By Arek Sarkissian II
Arizona Daily Wildcat
Thursday February 6, 2003
College of Nursing professors believe guidelines are just a start
Wednesday's introduction of two new policies on threatening and disruptive behavior in the classroom received mixed responses from faculty members.
They agreed that, although the policies are necessary, the university still needs a more interactive approach to fixing the problem.
Both policies were designed to give faculty a step-by-step method of handling students who pose a threat to their safety or are disrupting instruction, as opposed to the old method, which was scattered among 26 different parts of the Student Code of Conduct.
Although the policies were created in response to the shootings at the College of Nursing, some professors believe that faculty need to be more professionally prepared for disturbing or violent situations for the policies to be efficient.
 |
|
As educators, all of us have students we're uneasy about, whether it be personally worried that they're not doing well or they have personal issues.
- Judith Berg, faculty chair of the nursing college
|
 |
Judith Berg, faculty chair of the nursing college, said that training sessions for stress and how to effectively handle unruly people would be more beneficial than just written guidelines.
"People know the help is out there, but it's almost human to not want to take it," Berg said.
The key to curbing violence in the classrooms is to teach instructors how to recognize potentially violent people before an incident occurs, she said.
"As educators, all of us have students we're uneasy about, whether it be personally worried that they're not doing well or they have personal issues, knowing guidelines of how to better handle them will assist us in feeling more comfortable," Berg said.
Despite the work that still needs to be done, the policy is the beginning of a positive chain of events, she said.
"It was a very needed thing to have something like this on campus. The university is moving in the right direction."
However, other faculty are concerned the new behavioral guidelines might be overlooked.
Michael Dues, head of the communication department said the new processes might not always prove effective; in some situations it will be almost impossible to maintain.
The policies are a good start, he said, but
he questioned whether the university will support faculty if they are exercised.
Dues referred to an incident in which a student began yelling obscenities at him after he was denied space in a class at the beginning of the
spring semester. Although the student quickly
left the Communication building, incidents like these, are common, Dues said.
Because Dues didn't know who the student was, no further investigations or disciplinary actions were taken.
"Now what am I supposed to do? Ask everyone's name that comes into my office?" he said.
In another incident, a group of graduate students became abusive to the communication faculty, prompting Dues to issue written reprimands. While administration dismissed grievances filed by the graduate students to counter the reprimands, Dues said many faculty members felt like they were on their own.
He said even if there was a policy, the stress developed from student life is inevitable.
"I don't know to what point there's a lack of policy or some people just don't know how to handle the stress," he said.
