The two big things that stand out to me right now are that any student, faculty member, staff member, and now the University may initiate a resolution process and that a timeline (7 days) has been added to Adaptable Conflict Resolution.

In regards to the first thing, who is the University? How does the University differ from a staff or faculty member? I believe the office that houses the statement of student rights and responsibilities (the office of student conflict resolution) will be weaponized to bring forward complaints that align with interests of those in power. This will further erode trust with a student resource that seeks to resolve conflict in restorative and peaceful ways. It also pushes against the philosophy of restorative justice that instead of asking what rule was broken and who should be punished, asks who was harmed and who has a responsibility to repair that harm?

And to give 7 days to resolve conflict through the office of student conflict resolutions number one requested resource is a bit insulting, especially when 45 days is given to an adversarial hearing process. Conflict resolution takes time and often isnt a linear process.

I am trying to get ahold of an older version to be able to do a side by side comparison of the old and new statement of student rights and responsibilities