Earlier wording of a section in the university disciplinary regulations empowered the proctor to direct a student "not to attend a specific social function or functions, or not to visit any or all of its affiliated colleges" for up to three months.
At a recent meeting, the University Council approved a recommendation, previously backed by the university Senate, to extend the restriction "up to the end of the current year (December 31)".
An accompanying report said the three-month maximum was "proving insufficient".
This was "extremely short", particularly if the period began late in a semester, such as in May and then the student was away from the university for several weeks over the mid-semester break.
"This power is applied when a student has been, or is being, a disruptive nuisance to the occupiers of the area concerned or where health and safety could be compromised," the report said.
The direction was applied to students only when this would not "significantly impact" on their ability to continue their studies.
It was important that any directive involving a longer period be applied fairly and that the length of time was in keeping with the "offence" involved.
Approached for comment, university Student Services director John Price said if the original directive was issued early in the year, the proctor would not now be required to repeat directives to cover the rest of the year.
Directives could also be issued for shorter periods and be cancelled at any time.
Asked whether the changed provisions were mainly intended to apply to students making a nuisance of themselves at residential colleges where they did not live themselves, Mr Price said this was one example, but the section of the regulations could be applied to any part of the university.
There had not been an increase in disruptive or unsafe behaviour by students, and the move allowed the proctor more flexibility, he said.
The Otago University Students Association supported the change, which had been preceded by "good process and consultation," association president Edwin Darlow said.
The regulations were intended to protect students, and not to hinder anyone's studies, Mr Darlow said.
He noted that students retained the right to appeal any such decisions involving them, and the association would continue to monitor how the regulations were applied, he said.
