The University redefined the circumstances under which a student can raise sexual assault charges in July, altering its policy from one of "clear and convincing evidence" to a broader standard in which an incident of sexual misconduct more likely than not occurred.
The revised policy emphasizes assistance to victims and broadens the definition of "sexual misconduct" to encompass "an unwelcome sexual behavior that occurs without effective consent."
In such a case, sexual harassment in the form of cyberstalking or relationship violence is included in the definition, according to a statement released by the University. The revisions also eliminated the geographic limit on jurisdiction and indefinitely extended the window of opportunity for taking action.
The revisions, which went into effect July 8, focused on clarifying the specifications and definitions of the policy as well as identifying the wide area of immediate support and knowledge available to victims of sexual misconduct. Support, if used properly, could "help [victims] find what they need in order to heal," said Claire Kaplan, director of Sexual and Domestic Violence Services at the University.
When charges are filed, the complainant may choose to pursue either a formal or informal resolution. Whereas a formal resolution requires the accused to face an investigation and a hearing panel comprised of students and faculty, an informal resolution only requires the accused to face the complainant and a presiding officer.
University President Teresa A. Sullivan approved revisions to the University's Policy and Procedures for Cases of Student Sexual Misconduct in early July, marking the first change to the policy since 2005.
University officials began a review of the policy in December 2010, following the general "five-year policy review cycle" to University policies, Associate Dean of Students Nicole Eramo said in an email. Eramo, who is also the chair of the Sexual Misconduct Board, said the policy overhaul was not a direct response to the murder of Yeardley Love in May 2010.
"There was no precipitating event that caused us to review the policy," Eramo said. "Those of us involved in implementing the policy felt like we had learned a lot in the past few years from our experiences working under it and felt that we wanted to put some of that knowledge into practice."
The team charged with reviewing and revising the policy included staff members from the Office of the Dean of Students and the General Counsel's Office, as well as Patricia Lampkin, vice president and chief student affairs officer, Eramo said.
Following review, Lampkin invited comments by students and members of the University community from May 4 through May 20. The 17-day comment period yielded 41 comments, which were "read and considered" by all members of the revision team, and resulted in changes from the original draft, Eramo said.
Although review of the 2005 version of the policy began in December 2010, the release of a "Dear Colleague" letter April 4 by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights demanded that university officials nationwide review the new policy to ensure revisions complied with provisions under Title IX, an act preventing gender discrimination in K-12 schools as well as universities.
Kaplan noted because the letter came when the University was nearing the end of the revision process, only slight changes needed to be made.
The policy simply clarifies "what has always been a law" in cases of sexual harassment, an area which was less clear when dealing "student to student," Kaplan said.
"I am hopeful that having a more inclusive policy will limit confusion among students about where they can bring complaints of gender-based violence," Eramo said.
Read More
Honor Committee, Class Councils offer resources for students during exam season
By Lidia Zur Muhlen and Brandon Kile | YesterdayEvery semester, the Honor Committee utilizes a portion of its roughly $5 million endowment to fund its finals season initiatives.
University sees increase in fraudulent emails and phishing attempts
By Bertie Azqueta | 4 days agoSome of these phishing attempts come from @virginia.edu email addresses, making it more challenging for University Outlook users to differentiate fraudulent emails.
Faculty Senate discusses proposal to separate faculty position renewal from promotion
By Lexie Stadler | 5 days agoAGF are non-tenure-track professors who hold roles primarily focused on teaching, research, academic librarianship and clinical service.
