University of Pennsylvania
The Provost, Deans, Department Chairs and other administrators should respond to reports of prohibited sexual relations that are brought to them by inquiring further and, if such reports appear to be accurate, initiating appropriate disciplinary action or remedial measures against the teacher or supervisor involved.
Princeton
Complaints regarding non-academic conduct of members of the Faculty should be addressed to the Dean of the Faculty. When such a complaint is brought forward, the Dean normally conducts an inquiry and, if appropriate, submits his or her findings and recommendations to the President.
Northwestern
If any faculty, staff, or student of Northwestern violates the terms of this Policy, disciplinaryaction will be taken in accordance with relevant disciplinary procedures contained in the relevant handbooks, policies, procedures, practices, or contracts. Violations of this policy will result in disciplinary actions, which can include, but are not limited to, written warnings, loss of privileges, mandatory training or counseling, probation, suspension, demotion, exclusion, expulsion, and termination of employment, including revocation of tenure.
Emory
The deans, department Chairs, and other administrators should respond to reports of prohibited sexual relationships by inquiring further and, if such reports appear to be accurate, initiating appropriate disciplinary action or remedial measures against the teacher involved. Egregious breach of this policy is adequate cause for termination under paragraph 12(C) of the Statement of Principles Governing Faculty Relationships.
Brandeis
A violation of this policy may result in disciplinary action. Cases involving faculty will
go to the appropriate Dean and will follow Faculty Handbook procedures in Section VII. Dispute Resolution.
Tulane
An allegation that a person in authority has failed to avoid or terminate a position of authority when a consensual relationship has developed will be referred in writing to the Office of the Dean of the division in which the student is enrolled. The person making a complaint (hereinafter the complainant) may be a faculty or staff member or a student; the complaint and all supporting evidence and information must be given in writing. Once an alleged violation of this policy has been reported, the written complaint shall be reviewed by the associate dean of the division of the accused student to confirm that the charge being made falls within the scope of this policy and that all initial documentation has been prepared. The associate dean shall consult with the complainant and the cited student if necessary to ascertain what witnesses should be called in the hearing, and to make sure that all concerned understand the workings of this policy. The associate dean shall also inform the cited student of his or her rights under this policy, including the right to be accompanied to the hearing by a counselor/advisor. This initial review shall take place if possible within two (2) working days of the time when the formal charge is made. If, in the considered opinion of the associate dean, the charge is improper and should not be taken to a hearing, that decision shall be communicated to the Dean of that division and then to the complainant, who retains the right to have the associate dean’s decision reviewed by the chair of the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility of Students and a designated faculty member and student from that committee. The reviewers may set aside the associate dean’s decision. If the charge is brought to a hearing, all parties to the case on either side shall be allowed four (4) working days to review all the written documents before the date set for the hearing.
In the case of a faculty member, the hearing body is the faculty grievance committee of the faculty member’s division.
In the case of a graduate student teaching assistant, the hearing will be conducted by the department chair and the Dean of the Graduate School.
In the case of a staff member, the procedure outlined for staff in Section 8, “Standards of Conduct” of the Staff Handbook under the subheading Grievance Procedures will be followed.
In the case of an administrator, the hearing will be conducted by the person to whom the administrator reports.
Within seven (7) working days of receiving the complaint, the designated body or officer of the university shall have completed the hearing and arrived at a finding concerning whether a consensual relationship exists. The finding will be communicated to both parties and the Office of the student’s Dean. If the finding is that a consensual relationship exists and neither of the parties agrees to termination of authority, the appropriate officer of the university shall terminate the position of authority between the two persons. In the case of a faculty member, the divisional grievance committee will inform both parties and the Office of the student’s Dean of its findings. If the committee recommends the termination of the position of authority, the committee will refer its recommendation to the office of the student’s dean. The Office of the student’s Dean will immediately implement the committee’s recommendation.
In the case of a graduate student instructor, this will be the Dean of the graduate student instructor’s division. In the case of a staff member, this will be the individual outlined in Section 8, “Standards of Conduct,” of the Staff Handbook.
In the case of a student declining alternative instruction, this will be the Office of the student’s Dean.
In the case of a student declining alternative supervision of non-instructional academic work (such as thesis readership, etc.) this will be the department chair.
In the case of a student declining alternative work supervision, this will be the individual at the next supervisory level. In the case of an administrator, this will be the person to whom the administrator reports.
In the case of the President of the University, this will be a full session of the Board of Administrators.
Appeals
Appeals must be made within five (5) working days of the receipt of the written notice of the investigation. Where the accused is a faculty member, any appeal must be filed in writing with that faculmember’s dean and with the University Senate Committee on Faculty Freedom, Tenure, and Responsibility. FTFR will review appeals in accordance with the grievance procedures described in the University Senate Constitution, By-Law III (Standing Committees), Section 1 (Committee Functions): Committee on Faculty Tenure, Freedom, and Responsibility:Functions.
Where the accused is a student, the appeal shall be reviewed in accordance with the appeals procedures described in the Code of Student Conduct.
Where the accused is a staff member or an administrator, the President of the University shall review appeals, according to the procedure set forth in Section 8, “Standards of Conduct,” of the Staff Handbook.
Where the accused is an administrator, a committee of the Board of Administrators shall review appeals.
When the accused is the President of the University, the full Board of Administrators shall review appeals.
Washington University
Any credible allegation of a faculty member’s failure to avoid or terminate a position of authority while in a consensual faculty-student relationship obligates the department chair, dean or other responsible person to conduct a prompt and thorough inquiry to determine whether the allegation is true. Where it is concluded that a position of authority in a faculty-student consensual relationship exists and the faculty member and/or the student involved refuse(s) to terminate the position of authority, the department chair or dean shall terminate the position of authority and can impose sanctions against the parties involved.
Persons in violation of this policy shall be subject to sanctions ranging from verbal warnings to dismissal or termination. Persons who knowingly make false allegations that a faculty-student consensual relationship overlaps with a position of authority between the two shall be subject to the same sanctions.
Nothing herein shall abridge the rights of faculty as outlined in the Washington University Policy on Academic Freedom, Responsibility and Tenure.
University of Michigan
Violations of this policy will be considered misconduct on the part of a faculty member and will be subject to institutional sanctions up to and including termination of appointment. Student supervisors or graduate student teachers (e.g., Graduate Student Instructors and Graduate Student Research Assistants) who violate this policy may also be subject to academic sanctions up to and including expulsion as a result of allegations having been filed separately under other appropriate University policy.
Violations of this policy include:
- A faculty member has supervisory responsibility for a student with whom he or she is having or has had a romantic and/or sexual relationship but fails to disclose the relationship promptly (see Section III.B. Disclosure Requirement).
- The faculty member discloses the relationship but fails to cooperate in the development of a satisfactory plan to resolve the conflict of interest (see Section III.B. Development and Approval of a Conflict Resolution Plan) or fails to adhere to an agreed-upon plan.
- The faculty member discloses the relationship but after the chair, dean, and/or director determine(s) that no satisfactory plan is possible to resolve the conflict of interest, the faculty member continues the relationship (see Section III.B. When a Conflict Resolution Plan Is Not Agreed Upon).
