"It is the business of a university to provide that atmosphere which is most conducive to speculation, experiment and creation. It is an atmosphere in which there prevail 'the four essential freedoms' of a university--to determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study."

In general, the legal standard of review for governmental decisions (such as classroom policies set by faculty members at a public institution) is the rational basis test. In other words, the decisions faculty members make on how to conduct their classes are likely to be upheld in a court of law if they are reasonable, meaning that they are not arbitrary and capricious, based on malice, or based on discrimination on the basis of race, religion, gender, disability, or national origin. In any event, a faculty member should always be prepared to articulate a rational justification for any classroom policy he or she imposes (e.g., a faculty member may proscribe certain conduct in the classroom because it would be disruptive to the teaching or educational process).

The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that the University provide reasonable accommodations to those students who identify themselves as disabled and request such accommodation. Students are not required to disclose disabilities, and faculty members should not ask any student about whether he/she is disabled. However, if a student identifies him or herself as disabled and requests a reasonable accommodation from a faculty member, the faculty member should refer the student to the Disability Services Office, which will provide necessary assistance or information on accommodations specific to his/her disability. (See Policy Statement #51). Classroom policies should be flexible enough to accommodate disabilities.

• attendance/absences/tardiness
• participation
• papers, projects, tests/exams

Policies should be flexible enough to accommodate religious practices and holidays for those students with "sincerely held religious beliefs."

• attendance/absences/tardiness
• participation (e.g., requirement to engage in conduct proscribed by a religious belief)
• tests/exam schedules
• appropriate dress

Faculty members should make sure that their classroom policies do not have the effect (intentional or unintentional) of illegally discriminating on the basis of race, gender, national origin, religion, or disability. Differential treatment of one of these "protected" classes results in "strict scrutiny" by a court and requires a "compelling governmental interest" (the otherwise illegal discrimination is justified by a very important reason).

• attendance/absence/tardiness (religion, disability)
• participation (disability)
• papers, projects, and tests/exams (race, gender, national origin, religion, disability)
• appropriate dress (religion)

For the most part, courts leave grading policies to the discretion of the faculty member, within the academic standards established by the institution. Grade challenges by students are not likely to be successful in court unless there is an underlying violation of the student's right, such as illegal discrimination. One court has found that a faculty member's award of a grade was an exercise of his First Amendment right to free speech, and the institution therefore violated his free speech when it attempted to force him to change the grade. The court also held, however, that the university could have changed the student's grade itself.

Generally, a grading policy will be enforceable if it is based on the students' performance and other standards relevant to the educational process. A grade based in part upon an unrelated factor, such as what the faculty member thinks of the student as a person, is less likely to be enforceable. Clearly unenforceable policies are those that are arbitrary, discriminatory, or malicious.