|Approved by the:
|Student Senate March 5, 2015|
This past academic year Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost Karen Hanson charged a group to examine our current practices. The Admissions Executive Advisory Group, the committee that reviews admission recommendations for applicants that have indicated a criminal record, reviewed the current conduct questions. Their goal was to determine whether the University should modify the questions to remove barriers to access that may be caused by the broad nature of the current language while at the same time being attentive to campus safety concerns. The recommendation of the committee was endorsed by Provost Hanson and President Kaler and is now in practice on the Twin Cities campus. The language now reads:
Please note that regardless of whether a student checks yes for any of the aforementioned questions, academic admissibility is determined first based on the student's application and academic credentials. If a student is deemed admissible, then consideration of the suspension/expulsion or felony/sexual offense is reviewed and a determination is made as to whether the information poses a threat to safety or academic integrity. If there is information that suggests a possible threat to campus safety or academic integrity, that information is forwarded to a University-wide committee with representation from across campus departments including Counseling, the University colleges, Student Affairs, the Office for Student Conduct and Academic Integrity, Housing and Residential Life, the Office for Equity and Diversity, the Office of the General Counsel, and University of Minnesota Police Department. The committee considers factors including the conduct's severity, relationship to the academic program, timeframe, mitigating circumstances, and any evidence of rehabilitation to determine whether the student's circumstances should impact the admission decision. Based on this review, the committee makes a recommendation of admit or deny to the Director of Admissions and the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education. In the past, very rarely have 'yes' answers impacted an admission decision.
 Runyan, Carol W., Matthew W. Pierce, Viswanathan Shankar, and Shrikant I. Bangdiwala. 2013. "Can Student-Perpetrated College Crime Be Predicted Based on Precollege Misconduct?" Injury Prevention 19(6):405–11.
 Lageson, Sarah Esther, Mike Vuolo, and Christopher Uggen. 2014. "Legal Ambiguity in Managerial Assessments of Criminal Records." Law & Social Inquiry. doi: 10.1111/lsi.12066.
 National Employment Law Project. 2015. Ban the Box: U.S. Cities, Counties, and States Adopt Fair Hiring Policies to Reduce Unfair Barriers to Employment of People with Criminal Records. (http://www.nelp.org/page/-/SCLP/Ban-the-Box-Fair-Chance-State-and-Local-Guide.pdf?nocdn=1).
 Minn. Stat. S 364.021(a) (2014).
 Council on Crime and Justice. 2012. Reducing Racial Disparity While Enhancing Public Safety: Key Findings and Recommendations. (http://www.crimeandjustice.org/researchReports/Reducing%20Racial%20Disparity%20While%20Enhancing%20Public%20Safety.pdf).
 American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota. 2014. ACLU releases data showing racial disparities in low level arrests in Minneapolis. (http://www.aclu-mn.org/news/2014/10/28/aclu-releases-data-showing-racial-disparities-low-level-arre).
 Supra note 3.
 Office of Equity and Diversity. 2014. .About OED. (https://diversity.umn.edu/aboutoed).