Chapter V

Instructional Policies

Academic Honesty

(Senate: 7/25/00, 7/27/04, 10/23/07, 6/1/10, 11/12/13, 6/2/15, 2/11/20; President: 2/5/01, 11/24/04, 11/29/07, 6/21/10, 3/19/14, 10/13/15, 7/24/20; Editorial Amendment: 8/01, 09/09)

Governing documents: Executive Order 1098, Student Conduct Procedures


The University in its quest for truth and knowledge embraces honesty and integrity. These fundamental values must not be compromised. The trust within our community and society needs to be vigilantly protected. Cheating and plagiarism can be neither justified nor condoned, as this would destroy the ideals and purposes of higher education. Students enter our University to gain the knowledge and tools necessary for contributing positively to society. Academic integrity is critical to building trust and honesty in our community and society. Therefore, the University takes seriously its responsibility to uphold academic honesty.

I. Definitions

A. Cheating
At Cal State L. A., cheating is defined as the act of obtaining or attempting to obtain credit for academic work through the use of any dishonest, fraudulent, or unauthorized means. Some courses may require that you gather evidence from outside sources in order to complete assignments. These sources should be properly referenced and cited. However when students submit work for academic credit, they are claiming it is their own original work based on knowledge and understanding obtained through course instruction and by the student's own effort. Submitting work that is in violation of this claim or using materials that are not permitted by the instructor is unauthorized. Unless explicitly provided permission by the instructor, work that comes from other sources, including other students, coursework from previous semester's websites, and digital media is considered unauthorized. Academic work encompasses assignments, practicum, examinations, including comprehensive examinations, and theses as part of a course or degree program at the University. The following examples are intended to be representative, but not all-inclusive:

  1. Examinations

  • Copying from another student's work
  • Employing signals to obtain answers from or provide answers to others
  • Knowingly obtaining, possessing, or reviewing an unauthorized copy of an examination, or attempting to do so
  • Using any materials, such as lecture notes or textbooks, including digital media, during an examination when unauthorized. Unauthorized materials could include data stored on calculators, phones, or other electronic or digital devices and media
  • Possessing crib notes at the location and during the time of the examination
  • Attempting to receive an excused absence under false pretenses to avoid taking an examination at the scheduled time
  • Obtaining assistance in answering questions on a take-home examination, unless explicitly authorized
  • Attempting to use or using bribery to obtain an undeserved grade
  • Changing an answer on a graded test and claiming the student's response to the question was incorrectly marked wrong

    b. Assignments and Other Coursework

  • Copying the work of other persons in whole or in part and claiming authorship
  • Submitting work obtained from any source that provides unauthorized materials
  • Submitting work that is not one's own
  • Submitting the same work to two or more different instructors for credit in their courses without their prior permission
  • Inventing, falsifying, or altering data for submitted work
  • Fabricating bibliographic references

B. Plagiarism
At Cal State L. A., plagiarism is defined as the act of using ideas, words, or work of another person or persons as if they were one's own, without giving proper credit to the original sources.

The following examples of plagiarism are intended to be representative, but not all-inclusive:

  • Failing to give credit via proper citations for others' ideas and concepts, data and information, statements and phrases, and/or interpretations and conclusions
  • Failing to use quotation marks when quoting directly from another, whether it be a paragraph, a sentence, or a part thereof
  • Paraphrasing the expressions of thought by others without appropriate quotation marks or attribution
  • Assembling parts from various works and submitting the synthesis or single paper as one's own creation
  • Representing another's artistic/scholarly works, such as musical compositions, computer programs, photographs, paintings, drawings, sculptures, or similar works as one's own

C. Misrepresentation
Knowingly furnishing false academic information to a University official, faculty member, or campus office is subject to discipline for academic dishonesty.

The following examples are intended to be representative, but not all-inclusive:

  • Providing fraudulent transcripts
  • Providing fake letters of recommendation
  • Falsely marking hours or attendance for a practicum
  • Taking an examination in place of another individual
  • Asking or arranging for someone to take an examination in one's own place
  • Misrepresenting the authorship of any submitted work

D. Collusion
Any student who intentionally helps another student perform any of the above acts of cheating, plagiarism or misrepresentation is subject to discipline for academic dishonesty.

The following examples are intended to be representative, but not all-inclusive:

  • Sharing course materials or examinations or solutions with other individuals without authorization
  • The sharing and/or uploading of instructor-provided course materials (e.g., assignments, exams, quizzes, etc.) to student groups and/or digital media outlets, including external resources sites (e.g., Course Hero, Chegg, Quizlet, Studypool, Google Drive, etc.) without the written permission of the instructor
  • Asking or arranging for someone to take an examination in one's own place

II. Consequences and Sanctions
Violations of academic honesty have a dual aspect, constituting both a breach of ethics and a form of academic non-performance.  Hence the consequences of violating this policy may fall into two categories.  Addressing the violation as an academic matter does not preclude the imposition of further administrative sanctions.

Academic Consequences:
Faculty have the right to establish the standards by which the academic performance of students will be evaluated, including the consequences of students not meeting some portion or all of the academic requirements of a course through acts of cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation or collusion. These consequences may include but are not limited to assigning a lowered grade, zero or "F" on an individual assignment, or lowering the student's grade or assigning an "F" in the course.  Faculty may alternatively permit the student to repeat an assignment/test or complete and submit additional assignments.  However, before these consequences can be effected, the faculty member shall follow the reporting procedures outlined in section III.

Administrative Sanctions:
In addition to academic consequences imposed by faculty members or other reporting parties, the University can impose administrative sanctions. Cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation or collusion, in connection with an academic program or campus are subject to the Student Conduct Code and may warrant actions such as, but not necessarily limited to,

  • Expulsion
  • Suspension
  • Probation
  • Withdrawal of a degree
  • Restitution

Although sanctions can be imposed for a single offense, repeat offenders will receive particular consideration for administrative sanctions. Multiple offenses committed in more than one course, even when discovered simultaneously, shall be considered repeat offenses.

III. Reporting Procedures
For the purposes of reporting findings of academic dishonesty, the ‘reporting party’ may refer to a probationary, tenured or temporary faculty member, a librarian, a person in an academic administrative position, a counselor, coach, administrator of a testing center or another person in a position of authority over a student’s academic work.  Throughout this policy, the term ‘faculty member’ shall be used to stand in for any reporting party.  Teaching assistants, graduate assistants and staff should report allegations of academic dishonesty to their authorized university supervisor. Allegations shall be made against individual students rather than groups of students.

When a faculty member suspects that a student has committed an academically dishonest act, it is the faculty member’s responsibility to take the following steps:

  1. The faculty member must first carefully consider the evidence of the apparent dishonesty.  A perception that is not supported by reasonable evidence, will not suffice. Examples (not necessarily comprehensive) of evidence sufficient to pursue action are:

    • Documentation regarding the source of text which the student has used without proper attribution or has attempted to represent as his/her own work

    • A demonstrably marked difference in the writing style of the student, as compared to his/her work on previous assignments

    • Testimony from others regarding a student’s use of dishonest means to fulfill the assignment at hand

    • Firsthand observation of the student engaging in a dishonest act, in a situation in which the student cannot effectively deny that the act took place

    • Admission by the student that he or she undertook a dishonest act in fulfillment of the assignment at hand

    • A suspicious degree of similarity in work done by different students

    Faculty members are encouraged to discuss any perception of dishonesty and the evidentiary basis for an action with their department/division chair or school director and/or associate dean prior to discussing perceptions of wrongdoing with the affected student.

  2. When satisfied that a reasonable evidentiary standard has been met and as soon as possible after discovering the alleged violation, the faculty member should arrange an office conference in order to inform the student of the allegations and the intended academic consequences of the violations. At the conference, the student should be informed of the supporting evidence, the intended academic consequences, and the Academic Honesty Policy.

    In the event that the student disputes the findings of academic dishonesty, he or she shall be given the opportunity to respond (orally or writing).  The faculty member must consider any information or evidence that the student presents during or after the conference, and determine whether or not such information or evidence mitigates or refutes the charge of academic dishonesty.  In every case the student shall have ten (10) days beyond the date of the conference to respond to the allegations, before a report is made (as outlined in #3, below).

    At the conference, the student should also be informed of the University’s Grade Appeals/Academic Grievance Policy.  Under that policy, the student may appeal the determination that he or she has committed academic dishonesty, the academic consequences stemming from such a determination. Administrative sanctions may be appealed through the CSU Student Conduct Code.

  3. If after consideration of all evidence (including any provided by the student), it is determined that a preponderance of the evidence favors a finding of academic dishonesty, the faculty member shall proceed as directed below.

    The faculty member shall report the finding of academic dishonesty to the Vice President for Student Life or designee and the Student Conduct Administrator via The On-Line Academic Dishonesty Report Form. This report shall be the statement of charges against the student and the record of the academic consequence(s) imposed; all supporting documentation shall be attached to the form and made available to the student. If a student appeals a grade or other adverse consequence of an allegation of academic dishonesty, this report and the related documentation shall be subject to review.

In cases where the student fails to attend the scheduled conference to discuss the alleged dishonesty, or when the alleged dishonesty is detected at the close of the quarter and the faculty member has not been successful in a good-faith effort to contact the student, an Academic Dishonesty Report Form describing the alleged incident and documents supporting the allegation shall be submitted on-line to the Vice President for Student Life or designee and the Student Conduct Administrator and made available to the student.

In cases where the faculty member cannot, for serious and compelling reasons, participate in any one or more parts of the above process, the department/division chair or school director shall represent the reporting party.

IV. Confidentiality
All parties to the initial conference between a faculty member and a student accused of academic dishonesty and all subsequent deliberations regarding incidents of academic dishonesty have the right to expect that such deliberations will occur in a setting of strictest confidentiality.

Concomitant with this right of confidentiality is the obligation of all parties to refrain from any discussions of these issues regarding cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation or collusion outside of the informal and formal conferences and meetings as outlined elsewhere in this document and in related policies (including the Grade Appeal/Academic Grievance Policy). Confidentiality shall be maintained unless a legitimate need to know is established by the department/division chair or school director in order for the faculty to complete their responsibilities as University employees or in any legal action, and in a manner consistent with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (Student Records Administration - 011, Sec 5.8) and any other applicable law. The department/division chair or school director may consult with, or request documentation of a student's history of academic dishonesty from the Student Conduct Administrator only on a strict need to know basis. Violators of this principle of confidentiality are themselves subject to university disciplinary action.

In the matter of student records and according to Federal and State privacy laws, students have the right to protections against improper disclosure of personal information. However, it is permissible for transcripts of student academic records to contain information regarding a student's academic status including such disciplinary actions as suspension or expulsion. Suspension of one academic year or more shall be entered on the student’s transcript permanently without exception; this requirement shall not be waived in connection with a settlement agreement.


Any threats or acts of retaliation against any member of the faculty or staff as a consequence of implementing this policy on Academic Honesty will be cause for disciplinary action under section 41301, Title 5, California Code of Regulations, in addition to civil and criminal liabilities.

Student Grievance Procedures

The procedures by which students may seek redress of non-academic grievances are detailed in Appendix H, "Student Grievance Procedures."

Grade Appeals/Academic Grievance Policy

 (Senate: 6/1/10, 6/4/13, 7/13/13 [EA]; President: 6/21/10, 7/25/13)

Governing Document: Executive Order 1037 and 1074

 I.       Introduction

The purpose of this policy is to establish fair and equitable means by which matriculated students may appeal assigned course grades and other Academic decisions.  Non-Academic grievances filed by matriculated students should follow the procedures outlined in the Student Grievance Procedures.  Charges of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation filed by students or applicants for admission to the University are addressed in a separate policy.

Faculty members at CSULA have the sole right and responsibility to assign grades.  It is assumed that the grades assigned by faculty members are free from error, prejudice, or capriciousness.  In the absence of compelling reasons to believe that one of these criteria is missing, the grade assigned by the instructor of record is to be considered final and correct.  It is the responsibility of anyone appealing a grade to demonstrate otherwise.

Throughout this policy, the terms ‘day’ and ‘days’ shall refer to academic work days (i.e., any day, Monday through Friday, on which the University is open for business and faculty are on duty). Academic work days do not include holidays or term breaks.

II.     Basis for Appeal

It is presumed that the assignment of final course grades and other academic decisions result from consistent, fair, and equitable application of clearly articulated standards and procedures. Students appealing such decisions must demonstrate that the standards and procedures were not clearly stated or that they were not applied in a consistent, fair and equitable manner. An appeal may not be based on a disagreement with the standards and procedures themselves.  Further, an instructor's evaluation of a student's work and performance in that instructor's course must not be over-ridden merely because of a difference of opinion or evaluative judgment, provided it is formed in accordance with the generally accepted canons of the relevant discipline and of the University and the Department/Division/School wherein said course is offered.

An appeal may be initiated only on a claim that the decision/final grade was based on:

(1) Clerical error;
(2) Capricious or prejudicial evaluation;
(3) Inconsistent or inequitably applied standards for evaluation; or
(4) A finding of academic dishonesty that the student disputes.

The burden of proof in the appeal of a grade or other academic decision is on the student. In every appeal, the student must present evidence that the grade/decision being appealed was based on one of the first three conditions articulated above, or (in the case of the fourth possible basis), evidence that the allegation of academic dishonesty was not warranted.

A student may appeal a final course grade or a grade on a Comprehensive Examination or a project (e.g., art exhibition) or thesis required for graduation. Students who believe that individual exams and/or assignments demonstrate evidence of prejudicial, capricious, or arbitrary grading may appeal the grade assigned in individual assignments only insofar as those grades had direct bearing on the final grade.  In every case, the student must attempt to resolve a grade dispute informally before filing a formal Grade Appeal.

Students may also appeal other types of academic decisions. These include, but are not limited to: the decision to refuse admission to or to disqualify a matriculated student from a major or program; academic consequences (in addition to course grades) that result from accusations of academic dishonesty; and academic probation, suspension, or disqualification.

III. Process

Before a student may initiate a formal Grade Appeal based on a clerical error, capricious or prejudicial evaluation, inconsistent or inequitably applied evaluation standards, he or she must attempt to resolve the issue informally.  All other Academic appeals, including findings of academic dishonesty, shall proceed immediately to the Formal Appeal Process, outlined in Section B, below.

  1. Informal Process

Students who believe that they have a basis for a grade appeal (as outlined in Section II) should notify the course instructor in writing, within twenty (20) days of the beginning of the term (excluding summer) immediately following the formal posting of the grade. If the instructor is not responsive or is unavailable to respond to a student’s good faith efforts to contact him/her, the student should contact the department/division chair or school director (hereafter the chair) in which the course was offered.  In the event that the instructor is not available to discuss informal resolution of the Grade Dispute with the student even with the intervention of the chair, the Formal Appeal process may be initiated.

If the student and instructor are not able to resolve the problem to the satisfaction of both parties, the student should discuss the assigned grade with the chair or other appropriate supervisor. This discussion is a prerequisite to proceeding to the Formal Appeal Process.  However, if the chair is the instructor against whom the student wishes to file the Grade Appeal, the student may bypass this step of the informal resolution process and either request mediation by the college Dean or proceed directly to the Formal Appeal Process.

The chair shall reasonably attempt to facilitate a resolution to the grade dispute.  The involved parties are strongly encouraged to participate and cooperate with the chair’s attempt to resolve the dispute. The chair may consult an appropriate department/division/school committee to hear Grade Appeals or other Academic Grievances. This department/division/school committee shall recommend a resolution to the chair, who will share this information with the student and the instructor.

If the grade dispute cannot be informally resolved within the department/division/school, any of parties may request mediation from the dean or designee.

If the grade dispute is informally resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the two parties and the resolution is that the final course grade is to be changed, the instructor shall complete a Change of Grade form within three (3) academic days of resolving the matter. No further action under this policy need be taken. If the grade dispute cannot be informally resolved or is not completed by the end of the term during which it was initiated, the student may elect to proceed to the formal grade appeal process.

If at any point in the informal process a student makes an allegation of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation based on age, disability, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, genetic information, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, veteran status, or any other protected status by state or federal law, the student should be referred to the director of the Office for Equity and Diversity and provided with a copy of Executive Order 1074.

  1. Formal Appeal Process

A formal appeal of a course grade or other academic decision must be initiated no later than the end of the academic term (excluding summer) following formal notification to the student of the decision or grade.  For the purposes of this policy, the posting of course grades constitutes formal notification to students of course grades.  For all other decisions, formal notification will normally be in the form of written correspondence from the appropriate university, college, or department/division/school authority.

A formal appeal is to be filed in the office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs (hereafter, the Provost). A formal appeal must include (1) the Academic Grievance Appeal Form (2) a copy of the grade report (for grade appeals) or notification of the decision being appealed (for all other academic appeals); (3) a written statement clearly presenting the basis for the appeal; and (4) any documentation that supports the appeal (such as the course syllabus, exams, papers, assignments, or other corroborating documents).

The University Academic Appeals Board shall review all appeals. The Board shall determine, within twenty (20) days of receipt of the written request, whether or not the grievance or appeal warrants further review.  If the Board determines that the case does not warrant further review, the board shall notify the student of this decision, in writing.  With the exception of appeals as described in Section V, below, this decision shall be final and binding.

If the Board determines that a hearing is warranted, the chair of the Board shall notify, in writing, both the student and the respondent of this determination; notice to the respondent shall invite a written response prior to the date of the hearing. When the appeal concerns a course grade, the respondent shall be the instructor of record for the course.  When an appeal concerns the grade on a comprehensive exam or a thesis or project, the respondent shall be the chair of the exam, thesis, or project committee.  For all other academic appeals, the respondent shall be the person upon whose authority the decision was rendered (e.g., the chair if the decision was to disqualify the appellant from the program or major). In the event that an instructor is not available to participate in the formal process, the department/division chair or school director shall appoint another instructor whose area of expertise most closely approximates that of the instructor of record (and/or that most closely matches the material covered in the course), to represent the interests of the instructor of record. Where the despondent is not clearly identified, the dean of the college or the Provost shall designate the appropriate party to respond on behalf of the college or the University, respectively.

The notification shall specify the proposed date and time of the hearing and shall invite both parties to appear at that time, if they wish to present testimony or further evidence not already included in the written record. The Board shall appoint, from among its membership, a Hearing Committee consisting of two faculty members and one student member (if the student appellant has authorized student participation in the hearing).  In no case shall a member of a hearing committee be from the same department/division/school from which the appeal originated.

The Hearing Committee shall convene and, if necessary, hold any hearing(s) within twenty (20) days of the determination that a hearing is warranted.  The committee shall consider the documentation submitted by the appellant, as well as any written response submitted by the respondent.  The committee may call witnesses before them, if they determine that such witnesses could provide relevant information not available in the written documents before them.  If a student is given a hearing before the committee, the respondent must also be offered the opportunity to be heard by the committee.

Although in grade appeals the presumption is that the assigned grade is correct, should the Hearing Committee find (after conducting a hearing) that the evidence indicates otherwise, the Hearing Committee may determine that the grade should be changed. Similarly, the presumption is that the academic decisions are made fairly, equitably, and in good faith; however, should the evidence indicate otherwise (after a hearing has been conducted), the Hearing Committee may determine that a decision should be reversed. In all cases, the Appeal Board’s authority (as well as that of convened Hearing Committees) is limited to actions consistent with the policies of the California State University system and those of California State University, Los Angeles.

The Hearing Committee’s deliberations and decision(s) in Academic Appeals shall be limited to the following issues: (1) whether, in fact, the evidence presented establishes that the grade assigned or the academic decision in question was erroneous, capricious, or prejudicial, or involved the inconsistent or inequitable application of standards for evaluation; and if it is judged that the evidence does establish that one of these conditions was operative, (2) the appropriate academic remedy.

Student members of the Hearing Committee shall be limited to discussion of (1).  Only faculty members of the committee shall establish the answer to (2).  In every case, the committee’s decision shall be bound by any other relevant campus or CSU system policies.

The Hearing Committee shall deliberate on the case and issue a finding within ten (10) days of the conclusion of the hearing(s) related to the case.  The Hearing Committee’s decision shall be formalized in writing and  addressed to the appellant, with copies to the respondent, the college dean, and the Provost (or designee, as the executive secretary of the Academic Appeals Board), and shall include a summary of their findings, the final decision, and the reason(s) for this decision.  A copy of the Hearing Committee’s findings shall be placed in a file in the Provost’s office.  At the subsequent meeting of the Academic Appeals Board, the executive secretary shall report on all matters resolved by the Hearing Committee(s) convened since the previous meeting.

In the event that the Hearing Committee finds in the appellant’s favor, the Provost or designee shall ensure that within ten (10) academic days of receipt of the committee’s finding a Change of Grade form is completed or other remedy initiated.  In cases in which the instructor of record of a course refuses to sign the change of grade form, the college dean shall complete the form in his/her place.

Grade appeals that allege discrimination, harassment or retaliation based on age, disability, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, genetic information, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, veteran status, or any other protected status by state or federal law, shall proceed concurrently (I) under this grade grievance/academic appeals policy, and (II) under Executive Order 1074, as mediated by the Office for Equity and Diversity.  However, the grade appeal procedure shall be placed in abeyance until such time as an investigation by the Office of Equity and Diversity (and any related appeals) into the allegation of discrimination, harassment or retaliation is completed.  The final determination regarding whether discrimination, harassment or retaliation occurred, will be provided to the University Academic Appeals Board.  The Board shall be bound by such determination, with respect to whether discrimination, harassment or retaliation occurred, when considering the grade appeal request under Executive Order 1037.  Any finding of discrimination, harassment or retaliation may be relevant to the issue of the grade appeal.

IV. Confidentiality

All discussions and deliberations of the Academic Appeals Board and of Hearing Committees shall be held in strict confidentiality. Confidentiality shall be maintained unless a legitimate need to know is established by the Hearing Committee chair or in order for the committee members to complete their deliberations in the matter at hand or as required by any legal action, and in a manner consistent with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (Student Records Administration - 011, Sec 5.8) and any other applicable law.  The Hearing Committee chair may consult with or request documentation of a student's history of academic dishonesty from the Judicial Affairs Officer, and may apprise Hearing Committee members of such information only on a strict need to know basis.

No student member of the Academic Appeals Board or a Hearing Committee may be apprised of any academic information concerning another student (including grades or other confidential information) unless that student has expressly permitted such disclosure by signing the disclosure statement on the formal Academic Appeals Form.

V. Finality of Hearing Committee Decisions and Conditions under which Appeals are Allowed

The Hearing Committee’s decision is final and binding on all parties.  However, any party to the dispute (either the student or the respondent) may appeal a committee decision on grounds of procedural violations.  If either party alleges that the procedures outlined in this policy were violated, they must present a written appeal to the President outlining their allegations within ten (10) days of notification of the decision.  The President (or designee) shall then investigate only the issue as to whether there were procedural violations in the handling of the appeal; if there is a finding of procedural violations, the President shall send the case back to the first step of the formal appeal (outlined in Section III B, above) to begin again.

VI. Annual Reports and Record Retention

The Provost shall retain for a period of three years after the appeal has been exhausted each appeal that has been filed with the Academic Appeals Board, and a copy of all documentation submitted initially as well as at any time during the proceedings.  After three years, the file shall be destroyed.

Annually, at the end of each academic year, the Provost shall report to the President and to the Academic Senate the number of formal academic appeals received, as well as the nature and resolution of each appeal.

VII. Timelines

The timelines in this policy may be extended by the Provost, if the appellant can present documentation of extenuating circumstances that prevented a timely filing of the appeal (or a timely response at a later stage) or if the Appeals Board or Hearing Committee provides compelling reasons that warrant such an extension.

University Academic Appeals Board

(Senate: 6/1/10, 3/8/11; President: 6/21/10, 3/29/11)

The University Academic Appeals Board is the primary campus entity concerned with “due process” of academic matters for the students and instructors at California State University, Los Angeles, particularly in regards to the assignment of grades and other academic decisions rendered by the faculty and affecting individual students. The Board hears grade appeals based on a student’s belief that an instructor has made a clerical error, been capricious or prejudicial in the evaluation of the student’s work, or inconsistently or inequitably applied evaluation standards.   In addition, the Board hears appeals in which a student disputes a finding of academic dishonesty that has led to the imposition of academic consequences.


Provost (or designee), ex officio (non-voting)
Student Judicial Affairs Officer, ex officio (voting)
One faculty member, elected from each college, for staggered 2-year terms; plus two faculty members elected at-large, for staggered 2-year terms.  Faculty members in the Library and Student Affairs are considered the same as a college for his purpose.
Four students with at least junior standing, to be appointed by Associated Students, Inc.

Charge: The Academic Appeals Board shall be responsible for the conduct of all student grade appeals and academic grievances that reach the University level, as outlined in the University’s Grade Appeals/Academic Grievance policy.

The Academic Appeals Board reports directly to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.

The Academic Appeals Board shall convene at least monthly, on the first Friday of each month, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

The Board shall review formal grade appeals and academic grievances and shall determine (by a simple majority vote) which formal grievances warrant a hearing at the university level.  If the board so determines, then a Hearing Committee (drawn from the Appeals Board membership, as specified in the Grade Appeals/Academic Grievance policy) shall be convened to hear the case.

The proceedings of the University Academic Appeals Board and any Hearing Committees convened shall be governed by the relevant procedures outlined in the University’s Administrative Manual.

Student Disciplinary Procedures

The procedures governing hearings in matters of student discipline were established for The California State University by Chancellor's Executive Order 970 of February, 2006. These procedures are detailed in Appendix I, "Student Disciplinary Procedures."

Access to Records of Individual Library Users

(Senate: 4/21/71, 11/15/94; President 4/30/71, 3/3/95; Editorial Amendment: 9/99)

Purpose. This policy is intended to protect individual users of the John F. Kennedy Memorial Library, California State University, Los Angeles, from improper disclosure or misuse of information about books charged to them and their use of the library.

Modern library operations make it feasible for the library to accumulate extensive statistical information about library use, including data on borrowing patterns of different classes of users. Such information is extremely helpful in analyzing the effectiveness of the library's collections and services, in predicting future use patterns and users' needs, and in administrative applications.

The library is aware of its responsibility to safeguard the confidentiality of information about any individual's use of the library. This responsibility includes but is not limited to the observance of the following guidelines.

Procedures. The details of an individual's borrowing history will not be compiled unless legally required and will not be publicized, nor released to any individual or agency external to the library, nor released to unauthorized personnel within the library. This prohibition will not apply to the extent that it is necessary for the library to maintain records of delinquent borrowers and to transmit information about fines and other charges incurred by such borrowers to the University Financial Services Office for collection. However, such records will be maintained in confidence and will not be available to persons other than those involved in the assessment and collection of such charges.

When, for administrative purposes, the library prepares analyses of the borrowing history of users, the names of persons involved in such studies will not be used. Circulation records that include identification of individual borrowers will not be accessible to any individual or agency external to the library nor to unauthorized personnel within the library.

Once a borrowing transaction is completed, no records will be kept which will permit the circulation of history of library materials to be related to the identity of individual library users.

Teacher Disclosure Policy

(Senate: 3/18/65, 2/27/79; President: 5/27/65, 3/8/79)

When interrogated directly by prospective employers of any kind, or indirectly by the University's administrative officers on behalf of prospective employers, a professor can safely answer questions which the professor finds clearly concerned with the student's competence and fitness for the job. But questions relating to the student's political, religious, moral, sexual, or social beliefs, opinions, or activities may jeopardize the professor-student relationship and constitute an infringement of the student's academic freedom. The University will support any professor's decision not to respond to questions which that professor considers to be of this type.

To guard against the danger of putting their students in an unfavorable light, professors should preface each written questionnaire or oral interview with a brief pro forma statement explaining that the academic policy to which they subscribe precludes their answering certain types of questions, and that no presumptive inferences about individual students should be drawn because of their adherence to this established university policy.

There should be no exceptions to the rule not to respond to such questions, even though an individual student might wish it. Personal expediency should not be permitted to override a principle which seeks to ensure the kind of intellectual climate in which unhampered inquiry and uninhibited learning can take place.

It is recommended that copies of such a statement be made available to professors for use, through their department/division/school offices. The text of such a statement might read: "It is my practice, in accordance with expressed university policy, not to answer questions relating to the student's political, religious, moral, sexual, or social beliefs, opinions, or activities because answering such questions tends to jeopardize the professor-student relationship and often constitutes an infringement of the student's academic freedom."

Communications Code

The regulations governing the publications and broadcasting activities subsidized by the Associated Students and affiliated with an instructional department/division/school of the University are detailed in Appendix J, "Communications Code."

Field Trips

In order to provide information to the University concerning the location of an instructor or a student in case of an emergency, and to protect the faculty member and the student in case of an accident, faculty members are asked to notify the dean's office, after approval by the department/division chair or school director, prior to leaving on such a trip.

S-Factor Field Experience Courses

(Senate: 8/11/87; President: 7/25/88)

A minimum of three hours per week per unit is required of students earning credit in field experience courses. The Catalog description of each s-factor field experience course must contain a statement describing the required number of hours for that course.

Division of Intercollegiate Athletics Normal Progress Statement

(Senate: 9/9/83, 6/3/86, 1/25/00; President: 10/21/83, 9/2/86, 4/4/00; Editorial Amendment: 8/01, 5/15)

In order to be eligible for competition in intercollegiate athletics, student-athletes must earn units in courses acceptable toward a specific degree program at a minimum rate of 24 units between seasons of competition.  As prescribed by NCAA regulations, seventy-five percent of these units (18) must be earned in fall and spring semesters.  For students who have not declared a major, no more than one-third (8) of the yearly minimum number of units may be electives.  At least two-thirds (16) of the units must be in general education and required University courses.   For students who have declared a major, at least two-thirds (16) of the units must be in general education, required University, or major courses, and free elective courses up to 8 units annually are permitted only to the extent that the particular degree program accommodates them.  Repeated courses may be counted once for normal progress, unless repetition of the course for credit has been authorized in the University Catalog.  Repeated courses and incomplete courses, when completed, will be applied toward normal progress requirements in accordance with NCAA rules.

In the calculation of the required 16 unit major, general education, and required University courses, only courses in the primary major will be included.  Courses taken in a minor, a second major, and professional education courses will be considered elective.  In the freshman year only, students may count up to 12 units of satisfactorily completed precollegiate courses acceptable for any degree program.

Student-athletes who transfer from other institutions shall be subject to the above minimum academic progress schedule upon enrollment at Cal State, L.A.

A minimum overall collegiate grade point average of 2.0 and a minimum Cal State L.A. grade point average of 2.0 must be maintained at all times in order to remain eligible for competition.  A necessary condition for practice, as well as for competition, shall be enrollment in no fewer than 12 units of coursework, unless an official graduation check form indicates that the student-athlete needs fewer than 12 units to graduate.

Student athletes must formally declare a major by the beginning of the fifth semester of collegiate enrollment.  Fifth semester student-athletes will be declared eligible by the Faculty Athletics Representative only after receipt of:

  1. Evidence of the student-athlete's formally declared major.
  2. A copy of the student-athlete's department/division/school advisement form signed by the department/division/school advisor.

In the case of fall sports that begin competition prior to mid-September, juniors and seniors who have not submitted this material will be ineligible for competition.

Student-athletes who change a major will be required to supply an updated advisement form to the Faculty Athletics Representative.  After a change of major, a student-athlete may meet the normal academic progress requirements if the units earned prior to the change are acceptable toward the degree previously sought, and the units earned from the time of the change are acceptable toward the new desired degree.   This means that changing a major is not a valid reason for failing to meet normal progress.

Special Action Graduate Admission Policy

(Senate: 10/25/83; President: 11/8/83; Editorial Amendment: 9/99, 9/00, 8/01, 4/15)

Applicants who were in good standing at the last college attended but who do not meet the mandated admission requirements may petition for admission by special action if acceptable alternative evidence exists that the applicant possesses sufficient academic, professional and other potential pertinent to the applicant's proposed graduate objective.

Special action admission may be granted by the appropriate college graduate dean upon the recommendation of both the proposed major department/division/school and the college graduate studies committee.

Students admitted by special action to Master's degree programs will be admitted to conditionally classified graduate status and must complete specific prerequisites and a minimum of 9 semester units of qualifying courses specified by the major department/division/school and college graduate dean. The grade point average for qualifying and prerequisite courses is established by the department and must not be less than 3.0. Students admitted to non-degree programs must complete special requirements as designated by the major department/division/school and college graduate dean.

Graduates of Unaccredited Institutions

(Senate: 3/9/93, 10/11/94; President: 10/25/94, 3/3/95; Editorial Amendment: 9/00, 8/01, 1/21/15)

A degree from an unaccredited college is not recognized for admission in postbaccalaureate or graduate standing. Graduates of such institutions may be admitted in undergraduate standing if course work is deemed acceptable and meets undergraduate admission requirements, and may be granted postbaccalaureate or graduate standing upon satisfaction of the following conditions:

  • Meet the minimum university, college, and department/division/school requirements for admission to classified graduate standing in a degree program.

  • Complete a minimum of three upper division courses (at least 9 semester units), specified in advance by the proposed major department/division/school, with a grade point average of at least B (3.0). These courses may not be 5000-level. Upon recommendation of the department/division/school and the college graduate dean, 4000-level qualifying courses may be applied to the master's degree program.

  • Receive the written recommendation of the department/division/school in which the degree is sought and of the appropriate college graduate dean.

An applicant with a bachelor's degree from an unaccredited institution and a master's degree from an accredited institution may be admitted as a regular postbaccalaureate or graduate student, assuming that all other requirements have been met and that appropriate approvals have occurred.

Admission of International (Visa) Undergraduate Students

(Senate: 12/9/80, 8/5/86, 2/10/02; President: 3/5/81, 5/5/87, 5/19/04; Editorial Amendment: 8/01, 1/21/15)

International (visa) students (and all others who are not permanent U.S. residents) will be admitted to Cal State L.A. only if they meet one of the following requirements:

  1. Completion of two years of acceptable college work (56 semester units or equivalent) with a minimum 2.4 grade point average as evaluated by the University (A=4.0), an acceptable course in English composition, speech, critical thinking, and mathematics with a minimum grade of C in each course, and a minimum 550 paper-based or 213 computer-based score on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL);or
  2. Graduation from a foreign high school where the language of instruction was not exclusively English, (with a minimum 3.0 grade point average/equivalent to a U.S. B average, as evaluated by the University), a minimum 2.4 grade point average in any college work attempted (as evaluated by the University), and a minimum 550 paper-based or 213 computer-based TOEFL score. The academic eligibility requirement for high school work is the same as for graduates of high schools in California, although submission of ACT or SAT scores is not necessary, unless specifically requested by the University.   Foreign high school equivalencies will be determined by the University; or
  3. Graduation from a foreign high school where the language of instruction was not exclusively English, (with a minimum 3.0 grade point average/equivalent to a U.S. B average, as evaluated by the University), and a minimum 550 paper-based or 213 computer-based TOEFL score. The academic eligibility requirement is the same as for graduates of high schools in California, although submission of ACT or SAT scores is not necessary. Foreign high school equivalencies will be determined by the University.

The Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) is required of all students, regardless of citizenship, who have not attended schools at the high school level or above for at least three full years of full-time study where English is the principal language of instruction.  The TOEFL exam may be taken as a paper exam or via computer.

The Admissions Office will consider variation from the stated minimum TOEFL score requirement only for those students who have a 3.0 grade point average as evaluated by the University and whose TOEFL score is not more than ten points below the stated minimum for the paper-based test, and not more than six points below the state minimum for the computer-based test. In exceptional cases the Director of Admissions and Records may waive the TOEFL requirement upon the recommendation of the applicant’s major department/division/school.

The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS) requires F-1 visa undergraduate students to carry a minimum study load of 9 semester units. International students must have advance proof of adequate financial resources, be in good health, and comply with all University and U.S. and BCIS regulations. The University international student office should be consulted for information on visas, housing and related matters.
Application forms for international students, available from the Admissions Office, should be filed at least six months before the beginning of the desired semester of attendance.


(Senate: 7/31/73, 3/9/76, 11/22/88, 11/9/93; President: 8/13/73, 4/9/76, 1/19/89, 12/13/93)

For the health of all members of the university community, smoking is prohibited in California State University, Los Angeles buildings or leased space within buildings shared by others.

Academic Senate | Faculty Handbook | Chapter 5 TOC | Back to Top