The Key — Opening the Window to Penn’s New Open Expression Policies
On Wednesday, Provost John Jackson announced a new community-facing process for developing permanent open expression policies. This is a meaningful step toward restoring transparency and trust after nearly two years of temporary rules and a policymaking process that had departed from established governance procedures.
How did we get here?
Since May 2024, interim open expression guidelines have governed campus. As we recently discussed, the school’s administration had committed to following Penn’s formal policies to produce permanent guidelines.
In Summer 2024, the Provost’s Office assembled a task force to propose revisions to the permanent policies alongside the existing processes. But in the months that followed, there was little public visibility into drafts, deliberations, or stakeholder input. Concerns about opacity grew among faculty, students, alumni, and groups like the Association of American University Professors at Penn (AAUP-Penn).
In January, three faculty members published an op-ed in The Daily Pennsylvanian (DP) about what they described as a departure from promised procedures. Last week, AAUP-Penn published an open letter calling on Penn to increase transparency into the revision process so far, convene a 2025–2026 Committee on Open Expression (COE) to recommend policy changes, and share a draft openly in a University Council meeting.
This week’s announcement marks a shift: under increasing scrutiny and with trust wavering, the administration is now outlining a more transparent path forward.
What’s the new process?
In his email to the community, Provost Jackson said that in April of 2025, the Task Force Chairs presented their policy suggestions to the University Council, and that since then, no formal next steps had been taken. The administration is now outlining a path forward.
Provost Jackson’s email also said that next Tuesday, March 31st, Penn will publish a draft of the Guidelines on Open Expression. Through May 18th, Penn community members will be able to submit feedback via an online survey and two listening sessions.
Over the summer, Provost Jackson, the COE—which was advertised this week as seeking additional members—Faculty Senate leadership, and other campus stakeholders will review and incorporate community feedback. A revised draft will then be presented to the University Council on September 9th, followed by final approval by President Jameson.
Why does this matter?
Provost Jackson’s message did not explicitly frame this shift as a response to community concerns. But the timing and substance nonetheless come amid increased scrutiny and follow calls for greater transparency.
This is an important first step in rebuilding trust among a community that has felt excluded from policymaking that appears to sidestep university procedures. At Penn, the pursuit of excellence is strengthened by a culture grounded in trust and legitimacy, one where people feel free to express their views and are confident that those views are heard.
But signaling openness is not the same as demonstrating it.
Provost Jackson and his team now face a more difficult task: balancing their authority as decision-makers with meaningful community input. That means not only gathering feedback but also showing how it shapes outcomes.
There are clear ways to do this. To demonstrate the community’s ideas are being considered, Penn’s administration could publish aggregated feedback from survey results. It could also release notes from listening sessions publicly to demonstrate that community participation is substantive, not just symbolic.
Penn is not a direct democracy, but it should not operate as a black box. This process creates an opportunity to rebuild trust and strengthen the foundation for open expression. Realizing that opportunity will depend on whether transparency is sustained through to the final policy.
The Almanac
Curated highlights from this week’s Penn news
Penn’s VP of Government and Community Affairs outlines early strategy
This week, VP for Government and Community Affairs Leigh Whitaker discussed her first months in role with The DP, noting a significant shift in Penn’s relationship with the federal government since the start of the second Trump administration.
Whitaker said Penn is adjusting its approach with the government by bringing policymakers to campus to see firsthand the impact of federal funding on research, technology, and public health.
She also spoke directly about the proposed Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education that Penn declined to sign in October. Whitaker noted that as it was originally drafted, the Compact did not align with Penn’s mission.
So what? Penn’s reliance on the federal government spans from financial aid to research funding to Medicare and Medicaid, which together brought $5 billion to Penn Medicine in FY2025. Although Penn is expanding private-public partnerships and alternative science funding routes, its relationship with, and funding from, the government remains critical.
Penn admits undergraduate Class of 2030 from 61,000 applicants
Last night, thousands of future students were admitted to Penn’s Class of 2030. The admitted students have until May 1st to secure their spot in Penn’s class.
Penn saw a dramatic 15% drop in applicants this cycle, from 72,000 last year to 61,000 this year. This is likely due in part to demographic shifts and also to Penn’s reinstatement of its standardized testing requirement. Although 61,000 is a decrease from last cycle, it is still more than the 59,000 applicants for the Class of 2027 and the 55,000 for the Class of 2026, when testing was optional.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, standardized testing was optional for the Class of 2025 through the Class of 2029. During that time, applicants skyrocketed from 42,000 for the Class of 2024 to 56,000 for the Class of 2025.
So what? Beginning in 2022, Penn instituted a policy of withholding acceptance numbers on decision day. Even without that figure, given the smaller applicant pool, Penn’s acceptance rate likely increased from last year. However, a higher acceptance does not mean an easier acceptance or a less qualified class. Given the testing requirement, Penn’s Class of 2030 may display even higher levels of academic excellence than in recent classes.
Two Penn Carey Law professors rank in top ten most-cited legal scholars
This year’s George Mason University rankings of American legal scholars, which compare how often scholars were cited between 2019-2021, ranked Penn Law professors Jill Fisch and Elizabeth Polman as 6th and 8th, respectively. Penn is the only school to have two scholars in the top ten.
Additionally, seven Penn professors ranked in the top fifty, the same scholars who were included in the last list. Harvard Law, with nine scholars, moved to first place. Penn, the number one school for the last rankings, moved to number two.
So what? The rankings reinforce Penn’s standing as a leading center for legal scholarship. While citations highlight research impact and help shape the school’s reputation, they capture only part of academic excellence. Teaching quality remains critical to the student experience and the strength of the institution.
Thank you for reading the Franklin’s Forum newsletter! We love connecting with our readers — send us your thoughts and questions, Penn news, and ideas for future issues. If you enjoyed this edition, please spread the word by forwarding it to friends and classmates.