Managing Classroom Behavior: Student Expectations and Faculty Guidelines

© 2011 The Advisory Board Company

STUDENT AFFAIRS LEADERSHIP COUNCIL

Managing Classroom Behavior:

Student Expectations and Faculty

Guidelines

Custom Research Brief

August 23, 2011

I. Research Methodology II. Executive Summary

III. Classroom Behavior Policies

IV. Communicating Expectations to Students V. Providing Faculty with Behavior

Management Guidelines Networking Contacts

T

R

A

R

M

THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

I.

R

ESEARCH

M

ETHODOLOGY

Project Challenge

Leadership at a member institution approached the Council with the following questions:

Project Sources

Education Advisory Board’s internal and online (www.educationadvisoryboard.com) research libraries

The Chronicle of Higher Education (http://chronicle.com)

National Center for Education Statistics [NCES] (http://nces.ed.gov/)

Research Parameters

The Council interviewed administrators at colleges and universities with classroom behavior policies and arts colleges.

A Guide to Institutions Profiled in this Brief

Institution

Location

Approximate

Enrollment

Classification

Type

Small City 24,600

Research Universities (very

high research activity) Public

University B Mid-Atlantic

Large City 2,100

Special Focus Institutions--Schools of art, music, and

design

Private

University C Mid-Atlantic

Small City 5,800

Master's Colleges and Universities (medium

programs)

Public

University D Mid-Atlantic

Large City 2,400

Special Focus Institutions--Schools of art, music, and

design Private University E Midwest Remote Town 12,700

Master's Colleges and Universities (larger

programs)

Public

Source: National Center for Education Statistics

What guidelines are in place to set expectations for classroom behavior? How are expectations set and communicated, especially for seminar-style classes that require frequent interaction and discussion? Are expectations outlined in course syllabi?

How are such classroom behavior guidelines determined? Who is involved in this process? What distinguishes a classroom management issue from threatening behavior? What guidance do other institutions provide faculty for identifying and responding to each type of behavior issue?

Do full-time and/or part-time faculty receive classroom management training? If so, what is included in this training?

What process is in place for responding to concerning classroom behavior? Who addresses concerns identified by faculty members?

At what point may a student be denied attendance to class due to concerning behavior? Who is responsible for determining and communicating this?

II.

E

XECUTIVE

S

UMMARY

© 2011 The Advisory Board Company 3

Key Observations

 Contacts observe that disruptive classroom behavior is rarely the result of student intent, but rather a naiveté of accepted behavioral norms. Contacts find that introducing expectations at the beginning of each term significantly reduces minor disruptions. Contacts employ various techniques to introduce behavioral expectations: some include specific expectations in course syllabi; faculty in the College of Business and Technology at University E may request students sign a classroom behavior contract; student affairs administrators at University C host a skit about disruptive classroom behaviors during new student orientation, followed by a discussion of what behaviors are unacceptable and why they interfere with classroom instruction.

 Contacts note hesitation among some faculty to introduce and enforce classroom behavior rules for students, but mitigate this hesitation through education and encouragement from fellow faculty and administrators. Contacts attribute this hesitation to concern that rules will not be well-received by students or a fear of eliciting punishment. To allay these concerns, administrators offer to support faculty confronting disruptive students and describe the positive difference a policy has affected in class among fellow faculty members. Contacts at University C attribute success of classroom management guidelines to the faculty senate’s initiation and implementation of the policy, rather than university administrators’.

 Contacts share a desire to enhance classroom management training for faculty. Current training practices among contact institutions are limited, and often target new faculty or graduate teaching assistants. Because the new faculty and graduate teaching assistants are either inexperienced or in close proximity to the age of their students, contacts prioritize these groups to receive classroom management training. In partnership with the counseling center director, student affairs administrators at University C host a voluntary training session that addresses forms of concerning behavior and symptoms of behavioral issues, and offer strategies and resources for managing them.

 Across contact institutions, guidelines are in place for responding to mild, concerning, and threatening behavior. Typically, policy suggests that faculty first address mild disruptions (e.g., whispered conversations, cell phone use, tardiness) by reminding the class as a group, rather than an individual student, of acceptable classroom behavior. If the problem persists, faculty are encouraged to speak to a student outside of class. For sustained disruptions that have been previously addressed, faculty are encouraged to elevate the issue to a department chair or to student affairs administrator. Faculty are also encouraged to contact a department chair or student affairs administrator for any disruptions they consider concerning or are uncomfortable managing personally. Behavior that is considered threatening should be brought immediately to the attention of campus safety personnel, who typically remove threatening students from class; subsequently, incidents should be brought to the attention of student affairs administrators, who will proceed with adjudication if necessary.

 Contact institutions also share similar policies regarding the removal of disruptive students from class both temporarily and permanently. Faculty at contact institutions may remove a student from class if the level of disruption prevents class from continuing or if there is an immediate threat of danger. If the student refuses to leave when requested by the faculty member, he or she is informed that campus safety will be notified, and will be escorted from class. To remove a student from class permanently, most institutions require an adjudication process; this is typically not a decision a faculty member can make autonomously.

III.

C

LASSROOM

B

EHAVIOR

P

OLICIES

Several contact institutions maintain specific policies delineating expected classroom behavior for students and providing protocol faculty may follow to address varying degrees of disruptive behavior. The context and content of these policies are described below; the full policies are included in Appendices A and B.

University A

: Policy on Classroom Behavior

The Office of the General Counsel maintains an online database of university policies; this includes a policy which describes specific classroom behaviors that will not be tolerated, and outlines appropriate faculty responses to various student behaviors. Responsibility for this policy is shared between the provost’s office and the student conduct office. The former manages disseminating the policy among faculty and the latter enforces it through complaint resolution and the student adjudication process. (See Appendix A for full policy.)

University C

: Classroom Responsibilities of Faculty and Students

This policy was originated approximately eight years ago by the faculty senate, whose members recognized widespread classroom disruption. This issue was largely attributed to a lack of awareness of behavior expectations among students and a lack of awareness among faculty of appropriate methods of response.

Prior to the development of this policy, the code of student conduct included a provision against threatening behavior, but did not include clear expectations or guidelines for less severe behavior. A sub-committee of the faculty senate was formed to gather examples from policies at other institutions and synthesized a policy that aligned with the culture at University C. Contacts note that the new policy has increased student awareness of behavior expectations and allowed faculty to manage minor issues autonomously and appropriately. Contacts attribute the success of this policy to the fact that it was originated by faculty rather than mandated for faculty. (See Appendix B for complete Class Responsibilities.)

University E

: Contract for Classroom Behavio

r

This policy was also prompted by a shared experience among faculty of disruptive classroom behavior. The Associate Dean of the College of Business and Technology and several colleagues developed a behavior policy; the contract format serves as an exercise for business students in reading and signing contracts. Faculty generated a list of disruptive behaviors, defined as any activity

that impedes on the educational environment; behaviors that are subject to personal preference, such as a student wearing a hat in class, and that do not directly affect a student’s ability to learn, were not included. Behaviors affecting only the perpetrator, such as completing homework for another class, are not prohibited; contacts believe each student has the right to be disengaged in class--provided this choice does not negatively impact the education of any other student. For example, a student completing homework for another class who becomes a distraction to other students would be subject to discipline from the instructor. Use of the contract is not limited to the college of business and is used by other colleges within the university, as well as other institutions.

Classroom Behavior Policies at Select Institutions

“The issue of classroom management is intertwined with student learning. The classroom is a community where the behaviors of individuals are interdependent. Students have the right to do what they want, but when it impacts the students around them, that’s where I draw the line.”

– Council Interview “I think it is key that, if it is a faculty policy, someone on the faculty has to champion it and take ownership of the process. If student affairs did it, it wouldn’t have gotten adopted.”

III.

C

LASSROOM

B

EHAVIOR

P

OLICIES

© 2011 The Advisory Board Company 5

Rationale for a Behavior Policy

All three policies provide context for the implementation of a behavior policy. The policies at University A

and University C explain that disruptive behavior interferes with the academic mission of the university. Similarly, the policy at University E describes the classroom as a community and reminds students that the behavior of one may impact others. All three policies also include an explanation that behavior guidelines are not meant to curtail thoughtful discussion or disagreement with a professor, if it is conducted respectfully.

Specific Examples of Disruptive Behavior

Each policy provides examples of behaviors that are not tolerated, including the following examples: Arriving late or leaving early

Using tobacco products Monopolizing class discussion Speaking out of turn

Making distracting noises Conducting side conversations Allowing a cell phone to ring, answering cell phone calls, texting Refusing to follow directions Employing insulting language or gestures

Verbally or physically threatening faculty or students

Reading newspapers or magazines Completing homework for other classes

Using a laptop to chat, watch movies, play games

Sleeping

Leaving behind trash

Guidelines for Faculty Management of Behavior

All three policies reference how faculty should respond to disruptive classroom behavior. The University A

and University C policies suggest the appropriate faculty response for initial non-threatening behavior, repeated non-threatening behavior, and threatening behavior. The University E policy does not provide specific guidelines for managing disruptive behavior, but does stipulate that faculty may deduct points from a student’s grade when the behavior contract is violated.

IV.

C

OMMUNICATING

E

XPECTATIONS TO

S

TUDENTS

According to contacts, the cause of inappropriate classroom behavior is often a lack of student awareness that certain behaviors disrupt the learning process. Many contacts have found that simply introducing behavior expectations to students at the beginning of each semester helps reduce the number of disruptions throughout the year. Contacts also emphasize that students are not always aware of how their behavior impacts other students, and observe that

explaining why certain behaviors hinder a productive learning environment is more effective than merely forbidding behavior. Across institutions, student affairs administrators ensure classroom behavior policies are accessible by including them in student handbooks and online; they also encourage faculty to include specific expectations in course syllabi. Some contacts report several additional methods of communicating expectations of behavior to students, as described below:

Introduce Expectations During Student

Orientation

As part of new student orientation, contacts at University C arrange a demonstration of students behaving poorly in class to bring a comedic element to the introduction of classroom behavior expectations. The performance is followed by a discussion about specific expectations and how individual behavior affects classmates. This session is rated highly among all orientation sessions, and has been successful in communicating classroom behavior expectations. Orientation at

University D also includes a presentation on classroom behavior expectations and refers students to the student handbook policy.

Establish Expectations

through a Contract

At University E, the contract on classroom behavior is not an institution-wide policy; implementation is at the discretion of each faculty member. In the case of its originator, the contract is distributed to students on the first day of class. Students elect to participate by taking at least one day to read the contract and return a signed copy to the professor, affirming their agreement to comply with the behavior expectations. The contract itemizes expected and unacceptable behaviors, states that students will receive five points for participating, and are subject to the deduction of one point for each violation of the contract. In other classes, professors may modify the itemization of behaviors, and may simply include these items in the syllabus rather than asking students to sign a contract.

Communicating Expectations to Students

“You can’t hold somebody to a standard unless they know what that standard is. Most students don’t intend to be disruptive. You have to explain what is unacceptable and why so they know it is more than your personal preference.”

V.

P

ROVIDING

F

ACULTY WITH

B

EHAVIOR

M

ANAGEMENT

G

UIDELINES

© 2011 The Advisory Board Company 7

Across contact institutions, contacts employ a variety of methods to communicate classroom behavior management guidelines to faculty:

Step-by-Step Instructions

At University A and University C, specific guidelines are outlined in the classroom behavior policy that dictate how faculty should respond to disruptive behavior as it first occurs, and as it increases in frequency and severity. Contacts at

University B are developing a quick-reference guide to managing classroom disruption that maps various levels of behavioral issues (individual behavior, classroom disruption, threat of danger) to recommended solutions.

New Faculty Training

Contacts at University A, University B, and University C address classroom management during orientation for new faculty and graduate teaching assistants. In most cases, this training is required, but attendance is not enforced. Contacts at University B express interest in more strictly enforcing attendance at this session, and in providing review sessions for more tenured faculty.

Informal Presentation of

Guidelines

Within the college of business at University E, the associate dean encourages faculty to notify campus safety if they or their students experience verbal or physical threats during class, and educates faculty about the student judicial process. To address minor disruptions, faculty are advised to establish behavior expectations at the beginning of each semester, but are autonomous in managing minor issues as they occur.

At University D, faculty manage minor disruptions according to their best judgment. To provide guidelines for addressing more serious behavior, student affairs administrators disseminate a letter at the beginning of each academic year to explain procedures for managing and elevating incidences of concerning behavior. Resources are also provided on the dean of students’ website that outline appropriate steps for students, faculty or staff if they observe concerning behavior. Each semester, the dean of students at University C presents at standing meetings of various faculty groups to explain the behavior policy and guidelines, and suggest that faculty include the policy in course syllabi. Contacts note that these presentations ensure that faculty are aware of the policy and who to contact when concerns arise.

V.

P

ROVIDING

F

ACULTY WITH

B

EHAVIOR

M

ANAGEMENT

G

UIDELINES

At some institutions, faculty are only provided with guidelines for handling threatening behavior, and are left to employ their best judgment for handling minor disruptive behavior. Many contacts note that insight into behavior management comes with experience, and that minor disruptive behavior is not prevalent enough to warrant implementation of formal guidelines.

“I think there is an assumption at many universities that you figure it out as you go along, and most faculty do, but what is unfortunate is the hundreds of students they come into contact with who get less from the classroom experience than they would have if the faculty had figured it out sooner.”

– Council Interview Many contacts ascribe the majority of classroom disruptions to mental health issues, which may require alternative management techniques:

Counseling Center Session for New Faculty: The counseling center at University B hosts a session for new faculty about how various mental health issues manifest in the classroom and teach them to recognize troublesome behaviors.

Coordinating with the Learning Resource Center: When a student discloses a mental health issue to the learning resource center at University B, center staff can inform faculty members about a student’s situation (to the extent a student has authorized) and develop an educational plan for managing behavior. Contacts note that providing additional support significantly reduces classroom disruption, but unfortunately, is only an option when students inform staff about their mental health situation.

Counseling Center Voluntary Training: During the academic year, the director of the counseling center at University C hosts a voluntary training session about managing difficult students. The session addresses a range of issues (e.g., a student who is not disruptive in class but produces concerning work in an English paper, or how behavioral issues of students with Autism or Asperger’s Syndrome may manifest in group work) and provides strategies and resources for managing those issues. For several years, the director of student counseling at University A has also hosted a voluntary, mid-semester workshop to educate faculty about recognizing warning signs of mental health issues.

Providing Advice for Recognizing Troubled Students: Though no in-person training is currently provided, the Dean of Students website at University D provides advice for faculty to recognize troubled students, compiled by counseling staff. (See Appendix C)

V.

P

ROVIDING

F

ACULTY WITH

B

EHAVIOR

M

ANAGEMENT

G

UIDELINES

© 2011 The Advisory Board Company 9

University A

To address non-threatening but disruptive behavior, instructors should issue a general warning to the entire class rather than an individual student; individuals may become embarrassed and defensive, which could cause the issue to escalate.

If a problem persists, an instructor should meet privately with a student to discuss the issue, explain why it is disruptive, and address potential consequences. If a problem continues, an instructor may remove a student from class for the day.

If physical or verbal threats have been made or there is a threat of immediate danger, an instructor should notify the department of public safety immediately, and the department chair shortly thereafter.

University B

If a student is not disruptive, but exhibits concerning behavior, the instructor should consult with the Associate Dean of Students for Health and Welfare.

If a student is disrupting class, the instructor should consult with the Dean of Academic Services, who supports classroom management.

If there is an immediate threat of danger, an instructor should contact campus safety immediately, and later notify the Associate Dean of Students, who manages discipline.

University C

To address disruptive behavior, an instructor should issue a general, not individual, warning. If it is necessary to address an individual during class, it should be done in a firm, respectful, and non-threatening manner.

If disruption persists, an instructor may ask a student to leave class for the day.

If a disruption is threatening, or has not been solved by reasonable measures, class may be adjourned and the university police may be summoned to remove the disruptive student from class.

University D

Faculty use their discretion when managing minor disruptions, but are encouraged to consult with administrators about concerning behaviors. Faculty are encouraged to initially report to student affairs rather than the counseling center because the former is better equipped to triage issues, and the latter is bound by confidentiality stipulations.

Instructors may ask a student to leave class for the day.

Instructors should feel empowered to contact campus security if a student exhibits threatening behavior.

University E

Management of minor issues is at the discretion of instructors; many faculty speak with students after class to avoid embarrassment. For innocuous infractions, such as a ringing phone, an instructor may address it during class and deduct a point as stipulated by the behavior contract.

Instructors may elevate concerns to the Associate Dean of the College, or may inform a student of the possibility of a student judicial hearing.

If threatening or abusive behavior occurs, instructors should inform a student that campus safety will be contacted; officers will then remove the student from class if he or she has not already departed.

Protocols for Managing Mild, Persistent, or Threatening Behavior

V.

P

ROVIDING

F

ACULTY WITH

B

EHAVIOR

M

ANAGEMENT

G

UIDELINES

University A

When faculty require additional support to manage a disruptive student, they may ask a student to meet with the conduct office about the consequences of their behavior, including a possible probationary period or punitive sanctions. Faculty are also encouraged to consult with department chairs, the director of student counseling, or the director of the center for teaching and learning. Faculty may also request that their respective department leader or college dean observe class to understand the particular behavior issue and provide advice.

University B

If an instructor cannot resolve a classroom issue independently, he or she may elevate it to the Associate Dean for Student Life, who will address the issue in a conference with the student, faculty member, and possibly the Dean of Academic Services. Issues are only elevated to the conduct board if they are severe enough to result in suspension, or if they are too complex for the discretion of one administrator.

University C

If faculty cannot resolve a disruption with a student, they should seek intervention from the department chair. If the problem persists, the issue is referred to the Dean of Students. In the rare case that an issue remains unresolved, the Dean of Students determines if the university code of student conduct has been violated, in which case a disciplinary hearing is scheduled.

University D

Faculty are encouraged to elevate concerns to student affairs administrators, who can triage and track incidents. Contacts report that some faculty tend to report issues directly to the counseling center, which is discouraged, because that center is bound by confidentiality and cannot inform others, such as the respective college dean, about student issues. Faculty are also encouraged to file reports through a software that tracks student concerns (academic, personal, physical, and mental) and conduct, helps triage concerns, and maintains a record of events and outcomes.

University E Faculty may elevate behavioral issues to the Associate Dean of the College, who

speaks to a student directly, and if necessary, schedules a judicial hearing.

When Does Art

Cross the Line?

At University D, instructors use discretion to determine whether a student’s artwork is threatening, and elevate the issue to student affairs administration when they find it concerning. Contacts at University B also defer to the discretion of faculty, who receive support and guidance from their respective department chairs. Unfortunately, the difficulty in defining “threatening” artwork yields inconsistency in what is permitted. Contacts do acknowledge that among 150 faculty, there is a wide variance in tolerance, and have even witnessed an instance in which similar work was accepted in one class, and considered harassment and elevated to the conduct board in another.

Elevating Classroom Issues to Administrators and Student Conduct Boards

What Constitutes

“Threatening

Behavior?”

Contacts generally define “threatening behavior” as abusive behavior or speech that jeopardizes the safety of the classroom. Contacts maintain this vague definition to err on the side of caution and encourage faculty to report anything they find concerning.

“I’d much rather hear all the trivial problems than not get them until they are a crisis. I am accessible all the time—there is no level it has to cross.”

V.

P

ROVIDING

F

ACULTY WITH

B

EHAVIOR

M

ANAGEMENT

G

UIDELINES

© 2011 The Advisory Board Company 11

Importance of Event Documentation

At most contact institutions, faculty may dismiss a student from the remainder of a class session, but may not permanently dismiss a student without elevating the issue to administrators. At University B faculty can excuse a student from class permanently, but must have ample, documented justification (e.g., proof that the student's grade cannot improve enough to pass with the remaining class sessions) if a student appeals his or her removal from class. Typically this decision is made by an administrator through a conduct intervention, but faculty documentation of the disruptive event is still encouraged. Contacts at University A require an adjudication process for students to be permanently removed from class. Contacts note that during conduct hearings, the charging party must prove offense, so faculty are encouraged to document specific incidents to provide evidence for the events that occurred and demonstrate that proper protocol was followed.

Removal from Class as a Final Option

At University C, permanent removal from class is a consequence administered by the student concerns committee, composed of faculty, counseling center staff, and athletics staff. The committee reviews student cases, and if a threat is established, an interim withdrawal or suspension may be mandated. The committee also establishes an appeals process required for a student to return to class, which may entail an evaluation or completion of a treatment program, depending on the nature of the conduct violation. An involuntary withdrawal may be warranted in situations when a threat or sustained disruption has occurred. Contacts note that removal from class, whether temporary or permanent, cannot be the first warning a student receives unless the behavior is threatening; a student cannot be removed from class for sustained disruptive behavior if the issue had never been previously addressed by the instructor.

Assessment of Mental State

At University D, removal from class is typically a response to a mental or physical ailment that is detrimental the student or the community; class removal is often determined by the Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students. In such cases, a student would be removed from all of his or her classes. Removal from one particular class, likely due to a personal conflict with an instructor rather than an overarching mental or physical state, would be determined by the Provost.

V.

P

ROVIDING

F

ACULTY WITH

B

EHAVIOR

M

ANAGEMENT

G

UIDELINES

Across contact institutions, many contacts note that some faculty are hesitant to report disruptive students, provide consequences for inappropriate behavior, or even set behavior expectations at the beginning of the semester. Contacts report that faculty are reluctant to set rules because they do not want to impede academic freedom or constantly reprimand students, and are concerned that students will not be receptive to behavior restrictions. For example, contacts at University E report that faculty may also hesitate to elevate issues in order to protect students from being too harshly penalized, or to protect themselves from being criticized for how they initially responded to the situation. Contacts offer several strategies for mitigating faculty resistance:

Share positive feedback from other faculty: Student affairs administrators at University C allay these fears by sharing positive feedback from faculty who have successfully implemented behavior expectations in their classrooms.

Demonstrate support of deans and department chairs: At University B, contacts have found that support from academic deans and department chairs can encourage faculty to trust outlined processes and adhere to the advice of the student life and judicial affairs administration.

Mitigating Faculty Resistance to Introduction

or Enforcement of Behavior Policies

“You aren’t scolding students, you are educating them on your duty as a professor to support student learning, and that you have to do what is necessary to help everyone succeed, and that includes being in control of the classroom.”

Appendix A

University A Policy on Classroom Behavior

Introduction

1. The goal of University A and its faculty and students is to foster a dynamic environment of higher learning where all students develop analytical skills, learn to think critically and communicate effectively, promote inquiry, pursue knowledge, and prepare for productive careers. Behavior in the classroom that impedes teaching and learning and creates obstacles to this goal is considered disruptive and therefore subject to sanctions. The purpose of these sanctions is to create and protect an optimum learning experience; they should not be considered punitive, neither by the student nor by the instructor. Disagreement expressed in a civil fashion, eccentricity, idiosyncrasy, and unconventional behavior are not, per se, disruptive to the classroom experience. These sanctions are intended only to preserve the classroom as a place to pursue knowledge, exchange ideas, and share opinions in an atmosphere of tolerance. Students have the responsibility of complying with behavioral standards. Faculty members have a professional responsibility to set reasonable limits on the expression of opinions while treating students with dignity, respect, and understanding while guiding classroom activities. At the classroom level, clear guidelines for behavior and early intervention are the foundation for an intellectually stimulating experience for students and instructors alike. Instructors are encouraged to include in their syllabi guidelines for classroom behavior. Instructors who state these guidelines early and enforce them at the first appearance of disruptive behavior prevent minor episodes of classroom misconduct from escalating into serious confrontations and help transgressors to avoid the more serious consequences of such actions. Examples of improper behavior in the classroom (including the virtual classroom of e-mail, chat rooms, telephony, and web activities associated with courses) may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1.1. Arriving after a class has begun; 1.2. Use of tobacco products; 1.3. Monopolizing discussion; 1.4. Persistent speaking out of turn;

1.5. Distractive talking, including cell phone usage;

1.6. Audio or video recording of classroom activities or the use of electronic devices without the permission of the instructor;

1.7. Refusal to comply with reasonable instructor directions; 1.8. Employing insulting language or gestures; and

1.9. Verbal, psychological, or physical threats, harassment, and physical violence.

Policy

2. When confronted with disruptive, but non-threatening behavior, the instructor should issue a general word of caution to the class as a whole rather than to a particular student so as not to exacerbate the problem.

2.1. If a general caution directed to the entire class does not stop the disruptive activity, the instructor should endeavor to meet in private with the disruptive student. The resulting discussion should include a description of the problem, the reason it is disruptive, and the consequences of continued violations of classroom behavior guidelines.

2.2. If the disruptive behavior is preventing further instruction, the instructor is authorized to ask the disruptive student to leave the class immediately for the remainder of the class session. Removal from the classroom more than one class period, for an extended period, or on a permanent basis normally requires the instructor to file charges of a violation of the University Discipline Code with the Vice President for Student Affairs. The department head/chair or dean may negotiate a withdrawal from the course or a transfer of the disruptive student to a different course section or course, if, in his or her opinion, a different instructor and different classmates would diffuse the situation and provide the disruptive student with a new learning opportunity.

2.3. If threats have been made or physical violence is imminent, the instructor should notify the University Department of Public Safety immediately. The instructor should also notify the course department head/chair or dean promptly, followed by a memo to the department head/chair or dean.

Appendix B

University C: Classroom Responsibilities of Faculty and Students

Students and faculty both have responsibilities for maintaining an appropriate learning environment based on mutual respect, in which the academic freedom of both is protected. Classroom disruptions interfere with the academic mission of the university. Faculty members in particular have the professional responsibility to treat students with understanding, dignity and fairness, and to guide classroom discussion. They should establish clear and reasonable norms for the manner in which students express opinions. Faculty members are expected to serve as role models for appropriate conduct. According to the University’s Code of Student Conduct, “The primary responsibility for managing the classroom environment rests with the faculty.”

Respectful expression of disagreement with the course instructor or other students, during times when the instructor permits discussion, is a normal and valuable part of the educational process. Disagreement per se should not be construed as disruptive behavior, nor should the provisions of these guidelines be used to punish classroom dissent. Students are permitted to ask relevant questions and voice opinions, but not in such a manner as to insult the instructor or other members of the class. Students who believe that they have been treated in an arbitrary or punitive manner by their instructors should review the matter with the faculty member, then the department chair (if necessary), and finally the Dean of Students (if necessary).

CLASSROOM DISRUPTION

Students may not disturb normal classroom procedures by distracting or disruptive behavior. Examples of disruptive behavior include, but are not limited to, the following:

Repeatedly leaving and entering the classroom without authorization Answering cellular phone or allowing pager to beep

Making loud or distracting noises

Repeatedly speaking without being recognized, interrupting the instructor or other students, or otherwise acting in disregard of the instructor’s requests

Resorting to physical threats or violence directed toward the instructor or other students.*

*Physical threats or violence are a violation of the University’s Code of Student Conduct and incidents should be referred to the Dean of Students immediately. Please consult “Standards of Classroom Behavior,” in The University Code of Student Conduct and the University’s “Policy Against Verbal Assault, Defamation and Harassment” for further information.

STRATEGIES FOR ADDRESSING CLASSROOM DISRUPTION

In the unfortunate circumstance that a student is engaging in disruptive behavior, the following responses should be considered.

If an instructor believes that inappropriate behavior is occurring, he/she should consider a general word of caution rather than warning a particular student.

If the behavior is irritating but not disruptive, the instructor may try speaking with the student(s) involved outside of class.

There may be circumstances when it is necessary to speak to a student during class about his/her behavior. This should be done in a firm, respectful, and non-threatening manner.

A student who persists in being disruptive may be asked to leave the class for the remainder of the period.

If the disruption is serious, and other reasonable measures have failed to stop the disruptive activities, the class may be adjourned, and the University Police may be summoned, if necessary, to remove the disruptive student from the classroom safely.

The faculty member should meet with the disruptive student to determine if an agreement can be reached for the student to continue in the class.

If no agreement is reached, the faculty member should seek intervention by the Departmental Chair to resolve the problem.

If the problem cannot be resolved by the faculty member and departmental chair, the matter should be referred to the Dean of Students. In most cases, disruption problems can be resolved through informal discussion of the Dean of Students with the parties involved.

In the rare cases when the issue of a dispute cannot be informally resolved, the Dean of Students will determine whether a violation of the University’s Code of Student Conduct has occurred. If a serious, unresolvable violation has occurred, a Hearing or Disciplinary Conference will be scheduled and may result in the student’s suspension from the class or the college. Procedures for disciplinary hearings and the sanctions imposed will be conducted in accordance with the University’s Code of Student Conduct. All faculty and students are entitled to the assistance of a campus advisor in resolving disputes brought to the Dean of Students. A list of trained campus advisors is available from the Dean of Students, but any member of the University C community (faculty, staff, or student) may serve in this capacity. (

Adopted by the CCAS Faculty Senate 12/05

Appendix C

University D: Tips for Recognizing Troubled Students

There are three levels of student distress which, when present over a period of time, suggest that the problems are more than “normal” ones.

Level 1 Although not disruptive to others in the class, these behaviors may indicate that something is wrong and that help may be needed:

1. Serious grade problems

2. Unaccountable change from good to poor performance 3. Change from frequent attendance to excessive absences 4. Change in pattern of interaction

5. Marked change in mood, motor activity, or speech 6. Marked change in physical appearance

Level 2 These behaviors may indicate significant emotional distress and a reluctance or inability to acknowledge a need for professional help:

1. Repeated request for special considerations

2. New or regularly occurring behavior which pushes the limits and may interfere with class management 3. Unusual or exaggerated emotional responses

Level 3 These behaviors usually show that the student is in crisis and needs emergency care:

1. Highly disruptive behavior (hostility, aggression, etc.)

2. Inability to communicate clearly (garbled slurred speech, disjointed thoughts)

3. Loss of contact with reality (seeing or hearing things that are not there; beliefs or actions at odds with reality)

4. Overt suicidal talk, including a coherent plan 5. Homicidal and/or suicidal threats

What constitutes a concern about a student?

Concerns about a student can range from missing class to a change in attitude to the death of a family member or thoughts of suicide. It also covers traumatic events that may have occurred, such as a sexual assault, car accident, etc. Regardless, we always tell students, family members and faculty and staff to trust their instincts. If they think something is wrong, they need to let us know so we can ensure that the student is doing well.

The Advisory Board has worked to ensure the accuracy of the information it provides to its members. This project relies on data obtained from many sources, however, and The Advisory Board cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information or its analysis in all cases. Further, The Advisory Board is not engaged in rendering clinical, legal, accounting, or other professional services. Its projects should not be construed as professional advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances. Members are advised to consult with their staff and senior management, or other appropriate professionals, prior to implementing any changes based on this project. Neither The Advisory Board Company nor its programs are responsible for any claims or losses that may arise from any errors or omissions in their projects, whether caused by the Advisory Board Company or its sources.

© 2011 The Advisory Board Company, 2445 M Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20037. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the Advisory Board Company. This prohibition extends to sharing this publication with clients and/or affiliate companies. All rights reserved.