Higher education has faced dramatic challenges these past few years, prompting high-profile changes to university leadership and a rethinking of campus policies.

It’s been a bumpy road for school administrators and legal counsel with the Covid-19 pandemic, overseas wars, artificial intelligence, and campus protests that resulted in arrests and mass disciplining of students.

This academic year, colleges, university presidents, and boards should consider further updates to campus policies to manage student protests and ensure compliance with new regulations.

Against this backdrop, campus leadership might feel some trepidation. But just as the Chinese characters for “crisis” can also be translated as “danger” and “an inflection point for change,” these recent events offer a roadmap for what does and doesn’t work in higher education.

Universities and colleges may be tempted to fashion new policies that add new types of violations to their existing ones. However, reviewing existing policies and ensuring their consistent, fair, effective application is often appropriate and sufficient.

AI Conundrum

The pandemic forced education into the digital age by making many classes and exams fully virtual. Predictably, this caused grave concerns about academic misconduct and students potentially cheating during remote exams. In response, an overnight industry of remote proctoring sprang up.

This response brought some attendant inequities. Some students were accused of cheating based on such evidence as being in a noisy environment where other voices might be heard, or excessive eye movements away from the screen.

Like the plagiarism checker applications that arose with the age of internet research, these remote proctoring technologies posed a seductive tech solution to what appeared to be a new crime. Of course, there was no new crime. The violations of cheating and plagiarism hadn’t changed. Only the means of accomplishing them had grown.

The same problems are true with AI use by students in completing assignments. Some plagiarism checker applications boast of detecting AI writing versus human (student) composed writing.

Aside from debates over the veracity of such claims, schools may want to resist policing tech advances with different tech solutions, and focus instead on teaching responsible, ethical use.

The powerful and inexorable growth of AI can’t be curbed, and may result in unfair accusations against students. Schools should prioritize teaching, not policing, when it comes to adapting education in the AI era.

Policy Revamp

Student protests are a recurring challenge, and today’s universities should incorporate guidance from past lessons in response to current challenges.

Often, schools already have the tools for these solutions in their existing arsenal: conduct codes and best practices to guide communication with students, student organizations, and law enforcement.

Many universities don’t fully leverage their existing tools, such as conduct codes and best practices, to effectively manage these situations. When advising higher education institutions how to navigate the complex dynamics between students, student organizations, and law enforcement, all parties’ interests should be acknowledged and balanced.

Universities should guard against conflating law enforcement issues with student conduct. The line is easy to discern when it comes to campus protests: if there is violence, it’s a law enforcement issue.

Campus violence may also have attendant consequences, such as probation from school, suspension, or even expulsion. But short of violence, student protests should be considered a student conduct issue, not a law enforcement issue.

Existing student conduct codes will already bar threats, harassment, disrupting classes, and even “hate speech.” Adding new categories of violations for “gatherings,” “occupying buildings,” much less expressing any particular opinion about an issue such as the Israel-Hamas war, are largely unnecessary.

Universities with proper policies can likely rely on the good old-fashioned hard work of communication to prevent disruption and potential violence.

University leadership should review processes for coordinating and updating law enforcement about plans for emergency responses and, more importantly, preventing emergencies. Many campuses demonstrated great foresight by barricading areas where encampments might occur.

This solution, however, is only one tool among many. Reminding students of the institution’s principles and community values of education and respect lays a great foundation for any enforcement of student conduct codes.

Schools have found that organized, structured involvement and collaboration with student organizations is critical. Student affinity groups, including Greek life organizations and even sports teams, can be powerful catalysts in the quality of student life.

Involving these groups in wrestling with important social issues early and often can be effective in heading off explosive campus conflicts.

Engendering positive relationships with current students through these collaborative efforts often translates to increased alumni goodwill—a crucial element for campus leadership.

Schools already have the tools they need to evolve education, so long as they remember to use them.

Reproduced with permission. Published Aug. 20, 2024. Copyright 2024 by Bloomberg Industry Group, Inc. (800-372-1033) http://www.bloombergindustry.com