On April 10, the University Assembly (UA) will debate and likely vote on a resolution to change how allegations of sexual violence by students are resolved, transferring their jurisdiction from the Campus Code of Conduct to a modified version of University Policy 6.4. If passed, the resolution will go to President David Skorton. If he approves it, jurisdiction will be transferred and University Policy 6.4 modified accordingly. Here, Melissa Lukasiewicz, chair of the UA, answers questions about the resolution.

Q: Melissa, what prompted this resolution?

A: On April 4, 2011, the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education sent a "Dear Colleague" letter to recipients of federal education funding to clarify their obligations under Title IX, the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sex in American educational institutions. Administrators then discussed with the UA the ways in which the Campus Code of Conduct -- which outlines processes for addressing allegations of sexual assault and sexual harassment by students -- has provisions inconsistent with the Dear Colleague letter. The UA passed a temporary amendment last April to modify the code to better comply with the letter and has since developed a long-term solution.

Q: What changes would come from that solution?

A: Since 1996, allegations of sexual harassment and assault involving faculty and staff have been handled under Policy 6.4. The same allegations against a student have been handled under the Code of Conduct. Policy 6.4 uses an investigative process, whereas the Campus Code utilizes an adversarial process. If passed by the UA and approved by President Skorton, such allegations against students will also be handled under Policy 6.4. Instead of a hearing board of students, faculty and staff, a designated, trained administrator would investigate the allegations of sexual harassment or violence involving students as well as faculty and staff. After talking with the accused, accuser and all pertinent witnesses, he or she would come to a decision based on a "preponderance of evidence" ("more likely than not") rather than a clear and convincing evidence standard. This process would be more private -- victims wouldn't need to discuss their experiences directly before other students or their assailants.

Q: Does the move from the Campus Code to Policy 6.4 and the corresponding change in the standard of evidence shift the balance of rights between the accused person and the accuser?

A: Policy 6.4 does not really shift the balance of rights -- it shifts the standard of proof. Changing the standard of proof to "preponderance of evidence," as the Dear Colleague letter requires, provides for more equal burden of proof for the accused and accuser, addressing some of the reasons that victims of sexual violence may choose not to report an incident. Nationwide, data suggests that 40 percent of all acts of sexual violence on campuses go unreported. The preponderance standard is the same standard used in federal and state courts when addressing allegations of discrimination and harassment and is the same standard used by the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education when addressing Title IX allegations against colleges and universities.

Q: What other changes would occur?

A: Both the complainant and the accused would have the same right of appeal under Policy 6.4. Also, allegations of sexual harassment and assault would be resolved far more quickly. Generally, under Policy 6.4, investigations are completed in less than 60 days, as required by Title IX, but the Campus Code process often takes significantly longer.

Q: How was the current resolution developed?

A: We have had a year of discussions in the UA's Codes and Judicial Committee, in UA meetings, and with institutional stakeholders and student leaders about whether to modify the Code of Conduct or to transfer these cases to a modified Policy 6.4. After considering all the reasonable alternatives to solve this complex set of issues, the sponsors crafted the current language in the resolution. This language was passed by the CJC in February and forwarded to the UA for consideration. The UA has been actively engaged in discussions ever since receiving this resolution from the CJC and hopes to finalize and vote upon it at the UA's next meeting on April 10.