Policies are never truly neutral. They are shaped by historical, social, cultural, and political forces, which have too often been rooted in colonialism, racism, ableism, and systemic exclusion (El-Lahib, 2015; Karmiris, 2021). In post-secondary institutions, this legacy of harmful frameworks continues to play out in policies that disproportionately impact Indigenous, Black, equity-deserving, 2SLGBTQIA+, neurodivergent students, and students with disabilities (Hernández & Harris, 2022; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine [NASEM], 2020).
These systems have often been constructed within Eurocentric and colonial ideologies (Bagshaw et al., 2022). As such, students from equity-deserving groups are disproportionately affected by these frameworks and are often over-represented in reporting data (Eaton, 2022). Rather than recognizing expressions of identity, culture, or trauma, student conduct processes often frame these behaviours as deviant.
Styres (2020) describes how Indigenous students face both direct and subtle forms of racism within post-secondary institutions. Instances include being labeled as disruptive when voicing Indigenous perspectives or facing punitive measures for advocating Indigenous rights, reflecting systemic biases in disciplinary practices (Styres, 2020). One student explained that “if you’re a good student and don’t say anything, you’ll be successful. But if you stand up for your rights then you’re penalized in a lot of ways” (p. 165).
For those interested in exploring anti-oppressive practices, be sure to check out CICMH’s Part 1 and Part 2 Toolkit, which offers practical strategies and resources for applying anti-oppressive practices on campus.
Transforming student conduct policies requires rethinking their foundations to build more inclusive and equitable educational environments. Restorative and trauma-informed approaches offer pathways that prioritize repairing harm, restoring relationships, and strengthening communities over punishment (Eaton, 2022). By addressing systemic inequities and creating policies that are more reflective of diverse student identities, institutions can build policies that foster belonging, safety, accountability, and justice for all.
The following reflections highlight the importance of understanding how these policies are rooted in systemic inequities and how their application continues to affect students today:
- Historical policies have sustained trauma and exclusion
From residential schools to policies of forced assimilation, Canadian institutions and educational systems have long contributed to the displacement and dehumanization of Indigenous peoples (Bombay et al., 2015). These policies were not isolated errors or historical missteps, but deliberate systemic tools of colonization (Chartrand & Horn, 2016). Their impacts continue through intergenerational trauma, institutional mistrust, and the ongoing marginalization of Indigenous students (Ontario Human Rights Commission [OHRC], 2022; Wilk et al., 2017). - Student conduct policies often reflect dominant norms
Many conduct systems were built around narrow definitions of “appropriate” behaviour, often grounded in white, Western, able-bodied, cisnormative, and middle-class standards (Bagshaw et al., 2022; Ekpe & Roach, 2023). Expressions of identity and behaviours that fall outside these norms are more likely to be viewed as disruptive or problematic, rather than expressions of cultural difference, survival, or distress. This dynamic results in equity-deserving students facing heightened surveillance and disproportionate disciplined action (Hinojosa, 2016).For more on how students may struggle to navigate these unfamiliar expectations, see our Learning Shock infosheet.
- The impact of colonialism is not in the past; it remains ongoing
Colonial systems are structured around hierarchy, control, and compliance, values that continue to influence institutional practices today. In student conduct processes, these influences can manifest through an emphasis on rule enforcement, control, and punishment over relational accountability, connection, and repair (Macfarlane, 2014). A trauma-informed approach calls for a critical examination of how such systems operate and for whom they are designed to serve or exclude. - Policy can support healing, but only when reimagined
When grounded in equity, dignity, and historical awareness, policies can be a powerful tool that supports safety, clarity, and fairness (OHRC, 2022). This requires involving students and communities with lived experience in policy creation, addressing systemic inequities directly, and being willing to adapt practices that cause harm (Rietbergen-McCracken, 2020). Restorative approaches and centering human connection over bureaucracy must be prioritized over punitive measures (Karp & Sacks, 2014). - Integrating policy with care is not enough, transformation is essential
Beyond compassionate interpretation, true transformation requires a fundamental rethinking of the policies themselves. Critical questions must be asked: What is the policy trying to protect? Whose safety is prioritized? How is harm defined, and who has the authority to decide? These inquiries are not just theoretical questions; they shape whether students feel seen, heard, and safe on campus (Johnny & Inn, 2025).
