Rice University

PROCEDURE FOR INVESTIGATING ACCUSATIONS

WARRANTING SEVERE SANCTIONS, INCLUDING DISMISSAL AGAINST FACULTY MEMBERS

1.  On rare occasions the administration may accuse a faculty member of misconduct or inappropriate behavior serious enough to warrant severe sanctions, including dismissal for cause. (See Rice Policy 201-97.) When such accusations arise, the procedures described below will be followed.

2.  The procedure may depend on the nature of the alleged misconduct. When sexual harassment is alleged, current Rice Policy 830-92 describes the investigative steps to be taken and the procedures to be followed; when research misconduct is alleged, Rice Policy 324-90 describes such steps and procedures. In all other cases in the procedure described below, there are three phases or steps, two of which are informal and preliminary to a third phase consisting of a written statement of charges by the university followed by a formal hearing when lawyers may be present. No policy‹whether relating to sexual harassment, research misconduct, or any other form of inappropriate behavior‹may deprive a faculty member, accused of an act that could warrant dismissal, of the opportunity to undergo the third phase as described in this document below.

3.  Dismissal of a faculty member will be preceded by the following stages: a) First Stage: discussions between the faculty member and appropriate administrative officers trying to find a mutual settlement; b) Second Stage: absent a mutual settlement, inquiry by the Appeals and Grievances Committee of the Faculty Council, which may, failing to effect an adjustment that may or may not involve mediation (the costs of which would be borne by the administration), determine whether in its opinion formal dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, without its opinion being binding upon the President. This committee should submit its report to the Faculty Council, with a copy to the faculty member, and the Council would forward the report with its recommendation to the President. c) Third Stage: a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity by the President or the President's designated representative(who may be an administrator, a faculty member or a lawyer), and a formal hearing described in paragraph 4 in which the administration's designate and the faculty member‹who may exercise the opportunity to be advised and/or represented by a faculty advocate or a lawyer‹will present arguments and evidence before a panel of the faculty member's peers. Only in this third stage will advocates or lawyers be a part of the proceedings.

4.  Any faculty member presented with charges such as those described in 3c will have the right to be heard by a Hearing Panel made up of five faculty members, none of whom is serving as an administrator above the department chair level. The members of this panel will be selected by the Faculty Council and submitted to the President by the Speaker. The five members of this panel will be chosen from a Hearing Panel pool of fifteen faculty designated annually by Faculty Council at the beginning of the academic year. The accused and the President will each have a maximum of two challenges when the panel is initially chosen. The Provost will then call the panel into session, recommend a schedule, and provide staff support. The panel will elect a chair and determine how to fill vacancies on it that may occur for any reason, including illness, resignation, or disqualification or recusal for bias or interest. When vacancies are filled, the President and the accused will each have a maximum of two challenges to these replacements.

(4a) Pending a final decision by the Hearing Panel, the accused faculty member may be suspended or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension only if continuance threatens harm to other persons, to the accused, or to university property. A faculty member who has been suspended pending a hearing receives full compensation throughout the period of suspension. A suspension that is not followed either by reinstatement or the opportunity for a hearing is in effect a summary dismissal in violation of academic due process.

(4b) Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made to the accused at least twenty days prior to the hearing. The accused may waive a hearing or may respond to the charges in writing at any time before the hearing. If the accused waives a hearing, but denies the charges or asserts that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the Hearing Panel will evaluate all available evidence and base its recommendation on the evidence in the record.

(4c) The hearing will be conducted by the Hearing Panel and will be attended by the President's designate, the faculty member, and, if he or she wishes, the faculty member's faculty advocate or lawyer. The hearing will be presided over by the chair of the panel. The Chair, elected by the panel, will control the hearing, establish its pace, determine when people are heard, and, most important, keep lawyers, if present, from overstepping the bounds of what the panel believes is appropriate in the efficient pursuit of truth.

(4d) A verbatim record of the spoken words of the parties, the witnesses, and the Hearing Panel while the hearing is in session (but not during the private deliberations of the panel) will be made for the use of all parties, including the accused.

(4e) The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and will be satisfied only by clear and convincing evidence in the record considered as a whole.

(4f) The President's designate will, prior to the hearing, be responsible for contacting potential witnesses deemed to have information material to the charges, and will gather as much information and as many documents as he or she thinks relevant to prepare for the hearing. The designate may contact potential witnesses in addition to those named by the administration or the accused. As this paragraph implies, the job of gathering evidence for the accusations rests with the administration and not with the hearing panel.

(4g) The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses and documentary or other evidence. The administration will cooperate with the hearing committee in making available documentary and other evidence.

(4h) The panel will bring as many witnesses forward as it deems appropriate, including those identified by the President's designate or the accused.

(4i) The procedure by which the hearing is conducted will be determined by the Hearing Panel, with the aim of efficiently obtaining the truth, insuring fairness and confidentiality, and according dignity to all parties and witnesses. The Hearing Panel will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence that is of probative value in determining the issues involved.

(4j) Both the faculty member and the President's designate will be allowed to confront and question any witness and respond to any interrogatory or document submitted during the hearing.

(4k) In a hearing of charges of incompetence, the testimony will include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institutions of higher education.

(4l) The findings of fact and the panel's recommendations to the President will be based solely on the record of the hearing, including the verbatim account in paragraph 4.d and all relevant documents and interrogatories.

(4m) The Hearing Panel's findings and recommendations, with supporting reasons, will be presented in a full report to the President, with copies to the Speaker of the Faculty Council and to the accused. If the President wishes, the panel will also provide any documents, notes, recordings or transcripts that are part of the record. 1) If the Hearing Panel concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has been established by the evidence in the record, it will so recommend. 2) If the Hearing Panel concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has been established, but that an academic penalty less severe than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend. 3) If the Hearing Panel concludes that there is cause for severe sanction but not dismissal, it will so recommend. 4) If the Hearing Panel concludes that adequate cause for dismissal, or for any other sanction, has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so recommend.

(4n) If the President rejects the report, he or she will state the reasons for doing so, in writing, to the Hearing Panel, to the faculty member, and to the Speaker of the Faculty Council, and provide an opportunity for response from the panel and the faculty member before transmitting the case to the Board of Governors.