March 31, 2026 Volume 72 Issue 29

March 25, 2026

To the Penn Community:

Penn’s commitment to open expression is a bedrock principle of our campus community and central to our institutional mission.

In August 2024, as many of you know, President Jameson and I charged a faculty-led Task Force to review the Guidelines on Open Expression and the Temporary Standards and Procedures for Campus Events and Demonstrations, with an understanding that the entire Penn community would play a pivotal role in providing input on any changes. As we approach the final stages of that review, we are asking for your participation. I will provide below a brief overview of our review process so far and describe how you can provide input. Your feedback will help ensure that President Jameson receives a well-vetted draft for his consideration later this year.   

During the 2024–2025 academic year, the Task Force on Open Expression consulted with members of our campus community to develop proposed revisions to the Guidelines on Open Expression and the Temporary Standards and Procedures for Campus Events and Demonstrations. As part of this work, the Task Force met with the Committee on Open Expression (COE) and with other student, staff, and faculty leaders. In February 2025, the COE voted to approve a draft of the Task Force’s recommendations, which was then returned to the Task Force for additional revisions. The Task Force co-chairs also presented an update on their recommendations to University Council in April 2025.

Since then, President Jameson and I have been working with campus leaders on how best to plan for implementation of the recommendations, in a way that reflects our enduring commitment to open expression while also capturing institutional expectations around clarity and campus safety. We conducted a review of past University approaches to such revisions; consulted with the Office of General Counsel, Division of Public Safety, and Division of University Life; and reached out to the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs for their guidance, especially about next steps.

We now invite input from all members of the Penn community.

A current draft of the revised Guidelines on Open Expression is published in this issue of Almanac, shared with student leaders and staff representatives across campus, and circulated in the Senior Vice Provost for Faculty’s April newsletter. There will then be two primary ways for Penn faculty, staff, students, and postdocs to share their feedback:

Online Feedback: All Penn community members may submit anonymous feedback through an online Qualtrics survey, accessible via the supplement of this issue of Almanac. The deadline for submissions will be May 18, 2026.

Listening Sessions: Two community listening sessions will be held to invite feedback, one virtual and one in-person. Details are published in the supplement of this issue of Almanac. 

Through the summer and early fall, my office will work with the Committee on Open Expression, Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs, and other campus stakeholders to review the feedback, identify key themes, and finalize a revised version of the guidelines, which will be presented at the University Council meeting on September 9, 2026. President Jameson will then review the final draft recommendations and publish the final version of the revised guidelines in Almanac. 

Thank you in advance for participating in this important process, which will shape the future of our shared commitments to substantive dialogue and open expression on campus. 

—John L. Jackson, Jr., Provost

March 27, 2026

After reviewing more than 61,000 applications, today we are delighted to welcome our newest group of Quakers admitted through Regular Decision.

Every year, we have the privilege of getting to know an extraordinary range of students through the stories they share with us. And every year we’re reminded that a Penn class is shaped not only by achievement, but also by the perspectives, curiosity, and sense of purpose students bring to our community.

The students admitted to the Class of 2030 are thoughtful, motivated, and eager to make a meaningful impact. They’ve shown academic strength, certainly—but just as importantly, they’ve demonstrated a commitment to engaging with the world around them: asking big questions, contributing to their communities, and diving into the pursuits that spark their interest.

What stands out already is the breadth of this group’s experiences and personalities. Some students lean deeply into a particular focus; others explore widely across fields and ideas. Together, they bring artistry, imagination, analytical thinking, and creativity in countless forms. No single path or talent defines them—what they share is a spirit of energy and persistent curiosity.

The admitted Class of 2030 represents students from 87 countries and all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and military APO students around the world. Closer to home, we’re especially excited to welcome our largest group of admitted students from Philadelphia. 

This collective breadth of experience is one of the things that makes the Penn community so dynamic, shaping students’ experiences in ways they may not yet anticipate.

To all students who engaged with Penn throughout this process—whether admitted, waitlisted or not offered admission this year—we are grateful for the time, effort, and thought you invested in sharing your story with us.

To our admitted Class of 2030: Congratulations! We can’t wait to meet you.

— Whitney Soule, Vice Provost and Dean of Admissions

The University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine (Penn Vet) has partnered with the Stamps Scholars Program to establish the Stamps VMD/VMD-PhD Fellows, a prestigious scholarship initiative recognizing exceptional veterinary students who exemplify leadership, academic excellence, and service. Penn Vet is one of the first graduate institutions selected to participate in the Stamps Scholars Program, signaling a notable expansion of the program’s impact beyond the undergraduate level.

Beginning with matriculating students in the 2026–2027 academic year, the competitive program will provide multi-year scholarships to select VMD and VMD-PhD students. The Stamps Fellows award will be the highest merit award available to applicants. It represents a transformative scholarship dedicated to advancing the next generation of leaders in veterinary medicine. The award also underscores Penn Vet’s dedication to attracting top-tier students, ensuring that monetary hurdles do not hinder their educational aspirations or ability to pursue promising career and leadership opportunities.

“We are tremendously grateful to the Stamps Scholars Program for their extraordinary investment in our students and in the future of veterinary medicine,” said Andrew M. Hoffman, Penn Vet’s Gilbert S. Kahn Dean of Veterinary Medicine. “This partnership empowers outstanding VMD and VMD-PhD students to pursue their boldest ideas in research and clinical care, without financial barriers. Stamps Fellows will not only thrive at Penn Vet, but also advance animal and human health and lead meaningful change worldwide. We are very proud to support their journey.”

Under the agreement, Penn Vet will nominate candidates from the VMD and VMD-PhD programs who exemplify academic excellence, strong veterinary and research experience, leadership potential, exceptional character, and a demonstrated commitment to making a positive impact on the practice of veterinary medicine.

In addition to receiving full cost-of-attendance scholarships for up to four years of study (or designated years within the VMD-PhD program), Stamps VMD/VMD-PhD Fellows will have access to enrichment funding to support high-impact educational experiences, including research projects and specialized internships, study abroad and global veterinary immersions, conferences, leadership training, and co-curricular development initiatives.

“Stamps Scholars are distinguished not only by their academic achievement, but also by their character, curiosity, and drive to lead,” said E. Roe Stamps IV, chairman of the Stamps Scholars Program. “We are proud to partner with Penn Vet to support students who will advance veterinary medicine and contribute meaningfully to their communities and to society.”

The Stamps Scholars Program partners with prominent colleges and universities to provide financial support and opportunities that empower students of remarkable promise to pursue ambitious academic, research, and leadership goals.

To learn more about the Stamps Scholars Program, click here.

David (Dave) Edward Deifer, associate director of Information Systems & Computing at Penn, died on January 7, 2026 from complications of throat cancer treatment. He was 63.

Born near Seoul, South Korea, and raised in Allentown, Pennsylvania, Mr. Deifer graduated from William Allen High School and eventually landed in Philadelphia. He initially worked as a fish cutter and teppanyaki chef while earning a certification in aerospace engineering. “He could flip a shrimp into your pocket with one hand and solder a circuit board with the other,” said his family in an online tribute. 

In 1989, Mr. Deifer joined Information Systems & Computing at Penn as a technician. Over the course of a 35-year tenure at Penn, he became a technical manager, a network engineer, a senior project leader, and eventually an associate director. 

Mr. Deifer became involved in several facets of Penn life: In 1996, he was one of the founding members of the Kelly Writers House, a volunteer-driven space that aimed to equalize access to the arts. Concurrently, he co-founded and was editor-in-chief of XConnect (pronounced “Cross Connect”), one of the earliest digital literary magazines. Housed in and ultimately endowed by the Kelly Writers House, XConnect became the first digital magazine to make the leap to print, and these print editions appeared nationally in independent bookstores and major retailers for 12 years. XConnect gained the enthusiastic support of Penn’s English faculty, and Mr. Deifer gave several talks at Kelly Writers House about online publishing (Almanac September 10, 1996). 

His creative pursuits as a writer and poet grew during his time at Penn. In 1997, Mr. Deifer was part of a group of more than a dozen poets who were the first to participate in a Saturday night reading at Kelly Writers House that was broadcast live on WXPN (Almanac March 4, 1997). 

In 2012, Mr. Deifer began taking photos during his walks around Philadelphia, and in 2017, these photos were featured in an exhibition, Departures: Relevance of In Between, at the Burrison Gallery in Penn’s University Club (January AT PENN 2017). 

Mr. Deifer is survived by his wife, Annette Earling; his son, Calvin; his daughter, Marylee (Tim); his father, Paul; his twin brother, Richard; his sister, Lee Anne (Brad); his grandson, Kieran, and many nieces and nephews. 

In lieu of flowers, donations can be made to support young artists at the Kelly Writers House: https://writing.upenn.edu/wh/. 

Jacqueline (Jacqui) M. Fawcett, a professor emerita of nursing in the School of Nursing, died on March 22. She was 87.

Dr. Fawcett received her BS from Boston University, and her MSN and PhD degrees from New York University. She joined Penn Nursing’s faculty in 1978 as an assistant professor, then became an associate professor two years later. She became a full professor in 1989. She left Penn in 1999 and joined the faculty of the University of Massachusetts Boston, from which she retired in 2025. 

Throughout her career, Dr. Fawcett was internationally recognized as one of the most influential nurse scientists and theorists in the discipline. Her pioneering work on nursing conceptual models, metaparadigm development, and theory guided research and practice.  It helped shape the foundation of modern nursing science and continues to influence curricula and professional frameworks around the world. She was best known for her meta-theoretical work, which focused on the nature and structure of knowledge in nursology, and her Roy Adaptation Model-based research, which focused on functional status in normal life transitions and serious illness, women’s responses to cesarean birth, and adaptation to motherhood. Her work was supported by the American Cancer Society, the National Institutes of Health, and the Oncology Nursing Foundation, among others. 

Dr. Fawcett published many journal articles and book chapters, and several books—including Applying Conceptual Models of Nursing: Research, Quality Improvement, and Practice (2017); The Neuman Systems Model: Celebrating Academic-Practice Partnerships, with Sarah Beckman (2017); and Contemporary Nursing Knowledge: Analysis and Evaluation of Nursing Models and Theories, with Susan DeSanto-Madeya (2013). Dr. Fawcett co-founded nursology.net, which went live in September 2018. The website is a repository for academic knowledge in the form of summaries and exemplars of philosophies, conceptual models, and theories. Dr. Fawcett was also a member of nursing theory guided practice expert panel of the American Academy of Nursing, where participated in many activities, most recently a new mission statement and a presentation about conceptual model and theory-guided health policies.

Dr. Fawcett received recognition for her teaching and scholarship from numerous organizations. Her awards include the American Journal of Nursing Book of the Year Award for The Relationship of Theory and Research; the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing Teaching Award; the First Annual Faculty Award from the Penn Nursing Doctoral Student Organization; and the Distinguished Scholar in Nursing and Distinguished Alumni Award from New York University.

“Jacqui, as she was known to many of us, was clear in her conviction to nursing and nursology as a discipline,” said Penn Nursing in a tribute. “Her work shaped how generations of nurses think about theory, knowledge, and the intellectual foundations of our field. She was generous and deeply committed to collegiality. She believed in interdisciplinary work and contributing through service to students and faculty alike.”

Margaret (Peggy) Redfield Mainwaring, ED’47, HON’85, a Penn Trustee emerita, an honorary trustee and chair emerita of the Penn Nursing School Board of Advisors, and the 1985 recipient of an honorary degree from Penn, died recently. 

Ms. Mainwaring attended Penn as an undergraduate, where she majored in math education and served on the Bennett Hall board of directors, the Christian Association, and the Houston Hall Board. She also participated in Kappa Alpha Theta, Pi Lambda Theta, and the Penn Players. She graduated from Penn’s Graduate School of Education in 1947, but continued her involvement with her alma mater. 

In 1973, Ms. Mainwaring made Penn history as the first woman elected to serve on the Board of Trustees. She again made history in 1984 by becoming the first woman vice chair of the board. She served a remarkable 29 years as a trustee, serving oin the Executive, Finance, Academic Affairs, Nominating, Alumni Affairs, and Health Affairs Committees, as well as chairing the Student Life Committee. She was a member of the boards of trustees of HUP and the Penn Presbyterian Medical Center and served on the advisory committee of the Institute of Contemporary Art, the precursor to its current board of advisors.

Ms. Mainwaring partnered with the late Claire M. Fagin, Penn’s former Interim President and former dean of the School of Nursing, to establish Penn Nursing’s board of advisors, and served as its inaugural chair, setting the stage for an era of great progress and substantial development (including the growth of the doctoral program, the creation of many key education and research programs, and a significant increase in the number of standing faculty). She was also instrumental in facilitating the renovation of the Nursing Education Building and its renaming in honor of Dr. Fagin. In recognition of her numerous contributions to Penn Nursing, Ms. Mainwaring was named a chair emerita of the board when she stepped down in 1992.

Elsewhere at Penn, Ms. Mainwaring served as president of the General Alumni Society (now Penn Alumni), the Association of Alumnae, and the Women of the Class of 1947. She helped organize the Celebration of 125 Years of Women at Penn, a special reunion in 2000 for World War II-era classes, and several reunions of the Class of 1947. She was a member of the Trustees’ Council of Penn Women and chaired the committee whose work led to the designation of the E. Craig Sweeten Alumni Center, Penn’s present-day alumni house. For her exceptional service and leadership, she received Penn’s Alumni Award of Merit in 1973 and an honorary Doctor of Laws from Penn in 1985.

In addition to contributing her time and expertise to Penn, Ms. Mainwaring provided significant financial support, both personally and through her work as a fundraising volunteer. She supported a wide range of areas at Penn, most especially the Penn Museum, where she established the Mainwaring Marketing Fund and an endowment to support archaeological science teaching. At the Penn Museum, Ms. Mainwaring and her husband Bruce endowed the Mainwaring Wing, a $17-million project that continues to provide improved access to collections, an enhanced environment for the preservation of artifacts, and study space for researchers. Her generosity and legacy reached the Penn Libraries, the Graduate School of Education, and the School of Nursing, where she established the Nightingale Professorship in Honor of Nursing Veterans. 

Ms. Mainwaring served on the boards of directors of two daycare centers and the Methacton Public School District in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, in addition to serving on several other local and national foundations. For her profound contributions, she was named a Distinguished Daughter of Pennsylvania by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 2004. Ms. Mainwaring was also a consultant in the fields of education and design.

She was predeceased by her husband, Penn Trustee emeritus Bruce Mainwaring, C’47, in 2022. She is survived by her children, Susan Roberts, CW’72, G’76; Scott, C’75; and Elizabeth Daniels, CW’76; and her grandchildren.

---

To Report A Death

Almanac appreciates being informed of the deaths of current and former faculty and staff members, students and other members of the University community. Call (215) 898-5274 or email almanac@upenn.edu.

However, notices of alumni deaths should be directed to the Alumni Records Office at Suite 300, 2929 Walnut St., (215) 898-8136 or email record@ben.dev.upenn.edu.

President J. Larry Jameson opened the University Council meeting on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 by highlighting his message to the Penn community, We Hold These Truths to Be Self-Evident (Almanac March 24, 2026). He emphasized Penn’s commitment to diversity and inclusion, and that respect, intellectual openness, and opportunity are essential to the University’s future.

President Jameson introduced Trevor Lewis, vice president for budget planning and analysis, who presented the Fiscal Year 2026 University Operating Budget. The budget is guided by In Principle and Practice, Penn’s strategic framework, and is advanced through Penn Forward, a University-wide initiative to shape Penn’s future. Undergraduate total charges for FY26 are $91,122 and the student aid budget is $328 million. The average awarded grant is growing faster than the cost of attendance, with 46% of students receiving financial aid from Penn in FY25.

Vice President Lewis said the FY26 outlook is favorable, but disciplined and not without its challenges. The central message of the budget is constrained spending in the face of revenue uncertainty. The budget must be approved by the Board of Trustees in June.

Provost John L. Jackson, Jr. introduced Sanya Carley, vice provost for climate science, policy, and action, who gave a presentation on a new university-wide initiative, Penn Climate. Its mission is to drive climate scholarship and action from local to global scales and to harness Penn’s formidable strengths across all schools, its health system, centers, and institutes, in order to elevate climate work across campus. Penn Climate will make the University a premier climate solutions hub that uses existing strengths to tackle the climate crisis.

Penn Climate’s strategic framework includes three keystones—to foster the next generation of climate leadership; to integrate and bolster interdisciplinary climate work across Penn; and to launch transformative strategic initiatives that leverage Penn’s strengths via the Climate Solutions Hub.

Associate Vice President and Associate University Secretary Lizann Boyle Rode discussed the topics raised during new business at the February 18, 2026 University Council meeting. She thanked all seven members of University Council for speaking and discussed how each of the  concerns raised have been addressed.

During the open forum portion of the meeting, presenters:

• Noted a perceived absence of enforcement of rules regarding electric scooters, bicycles, etc., on campus walkways, which could jeopardize the physical safety of community members.
• Called for additional transit options for students and urged Penn to join SEPTA’s UPass program.
• Expressed concern about a meeting between students and regarding the University’s support of community members impacted by federal immigration enforcement efforts.
• Questioned whether sexual assault complaints are receiving reasonably prompt investigations and/or resolutions.

During new business, additional concerns were raised about the presence of ICE agents in the Philadelphia area, including the airport. Another member of University Council urged the administration to ensure meaningful participation in the Title IX training available in Workday. 

The next University Council meeting is scheduled for April 29, 2026.

Provided here are proposed revisions to the University’s Guidelines on Open Expression for campus review and feedback. The process of how we arrived at this current draft was described in my March 25, 2026 message to the community (Almanac, March 31, 2026).

Penn faculty, staff, students, and post-docs are invited to provide their feedback through two channels:

• Online form: All Penn community members may submit anonymous feedback on an online Qualtrics survey, accessible by visiting this link. The deadline for submissions is Monday, May 18, 2026. 
• Community Listening Sessions: Two community listening sessions will be held to invite feedback, one virtual and one in person. Each session will be convened by Eric Feldman, Charles A. Heimbold Professor of International Law, Penn Carey Law, and immediate past chair of the Faculty Senate. 

Below are the dates and times of each session. Registration information will be sent via an all-campus email notification on Wednesday, April 1, 2026.  

• In-Person Session: 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 23, 2026, at Perry World House
• Virtual Listening Session: 12:00 noon on Friday, April 24, 2026

Through the summer and early fall, my office will work with the Committee on Open Expression, Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs, and other campus stakeholders to review the feedback, identify key themes, and finalize a revised version of the Guidelines, which will be presented at the University Council meeting on September 9, 2026. President Jameson will then review the final draft recommendations and publish the final version of the revised Guidelines in Almanac. 

—John L. Jackson, Jr., Provost

Proposed Revisions to the Guidelines on Open Expression

Principles of Open Expression

The University of Pennsylvania, as an academic institution, embraces its bedrock commitments to freedom of thought, inquiry, speech, and lawful assembly. The freedom to perform research;  to present and examine arguments and data; the freedom to express, listen to, and discuss various views; and the freedom to voice criticism and to protest are fundamental to the mission of the University of Pennsylvania. These freedoms are designed to ensure that all members of our community can both contribute to, and benefit from, the open exchange of ideas necessary for a thriving academic environment, which supports the development of critical thinking, intellectual discovery, and the pursuit of knowledge for the advancement of society. 

These Principles are intended to protect a broad scope of speech and to ensure the inclusion of all Penn community members in their protections. Speech and expression, for the purpose of these Principles, includes talking, writing, expressing views digitally or on signs, engaging in artistic expression, demonstrating, protesting, holding vigils, and other ways of making one’s views known peacefully. 

These Principles are explicitly addressed to forms of individual and collective expression by members of the University community. 

While fostering the free exchange of ideas, the University must also be able to pursue its core missions—to teach, engage in research and scholarship, promote the arts and athletics, convene the community, and generally perform its everyday operations. This includes ensuring that Penn community members are protected from physical injury and that Penn facilities are protected from property damage. The safety and security of the Penn community remains a foundational commitment to all students, faculty, staff, and postdoctoral trainees, and the University will prioritize this commitment in all matters. 

To preserve the principles of open expression, it is important to understand the norms of protected speech; norms that are designed to ensure that all members of the Penn community have the freedom to interact, share their ideas and listen to each other as supported by Penn policies and consistent with city, state, and federal laws. 

These Principles cannot cover every possible instance of challenging speech, so their effectiveness depends on the goodwill and intentions of all Penn community members to listen to each other, to treat people with mutual respect, and to make a good faith effort to know and apply these Principles in the collaborative spirit in which they are written.1

Applicability of These Principles

I. Any member of the Penn community or Penn-affiliated organization wishing to schedule an event, such as a demonstration, protest, rally, or guest speaker on campus, must review these Principles and adhere to them.  

II. Any event, meeting, demonstration, protest, gathering, rally, or similar form of expression in a University location is governed by these Principles, regardless of how it is characterized or labeled, if the person(s) involved have the intent to express a point of view using an organized expressive activity, or the event is reasonably likely to disrupt University functions.

III. Whether communications occur on Locust Walk or in cyberspace, open expression remains equally valuable to the University and equally protected to the same extent, under the same Principles, and subject to the same limitations as non-digital forms of communication. Accordingly, these Principles apply to both in-person and online expression/conduct, particularly where Penn community members act or present themselves as Penn officials, community members, or representatives.

IV. Members of the Penn community include faculty, students (including persons registered as students or who are on an unexpired official leave of absence), postdoctoral trainees, staff, and administrators of the University (including its constituent schools, research centers, and other subdivisions or affiliates). 

Standards 

I. The University, through the President, the Provost, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee (SEC), and the Committee on Open Expression, shall act to encourage and facilitate open expression within these Principles. Different expectations can apply to classrooms, where instructors set guidance within appropriate professional norms, and other gatherings and events that take place at the University. Those hosting expressive activities should review the Principles in advance to determine event sponsor requirements such as space reservations, permissible hours of use, sound restrictions, etc. The following standards apply to all Penn community members, regardless of viewpoint expressed.

II. Individuals or groups violate these Principles if:

a. They interfere unreasonably with the regular activities of others, such as by impeding or blocking access to places of work, learning, socializing, living, or patient care, or by unreasonably disrupting the normal activity that takes place within the University.

b. They hold a demonstration or gathering in a clinical care facility, library, museum, private office or residence, or in any facility that normally contains valuable or sensitive materials, collections, equipment, or records protected by law or University policy.

c. They build or erect structures (including tents, encampments, or other temporary structures) without a permit or other permission from the Vice Provost for University Life or authorized University personnel. 

d. They stay on or in University property regardless of space (indoor or outdoor) beyond permitted hours. Unauthorized overnight activities will be considered trespassing.

e. They negligently, recklessly, or intentionally cause physical injury or threaten such injury to any person or group.

f. They vandalize or damage University property; for example, by defacing buildings, walls, statues, or artwork, or their presence facilitates or obscures such damage. University statues and sculptures may not be climbed on or covered with any material.

g. They use excessive levels of amplified sound that disrupts work and learning (as detailed under “Implementation of the Principles of Open Expression” herein), or use open flames, or otherwise fail to abide by the Principles, Penn facilities policies, and/or other Penn policies. 

h. They engage in speech or conduct that is threatening, harassing, severe, or pervasive such that it limits or denies a Penn community member’s ability to participate in or benefit from their education or work. Such speech or conduct will be considered more severe if it targets individuals or groups on the basis of a characteristic or class protected by the University’s Equal Opportunity Policy and Nondiscrimination Statement, or federal, state, or local law, or other related Penn policies.

i. They fail to present University identification and to identify themselves when asked by University representatives such as the Division of Public Safety, the Executive Director of Open Expression, Open Expression Observers, or other authorized University officials.

III. Interference with the Speech of Others

a. Protecting open expression  includes not interfering with the open expression of others, as well as protecting the rights of the speaker. 

b. Community members may protest speakers on campus with whom they disagree, but they may not do so in a way that prevents the speaker from expressing their views or prevents other members of the community from hearing or seeing the speaker. Groups are encouraged to request Open Expression Observers as appropriate.

c. Individuals or groups may not suppress the speech of another individual—they may not have a “heckler’s veto” over speech with which they disagree. 

Committee on Open Expression

I. A Committee on Open Expression (COE) shall be comprised of Penn faculty, staff, and students. Given the broad representation of Penn community members who may serve on the COE, the Committee shall report jointly to the Provost and the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs. 

II. The charge, composition, and procedures for the COE are set forth in the “Implementation of the Principles of Open Expression” section. 

Open Expression Observer Program

I. To ensure that speech and expression align with the University’s commitment to safeguarding a free exchange of views by enabling Penn community members to interact freely, to share their ideas, and to listen to each other, the University shall maintain and support an Open Expression Observer Program. 

II. The Executive Director of Open Expression (EDOE) shall provide leadership to the Open Expression Observer Program. 

III. The core responsibilities of the EDOE and the composition and charge for the Open Expression Observer Program are set forth in the “Implementation of the Principles of Open Expression” section. 

***

Implementation of the Principles of Open Expression

As the Principles make clear, the University is deeply committed to freedom of speech, open expression, and inquiry as fundamental to a thriving academic community. Time, place, and manner restrictions ensure that these principles are extended to all members of the Penn community while enabling the University to support its missions of scholarship, teaching, and research. 

These guidelines outline administrative and operational policies and procedures. They are broadly organized into four sections:

• Section 1. Committee on Open Expression: Charge, Composition, and Procedures
• Section 2. Open Expression Observer Program
• Section 3. Open Expression Procedures and Referrals
• Section 4. Inviting Speakers to Campus 

An Appendix titled Campus Use Policies that Safeguard and Support Open Expression is appended.

Section 1. Committee on Open Expression: Charge, Composition, and Procedures

I. Charge. The COE shall have general oversight of matters involving open expression in accordance with these Principles. The COE shall provide advice to the Provost and the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs. The COE’s advisory responsibilities include:

a. Proposing revisions and interpretations of the Principles as requested by the Provost and/or the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs, or when the COE deems such revisions necessary, including is-suing interpretative guidance to give more specific meaning to the Principles. The COE may also recommend to the Provost and SEC amendments or repeal of any of the Principles (see Section IV. Procedures).

b. Reviewing the Principles every 10 years, or as needed, and making recommendations to the Provost and the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs for any appropriate revision.

c. Reviewing reports from University offices and committees that engage with open expression issues to ensure that the Principles are written and applied as intended; and if not, making recommendations to the Provost and SEC for revisions or providing an interpretation of the existing Principles. Such reports will include data and additional details, as feasible while protecting privacy, relevant to open expression, including but not limited to: the number of cases related to open expression referred for disciplinary actions against students, faculty, or other members of the Penn community, and their disposition; and the activity of the Open Expression Observer Program.

d. Working with Schools, Centers, divisions and operational units as appropriate to support open expression, including the Provost’s Office.

e. Reviewing policies and procedures from University offices that relate to open expression such as signage, room/event registration, protests and demonstrations, and social media to ensure that University policies and procedures follow and integrate with these Principles; and if not, making recommendations to the Provost and the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs for appropriate revisions of such policies and procedures. Any policies or procedures mandated by or related to compliance with local, state, or federal law are not subject to this provision.

f. Offering advisory opinions, if requested by the COE Chair and University officials with jurisdiction over disciplinary cases, regarding referrals of cases and interpretations of the Principles as they may relate to these cases. Requests to the COE for advisory opinions, and any subsequent process, shall not unreasonably delay any disciplinary processes. 

g. Submitting an annual report to the Provost and SEC (appropriately redacted for FERPA and other privacy concerns) on the status of the Committee’s work in the University’s journal of record.

h. At the conclusion of each academic year, the COE may review referrals and enforcement actions taken in accordance with these Principles and issue a public report (redacted for FERPA and other privacy considerations) outlining any recommendations to the Provost and SEC for changes to these Principles, to related University policies, or to best practices in the following year. 

II. Composition. The Committee on Open Expression consists of 13 members, constituted as follows: 

a. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee (SEC), through the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs, shall nominate seven faculty members for consideration by the Provost. The Provost may request alternate individual nominations. In considering alternate nominations, the Provost shall consult with SEC. Committee members will be invited to serve only after they have been recommended by SEC and approved by the Provost.

b. One professional staff member named by the Provost (after the Penn Professional Staff Assembly has offered the Provost advice and recommendations on such selection).

c. One weekly-paid staff member named by the Provost (after the Weekly-Paid Professional Staff Assembly, or equivalent organization, has offered the Provost advice and recommendations on such selection).

d. Two undergraduate students and two graduate/professional students, named by the Provost (after the NEC and GAPSA, respectively, have offered the Provost advice/recommendations on such selections).

e. In selecting members for the Committee on Open Expression, consideration should be given to a range of faculty, staff, and student membership, including a range of Schools represented, faculty rank, scholarship/research expertise, and University leadership and service.

f. All members and proposed members of the Committee on Open Expression must be in good standing with the University.

III. Members of the Committee are appointed for the following terms:

The faculty representatives and the representatives of the Penn Professional Staff Assembly and Weekly-Paid Professional Staff Assembly are appointed to three-year terms. The terms shall be staggered so that they serve overlapping terms; accordingly, the initial terms of such representatives may be one or two years so as to enable such staggered terms.

a. The undergraduate and graduate/professional student members are appointed to one-year terms.

b. Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired term by the appropriate nominating body set forth above, subject to approval by the Provost.

c. The Chair of the Committee shall be a faculty member selected jointly by the Provost and the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs. The chair’s term shall be three years.

d. The COE shall have an Executive Director (Executive Director of Open Expression, or EDOE), who will serve as a non-voting ex officio member of the COE to support its functions, assemble data and reports, and manage the Open Expression Observer Program. 

IV. Procedures

a. The COE will report jointly to the Provost and the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs, and the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs will advise the Provost with respect to governance and performance of the COE. 

b. A simple majority of those present for a meeting is required for any interpretations or other recommendations, except for recommendations to amend or repeal the Principles, which require support from at least two-thirds of the full COE. If approved by the COE, any proposed amendment or repeal is to be forwarded to the Provost. 

c. Only the Provost, after consultation with the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs, Council of Deans, and the University President may approve any amendments to—or repeal of—the Principles. 

d. Seven members of the Committee on Open Expression shall constitute a quorum for any meeting.

e. The Committee on Open Expression shall respect the privacy of individuals as its general policy and shall maintain the right to declare the confidentiality of its proceedings.

Section 2. Open Expression Observer Program 

I. The Open Expression Observer Program (OEOP) is an important component of supporting open expression on campus. Ideas and statements can be uncomfortable or even offensive to individuals and groups within the University community. The OEOP helps to ensure that speech and expression align with the University’s commitment to support the free exchange of views by enabling community members to interact freely, to share their ideas, and to listen to each other. 

II. Executive Director of Open Expression (EDOE)

a. The EDOE manages the OEOP and is responsible for recruiting, training, and deploying Open Expression Observers; for making decisions about referrals; for reporting about the functioning of the program to the COE; and for providing educational opportunities about open expression to the Penn community in collaboration with other units within the University.

b. The EDOE will work with the Chair of the COE to help guide the vision and broad practice of the work of protecting these Principles through the OEOP, the COE, and other relevant offices. 

c. The EDOE will oversee the Open Expression Observer Program.

d. The EDOE shall report to the Provost and have a dotted line report to the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs. In selecting and evaluating the performance of the EDOE, the Provost shall consult with the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs and the Chair of the COE. The EDOE will regularly brief the Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs and upon their request.

III. Open Expression Observers (OEOs)

a. Open Expression Observers (OEOs) are neutral parties who engage with meetings, events, or demonstrations when deemed necessary to support and maintain open expression. The EDOE or event organizers who are concerned about potential disruption may request OEOs attend meetings, events, or demonstrations. 

b. Penn faculty, staff, or administrators are appointed to this role and given appropriate protected time. 

c. Individuals shall be selected through an application process managed by the EDOE with the support of the COE Chair. 

d. OEOs will be trained in conflict resolution, de-escalation, and mediation, as well as in the Principles, before being assigned to any meeting, event, or demonstration.

e. Members of the COE may not participate in the Open Expression Observer Program.

Section 3. Open Expression Procedures and Referrals

I. Open Expression Observer Program: Procedures

a. OEOs are assigned to meetings, events, or demonstrations based on the likelihood of disruption as determined by the EDOE without regard to viewpoint.

b. OEOs attend the meeting, event, or demonstration to which they are assigned, and aim to ensure that the Principles are followed by all. As needed, they shall inform, mediate, de-escalate, and in extenuating circumstances and if necessary to protect health, safety, or property, contact the Division of Public Safety (DPS) for assistance. DPS is charged with ensuring the safety of the Penn community. Actions by DPS that relate to open expression shall be reported to the COE as part of COE’s review and advisory role.

c. The EDOE or OEO shall identify themselves to those responsible for the meeting or event or to the leaders of a protest or demonstration, ideally through interaction, and at a minimum by wearing an identifying credential.

d. Any OEO who attends a meeting, event, or demonstration shall respect the privacy of those involved. In particular, they shall not report the identity of any person attending, unless that person is considered to have violated the Principles, University policy, or applicable laws.

e. The EDOE, OEO, or event organizers may request that DPS  attend meetings, events, or demonstrations in University locations to help protect the open expression of those involved and to maintain public safety.

f. The EDOE and OEOs serve to support the Principles of Open Expression and the University’s commitment to freedom of thought, inquiry, speech, and lawful assembly. Threats or violence towards the EDOE or an OEO, as with any member of the Penn community, will be considered violations of the Principles. 

II. Referring Violations

a. OEOs shall refer potential violations of the Principles by any member of the University community to the EDOE. University community members may report potential violations as well.

b. The enforcement of the Principles shall be consistent and without regard to viewpoint. 

c. When a violation is observed by an OEO and circumstances permit (e.g., where there is no imminent risk to health, safety, or property), the OEO should endeavor to issue a clear verbal or written warning and instruction to those involved. The instruction shall include notice that they are in violation of the Principles; if the activity persists, those involved may be asked to disband or leave, particularly when the activity is deemed to disrupt University operations or create a threat. However, an instruction or warning by the OEO is not tantamount to a finding that a violation has occurred. Whenever possible, de-escalation and mediation are preferable to referrals for violation.

d. Alleged violations of these Principles are reviewed with the EDOE to determine whether the case merits referral. The EDOE shall consult the Chair of the COE regarding any referral; but the final decision regarding referral rests with the EDOE. Other members of the Penn community may also make referrals or contact the relevant authorities on campus when they observe suspected violations. A referral is made as follows:

i. Students are referred to the Center for Community Standards and Accountability (CSA) upon the filing of a complaint and preliminary review of the allegations. If a charge is pursued, CSA will follow the normal disciplinary/restorative justice process, as appropriate. In extraordinary circumstances, when a student’s presence on campus is deemed by the University to be a threat to order, health, safety, or the conduct of the University’s educational mission, the Provost (or designee), in consultation with the student’s Dean or Associate Dean, may place the student on a mandatory temporary leave of absence or impose conditions upon the student’s continued attendance, pending a hearing of disciplinary charges.

ii. Staff are referred to the Division of Human Resources, which will follow University/School/Center staff disciplinary processes.

iii. Faculty are referred to their School Dean or the Provost for further action, in accordance with The Faculty Handbook. The Dean or Provost may consult with the School’s Committee on Academic Freedom for advice, but is not required to do so. If a charge is pursued, the Dean or Provost will follow the Procedure Governing Sanctions Taken Against Members of the Faculty in The Faculty Handbook.

e. Individuals or groups who are deemed to be in violation of the Principles during a meeting, event, or demonstration and who complied with an OEO’s instruction but disagree with that instruction or the applied interpretation of the Principles, may subsequently present a challenge to the validity of the OEO’s finding to the relevant body listed above (i.e., CSA, HR, the relevant dean, or other relevant authority). As part of the resulting review process, the relevant body listed above may (but is not required to) subsequently request an advisory opinion from the COE as to whether the Principles were properly interpreted and applied to the conduct in question. The COE will take up the request at the discretion of the COE Chair, in consultation with the EDOE. The COE may then issue its advisory opinion to the relevant body listed above, which will consider the opinion in its determination as to whether the conduct in question violated the Principles or any other Penn policy. The COE’s advisory opinion shall not unreasonably delay any disciplinary process. 

III. Consultation with the Committee on Open Expression

a. The COE may, upon request from the Provost, draft and issue an advisory opinion with respect to any conduct or activity (past, present, or future) that relates to open expression generally or these Principles specifically. 

b. In cases referred by the Provost related to instructors, classes, departments, and schools, the Provost may consult with the COE prior to referral.

c. In cases related to on-campus events and protests, a Penn policy (or its application) that limits usage of space, or other concerns related to the Principles, the EDOE will similarly have discretion to consult with and interview relevant persons. 

d. The COE may request information from the relevant individuals involved or from other Penn officials, review their involvement and policies, and (as part of its advisory opinion) issue recommendations to the Provost and Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs for future actions, such as revising policies and practices. 

IV. The Division of Public Safety and Law Enforcement

a. Law enforcement officers, including those employed by Penn, the City of Philadelphia, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the federal government, are obligated to follow the law and legal processes to ensure the health and safety of the University campus and community. The Principles do not supersede that duty. If law enforcement determines that an activity jeopardizes the health and safety of the University campus or community or may violate local, state, or federal law, they may have a legal duty to intervene. 

V. Enforcement

a. Actions taken beyond making one’s thoughts heard or read— particularly when such actions violate these Principles, Penn policy, or relevant law—do not constitute speech and expression protected by these Principles.

b. Each member of the University community is expected to know and follow the Principles. Disrupting University operations is not permitted. This includes conduct that interferes unreasonably with the activities of other persons; causes injury to persons or property or threatens to cause such injury; holding meetings, events, or demonstrations under circumstances where health or safety is endangered; or knowingly interfering with unimpeded movement in a University location or with University operations.

c. Given the open nature of Penn’s campus, the Division of Public Safety (DPS) may ask for University identification in University locations. During events, meetings, or demonstrations, the Executive Director of Open Expression, Open Expression Observers, or other authorized University officials may also ask for University identification in University locations.

d. Checking University identification for safety concerns ordinarily does not involve making a record of the information for purposes of future disciplinary actions. DPS, the Executive Director of Open Expression (EDOE), or Open Expression Observers who request identification information for purposes of a possible disciplinary action must give notice of this intention to any University identification holders at the time of making such a request. Failure or refusal to produce University identification upon request is a violation of the Principles. 

e. The EDOE may also assist in offering advice during meetings, events, or demonstrations to requesting parties regarding the Principles if the EDOE is present during a situation that involves possible violations of the Principles. 

Section 4. Inviting Speakers to Campus

I. By allowing a specific speaker to speak or a group to organize and invite a speaker or hold an event, the University does not necessarily endorse that speaker’s or event organizer’s content or viewpoint; rather, it affirms the value of creating a robust marketplace of ideas and fostering reasoned debate, disagreement, and discourse.

II. Most speakers at Penn are invited not by the University itself, but by particular organizations, departments, schools, and individuals at Penn. The Principles protect members of the entire University community against reprisal for hosting controversial speakers and events. Other members of the University community likewise may criticize a proposed speaker’s or event’s substance or viewpoint or even call upon the event organizer to cancel an event or rescind an invitation. But they may not go beyond criticism to express or imply a threat to an organization’s or speaker’s or event’s safety, standing, affiliation with the University, or a threat of violence or similar unlawful conduct. 

III. The norm at the University, barring any concerns over budget, security, health, or safety, is to allow reservations of venues, provision of security, audiovisual, publicity, and other logistical support on a first-come, first-served basis and in accordance with the Principles and University policies. Any denial of a timely request for venue or related services/support may not be based on the substance or nature of the views expressed. 

IV. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Division of Public Safety (DPS) may recommend or require that an event take place in a particular (larger or smaller) University venue, be protected by additional security, and/or take place at a later date in order to allow more time to plan appropriately for the safety of the community, including the speaker.

V. Any invitations to political candidates or events featuring or promoting political candidates or parties (without regard to political party or viewpoints) are subject to additional requirements due to the University’s tax-exempt status. 

Appendix: Campus Use Policies that Safeguard and Support Open Expression

This appendix serves as a resource and summary of existing University policies that reinforce and reaffirm Penn’s commitment to open expression and, at the same time, ensure that campus meetings, events, demonstrations, and other forms of open expression are appropriately balanced with other needs, rights, and expectations of the campus community.

These policies exist so that all members of the Penn community have equal opportunity to pursue learning, teaching, research, patient care, and service while enjoying full access to the many University resources available for academic excellence. Designated University offices and divisions are responsible for the administration of policies.

The Committee on Open Expression is charged with reviewing pertinent policies and procedures from University offices that relate to open expression (e.g., signage, room/event registration, protests and demonstrations, and social media oversight). This ensures that University policies and procedures adhere to the Principles on Open Expression. The Committee will also make recommendations to the Provost and Faculty Senate Tri-Chairs for revisions of such policies and procedures where they might diverge from the Principles.

I. Scheduling Events

a. The facilities of the University of Pennsylvania, both indoor and outdoor, exist for the primary purpose of University-related education, research, and patient care. Priority for the use of facilities is given first to those academic and patient care activities and then to programs of University-recognized groups. 

b. Events are presumed to be private, that is, limited to members of the Penn community, unless specifically stated otherwise. 

c. The procedure for scheduling events varies for different venues. Organizers should research and determine the process necessary for their venues of choice. 

d. University Life Space and Events Management manages space reservation for many University locations and may serve as a resource for event organizers who are seeking to reserve space. 

e. All non-academic events requiring the use of Perelman Quad, performing arts facilities, Blanche Levy Park (including the area known as the “Button”), Locust Walk, other University Life Spaces, or Central Pool classrooms must be registered with University Life Space and Events Management. While in most cases applications for use of these spaces must be made with designated University Life Staff seven business days in advance, some events may call for more immediate attention. In such cases, special requests for shorter notice will be considered on a case-by-case basis, and every effort will be made to support open expression without regard to viewpoint or content. In general, no event requiring a security assessment from the Division of Public Safety (in accordance with Section g below) will be granted on an expedited timeline. 

f. Scheduling of spaces within specific School or Center facilities is administered by the School or Center. Use of these particular spaces may be supplemented by University policies. In all circumstances, the Principles shall guide the University.

g. University Life Space and Events Management or the specific School or Center—in consultation with the Division of Public Safety—may determine that certain events require a security assessment from the Division of Public Safety. In these instances, the event may result in the implementation of additional safety/security measures. The Special Event Security Request Form must be used to request event security provided by Penn’s Division of Public Safety.

h. Events must occur during the stated business hours in each University location. For spaces managed by University Life Space and Events Management, requests for events to occur or extend outside of stated business hours must be approved in advance by the Vice Provost for University Life or designee. For spaces managed by Schools or Centers, these requests must be directed to the appropriate official in the School or Center. The Division of Public Safety and other University officials may also be consulted when reviewing such requests.

i. The University reserves the right to require a delay or relocation of any event, despite prior approval, should additional information emerge that raises logistical or potential safety concerns. 

j. Resource information: Pennbook/Use of Facilities or contact the Vice Provost for University Life Space and Events Management or School or Center Building Administrators (for School or Center specific questions).

II. Access to Penn Spaces and Event Contracting

a. Schools, departments, centers, institutes, and all faculty, students, postdoctoral trainees, and staff are expected to uphold the Principles when coordinating and hosting events that may involve non-Penn affiliates or organizations. Penn community members may not serve as “individual fronts” or “proxies” for non-Penn affiliated organizations that may solicit them in order to gain access to or use of Penn venues to organize or host an event on their behalf.

b. Any representation of sponsorship or support by University departments, centers, institutes, or similar organizations must receive prior written approval from the relevant chair or director to ensure that all protocols for approval are followed.

c. The use of standardized templates in contracting for space is preferred. If the templates are not used, or there are meaningful deviations, the organizers must consult the Office of General Counsel to determine what is permissible. 

d. No student may sign a contract on behalf of the University. All contracts or agreements for lectures, performing arts activities, programs, conferences, services, or other events sponsored by student organizations must be reviewed by the relevant School/Center before being shared with the Purchasing Department for signing. 

e. Any contract for an event must be reviewed and executed by an authorized Penn representative. 

f. Resource information: Pennbook/Contracts, or contact the Vice Provost for University Life Space and Events Management or School or Center Building Administrators (for School or Center specific questions).

III. Amplified Sound

a. On weekdays when classes are in session, amplified sound (including, but not limited to bullhorns, musical instruments, and amplified speakers) is only permitted on College Green, Blanche Levy Park, or Penn Commons between the hours of 5:00 p.m.-10:00 p.m. Requests for amplified sound on College Green, Blanche Levy Park, or Penn Commons outside of 5:00 p.m.-10:00 p.m. on weekdays must be submitted for approval during the space reservation process. 

b. Regardless of time of day, amplified sound is not permitted on College Green, Blanche Levy Park, or Penn Commons during scheduled University events (e.g., Convocation), Final Exams, and Reading Days.

c. Amplified sound or live music on Locust Walk (West of 36^th Street) is permitted only between 12:00 noon-1:00 p.m. on weekdays when classes are in session. At all times any noise must be kept at a level that does not disrupt classes in session or faculty, staff, and administrators working in surrounding buildings.

d. If noise resulting from an event in an outdoor space interferes or conflicts with library, office, and classroom activities, the continued use of that outdoor space may be denied.

e. Resource information: Pennbook/Use of Facilities; University Life/Noise Pollution Restrictions; Pennbook/Vending Policy, or contact Vice Provost for University Life Space and Events Management or School or Center Building Administrators (for School or Center specific questions).

IV. Posters, Signs, Banners, and Chalking

a. The University Campus-Wide Exterior and Interior Signage Policy details information for displaying temporary signage, including chalking. The following are modifications to the Campus-Wide Exterior and Interior Signage Policy:

i. Light projections may not be displayed on any University building or structure without seeking express written permission from the Vice Provost for University Life or the relevant Dean’s Office (for a School or Center-specific building). 

ii. The University Poster Policy outlines policies for posting notices in outdoor areas, indoor areas, on Locust Walk and in residential areas.

iii. To protect open expression, signs posted in compliance with the Principles will not be removed, and it is a violation of the Principles if an unauthorized individual removes them or posts over them. 

iv. Non-compliant signage, including posters, banners, and chalking, will be removed immediately. 

v. School guidelines for posters and banners may supplement University policies. 

b. Resource information: University Campus-Wide Exterior and Interior Signage Policy; University Poster Policy; Pennbook/Vending Policy, or contact the Vice Provost for University Life, School or Center Building Administrators (for School or Center-specific questions), Facilities and Real Estate Services, or the Office of College Houses and Academic Services.

V. Use of Social Media

a. Community members have the right to use social media to express themselves. However, this right is also circumscribed by principles of respect, University policy, and local, state, or federal law. 

b. Online harassment or the doxing of students, faculty or staff is counter to Penn’s commitment to creating an inclusive community that upholds the University’s fundamental values of academic freedom, open expression, and productive exchange of perspectives and ideals.

c. To the extent that Penn organizations or community members can be identified as perpetrators of such online harassment or doxing, the University may take action as appropriate.  

d. Resource information: Guidelines for the Use of Social Media; Online Harassment

VI. Livestreaming, Filming, and Media Access

a. For spaces managed by University Life Space and Events Management: Livestreaming an event requires approval by the Vice Provost for University Life (VPUL). For spaces managed by Schools or Centers, requests for livestreaming an event must follow the School or Center’s policies and protocols. University Communications and the Division of Public Safety may also be consulted when reviewing any requests. The VPUL (or designee) and Schools and Centers shall consult with the Executive Director of Open Expression prior to making a determination. 

b. News media are required to produce credentials when requested by University Communications and access may be limited, especially during demonstrations, to allow the Division of Public Safety to maintain campus safety.

c. Resource information: Contact University Life Space and Events Management or University Communications. 

VII. Use of University Name

a. Penn regulates use of its name, including University of Pennsylvania, Penn, the names of its Schools and programs, its shield and related insignia, trademarks, and logos (“insignia”) to ensure that such use is related to the University’s educational, service and research missions and promotes its objectives.

b. Resource information: Pennbook/Use of University Name Policy.

VIII. Non-University Persons

a. The University reserves the right to request University identification from participants engaged in events and demonstrations on campus for the sole purpose of determining whether an individual is affiliated with Penn.

b. Non-University persons who participate in meetings, events, or demonstrations in a University location are required to comply with the Principles and any additional instructions from other University officials, including the Division of Public Safety, the Executive Director of Open Expression, Open Expression Observers, and the Vice Provost for University Life (or delegates). Non-University affiliated persons have less expansive rights than those who are members of the Penn community.

c. Resource information: Identification Card Policy No: 204 or contact the Division of Public Safety.

--
1 These Principles integrate and supersede the previous Guidelines on Open Expression and the Temporary Standards and Procedures for Campus Events and Demonstrations (once enacted).

Click here to view the pdf version of this supplement.

Penn Nursing’s Dawn Elizabeth Bent, an administrator in the DNP-nurse anesthesia program and an assistant practice professor in the department of biobehavioral health sciences, has been elected a Distinguished Fellow of the National Academies of Practice (NAP).

Class of 2026 fellows were formally inducted during the NAP Annual Meeting and Interprofessional Forum in early March. A NAP Fellowship is an honor extended to those who have excelled in their profession and are dedicated to furthering interprofessional collaboration to support affordable and accessible healthcare.

“Being inducted as a Distinguished Fellow into the National Academies of Practice is an honor and a humbling recognition from colleagues I hold in the highest regard,” said Dr. Bent. “I am thrilled to join this community and eager to continue collaborative work advancing interprofessional healthcare.”

Matthew Conaty, a doctoral candidate at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, has been named a Pacific Telecommunications Council (PTC) Emerging Scholar.

Mr. Conaty is a legal historian of science, technology, and the administrative state. He researches crisis and disaster communications technology, such as the U.S. Emergency Alert System.

As part of the Emerging Scholar Program, Mr. Conaty presented at the 2026 PTC Annual Conference in Honolulu, Hawaii. His presentation, “‘Neither Operationally Desirable Nor Economically Practical’: A Political Economic Analysis of the Emergency Alert System,” examined the history, present, and future of the public warning system, considering the system’s resiliency in an age of climate crisis, nuclear tension, and infrastructural failure.

The PTC Emerging Scholar Program seeks to recognize exceptional, up-and-coming scholars in the field of information and communications technologies.

University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School faculty continue to shape the direction of legal scholarship, with seven scholars named to the annual “Top 100 Legal Scholars of 2025” ranking compiled by law librarians at George Mason University. The third annual list, which measures citations to recent legal scholarship, recognizes Jill E. Fisch, Elizabeth Pollman, Dorothy E. Roberts, Herbert Hovenkamp, Sandra G. Mayson, Cary Coglianese, and David A. Hoffman.

The ranking is based on citations to articles published between 2019 and 2021, measuring how frequently those works are cited in law review articles and offering a snapshot of the legal scholarship shaping current academic and policy debates. The Penn Carey Law faculty recognized this year represent broad impact across fields, including corporate governance, civil rights, criminal law, regulation, and empirical legal studies.

Notably, Jill E. Fisch and Elizabeth Pollman both rank among the top 10 scholars nationally, making the University of Pennsylvania the only institution with two scholars in the top 10. Elizabeth Pollman and Dorothy E. Roberts both rank in the top 10 when adjusted for co-authorship.

Meanwhile, Dorothy E. Roberts authored the most cited article, “Abolition Constitutionalism,” with 379 citations—the highest of any article across all three years of the ranking. Originally published in 2019, the 122-page article has risen in the ranking each year and continues to inform legal scholarship and the broader legal community.

“This recognition reflects the extraordinary impact of our faculty’s scholarship,” said Sophia Z. Lee, dean of Penn Carey Law and the Bernard G. Segal Professor of Law. “Across a wide range of fields, Penn Carey Law is home to scholars who produce research that shapes legal thinking, informs policymaking, and advances public understanding of critical issues.”

Former Delaware Chief Justice Leo E. Strine Jr., who is affiliated with Penn Carey Law and Harvard Law School, also appears in the Top 100.

The following Penn Carey Law faculty members earned spots in the ranking:

Top 100 Scholars Ranked by Citations to Law Review Articles (2019-2021)
Jill E. Fisch—#6
Elizabeth Pollman—#8
Dorothy E. Roberts—#14
Herbert Hovenkamp—#19
Sandra G. Mayson—#22
Cary Coglianese—#38
David A. Hoffman—#50

Top 100 Scholars Adjusted for Co-Authorship
Elizabeth Pollman—#3
Dorothy E. Roberts—#7
Sandra G. Mayson—#13
Herbert Hovenkamp—#14
Jill E. Fisch—#15
Cary Coglianese—#57
David A. Hoffman—#85

Victor Pickard, the C. Edwin Baker Professor of Media Policy and Political Economy and Media at the Annenberg School for Communication and co-director of the Media, Inequality & Change Center, has been named a Roosevelt Institute Think Tank Fellow.

Selected alongside eight others recognized for advancing a democratic vision for the American economy, Dr. Pickard will use his fellowship to explore policy approaches for rebuilding the public media system and examine how media and communications reform connects to the larger effort to renew American democracy.

“As millions of Americans face rising costs for housing, healthcare, and basic necessities, we need economic thinking that confronts how power is concentrated in our markets and governing institutions,” said Hannah Groch-Begley, managing director of Roosevelt’s think tank, in an announcement. “These additional think tank fellows bring the rigor and imagination needed to advance policies that make the economy work for working people.”

This class of fellows will build on more than 20 years of rigorous, people-centered Roosevelt Institute policy research, surfacing bold ideas to ensure all Americans lead good lives.

The Roosevelt Institute is a think tank and student network working to rebalance power in the economy and democracy. As the nonprofit partner to the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum, it carries forward the legacy of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt by producing ideas that shape public debate and investing in the next generation of leaders. 

Members of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) have elected Robert Herman Vonderheide, director of the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, to the position of 2026-2027 president-elect. Dr. Vonderheide will become president-elect on April 20 during the 2026 AACR Annual Meeting in San Diego, California, and will assume the presidency in April 2027 at the 2027 AACR Annual Meeting in Orlando, Florida.

AACR is the first and largest cancer research organization dedicated to accelerating the conquest of cancer, with more than 62,000 members residing in 143 countries and territories. AACR’s mission is to prevent and cure all cancers through research, education, communication, collaboration, science policy and advocacy, and funding for cancer research.

“As the full power of discovery science is being unleashed to treat and cure more cancer patients than ever before, now is the time to accelerate and double down on cancer research,” Dr. Vonderheide said. “I am so proud to serve as AACR president during such transformative progress for our field. The AACR is a special organization that is uniquely positioned to draw on the tremendous talent and drive of its members to ensure support and passion for cancer research in every setting: in research labs, classrooms, board rooms, community centers, and halls of government. The imperative is clear: science improves and saves lives. Together, we are meaningfully changing what it means for patients to hear, ‘You have cancer.’”

Dr. Vonderheide is the John H. Glick, MD Abramson Cancer Center Director’s Professor, the vice dean of cancer programs in Penn’s Perelman School of Medicine, and vice president of cancer programs at the University of Pennsylvania Health System. As director of the ACC, he leads one of only seven cancer centers in the U.S. to be continuously designated as a Comprehensive Cancer Center by the National Cancer Institute.

Dr. Vonderheide is an internationally renowned cancer immunotherapy and translational research expert. Through his integration of basic and clinical investigations, he has advanced the establishment of cancer treatment strategies and defined the immunobiology of tumor microenvironments using genetically engineered laboratory models. Throughout his career, he has deciphered mechanisms of cancer immune surveillance and developed novel immunotherapeutics for patients with pancreatic cancer, melanoma, and breast cancer. He is well-recognized for driving the development of agonist CD40 antibodies, and discovered that telomerase is a universal tumor antigen, leading efforts to develop telomerase vaccination for both cancer therapy and the prevention of cancer in healthy individuals. More recently, he has investigated the potential of KRAS inhibition to intercept pancreatic cancer.

E. John Wherry, the Barbara and Richard Schiffrin President’s Distinguished Professor and chair of the department of systems pharmacology & translational therapeutics in the Perelman School of Medicine, has been elected to serve on the AACR Board of Directors for the 2026-2029 term. Dr. Wherry is also the director of both the Colton Center for Autoimmunity and the Institute for Immunology and Immune Health (I3H), where researchers are conducting deep profiling of individual immune systems to capture each patient’s unique immune fingerprint, a living blueprint of personal health and disease, that offers new ways of thinking about healthcare.

The April AT PENN 2026 calendar is now available! Click here to view the calendar online, or click here to view a printable PDF. 

On Tuesday, April 14 at 4:30 p.m., Dr. Salamishah Tillet, this year’s Provost’s Distinguished Visiting Faculty Fellow, will present: All The Rage: The Myth, Meaning, and Many Afterlives of Nina Simone.

The Provost’s Distinguished Visiting Faculty Fellow Lecture brings Pulitzer Prize–winning writer Salamishah Tillet to the University of Pennsylvania for a special lecture in anticipation of her new book, Nina Simone and the World She Made. This book—a blend of criticism, memoir, and biography—examines how Simone has come to embody the struggles of contemporary America more than any other artist of the civil rights era. 

Salamishah Tillet, C’96, taught at Penn for more than a decade and is currently Distinguished Professor of Africana Studies and Creative Writing at Rutgers University-Newark. Following her reading will be a lively conversation with Penn Provost John L. Jackson, Jr. about Simone’s life and enduring legacy, as well as Tillet’s journey as a critic, scholar, and curator, inviting the audience to consider the role of artists, past and present, who use their voices to reflect the times in which they live. 

The lecture is co-sponsored by the Office of the Provost, the Annenberg School for Communication, and the Netter Center for Community Partnerships. It will be held in the Harold Prince Theatre of the Annenberg Center, 3680 Walnut Street. 

Please register at: https://upenn.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_6mmCr6RU4DKsHZ4.

In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a powerful tool capable of accelerating discovery across research institutes.

Now in its third year, AI Month at Penn returns this April with a sharpened focus on human-centered AI, convening researchers and practitioners to explore how rapidly evolving tools can expand knowledge while safeguarding human judgment. From 60-second lectures to a hack-AI-thon and from workshops to symposia, the month’s events map the terrain where algorithms meet values and where new ideas move from possibility to practice.

Some highlights include:

Death of Distance and Redux? How AI is Changing the Future of Cities: April 9, noon, Kleinman Energy Forum, 4th floor, Fisher Fine Arts Library—Featuring Elizabeth Delmelle, Erick Guerra, John D. Landis, Xiaojiang Li, and Susan Wachter, this panel conversation will explore whether generative AI and remote collaboration tools will reshape the geography of work, revisiting the long-standing idea of a “death of distance” as digital infrastructure changes where creative and economic activity happens. Free and open to the public.

From Crowned Snake to Chnoubis: Learning AI Image Enhancement: April 9, noon, Penn Museum, 3260 South St.—Participants will explore how AI-powered image enhancement reveals details in museum objects, such as inscriptions, textures, and underdrawings, supporting conservation and scholarship. The workshop introduces machine learning tools that can improve visibility while preserving the integrity of original materials. The event is open to Penn students only and seating is limited.

Designing Better Learners: What AI Reveals About the Learning Brain: April 16, 11 a.m.—This virtual, hands-on session introduces approaches for structuring ideas and building a “second brain” to support research, coursework, and creative projects. Participants will explore how AI tools can help clarify thinking, generate questions, and support continuous learning.

Textpocalypse Now: AI and the New Political Economy of Writing: April 17, 4 p.m., Room 135, Fisher-Bennett Hall, 3340 Walnut St.—This talk will consider the status of writing in the present moment, not from the qualitative question of whether AI can write better than humans, but from the stance of political economy—meaning the role of writing in the “scriptural economy,” as well as online industries’ insatiable demand for “content” and the increasing awareness (sometimes called the “Dead Internet”) that more and more of what people read online is merely eavesdropping on conversations among machines.

AI-Informed Activities and Assignments to Support Student Learning: April 21, 3:30 to 5 p.m., Kleinman Energy Forum, 4th floor, Fisher Fine Arts Library—In an interdisciplinary introductory panel, speakers will describe how they use AI to support student learning through in-class activities or out-of-class assignments. Following the panel, speakers will be available to discuss their use cases in more detail and answer questions at stations during an informal reception. Panelists will include Faizan Alawi, Elizabeth Emery, Seiji Isotani, Bhuv Jain, James Petersson, and Sarah Pierce.

IDEAS on Generative AI Symposium: April 30, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., Amy Gutmann Hall—This forward-looking event will explore the next wave of generative and multimodal artificial intelligence. As generative models rapidly evolve from text and image synthesis toward integrated systems that can reason, perceive, and act, this symposium will bring together leading researchers across natural language processing, computer vision, robotics, and machine learning to discuss the scientific foundations and future directions of the field.

For a complete list of events, visit the Penn AI Month website.

Adapted from a Penn Today article, March 25, 2026.

Division of Public Safety
University of Pennsylvania Police Department Crime Report

About the Crime Report: Below are the Crimes Against Persons and/or Crimes Against Property from the campus report for March 16-22, 2026. The Crime Reports are available at: https://almanac.upenn.edu/sections/crimes. Prior weeks’ reports are also online. –Eds.

This summary is prepared by the Division of Public Safety (DPS) and contains all criminal incidents reported and made known to the Penn Police, including those reported to the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD) that occurred within our patrol zone, for the dates of March 16-22, 2026. The Penn Police actively patrol from Market Street to Baltimore Avenue and from 30^th Street to 43^rd Street in conjunction with the Philadelphia Police.

In this effort to provide you with a thorough and accurate report on public safety concerns, we hope that your increased awareness will lessen the opportunity for crime. For any concerns or suggestions regarding this report, please call DPS at (215) 898-7297. You may view the daily crime log on the DPS website.

Penn Police Patrol Zone
Market Street to Baltimore Avenue and from 30^th Street to 43^rd Street

Philadelphia Police 18th District
Schuylkill River to 49th Street & Market Street to Woodland Avenue

Below are the Crimes Against Persons from the 18th District: 6 incidents were reported for March 16-22, 2026 by the 18^th District, covering the Schuylkill River to 49th Street & Market Street to Woodland Avenue.

The Division of Public Safety offers resources and support to the Penn community. DPS developed a few helpful risk reduction strategies outlined below. Know that it is never the fault of the person impacted (victim/survivor) by crime.

• See something concerning? Connect with Penn Public Safety 24/7 at (215) -573-3333.
• Worried about a friend’s or colleague’s mental or physical health? Get 24/7 connection to appropriate resources at (215) 898-HELP (4357).
• Seeking support after experiencing a crime? Call Special Services - Support and Advocacy resources at (215) 898-4481 or email an advocate at specialservices@publicsafety.upenn.edu
• Use the Walking Escort and Riding services available to you free of charge.
• Take a moment to update your cellphone information for the UPennAlert Emergency Notification System
• Download the Penn Guardian App which can help Police better find your location when you call in an emergency.
• Access free self-empowerment and defense courses through Penn DPS.
• Stay alert and reduce distractions; using cellphones, ear buds, etc. may limit your awareness.
• Orient yourself to your surroundings. (Identify your location, nearby exits, etc.)
• Keep your valuables out of sight and only carry necessary documents.

Another tip in a series provided by the Offices of Information Security, Information Systems & Computing and Audit, Compliance & Privacy

The Office of Information Security is reviving Ben Franklin’s kite experiment as part of Take Your Child to Work Day, emphasizing renewable energy sources such as wind, lightning, and static electricity. The event will be held at Penn Commons in front of Houston Hall from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Thursday, April 23, 2026.

Children will learn about Ben Franklin’s kite experiment while coloring and building their own kites and adding a small toy key to the kite’s rod. Additionally, they will explore the idea of a key as an information security tool that functions as both a password and a PIN to safeguard private information and devices. Parents will have the chance to introduce their children to their workplace and showcase various career roles.

Since 2018, the Office of Information Security has hosted this kite activity each spring for Penn families as part of the annual Take Our Children to Work Day. Advanced registration opens on Tuesday, March 31 at 9 am. Visit the Division of Human Resources' Take Our Children to Work Day web page for details on how to register for one or more activities at:

https://www.hr.upenn.edu/PennHR/wellness-worklife/upcoming-events-and-workshops/take-our-children-to-work-day

The Office of Information Security welcomes your input on new information security activities for children and families. Contact us at security@isc.upenn.edu to share your ideas. 

--

For additional tips, see the One Step Ahead link on the Information Security website: https://isc.upenn.edu/security/news-alerts%23One-Step-Ahead.

Elly R. Truitt

One of the most hard-won perspectives that I have learned over twenty-five years of teaching college students is that I teach the students in front of me. Not the students I thought I would have, the ones I wish I had, the ones I had last year, or last semester. Today, I find that the students in front of me are increasingly anxious, at the expense of their curiosity, tolerance for intellectual risk and discomfort, and confidence in themselves as learners. This anxiety can manifest in different ways, including an over-reliance on seeking approval, often couched as a request for “clarification;” a reluctance to use resources that require face-to-face interaction (talking to a librarian, going to the Weingarten Center); contesting grades; rote transcription of lecture/course material in the hope that replication will produce mastery; aggression or hostility, which can look like the student who cries in your office every week or the student who complains to your head of department about your teaching; and disappearance/avoidance. However it manifests, this anxiety interrupts learning because of how it stifles curiosity, confidence, and the ability to take intellectual risks and tolerate cognitive discomfort. Fostering student autonomy can improve their confidence and willingness to take risks, and if they are less anxious, they can be more open to ideas and to discomfort. Below are some strategies that I have developed to foster student autonomy and increase their confidence in themselves as learners.

Foster autonomy through course design and course policy: Designing your syllabi, assignments, and course policies with an eye to empowering students to take a more active role in their learning will acculturate them to this role and give them opportunities to practice and experiment with making choices about their learning. There are a number of ways that you can do this, depending on the other factors and needs of your course. 

• Designing an attendance policy that gives students one or two classes that they can miss without penalty gives them the option of making decisions that align with their priorities (other classes, well-being, work). 
• If your course assessment is structured around regular quizzes or problem sets, you can give students a “pass” for a week of their choosing, so that if they’re sick or have some other assignment or commitment, they can exercise their option. You can also give students a choice of when to submit assignments, so that they can think about what their schedule is like from a holistic perspective, and make a decision accordingly (caveat: I have done this and some students find the lack of a firm due date very anxiety-producing).
• Giving students options on assignments—different formats, problem sets, questions, experiments, anything—is another way to foster their autonomy, because it forces them to make a decision that relates to their learning. 
• Recruit students to help design course policies. A few years ago, I started designing the policy on extensions for assignments in collaboration with the students. I dedicate about 20 minutes of class time to have a discussion about what an extension policy is for, what kind of possibilities exist for a policy, and what seems reasonable and equitable. I add my own thoughts and put all the proposals on Canvas for a 48-hour comment period. There has never been any additional comment, and the students often come up with really good ideas about a policy for submitting late work. Once we have all agreed, I write up the policy and put it on the course website. An added benefit of doing this is that the students, as co-authors of the policy, feel bound to it, and don’t send panicked emails at the eleventh (or twelfth) hour asking for exceptions.

Foster autonomy through assignments and in-class activities: One way of fostering student autonomy is through giving them choices, either related to assignments or course material. Another is by designing assignments and learning activities in which autonomy is necessary. I have done this with assignments, activities, and deliverables in classes ranging from first-year seminars to large intro lecture courses to upper-level seminars, and even capstone courses. This has looked like:

• Having students work in small groups to design (with feedback and revision) weekly quizzes on the reading and lecture material. This requires them to know the material; to make judgements about what questions, facts, ideas, or concepts are the most important; and to shift from passive reception of learning to active meta-cognition. I also have the students write exam questions whenever I teach a course with a final examination; this allows me to see what course material they think is important and it is an excellent review exercise for them.
• Self-assessment on their own work. I do this in conjunction with peer review, asking the students to read a colleague’s work and prepare 1-2 paragraphs of feedback, which they share with both me and their colleague, and then turning their attention back to their own work, with the same reader-centered perspective, rather than their writing-centered perspective. I prepare a set of questions for them to answer as they read their own work and critique it. They answer their questions on the worksheet, which is what I collect and read. This exercise can be very effective, and it also can produce some very uncomfortable emotions in the students, as they can find non-judgmental self-critique to be difficult to access.
• Giving students the opportunity to rewrite any (or all) of their papers. This is tricky in terms of the time spent assessing student work and is only workable if you have help with grading or fewer than thirty students. But giving students this option fosters their autonomy by giving them more flexibility in how they approach the assignments and allocate their attention. The knowledge that they can choose to rewrite the paper later for a higher grade lowers the stakes of the assignment and can make them more willing to experiment with ideas. A bonus is that allowing this also habituates students to the necessity of revision as a part of the thinking process.
• Give students opportunities to learn in class without screens and from each other. Having students talk to one another in small groups about some aspect of the course material is one of the most powerful settings for learning, because learning is a relational activity. Ceding control of the lectern and letting the students talk to each other about the material shifts the classroom dynamic. It highlights the fact that autonomy is not confused with control or self-involvement; rather it is something we exercise in community and that we learn best when we learn from one another.

While these practices do not solve every challenge that student anxieties cause, they do allow my students to begin to take responsibility for their learning and for their place in the world with others.  These practices also allow me to support the students in front of me to become the students I want to be teaching.

Elly R. Truitt is an associate professor in the history & sociology of science department in Penn’s School of Arts & Sciences.

--

This essay continues the series that began in the fall of 1994 as the joint creation of the College of Arts and Sciences, the Center for Teaching and Learning and the Lindback Society for Distinguished Teaching. 

See https://almanac.upenn.edu/talk-about-teaching-and-learning-archive for previous essays.