However, these advisers are rarely used by students. Jeff Neal, a spokesperson for FAS, confirmed that “only a small percentage” of students make use of the option.

Biology professor Richard M. Losick, who has served as a personal adviser for students before the Ad Board, said he thinks freshmen are at a particular disadvantage in the Ad Board’s advisory system because they have had less time to develop close bonds with possible advisers.

But although current UC President Danny P. Bicknell ’13 acknowledged that freshmen face a slight inherent disadvantage in the advisory process, he said he thinks individual initiative often plays a larger role than class year in determining access to advising.

“You can’t necessarily say that time will make stronger relationships—a freshman may be able to establish the same strength of a relationship as a senior,” Bicknell said.

But Michael R. Schneider, a lawyer who has advised undergraduates facing the Ad Board, argued that even when personal advisers are used, they lack the training necessary to truly serve a student’s needs during the Ad Board process.

According to Neal, personal advisers do receive some training. Neal, who declined to speak in person or by phone about the Ad Board, wrote in an emailed statement that Ellison offers information to every adviser assigned to a case.

Still, the efficacy of this adviser briefing is unclear.

Natasha, a student who went before the Ad Board for a non-academic disciplinary case, chose her resident tutor as her personal adviser. However, Natasha’s personal adviser, a first-year tutor who had never been before the Ad Board during his time as an undergraduate at the College, admitted that he knew little about the Board’s processes.

Before he accompanied Natasha to her subcommittee hearing, he told her he didn’t know how to help her and could only offer moral support, recalled Natasha, who requested that her name be changed because she did not want it known that she has gone before Ad Board.

THE RESIDENT DEAN

Today, with few accused students taking advantage of the option to have a personal adviser in the Ad Board process, critics say that the flaws of the resident dean’s role in the process remain.

The Ad Board’s website states that the role of the student’s official Board representative—typically the resident dean—is that of a liaison: “He or she will be present at all meetings and will make certain that you are kept informed throughout the process. Your Board Representative also will present to the Board a full summary of the facts of the case in which you are involved; he or she will not advocate for you but will make certain that your perspective is clearly presented.”

But nowhere on the website is it explicitly stated that unlike certified mental health practitioners and lawyers, the confidentiality of a student’s conversations with his or her resident dean is not protected under the law.

In practice, Losick said, accused students often expect that their resident dean will act as their advocate and will respect the confidentiality of their communications.

“They’re assuming the resident dean is someone who they can confide in,” Losick said. ”I’ve seen time and again this is not the case—the resident dean is beholden to the Ad Board and not to the student.”