The Academic Senate and Office of the Provost released a preliminary report on Aug. 7 that outlines new recommendations that aim to support academic freedom, free expression and open discourse on campus. The report discourages the University from taking official positions on public controversies and proposes facilitating dialogue between community members with differing viewpoints.  

The report comes from the Provost-Senate Joint Task Force on Academic Freedom and Professional Responsibility, which was formed in January to review USC’s policies and campus climate around free speech. A final report is expected to be published later this semester. 

According to the report, while the University has policies intended to support free expression, many students, faculty and staff said the current environment on campus discourages discussion of controversial issues. Respondents mentioned that “the university could do more to meet its high aspiration on these matters,” with some noting self-censorship or avoidance of issues in the classroom altogether. 

“[USC students] worry about social or institutional punishment for expressing unconventional views,” the report read. “Many students have limited exposure to the idea that free expression and open discourse are important for the effectiveness of their education.”

To address these concerns, the task force recommended that the University adopt a statement of values that focuses on academic freedom and free expression. This proposed statement would see the University committing to protect and guarantee faculty rights to teach and research without restriction, emphasize the value of open debate and refrain from commenting on political issues that are not of “existential concern” to the University.  

“Education is not intended to make people comfortable but to help them think critically, develop independent judgment, and challenge their assumptions,” the report read. “Concerns about civility and mutual respect cannot be used as a justification for closing off discussion of ideas, however offensive or disagreeable those ideas may be to some.”

The initiative also proposed several outreach programs focused on different aspects of student and faculty life. The report suggested working with the University Club of USC to host dinner dialogues that take inspiration from “Living Room Conversations” or “Make America Dinner Again,” which Justine Lee and Tria Chang launched following the 2016 presidential election as a way to build understanding between people with differing political viewpoints. 

The report also proposed that the University create an academic freedom council composed of five to nine senior faculty members. This council would advise administrators on difficult cases that are related to free expression and serve as a resource for the community. Members would provide expertise on issues related to academic freedom to avoid problems caused by administrators making “quick decisions after consulting mainly a small group of their inner advisors, usually other administrators.”

Lastly, the report called for a multi-year culture-building initiative that would focus on embedding free expression across USC’s academic and student life. The initiative would include new curriculum elements in the University’s two required undergraduate writing courses. The report also highlighted that discourse, expression and rhetoric are an important element of these classes. 

An additional proposal for the culture-building initiative is to work with several student organizations such as the Office of Religious and Spiritual Life, USC Center for the Political Future, Center for Inclusive Democracy and Center for Excellence in Teaching. The report highlighted these organizations for their events that focus on open dialogue and free expression.

The proposed initiative would include a dedicated brand, staff and funding north of $100,000 “to be seen as serious.” The report stated the funding would ideally come from external sources given the University’s strained finances. 

The report also discusses what speech the University supports, stating that it supports the “growth of its students” within certain parameters. The report states that “the University may restrict expression and debate that violates the law, […] or that is otherwise incompatible with the functioning of the University”. Freedom of expression is another issue that the report addressed in a draft statement of principles on academic freedom, free expression and open discourse. 

“The University may reasonably regulate the time, place and manner of expression and debate so that it does not disrupt the ordinary activities of the University,” the report read. The statement itself mirrors limits that are put on the First Amendment legally and reflects California’s Leonard Law which was passed in 2009 and requires private universities to maintain free speech in the same manner that public universities do. 

During the 2024 Gaza Solidarity Encampment, the University justified sweeping the encampment with allegations that protestors were trespassing. The University also banned “disruptive actions” during study days and final exams in 2024, while the encampment was ongoing in Alumni Park. 

The preliminary report concludes by encouraging continued discussion across the University. The task force will gather additional feedback before issuing its final report later this year.