While simple regulations are more likely to flexible, this is not necessarily the case. The problem of how much constriction of student choice is reasonable is an area of potential conflict among the interests of students, university units and the university itself. The purpose of this assessment will be twofold. First will be identification of areas within university regulation that are unreasonably opaque a shown by a careful inspection of appeals and by interviews with advisors. Second will be to determine if university regulations place undue constraints on the choices of students.
Concordance is necessary between university goals and regulations at every level.
Goals that are general to the university must be known and attempts must made to insure that unit regulations passed for more narrow purposes do not clash with those general goals. I believe that much of the assessment ground work could be done by a few individuals. Certainly looking at the numbers of appeals is something that is done on a regular basis. Doing this part of the assessment would only require a careful analysis Simple regulations are preferred because misinterpretation is less likely. Simple regulations are also advantageous when they leave space for student choice.