Search Reslife.net
		In Search of Ethics: Is the Concept Lost or Just Misplaced? By Lorinda Krhut Director of Residence Life The University of Southern Mississippi In just about every graduate education program, time is spent on discussing ethics and how behaviors and choices impact not only careers but also how one may feel about themselves. Most residence life programs incorporate some kind of ethics discussion during resident assistant training, full of scenarios asking student staff what they would do in certain situations. At most housing conferences, there are at least a few programs focused on the ethical behavior of our students, student staff and professional staff. Why, all of a sudden, is ethical behavior becoming such an important issue in discussions across the country? Perhaps the importance lies not in its existence but in its seemingly lack of existence among some who are hired to be role models and exemplify behavior which models the philosophy and mission of the institutions and colleges of their employment. The discussion is prevalent among those seasoned professionals who spend much time in the recruitment, selection and training of staff. The challenge is most often found in choices of individuals to deceive, take advantage of and make decisions without looking at the ramifications of what the decision is doing to others. Although there have always been individuals who have operated in a selfish vacuum, the trend of these behaviors seems to be occurring more often. A noticeable group where this is occurring is in our paraprofessional and entry-level staff. As a result, discussion of these behaviors has come to the forefront in an effort to rectify the trend. One may ask what type of unethical behaviors seem to be occurring more often than in the past? During the recent Association of College and University Housing Officers- International conference in Kansas City, an unscientific survey was conducted among a group of chief housing officers asking their experience with unethical behaviors of staff or prospective staff. In all cases, directors were perplexed by what they believe to be a naivete' and/or lack of education regarding expectations in the interview process as well as the workplace. In one instance, a director was relaying an experience she had with a hall director candidate who agreed to interview at the institution, accepted a plane ticket, and came to the campus and interviewed. Weeks later, the director discovered the candidate had already accepted a position at another institution at the time of her interview, but wanted an opportunity to visit another institution “just in case she liked it better”. Another example concerned a hall director who was hired by an institution and on the day beginning hall director training, the hall director never showed up. Worried, the residence life director called the prospective hall director’s home only to hear from his mother that the individual had left for hall director training – in another state. What makes this situation even more bazaar is this same individual upon completing his graduate degree at the other institution, sent a letter of interest for an area coordinator position at the institution he was a “no show”. Still another residence life director stated that during his institution’s interview process, a hall director candidate candidly told other candidates involved in the interview process that he had no intention of accepting a position at the institution. He just wanted a cheap opportunity to see another part of the country. As much as we’d like to believe these situations are uncommon, the scenarios mentioned above are increasing. Over and over we hear of resident assistants who feel they should be given leniency when caught violating the policies they are expected to adhere. Parents of paraprofessional staff are becoming more involved in criticizing professional staff for making their paraprofessional children accountable for unethical decisions. Take, for instance, the two under-aged resident assistants who were terminated after being found drinking beer with another resident on the front porch of their residence hall. When asked what they were drinking, they both admitted they had an alcoholic beverage. But after termination, the parents felt their punishment should have been less “because the young women told the truth”. The contention was that if the resident assistants had denied having an alcoholic beverage, then they would not have lost their jobs. “So”, as the parents said, “they were punished for telling the truth”. As difficult as it was to convince the parents that this was not the case, it is no wonder students are having a difficult time with the concept of ethics. So what do we do as professionals? Do we give up and claim it’s a sign of the times as evidenced by the behavior of notable political leaders, sports greats, or business leaders? Do we “make due” with what we have and hope for the best due to the sparse number of candidates who wish to make student affairs a profession? The optimists say “no”. As student affairs professionals, it is our responsibility to make a difference through a more focused education on expectations of behavior and decision-making. Whether it’s through in-service education or more formal classes on ethical development, the students and staff under our direction deserve to be successful in their careers. They need to know their decisions should be based on how it will affect others more than how it will affect them. Some will need to be taught that ethical decision-making is not necessarily a right or wrong decision. That it can be one of those “gray” areas that so often comes our way. But more importantly, they need to learn that with every decision they must assume responsibility and be accountable for these decisions. If the decision is based on sound ethical logic, the decision will be right, no matter what the consequences. So, are ethics lost or just misplaced? Neither. Ethical conduct and decision making is reflective of the expectations of the culture we live and work. It is up to us to educate our paraprofessionals and new professionals to that culture. We need to spend both quality and quantity time in educating our staff with expectations of behavior. We need to teach staff to be accountable for the decisions they make through support and guidance. We need to make a priority the development of ethical decision making in order to prepare our staffs to be strong leaders. It is our responsibility. We can make a difference. About the Author Ms. Krhut has been serving as the Director of Residence Life and Housing at The University of Southern Mississippi since 1988. Her previous experience includes teaching high school Speech and Literature, serving in the capacity of Guidance Counselor and Social Director of Mastin School of Nursing – University of South Alabama, and working in the housing area as Area Coordinator, Assistant Director, and Associate Director of Housing at the University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama. Lorinda has a MA from the University of South Alabama and a BS from The University of Southern Mississippi. Her professional activities include active membership and committee work in the Association of College and University Housing Officers-International (ACUHO-I), Southeastern Association of Housing Officers (SEAHO), Southern Association of College Student Affairs (SACSA), and Mississippi Association of Housing Officers (MAHO). She has served as president of the Mississippi Association of Housing Officers and is currently serving as past president of the Southeastern Association of Housing Officers. Ms. Krhut has served on numerous University committees and is actively involved in community work. She is married and has two children ages 18 and 16.