The Office of Student Conduct announced last week that first-time violations of the Student Code of Conduct that occur during freshman year will no longer be accessible by prospective employers or graduate schools. Rather than recording the incident on students’ disciplinary records, the University will instead note the incident using internal documentation that is not accessible to external third parties without the student’s written consent.
Supporters of this policy change argue that freshman year is a transitional period in students’ lives and that one lapse in judgment should not negatively impact their future after graduation. Representatives from the Office of Student Conduct and GUSA, who advocated for the revised policy, hope to turn amnesty for first-time transgressions into educational opportunities that will deter future misbehavior by first-year students. Consistent with this ideal is a provision in the new policy requiring students to complete University-ordered sanctions in order to move the incident from their public disciplinary record to their internal record. Depending on the type and severity of the policy violation, these sanctions can range from a written letter of censure or work sanctions to the mandated completion of online alcohol-education modules.
Although lenient compared to previous versions of the Georgetown Student Code of Conduct, the new policy does not unconditionally vindicate the mischief of first-year students, nor does it grant carte blanche to the full spectrum of their potential negative behaviors. The new amnesty policy only applies to noise- and alcohol-related violations and, if a student subsequently commits another policy violation following forgiveness of the first incident, both will become visible on their disciplinary record.
Despite its limitations, granting amnesty to freshman for first-time policy violations is a positive change to the Code of Conduct that will improve relations between University administrators and students. Alongside other changes to the Code of Conduct—such as amnesty for students who report a sexual assault but may have simultaneously violated the University’s alcohol policies. Georgetown has proven a willingness to actively listen and respond to the voices of student advocates.
While the revised policy signals a good first step, the Student Code of Conduct does not afford the same benefits to transfer students or to upperclassmen. If the logic that students’ professional and academic futures should not be jeopardized by a single mistake is to carry any weight, forgiveness for first-time policy violations should apply to all students, not merely freshmen, in the future.
In order to enact this change, the University must continue to engage in active dialogue with students and respond to their concerns with concrete solutions in a timely manner. This most recent round of changes to the Student Code of Conduct has shown that such cooperation is attainable and, if continued, will benefit both administrators and students.
