|
Dear UCSF Faculty:
Currently under review at the request of the systemwide Academic Senate are proposed revisions to the Faculty Discipline process and APM-015 (Faculty Code of Conduct) and APM-016 (University Policy on Faculty Conduct and the Administration of Discipline).
Because of the far-reaching nature of these revisions, we are offering an anonymous comment space here for faculty to express concerns and questions. Comments are filtered for spam and may take up to 24 hours to post to the website.
Our campuses response is due to systemwide in early November 2025. However it is anticipated that focus groups will follow, and we want faculty input.
In addition the below systemwide guidelines are subject to systemwide review in the same document:
- Faculty Respondent Disciplinary Sanction Guidelines for Misconduct Related to Expressive Activity
- Companion Document – Faculty Disciplinary Sanctions Guidelines re Expressive Activity
- Non-Senate Academic Appointee Respondent Corrective Action/Disciplinary Sanction Guidelines for Misconduct Related to Expressive Activity
- Guidelines on Good Cause Factors re Extensions of Time
A summarized 6-slide powerpoint on the key elements of this systemwide review can be found here. Also, the original document under review can be found on the UC Academic Senate website here.
The UCSF Academic Senate has concerns over these proposed revisions in two key areas:
- Proposed change in hearing panel from a UCSF body of faculty peers, to a systemwide body of faculty peers. This could include faculty from the Humanities, Political Science, Literature, etc., who are not familiar with the Health Sciences Compensation Plan or the processes/practices within UCSF.
- Definitions on key terms including:
- Expressive vs. disruptive activities (definitions of either appear subjective)
- Review of such activities by an unknown administrator (rather than a body of faculty peers). Further if the administrator changes, does the definition of such activities change?
- Protection foremost of the institution rather than the faculty under disciplinary review
| 
