Essay On Lack Of Accountability

In 2011 the Department of Education released a “Dear Colleague” letter aimed at reminding educators of a fact established by the Supreme Court: under Title IX, schools much ensure survivors of sexual assault can stay in school and learn safely and notified colleges and university that the federal government was going to be aggressive on sexual misconduct. However, under DeVos’s new ruling the federal government is pulling back their investigation into sexual assault on college campuses.

As it is seen time and time again, issues and problems about Title IX are discussed in a degrading manner. In the past, people

Title IX requires certain programs and professionals in order to be in full compliance with the law. To better enforce these regulations, Lhamon created a document of ‘guidance’ in order to streamline the process of enforcing Title IX regulations across campuses. Counter to the claim of Senator Harkin, Senator Alexander questioned the power of the Department of Education and their authority to create and enforce what Lhamon repeatedly referred to as ‘guidance.’ Instead of advocating for more power for the Department, Senator Alexander argued that it was beyond the scope of the Department’s authority to create and enforce regulatory measures without undergoing traditional legal proceedings. While Senator Harkin argued that Lhamon should have more of an enforcement authority, Senator Alexander disagreed with the means to which that authority was

‘Sexual Violence is more than just a crime against individuals. It threatens our families; it threatens our communities. Ultimately, it threatens the entire country’ (qtd. in Burleigh pg. 2). In the article, “Confronting Campus Rape” written by Nina Burleigh; a writer, journalist, and professor at Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, describes what students are doing to force universities to take a stronger stand against campus sexual assault. Moreover Burleigh describes what the government is doing to make a difference on the issue. This includes laws that have created consequences for the assaulter and laws that protect the victim. According to Burleigh, a young woman called Laura Dunn was sexually assaulted on campus. Dunn was a student of UW. On April 4th, 2014, Dunn lost her virginity to two UW athletes. That night, Dunn was attending a party at the university. Dunn was enjoying the party and lost count of her alcohol intake. Dunn remembers being led out by two older teammates, who she knew. Dunn was very intoxicated, enough to stumble on her way back to what she thought would be another campus party, as one of the athletes helped her walk. The athletes led Dunn to one of their apartments where she found herself on a bed with both of them on top of her. Dunn was so intoxicated that she couldn’t help but to drift in and out of conscious leaving her unable to stop the two men. Dunn began to feel sick and was led to the bathroom by one of the athletes, where he penetrated her from behind while she was throwing up. That was a date Dunn would never forget. Dunn like many other women at the UW have been sexually abused by other students. Although Dun’s incident is shocking, it is not uncommon for women to be sexually assaulted on campus. A woman at the  university of Wisconsin is more prone to being sexually assaulted than any other woman in the country because of alcohol intoxication; this is a problem that must be resolved.

This paper discussions how race and sexual harassment are being kept, and dealt with, as separate entities and college campuses should not treat these issues as individually. Drawing attention and raising awareness about discrimination based on race, ethnicity and gender the authors want to show how these can affect sexual harassment on campus.

Kaplin & Lee (2014) describe the law in higher education as “pervasive and inescapable” (p.11) because it is integrated into every area of campus activities. Postsecondary intuitions must observe laws and regulations from external sources such as the federal, state, and local government as well as accrediting agencies and athletic associations. Along with external sources, it also must adhere to its own internal policies that are specific to its institution. Regulations can be overbearing because it leaves little room for error to be made, and if so could lead to legal disputes. But on the other hand, laws ensure accountability and ensure that issues within an institution are being addressed properly. An example of this is Dixon v. Alabama

This allows the discipline to remain at a local level, where there is someone with a better understanding of the situation and allows for a better synopsis. This also helps to alleviate the issue of the case being pushed over the heads of the school administration to the school board or special committee with no knowledge of the situation, and allows them to focus more on the tasks that they have. Once all parties have been notified and made fully aware of the charges or cause for discipline, then the actual discipline or consequence can be issued. Students are entitled to an informal hearing, at a minimum, before being suspended or expelled (Due Process).

During this past summer, The University of North Carolina (UNC) was infected with a micro-aggressive pandemic. Micro-aggression is everyday put downs or insults which is towards a socially devalued group of well-intended people who may be unaware that they have engaged in such biased behaviors (Sue, D. W., Sue, D., & Sue, D. W., 2003). The entire campus was tormented with the politically correct malady. The University officials discharged guidelines to the staff on issues ranging from gender-neutral dress codes to conversations about women's shoes in hopes of spreading off the atrocious disease. One of the guidelines of the University's Employee Forum advised against complimenting a woman on her chores of footwear. Campus Reform was the first to the Universities micro-aggression policy. It covered everything from Islam to transgenderism. To compliment a lady on her choice of shoes would be considered micro-aggression meaning "I notice how you look and dress more than I value your intellectual contributions. How you look is really important." (Todd Starnes, 2016)

The use of trigger warnings and avoidance of microagressions has already been showcased at many prominent institutions of higher learning. It has been seen not only in the form of students protesting, but in some cases in administrations adopting policies and demanding professors to avoid certain topics for the sake of accommodating the psyche of students who anticipate being offended. Haidt and Lukianoff provide the example of the University of California, where professors were given lists of microaggressions, including statements such as “‘America is the land of opportunity’ and ‘I believe the most qualified person should get the job’” (Haidt/Lukianoff 3). Microaggressions have made the jump from recognizing someone’s ignorance, or even a simple error in word-choice to reporting and reprimanding the “aggressor”. One notable instance of a microaggression reporting system is from Ithaca College. According to Noreyana Fernando in an article for The Ithaca Voice, the college is implementing an online system by which students can report and publish instances by which they feel victimized by a microaggression. In this system, the person responsible for the offense will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and a punishment may be determined by representative students or administrators (Fernando 1). While the fact each case will be handled individually is a good thing, the fact that microaggressions will be publicly reported in the first place and need to be resolved officially is

In June of 2015, Teresa Buchanan lost her job as a professor at the Louisiana State University for creating violation the school’s code of ethics, creating a hostile environment, and sexual harassment. The professor did not harass, bully, or threaten anyone. However, a series of bad jokes led to the demise of her employment with the university. Harmless jokes are usually not an issue, but when sexual jokes and vulgar language are at hand, there is a higher probability for someone to be at risk for dismissal from any professional establishment. Buchanan claims her rights to free speech and due process were violated. As a result of the school’s actions and the censoring of her free speech, the faculty tenured professor plans

This essay argues that universities have gone too far in suppressing unpopular, even distasteful, speech that is accorded the highest degree of First Amendment protection and that is vital to facilitating the robust exchange of ideas and viewpoints among students and faculty. As discussed below, university administrators have censored faculty members and, in some cases, adopted policies that discourage core political speech, discriminate against speech on the basis of its content, and deter faculty and students from expressing controversial views.

College administrations have tried very little, and accomplished even less when it comes to dealing with anti-Semitism on campuses. Many administrators are reluctant to treat Jewish victimization in the way they it treats complaints of mistreatment from people of color and women. Administrative indifference to anti-Israel, anti-Jewish incidents on the University of California a Irvine campus was so severe that the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) was compelled a decade ago to file a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education alleging violations of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Administration is determined to protect free speech, and does so by ignoring anti-Semitism that is disguised at anti-Zionism. However, there should be a red line between protecting students’ free speech, including repugnant speech involving Jews and Israel. Administration should be held accountable for campus- sanctioned groups such as Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) when they engage in behavior such as disrupting pro-Israel speakers or setting up blatant mechanisms designed to intimidate Jewish

In her testimony before the New York City Commission on Human Rights, Bernice Sandler delivered an evidence-based account of sex discrimination at all levels of higher educational institutions. At the time, no laws had been enacted to prohibit discrimination in education. At the start of Sandler’s fight against employment bias, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had yet to be amended to cover academic institutions and to forbid sex discrimination in employment. A crucial element of this was for it to apply to – upon amendment – all universities regardless of their type (public or private) and federal funding status. This act also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commissioned to enforce Title VII. The act’s specific exclusion

Consistent with the University Nondiscrimination Policy and Sexual Harassment Policy, harassment on the basis of a legally protected classification, such as racial harassment or sexual harassment, is prohibited. This policy statement will be applied with due respect for the University’s commitment to equality of opportunity, human dignity, diversity, and academic freedom, and, when constitutionally protected speech is implicated, only to the extent consistent with the First

With the information gathered, the creation of a more effective and adequate disciplinary policy can be formulated. This policy will work to reduce the number of minority students being removed their educational institutions. Also, the policy will be a revision of discipline policies that are currently ineffective and inadequate to addressing the misbehaviors of students; such as the Grounds for Possible Suspension or Expulsion policy.