As we noted a week ago, Brown had the choice of ignoring the emails from the student or alternatively making a Big Deal about it and placing the student under investigation. Brown, of course, chose the latter, giving itself a ton of unpleasant publicity.
Now Brown's investigation has determined that the student was guilty of nothing.
At this point it also had two choices. It could have let the matter drop or compose an elaborate defense of why what it had done could not be seen as infringing on free speech and academic freedom. Which option do you suppose it chose?
If you have to guess, see below:
...A spokesperson for Brown would not comment on the findings of the hearing, and sent [a local TV station] the following statement:
Both federal law and University policy protecting the privacy of student records limit our ability to disclose details publicly about disciplinary processes for individual students. While we cannot share details on the outcomes of Brown’s student conduct process, we can offer broader comment on the issue and our process: Despite continued public reporting framing this as a free speech issue, it absolutely is not. Since the initiation of Brown’s review, that review has centered on investigating whether improper use of non-public Brown data or non-public data systems violated law or policy; whether deliberate targeting of individual employees violated law or policy; and whether violations to Brown’s misrepresentation or name use policies took place. Brown has detailed student conduct procedures in place to investigate alleged conduct code violations, resolve them and — in instances when students are found responsible — implement discipline. They are publicly available and outline in detail how disciplinary procedures and hearings are conducted, the rights and responsibilities students have, what outcomes might be expected, and how students can appeal decisions. Those procedures have guided our actions since this issue originated. Students have ample opportunity to provide information and participate directly in that process to ensure that all decisions are made with a complete understanding of circumstances. As Brown’s procedures make abundantly clear, students are not presumed to be responsible for alleged violations unless so found through the appropriate conduct proceedings. Since the start of this matter, Brown has proceeded in complete accordance with free expression guarantees and appropriate procedural safeguards under University policies and applicable law.
Apparently, Will Rogers never went to Brown:
No comments:
Post a Comment