# data[].attributes.body
After the completion of my Master in Education, Student Development and Leadership in Higher Education degree, I hope to continue my work in the functional area of Student Life. As I continue my journey through higher education, I eventually want to hold the position of Dean of Students. I believe this course, and areas regarding student conduct and rights, will greatly benefit me in this position one day.

# data[].attributes.headline
According to a Professional: Top 5  What I Learned

# data[].attributes.subject
According to a Professional: Top 5  What I Learned

# data[].attributes.body
I spoke with the Associate Dean of Student Engagement at Eastfield College, Katy Launius, about current legal and ethical practices that may directly impact her work.

1. As the conduct officer at Eastfield College, 1st Amendment rights and free speech are at the forefront of Ms. Launius' work. While there is less tension at community colleges than universities regarding free speech, this is still a topic which directly relates to student conduct and student life.

2. As the state of Texas implemented Campus Carry for community colleges in August 2017, student conduct hearings have been directly impacted and policies have been revised. Policy changes implemented now include a 72 hour notification period and a mandatory gun free zone established.

3. As an area under Ms. Launius' supervision, one area of ethical concern is how and if student organizations can limit their leadership roles based upon race and/or gender identity.

4. Due process rights are of the utmost importance to Ms. Launius' role as the conduct officer. In addition, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act sets boundaries of when and how schools can enforce medical withdrawal due to mental health issues. Ms. Launius said this sometimes is a fine line and often a difficult decision to weigh out and make.

5. The Association for Student Conduct Administrators (ASCA), the Office of Civil Rights, and The Chronicle of Higher Education are all sources Ms. Launius frequents to keep up to date with legislature and legal rulings directly impacting her everyday work.

(K. Launius, personal communication, August 23, 2018)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Association for Student Conduct Administration (ASCA) is the leading voice for student conduct in higher education. ASCA and its members are dedicated to upholding the integrity of the student conduct process, resulting in the ability to build safer educational communities and positively impact the higher education experience.

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration - NASPA Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration - NASPA Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education

# data[].attributes.body
During my search of the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA) website, free speech and student's first amendment rights were frequently topics of discussion. Both of these pressing issues directly impact institutions of higher education and it's students.

More recently, tensions related to race and gender identity have come to the forefront of conversations within institutions across the nation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Despite the increasing development of bias response teams on college and university campuses, little scholarship has examined these teams and, in particular, team leaders' approaches to understanding the role of free speech in responding to bias. Through semi-structured interviews, administrators who served on bias response teams at 19 predominantly White institutions described the need to balance free speech with other interests, recognize the nuance of First Amendment protections, and respond with educational conversations.

A steady stream of racist incidents have occurred at higher education institutions throughout the United States, including racial slurs painted on campus buildings, derogatory posters in university hallways, and racist messages and videos on students' social media accounts (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2016a, 2016b). In one instance at East Tennessee State University, a White man wearing a gorilla mask tried to give bananas wrapped in nooses to attendees of a Black Lives Matter rally (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2016b). Campuses also routinely witness bias directed against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer students (Rankin, Blumenfeld, Weber, & Frazer, 2010), religious minorities (Flaherty, 2016), and students with disabilities (Gonzales, Davidoff, Nadal, & Yanos, 2015), among other groups.

In many bias incidents in higher education, the role of First Amendment protections- particularly free speech-constitutes a flashpoint of disagreement among various constituencies. While some students, faculty members, and groups external to higher education argue for absolute free speech and detest any response from college administrators, others deplore what they view as impermissible hate speech and insist that institutions respond in a visible manner. As the number of bias response teams increased across the country, their presence has been the subject of critique by some free-speech advocates who pointed to the disbanding of a bias response team at the University of Northern Colorado following concerns a faculty member's academic freedom was compromised (Jaschik, 2016b) and the delayed implementation of a team at the University of Iowa (Jaschik, 2016a). In response, many students and student affairs administrators argued the teams serve an important role for students who may not otherwise know where to report or how to address such incidents (New, 2016). These differing perspectives necessitate consideration of the processes used by administrators who serve on bias response teams to respond to incidents that may be considered free speech. This study aims to answer the research question: How do bias response team members understand their roles concerning free speech?

Bias and Bias Response in Higher Education

To place this study in context, this section reviews several types of bias and bias incidents in higher education, followed by a consideration of student affairs administrators' attempts to protect free speech and promote diverse and inclusive campus environments. Lastly, the recent formation of bias response teams on campuses is reviewed. In addition to peer-reviewed sources, we also cite news articles, given the rapidly changing landscape on this topic and the lack of published scholarship examining bias response teams.

Bias Incidents on College and University Campuses

An abundant literature examines the extent and nature of various forms of bias on and off college and university campuses, including in online spaces. Bias incidents are defined as conduct, speech, and expression that are motivated by prejudice but which "do not involve criminal conduct such as assault, threats, or property damage" (Wessler & Moss, 2001, p. 17). A hate crime is classified as "a crime of violence, property damage, or threat that is motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias based on race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, gender, physical or mental disability, or sexual orientation" (Wessler & Moss, 2001, p. 17). Because free speech protections do not apply to criminal acts, this article focuses on institutional responses to bias incidents rather than hate crimes. Bias incidents may still include conduct or expression prohibited by institutional policy at public and private institutions. Such incidents only become classified as hate crimes if criminal activity is part of the incident (e.g., a student uses racial slurs while physically assaulting another student).

Some forms of bias in higher education are known as microaggressions (Sue, 2010), or "brief, everyday interactions that send denigrating messages" which are "subtle and insidious, often leaving the victim confused, distressed, and frustrated" (Rollock, 2012, p. 517). Examples of such instances on college campuses documented in the literature include racial microaggressions directed at students of Color in residence halls (e.g., racial jokes, racial slurs written in shared spaces; Harwood, Huntt, Mendenhall, & Lewis, 2012) and sexual orientation microaggressions, like the use of the popular expression, "that's so gay," by heterosexual male undergraduates (Woodford, Howell, Kulick, & Silverschanz, 2013). Many microaggressions might be considered expressions of free speech that violate no laws or institutional policies, presenting a potential challenge for bias response team leaders.

Research has also addressed bias in various campus environments, including in the classroom (Boysen, 2012; Boysen & Vogel, 2009; Boysen, Vogel, Cope, & Hubbard, 2009). One study found half of all students experienced bias in the classroom (Boysen et al., 2009). In addition, student organizations and off-campus parties with derogatory themes have been sites for bias incidents in numerous colleges and universities (Garcia, Johnston, Garibay, Herrera, & Giraldo, 2011). Most recently, technological advances present digital opportunities through which bias may be transmitted (Harris & Ray, 2014; Schroeder, 2013). Such digital forms of bias have targeted American Indians, including weblog responses to a university's removal of a racialized mascot (Clark, Spanierman, Reed, Soble, & Cabana, 2011), and Asian Americans, including a highly publicized instance of a video mocking Asian American students that went viral online and prompted Asian American students to report additional experiences of bias (Johnston & Yeung, 2014).

Administrative Responses to Bias: Balancing Free Speech and Diversity

While not all bias incidents involve the exercise of free speech, those that do present challenges for administrators considering options for an institutional response. In such cases, formal disciplinary processes for addressing policy violations and criminal acts do not provide appropriate guidance. Guided by institutional missions, student affairs administrators are chal- lenged to "simultaneously promote campus diversity and free speech" (Varlotta, 1997, p. 127). Within student affairs, scholars and practitioners have long considered the role of free speech protections in guiding administrators' decisions and attempts to create inclusive environments (see Klepper & Bakken, 1997; Laramee, 1991; Palmer, Penney, Gehring, & Neiger, 1997; Paterson, 1994; Varlotta, 1997). This flurry of scholarship in student affairs in the 1990s followed judicial rebuke of colleges and universities that created rigid campus speech codes in the 1980s and early 1990s (for discussion, see Kaplin & Lee, 2014, pp. 624-636).

Since campus speech codes began to be struck down, judicial rulings have generally protected the free speech rights of students at public colleges and universities (Olivas & Gajda, 2015). While private colleges and universities are not state actors and thus may restrict speech, in practice, many private institutions attempt to extend free speech protections to their student bodies by policy, practice, or according to state law (Levinson, 2007). Given this reality, administrators must respect the boundaries of relevant First Amendment protections while refraining from judging all attempts to discuss bias and diversity on campus through a legal lens. Administrators can create generative educational opportunities for engaging diversity without running afoul of free speech protections and view the First Amendment as a "starting point that sets the minimum parameters" for campus discourse (Varlotta, 1997, p. 131). Administrators are advised to enact non-regulatory approaches for addressing hateful speech that "do not rely on the prohibition of certain types of speech or the imposition of involuntary sanctions on transgressors" (Kaplin & Lee, 2014, pp. 633-34). Given the changing legal landscape, student affairs administrators must stay attuned to the current legal environment and seek ongoing education on developments in higher education law (Janosik, 2005).

Establishment of Bias Response Teams

Student affairs administrators and senior institutional leaders must carefully consider a variety of factors in responding to bias, including the role of free speech protections afforded by the First Amendment and by institutional policy (Harris & Ray, 2014). The University of Oklahoma president who expelled students singing a racist chant featuring the N-word was widely praised by diversity advocates yet placed the institution at legal risk of due process complaints (Stripling & Thomason, 2015). These free speech issues become particularly thorny when considering the role of electronically transmitted bias and students' online speech. Institutions struggle to define appropriate roles in relation to online speech outside of formal instructional contexts and whether such speech should be monitored and regulated under institutional policies (see Hutchens, 2012; Schroeder, 2013). In response to increased awareness of bias incidents in higher education, bias response teams - often led by and nearly always including student affairs administrators - have proliferated on college campuses and are often called upon to address matters that fall short of warranting disciplinary action (Anthony & Johnson, 2012). Bias response teams are institutional committees designed to receive and respond to reports of bias incidents, hate speech, and/or hate crimes on college campuses (LePeau, Morgan, Zimmerman, Snipes, & Marcotte, 2016; McDermott, 2013). Bias response teams must work to build trust with students and the wider campus community to encourage reporting, as Wessler (2004) contended that bias incidents are underreported on college campuses. The teams can help address incidents, facilitate communication among campus stakeholders, and identify gaps in campus policy (Wessler & Moss, 2001). Bias response teams also help administrators weighing how to respond to incidents that are not at the level of criminal acts or policy violations (McDermott, 2013). Teams have also been critiqued as scattershot and reactive, allowing an underlying culture of exclusion to remain intact (Hughes, 2013). Colleges and universities began creating bias response teams as early as the 1980s, including a team to combat bias against gay, lesbian, and bisexual students at Indiana University-Bloomington, one among several anti-bias teams at the university (Windmeyer & Freeman, 1998). Anecdotal evidence suggests the number of bias response teams nationally has expanded in recent years (McDermott, 2013; New, 2016). LePeau et al. (2016) examined the work of one bias response team in depth, developing a model to explain how team members connected with students, faculty, and staff members to respond to incidents. Thus far, beyond LePeau et al. (2016) and Miller, Guida, Smith, Ferguson, and Medina (in press), bias response teams have been the subject of little empirical research in higher education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Free Speech Tensions: Responding to Bias on College and University Campuses

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite the increasing development of bias response teams on college and university campuses, little scholarship has examined these teams and, in particular, team leaders' approaches to understanding the role of free speech in responding to bias.

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration - American Association of Community Colleges (AACC)

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration - American Association of Community Colleges (AACC)

# data[].attributes.body
Many colleges and universities across the US, and particularly in the state of Texas have been directly impacted by Campus Carry.

Though this is a major legal and ethical issue institutions are facing, the time it takes to develop and implement a policy the severity of concern could be dwindling.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In states that allow concealed weapons on campus, many community college presidents have undertaken lengthy feedback-gathering sessions to develop a policy.

That's according to Matt Franz, vice president of information technology at Clark State Community College in Ohio. Franz, who oversees safety and security at the college, wrote his doctoral dissertation on that topic and will discuss his findings at an April 30 session at the American Association of Community Colleges' Annual Convention in Dallas.

Two college presidents, Jo Alice Blondin of Clark State and Daniel Barwick of Independence Community College in Kansas, will provide their perspectives at the session.

Confusing laws

Thirty-three states have laws allowing people to bring concealed weapons to colleges and universities. Some of those states allow colleges to opt out; others do not. Sixteen states prohibit concealed carry on college campuses.

Franz' dissertation looked at 12 community colleges in Kansas, Texas, Mississippi and Wisconsin that recently enacted concealed carry laws. Each state in his study handled the issue a little differently.

Registration deadline: April 13 is the last day to register online for the AACC Annual Convention April 28 to May 2.

In Mississippi, for example, people need a certain level of training and must pass a background check to obtain a concealed carry permit. Some colleges interpreted that to mean they have the leeway to ban concealed weapons, Franz said. Colleges in Kansas cannot prohibit people from carrying concealed weapons unless the college can provide a certainty that no one has a gun. That means they would have to install metal detectors and guards at every building, something most colleges don't have the resources to provide.

Two-thirds of the presidents surveyed by Franz said the laws enacted in their states are confusing. Some state laws give discretion to colleges to declare parts of campus gun-free zones, such as childcare centers and performance venues, but also gave the caveat that you cannot have so many gun-free zones that it's generally prohibitive.

Feedback is critical

Ohio's law, enacted in March 2017, gives colleges the discretion to decide whether or not to allow concealed handguns on campus. Blondin advised faculty and staff of the new law via email, surveyed the entire campus, hosted open forums, briefed the board and sought opinions from the faculty, staff and student senates.

"The decision rested with the board of trustees, but I wanted to get as much information as possible from people on campus on how we should approach the issue," Blondin said. "We utilized our shared governance system in a way that was incredibly inclusive and respectful to everybody's opinion."

The three senates voted against allowing concealed carry, and in the end, the board decided to retain its current policy, which bans weapons on campus.

Through the information gathering process, college leaders learned most people supported stronger security measures as an alternative to concealed carry.

Clark State used a $750,000 state grant to establish an alert system that notifies people of any kind of emergency via phone, computer, in public spaces and in classrooms. The system was used this month for a tornado warning.

Any time a college needs to formulate a policy on a controversial issue, "make sure the entire campus has input and understands the rationale for the decision," Blondin advised. In this case, "everybody felt their voices were heard."

Opposing views

According to Franz, supporters of concealed weapons have expressed two main arguments: The Second Amendment protects the right of people to have legally obtained weapons and, in light of the recent mass shootings, they feel more comfortable being armed and trained to defend themselves.

Those opposed to concealed carry on campus spoke about the need for colleges to focus on academic discourse and to discuss challenging topics in class without the fear of having someone pull out a gun.

Many of the presidents Franz interviewed for his study said they overwhelmingly spent more time and effort developing a policy on concealed carry policy than any other issue. One college received 1,300 online comments to a request for feedback.

Regardless of whether concealed carry is legal or not, more than 90 percent of the presidents in Franz's study believe there are people on campus carrying guns.

Because it took so long for colleges to collect feedback and craft a policy, some presidents told Franz that by the time they had a policy in place, it was no longer a major issue. At one college, concealed carry wasn't even in the top 10 issues discussed on campus.

"People now tend to say, it is what it is, and there's not a whole lot of discussion or anger about it," Franz said.

Convention schedule online: Check out the 2018 AACC Convention schedule to plan your days at the premiere community college event of the year!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Developing concealed-carry policies for campuses - Community College Daily

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In states that allow concealed weapons on campus, many community college presidents have undertaken lengthy feedback-gathering sessions to develop a policy. That's according to Matt Franz, vice president of information technology at Clark State Community College in Ohio.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Texas law allowing people with concealed-carry licenses to bring their weapons on college campuses is slated to go into effect for public four-year institutions on Monday.

The state's colleges and universities have been communicating their policies on the new law to students, faculty, and staff members for several months. But those communication strategies take on added urgency now that "campus carry" is the law, and students are preparing to arrive for the new academic year.

Margarita Venegas, news manager at the University of North Texas, said the institution had incorporated training sessions into orientation for new students, faculty, and staff on what the law says and where the university has gun-free zones.

"That entails going over a little bit about what is SB 11, the actual law itself," Ms. Venegas said of the training sessions. "What does it outline? What does it allow for? What does it not allow? For example, there has been confusion about what is open-carry versus what is commonly known as campus-carry. So we want to educate people."

Ms. Venegas said that people might be concerned about the idea of guns on campuses, so the administration has been directing students to bring their concerns to the office of the dean of students. Concerned faculty and staff members should reach out to the human-resources department, she said.

This is "so that not only does everyone feel well educated, but if they have concerns, we can work with them to allay those before this policy starts or when they get to campus," Ms. Venegas said.

A majority of the university's information on the new law on Monday is going out on social media, "to be sure that this information is available to our new and incoming students, who may not be on campus yet, who may not have their emails set up yet," Ms. Venegas said. The university will distribute short videos, featuring the campus police chief explaining the law and policies, not only to students but to the community at large in anticipation of visitors to the campus.

Eric Gerber, executive director of university communication at the University of Houston, said all students, faculty, and staff members there will receive an email on Monday from the campus police chief about the right to bring concealed weapons to the campus, and there will be additional information on the university website's home page.

The most visible change at the university will be about 1,000 new signs around the campus designating which zones are excluded from the new gun policy. (Increased signage is one of the added expenses, both big and small, that the new law is expected to bring to Texas colleges.)

But this isn't a one-day communication campaign, Mr. Gerber said. When the academic year begins, the university will expand its efforts to inform people about bringing guns to the campus. That includes adding information to CougarSAFE, the university's communications program for safety and security issues, including crime, extreme weather, sexual misconduct, and traffic.

Part of Orientation

"We don't want to sensationalize the subject of campus carry, but it is important that everyone on campus clearly understand its significance," Mr. Gerber said in an email. He added that the university includes material and presentations about guns on the campus in new-student and new-employee orientations.

Chris Cook, managing director of the Office of Communications and Marketing at Texas Tech University, said that the institution's communications regarding the new law will be integrated into existing programming for students, including orientation and the student government's Safety Week. He also said the campus police department had updated its training video for active-shooter situations to include information about the campus-carry policy.

Gary Susswein, executive director of media relations and issues management at the University of Texas at Austin, said most of the university's correspondence over the summer regarding the new policy has been with faculty members. The university has been emailing them and giving them access to a frequently-asked-questions web page.

"They've been raising some very good questions about it that have really forced us to go deeper on our messaging to make sure that we're clear with answers to specific questions" about the rules, Mr. Susswein said.

The university sent out an email last week to remind the university community of provisions in the new law and in the university's policies.

Inbox: Email sent to @UTAustin students ahead of #campuscarry implementation on Monday. #txlege pic.twitter.com/KAMtHT8eR9
- Madlin Mekelburg (@madlinbmek) July 29, 2016

When classes begin, the university will make another push to get information out and will probably use more social-media channels to reach students, he said.

But, Mr. Susswein said, it is ultimately the responsibility of licensed gun holders to understand the rules.

"Under state law, those who have a license to carry are required to be familiar with the law and the rules of the campuses where they're going," he said. "And we're trying to put as much information as we can to both help them understand it and help others understand it."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Texas Begins Allowing Guns on Campuses on Monday. Here's What Public Colleges Are Saying.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Texas law allowing people with concealed-carry licenses to bring their weapons on college campuses is slated to go into effect for public four-year institutions on Monday. The state's colleges and universities have been communicating their policies on the new law to students, faculty, and staff members for several months.

# data[].attributes.body
Campus carry laws are important to educators for several reasons. At institutions of higher education, we are charged with keeping the safety and well-being of our students as a priority, whereas these laws potentially have a significant impact on student's thoughts and feelings. While some are in favor and feel they can now protect themselves more efficiently in the event of a tragedy, others are terrified and say firearms have no place at an educational institution.

While laws have been passed, it is in some ways, left up to each individual institution as to how they interpret the laws. Is it in the best interest of students to offer advanced counseling sessions for students regarding this issue? What areas of campus should be designated as "gun free zones" so students have a place they feel safe?

In the event of a shooting on campus, those who have a Concealed Carry permit could potentially be mistaken as a thread to police, once they arrive on scene. This poses an ethical issue that maintains difficult to address properly.

As a Dean of Students, I would need to be readily familiar with the extent of Campus Carry laws and what implications they have on my particular campus. In addition, potentially being a conduct officer, this would directly impact how hearings would be conducted to ensure both my safety, and the safety of others around hearing sites. I would also need to ensure there is advanced communication to students about what Campus Carry means and how they can further inform themselves of their rights and responsibilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Ashford, E. (2018). Developing concealed-carry policies for campuses – Community College Daily. Retrieved August 21, 2018, from http://www.ccdaily.com/2018/04/developing-concealed-carry-policies-campuses/

Eastfield College. (n.d.). Student Life. Retrieved August 25, 2018, from https://www.eastfieldcollege.edu/slifeefc/pages/default.aspx

Fennell, R. (2009). Concealed Carry Weapon Permits: A Second Amendment Right or a Recipe for Disaster on Our Nation's Campuses?. Journal Of American College Health, 58(2), 99-100.

Martinez, A. (2016). Texas Begins Allowing Guns on Campuses on Monday. Here's What Public Colleges Are Saying. Retrieved August 26, 2018, from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Texas-Begins-Allowing-Guns-on/237316?cid=cp36

Miller, R. A., Guida, T., Smith, S., Ferguson, S. K., & Medina, E. (2017). Free Speech Tensions: Responding to Bias on College and University Campuses. Retrieved August 21, 2018, from https://www.naspa.org/about/blog/free-speech-tensions-responding-to-bias-on-college-and-university-camp

Naylor Association Solutions. (2016). Association for Student Conduct Administrators. Retrieved August 25, 2018, from https://www.theasca.org/

# data[].attributes.body
After conducting initial research, an area of interest to me deals with concealed carry laws that have been passed across the state of Texas. Many legal and ethical issues arise when covering this topic and institutions are determining what measures will be best for their students.

# data[].attributes.body
Fennell, R. (2009). Concealed Carry Weapon Permits: A Second Amendment Right or a Recipe for Disaster on Our Nation's Campuses?. Journal Of American College Health, 58(2), 99-100.

Providing more counseling services to students can be an effective way to ensure students with a concealed carry license are mentally stable to do so.