Students now only have the right to a formal hearing when sanctions include suspension or dismissal
By LILY KENROW — campus@theaggie.org
With the start of the new year, the University of California (UC) system has set in place new interim policies for student conduct and discipline.
The updated Policies Applying to Campus Activities, Organizations and Students (PACAOS) 100 outlines the UC’s changes on how referrals sent to student conduct offices after Jan. 1 are processed, regardless of when the given incident in question occurred. Now, only students who face suspension or dismissal have the right to a formal hearing during their appeals process.
According to UC Office of the President (UCOP) Spokesperson Stett Holbrook, the new policies were designed to reduce confusion and streamline the disciplinary process.
“The interim policy was developed to improve consistency and clarity in student conduct processes across the UC system,” Holbrook said via email. “The policy aligns the level of process with the seriousness of potential outcomes, reserving formal hearings for the most significant cases while ensuring fair and timely procedures for all students.”
Stacy Vander Velde, UC Davis’ director of Student Conduct and Integrity and the Office of Student Support (formerly OSSJA), said via email that the investigation process for students has not changed significantly.
“A fair process that ensures student rights and affords due process is paramount to Student Conduct and Integrity,” Vander Velde said. “Our office will still gather information about what occurred, but under the interim process the Student Conduct Administrator will make a determination about whether the policy was violated and issue sanctions in accordance with the guidelines in Appendix H.”
ASUCD Student Advocate Inbar Schwartz, a fourth-year international relations and economics double major who runs the student government’s dedicated free and private office for advising students dealing with the university disciplinary process, noted that some students may not be able to defend themselves in the way they have previously.
“Students who are not sanctioned with suspension or dismissal will lose their right to a formal hearing,” Schwartz said via email. “They lose the opportunity to present documents and witnesses to a hearing body (not a court proceeding).”
Students facing non-suspension or dismissal related actions may now only appeal on the grounds that new relevant information in an investigation is presented, a procedural error occurs that affects the outcome or if the proposed violation is found disproportionate given the facts, according to PACAOS Appendix H.
Prior to the implementation of the new policy, formal hearings were conducted when a student or reporting body — typically a professor or instructor — rejected the sanctions given by Student Conduct and Integrity.
Schwartz also expressed concern that the timeline for students going through the investigation process may be overly lengthy. According to Appendix H, any reports of suspected academic misconduct must be submitted within 45 business days after the end of the quarter. Within 60 to 90 business days from the Notice of Allegation — the initial notice that the student has violated university policy — the Student Conduct and Integrity Office will determine if the student was in violation.
“This means that, at maximum, a student could face nearly a 9-month timeline before their case is resolved (assuming the misconduct occurred at the beginning of the academic quarter and that the reporting body submitted their report towards the end of the acceptable window),” Schwartz said.
Schwartz noted that this possible delay would be especially difficult for students closer to graduation. If found “in violation” of alleged misconduct, their professor has full discretion on their final grade and may force them to re-take the class.
“Without knowing the results of the case, slow timelines leave students’ grades in limbo, potentially delaying graduation and creating uncertainty and anxiety about needing to retake a prerequisite course of graduation requirement,” Schwartz said.
The current PACAOS policy is labeled as interim; Holbrook said the UC plans for a comment period and a finalized policy to be implemented before the 2026-2027 academic year. Vander Velde also confirmed that feedback on the policy will be collected later in winter and spring quarter in order to guide any amendments for the finalized policy change.
Written by: Lily Kenrow — campus@theaggie.org
