West Texas A&M University supports the principle of freedom of expression and respects the rights of instructors to teach and students to learn. Maintenance of these rights requires classroom conditions that do not impede their exercise. Classroom behavior that seriously interferes with either (1) the instructor’s ability to conduct the class or (2) the ability of other students to benefit from the instructional program will not be tolerated. An individual engaging in disruptive classroom behavior may be subject to disciplinary action.

Because classroom dynamics vary across disciplines and learning environments, faculty retain the discretion to determine how best to address disruptive behavior while operating within University policies. In carrying out this responsibility, the University emphasizes a set of shared values that guide classroom interactions. Faculty and students work together to foster an environment that is safe, supportive, and conducive to intellectual growth. When behavioral concerns arise, they should be addressed with fairness and professionalism, in ways that support student success while preserving the instructor’s ability to teach effectively. Instructors are encouraged to use appropriate University channels for consultation and intervention.

A. Levels of Disruptive Behavior

1. Low-Level Disruptive Behavior

Low-level disruptive behaviors are non-aggressive actions that interfere with the learning environment or normal classroom functioning but do not present safety concerns. These behaviors may distract peers, disrupt instruction, or impede effective participation. Examples include using personal technology in ways that interrupt instruction, refusing to comply with reasonable faculty or staff directions, sending unprofessional email communications, chronic tardiness, and persistent or unreasonable demands for attention.

2. Moderate-Level Disruptive Behavior

Moderate-level disruptive behaviors involve actions that interfere more substantially with the learning environment or the well-being of individuals but do not present an immediate safety threat. These behaviors often indicate emotional distress or difficulty managing personal, academic, or situational challenges. Examples include directing verbal aggression or hostility toward the instructor or peers, refusing to leave the classroom after being asked without physical aggression, conduct that intimidates others, and behaviors linked to noticeable emotional distress or trauma.

3. High-Level Disruptive Behavior

High-level disruptive behaviors are actions that create a significantly destabilizing environment or pose an immediate threat to health or safety. These situations require urgent intervention and may involve emergency or administrative response. Examples include exhibiting escalating or severe distress that suggests potential harm, damaging university property, and taking actions that endanger one’s own safety or the safety of others.

B. Faculty Response Framework

The level of a student’s disruptive behavior helps faculty determine an appropriate response. Low-level behaviors are typically addressed through direct communication and informal resolution using the Non-Immediate Disruption process. Moderate behaviors may require additional documentation, consultation, or referral but do not typically warrant immediate removal from class unless the situation escalates. High-level behaviors constitute immediate disruption and require prompt action to ensure safety using the Immediate Disruption process.

C. Response Procedures

1. Immediate Disruption

When a student’s behavior is so seriously disruptive as to require immediate action, faculty have the discretion to require the student to leave the class on an interim basis. Under university procedures, a student removed from class is entitled to an informal review with the department head or direct supervisor within three working days. Instructors may choose whether or not to attend the informal review.

Following the informal review and discussion with the instructor, the department head or direct supervisor may either:

• Approve an agreement of expectations drafted by the instructor and reinstate the student to the class, or
• Extend the removal and refer the case to the Student Conduct Office for adjudication. The department head or direct supervisor will ensure that relevant materials are forwarded to the Student Conduct Office and to the appropriate academic deans.

Faculty are not responsible for conducting the hearing or adjudication process but may be asked to provide information related to the incident.

2. Non-Immediate Disruption

When a student’s behavior does not require immediate removal from class, faculty determine how best to address the concern consistent with professional judgment and the needs of the instructional environment. Approaches may include, but are not limited to:

• Informing the student about the specific behavior that is inappropriate and communicating the changes in conduct expected moving forward. Faculty may choose to provide the student with a written or emailed summary of the discussion and may retain a copy for their records.
• If a student believes the expectations are unreasonable, the student may consult with the department head or direct supervisor. The department head or direct supervisor may support the expectations established by the instructor or work with the instructor to develop modified expectations. Any revised expectations will be communicated to both the student and instructor.
• If the behavior continues, faculty may notify the department head or direct supervisor, share relevant documentation, and seek departmental assistance. If the department head or direct supervisor concurs that the problem persists, the matter may be referred to the Student Conduct Office. The department head or direct supervisor will forward a summary of the behavior and relevant communications as part of the referral.

Faculty are encouraged to document behavioral concerns and related communications, including dates, descriptions of the behavior, and any follow-up actions taken. Records should be retained in accordance with the Texas A&M System Records Retention Schedule.

3. Laboratory Courses and Safety Compliance

In laboratory or other safety-regulated courses, students are required under University policy to complete all safety acknowledgments and comply with safety rules. Students who fail to complete required safety acknowledgments or who violate safety rules may be removed from the lab activity until compliance is achieved. Faculty may request support from departmental or safety personnel in addressing these matters.

D. Response Reference Table

The following table serves as a practical reference tool that aligns with the response procedures described above. It outlines whom to contact for common student concerns and when circumstances may require contacting UPD.

E. Clery Act Reporting Obligations

All West Texas A&M University faculty are designated as Campus Security Authorities (CSAs) under the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act. When a student reports or discloses a Clery Act crime, including but not limited to: sexual assault, stalking, relationship violence, aggravated assault, or hate crimes, faculty are required to report the incident to the WTAMU Police Department, regardless of whether the student wishes to pursue formal action. Faculty with questions about their CSA obligations should contact the WTAMU Clery Compliance Officer at kczesnowski@wtamu.edu or 806.651.2307, or consult the full Campus Security Authority Guidelines at wtamu.edu/university-police/resources/upd-campus-security-authority-guidelines.html.