they needed any additional support. Reflecting on the

ACPA’s Statement of Ethical Principles and Standards, I used the following guidelines in my

practice to help me advocate and support my perspective which lead me to make the decision I

had: “3.1 Contribute to their institution by supporting its mission, goals, policies, and abiding by

its procedures; 3.6 Inform supervisors of conditions or practices that may restrict institutional or

professional effectiveness; 4.2 Demonstrate concern for the welfare of all students and work for

constructive change on behalf of students; 4.5 Report to the appropriate authority any condition

that is likely to harm their clients and/or others” (ACPA, 2006, p. 5).

The on-call staff member responded in accordance with my direction. The situation

turned out to be a little more complex than originally reported. UCPD officers were on the scene

as well as the conference director. As our on-call staff member reported, the individual who was

being excused from the program was not as willing to part with the program as they had hoped.

The program counselor began handing out goodbye letters to staff members that included

negative comments regarding the program and the director and was not leaving the building as

instructed politely by police officers. Ultimately, the counselor had to be escorted out of the

complex by the officers present. Due to the individual leaving under the direction of the officers,
SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 8

the counselor was unable to follow proper “check-out” procedure which includes turning in their

campus card. This is an important step in the check-out process as the campus cards are what

allow students and guests to access the residence hall (tap system), their residence hall room, the

dining hall, the athletic center, the library, parking garage, etc.; all of which were being utilized

by the program he was removed from. Our on-call responder noticed that the individual still had

their card, and that it was not a harmonious excusal, the on-call staff member manually

deactivated their access to that card which includes terminating the access abilities for all of the

places the counselor was granted.

After the incident, the on-call responder submitted a report that included the details of the

situation and their actions; noting their correspondents with the police officers and the director as

well as the steps they took to make sure College Housing and Residential Services was not liable

for any further issues. As I mentioned above, there were potential consequences making this

decision. The following morning, I had set up a meeting with my supervisor to discuss the

incident in its entirety, not knowing exactly how it would go. Finally, through stating my claims

and my reasoning, as well as using the results of the situation to support my decision, my

supervisor agreed that it was good that we had a staff member on scene. Thankfully, there were

no repercussions or steps through the accountability process, the situation did not escalate too

much, and the action remained in good standing in regards to the remaining summer conference

team.

CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATIONS

Overall, the situation was not ideal. Fortunately, no one was hurt, all responders were

professional and did their jobs well, and the incident did not get out of hand. However, with that

being said, I believe the ethical dilemma could have been avoided. I think the major factor at
SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 9

play was the lack of higher education and/or student affairs background of my supervisor. I think

that as an employee within the field, it is their responsibility to know the best practices working

in the environment and with the demographic that they do. Although someone does not need a

degree in student affairs to support students and work in a university setting, it is still important

for them to be familiar with the foundations and guidelines that professionals use nationally such

as the ACPA Statement of Ethical Principles and Standards. I think that with a traditional student

affairs background and/or a familiarity of the ACPA statement on ethical practices, this situation

would have been avoided entirely. I have highlighted some guidelines that would have modified

the situation: “1.1 Conduct their professional activities in accordance with sound theoretical

principles and adopt a personal value system congruent with the basic tenets of the profession;

1.2 Contribute to the development of the profession (e.g., recruiting students to the profession,

serving professional organizations, advocating the use of ethical thinking through educational

and professional development activities, improving professional practices, and conducting and

reporting research); 2.16 Educate graduate students about ethical standards, responsibilities and

codes of the profession. 3.11 Define job responsibilities, decision-making procedures, mutual

expectations, accountability procedures, and evaluation criteria with subordinates and

supervisors” (ACPA, 2006, p. 2-5).

With these in mind, I believe that the approach to training and leadership would look

differently. Our training would have stronger explanations and examples of “On-Call Situations”

as well as a clear understanding of how to respond and leadership would help fill gaps of

knowledge or guidance on questionable situations. I believe this ethical dilemma highlights the

value in understanding and practicing the ACPA’s Statement of Ethical Principles and Standards
SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 10

as it helps regulate the methods of professionals in the field as well as generates a baseline for

how to operate professionally within an institution.

SUMMER CONFERENCE COORDINATOR PRACTICUM Mueller 11

References

Statement of Ethical Principles and Standards. (2006). In ACPA: College student educators

international. Retrieved August 4, 2017, from

http://www.myacpa.org/sites/default/files/Ethical_Principles_Standards.pdf

Summer Conferences. (2017). In University of Chciago. Retrieved August 4, 2017, from

https://summerconferences.uchicago.edu/planning-your-conference