GaryPavela.com is designed to be a resource on law and policy issues in higher education. The focus--drawing on over twenty years of writing in our law and policy newsletters and in publications such as The Chronicle of Higher Education, Change Magazine, and the Journal of College and University Law-- is on student development, student mental health issues, academic integrity, academic freedom and freedom of expression, due process, and risk management. The views expressed here are designed to stimulate discussion and reflection and are not a substitute for consultation with legal counsel. Your responses are welcome! Please contact me at gpavela@umd.edu.
-Gary Pavela
Featured Article Archive
[07.1] From the Chronicle of Higher Education: Only Speech Codes Should Be Censored
Section: The Chronicle Review
Volume 53, Issue 15, Page B14
http://chronicle.com/weekly/v53/i15/15b01401.htm
I often ask audience members at higher-education conferences how many of them come from campuses with "hate speech" codes. A substantial minority raise their hands, confirming research that about a third of the nation's colleges and universities continue to promulgate student disciplinary rules prohibiting expression that "subordinates" others or is "demeaning, offensive, or hateful."
Such continued adherence to speech codes is by now predictable, but remains puzzling. From a lawyer's perspective, the courts have spoken: Broadly written speech codes adopted by public institutions — and private institutions adhering to First Amendment standards — are unconstitutional. The legal parameters are becoming so well settled that enforcement of those codes may expose public-college administrators to personal liability for violating clearly established constitutional rights.
Understanding the speech-code phenomenon, however, requires looking beyond the law to the realities of campus politics. However sporadically enforced, speech codes serve the administrative purpose of broadcasting an easily identifiable institutional commitment to providing a safe and welcoming environment to a wide array of presumably vulnerable students. What's rarely considered, however, is the likely long-term impact on those very students whom administrators seek to protect.
Read the rest of the article here
[06.1] From the Chronicle of Higher Education: "Giving Them the Help They Need"
The author of a new book on student suicide says colleges need to think about a lot more than liability
http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i37/37a03901.htm
[06.2] From the Chronicle of Higher Education: Helping Troubled Students
Recent lawsuits arising from student suicides have many college administrators approaching the issue as a legal risk to manage. What are the legal risks, they wonder, of notifying parents -- or of not notifying them -- when their child seems at risk? Is it safer to suspend students who have mental-health problems? Those are the wrong questions, says the author of a new book about student suicide.
http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i37/37a03901.htm
[06.3] Student Sucide: Advice to resident advisors: From "Questions and Answers on College Student Suicide" (2006)
http://collegepubs.com/descrip/SUIappendixD.pdf
To order the book:
http://www.collegepubs.com/descrip/36.shtml
[06.4] Mood disorders and creativity
Your editor has been an advocate of using mandatory medical withdrawal procedures sparingly, if at all. In the unlikely event a student with a serious mental disorder won't accept a voluntary leave of absence, our advice is to "focus on the conduct."Read the rest of the article here
[06.5] Fifteen Principles for the Design of College Ethical Development Programs
Slowly, but with growing momentum, the subject of applied ethics is returning to American colleges and universities.
Read the rest of the article here: http://www.collegepubs.com/pdf/15_principles.pdf
[06.6] From the Chronicle of Higher Education: Curbing Boorish Conduct in the Classroom
Professors have long complained about disruptive students -- those who enter classrooms loudly and late, talk on cellphones, or read newspapers during lectures and discussions. Administrators and professors are trying new approaches to curb such behavior in their classrooms. Should professors outline expectations for conduct in their syllabuses? Can students be persuaded to turn off their cellphones? How should professors and colleges prevent disruptions in class?
Read the rest of the article here: http://chronicle.com/colloquylive/2003/08/disruptive/
[06.7] Ten principles for members of student conduct hearing boards
1. Disciplinary systems should reflect the diversity of campus cultures.
Beyond the basic elements of due process (notice, an opportunity to be heard, and final decisions supported by substantial evidence), there is no universal model prescribed by the courts for fact-finding and judicial decision-making. Lawful procedures will vary from campus to campus, and may include an initial focus on medication rather than adjudication, "structured conversations" rather than formal hearings, and recommendations to senior officials rather than appellate panels. To paraphrase Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis (1856-1941), each campus disciplinary system is a unique "social laboratory." By experimenting with different approaches in fact-finding and dispute resolution, these "laboratories" promote and refine core institutional values, while providing new models to the larger society. College disciplinary board members should be wary of stereotyped images of the law (usually the criminal model portrayed in the popular media) and study the design of their campus disciplinary system with an open mind.
Read the rest of the Ten Principles
[06.8] Friendship, fidelity and academic integrity
What follows is the revised text of a speech given by Gary Pavela on August 23, 2004 to the incoming class at Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas. The occasion was the inauguration of Trinity's new academic honor code—the result of a five year effort by students, administrators, and faculty members. The theme of the speech reflects the view that students (especially students in the "millennial" generation) are strongly peer oriented. They should be encouraged to see a commitment to academic integrity as a commitment to truth—and to understand that a commitment to truth is precisely the quality that allows true friendship to endure. Although the speech was given before an audience of several hundred students, it contains questions designed to encourage active participation.
