Proposed Changes to the Student Handbook for 2024-25

Authority and Reach of the Code

• Updated the definition of “students” who are subject to the Code  (page 1)
• Provided factors for the university to determine when application of the Code to off campus conduct is appropriate (“Where Does the Code Apply?”)  (page 2)

Rationale: These changes are needed to clarify to whom the Code applies and the definition of who is a “student” subject to the Code (“To Whom Does the Code Apply?”)

Violations

• Updated the Disruptive Behavior Policy (page 6) and added Sanctioning Guidelines (pages 33-34)

Rationale: The proposed changes add clarity about what constitutes disruptive behavior and offers transparency around the rubric employed by those imposing sanctions for violations.

Students' Rights

• Added a provision to provide the student a copy of the report at issue when they receive their initial notice (page 10)

Rationale: This provision is being added to enhance transparency for students. It will provide students more information up front to allow them to make more informed decisions about how they wish to resolve reported conduct.

Interim Measures/Suspension

• Updated the entire policy to include more robust information regarding the purpose and process for issuance of interim measures/suspension (pages 11-14)
• Enumerated factors the university will apply to determine whether interim action is appropriate (page 11)
• Clarified the process for students to appeal interim actions/suspension (page 13)

Rationale: These changes/additions will provide greater clarity about the process of issuing interim measures, including the factors considered before issuing interim measures (which includes interim suspension) as well as appealing such actions.

Alternative Resolution

• Provided more detail regarding Alternative Resolution (pages 19-20)
• Clarified that if a student resolves via Alternative Resolution, the university will not disclose the record of resolution to outside parties (page 20)
• Provided factors the Director will consider when determining whether a matter is eligible for Alternative Resolution (page 20)

Rationale: While Alternative Resolution is included in the prior version of the Handbook, we are seeking to provide more clarity for students as we continue expanding our use of Alternative Resolution. Providing clarity as the factors used  to determine eligibility for Alternative Resolution will lead to consistent and transparent decision-making.

Student Panels

• To ensure consistency, Panels now will recommend sanctions to the Director, which the Director will consider as part of a comprehensive post-panel review (pages 22-23)

Rationale: Because panels are comprised of different combinations of students, faculty, and staff, sanction reviews by the Director are designed to ensure greater consistency across cases and reduce the chance for arbitrary and capricious decisions.

Sanctions

• Removed Deferred Disciplinary Suspension as a Primary Sanction in Conduct Cases
  (removed from primary sanction descriptions on pages 29-32)

Rationale: When we evaluated the full range of Primary Sanctions, the difference between Probation and Deferred Suspension was not obvious to most students, and maintaining the two sanctions proved confusing to many. Also, since Deferred Suspension involves an automatic loss of several privileges, including representing the university and holding an office in a student organization, we concluded that this approach was reflective of a more punitive approach than we currently employ. As our process seeks to educate and develop students, an automatic loss of privileges does not serve our interests. The existing Probation sanction meets our needs, and should there be occasions on which loss of specific privileges is appropriate, this can be accomplished via targeted Secondary Sanctions.

• Provided enumerated factors to be considered when determining sanctions (pages 28-29)
• Incorporated Sanction Guidelines into the Code for clarity (pages 33-40)

Rationale: Including the factors and Guidelines in the Handbook will provide for increased transparency and clarity.

Appeals

• Eliminated the Appeals Committee from providing a “merit” review for Conduct cases
  (removed from "Procedure for Appeals" on pages 42-43)

Rationale: With the use of Informal Resolution and Alternative Resolution, we have few appeals that would be forwarded to the Committee, yet the university spends considerable resources in appointing, training, and maintaining the Appeals Committee. We have concluded that a merit review is not necessary and instead appeals will go directly to the VPSA/designee for review. This removes a barrier for students to receive an appeal review.

Revised Grounds for Appeal

• Removed Discrimination from the list of grounds
  (removed from "Grounds for Appeal" on page 41)

Rationale:  We streamlined the appeals language by removing a ground that is redundant. The content that would inform a claim of discrimination can be addressed via the existing Procedural Irregularity ground and/or through a report to Compliance & Equity.

• Revised Sanctions Appeal Ground
  (page 41, starting with "Sanctions that either exceed the Code of Conduct's Guidelines...")

Rationale: With the inclusion of clearer Sanctions Guidelines, outcomes will be more consistent, and students will better understand the bases for sanctions. Students will be able to appeal sanctions when sanctions deviate from the Guidelines without adequate justification. In addition, if students have personal circumstances that render a sanction as issued to be uniquely harsh to them, they will be able to ask for a sanction review by appealing.