Greetings, | Logout
ASCIT DONUT
(Legislative History)
(Legislative History)
Line 428: Line 428:
Proposed by the BoD on 31 May 2019.
Proposed by the BoD on 31 May 2019.
 +
 +
Voted on and passed by undergraduates 7 June 2019; results certified (late) by the review committee 10 June 2019.
=====Explanation=====
=====Explanation=====

Revision as of 08:27, 10 June 2019

ASCIT Review Committee

Contents

Election Results

Numerical results will be posted here.

Proposed Amendments

Amendment 1

Legislative History

Written by Chris Johnstone and Allison Wang.

Proposed by the BoD on 31 May 2019.

Voted on and passed by undergraduates 7 June 2019; results certified (late) by the review committee 10 June 2019.

Explanation

In short, these bylaw revisions do several important things:

1. Reduce the Full Board size from 7 representatives to 5 representatives. Currently, it can be very difficult to schedule cases (e.g. multiple hours spent scheduling) when BoC leadership needs to run multiple cases in a week while avoiding rep dismissals by respondents and other scheduling problems. A Board size of 5 increases scheduling ease dramatically while still ensuring that there are enough representatives to thoroughly cover all evidence. This should decrease the amount of time that cases spend dormant on the docket. This possibly increases in the deliberation time per individual Full Board (e.g, on the day of the Full Board, deliberation may take longer), as the same level of thoroughness in-case will be applied.

2. Add two new at-large reps, preferentially selected from those planning on living in Bechtel. These changes increase the BoC's manpower and should help ensure that those living in Bechtel have a local resource to go to if needed.

3. Under the current bylaws, only the relationship between the BoC and the undergraduate Dean is specified. In this version of the bylaws, we expanded our definition to include the Associate Deans. Currently, the Associate Deans provide valuable procedural support. For example, the BoC currently shares the names of respondents going to a Full Board with the Dean CRC co-Chair, an Associate Dean, to check for prior CRC convictions (which are only revealed when the Full Board is making a protection decision, if applicable). If certain evidence for a case needs to be gathered, such as Housing or Registrar data, or if Dean communication is required with faculty or staff members, BoC leadership shares relevant information with the dean BoC liaison, who is the other Associate Dean. Because the proposed bylaws include Associate Deans in the text, the proposed bylaws now also allow leadership to share relevant information including respondent names (even if later dismissed) for these official purposes.

4. There are several areas of the current bylaws that are vague or are not fully specified. Currently, the BoC uses best practices that are valid under the current bylaws but these still just remain best practices. This proposal codifies these best practices directly into the text of the bylaws. Such codifications include our standard of evidence (preponderance), the presence of an evidence review before Full Board, and a description of the reinstatement process. For example, while it has been a long-standing practice of the Deans to request all students on leave for BoC reasons meet with the Board before being possibly reinstated, this bylaw proposal explicitly requires students to contact BoC leadership as part of the return process and permits the Board to make a recommendation on reinstatement. 5. Clarify the appeal language. In the old bylaws, it was unclear what timeline appeals could be performed under, and how the VPSA appeal, which was just specified as a "procedural review" was different than the post-case communication with the Deans. Under this revision, the reasons for appeal to the VPSA are explicitly specified. Furthermore, under the old bylaws, the VPSA could not call for a case to be reopened/reconsidered by the BoC, meaning that if, for example, new evidence came to light during the appeals process, it could not be reheard by the Board.

6. Make several clarifications, such as renaming "defendant" to "respondent," renaming the "off-campus" rep to the "unaffiliated" rep, and clarifying the confidentiality requirements on both respondents and BoC reps to fully match current practices.


BoC leadership has discussed the proposed changes with those who interface with the BoC, including the Deans, the VPSA, and OGC and confirmed that these are in line with their processes.


If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Christopher Johnstone (cjohnsto@caltech.edu) or Allison Wang (aywang@caltech.edu).

Existing Text

ARTICLE XIII--BOARD OF CONTROL

SECTION 1. Purpose and Duties. The Board of Control (BoC) shall review all cases of alleged academic violations of the Honor Code and shall make recommendations to the Dean of Students for action in those cases in which a violation is found to have been committed.

SECTION 2. Membership. The activities of the BoC will be led and reviewed by the BoC Chair. The two BoC Secretaries shall assist the Chairman in investigation and case organization. The voting members of the Board shall consist of: two members elected from each of the undergraduate houses, up to five at-large members appointed by the BoC, and one member elected by students outside of the Houses.

(a) All BoC members shall serve a term of one year. The BoC representatives shall be selected as follows:

(i) House representatives shall be elected each year by vote of the members of that House. Voting shall be open to all registered undergraduates who are members of the House and who have not yet voted in another election for BoC representative. A candidate may run in any House, but students may only vote in one House. All representatives must be elected before the eighth week of second term.

(ii) At-large representatives shall be appointed each year by the newly elected Board members before the end of second term.

(iii) The election for the off-campus representative shall be run by the Review Committee before the beginning of third term. Elections will be announced and conducted as specified in Article VII. Registered undergraduates who did not vote in an election for House representative may vote for the off-campus representative.

(b) If a BoC member fails to register or takes a leave of absence at any time during their term of office, said member shall retire from that office immediately. Only registered undergraduates may serve on a case.

(c) If a BoC member retires before their term of office expires, they shall be replaced in the manner of their selection. The new representative shall serve for the remainder of the term.

(d) All BoC representatives must attend a formal training before they may serve on a case. Training shall be conducted by the Chairman and Secretaries with assistance from the Dean of Students and former Board representatives. Training should occur at the end of second term or the beginning of third term such that new representatives can begin hearing cases promptly. The training shall be open to any member of the Caltech community at the discretion of the Chairman and the Dean.


SECTION 3. Rules of Procedure.

(a) Reporting. Violations of the Honor System may be brought to the attention of the Board by any member of the Caltech community.

(b) Preliminary Investigation. When a suspected violation of the Honor System is reported, two members of the Board will conduct a preliminary investigation. The Chairman and one of the Secretaries will conduct this investigation unless one or both of them must excuse themselves, in which case the Chairman shall appoint suitable replacements. The preliminary investigation will be conducted as follows:

(i) The investigators will require any persons involved to discuss their knowledge of information concerning the case and will receive copies of all relevant evidence.

(ii) The investigators will determine whether the case will be brought to a full hearing of the Board or should be dismissed.

(iii) All potential defendants will be informed of all potential violations cited in the initial report. In addition, they will be informed of any current or former Board members or House presidents who may hear the case.

(iv) The defendant may select an assistant representative who may be present at the preliminary meeting and any future meetings. The defendant may consult this representative for explanations of Board proceedings and for information regarding the resources available to him. The assistant representative must be selected from a list of current or former representatives or House presidents and approved by the Chairman.

(c) Hearing.

(i) If a defendant feels that particular Board members are unable to render an unbiased judgment, a request may be made to the Chairman or the Dean of Students before the start of the full Board hearing that those members not sit on the case.

(ii) If a Board member feels unable to render an unbiased judgment in a particular case, that member should disqualify himself. Furthermore, no member of the Board shall sit in judgment of their own case. The preliminary investigators shall not have a vote on the Board.

(iii) No Board representative shall conduct any investigation outside a hearing except at the instruction of the Chairman.

(iv) Any person appearing before the Board at a hearing will be informed of the reasons for their presence.

(v) At any point before or during the hearing the defendant may select a silent witness with whom they may speak about their case. The silent witness may accompany them to any future meetings with the BoC. This silent witness must be a member of the Caltech community and approved by the Chairman. Additional silent witnesses may be granted only at the discretion of the Chair and the Dean of Students.

(vi) A defendant may be accompanied by an assistant representative and a silent witness. During the hearing, the defendant may request an aside with the assistant representative and may speak with him at any time for clarification or explanation. All those accompanying him to a BoC hearing must not disrupt or interfere with the proceedings of the Board in any way, and shall be immediately removed at the Chair's discretion if such disruption occurs.

(vii) Seven (7) voting members of the Board shall constitute a quorum. If needed to maintain a full quorum of the Board, the Board shall reserve the right to ask a past BoC representative or a current House president to serve on a case, contingent on a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the remaining voting Board members. All those serving on a case are bound to secrecy.

(viii) In case of absence or disability of the Chairman, the Board shall select a temporary chairman from among their number who, while acting as Chairman, shall not have a vote. In the case of absence of the Secretary, the Chairman shall appoint a temporary Secretary, who shall not have a vote.

(ix) A defendant attending a hearing of the full Board may ask the Chairman at any time for permission to hold a short, private recess with a Board member of the defendant's choice. Any new information pertaining to the case revealed in this conference will be shared with the full Board. The member shall remain able to vote on the case.

(x) OATH. The oath taken by all persons appearing before the Board of Control shall be: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

(d) Decisions.

(i) When a case is brought to a hearing of the full Board, the Board will make three decisions:

   1. Conviction: Whether or not an Honor System violation has been committed.
   2. Nullification: How to nullify the advantage that has been taken.
   3. Protection: How to protect the Caltech Community from future violations.

(ii) Before the Board votes to convict, the defendant will be shown all physical evidence pertaining to their case and given a reasonable opportunity to respond.

(iii) Before a vote for conviction or dismissal, all aspects of the case must be thoroughly considered. A three-fourths (3/4) vote of voting members of the Board present shall be necessary for any decision of the Board except case dismissal or the tabling of a case, which shall both require a simple majority.

(iv) No decision of a previous Board shall be revoked by any Board, unless the Board is convinced that new evidence or changed conditions change the status of the original case.

(v) In cases resulting in conviction, the Chairman and Secretary must make clear to the defendant the Board's basis for its decisions, including but not limited to the main line of reasoning that led to conviction.

(e) Confidentiality.

(i) All those appearing before the Board, and the Board itself, are expected to maintain absolute secrecy regarding case meetings of the BoC. Divulgence of any of the proceedings shall be considered a violation of the Honor System.

(ii) Should the defendant wish to discuss the issues involved in their case with others, after their case has been completed, they may do so at any time, provided no portion of the case that concerns other defendants is made public without the permission of those persons. However, once the defendant initiates discussion, witnesses in the case are no longer bound to secrecy.

(iii) If, in a particular case, the Board shall deem it wise to make known the proceedings of the Board, the Chairman shall be empowered to, upon resolution of the Board, to convey such information without disclosing the names or identities of any persons involved.

(iv) When a case is reported to the Board by some member of the Community, the Board will inform this member that the case is being considered. If any grade changes or status changes are necessary, the appropriate faculty member or administrator will be notified of the need for such changes at the close of the case.

(f) Records. Records of the proceedings of the Board are to be kept by the Secretaries.

(i) The Chairman and the Secretaries shall have the sole power to access the BoC records and shall do so only on official business of the Board.

(ii) The official minutes of proceedings resulting in convictions shall include the names of all persons concerned, the decisions reached by the Board with corresponding vote tallies, a description of any previous convictions, as well as the names of the members of the Board present.

(g) Collaboration with other bodies.

(i) The BoC may collaborate with the Graduate Review Board (GRB), the Dean of Students, the Director of Residence Life, and the Conduct Review Committee.

(ii) If a case involves both a undergraduate and graduate defendant, the Chairman and Secretary may conduct the preliminary investigation with the Chairman and Secretary of the GRB. The Chairman and Secretary of the GRB may sit in on the Board hearing for the case and shall not have a vote. The GRB shall have access to the records for this case.

(h) Review and Appeals.

(i) The Dean of Students will review all cases resulting in conviction conducted by the Board of Control. The Dean reserves the right to call for a reinvestigation of any case resulting in conviction upon suspicion of bias, incomplete information, or if additional relevant evidence becomes available.

(ii) Persons convicted of an honor code violation by the Board may raise objections to any aspect of the Board’s conviction, nullification and protection decisions for consideration by the Dean, who could make an independent assessment if warranted. The defendant should submit such objections in writing along with any supplementary material to the Dean within 10 days.

(iii) Final decisions for persons convicted of an honor code violation by the Board are made by the Dean, except as possibly modified through point (v) below.

(iv) The Dean shall be consulted in all cases the Board wants to dismiss, whether as a result of the preliminary investigation or a full hearing, without the names or identifying details of any involved persons being revealed. As a result of this consultation, further action by the Board may be agreed upon by the Board and Dean. If this further action leaves the Board’s decision to dismiss unchanged, or if no further action is taken, then the dismissal decision becomes final. Final decisions for persons dismissed of an honor code violation are made by the Board. All finalized dismissals shall be reported to the Dean for the purpose of keeping anonymized statistics.

(v) Cases resulting in leave shall receive a procedural review through the Vice President for Student Affairs.


Proposed Text

ARTICLE XIII--BOARD OF CONTROL

SECTION 1. Purpose and Duties. The Board of Control (BoC) shall investigate allegations of academic violations of the Honor Code by undergraduates and provide findings of fact and recommendations for conviction, nullification, and protection to the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students. In this article, the term “Dean” will refer to the Dean and Associate Deans.

SECTION 2. Membership, Elections, and Duties.

(a) Membership: The BoC shall consist of a Chair and two Secretaries; two members elected from each of the undergraduate houses; up to 7 at-large members appointed by the newly elected Chair and Secretaries before the beginning of third term—with 2 selected from applicants planning to live in Bechtel the following year, if any; and 1 member representing students not affiliated with any House. They all serve a term of one year.

(b) Replacement: If a BoC member fails to register or takes a leave of absence at any time during their tenure, they shall be replaced immediately in the same manner as they were selected. The replacement shall serve only for the remainder of the one-year term.

(c) Elections: Only registered undergraduates may be elected. Only registered undergraduates may vote and they may vote in only one House election. Houses must run representative elections before the beginning of third term. The election for the unaffiliated member shall be run by the Review Committee before the beginning of third term as specified in Article VII. Only registered undergraduates who did not vote in a House election, including those who live in a House, may vote for the unaffiliated representative. The unaffiliated representative may be a registered undergraduate with membership in a House.

(d) General Duties: The BoC Chair and the two Secretaries lead, organize, and review the activities of the BoC. The Chair and Secretaries assist Full Boards, but do not vote. The Chair, Secretaries, and voting members conduct preliminary investigations. Voting members serve and vote on Full Boards. If a case involves a graduate Respondent, the BoC will coordinate with the Graduate Dean.

(e) Training: By the middle of third term, the new BoC members must attend a training conducted by the Chair, Secretaries, and the Dean before conducting a preliminary investigation or serving on a case panel. Any member of the Caltech community may attend with the Chair or Dean’s approval.

SECTION 3. Reporting, Case Duration, and Confidentiality

(a) Reporting: All members of the Caltech community are expected to report suspected violations of the Honor Code by undergraduates to the BoC or the Dean. The person reporting an allegation is the Complainant. The person against whom the allegation is made is the Respondent.

(b) Case Duration: The BoC must consult the Dean if it cannot submit its Case Report to the Dean within 10 academic weeks of receiving an allegation, excluding the summer term and Respondent’s periods of unavailability for any reason, including leaves, terms abroad, vacation, or illness.

(c) Confidentiality: BoC leadership and voting members, respondents, assistants, and witnesses participating in a case (“participants”) shall not reveal to anyone within or outside the Caltech community any of the information concerning the case, including the identities of Respondent and witnesses, the allegation, evidence, BoC meetings, and/or discussions of the case. Failure to maintain confidentiality shall be considered a potential violation of the Honor Code. The exceptions to confidentiality are that:

(i) Respondent may discuss their case with persons who can provide evidence in their defense; seek support services from family, Campus resources, their assistant and their silent witness (as described and selected in Section 4); and seek professional services from therapists, attorneys, and clergy. Campus support services include RAs, RLCs, the Dean, Student Wellness Services, and the Center for Diversity. BoC leadership and voting members may seek support services from Campus resources.

(ii) Faculty, the Dean, and members of the BoC may offer support to Respondent but are not confidential resources. They may report to the BoC admissions of wrongdoing Respondent makes to them. Respondent makes such admissions to them at their own risk.

(iii) The BoC and Dean may share details of the case as needed with each other and with participants in the process, appropriate faculty, and staff to carry out the BoC process and recommendations.

(iv) Participants may share any information with the Dean or BoC.

(v) After the case, Respondent may discuss their case—or their portion of a case that has multiple respondents—with others. Once Respondent initiates such discussion, witnesses in that case may also discuss the case with others.

SECTION 4. BoC Process

(a) Oath: All persons appearing before the Full Board shall state: “I swear (or affirm) to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” Being dishonest during BoC proceedings may be considered a violation of the Honor Code.

(b) Cooperation: Respondent must cooperate promptly in scheduling appearances for any meeting they are requested to attend by the BoC or Dean. If Respondent does not so cooperate, actions may be taken without their input.

(c) Preliminary Investigation: The preliminary investigation involves these steps:

(i) The Chair:

1) Appoints 2 investigators whom the Chair approves as unbiased from among the Chair, Secretaries, and current and former voting members.

2) Requests concerns and evidence from the class instructor and/or TA.

(ii) The Investigators:

1) Notify Respondent of the allegation.

2) Invite Respondent to choose an assistant from a list of current and former BoC members and current House Presidents, approved by the Chair (“assistant”). Respondent may bring their assistant to the preliminary meeting and any future meetings with the BoC. The assistant may not speak for Respondent, but may provide support and information on the BoC process.

3) Talk to persons involved in the allegation.

4) Gather copies of all relevant evidence.

5) Discuss the allegation, available evidence, and BoC process with Respondent.

6) Determine whether there is a reasonable possibility of an Honor Code violation by Respondent and either recommend dismissal to the Dean or forward the case to a Full Board for a hearing.

7) Notify Respondent whether the case will proceed to a Full Board.

(d) Pre-Full Board: The period before the Full Board hearing involves these steps.

(i) The BoC:

1) Gives Respondent a list of the Full Board members who will hear their case.

2) Schedules Respondent’s hearing on a date that gives Respondent a reasonable time to review the evidence and prepare a defense beforehand and at an hour that Respondent finds reasonable.

3) Requests Respondent to provide evidence and witness names in their defense.

4) Answers Respondent’s questions about the process.

5) Arranges for Respondent to review the relevant evidence in person and take notes, with a BoC member present.

6) Invites Respondent to choose an assistant if they have not already done so.

7) Allows Respondent to choose a silent witness who must be a member of the Caltech community and approved by the Chair, to accompany them to meetings with BoC.

8) Requests Respondent’s input on questions to ask witnesses and issues to consider.

9) Appoints a Full Board of 5 voting members. If need be, the Chair can appoint former voting members or current House Presidents. The Chair shall exclude the preliminary investigators and those who claim, or whom the Chair determines have, an issue of bias.

10) Resolves any objection by Respondent that a Full Board member is biased.

(ii) The Dean:

1) Resolves disputes concerning bias.

2) Resolves disputes concerning scheduling.

(e) Full Board Hearing: The Full Board hearing generally involves these steps.

(i) The Chair and Secretary:

1) Assist the Full Board.

2) Take notes and maintain the record of the hearing.

3) Appoint a temporary designee from the BoC to do these duties in their absence.

(ii) The Full Board:

1) Interviews Respondent and relevant witnesses.

2) Allows Respondent to review any relevant evidence gathered after their pre-hearing evidence review and respond in writing.

3) Considers all relevant evidence.

4) Votes on resulting recommendations to the Dean.

(iii) Respondent may:

1) Select a silent witness who must be a member of the Caltech community and approved by the Chair, to accompany them to any meetings with the BoC.

2) Submit written materials in their defense before, during, or promptly after the hearing.

3) Present their defense to the Full Board.

4) Request the BoC to ask certain questions of certain witnesses.

5) Request to hold a short, private recess with their assistant, their silent witness, a Full Board member, the Chair, or the Secretary during the hearing. The Full Board member must share that information with the rest of the Full Board, the Chair, and the Secretary and remains able to vote on the case.

(iv) Attendees: Attendance at all Full Board meetings is limited to the BoC Chair and Secretaries and the Full Board. Witnesses, including Respondent, may attend only their own meetings with the Board. Respondent may bring their assistant and silent witness. No other attendees at Full Board meetings are permitted. The Board may require disruptive persons to leave.

SECTION 5. Full Board Recommendations to the Dean

(a) Definitions of Recommendations: The Full Board votes on these recommendations to the Dean:

(i) Conviction: Whether an Honor Code violation has been committed and its scope

(ii) Nullification: How to nullify the unfair advantage gained

(iii) Protection: How to uphold the Honor Code and protect the Caltech community from future violations (b) Dismissals: If the Full Board reaches a “no” vote on conviction, it shall recommend dismissal to the Dean. Where dismissal is recommended, after either the preliminary investigation or Full Board hearing, the BoC and Dean may agree on further action or finalize the dismissal. (c) Convictions:

(i) Confirmation of Access to Evidence: Before this vote, the Secretary will confirm that Respondent has had access, and a reasonable opportunity to respond, to any evidence being relied upon for this recommendation.

(ii) Preponderance of the Evidence: To recommend conviction of an Honor Code violation, the Full Board must find that the relevant evidence shows a likelihood of 50% plus at least the weight of a feather (i.e., it is more likely than not) that Respondent committed it.

(d) Protection:

(i) Past Convictions: After conviction and nullification votes are concluded, the Secretary will provide the Full Board any past Case Reports and Reinstatement documents for Respondent for consideration in making the protection recommendation.

(ii) Respondent’s Honesty: The Board may consider its view of Respondent’s honesty during the process in making the protection recommendation.

(e) Votes Required: The conviction, nullification, and protection recommendations each require a vote of 4 of 5. The dismissal or tabling of a case requires a vote of 3 of 5. Abstentions are not allowed on the conviction vote. A Full Board member who is unable to make a decision on conviction may not abstain but must vote not to convict. (f) Notification to Respondent: The Dean will communicate the results of the vote to Respondent. (g) Case Report: The Full Board will provide the Dean with a Case Report that summarizes the facts and the evidence relied upon in determining its recommendations. The Dean will provide the Report to Respondent. (h) Dean: The Dean will assess the Board’s recommendations. The Dean may instruct the BoC to re-open a case and address any issue. The Dean then decides whether to adopt, reject or modify the Board’s recommendations. The Dean will inform Respondent of their decision. (i) Confidentiality of Records: Case records are maintained and accessed by the BoC Chair and Secretaries. The BoC chair may share relevant records the for the purpose of official business.

SECTION 6. Respondent’s Options after Receiving Case Report

(a) Response: Within 7 calendar days of receiving the Case Report from the Dean, Respondent should (a) contact the Dean’s Office to schedule a meeting to discuss the Case Report, and (b) submit to the Dean any written objections to the Report and any additional information in their defense.

(b) Appeal: Within 7 calendar days of receiving the Dean’s decision letter, Respondent may submit an appeal, in writing, to the Vice President of Student Affairs (VPSA), in which case the Dean’s decision will not go into effect until the appeal is resolved. The appeal is limited to the Dean’s conviction, nullification, and/or protection decision(s) and is limited to one or more of the following grounds: a failure by the BoC or Dean to follow a procedure in this Article which resulted in an inaccurate determination of a violation of the Honor Code; the availability of new evidence or witness that were not available at the time of the Full Board hearing; or the protection decision is substantially disproportionate to the conduct. The decisions of the VPSA are final. The VPSA may instruct the BoC to re-open a case and address any issue.

SECTION 7. Reinstatement

(a) Notification to Dean and BoC: Within 6 weeks of the expiration of an involuntary leave, Respondent must:

(i) Complete a Return from Leave form

(ii) Send a letter to the Dean requesting reinstatement and explaining their plan for future compliance with the Honor Code. Respondent may elect to share this letter with the BoC.

(ii) Contact the BoC Chair or Secretary to schedule a meeting to discuss the Honor Code.

(b) Decision: The Dean makes the decision on Respondent’s reinstatement. The Dean’s decision is not appealable. The BoC may make a recommendation to the Dean on reinstatement.

Amendment 2

Legislative History

Written by Chris Johnstone and Allison Wang.

Proposed by the BoD on 31 May 2019.

Voted on and passed by undergraduates 7 June 2019; results certified (late) by the review committee 10 June 2019.

Explanation

7. Moves the turnover time period to be consistent with other bylaw requirements. Because new leadership must appoint the at-large reps by the beginning of third term, it does not make sense for turnover to occur at the beginning of third term.


If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Christopher Johnstone (cjohnsto@caltech.edu) or Allison Wang (aywang@caltech.edu).

Existing Text

Article VII

SECTION 8. Installation of CRC CoChair, IHC Chair, BoC Chair, BoC Secretaries, and Tech Editors will take place at the start of 3rd term.

Installation of all remaining Officers will take place 7th Monday of 3rd term.

An oath of office shall be administered by the retiring President to the incoming President which may take the following form: "I do solemnly swear that I will support the Articles of Incorporation of the Associated Students of the California Institute of Technology, Incorporated, and that I will discharge the duties of the office to which I was elected to the best of my ability."

The President shall administer the oath of their choice to the incoming Board of Directors.

Proposed Text

Article VII

SECTION 8. Installation of the CRC CoChair, BoC Chair, and BoC Secretaries will take place by the end of 2nd term. Installation of the IHC Chair, and Tech Editors will take place at the start of 3rd term.