FAQ

The Center for Student Conduct (CSC) addresses a wide range of matters involving potential allegations of misconduct.

We specifically address behaviors under the Berkeley Campus Code of Student Conduct, which covers undergraduate academic misconduct and non-academic misconduct for all students (undergraduate, graduate, and professional students).

Academic misconduct by graduate and professional students is addressed under the Graduate Student Academic Misconduct Policy (GAMP) or school-specific policies.

We also support procedures governed by other policies such as the Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy (SVSH) and the Anti-Discrimination Policy, by partnering with the Office for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination (OPHD). OPHD investigates allegations of misconduct under those policies and refers student respondents to our office for potential discipline. 

Please contact us at studentconduct@berkeley.edu or (510)-643-9069 if you would like to learn more about our processes or to receive support for a student conduct matter.

The CSC addresses student conduct that occurs on, or as it relates to University property, or at official University functions and University-sponsored programs conducted away from the campus.

University property is all land, buildings, facilities or other grounds or structures, or any item in possession of or owned, used, maintained or controlled by the University or designated by the campus as subject to these policies, including the International House.

University property also includes computers and network systems owned, maintained or controlled by the University or funded by University budgets or designated by the campus as subject to these policies.

The CSC also addresses off-campus conduct that adversely affects the health, safety, or security of any other member of the University community, the mission of the University, or any academic work or any records or documents of the University. See the Code of Student Conduct for more specific information regarding jurisdiction.

Anyone may file a complaint. Please visit our reporting site here. 

You can also choose whether you wish to have the referral for non-academic misconduct addressed through a restorative justice (RJ) process, which you can learn more about here. The CSC will evaluate whether the behavior would be appropriate for our RJ process.

The CSC will contact you if we have any questions about your report or if we can point you to more appropriate campus resources to address the alleged behavior.

The CSC will contact students when a complaint has been received. An Alleged Violation Letter (AVL) is sent via email to the student’s official University email address.

The AVL will include a brief summary of the alleged violation and the Code provisions implicated. AVLs will also provide a deadline by which the accused student must contact the office to respond to the letter and schedule an appointment to meet with a CSC staff member if they wish to participate in the process.

Failure to respond to the AVL or participate in the process will lead to determinations about the allegations and imposed sanctions without the student’s input.

The Alleged Violation Letter (AVL) will include instructions for how students can respond to the allegations, including if they accept responsibility or wish to meet with the CSC. The letter will also contain a link to schedule an appointment with a CSC staff member.  Students are greatly encouraged to contact the CSC by the listed deadline, otherwise a decision may be made without their input.

A student could also choose not to provide a response or to meet with the CSC, in which case the policy determination and resolution plan, including sanctions, would become final.
Students are encouraged to consider having an advisor in the process, which can be anyone of their choosing. Some students seek advice from the ASUC Student Advocates Office, hel@sao.asuc.org.

Students can also seek confidential advice and support through the Ombuds Office for Students & Postdoctoral Appointees and Student Legal Services. Students can also receive support from Respondent Services who can assign a Case Manager to provide them with information and support through the process. 

The Administrative Resolution meeting is your chance to share your perspective and side of the story. You will find information about the allegation(s) in the Alleged Violation Letter (AVL). During the Administrative Resolution meeting, you will meet with a CSC staff member who will share your rights and responsibilities in the process, the information the CSC has gathered about the allegations, and provide you with an opportunity to share your response to the allegations. Some of the most common possible outcomes to this meeting include:

1. the allegations may be dismissed;
2. the staff may need to gather further information regarding the allegation(s) ; or,
3. your case may be resolved directly between you and the staff member during the Administrative Resolution meeting.

An Administrative Resolution is the CSC's initial determination and proposed way to resolve the case. This occurs after the student has had a chance to meet with the CSC, share any response to the allegation(s), provide dosimeter or suggest witnesses, etc. and after the CSC has thoroughly reviewed all of the information gathered. This resolution is then communicated to the student, along with any options available to the student, including at least the chance to submit an appeal of the CSC’s Administrative Resolution decisions.

The Administrative Hearing is like a panel hearing, except the Independent Hearing Officer (IHO), serves as the decisionmaker for findings of responsibility and makes a recommendation to the Dean of Students regarding potential sanctions. See below. 

Depending on the possible outcome proposed in the Administrative Resolution, a student may choose to have the option to resolve their case through a hearing. A panel hearing is a more formal process for resolving a complaint. A hearing panel is composed by a group of three to five members of the University community, including other students, faculty members, and University staff. Panel hearings are administered by the Independent Hearing Officer (IHO), a University official who does not work in the CSC, but has oversight over the timelines and procedures of the Code. 

The panel reviews the allegations and renders a decision based on the totality of the evidence standard, meaning what is more likely than not, based on the evidence presented at the hearing and through documents prepared for the hearing. If a student is found "responsible" for the alleged violation(s), the panel will recommend appropriate sanctions, for the Dean of Students to consider.

Students are able to present witnesses and documents to support their case during hearings. Students may elect to have an advisor of their choice. Witnesses are subject to questioning by the CSC, the panel, and students. Upon hearing the evidence, the hearing panel must find by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not) that the student is either responsible or not responsible.

If a student admits to violating University policies or is found responsible, a resolution plan (commonly referred to as sanctions) will be assigned. Sanctions range from a Non-Reportable Warning to Dismissal from the University. The Center for Student Conduct strives to impose sanctions that are appropriate given the violation. A resolution plan also commonly includes educational and reflective resources to aid in the students' learning and growth, restore harm to the community, or minimize the risk of future occurrences.

In all cases, students are presumed to be not responsible for the alleged behavior.

The CSC bears the burden of proof in all cases and through our investigation, aims to collect information that paints a complete picture of the allegations and the related behavior. After reviewing that information and considering the statements made by students  in the Administrative Resolution Meeting or in a hearing, including witness statements, if the totality of the circumstances and facts gathered do not meet the preponderance of the evidence standard, the student will be found not responsible or the case will be dropped without a responsible finding for lack of evidence. In such circumstances, the student will not have a disciplinary record for the alleged behavior.   

If a student denies the allegations, or disagrees with the CSC’s findings the student can file an appeal of the Administrative Resolution for non-separation cases.

If a student is being suspended or dismissed from the University (separation) the student can request a formal hearing and may appeal the finding of the Hearing Body if they disagree with their determinations.

Students may receive support from an advisor at any stage of the process. A student may select an advisor of their choosing or request that the University provide one; the student is responsible for any expenses associated with selecting an advisor not provided by the University.

The advisor will have access to training regarding the procedures for student conduct investigation and resolution. An advisor may be present with the written permission of the student. The advisor may be any person (including an advocate, attorney, friend, or family member) who is not otherwise a party involved in the incident or a witness. With written permission from the student, the advisor will receive updates along with the student during the adjudication process of the alleged violation. The advisor’s primary role is to provide guidance through the process.

All communication must come from the student; the advisor may not write or speak on behalf of a student or otherwise disrupt any meetings or proceedings in any manner. An advisor may be excluded from participation by the Independent Hearing Officer or Center for Student Conduct staff member should they fail to adhere to these procedures. If a student has requested an advisor be assigned to them, the process will not begin without an advisor being identified. However, the conduct process will not be delayed due to repeated or ongoing unavailability of a particular advisor.

You or your advisor can access training slides on the conduct process.

Students may have an attorney serve as an advisor if they wish. The student is responsible for any expenses associated with selecting an advisor not provided by the University. 

The student conduct process is an administrative proceeding, not a criminal or civil process. The student conduct process does not follow the same rules of evidence found in a court of law. Instead, the conduct process follows the procedures described in the code and the evidentiary standard, therein which is described as “admissible information is the sort upon which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, and is not restricted to evidence admissible under the strict rules of evidence of a court of law.”

The Code of Conduct process is a separate administrative process, and may proceed separately but concurrently with a criminal process. Students are expected to represent themselves in all student conduct matters, whether or not the student is also facing concurrent criminal charges for the same set of circumstances. Students facing criminal charges may have an attorney present, in the role of their advisor, during all student conduct proceedings, but the attorney is restricted from speaking on behalf of the student in the proceedings. In addition, the Center for Student Conduct will correspond at all times directly with the student and not through any third party. 

A student may request that their advisor receive updates concurrently as the process progresses forward.

A student can participate in the process without making any statements, and no negative inference may be drawn from a student choosing not to speak. Negative inferences can be drawn from a student’s selective participation however, such as choosing to answer some questions and not others.

A student could also decide not to participate, or to stop participating, in the process entirely.  If a student does not participate, the student conduct process will move forward with the evidence gathered at that time. A student may be found responsible if the evidence reaches the preponderance standard and sanctions may be imposed. In doing so, the student waives their right to any further process, such as a hearing or appeal based on when they stopped engaging in the process. 

The student may not use their refusal to participate as a ground to appeal a decision

No. All student conduct matters are subject to lawful subpoenas. This includes audio recordings, written statements and records, and personal recollections. In fact, the University may have to contact the appropriate law enforcement agency if violations of the law become evident through the student conduct process.

Student conduct decisions are based on the preponderance of the evidence standard, meaning what is more likely than not to have occurred based on the available evidence. This standard applies to fact-finding decisions made at all stages of the process. 

The CSC bears the burden of proof in all cases and through our investigation, aims to collect information that paints a complete picture of the allegations and the related behavior.

The student conduct process is not attempting to determine whether a violation of the penal code occurred; the University is trying to determine whether or not a student violated University rules and regulations.

As such, the goals and the means of the criminal justice process and the student conduct process are dissimilar. Typically, no extensions are not given to students to accommodate their interests in the criminal process.

Timeline extensions may only be granted by the Independent Hearing Officer, a University official that does not work in the CSC, but has oversight over the Code’s procedures and timelines. Students should contact them via email at sa_iho@berkeley.edu and state the reason for their requested extension, whether or not it is related to a pending criminal matter.

No. "Double-jeopardy" is a concept that applies to criminal proceedings. The student conduct process is a distinct University process from criminal prosecution. It aims to address violations of the Code and University policies and is not a part of a criminal prosecution.

The courts have long recognized the differing interests of the University community from that of the criminal justice process. Since 1961, a significant body of case law has been established that outlines basic expectations of fairness in any student disciplinary process. The UC Berkeley’s due process protections meet or exceed any required by the courts.

In cases involving behavior where there is reasonable cause to believe that a student’s actions threatens the health or safety of any person on University property or at official University functions, or other disruptive activity incompatible with the orderly operation of campus, an interim exclusion from campus, classes, campus, or specific activities and areas of campus  suspension may be invoked in addition to the initiation of conduct action. This is known as an interim suspension.

A student will be restricted only to the minimum extent necessary to limit the likelihood of harm based on the information available at the time of the interim suspension.

A student placed on interim suspension will be given prompt notice of the reason for the interim suspension and the duration of the interim suspension. Any interim suspension will be reviewed by the Chancellor or their designee within twenty-four hours of issuance by the Center for Student Conduct. The student will be provided with the opportunity for a prompt hearing before the Independent Hearing Officer regarding the merit of the interim suspension. At the hearing, the Independent Hearing Officer may modify or cancel the interim suspension.

Records are confidential and are typically kept for five calendar years from the end of the academic year in which the conduct case was closed. After this time, records concerning most cases are destroyed. Records related to certain behaviors, such as Clery crimes, are kept longer. Cases that resulted in an outcome of dismissal are kept indefinitely. The records retention practices of the CSC are detailed in the Code of Student Conduct.

In compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA), all conduct records are considered confidential records, with exceptions noted in FERPA. The Center for Student Conduct only releases records directly to the student for them to view, and may only discuss a student's record with others with the student’s documented authorization.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is a federal law that governs student records. 

The privacy protection FERPA gives to students is very broad. With limited exceptions discussed below, part 99.3 of the FERPA regulations gives privacy protection to all student education records. Education records are defined as "[t]hose records that are directly related to a student and [are] [m]aintained by an educational agency or institution or by a party acting for the agency or institution." Examples of student records entitled to FERPA privacy protection are grade reports, transcripts, and most disciplinary files.

Unless personally identifiable information from a student's education record falls under a specified exception, the information cannot be released to third parties (including parents) without signed and dated written consent from the student.

You can visit the U.S. Department of Education FERPA website and UC Berkeley’s Office of the Registrar’s FERPA websites to learn more.

This form is used by faculty in academic misconduct situations (i.e., cheating, plagiarism, etc.). The form allows for mutual agreement to expedite resolution of an academic misconduct allegation if the student accepts responsibility for the alleged violation. A student is only eligible for one FDF resolution process during their undergraduate career at UC Berkeley.

The FDF process does not apply to graduate and professional students.