Update: External Reviews of Academic Freedom, Title VI Compliance, and Research Integrity

Dear Drexel Colleagues,

Campus demonstrations and encampments in Philadelphia and on college campuses across the country over the past three weeks, as well as varying university responses to those activities, underscore the challenges that Drexel University faces: How do we best protect free speech while simultaneously taking strong action to prohibit or respond to speech or conduct that may violate our nondiscrimination policies? How do we protect the right to protest while simultaneously ensuring no disruption to normal operations or danger to the safety of our community? How do we protect academic freedom while simultaneously protecting the rights of others to speak, teach, and learn freely? 

Our community is stepping up to meet these challenges. In my March 12 message, I shared with you that Drexel would launch a rigorous external review both of our institutional responses to reports of discrimination and harassment under Title VI, the federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin, and our free-speech and academic freedom policies while ensuring the safety and well-being of all students, faculty, and professional staff. I also reported that an external review would soon be underway of our policies and procedures for ensuring the integrity of all University-based research publications and conduct, and for adjudicating alleged findings of all forms of academic misconduct, including plagiarism. 

Today, I would like to share details about these reviews, including the processes for enlisting your feedback and drawing upon the expertise of Drexel faculty to inform the process. 

First, leading the external review of our policies is Cozen O’Connor’s Institutional Response Group (IRG), led by Attorneys Gina Maisto Smith and Leslie Gomez. IRG is the nation’s first legal practice dedicated to the institutional response to sexual and gender-based harassment and violence, other forms of discrimination and harassment, and related matters, and has advised many colleges and universities on institutional responses to discrimination and harassment and their intersection with principles of free speech and academic freedom.  

Together with Cozen O’Connor and our senior leadership team, we are enlisting the expertise of Drexel faculty to co-chair an Advisory Committee of faculty, trustees, students, and professional staff. Integrated with senior leadership, this Advisory Committee’s charge will include: benchmarking Drexel’s policies and procedures against other universities for effective practices; soliciting broad community input; and charting next steps toward ensuring that this vital work will reflect the values and collective brainpower of our community. At the same time, a Community Engagement Group comprised of faculty, professional staff and student representatives will provide further critical insight and perspective to the Advisory Committee and serve both as ambassadors to the broader community and liaisons to surface specific suggestions or concerns. Stay tuned for additional updates and communications regarding these efforts and opportunities to participate in this important conversation. 

Second, as I wrote in my March 12 message, Drexel has also begun an external review of our policies and procedures for promoting the integrity of all University-based research projects, publications, and conduct, and for adjudicating alleged findings of all forms of academic misconduct, fabrication, and falsification, including plagiarism. This external review will be led by Maidstone Consulting Group, which has extensive expertise evaluating research misconduct and ensuring academic integrity. This review also will benchmark Drexel’s infrastructure and policies around research integrity against other peer institutions and the forthcoming regulatory changes to ensure that we are exemplars of best practices.  

This academic year has been such a trying time for our community of learners and scholars that we are at risk of forgetting what it means for us to belong a vibrant community of scholars and learners: We give one another the space to speak freely with the understanding that expressing controversial ideas should not threaten anyone’s safety. We prize honesty and integrity, and make the extra effort to ensure that we are respectful of individual rights and civil to one another. We do not tolerate harassment, intimidation, or hate. And we work to create more forums and spaces that allow us to listen to one another so we can learn from one another.  

A community of scholars devoted to free speech, inquiry, and the pursuit of knowledge must create room both to permit peaceful campus protests, which can raise public awareness, create a sense of solidarity around a cause, and spark passionate debate, and to encourage critical thinking, independent inquiry, civil discourse, and deep listening to other points of view with an earnest intent to understand their perspectives.  

While there have been reports of isolated antisemitic and Islamophobic incidents on our campus, I have been heartened that discussions and debates over the war between Israel and Hamas have remained civil, and protests orderly. It is our expectation that the review will be completed this coming fall. I look forward to the work of these external reviews to map out a productive course and future for our Drexel community in which those conversations can be deeper, debate more illuminating, deliberations more productive, and protests peaceful.  In this way, we can build and foster a community of scholars who can live and learn together.  

Sincerely,

John Fry
President