COA 09-11 Catalog - Peralta Colleges

district policies and procedures201includes a special area of protected speech. Consistentwith the principles of academic freedom, course contentand teaching methods remain the province of individualfaculty members. Academic freedom, however, is notlimitless. Academic freedom does not protect classroomspeech that is unrelated to the subject matter of the courseor in violation of federal or state anti-discriminationlaws. Some speech may constitute environmental sexualharassment, harassment based on another impermissiblecharacteristic or discrimination. If a faculty memberengages in unwelcome sexual behavior or other improperbehavior based on a characteristic protected by thispolicy that has the purpose or effect of unreasonablyinterfering with an employee’s work environment or astudent’s academic performance or creates a hostile andintimidating work or academic environment, then it mayconstitute environmental harassment or discrimination,as outlined in Board Policy and these implementingprocedures.The District must balance these two significant interests:the right of academic freedom and the right to be free fromdiscrimination and harassment. The First Amendmentprotections, including those of academic freedom, arenot absolute. When a faculty member raises academicfreedom as a defense against charges of discriminationor discriminatory harassment, the District must examinethe nature and context of the faculty member’s behavior.A key to this examination is determining whether thebehavior of the faculty member is related to his or herlegitimate academic judgments within the context offurthering the institution’s legitimate mission.Nothing in the District’s Discrimination and DiscriminatoryHarassment Policy should be construed to prevent facultymembers from rigorously challenging fundamental beliefsheld by students and society. These challenges shouldbe done in a manner that, in the professional judgmentof the faculty member, is most pedagogically advisable.Indeed, this is at the core of academic freedom; however,faculty members may not interject into the academicsetting an element of discrimination or discriminatoryharassment that is unrelated to any legitimate educationalobjective. Nor, may a faculty member create, or allow, theeducational setting to be so charged with discriminationor discriminatory harassment, that our students areprevented from effectively participating in the academicenvironment. As such, faculty members must beaware that the District will investigate and respond toemployee or student complaints that involve coursecontent in accordance with its general discriminationand discriminatory harassment policy and facultymembers may be subject to discipline for egregiousconduct, in the same manner as provided in Board Policyand any implementing procedures for all other Districtemployees.The Peralta Community College District is committed toinsuring that the academic freedom rights of our facultyare secure, and to insuring our students an academicenvironment free of discrimination and harassment.Nothing in this section is intended to abrogate rights ofAcademic Freedom stated in the collective bargainingagreement with the Peralta Federation of Teachers.E. Consensual Relationships1. Definitions(a) The terms “instructors” and “faculty member”are defined as any person who teaches inthe District, is in an academic position, orby virtue of their position has control orinfluence on student performance, behavior,or academic career.(b) A “District employee” is defined as any personwho is employed by the Peralta CommunityCollege District, or acts as its agent andoperates within the District’s control.2. RationaleThe District’s educational mission is promoted byprofessionalism in faculty/student, as well as supervisor/subordinate, relationships. Professionalism is fosteredby an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect. Actionsof faculty members and supervisors that harm thisatmosphere undermine professionalism and hinderfulfillment of the educational mission. Trust and respectare diminished when those in positions of authority abusetheir power in such a context as to violate their duty to theeducational community and undermine the trust placedin the District as a public employer and an educationalinstitution.3. Ethical ViolationRecognizing that the unequal power of adult consentingparties is inherent in consensual relationships betweensupervisor and employee or student and teacher, theDistrict will view it as unethical behavior if facultymembers or supervisors engage in romantic relationswith students enrolled in their classes or employees undertheir supervision even though both parties appear to haveconsented to the relationship.4. Presumption of a Policy ViolationThe faculty member or supervisor who contemplates aromantic relationship with a student or employee mustrealize the complexity of the situation and its potentialnegative consequences. Regardless of consent or mutualattraction, the faculty member or supervisor generallywill be judged guilty of sexual harassment if anycomplaint eventually emerges, either from the partnerin the relationship or from his or her fellow studentsor co-workers. A romantic relationship between anyminor employee or student and an adult employee ispresumptively deemed not to be a consensual relationshipand constitutes sexual harassment.