Faculty Handbook 2020-21
A. Restated Articles of Incorporation
B. Academic Freedom & Tenure, 1940 Statement of Principles
C. Faculty Review Core Questions
D. Guidelines for Pitzer College Landscape / Statement of Environmental Policy and Principles
E. Office of Foundation & Corporate Relations Grant Guidelines
F. Pitzer College Faculty Year-End Report
G. Planned Early Retirement Plan for Faculty (Regular of Phased)
H. Student Appointments Committee
I. Student Senate
J. Judicial Code - Pitzer College Code of Student Conduct
K. 12-Month Pay Policy Statement
L. Guidelines for the Structure and Format of the Self-Study Report
M. Scientific Research Misconduct Policy
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF
A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION
MELVIN OLIVER and MELANIE LACEY certify that:
1. They are the President and Secretary, respectively, of P ITZER COLLEGE, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation (“Corporation”).
2. The Articles of Incorporation (“Articles”) of this Corporation are amended and restated in their entirety to read as follows:
“ARTICLE I NAME
The name of this Corporation is PITZER COLLEGE.
ARTICLE II ELECTION
This Corporation elects to be governed by all of the provisions of the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law of 19 80 not otherwise applicable to it under Part 5 thereof.
ARTICLE III PURPOSE
A. This Corporation is a no nprofit public benefit co rporation and is not organized for the private gain of any person. It is organi zed under the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law for charitable purposes.
B. The specific purposes of this Corporation are:
(1) to establish, conduct and maintain an educational institution of collegiate grade for men and women, the advancement of their intellectual, scientific, moral and spiritual improvement through the dissemination of knowledge, the development of re search and the promotion of the broad and inclusive interest of learning, with all the powers and privileges by law conferred u pon or permitted to be exercised by such Corporation, including the granting of literary honors in the giving of suitable diplomas;
(2) to engage in any other activities in furtherance of the purposes for which this Corporation is formed; and
(3) to receive, invest and utilize funds and property acquired through the solicitation of contributions, donations, grants, gifts, bequests and the like for the purposes for which the Corporation is formed.
LIMITATION ON CORPORATE ACTIVITIES
A. The Corporation is organized and operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
B. Notwithstanding any other provision of these Restated Articles of Incorporation or the Bylaws for this Corporation, the Corporation shall not carry on any other activities not permitted to be carried on (a) by a corporation exempt from federal income tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or (b) by a corporation contributions to which are deductible under Section 170(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
C. No substantial part of the activities of this Corporation shall consist of the carrying on of propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, nor shall this Corporation participate or intervene in any political campaign (including the publishing or distribution of statements) on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office.
DEDICATION AND DISSOLUTION
A. The property of this Corporation is irrevocably dedicated to charitable and educational purposes meeting the requirements for exemption under Section 214 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, and no part of the net income or assets of this Corporation shall ever inure to the benefit of any director, officer or member thereof or to the benefit of any private person.
B. On the dissolution or winding up of the Corporation, its assets remaining after payment, or provision for payment, of all debts and liabilities of this Corporation shall be distributed to a nonprofit fund, foundation or corporation which i s organized and operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes meeting the requirements for exemption under Section 214 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code and which has established its tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
C. If this Corporation holds any assets in trust, or if the Corporation is formed for charitable purposes, then such assets shall be disposed of on dissolution in conformity with this Corporation’s Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws subject to complying with the provisions of any trust under which such assets are held. The disposition shall be in such manner as may be directed by decree of the Superior Court of the county in which the Corporation has its principal office, on petition therefor by the Attorney General or by any person concerned in the liquidation, in a proceeding to which the Attorney General is a party. Such decree of the Superior Court may be waived if the Attorney General makes a written waiver of objections to the disposition.
These Articles of Incorporation may be amended or repealed, or new Articles of Incorporation may be adopted, only by the approval of a majority of the Board of Trustees of the Corporation.”
3. The foregoing amendment and restatement of the Articles has been duly approved by the Board of Trustees of this Corporation.
4. The Corporation has no members.
We further declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the matters set forth in this certificate are true and correct of our own knowledge.
Date: May 14, 2007 PITZER COLLEGE, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation
MELVIN OLIVER, President
MELANIE LACEY, Secretary
ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND TENURE
1940 STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES
The purpose of this statement is to promote public understanding and support of academic freedom and tenure and agreement upon procedures to assure them in colleges and universities. Institutions of higher education are conducted for the common good and not to further the interest of either the individual teacher or the institution as a whole. The common good depends upon the free search for truth and its free exposition.
Academic freedom is essential to these purposes and applies to both teaching and research. Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth. Academic freedom in its teaching aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of the student of freedom of learning. It carries with it duties correlative with rights.
Tenure is a means to certain ends, specifically: (1) freedom of teaching and research and of extramural activities, and (2) a sufficient degree of economic security to make the profession attractive to men and women of ability. Freedom and economic security, hence tenure, are indispensable to the success of an institution in fulfilling its obligations to its students and to society.
(a) The teacher is entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of results, subject to the adequate performance of his/her other academic duties; but research for pecuniary return should be based upon an understanding with the authorities of the institution.
(b) The teacher is entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing his/her subject, but he/she should be careful not to introduce into the teaching controversial matter which has no relation to his/her subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
(c) The college or university teacher is a citizen, a member of a learned profession, and an officer of an educational institution. When he/she speaks or writes as a citizen, he/she should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but his/her special position in the community imposes special obligations. As a person of learning and an educational officer, he/she should remember that the public may judge his/her profession and his/her institution by his/her utterances. Hence, he/she should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that he/she is not an institutional spokesman.
(a) After the expiration of the probationary period, teachers or investigators should have permanent or continuous tenure, and their service should be terminated only for adequate cause, except in the case of retirement for age, or under extraordinary circumstances because of financial exigencies.
In the interpretation of this principle, it is understood that the following represents acceptable academic practice:
(1) The precise terms and conditions of every appointment should be stated in writing and be in the possession of both institution and teacher before the appointment is consummated.
(2) Beginning with appointment to the rank of full-time Instructor or a higher rank, the probationary period should not exceed seven years, including within this period full-time service in all institutions of higher education; but subject to the proviso that when, after a term of probationary service of more than three years in one or more institutions, a teacher is called to another institution, it may be agreed in writing that his/her new appointment is for a probationary period of not more than four years, even though thereby the person’s total probationary period in the academic profession is extended beyond the normal maximum of seven years. Notice should be given at least one year prior to the expiration of the probationary period if the teacher is not to be continued in service after the expiration of that period.
(3) During the probationary period a teacher should have the academic freedom that all other members of the faculty have.
(4) Termination for cause of a continuous appointment, or the dismissal for cause of a teacher previous to the expiration of a term appointment, should, if possible, be considered by both a faculty committee and the governing board of the institution. In all cases where the facts are in dispute, the accused teacher should be informed before the hearing in writing of the charge against him/her and should have the opportunity to be heard in his/her own defense by all bodies that pass judgment upon his/her case. He/she should be permitted to have with him/her an advisor of his/her own choosing who may act as counsel. There should be a full stenographic record of the hearing available to the parties concerned. In the hearing of charges on incompetence the testimony should include that of teachers and other scholars, either from his/her own or from other institutions. Teachers on continuous appointment who are dismissed for reasons not involving moral turpitude should receive their salaries for at least a year from the date of notification of dismissal whether or not they are continued in their duties at the institution.
(5) Termination of a continuous appointment because of financial exigency should be demonstrably bona fide.
At the conference of representatives of the American Association of University Professors and of the Association of American Colleges on November 7-8, 1940, the following interpretations of the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure were agreed upon:
(a) That its operation should not be retroactive.
(b) That all tenure claims of teachers appointed prior to the endorsement should be determined in accordance with the principles set forth in the 1925 Conference Statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure.
(c) If the administration of a college or university feels that a teacher has not observed the admonitions of paragraph (c) of the section on Academic Freedom and believes that the extramural utterances of the teacher have been such as to raise grave doubts concerning his/her fitness for his/her position, it may proceed to file charges under paragraph (a) (4) of the section on Academic Tenure. In pressing such charges the administration should remember that teachers are citizens and should be accorded the freedom of citizens. In such cases, the administration must assume full responsibility, and the American Association of University Professors and the Association of American Colleges are free to make an investigation.
 Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors. L, 3 (September 1964), pp. 251, 52
 The word “teacher” as used in this document is understood to include the investigator who is attached to an academic institution without teaching duties.
What courses did you take from Professor X (list by title)? Give the year and semester for each course.
What is your major or contemplated major? What is your year in college?
In which capacities (teaching, advising, research) did you know Professor X?
What is s/he like as a teacher? Were the courses you took conducted primarily as lecture or as discussion courses? In addition to lecture and discussion, were any of the following included as course components: (a.) laboratory (b.) community placement (c.) internship (d.) information resource technology (e.g., the web) (e.) field trips (f.) small group discussion (g.) other. Did s/he supervise you in any research projects? Did s/he have knowledge of the subject taught in the course? Were the goals of the course clearly defined? Were the goals met?
Please describe the quality and quantity of reading assignments.
What kinds of writing assignments were there? Did the instructor do anything to help you improve your writing?
Describe the examinations given in the course. Did they cover the main point of the material? Did they seem fair?
What grade did you receive in each course you took from Professor X? Did you receive the grade you expected? Were the grading practices fair?
Are you aware of Professor X’s research interests? To what extent did her/his research contribute to the course?
How challenging was the course?
How has the instructor (course) affected your attitude towards or interest in the materials?
How available was Professor X outside of class?
What was the best thing about Professor X’s courses?
What was the worst thing about Professor X’s courses?
How would you rate Professor X in relation to other Claremont Colleges’ instructors from whom you have taken courses?
How long has Professor X been your advisor?
How available has Professor X been to you as an advisee?
How effective has Professor X been in orienting you as a new student to the College? Does Professor X appear to know the course offerings at Pitzer? At the other Claremont Colleges?
How helpful has Professor X been in helping you to design course schedules appropriate to your interests and needs?
Has Professor X assisted you in making your plans to meet the major requirements and educational objectives of the College?
How helpful has Professor X been in assisting you in discussing summer or post- graduate plans?
Do you have any suggestions for making Professor X a more effective advisor?
If you had the opportunity to help make Professor X more effective, what would you suggest?
As you know, Pitzer College embraces within its educational mission the “interdisciplinary and intercultural exploration” of knowledge, as well as “social responsibility and the ethical implications of knowledge and action.”
a. To what extent did Professor X incorporate ideas or themes related to “interdisciplinary and intercultural exploration”? (Did Professor X include material from other disciplines in the teaching of the course? In what ways? How did Professor X include material relevant to the exploration of intercultural issues? How relevant were these objectives for the course or courses that you took?)
b. To what extent did Professor X develop ideas or course materials that promoted “social responsibility” or explore the “ethical implications of knowledge and action”? (Can you think of any concrete examples? How relevant were these objectives for the course or courses that you took?)
Use this space for additional comments.
GUIDELINES FOR THE PITZER COLLEGE LANDSCAPE
1. Campus landscaping should reflect our climate and geological setting. Geologically, Pitzer is situated on an alluvial fan at the foot of some of the steepest mountains in the world. Biologically, we are at the intersection of the mountainous chaparral community with the coastal sage scrub of the valley. In a broader sense, we are part of the arid and semi-arid American Southwest that embraces New Mexico, Arizona, and parts of Utah and Nevada, as well as southern California and Baja. Climatically, we live in one example of a “Mediterranean” climate (mild, wet winters and hot, dry summers), which we share with the countries of the Mediterranean rim and parts of southern Africa, Australia, and Chile.
Geographically, we can communicate a sense of place by keeping the campus open to a view of the mountains; geologically, by incorporating granitic boulders, cobbles, and decomposed granite into the built landscape; floristically, by preserving remnants of the natural landscape and by using native plants both individually and in their natural patterns of association.
The notion of “native” plants is not as simple or restrictive as is sometimes assumed; it is more like a multi-dimensional set of concentric circles. For example, there are plants native to the San Antonio Wash; plants native to the alluvial scrub ecosystems of southern California; plants native to southern California generally; plants native to the American Southwest; and plants appropriate to this place because they are native to one or another of the world’s climatically “Mediterranean” areas. Examples of things that are not meaningful to do here include installing English gardens, planting rows of eastern trees, and introducing redwoods under the guise of “California natives.”
2. The campus should be designed to conserve water. Although Claremont is not desert (less than ten inches average rainfall), it is semi-arid (sixteen inches average rainfall). It can support endless green lawns and rows of exotic street trees only by taking water from other regions. This long-term situation is punctuated by periodic drought, protests from the water colonies, spasms of water rationing, and rising water prices. Pitzer’s landscape needs to move further in the direction of “xeriscape” (landscaping appropriate for dry climates), which involves such things as more efficient irrigation, limitation of water-consumptive turfgrass to areas where it is needed for specific functions (e.g., playing fields), and the user of “drought- tolerant or “water-wise” plant material.
As the new master plan is implemented, there will be more turfgrass (and therefore more water use) because there will be more playing fields. In this situation, we need to choose our varieties of turfgrass wisely, design our irrigation systems carefully, offset the new water use by reducing water use in other parts of the campus (for example, by converting some grassy areas to less water-consumptive vegetation), and explore ways of reusing irrigation water that runs off playing fields and parking lots. In order to monitor and control water use, metering is essential for specific buildings and landscape areas, but until 1991 there was only one water meter for the entire College. Two meters were added as part of the East Mesa project, and this practice needs to continue as new buildings are built and portions of the campus are newly landscaped or altered. In addition, the College should investigate the state of the art with regard to rain gauges and moisture sensors to see if they should be included as an integral part of a water-conserving irrigation system. As for plant material, there is a great overlap (though by no means a complete correspondence) between the xeriscape principle and the principle of using native plants. The general use of xeriscape does not preclude the occasional use of some water-consumptive native plants if these are grouped on separate irrigation lines and do not dominate the landscape. More precise guidelines will need to be developed after the city of Claremont adopts its version of the Model Landscape Ordinance mandated by AB 325, developed by the Department of Water Resources, and currently being adapted for Claremont by former Pitzer student Gerald Taylor.
3. The campus landscape should be educational. It can communicate a sense of place and demonstrate how people can live more within the limits of their region’s resources. It can provide an environment conducive to learning by providing outdoor nooks, both sunny and shady, where members of the College community can read, meditate, write, and converse. It is also possible to display some of the different dimensions of nativity in instructive ways that provide variety and support the College’s commitment to intercultural understanding. For example, instead of simply mixing Australian, southern African, and southern Californian plantings, we could have an Australian and/or a southern African garden, perhaps at one or more of the new buildings. A sign and labels, or a brochure, could interpret these gardens to us and to campus visitors. A different garden might focus on Native American uses of southern California plants, while another might highlight introduced plants that had, over time, become “naturalized.”
4. Campus plantings should be interesting and attractive, with attention to shape, texture, and color. More attention should be paid to planting for the long run (e.g., trees that will be magnificent specimens after many years). More attention should be paid to plantings that bloom over the seasons, instead of just in the summer when the main College program is on vacation.
5. The landscape should help unify the campus, which will increasingly contain buildings of different styles and periods. Unity might be accomplished partly by using certain native plant species as “theme” trees and shrubs in different parts of the campus, especially at points of entrance, exit, and transition. Certain associations of plants might also become a distinctive Pitzer characteristic. In addition, proper landscaping can soften the intrusive mediocrity of some of the older buildings, as through the use of climbing vines on blank walls.
6. Grounds management should emphasize ecological understanding of soil development and maintenance, biotechnical cycling, species and age diversity, and structural and physiological adaptation of the vegetation. It should shun the practice of planting monocultures of nutrient- and water-demanding, exotic vegetation on nutrient-poor, rapidly-draining soils. Such practices create drought- and pest-prone landscaping, which we then “force” with increased water, fertilizer, and pesticides.
7. Finally, and equal in importance to the other goals, landscaping should reflect the spirit of the College. This spirit is not expressed by the imperialism of imposing rigid, geometric forms–or alien plant species–upon the natural world, but by a more “naturalistic” style that is informal, diverse, and respectful of natural patterns and native species.
STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND PRINCIPLES
Pitzer College strives to incorporate socially and environmentally sound practices into the operations of the College and the education of our students. Pitzer exists within inter-reliant communities that are affected by personal and institutional choices, and the College is mindful of the consequences of our practices. A Pitzer education should involve not just a mastery of ideas, but a life lived accordingly. We are thus committed to principles of sustainability, and dedicated to promoting awareness and knowledge of the impacts of our actions on human and natural communities.
OFFICE OF FOUNDATION AND CORPORATE RELATIONS
As part of College Advancement, the Foundation and Corporate Relations Office is responsible for seeking institutional support for Pitzer College - financial aid, faculty development, equipment, endowed funds, and other campus priorities and programs. This involves identifying, cultivating, soliciting, and stewarding corporate and foundation funding sources. Foundation and Corporate Relations also can assist faculty and staff in obtaining funding for research projects through access to an on-line foundation directory and limited staff assistance with grant development.
Guidelines for Faculty and Staff Grant Seekers
Foundation and corporate grant seekers should coordinate their prospect list with the Foundation and Corporate Relations staff prior to contact with a prospect to obtain advice and guidance about the College’s current or previous relationship, if any, with a foundation. In this way, you could begin to make arrangements for College endorsement of your project and learn if the College has contacts that should be informed about your proposal.
The Foundations and Corporate Relations Office has active projects with many foundations to support campus-wide programs. These require on-going cultivation and a proactive, coordinated approach to maximize their funding potential for the entire campus. Information about these projects is available from the Foundation and Corporate Relations Office, McConnell 320, -79451
Obtaining College Endorsement of Proposal
Once you have identified funding prospects for your project, you must also obtain college approval for the idea. All ideas for new programs that have academic impact/implications must be approved by the Dean of Faculty and APC. All ideas for new programs that have student life impact/implications must be approved by the Dean of Students.
Foundation & Corporate Office Services
The Office of Foundation/Corporate Relations will supply or obtain items requested by funders or provide services such as:
• the President’s signature on cover letters
• supplemental institutional material as requested by the prospect (i.e., financial reports, operating budget, Pitzer Fact Sheet).
• express mailing of your proposal and supplemental information
• distribution of copies of all final proposals to appropriate deans, appropriate faculty and staff, and the Public Relations Coordinator.
PITZER COLLEGE FACULTY YEAR-END REPORT
NAME FIELDGROUP(S) _
On this form, please list your activities and accomplishments for the past academic year.
B. Academic Advising:
C. Scholarly and Artistic Activities:
D. Service to the College and Other Communities:
E. Miscellaneous: Anything else you wish to add to this report
F. Please append an updated curriculum vitae.
G. If this is the year immediately following your five-year review, please include any ways you may have made changes in your teaching, advising, scholarly and artistic activities, or service activities as a result of information you obtained during that review. Due annually by August 15.
PLANNED RETIREMENT POLICY FOR FACULTY
(Effective July 1, 2007) MAY 9, 2007
[Approved College Council 5/3/07
Approved Board of Trustees 5/14/07]
PLANNED RETIREMENT POLICY FOR FACULTY
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
This document constitutes the plan document for the Pitzer College Planned Retirement Policy for Faculty (the “Policy”). The portion of the Policy providing for payments during the six- month period following an eligible Faculty member’s full retirement date under the Policy’s planned full retirement program is an “employee pension benefit plan” within the meaning of section 3(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”). That portion of the Policy is maintained for the purpose of providing deferred compensation for a select group of management or highly compensated employees, within the meaning of ERISA. This document is provided by Pitzer College (the “College”) to Faculty members who may become, or are, eligible for the Policy. Those Faculty members should keep this document for future reference.
The Policy recognizes that the College values contributions of Faculty members of a variety of ages and interests. The Policy is intended to widen the range of retirement opportunities available to the Faculty. An eligible Faculty member’s participation in the Policy’s planned full retirement program or planned phased retirement program is entirely voluntary by the Faculty member and is in the sole discretion of the College.
An eligible Faculty member is entitled to participate in the planned full or phased retirement program only if all of the conditions of Section 3 are satisfied with respect to that Faculty member.
The Policy is an amendment and restatement of the Pitzer College Retirement Policy (the “Prior Policy”) that has existed up until July 1, 2007. The Prior Policy remains in effect only with respect to Faculty members who, with the College, signed contracts under the Prior Policy prior to July 1,2007, and such Faculty members will not be entitled to the planned full or phased retirement program under this amendment and restatement.
Section 2.1. Generally, as provided in Section 3 in greater detail, an eligible Faculty member who satisfies certain conditions may decide to participate in the planned full retirement program or the planned phased retirement program at the sole discretion of the College. Certain terms used in Section 3 or elsewhere in the Policy are defined in this Section 2.1.
(a) “Eligible Faculty member” means any tenured associate or full professor of the College who has 20 consecutive Years of Service and, for purposes of the planned full retirement program, has attained age 60 or, for purposes of the planned phased retirement program, has attained age 55. However, in no event does “eligible Faculty member” include
(1) any person whose teaching load is less than the College’s standard teaching load, as determined by the College, during the academic year during which he or she first satisfies both the service requirement and applicable age requirement described above,
(2) any person classified by the College for purposes of income tax withholding or employment taxes as an independent contractor, without regard to any retroactive reclassification of him or her as an employee,
(3) any person rendering services to the College pursuant to an agreement (i) characterizing him or her as an independent contractor, (ii) with another organization, or (iii) that includes a waiver of participation in the Policy,
(4) any person who has an individual written agreement with the College providing for severance or other termination or retirement benefits, or any other types of benefits, upon termination of employment with the College, regardless of whether such benefits are subject to requirements or conditions (e.g., the person not being terminated by the College for performance deficiencies), or
(5) any person included in a unit of employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement between employee representatives and the College.
(b) “Year of Service” means a fiscal year of the College (i.e., a twelve-month period beginning on a July 1 and ending on the following June 30) during which an associate or full professor of the College fulfilled normal teaching responsibilities at the College for not less than the College’s standard teaching load (for ten months), as determined by the College, for the academic year coinciding with such fiscal year. For purposes of the Policy, the academic year of the College shall be considered to coincide with the fiscal year of the College. For this purpose, periods of an associate or full professor’s sabbatical and other paid leaves of absence, and approved unpaid leaves of absence, will be considered as periods during which normal teaching responsibilities at the College for not less than the College’s standard teaching load are fulfilled
(c) “Plan Administrator” means the College.
(d) “Board” means the Board of Trustees of the College.
(e) “President” means the President of the College.
(f) “Dean of the Faculty” means the Dean of the Faculty of the College.
Terms of Planned Full and Phased Retirement Programs
Section 3.1. General participation eligibility. An eligible Faculty member may become eligible to participate in the Policy’s planned full retirement program pursuant to Section 3.2 or planned phased retirement program pursuant to Section 3.3. Notwithstanding any provision of the Policy, once a Faculty member elects to participate in one of these two programs, he or she cannot elect to participate in the other program.
Section 3.2. Planned full retirement.
(a) Eligibility and available full retirement dates. Subject to the rule requiring a timely election and the other conditions set forth in this Section 3.2, an eligible Faculty member can retire from employment with the College under the Policy’s planned full retirement program on the first, second, third, fourth or fifth July 1 (a “full retirement date”) following the eligible Faculty member’s (i) completion of 20 consecutive Years of Service and (ii) attainment of age 60. For example, an eligible Faculty member who satisfies the service and age requirement by the end of the academic year that ends on June 30, 2010 (and not by the end of any prior academic year) may retire under the planned full retirement program on July 1 of 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 or 2014.
Notwithstanding the foregoing and any other provision of the Policy, whether an eligible Faculty member can retire from employment with the College under the Policy’s planned full retirement program on any particular full retirement date is subject to the sole and absolute discretion of the College. With regard to each election deadline described under Section 3.2 below, such discretion (i) will be exercised only by the President or Dean of the Faculty, (ii) will be exercised based principally on business or financial considerations of the College, and (iii) will not be exercised in a manner that is inconsistent among Faculty members to whom such election deadline applies and for whom the business and financial considerations of the College are similar as determined by the College. The President or Dean of the Faculty will inform the Faculty member of the available full retirement dates, if any, not less than 30 days prior to the election deadline.
(b) Election deadline and other conditions. To retire under the Policy’s planned full retirement program on a full retirement date, the eligible Faculty member must have made his or her election to retire on that date no later than the July 1 (the “election deadline”) which is 2 years (i.e., 24 months) prior to the first July 1 by which he or she satisfies the service and age requirements described under Section 3.2(a). The Faculty member must make his or her election by providing written notice to the Dean of the Faculty (on the form provided by the Dean of the Faculty for this purpose) no later than the election deadline. In addition, the Faculty member must with the College subsequently enter into a written retirement agreement provided by the College for this purpose, and signed by the President or Dean of the Faculty, no later than 30 days after the election deadline (i.e., by the July 31 following the election deadline).
The retirement agreement will include the Faculty member’s agreement to retire on the specified full retirement date, the Faculty member’s agreement to fulfill normal teaching responsibilities as an associate or full professor at the College for not less than the College’s standard teaching load, as determined by the College, up to the full retirement date, provisions regarding any applicable sabbatical or other leave, the Faculty member’s release and waiver of claims required by the College, and other terms that the College requires in its sole discretion. Any rescission, avoidance or breach of any provision of the retirement agreement by the Faculty member will cause the Faculty member to be ineligible for any benefit under the Policy’s planned full retirement program.
The release and waiver of claims required by the College will be a release of, and waiver of claims against, the College and its affiliates, and their directors, officers, employees and agents, and related persons. The release and waiver of claims must be in the form as determined by the College in its sole discretion. The release and waiver of claims may also provide, in the sole discretion of the College, that the Faculty member agrees to one or more restrictive covenants for the benefit of the College and its affiliates and other related persons as may be required by the College and permitted by law, including but not limited to the Faculty member not disparaging, competing with or soliciting employees of the College and its affiliates, and the Faculty member not infringing upon proprietary rights or disclosing confidential information of the College and its affiliates.
(c) Planned full retirement payments. In addition to regular base salary and other standard compensation for teaching before retirement, two additional amounts are paid to the eligible Faculty member who elects and satisfies the requirements for planned full retirement described in this Section 3.2. The first additional amount is equal to 97.5% of the annual base salary being paid to the eligible Faculty member during the academic year that begins on the July 1 which is 12 months after the election deadline. This amount is paid in a single lump sum payment during December of that academic year, subject to continued employment on the first day (i.e., December 1) of that month. The second additional amount is equal to 162.5% of the annual base salary being paid to the eligible Faculty member during the final academic year preceding the full retirement date. This amount is paid in 6 monthly installments (i.e., with each installment being 1/6th of the second additional amount) beginning on the full retirement date, with payment subject to employment on the preceding June 30 (i.e., the day immediately preceding the full retirement date). Such additional amounts will not be considered for purposes of determining the College’s contributions to the College’s Academic Retirement Plan for the benefit of the eligible Faculty member or for any other purpose of any benefit plan of the College. Each payment described in the preceding paragraph will be reduced by withholdings and deductions required under federal, state and local laws and by other applicable reductions. The College may reduce the amount of any payment described in the preceding paragraph as it deems appropriate in its sole discretion for any amount owed (i.e., due and payable) by the eligible Faculty member to the College.
(d) Death while receiving planned full retirement payments. If an eligible Faculty member dies after his or her full retirement date and before the final payment of amounts described under Section 3.2(c), the remaining payments shall continue to be made to the beneficiary designated by the eligible Faculty member for this purpose or, if there is no such designated beneficiary that survives the eligible Faculty member, then to the eligible Faculty member’s surviving spouse or, if the eligible Faculty member has no surviving spouse, then to the eligible Faculty member’s estate. Any beneficiary designation to be made by an eligible Faculty member must be made on a form provided by the Dean of the Faculty for this purpose and the designation is only effective if delivered by the eligible Faculty member to the Dean of the Faculty prior to the eligible Faculty member’s death.
(e) Continued medical insurance and discontinuance of other benefits. Beginning on the eligible Faculty member’s termination of employment with the College on his or her full retirement date, the eligible Faculty member, if covered by the College’s medical insurance plan immediately prior to such full retirement date, will continue to be eligible to be covered by such plan, to the extent permitted by such plan, with the same College contribution to the cost of such coverage as made by the College from time to time for a Faculty member who has not terminated employment. Such eligibility will be discontinued, if not earlier pursuant to the terms of such plan, when the eligible Faculty member’s coverage is discontinued or, if earlier, when the eligible Faculty member reaches the age at which he or she first becomes eligible for Medicare (either Part A or Part B) coverage or benefits, regardless of whether the eligible Faculty member enrolls in Medicare coverage.
If a spouse or any dependent of the eligible Faculty member is also, with respect to the eligible Faculty member, covered by the College’s medical insurance plan immediately prior to the Faculty member’s full retirement date, such covered person will continue to be eligible for such coverage, to the extent permitted by such plan, until the eligible Faculty member is no longer eligible for such coverage or, if earlier, when coverage for such covered person is discontinued or, if earlier, when such covered person reaches the age on which he or she first becomes eligible for Medicare (either Part A or Part B) coverage or benefits, regardless of whether such covered person enrolls in Medicare coverage, or when such covered person is otherwise no longer eligible for coverage pursuant to the terms of the College’s medical insurance plan (e.g., loss of status as a spouse or dependent of the eligible Faculty member). The College will contribute to the cost of such coverage under the College’s medical insurance plan for a spouse or dependent to the same extent as the College contributes to the cost of such coverage from time to time for the spouse or dependent of a Faculty member who has not terminated employment. Other than continued coverage in the College’s medical insurance plan to the extent described above, effective upon an eligible Faculty member’s full retirement date, such Faculty member will be no longer eligible for any employee benefit plan of the College, except to the extent expressly provided in any such plan or as set forth in Section 3.4.
Section 3.3. Planned Phased Retirement.
(a) Eligibility and available phased retirement dates. Subject to the rule requiring a timely election and the other conditions set forth in this Section 3.3, under the Policy’s planned phased retirement program, an eligible Faculty member can reduce his or her teaching load to a teaching load that is 60% of the College’s standard teaching load, as determined by the College, on any of the first ten July 1sts (a “phased retirement date”) following the eligible Faculty member’s
(i) completion of 20 consecutive Years of Service and
(ii) attainment of age 55. For example, an eligible Faculty member who satisfies the service and age requirement by the end of the academic year that ends on June 30, 2010 (and not by the end of any prior academic year) may reduce his or her teaching load to a 60% teaching load on July 1, 2010 or any subsequent July 1 up to and including July 1, 2019.
Notwithstanding the foregoing and any other provision of the Policy, whether an eligible Faculty member can under this Policy’s planned phased retirement program reduce his or her teaching load on any phased retirement date is subject to the sole and absolute discretion of the College. With regard to each election deadline described under Section 3.3 below, such discretion
(i) will be exercised only by the President or Dean of the Faculty, (ii) will be exercised based principally on business or financial considerations of the College, and
(iii) will not be exercised in a manner that is inconsistent among Faculty members to whom such election deadline applies and for whom the business and financial considerations of the College are similar as determined by the College. The President or Dean of the Faculty will inform the Faculty member as to whether a particular July 1 is an available phased retirement date not less than 30 days prior to the election deadline for that phased retirement date, provided that the Faculty member so requests not later than 90 days prior to such election deadline.
While on a reduced 60% teaching load, the eligible Faculty member will be expected to teach part-time during the entire academic year but, in exceptional circumstances, depending upon curricular needs, the Faculty member may be allowed to fulfill his or her teaching responsibilities during one semester. Any such arrangement for one year will not commit the College to such a schedule in subsequent years. The eligible Faculty member will be required to continue other College responsibilities, such as advising, committee service and thesis supervision. The Faculty member will be eligible for research and travel funds and other privileges available to part-time Faculty members, but may be asked to share an office with one or more other Faculty members. The Faculty member will be eligible for sabbatical leaves on the regular schedule.
(b) Election deadline and other conditions. For an eligible Faculty member to reduce his or her teaching load to a teaching load that is 60% of the College’s standard teaching load, as determined by the College, on any phased retirement date, the eligible Faculty member must have made his or her election to do so no later than the July 1 (the “election deadline”) which is 1 year (i.e., 12 months) prior to such phased retirement date. The Faculty member must make his or her election by providing written notice to the Dean of the Faculty (on the form provided by the Dean of the Faculty for this purpose) no later than the election deadline. In addition, the Faculty member must with the College subsequently enter into a written retirement agreement provided by the College for this purpose, and signed by the President or Dean of the Faculty, no later than 30 days after the election deadline (i.e., by the July 31 following the election deadline). The retirement agreement will include the Faculty member’s agreement to fulfill normal teaching responsibilities as an associate or full professor at the College for not less than 60% of the College’s standard teaching load from the phased retirement date up to full retirement, provisions regarding any applicable sabbatical or other leave, the Faculty member’s release and waiver of claims required by the College, and other terms that the College requires in its sole discretion. Any rescission, avoidance, or breach of any provision of the retirement agreement by the Faculty member will cause the Faculty member to be ineligible for any benefit under the Policy’s planned phased retirement program. Such release and waiver of claims will be as described in Section 3.2(b).
(c) Planned phased retirement payments. While on a reduced 60% teaching load, the eligible Faculty member’s regular base salary will be reduced to 60% of the equivalent full time salary of the eligible Faculty member. The eligible Faculty member will continue to receive contributions to the College’s Academic Retirement with the amount of such contributions determined by the eligible Faculty member’s reduced regular base salary. Unlike the Policy’s planned full retirement program, no additional amounts are paid to the eligible Faculty member prior to, on or after the eligible Faculty member’s phased retirement date under the Policy’s planned phased retirement program. While on any sabbatical leave, the eligible Faculty member’s continued salary will be at the reduced amount.
(d) Continued medical insurance and other benefits. While on a reduced 60% teaching load, the eligible Faculty member will continue to be eligible to participate in the College’s medical plan, and in all other employee benefit plans of the College, to the extent permitted by such plans. To the extent any plan provides that its level of benefit is determined by the amount of compensation paid to the eligible Faculty member, such as any of the College’s life insurance plans, such benefit level may be accordingly reduced. An eligible Faculty member whose most recent date of hire by the College is after September 30, 1996 will not be eligible for participation in the long-term disability insurance plan of the College while on a reduced 60% teaching load.
Beginning on the eligible Faculty member’s termination of employment with the College on his or her full retirement, the eligible Faculty member, if covered by the College’s medical insurance plan immediately prior to such full retirement, will continue to be eligible to be covered by such plan to the extent permitted by such plan, without any College contribution to the cost of such coverage. Such eligibility will be discontinued, if not earlier pursuant to the terms of such plan, when the eligible Faculty member’s coverage is discontinued or, if earlier, when the eligible Faculty member reaches the age at which he or she first becomes eligible for Medicare (either Part A or Part B) coverage or benefits, regardless of whether the eligible Faculty member enrolls in Medicare coverage.
If a spouse or any dependent of the eligible Faculty member is also, with respect to the eligible Faculty member, covered by the College’s medical insurance plan immediately prior to the Faculty member’s full retirement, such covered person will continue to be eligible for such coverage to the extent permitted by such plan, without any College contribution to the cost of such coverage. Such eligibility will be discontinued, if not earlier pursuant to the terms of such plan, when the eligible Faculty member is no longer eligible for such coverage or, if earlier, when coverage for such covered person is discontinued or, if earlier, when such covered person reaches the age on which he or she first becomes eligible for Medicare (either Part A or Part B) coverage or benefits, regardless of whether such covered person enrolls in Medicare coverage, or when such covered person is otherwise no longer eligible for coverage pursuant to the terms of the College’s medical insurance plan (e.g., loss of status as a spouse or dependent of the eligible Faculty member). Other than continued coverage in the College’s medical insurance plan to the extent described above, effective upon an eligible Faculty member’s full retirement, such Faculty member will be no longer eligible for any employee benefit plans of the College, except to the extent expressly provided in any such plan or as set forth in Section 3.4.
Section 3.4. Professor Emeritus Status. Normally, Faculty members who retire under the Policy will be considered for emeritus status upon the commencement of their full retirement (either under the planned full retirement program or the planned phased retirement program). Whether such status is granted will be determined in the sole discretion of the College. If emeritus status is granted, the emeritus professor will normally receive the following perquisites during his or her tenure as professor emeritus, as determined by the College in its sole discretion:
1. Office space or desk space in an “emeriti office” with telephone and secretarial service will be provided on an “as available” basis.
2. Authority to use College stationery and to use the institution for purposes of identification and grant administration, the latter through normal committee and staff office channels.
3. Library and Faculty House privileges and other privileges designated by the Faculty Executive Committee.
Administration of the Policy
Section 4.1. Plan Administrator. The President and Dean of the Faculty will be responsible for carrying out the rights and responsibilities of the College regarding the Policy, including those as Plan Administrator.
The Board and President, each individually, have the sole authority to interpret and construe the Policy in regard to all questions concerning the status and rights of persons under the Policy, and all such decisions of the Board or President shall be conclusive and binding on all persons.
Section 4.2. Claims Procedure. Any Faculty member who believes that he or she is entitled to a benefit or other right under the Policy which has been denied, may file a claim in writing with the President. No later than 90 days after the receipt of a claim, the President will allow or deny the claim in writing. A denial of a claim, in whole or in part, will be written in a manner calculated to be understood by the claimant and will include (i) the specific reason or reasons for the denial, (ii) specific reference to pertinent Policy provisions on which the denial is based, (iii) a description of any additional material or information necessary for the claimant to perfect the claim and an explanation of why such material or information is necessary, and (iv) an explanation of the claim review procedure.
A claimant whose claim is denied (or his or her duly authorized representative) may within 60 days after receipt of denial of his or her claim (i) request a review upon written application to the President, (ii) review pertinent documents, and (iii) submit issues and comments in writing. The President will notify the claimant of the President’s decision on review within 60 days after receipt of a request for review unless special circumstances require an extension of time for processing, in which case a decision will be rendered as soon as possible, but not later than 120 days after receipt of a request for review. Notice of the decision on review will be in writing. The President’s decision on review will be final and binding on any employee or former employee of the College or any successor in interest of either.
Amendment or Termination of the Policy
Section 5.1. Right to Amend or Terminate. The College reserves the right to, and will by written action of the Board, which will be exercised by the Board in its sole and absolute discretion, at any time, without any necessary prior notice to or approval of any employee or former employee or any other person, amend or terminate the Policy in any particular manner; provided, however, that no amendment or termination will adversely affect the benefits or rights provided, or to be provided, under the Policy to an eligible Faculty member in connection with a planned phased or full retirement for which a retirement agreement has been executed prior to the adoption of such amendment or termination. The Policy will be reviewed by the College at least every five years and will be amended or terminated if the College so desires in its sole and absolute discretion. Eligible faculty members are governed by whatever terms of the Policy are in effect at the time they execute a retirement agreement with the College. Notwithstanding any provision of the Policy, the Policy is intended to comply with the provisions of section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as enacted by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. The College shall have the sole and absolute discretion to amend or terminate the Policy to satisfy any requirements of such section 409A or regulations or other guidance issued or otherwise provided by the U.S. Treasury Department with respect to such section 409A to the extent applicable to the Policy.
Section 6.1. Limitation on Rights. Participation in the Policy does not give any employee the right to be retained in the service of the College or any rights to any benefits whatsoever, except to the extent specifically set forth, if at all, in a retirement agreement.
If an eligible Faculty member who has executed a retirement agreement with regard to the Policy’s planed full retirement program terminates his or her employment, whether as a voluntary termination or due to his or her death or disability, or has his or her employment terminated by the College prior to his or her full retirement date, such eligible Faculty member shall not be entitled to such planned full retirement or any payments or other benefits related thereto.
Section 6.2. Method of Funding. The College will pay all additional payments with respect to the Policy’s planned full retirement program from current operating funds. No property of the College is or will be, by reason of the Policy, held in trust for any employee of the College. No person will have any interest in or any lien or prior claim upon any property of the College by reason of the Policy or the College’s obligation to pay additional amounts pursuant to the Policy.
Section 6.3. Governing Law. The Policy will be construed and enforced in accordance with ERISA and the laws of the State of California to the extent such laws are not preempted by ERISA. Notwithstanding any provision of the Policy, the Policy is intended to comply with the provisions of section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as enacted by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, and will be interpreted and construed accordingly. Notwithstanding any provision of the Policy, if a payment to be made pursuant to the Policy constitutes a deferral of compensation under such section 409A, then such payment will not commence any earlier than the earliest of:
(i) one day after the eligible Faculty member has a “separation from service” within the meaning of such section 409A,
(ii) any other date permitted by such section 409A, and (iii) any other date permitted by regulations or other guidance issued or otherwise provided by the U.S. Treasury Department or the Internal Revenue Service with respect to such section 409A.
Section 6.4. Assignments. No rights, obligations or liabilities of an eligible Faculty member hereunder are assignable or otherwise alienable.
Additional Policy Information
Plan Name: Pitzer College Planned Retirement Policy for Faculty
Plan Sponsor and Plan Pitzer College Administrator: c/o Dean of the Faculty 1050 North Mills Avenue Claremont, California 91711 (909) 621-8000
Agent for Service of Legal Process: Pitzer College Dean of the Faculty 1050 North Mills Avenue Claremont, California 91711 (909) 621-8000
Plan Year: January 1 through December 31
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the College has caused this instrument to be executed by its duly authorized officer this day of , 2007.
PITZER COLLEGE DRAFT MAY 9, 2007
FIRST AMENDMENT TO PITZER COLLEGE
PLANNED RETIREMENT POLICY FOR FACULTY
This document (this “Amendment”) constitutes the First Amendment to the Pitzer College Planned Retirement Policy for Faculty, which was executed by Pitzer College (the “College”) on (enter date of execution of Policy) (the “Policy”). This First Amendment, along with the Policy, is provided by the College to Faculty members who may become, or are, eligible for the Policy. Those Faculty members should keep this First Amendment, along with the Policy, for future reference. The purpose of this Amendment is to modify the Policy with regard to the final regulations issued during 2007 by the U.S. Treasury Department with regard to section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. Accordingly, the Policy is amended as described in the following paragraphs:
1. Section 3.2(c) of the Policy is amended by adding at the end thereof new third and fourth paragraphs which reads as follows:
Notwithstanding the foregoing and any other provision of the Policy, the second additional amount to be paid to the eligible Faculty member pursuant to the first paragraph of this Section 3.2(c) will not be paid if the eligible Faculty member does not at the end of the day immediately preceding the eligible Faculty member’s full retirement date incur a “separation from service” with the College as defined and determined pursuant to section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable regulations and other guidance promulgated by the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service (“Code §409A”).
In other words, the term “retirement” and “termination of employment” and similar terms are intended for purposes of eligibility for payment of the second additional amount to have the same meaning as the term “separation from service” as defined and determined for purposes of Code §409A. For that purpose, as provided by Code §409A, a separation from service will be determined to occur based on whether the facts and circumstances indicate that the College and the eligible Faculty member reasonably anticipate on the full retirement date that the level of bona fide services that the eligible Faculty member will perform for the College thereafter will permanently decrease to no more than 30% of the average level of bona fide services performed over the immediately preceding 36 months. (The Policy provides that, as allowed by Code §409A, whether a separation from service occurs will be determined based on 30%, rather than 20%, of the average level of bona fide services performed over the immediately preceding 36 months.)
In explanation of the preceding paragraph, whether a retiring Faculty member continues to provide any services for the College after his or her full retirement date will only be pursuant to an agreement of the College and the retiring Faculty member independent of, and not as a condition to, the retirement agreement. Assuming that a retiring Faculty member’s work load prior to his or her full retirement date is normally comprised 50% of teaching responsibilities and 50% of research and other responsibilities, the 30% maximum percentage which is the basis on which a determination is made as to whether a separation from service has occurred will not normally preclude a determination that a separation from service has occurred where there exists an expectation that the retiring faculty member will continue to teach one course after retirement. If any services are after the full retirement date provided by the retired Faculty member teaching one or more courses, compensation therefor will be at the standard per course rate determined by the College.
2. Section 6.3 of the Policy is hereby amended by deleting the last two sentences so that Section 6.3 will read as follows:
Section 6.3. Governing Law. The Policy will be construed and enforced in accordance with ERISA and the laws of the State of California to the extent such laws are not preempted by ERISA. Notwithstanding any provision of the Policy, the Policy is intended to comply with the provisions of Code §409A and will be interpreted and construed accordingly.
3. All references in the Policy to the “Policy”, “hereunder”, “herein”, or words of similar import shall mean and shall be a reference to the Policy as amended hereby.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the College has caused this instrument to be executed by its duly authorized officer this day of , 2011.
PITZER COLLEGE By:_
STUDENT APPOINTMENTS COMMITTEE
a) Student Appointments Committee shall be a standing committee of Student Senate.
a. Six officers of Student Senate (as described in Article III of the Student Senate
b. One faculty member of Student Senate
c) Functions. To appoint students to position as defined in Article VII of the Student Senate
A minimum of 24 members–21 student voting members to College Council (or no less than one third of the members of College Council)–to be drawn from the following groups:
a. Four officers (Student Chair, Vice-Chair, Secretary, and Treasurer) elected by the student body
b. One member from each of the following academic standing committees: Academic Planning Committee, Curriculum Committee, Academic Standards Committee, Campus Life Committee, Diversity Committee, Study Abroad and International Programs Committee, and Faculty Executive Committee. These representatives are elected by the student body to serve on one of the standing committees
c. Four members, one from each student class (first-year, sophomore, junior, senior), elected by their respective class
d. Four members, one from each Dormitory Council, elected by their respective Dormitory Council, and one off-campus/New Resources representative, elected by students who live off-campus
e. Dean of Students (ex-officio non-voting member)
f. Two appointed faculty members, selected each year by the Faculty Executive Committee on the recommendation of the Dean of Faculty
2. The Student Senate’s task is to discuss and make appropriate policy recommendations pertaining to student life and community issues, as well as discussing items on the agenda of College Council. Members of the Student Senate serve as the student voting representatives to College Council.
a. The Student Senate will meet as a whole on a weekly basis to discuss student life issues, new propositions, and items on the College Council agenda.
b. Meetings will be open to the entire Pitzer community; however, the Student Senate does reserve the right to hold student-only meetings in addition to the regularly scheduled weekly meetings.
c. The Student Convenor will be empowered to form and delegate duties upon ad-hoc subcommittees of the Student Senate.
d. A quorum will consist of 50 percent plus one of the members of the Student Senate. A proposal may only be voted on when a quorum is present, and must be passed by a majority of those present in order to become a recommendation of the body.
e. The Student Senate will include two permanent subcommittees; the Budgetary Subcommittee and the Communications Subcommittee. The Budgetary Subcommittee will be chaired by the Treasurer, and will contain three other members of the Student Senate. The subcommittee will conduct a scheduled allocation process each April, and is also charged with preparing the final proposal for the allocation of the Student Activities Fee to Pitzer clubs and other five-college organizations. This proposal will then be voted on by the Student Senate as a whole. The subcommittee will follow the allocation guidelines updated by the Community Relations Committee in the spring of 1990 when preparing this proposal. The Communications Subcommittee will be chaired by the Secretary, and will contain two other members of the Student Senate. The subcommittee will be charged with writing and distributing the “Pitzer Perspective”, a biweekly newsletter which informs the student body about issues being considered in Pitzer governance. In addition, the subcommittee members will receive copies of all Pitzer minutes (as well as the minutes from five-college committees which rely on the participation of Pitzer students), and will be asked to inform the Student Senate of any issues which the subcommittee believes should be addressed by the Senate.
JUDICIAL CODE- Pitzer College Code of Student Conduct
Pitzer College has a high respect for individuality among its students and acknowledges the right to explore, clarify, and adopt individual values. The College makes no attempt to stand in loco parentis or to be responsible for the total life of its students. The College does, however, have the responsibility of encouraging an atmosphere where students, staff and faculty can effectively pursue the goals of education and community living. All students are responsible for their own behavior and how this behavior impacts the community. The Code of Student Conduct seeks to protect the rights of the individual and the rights of the community with fairness, integrity, and respect for the goals of all.
The Pitzer College Code of Student Conduct sets out definitions of rules and fair procedures within the Pitzer community. As members of this community, students are required to abide by all the policies and procedures of Pitzer College and the Claremont Colleges as well as all local, state, and federal laws. It is each student’s responsibility to be aware of the content of the Code of Student Conduct as well as other policies of the College which are published in the Student Handbook.
This Code is reviewed periodically by the Judicial Council which is composed of five students and five faculty members to reflect changes in community standards and is then adopted by College Council.
Disciplinary authority for the Code of Student Conduct originates in the Board of Trustees, the President, and the By-Laws of the College. The Judicial Council has authority to conduct hearings on charges of violations of the Pitzer College Code of Student Conduct, while the Office of Student Affairs is responsible for the administration of residential life policies and for enforcing the disciplinary policies of the College.
Decisions made by the Judicial Council or an administrative review are generally final. However, an appeal may be made on specified grounds by the respondent. The sanctions imposed by the judicial process will remain in place unless and until the appeal is successful and the sanctions are overturned.
I. Definition of Terms
1. The term College means Pitzer College
2. The term “student” includes all persons taking courses at Pitzer College , both full- and part-time, and those who attend the Claremont Colleges and who reside in Claremont Colleges residence halls. Persons who are not officially enrolled for a particular term but who have a continuing relationship with Pitzer College are considered students.
3. The term “faculty member” means any person hired by Pitzer college and appointed by recommendation of Faculty Executive Committee to conduct classroom or teaching activities.
4. The term “member of the Claremont Colleges community” includes any person who is a student, faculty or staff member, college official or any other person employed by the College(s).
5. The term “intercollegiate policy” means any of several jointly-adopted policies of the Claremont Colleges which guide but do not supersede the procedures and policies of Pitzer College .
6. The term “College-owned property” includes all land, buildings facilities, and other property owned jointly or singly by any of the Claremont Colleges, or property of any facility or institution owned by or affiliated with the Claremont Colleges.
7. The term “Judicial Council” means the group of both faculty members appointed by the Pitzer College Faculty Executive Committee and student members elected by the student body of Pitzer College , who are authorized to hold hearings to determine whether a student has violated the Code of Student Conduct and to impose sanctions.
8. The “Dean of Students Office” is that official or the designees of the College appointed by the Pitzer College President and empowered by the Judicial Council through the College By-Laws to be responsible for the administration of the Student Code.
9. The term “judicial proceeding” means the procedures and processes of a student disciplinary action, (either a Judicial Council hearing or administrative review) after a formal charge of a specific alleged violation of the Code of Student Conduct is made.
10. The term “shall” is used in the imperative sense.
11. The term “may” is used in the permissive sense.
12. The term “policy” is defined as the written regulations of the College as found in, but not limited to, the Code of Student Conduct, the Student Handbook, and the College Catalogue.
13. The term “complaint” means the set of circumstances or events reported to the Dean of Students Office and/or being investigated which may or may not lead to a written charge.
14. The term “complainant” refers to the individual(s) initiating a complaint of a violation of the Code of Student Conduct which may or may not result in a charge.
15. The term “respondent” refers to the person against whom an alleged violation of the Code of Student Conduct is charged.
16. The term “victim” refers to the individual(s) who has been harmed by the alleged violation of the Code of Student Conduct.
17. The term “charge” means a written statement of the provisions of the Student Code alleged to be violated and the factual circumstances surrounding the alleged violation.
II. Judicial Authority; Office of the Dean of Students
A. Investigation and Resolution of Disputes.
1. Investigating. The Dean of Students Office is responsible for enforcement of the Code of Student Conduct and for ensuring that the rights of all students are upheld.
When a complaint is made against a student, the Dean of Students Office shall conduct an investigation to determine if the alleged violation(s) has merit. Any student against whom there might be a charge of a violation of the Code of Student Conduct has all the rights enumerated in Section VI of this code. In addition to these rights, the Dean of Students will provide the student(s) who is (are) being investigated or charged with a copy of the Code of Student Conduct as well as a sheet that points out the student’s right to consult an advisor and that offers a short list, prepared by Student Senate, of potential advisors (faculty, students, and staff) who have volunteered to provide students with information about the Code of Student Conduct and advice during the judicial process.
2. Severity of disciplinary cases. A student charged with violating the Code of Student Conduct has the right to have a hearing before the Judicial Council for any alleged violation. However, in cases of alleged minor violations, complaints can often be resolved without a full Judicial Council hearing. Generally, there are three levels of disciplinary action depending on the seriousness of the alleged violation.
a. Residential life complaints. Complaints about student behavior and reports of alleged violations of residential life policies, such as noise policy, guest policy, pets, room changes, furnishings, etc, normally are first addressed by the Dean of Students Office. Such complaints are reviewed by a Residence Hall Director and/or Associate or Assistant Dean of Students and examined in a conference with the student(s). Many matters can be resolved at this level. Attempts at conflict mediation and reconciliation as well as resolution by imposition of sanctions for admitted violations may make unnecessary a formal judicial proceeding and bringing a charge. Resolution may entail a variety of responses, including no action, a warning, an educational or community service assignment, a fine, residential probation, restitution or some combination, depending on the severity of the case. A respondent may appeal from the residence life staff to the Dean of Students for reconsideration on the same grounds as judicial appeals. (See Section VII. E.)
b. Administrative review option. In the event of repeated complaints, such as those in A.1. above, about the same person or somewhat more serious alleged violations, but where the potential sanction would not usually be suspension or expulsion, the respondent has the choice of either an administrative review within the Dean of Students Office, as provided for in II.B below, or to have the case reviewed by the Judicial Council. An administrative review offers privacy and the possibility of negotiation of the case. When offered this option, the student has five class days to decide. If the student chooses an administrative review, the student does not have the right to a hearing before Judicial Council for the same alleged violation(s). Once the student decides, a charge is issued and a date and time is set for the administrative review or Judicial Council hearing.
c. Cases in which the possible sanction could be suspension or expulsion from the College will be referred directly to the Judicial Council by the Dean of Students Office.
d. Mediation. Mediation is intended to allow the two people involved to discuss their respective understandings of the incident through the assistance of a trained professional. Mediation is designed to encourage each person to be honest and direct with the other and to accept personal responsibility where appropriate. Its goal is to facilitate the resolution of the incident to the satisfaction of both persons involved, and to produce a written agreement that is binding on both parties. Mediation is not a procedural option for cases of Sexual Offenses. Requests for mediation should be filed with the Dean of Students by the complainant and/or respondent, and both parties must agree to enter into mediation. In addition, the Dean or his/her designee must agree that mediation is a desirable method for resolution of the case. All parties have to agree to the choice of the mediator. If the process proves unsatisfactory at any time during the mediation before an agreement is reached, the complainant may pursue other courses of action.
e. For alleged violations in either case b or c. above, The Dean of Student’s Office meets separately with the complainant(s) and/or the alleged victim(s) to notify each of his or her rights and to provide each with a copy of the Student Code.
B. Procedures for an Administrative Review
If the respondent chooses to have an administrative review, the Dean of Students will notify the respondent in writing of the alleged violation(s) including the specific circumstances or behaviors alleged to have violated that policy or regulation. An Associate or Assistant Dean of Students (or in severe cases the Dean) will review the case. The review will include individual interview(s) with the respondent, the complainant, the victim, any witnesses, and the review of other documentation or materials relevant to the case. Advisors to the respondent, claimant, or victim may be consulted beforehand, but will not be permitted to be present during the administrative review. The official who conducts the review will make a decision based on a preponderance of the evidence. That is, is it more likely than not that the respondent(s) is responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct?
When a student is found responsible for a violation through an administrative review, the Dean of Students Office will impose sanctions. The range of sanctions that may be imposed includes, but is not limited to: community service, educational sanctions, referral to drug or alcohol counseling or rehabilitation, warning, probation, monetary fines, restitution, revoking of on-campus privileges (including on-campus housing), but does not include expulsion or suspension from the College. The respondent will be notified in writing of the results of the review. When a violation of the Code of Student Conduct is determined in an administrative review, and sanction is imposed by the Dean of Students Office, appeal, if any, is directed to the President. (See Section VII. E.) Grounds of appeal include violations of the student’s rights as set forth in the Code of Student Conduct, insufficient or compelling new evidence, and/or severity of the sanction.
C. Procedures for Mediation
The only parties present at the mediation session(s) are the two persons involved in the incident, their advisors if they wish (a student, faculty, or staff member of the Claremont Colleges), and a trained mediator who should not be student. The parties shall be offered the opportunity to participate without physically facing each other. If so requested, the mediator shall work out an acceptable arrangement. The mediator will listen to the parties and work with them to develop a written agreement on the key issues emerging from the incident, which may include an activity or restraints on behavior that one or both parties agree to following the mediation. The outcome will be communicated to the Dean of Students or his/her designee immediately. The written agreement will be kept in both students’ discipline files located in the Office of Student Affairs and may be used for purposes of sanctioning in subsequent judicial matters. Charges of violations of the agreement should be heard by the Judicial Council. There is no statute of limitations on the mediation process.
Note: If a hearing to consider an alleged violation(s) is submitted to the Judicial Council, whether because it is chosen by the respondent or referred by the Dean of Students Office, the hearing procedures described in Section VII below will apply. In either case, preparation of charges and notification of the Judicial Council Chair will be the responsibility of the Dean of Students Office.
III. Proscribed Conduct
Violations of the Code of Student Conduct include:
A. Offenses against persons and property:
1. Threatening or endangering other persons. No Pitzer student shall threaten or endanger the safety and/or wellbeing of others.
2. Physical assault. No Pitzer student shall attack or physically injure any member of the campus community or visitor to the campus.
3. Harassment. Every Pitzer community member has the right to freedom from harassment and abusive behavior, including harassment directed at his/her racial, religious or ethnic background, physical disability, or sexual orientation. No Pitzer student may engage in behavior which is excessively or persistently annoying enough to detract substantially from the quality of life, or the quality of the working conditions of students or any other member of the Claremont Colleges. Examples of harassment can include: making excessive noise in residence halls, damaging or highly offensive practical jokes, and racist behavior. (Cases of alleged sexual harrasment will follow the Sexual Harrasment Policy and Procedures outlined in this handbook for resolution.)
4. Property offenses. No Pitzer student shall steal, embezzle, damage, or endanger the property or otherwise violate the property rights of any Claremont College, jointly owned or affiliated facility, or of any member or authorized guest of the Claremont College community who is on college-owned property.
5. Firearms violations. Firearms or other dangerous weapons are prohibited on campus. Any student with firearms must store them at Campus Security headquarters.
6. Interference with college activities. No Pitzer student shall act in an unauthorized way to make impossible the satisfaction of any physical condition necessary for the success of any authorized activity on college-owned property (by college-owned property we understand property owned jointly or singly by any of The Claremont Colleges, or property of any facility or institution owned by or affiliated with the Colleges).
B. Providing false information: No Pitzer student shall knowingly provide false information in relation to the implementation or enforcement of any College policies, rules or regulations. This includes, but is not limited to, forging instructor or advisor signatures or add-drop sheets or petitions, giving false or misleading information to college employees and committees, and knowingly giving false testimony to Judicial Council in the course of a hearing. Every student must provide identification upon request of any college employee.
C. Academic dishonesty: Any member of the Pitzer community who is aware of academic dishonesty by a student has the responsibility to try to halt it, either by intervening immediately, or by speaking with the person committing it, and by reporting it to the Dean of Students Office for possible referral to Judicial Council. If an instructor concludes that the standards of academic honesty have been disregarded, it is his or her responsibility to make the information available to the student, to report the incident to the Dean of Students Office, and to tell the student that a report is being made. The faculty member may handle the case and impose any academic penalty including failure in the course. The faculty member should report the outcome to the Dean of Students Office. If a student disputes the incident or the severity of the penalty, he or she may have a hearing before Judicial Council.
1. Plagiarism. No Pitzer student shall appropriate the work of another- for example, parts of passages of another’s writings, the ideas and language of another, the artistic compositions of another-and pass them off as his/her own work. Students may not use substantial extracts from books, journals, or other sources without citation.
2. Cheating. No Pitzer student may intentionally use or attempt to use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in an academic exercise or examination. Duplicate papers. No student may hand in the same paper in more than one course without obtaining prior permission in writing from the instructor(s), and stipulating the conditions (such as extra research, length of paper, etc.) Facilitating academic dishonesty. Intentionally or knowingly helping or attempting to help another to violate this code of academic integrity. Claiming Credit Falsely. Intentional fraud, in which a student seeks to claim credit for the work or effort of another without authorization or uses unauthorized materials or fabricated information in any academic exercise. Academic dishonesty can include forgery of academic documents, intentionally impeding or damaging the academic work of others or assisting other students in acts of dishonesty.
D. Sexual Offenses: Every Pitzer Community member has the right to freedom from harassment and/or abuse, including sexual offenses. When this right is ignored, the offense degrades the victim, our community, and society at large. Pitzer College will not tolerate sexual offenses of any kind. In recognizing both the physical and psychological trauma associated with such offenses, Pitzer College encourages victims to seek help from the Dean of Students, a hall Director, an RA, or a potential advocate defined as a faculty, student, or staff member of the Claremont colleges. Also in recognizing the difficulty that these cases present for individuals to come forward, Pitzer College will make every effort to facilitate the process and support survivors of sexual offenses. Pitzer College recognizes that sexual offenses are a crime and victims are encouraged to address the issue through the criminal system and seek police help. In a judicial proceeding, information regarding prior sexual conduct of either the complainant or the respondent will not be considered relevant. The manner in which a complainant was dressed will not be admitted as evidence in any review or hearing. Sexual offenses fall into four broad categories with the following definitions. It is possible that a given incident could lead to more than one of these charges:
1. Rape is defined as sexual contact in which there is penetration of a bodily orifice (examples primarily include the genital and anal areas and the mouth) however slight by an object (examples include but are not limited to a penis, a finger, a bottle, etc.) in the absence of effective consent. In a case where a student is found responsible for rape, Judicial Council is required to impose the sanction of expulsion.
2. Sexual Assault is any sexual contact without effective consent that occurs by a man or a woman where penetration has not occurred. Sexual assault includes but is not limited to the legal definition of sexual battery defined by the California Penal Code 2002 under section 243.4 (a) as touching an intimate part of another person while that person is unlawfully restrained by the accused or the accomplice, and the touching is against the will of the person touched and is for the purpose of sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse. Touching as defined in the California Penal Code means physical contact with another person, whether accomplished directly, or through the clothing of the person committing the offense, or through the clothing of the victim.
3. Sexual harassment (between students) is defined as a pattern of unwanted and unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other visual, verbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature if it creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work, educational or student living environment. It includes but is not limited to any unwelcome touching, patting, pinching, or brushing against a person’s body, and any harassment directed against a person because of his/her gender or sexual orientation. It also includes any attempt to coerce an unwilling person to unwanted sexual attention or to punish a refusal to comply. Sexual harassment may also exist in power situations where one’s submission to or rejection of another’s behavior is the basis for decisions affecting that person. Cases of alleged sexual harassment will follow the Sexual Harassment Policy and Procedures outlined in this handbook for resolution.
4. Sexual Exploitation occurs when a student takes non-consensual sexual advantage of another individual or individuals for the purpose of his/her own or someone else’s benefit, and the behavior does not fall under the previous definitions of sexual offenses.
Examples include, but are not limited to:
• Potential transmission of HIV or STD when the condition is known but undisclosed
• Inducing incapacitation with the intent to rape or sexually assault- regardless if the sexual offense takes place (i.e. alcohol, date rape drugs, etc.)
• Videotaping and photography for the purpose of sexual arousal, sexual gratification,
• or sexual abuse without knowledge and effective consent of all parties involved
• Peeping Tommery
• All of the above definitions imply an absence of effective consent.
Effective consent is informed, freely and actively given, mutually understandable words and/or actions; which indicate a willingness to do the same things, at the same time, in the same way, with each other. “Consent” is defined under the California Penal Code 2002 section 261.6 to mean “positive cooperation in act or attitude pursuant to an exercise of free will. The person must act freely and voluntarily and have knowledge of the nature of the act or transaction involved.” In cases where there is an absence of mutually understandable words and/or actions, it is the responsibility of the initiator to ensure that they have the consent of the other person(s). Consent for certain activities does not imply consent for other activities, and at anytime, regardless of what has previously occurred, consent can be withdrawn. The initiator should obtain consent at every stage of new sexual activity. The role of the initiator can change throughout the sexual encounter. Examples of ineffective consent include obtaining consent through the use of fraud, actual or implied force in the form of physical violence, threats, intimidation, or coercion.
• Physical force exists when someone acts upon the subject physically by exerting control over the subject’s body through violence, which can include punching, kicking, or restraining.
• Threats exist where a reasonable person would have been compelled by the words or actions of another to give permission to sexual contact they would not have otherwise given. Examples include threats to kill the subject, themselves, or to harm someone close to the subject.
• Intimidation exists where someone uses his or her physical presence coupled with menacing behavior to intimidate the subject(s) and no physical contact occurs, and/or knowledge of prior violent behavior coupled with menacing behavior of the respondent threatens the complainant.
• Coercion exists when the sexual initiator pressures the subject(s) in a manner that is oppressive and violates norms of respect to engage in unwanted sexual behavior. An individual is incapable of giving effective consent when s/he is physically incapacitated as a result of alcohol or drug consumption, whether it is voluntary or involuntary, or is unconscious, unaware, or physically helpless. Individual may not engage in sexual activity with another who one knows or should be able to reasonably infer is physically incapacitated. A person is unable to give effective consent when they lack the ability to determine that a situation is sexual, and/ or cannot rationally appreciate the nature and extent of that situation. A minor is never capable of giving effective consent.
Silence, previous sexual relationships, and/or current relationship with the respondent (or anyone else) may not be taken to imply consent. A person who is subjected to physical or sexual aggression is not required to actively resist. Intentional use of alcohol/drugs by the respondent is not a reason and/or an excuse for violation of the student code of conduct.
E. Misuse, theft, or abuse of College computer time or accounts. Violations of college computer policy will be heard as normal disciplinary or judicial proceedings.
F. Violating College policies and relevant laws described in the Student Handbook, including but not limited to policies on:alcoholic beverages: See the College Alcohol and Drug Policy section of this handbook and the section on state and local alcohol laws. illegal drugs: See the College Alcohol and Drug Policy section of this handbook and the section on state and local drug laws. sexual harassment: See Sexual Harassment Policy and Procedures and section III.D. of this Code. sexual assault: See Claremont Colleges Inter-campus Sexual Assault Policy Statement as well as section III.D of this Code. computer use policy: See Computer User Agreement. fire and safety: See Fire Safety Regulations. outdoor art: See Outdoor Art Policy.
G. Knowingly aiding another person in any violation of the Code of Student
No student shall knowingly aid another person in the violation of any rules contained in this Student Handbook.
IV. Special Powers
A. Violations of Law. Whether through administrative or Judicial Council action, the College reserves the right to impose sanctions against students for conduct that may violate any federal, state or local law on or off campus, even though such crimes may also be tried in the local courts. When a student is charged with a legal violation, and college disciplinary action is also taken, campus proceedings may be carried out prior to, simultaneously with or following civil or criminal proceedings. The College’s proceedings are not bound by any determinations of fact or law made in any civil or criminal proceedings.
B. Interim Suspension. Any student who, in the judgment of the Dean of Students or her/his designee, presents a clear and present danger to the health, safety, and/or welfare of the College community is subject to suspension from the College by the Dean of Students or her/his designee on an interim basis, pending a hearing by the Judicial Council. Such a suspension does not prejudge that a violation has occurred. Interim suspension will be followed by speedy access to a full and fair hearing.
1. A student whom the Dean of Students or her/his designee has placed on interim suspension pending a hearing may appeal such suspension to the President. The President shall issue her/his decision on such an appeal to the student in writing.
2. Should Judicial Council in a hearing find that no violation of the Student Code occurred, the interim suspension shall be lifted.
C. Search of Rooms Pitzer College respects the privacy of members of the College community. However, the College reserves the right to conduct searches of residence hall rooms if reasonable cause exists to believe that
(1) activity is taking place which is detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the Pitzer College Community, or
(2) activity is taking place which constitutes a violation of the Code of Student Conduct. Determination of reasonable cause is to be made by the Dean of Students (or, in her/his absence, the Associate and/or Assistant Dean of Students). Every effort will be made to have present the student whose room is being searched. In addition, rooms may be entered for routine cleaning services and/or to inspect or repair plumbing, electrical, heating and cooling systems, or room furnishings.
D. Campus Emergency Policy. The President of Pitzer College and in her/his absence the Dean of Faculty or Vice President for Administration shall have authority to deal with any emergency that may arise on campus and to employ such means including the employment of counsel for this purpose and to delegate to the Provost of the Claremont Colleges such authority as may be necessary under the circumstances
V. The College Judicial Council
A. Jurisdiction. The Judicial Council shall hold hearings, make determinations of fact, and impose sanctions on those determined to be in violation of the Code of Student Conduct. The College Judicial Council shall not have appellate jurisdiction. If having completed a hearing, the Judicial Council finds that the respondent should be sanctioned for violating the Code of Student Conduct, the respondent may ask for review of that decision by the President.
1. Any member of the Claremont Colleges community may bring a complaint against a Pitzer student to the Pitzer Dean of Students Office. The Dean of Students Office will attempt to resolve the case, if possible, including in some instances offering the respondent the option of having an administrative review, Section II. If the complaint cannot be resolved, or if the respondent or the Dean of Students elects a Judicial Council hearing, the Dean of Students Office will forward the case by preparing a written charge to the Judicial Council.
2. Inter-campus complaints. When Pitzer students are on the campus of another of the Claremont Colleges, they are expected to respect the regulations of that College as well as those of their own College. If a student of another College violates the regulations of the host College, judicial action may be brought against that student at his/her home College. The name of any students concerned, along with all pertinent information, will be sent to the Dean of Students of the College involved. As a temporary measure, the administration of the host College may, at its own discretion, prohibit a student from coming onto its campus until judiciary proceeding at the student’s home College is complete. Such a prohibition shall be communicated to the student through his/her home College at the request of the host college.
3. In cases coming before the Judicial Council the Dean of Students Office shall formulate the charge, which shall be a written statement giving the relevant regulation or policy that has been allegedly violated and the specific behavior or sequence of behaviors alleged to have violated that regulation or policy. The respondent will receive written notice of any violation according to the procedures outlined in Section VII. B.
B. Composition. The College Judicial Council shall consist of five students, in good academic and disciplinary standing, not subject to recall, elected by the student body, in conjunction with a faculty jury pool Each semester, every member of the faculty, excluding those on leave, FEC or APT, will be eligible for training and subsequent service on a College Judicial Council hearing. The Dean will ensure that a sufficient pool of faculty are trained and on-call. For each matter brought to a hearing, a committee comprised of five people, either three students and faculty or two students and three faculty, will be chosen to serve. Faculty will be determined through a random draw conducted by the Dean of Faculty’s office with students determined by the Dean of Students office amongst those elected. The time and place of a College Judicial Council hearing will be set by the office of the Dean of Faculty in consultation with the Dean of Students. A dean from the Office of Student Affairs will sit with the Council as an advisor on process and to represent the views of the College. The Dean of Faculty, Chair of FEC, and the Dean of Students will ensure as much as possible that Judicial Council is representative of the College community. The Chair shall be elected from among the voting membership of the Council.
C. Quorum. Five members shall constitute a quorum of the Judicial Council for the purpose of meeting. For a hearing, the quorum shall consist of five members, including at least two faculty members and two student members. Prior to the hearing, the respondent and complainant will be notified of the names of those members of the Judicial Council who will be hearing the case. If either objects to any member or members of the board, he or she may write to the Dean of Faculty requesting that those members be replaced. The letter must include an explanation for the objections. Removal from the hearing board will occur if and only if the Dean is convinced after investigating that absence of impartiality would result in an unfair hearing by allowing that member/those members of the Judicial Council to adjudicate the incident. Requests for removal shall not be revealed to members of the Judicial Council. If there are insufficient numbers of faculty/students to reach a quorum, the Deans of Faculty/Students shall appoint an ad hoc replacement from among the faculty/students who have received Judicial Council training before the hearing.
D. Notification. The Pitzer College Code of Student Conduct and rights of students will be published in the Student Handbook each year.
E. Reports. The Judicial Council shall report at least once a year to the College Council the numbers and types of cases it has heard, the difficulties it has encountered, the recommendations made and sanctions imposed, the appeals made to the President, and the decisions of the President. These reports are for the purpose of informing the Pitzer community of the general nature of its judicial problems and shall avoid identifying the persons involved.
F. Training. The Dean of Students Office shall design and be responsible for providing comprehensive training, in consultation with appropriate professional external agencies, in sexual offenses, hate crimes, and other relevant topics to members of the Judicial Council and the faculty at large.
VI. Rights of Students Charged. (Bylaws, Art. VII. Sec. 7.7) Each respondent involved in a judicial proceeding shall have the following rights:
• Right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
• Right to be informed, in writing, of the charges against her/him and in sufficient time to prepare or judicial proceedings.
• Right to a speedy hearing or administrative procedure.
• Right to have a formal hearing before Judicial Council for any alleged violation of the Code of Student Conduct.
• Right to a hearing separate from that of another respondent.
• Right to be assisted in her/his defense during a Judicial Council hearing by an advisor of her/his choice who must be a student, faculty, or staff member of the Claremont Colleges.
• Right to consult an advisor of her/his choice prior to an administrative hearing, who is a member of the Claremont Colleges and is knowledgeable about the Code of Student Conduct.
• Right to face the person who has brought complaints against him/her (the “complainant”).
• Right to refuse to respond to questions that are self-incriminating.
• Right to call material and character witnesses from the College community.
• Right to be free from a re-hearing for the same alleged violation
• Right to be free of penalty or sanction if found not responsible for violation of the Student Code.
• Right to reconsideration of a decision on specific grounds (grounds for appeal are violation of a student’s rights as set forth in the Code of Student Conduct, insufficient or compelling new information, and/or severity of the sanction).
VII. Judicial Council Hearing Procedures
The following are guidelines for conduct of Pitzer College Judicial Council hearings. This process does not intend to duplicate or imitate criminal or civil legal procedures. Instead, the guidelines are meant: (a) to provide for constructive, just, and prompt investigations and resolutions of complaints alleging violations of the Pitzer College Code of Student Conduct, and (b) to provide fair treatment for all parties involved in disputes, those who have complaints as well as those against whom complaints are made.
B. Pre-Hearing Procedures
1. Complaints of alleged violations which are being referred to Judicial Council for hearing shall be written, and delivered to the Judicial Council Chair, by the Dean of Students. Within two class days, the Judicial Council Chair shall arrange for a copy of the charge to be delivered in person to the respondent, as well as to the complainant(s) or victim(s). The copy to the respondent will constitute his/her formal notification of the charge(s) against him/her and the intent to hold a Judicial Council hearing. This written notification will include the complaint(s) against the respondent; the specific policies and portions of the Code of Student Conduct the respondent has allegedly violated; his/her rights as guaranteed in Article VII. Section 7.7, Pitzer College Bylaws; the nature of the information which will be presented against him/her, as well as any written or recorded statements obtained during the Dean of Students Office investigation, and the sanctions which could be applied if he/she were found in violation of the Code of Student Conduct.
2. The respondent has the right to have an advisor from the Claremont Colleges at the hearing who may be faculty, student, or staff. In order to aid in obtaining support, the respondent may request that the Dean of Faculty appoint a faculty member to advise him or her in contacting witnesses and in other matters related to the complaints. If the charges are serious enough that they might result in suspension or expulsion from the College, the respondent is particularly advised to select an advisor to be present during the Judicial Council hearing.
3. The Judicial Council Chair sets a date for the hearing. Under normal circumstances the hearing should be scheduled for a date not fewer than 5 or more than 25 class days from the time the respondent was first formally notified of the charge(s) against him/her. The Judicial Council Chair shall inform both the respondent and the complainant(s) or victim(s) of the time, place, and date of the hearing. It is the responsibility of the parties to inform their respective advisors of this information. The victim(s) or complainant(s) will have available to them all information sent to the respondent by the Judicial Council Chair at the same time as the respondent is notified.
4. Under extraordinary circumstances, either the respondent or the complainant may request waiver of the time limit for a hearing in writing to the Judicial Council Chair. A decision on the request will be made by the Judicial Council. All parties will then be notified of the date, time, and location of the rescheduled hearing.
C. Hearing Procedures
1. The respondent shall be informed of his/her rights and shall have an opportunity to speak and to present information in his/her behalf. Should the respondent, having been properly notified of the date, time and place of the hearing, fail to appear at the time and place specified, the hearing shall proceed in the same manner as if s/he were present, unless the Judicial Council decides by majority vote to postpone the hearing.
2. No member of Judicial Council shall join or rejoin deliberations after a hearing has begun. No member may be excused from a hearing once it has begun except for good cause and by a majority vote of the other members present, and then only if such action does not violate the quorum provisions of Section V. D. above. No member of Judicial Council who has not been present for the entire hearing shall participate in the decision or in a subsequent discussion of sanctions.
3. Judicial Council shall consider only information introduced at the hearing, before the Council. Normally this will include a written statement from the complainant, from the respondent, and from any witnesses; it may also include responses to questions given during the hearing. Written statements will be considered only when the respondent is aware of their content and of the names of those individuals who have made the statements and only when the student making the statements appears before the Judicial Council to answer questions about the statements. Character witnesses, if any, may state their knowledge of the character of the respondent, but must refrain from comments on the character of the claimant(s).
4. Except as provided under Section VII.D.6. below, only one witness shall be allowed in a Judicial Council hearing at any one time.
5. All questions during the hearing shall be asked by or to Judicial Council members. The purpose of the hearing is not to conduct a trial but to gain as full and fair an account as possible about the alleged violation and to determine whether a violation of the Student Code of Conduct has occurred. The respondent and the complainant(s) shall have the right to suggest questions to the Chair to be asked by Judicial Council members, but only Judicial Council members shall directly question the respondent, complainant, or the witnesses. The Chair, in consultation with the Judicial Council, may modify the question process to facilitate the proceedings. The Chair may exclude irrelevant and unduly repetitious information. Normally, the hearing conforms to the following order of procedure:
(a) Presentation of the written charge from the Dean of Students Office, questions from Judicial Council members to the Dean of Students designee and/or the complainant(s) regarding the complaint.
(b) Statements of witnesses on behalf of the complainant(s); questions from Judicial Council members to the witnesses.
(c) Statement of the respondent; questions from Council members to the respondent.
(d) Statements of witnesses on behalf of the respondent; questions from Judicial Council members to the witnesses.
(e) At the option of the Council, a second round of questioning of the complainant(s) and any supporting witnesses a majority of the Council wishes to hear in rebuttal.
(f) At the option of the Council, a second round of questioning of the respondent and any supporting witnesses a majority of the council wishes to hear in rebuttal.
(g) Close of the hearing.
6. The person(s) bringing the complaint and the respondent shall have the right to be present during the presentation of evidence and questioning of witnesses. S/he also shall have the right to be accompanied by an advisor of her/his choice, who must be a student, faculty, or staff member of the Claremont Colleges.
7. In all Sexual Offense cases, the complainant shall be offered the opportunity to participate in the hearing without directly facing the respondent. If so requested, the Judicial Council Chair shall make appropriate arrangements. For example, the room may be partitioned so that the complainant and the respondent do not see each other. In any case, the respondent and the complainant and/or their advisors shall have the opportunity to hear the testimony, have questions asked of other party during the hearing process, and to hear the responses.
8. No actions shall be taken in a Judicial Council hearing which would impede the orderly conduct of the hearing. Disruption of the Judicial Council is a violation of the Code of Student Conduct. The Chair may at any time recess a hearing to provide for gathering additional information or simply to provide a break in the hearing or the deliberation.
9. A verbatim record (such as a tape recording) shall be made of every Judicial Council hearing. This record shall be kept in the Dean of Students Office and shall remain confidential, although it may be made available upon request to the respondent. The record shall be destroyed five years after the respondent’s graduation or withdrawal from Pitzer College.
10. The hearing shall be closed.
D. Decision and Sanctions
1. The decisions of the Judicial Council shall be based solely upon information introduced at the hearing, before the Council. In determining sanctions the Council shall consider the nature of the violation and the circumstances under which the violation occurred. The Council may consider the previous conduct record of the respondent with respect to the application of sanctions only.
2. When a sanction requires a period of time for completion, the deadline for completion shall be specified. The respondent must report to a designee of the Dean of Students when he or she has completed the sanction. The case is not complete until the sanction has been completed and cleared by the Dean of Students Office. The Judicial Council will not monitor or reconsider a sanction once it is imposed.
3. The decisions of the Judicial Council shall be based on a standard of a preponderance of the evidence presented. The direct statement of a witness, including the complainant, the victim, and the respondent may be taken as sufficient proof of any act. Statements made by any witness must be evaluated for bias, plausibility, credibility, and consistency along with other available information. Any relevant information may be admitted if it is the type on which reasonable persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs. Unruly, irrelevant or unduly repetitious information may be ruled out of order by the chair. The decisions of the Judicial Council and its imposition of sanctions shall be reached in closed session by a majority vote. The Chair shall vote only in case of a tie.
4. If it finds that a violation of the Code of Student Conduct has occurred, Judicial Council shall consider the nature of sanctions to be imposed. At this phase of deliberation, The Dean of Students or a designee may provide the Council with historical information on the past conduct record of the respondent and the history of sanctions in similar cases.
5. Sanctions normally considered include (but are not limited to) the following:
(a) Disciplinary probation: Formal notice compelling a student to exhibit good behavior during a specified probationary period. Violations during the probationary period may result in temporary or permanent separation from the College.
(b) Removal from residence and/or board: Revoking, for a specific period of time, the privilege of on-campus residence and/or campus meals.
(c) Full Suspension: Temporary separation from the College for a specified period of time. The terms of the suspension shall be set by the Council and may include special conditions which must be satisfied during the suspension and/or special conditions which would be in effect upon the student’s return to the College.
(d) Expulsion: Permanent separation from the College.
6. Other sanctions. In addition to the sanctions above, the Judicial Council may impose disciplinary sanctions which are not listed above.
7. Expulsion is mandatory when a student is found in violation of the code on the charge of rape. A sanction of expulsion will be strongly considered in cases of gender-related physical assault.
8. Rehabilitative activities. In addition to any sanction, the Council may recommend rehabilitative activities to be undertaken by a student, including community service, participation in drug or alcohol abuse programs, etc.
9. Notification of decision. The respondent shall be notified in writing, within two class days following the hearing, of the Judicial Council’s decision and recommended sanctions, if any. Written notification shall include a summary of the reasons for the decision and an explanation of any sanctions imposed. In the case of an alleged sexual offense, intercollegiate policy and the California Educational Code require that the complainant(s) and or victim(s) who have been parties to the case and other appropriate college officials will be notified about its disposition within three days.
E. Appeals Procedure
1. Judicial Council decisions and sanctions are expected to be final. On specific grounds, the respondent may request that the President reconsider the Judicial Council’s decision. The appeal must be made in writing, and must be made within five class days of written notification to the student of the Judicial Council’s decision. Grounds of appeal include violations of the student’s rights as set forth in the Code of Student Conduct, insufficient or compelling new evidence, and/or severity of the sanction.
2. No more than five class days after receiving the written appeal and a completed transcript of the hearing, the President shall communicate her/his decision on any appeal to the respondent, the complainant and the Judicial Council Chair. If the President modifies the imposed sanction in any way, he/she shall communicate that fact and the reasons for making such a modification to the respondent, the complainant and the Judicial Council Chair. The decision of the President shall be final.
3. Except as required to explain the basis of new evidence, an appeal shall be limited to review of the verbatim record of the initial hearing and supporting documents for one or more of the following purposes:
(a) To determine whether the original hearing was conducted fairly in light of the charges and evidence presented and in conformity with prescribed procedures giving the complainant a reasonable opportunity to prepare and present evidence that a violation occurred and giving the respondent reasonable opportunity to prepare and present a rebuttal of those allegations.
(b) To determine whether the decision reached regarding the charged student was based on substantial evidence, that is whether the facts were sufficient to establish that a violation of the Code of Student Conduct occurred.
(c) To determine whether the sanction(s) imposed was appropriate for the violation.
(d) To consider whether there is new evidence, sufficient to alter a decision, or other relevant facts not brought out in the original hearing, because such evidence and/or facts were not known to the person appealing at the time of the original hearing.
1. All information pertaining to investigations and hearing proceedings is confidential and shall be shared only by Judicial Council members. The Judicial Council chair may, however, share such information with individual members of the College administration and staff on a need-to-know basis. “Need-to-know” is defined as information necessary to carry out the College judicial process.
G. Community Notification
1. Within five class days after the completion of a judicial hearing and appeal (if any) to the President, the Judicial Council may publicly inform the Pitzer community (and, in cases involving complainants from the other Claremont Colleges, the home colleges of said complainants) of its decision, sanctions imposed, and the action of the President. In cases in which the respondent has been found in violation of the Code of Student Conduct, publicity (including the name of the student) shall be at the discretion of the President. In cases in which the respondent was found not to have violated the code, such publicity shall be at the discretion of the respondent.
H. Records and Enforcement of Disciplinary Action
1. Records of Judicial Council decisions and sanctions shall become a part of the student’s disciplinary files (those maintained in the Dean of Students Office) and shall be kept for a period of five (5) years after the student’s graduation or separation from the College.
2. At the discretion of the Dean of Students in consultation with the Judicial Council, proceedings may continue without the student being currently enrolled.
3. No student shall be graduated while a complaint brought against him/her is pending before Judicial Council. No student shall be graduated with-out first fulfilling the terms of a disciplinary sanction.
4. The Dean of Students Office shall be responsible for enforcing disciplinary sanctions.
5. Any student on whom a sanction has been imposed may include in her/his student record a written response concerning the decision and sanction.
POLICY STATEMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH IRC 409A
RE: PITZER COLLEGE SALARIES WILL BE PAID OVER 12 MONTHS
(Deferred Compensation Rule IRC 409A, effective 1/1/08; Reviewed by Jacqueline Parks, BBK)
Pitzer College requires that all faculty and exempt employees be paid their annual salary over twelve months regardless of the fact that they will actually work over a shorter time period. Specifically, the academic year salary shall be paid in twelve equal installments issued on or before the 26th day of each month, beginning on July 1 and ending on June 30. Faculty members are expected to be in residence at the college from August 15th in the fall through commencement in the spring. Visiting faculty who teach only one semester will be paid for specific periods in accordance with individual terms of employment. Visiting faculty who teach in both semesters of an academic year will be paid in twelve equal installments in the same manner as regular faculty.
In the event a separation from service occurs before the end of the 12-month payment period, employee will be entitled to an additional payment for the amount actually earned from the beginning of the 12month pay period until the date of his or her separation from service, but which has not yet been paid. This additional payment will be included in the employee’s final paycheck. For this purpose, “separation from service” shall have the same meaning as that term is defined in section 1.409A-1(h) of the Treasury Regulations.
GUIDELINES FOR THE STRUCTURE AND FORMAT OF THE SELF-STUDY REPORT
This section of the self-study provides a context for the review and is primarily descriptive. The introduction should:
• State why the program exists and what it hopes to achieve.
• Provide specific goals, connected both to the field group’s general statement of purpose and to the College’s Educational Objectives, for what the program hopes to achieve. Goals could relate to student learning, growth of the program, or faculty development.
• Establish outcomes that can be observed if goals are being met. Outcomes should be measurable-for example, specific growth in enrollment or number of majors, number of students fulfilling the College’s Educational Objectives through program courses; growth in program- specific knowledge over the course of a class; certain levels of achievement, in terms of both program and institutional outcomes, in capstone and other senior projects. Must include direct assessment of student learning from majors and non-majors, i.e., samples of student work and an analysis of whether students are meeting student learning outcomes.
• Describe how the program fits into the institutional structure and its relationship to departments and programs within the Claremont Consortium. This description may include a brief history of the program and any changes since the last review.
2. Analysis of Evidence
This section, which forms the bulk of the self-study, presents evidence indicating the extent to which program goals are being met. The evidence should address both program quality and program sustainability.
Evidence of Program Quality
• Students: Evidence about the students, whether majors or non-majors, enrolled in specific courses in the program. Specific evidence might include gender, ethnicity, age, GPA. Types of indicators depend on the goals.
• Curriculum: Evidence about the breadth and depth of the curriculum and its alignment with learning outcomes. Specific evidence might include a curriculum map or flow chart that describes how (and when) the sequence of courses meets goals for learning outcomes; a comparison of the program’s curriculum with those at other comparable institutions (and/or those in the consortium); measures of teaching effectiveness (e.g. course evaluations, peer teaching evaluations, faculty scholarship, etc.); other learning experiences relevant to program goals and numbers of students participating (e.g. internships, community-based learning, research, etc.); a description of how faculty’s pedagogy responds to various learning modalities.
• Student Learning and Success: Evidence about students’ achievement of desired learning outcomes (i.e., direct assessment). Field groups should provide samples of student work (e.g., student papers, senior theses, capstones) and assessment of major learning outcomes. Additional evidence might include both quantitative and qualitative measures for majors and non- major students. Quantitative measures could include: student retention and graduation rate trends (could be disaggregated by various demographic categories); number of non-majors taking courses; number of interdisciplinary special majors advised; placement of graduates into graduate schools, post-graduate opportunities, and jobs; graduating student and/or alumni satisfaction surveys; and disciplinary ratings of the program. Qualitative measures could include the ongoing efforts by the department to respond to previous assessment results; performance evaluations of students’ capstone and/or thesis projects; and student/alumni achievements.
• Faculty: Evidence about the achievements of faculty in relation to program mission and goals. Specific evidence might include list of faculty specialties and how they align with program curriculum; teaching quality (e.g. course evaluations, peer evaluations, faculty self-review); record of scholarship; participation in professional development related to pedagogy and/or assessment; external funding and other awards; faculty service; faculty distribution across the ranks; and faculty diversity. Evidence of Program Sustainability
• Demand: Evidence of the trends in numbers of students in the program and in courses over a five-to eight-year period, and the number of independent studies undertaken. Specific evidence might include trends within the profession, the Consortium, or the region or nation that identify future trends for the program.
• Allocation of Resources: Evidence of the degree to which resources are appropriately allocated to maintain program quality. Specific evidence might include an evaluation of faculty (student- faculty ratio, faculty workload, faculty review processes, professional opportunities and resources, etc.); student support (academic & career advising, tutoring, remedial resources, support for community and campus engagement, etc.); information & technology resources (for both faculty and student needs); facilities (classroom space, labs, office space, student space, etc.); staff and financial resources for future needs.
3. Summary Reflections
This section of the self-study provides an interpretation of the findings that will determine a program’s strengths, weaknesses, and areas to target for improvement. Whenever possible, findings should be interpreted in the context of professional benchmarks and the standards of aspirant peer institutions. Questions to address include: Is the curriculum aligned with the program goals? Are the program goals aligned with the goals of those people the program serves? Is the level of program quality aligned with the institution’s acceptable level of quality? Are program goals being achieved? Are student learning outcomes being achieved at an acceptable level? (To answer these questions, ―acceptable levels‖ should be identified.)
4. Future Goals and Planning for Improvement
The concluding section of the self-study is devoted to future planning and improvement. The findings and their interpretation serve as the foundation for an evidence-based plan for improvement. This section might identify future goals in the period before the next review, how to address weaknesses that have been identified, how to build on program strengths, what improvements are possible with existing resources, what improvements can be addressed only with additional resources, and how collaborations (with other departments, field groups, offices, community organizations, etc.) can improve program quality.
Data to Be Included in the Self-Study Report
Data to be provided by the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment could include:
• Students in the Program: Data on students in the program over time. Data could include students’ gender, ethnicity, age, GPA, etc.. (Types of indicators depend on program goals.)
• Curriculum: Data on the curricula of comparable institutions’ programs and/or those in the Consortium.
• Student Learning and Success: Data on student retention and graduation rates over time (could be disaggregated by demographic categories); job placements for graduates; placements of graduates into graduate schools or other post-graduate opportunities (like fellowships); results of graduating students and/or alumni surveys; how the program ranks in any national rankings.
• Demand (related to program sustainability): Data on the trends in numbers of students in the program over a five-to eight-year period.
• Allocation of Resources (evidence of program sustainability): Student-faculty ratios for courses in this program (perhaps in comparison with those in other consortial programs).
Data to be compiled by the program could include:
• Descriptive Introduction: Information on other programs within the Consortium that relate to the Pitzer program (including data on level of cooperation and coordination).
• Curriculum: Measures of teaching effectiveness such as course evaluations, peer teaching evaluations, and faculty scholarship; curriculum map or flow chart describing program’s sequence of courses; information about learning experiences relevant to the program (e.g. internships, community-based learning) and number of students participating.
• Student Learning and Success: Direct assessment of student learning outcomes among majors and non-majors, based on students’ work, capstone and/or thesis projects; information about student/alumni achievement; information about ongoing efforts to respond to previously identified weaknesses.
• Faculty: Information about faculty specialties in relation to program curriculum; peer teaching evaluations; faculty self-reviews; record of scholarship and service; participation in professional development related to pedagogy and/or assessment; external funding and awards; faculty distribution across the ranks and diversity.
• Demand (evidence of program sustainability): Any evidence of trends within the profession, the Consortium, or region/nation that would affect the future of this program.
• Co-Curricular Connections: Data on other Pitzer programs and opportunities that relate to the academic program (e.g., number of students involved in campus clubs and organizations, relevant faculty-or student-initiated campus or residential life programming, relevant community- based learning experiences, etc.).
• Allocation of Resources (evidence of program sustainability): Information about faculty workload, faculty review/evaluation processes, professional opportunities and resources, student support (academic and career advising, tutoring, remedial resources, support for community and campus engagement, etc.); information and technology resources for faculty and student needs; facilities (classroom spaces, labs, office spaces, student spaces, etc.); staff and financial resources for the future.
Scientific Research Misconduct
Pitzer College adheres to the highest ethical and professional standards in scientific research. Accordingly, the College has adopted a policy for responding to allegations of scientific research misconduct by members of its faculty, students, or professional staff. This policy applies to all scientific research conducted in College facilities and to all professional employees of the College involved in any scientific research project, including those supported by the Public Health Service (PHS) or for which an application to PHS has been submitted.
In all scientific research projects, the Principal Investigator has the responsibility to record and retain primary data and to adhere to accepted research protocols. The Principal Investigator has supervisorial responsibility for ensuring acceptable research conduct on the part of all personnel engaged in scientific research under his/her direction. Scientific misconduct or misconduct in science is defined as practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data. Examples of scientific research misconduct include, but are not limited to:
• Knowingly falsifying, fabricating, or otherwise misrepresenting data, methods of data procurement, or data analysis;
• Improper use of privileged information such as grant proposals or manuscripts under review, or use of information gathered through unauthorized means;
• Substantial failure to comply with federal requirements concerning research conduct or with commonly accepted standards of conduct within the academic community.
Filing a Complaint
Anyone concerned about possible research misconduct is urged to discuss the issues involved with the Dean of Faculty. Complaints shall be made in writing to the Dean of Faculty, Pitzer College, 1050 North Mills Avenue, Claremont, CA 91711, who shall serve as the Research Integrity Officer for the College.
Upon receiving an allegation of scientific misconduct, the Dean of Faculty, in consultation with the Chair of the Faculty Executive Committee, will promptly assess the allegation to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant an inquiry, whether federal support or applications for federal funding are involved, and whether the allegation falls under the policy’s definition of scientific misconduct. An inquiry is deemed to be warranted only if it is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified. Allegations of scientific misconduct by students or professional staff when federal funding is not involved will be adjudicated using the College’s normal procedures for such allegations of academic dishonesty by students or professional misconduct by staff. Allegations concerning scientific misconduct by faculty members or by any member of the Pitzer College community when federal funding is involved will be considered using the procedures described below.
Inquiries and investigations will be conducted in a manner that will ensure fair treatment to the respondent in the inquiry or investigation and confidentiality to the extent possible without compromising public health and safety or thoroughly carrying out the inquiry or investigation.
To the extent possible, the College will protect the privacy of both the reporting individual and the respondent. The Dean of Faculty may establish reasonable conditions to ensure the confidentiality of such information. Institutional employees who make, receive, or learn of an allegation of research misconduct will protect, to the maximum extent possible, the confidentiality of information regarding the complainant, the respondent, and other affected individuals. The College also will regard any retaliation against persons bringing complaints of scientific research misconduct as constituting misconduct; as such, any apparent retaliation should be reported immediately to the Dean of Faculty. The College also recognizes that the respondent retains her or his speech rights, and the protection of her or his academic freedom, and this includes the option of the respondent discussing her or his case with other members of the community or in public; finally, the College recognizes that the respondent making such a choice to discuss her or his case with others does not, in and of itself, constitute retaliation.
A copy of the complaint will be given to the respondent. The respondent has the right to seek legal counsel. The respondent will be given an opportunity to respond to the allegations. In general, the respondent will be instructed to respond in writing within one month of receiving a copy of the complaint. This written response to the allegation should be filed with the Dean of Faculty, who upon reviewing the complaint and the response, may request an interview with the respondent. Both the respondent and the College have the right to have legal counsel present at the interview. If the College consults legal counsel or has legal counsel present at the interview, the respondent has the right to be represented by legal counsel whose reasonable expenses will be paid by the College. The College shall inform the respondent of its intent to consult legal counsel, or to have legal counsel present at the interview, in a manner timely enough to permit the respondent to also secure legal counsel. In cases of alleged scientific research misconduct involving falsification or other misrepresentation of data or research protocols, the Dean of Faculty may sequester the respondent’s research records at the time which the respondent is notified of the complaint. Any sequestered records will be promptly photocopied and returned to the respondent. Sequestering of research records will be carried out in accordance with Section 307b of 42 CFR Part 93, Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct.
After the respondent has addressed the complaint, the Dean of Faculty will convene the Faculty Executive Committee, which will deputize an ad hoc inquiry committee (normally a subcommittee of the FEC) to review the complaint. Normally, that ad hoc inquiry committee will consist of the elected faculty on the FEC, along with the Dean of Faculty. It is expected that in general these members of the Faculty Executive Committee will have no real or apparent conflicts of interest in the case, and will have the necessary expertise to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the allegation, interview the principals and key witnesses, and conduct the inquiry. When any of these persons does have a real or apparent conflict of interest, then they shall be recused. In cases of a recusal, and in other cases where those on the ad hoc committee judge that they collectively lack sufficient expertise to proceed with the initial investigation, additional qualified persons, from outside of the FEC, will be added to the ad hoc inquiry committee (henceforth called the inquiry committee) membership. Such additions will insure that the minimum size of the inquiry committee will be five persons and that it will always have an odd number of members. The persons added to the inquiry committee for this purpose may be scientists, subject matter experts, or other qualified persons from inside or outside the institution. Adjustments to the inquiry committee’s membership will be made by jointly by the Dean of Faculty and the elected faculty of the Faculty Executive Committee, with the exception of any of those persons who are recused. Decisions of the inquiry committee will be by majority vote, following the procedures in the Pitzer College Faculty Handbook for voting by the Faculty Executive Committee. This inquiry committee, once fully constituted, will be deputized by the Faculty Executive Committee to act on its behalf in regard to all aspects of the inquiry. If the inquiry committee believes there is insufficient evidence to suggest research misconduct, it will confer with the complainant. If, after such consultation the Faculty Executive Committee believes there is insufficient evidence to support an investigation of research misconduct, the complainant and respondent will be so notified in writing. The College will undertake diligent efforts, as appropriate, to restore the reputation of persons alleged to have engaged in misconduct and to maintain the positions and reputations of those persons who, in good faith, made the allegations of misconduct. Detailed documentation of an inquiry which determines that an investigation is not warranted will be maintained for at least three years and will be provided to authorized personnel of involved funding agencies, including PHS, upon request. If the inquiry committee feels there is reason to believe that possible research misconduct is involved, a formal investigation will be undertaken.
A record of the inquiry committee’s deliberation will be kept in the confidential files of the Dean of Faculty. This report, prepared and signed by the members of the inquiry committee, will contain the original complaint, the evidence reviewed, interview summaries, a summary of the committee’s deliberations and conclusions, and all written statements received from the respondent. A copy of the inquiry committee report will be given to the respondent, who has the right to respond to the report, including all allegations and findings; any response by the respondent must be made within 30 days from receipt of the inquiry committee report. Any comments made by the respondent, which in general will need to be made in writing, will be made part of the inquiry record. In cases in which more than 60 days were required to complete an inquiry, the circumstances contributing to the protracted nature of the inquiry must be documented and made part of the inquiry record. Both the report of the inquiry committee and any response made by the respondent will be placed in Part C of the respondent’s personnel file.
If the research project is federally funded, the funding agency will be notified of the complaint in cases where the alleged misconduct might pose an immediate health hazard or substantial threat to federal funds or equipment. Appropriate interim administrative actions will be taken to protect federal funds and ensure that the purposes of the federal funding are being carried forward to the extent possible. In the case of PHS-supported research, the Office of Research Integrity will also be notified if (1) there is an immediate need to protect the interests of the person(s) making the allegations or of the individual(s) who is the subject of the allegations as well as his/her co-investigators and associates, if any; or (2) if it is probable that the alleged incident is going to be reported publicly; or (3) the allegation involved a public-health- sensitive issue, such as a clinical trial; or (4) there is a reasonable indication of possible criminal violation, in which case the institution will notify the Office of Research Integrity within 24 hours of reaching such a determination.
The Dean of Faculty and the ad hoc Committee jointly appoint a second committee to investigate the charges of scientific research misconduct. A typical committee for such investigation will consist of five people and may include Pitzer College faculty, non-faculty personnel, or outside faculty or scholars. In cases involving alleged scientific misconduct pertaining to animal care and use or to human subjects, the College’ relevant standing committee (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee or Institutional Review Board) will generally form the core of the investigative committee. Committee members will be selected in order to provide the committee with necessary and appropriate expertise for undertaking the investigation, taking care to prevent real or apparent conflicts of interest in the investigation. The committee will be chaired by the Dean of Faculty, who will vote only in cases in which the vote is tied. The Dean of Faculty will notify the respondent of the proposed committee membership within 10 days. No challenges of members for cause shall be accepted, but the respondent shall have the right of three peremptory challenges, including challenges of the Dean of Faculty. In all such cases the Dean of Faculty, in consultation with the Faculty Executive Committee, shall replace the challenged members after each.
The investigative committee will conduct a thorough review of the alleged scientific misconduct, affording the affected individuals confidential treatment to the maximum extent compatible with a thorough review. They will review the existing file and examine all documentation including but not limited to research records, computer files, research proposals and publications, and correspondence. Interviews should be solicited from the complainant, the respondent, and others who might have relevant information. Interviews of the respondent should be tape recorded or transcribed; other interviews should be tape recorded or transcribed. If, in the course of an investigation, substantial evidence is uncovered that suggests immediate health hazards, a need to protect federal funds or equipment and individuals affected by the investigation, and/or that the alleged incident will probably be publicly reported, the involved federal funding agency and relevant oversight offices such as the Office of Research Integrity should be notified. Agencies and oversight offices should also be notified promptly if, during the course of the investigation, facts are disclosed that may affect current or potential federal funding for individuals under investigation or that federal agencies may need to know to ensure appropriate use of federal funds and otherwise protect the public interest. If there arises any reasonable indication of possible criminal violations, federal agencies and oversight offices such as the Office of Research Integrity must be notified within 24 hours. The College must take appropriate interim administrative actions to protect federal funds and ensure that the purposes of the federal financial assistance are being carried out.
The findings of the investigation committee should be based on a preponderance of the evidence, with the decision reached by majority vote. A committee report reviewing the investigation committee’s procedures, evidence and deliberations must be signed by all members of the committee. Members of the investigative committee can, individually or in concert with others, submit dissenting reports, which are understood to be components of the overall report that all members will sign. The signing of the investigation committee’s report certifies that it accurately reports both the committee’s majority findings and any dissenting views.
If the investigation committee finds that no scientific research misconduct has occurred, the College must make reasonable attempts to restore the reputation of the respondent, including publicity of the respondent’s exoneration by the investigative committee. In addition, if the committee finds that no scientific research misconduct has occurred, the College will reimburse the respondent for legal fees incurred during the investigation. If the investigation committee finds that scientific research misconduct has occurred, its report may include recommendations for institutional action. The investigation committee’s report and supporting documentation will be forwarded to the Dean of Faculty and the Faculty Executive Committee for review and institutional response, including any sanctions to be taken. Such sanctions may include but are not limited to withdrawal of all pending or published abstracts and papers emanating from the research where misconduct was found, removal of the responsible person from the project involved, restitution of funds, a letter of reprimand, special monitoring of future work, probation, suspension, salary reduction, and steps leading to possible reduction in rank, or termination for cause, provided such steps are consistent with the procedures established in the Faculty Handbook. The respondent will be notified of the committee’s findings and provided with a copy of the report within five business days of its receipt by the Dean of Faculty and the Faculty Executive Committee and will have the opportunity to comment on the report, including all allegations and findings. If the investigation committee has found that scientific research misconduct has occurred, the respondent’s comments on the findings will be forwarded to the Dean of Faculty and to the Faculty Executive Committee for consideration along with the report of the investigation committee.
If the College plans to terminate an inquiry for any reason without having brought it to completion, a report of these plans and the reasons behind them will be made to any federal agency that has been informed of the alleged scientific research misconduct and to the Office of Research Integrity in any case involving funding by the PHS. If, in cases involving PHS funds, the College intends to complete an investigation but cannot do so within 120 calendar days, it must submit to the ORI a request for an extension which should include an explanation for the delay, an interim report on the progress to date, an outline of what remains to be done, and an estimated date of completion. The report of the Investigation Committee shall be placed in Part C of the respondent’s personnel file.
Institutional Review and Action
The Faculty Executive Committee will make a final determination whether to accept the findings and recommendations of the investigation report. The Faculty Executive Committee may ask the investigation committee to perform further fact-finding or review of the evidence. If the Faculty Executive Committee does not accept the findings and recommendations of the investigation committee, the Chair of the Faculty Executive Committee will respond to the investigation committee in writing, detailing the reasons for reaching different conclusions. The explanation must be consistent with the College’s policy on scientific research misconduct, with definitions of scientific research misconduct recognized by relevant federal funding agencies, and with the evidence produced during the investigation. If the Faculty Executive Committee rejects all findings of scientific research misconduct, the College will make diligent efforts to restore the reputation of the respondent. In cases in which the Faculty Executive Committee of the College finds scientific research misconduct to have occurred, any funding agencies involved will be notified within 90 days; reports to federal agencies will be in the form required by those agencies. When PHS funds are involved, the report must describe the policies and procedures under which the investigation was conducted, how and from whom information was obtained relevant to the investigation, the findings, and the basis for the findings, and include the actual text or an accurate summary of the views of any individual(s) found to have engaged in scientific research misconduct, as well as a description of any sanctions taken by the College. Institutional action against faculty and professional staff found to have engaged in scientific research misconduct will be determined by the Faculty Executive Committee, and may vary, in accordance with the seriousness of the breach of professional standards, from reprimand to dismissal, and the finding of scientific research misconduct will be reflected in the respondent’s personnel file. The College will prepare and maintain documentation to substantiate an investigation’s findings. In cases involving PHS funds, the documentation will be made available to the Director of ORI upon request.
Timetable for Responding to Complaints of Scientific Research Misconduct
The College’s response to any complaint of possible scientific research misconduct must be thorough and fair. The speed with which the College can respond will generally be affected by several factors, including the need of participants to seek legal counsel, the scope of the investigation, and the difficulty of assembling committees and conducting investigations during the College’s summer recess. In general, a complaint shall be delivered to the respondent within 5 working days of its receipt by the Dean of Faculty. The respondent shall respond in writing within 30 days. Upon receiving the respondent’s answer to the complaint, the Dean of Faculty has 10 days in which to confer further with the respondent as necessary and to convene the Faculty Executive Committee to review the case. Once an inquiry has been initiated, the Faculty Executive Committee must complete the inquiry, including submitting its report, within 60 calendar days unless circumstances clearly warrant a longer period. If the Faculty Executive Committee feels that there is sufficient cause to suspect research misconduct, the College has 30 days from the date of the committee’s vote to appoint the investigation committee. The investigation committee’s report is due within 10 days of their final vote. The respondent has 5 working days in which to announce any peremptory challenges of members of the committee. The length of the investigation, including preparing the report, will not extend beyond 60 days unless circumstances clearly warrant a longer inquiry. Reports to granting agencies will be made within 120 days of the first meeting of the investigation committee.
The respondent may appeal any determination by the Dean of Faculty and Faculty Executive Committee to the President of the College within 30 days. Such appeals must be based solely on a failure to follow procedures. In cases where new evidence is brought to the attention of the President, the President may decide whether the matter should be referred back to the original Investigation Committee.
Any new evidence that comes to light after a determination is made shall be brought to the attention of the Dean of Faculty and the Faculty Executive Committee in writing. The Faculty Executive Committee will decide whether the matter should be reopened by the College.
Allegations of Scientific Research Misconduct Not Made in Good Faith
If the Dean of Faculty determines that an allegation of research misconduct was not made in good faith, he/she will decide in consultation with the Faculty Executive Committee what administrative action will be taken against the complainant.