As racial justice and other protests have spread on university campuses across the United States, administrators have learned it’s not enough to say, “We’re listening.”

Instead, many are deploying the Bias Response Team.

Ohio State University has one. So does the University of Oregon. The University of Iowa is building one this spring.

The University of Northern Colorado developed its own in 2014.

These teams, generally, serve three main functions:

” They serve as a reporting tool for bias-related incidents.

” They often mediate discussions between offended parties and those who offended.

” They seek to educate the general campus community about bias and how to avoid it.

UNC’s team dealt with 44 incidents this past year, and it launched a poster campaign in March bearing the familiar, national hashtag, #LanguageMatters. Those posters, among other things, tell students not to say “gay” if they mean “bad,” and advise against calling someone a terrorist based on the clothes they wear.

It’s a proactive approach to problems administrators have been criticized for handling slowly or after the fact. And though the rise of the bias response team has been applauded in some corners, critics are wary of the effects of such teams on free speech.

Tide turning

In the past few years, protesters have peppered college campuses across the country.

In late 2015 alone, Princeton students wanted Woodrow Wilson’s name removed from a building, Harvard Law students wanted the school’s seal replaced and University of Missouri protests yielded a president’s resignation.

At the heart of most protests is the idea administrators haven’t responded to issues of racism, sexism and other problems.

UNC President Kay Norton has grappled with the same kind of criticism.

Just this year, students have said the university’s campus salon doesn’t meet the needs of many students of color; they’ve pointed out the Cesar Chavez Center, which offers support to Latino students, has for years been the only building on campus without a paved parking lot; their protests also helped reverse the university’s decision to suspend the Mexican-American studies program.

Norton got an earful this past fall about these and many other issues when she hosted a series of listening sessions.

Listening is one thing. Doing is another. By the end of the sessions, Norton was happy to announce a bidding process for a new campus salon and approval of a new parking lot at the Cesar Chavez Center, among other quick fixes. There will be more, Norton promised.

Still, all of these fixes were reactive. Students, staff and faculty have called them defensive, cover-your-butt solutions.

The Bias Response Team doesn’t operate that way.

The UNC Bias Response Team began to track and respond to bias-related incidents, including racially charged rhetoric, in 2014.

“There was a need for sharing stories (about bias-related behavior),” said Reyna Anaya, who oversees UNC’s Bias Response Team.

It soon became more than a place to vent. It sought to solve problems. When possible, the team seeks to bring together those who have been offended and those who did the alleged offending for conversations.

Moreover, the group this spring launched that poster campaign.

UNC describes bias as any verbal, nonverbal or written behavior toward an individual or group based upon actual or perceived identity characteristics including, but not limited to: race and/or color; religion, faith and/or spirituality; national origin; sexual orientation; ethnicity; gender; socioeconomic status/social class; pregnancy; marital status; gender identity and/or expression; sex; group affiliation; language; political affiliation; cognitive, physical and/or developmental ability; immigration status; military and/or veteran status; age; size and/or shape.

It’s this type of catch-all that gives First Amendment advocates pause when it comes to bias response teams, particularly when those broad definitions are used to punish students.

Policing speech

Azhar Majeed is the director of policy reform at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, an advocacy organization that focuses on freedom of speech, legal equality, due process and religious liberty in higher education.

Majeed said his organization has tracked the rise of bias response teams for a few years.

What worries Majeed the most is universities seem to be leaning toward punishing students for protected free speech, including op-eds in student newspapers, student events on campus or the invitation of a particular speaker on campus.

At UNC, a student could be punished for calling another student or group “retarded” or using racial epithets, or if a person is the victim of obscenities directed at their identity, said UNC Dean of Students Katrina Rodriguez in an email. Punishments could range from a warning to expulsion. But Rodriguez added the use of the terms casually, publicly or in conversation wouldn’t necessarily warrant discipline. Instead, the terms would have to be used in a threatening manner.

Majeed said universities have a legitimate reason to address harassment on their campuses.

But the foundation works with higher education institutions to rein in policies so they coexist with the First Amendment. Because so many universities are adopting these bias response teams, Majeed said that’s now an uphill battle.

Majeed said UNC’s poster campaign alone could harm free speech because it’s coming from the university, a powerful institution.

“Even if a university stops short of actual punishment, the mere fact that it’s coming down on one side will have a chilling effect on the other side,” Majeed said. “If I’m a student at that school, I will be careful of what I say. I will self-censor.”

Anaya said she knew the poster campaign could ruffle some feathers.

A few weeks ago, she said she told students who participated – their photos were on the posters – they were taking part in a form of activism.

One poster in particular caught attention.

The text read, “When you say ‘all lives matter’ … You are dismissing the Black Lives Matter movement and the brutality impacting the black community.”

Somebody on campus took exception to the message, scrawling a racial epithet under the picture of a black female student.

Anaya points to that incident as proof students didn’t self-censor. She also said the university never intended to have a chilling effect, adding that hanging up a poster with the university’s view doesn’t mean the university is restricting others’ views.

Anaya and Rodriguez say the campaign is simply about educating.

“I love that Reyna and her team created these posters that say, ‘Here’s how it impacts,'” Rodriguez said.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has a rating system for bias response team mission statements from across the country.

UNC does not have a rating on the FIRE website at this time.

“So many of these policies go after things like offensive speech, demeaning speech – these broad terms go against the First Amendment,” Majeed said. “There’s no way that these broad policies can be enforced in a consistent and even way. Ultimately, what it does is give discretion to university administrators to enforce policies.”

Tyler Silvy covers education for The Greeley Tribune. Reach him at tsilvy@greeleytribune.com. Connect with him at Facebook.com/TylerSilvy or @TylerSilvy on Twitter.