Illustration by Wynter Somera
HED: ‘Her Crime Was an Excessive Use of the Copy Machine’
DEK: Letters in support of suspended faculty member Kelly Xi
Kelly Xi, a lecturer in Contemporary Practices, Art Tech and Sound Practices, and the Low-Residency MFA, was suspended from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago on Dec. 3, 2024, due to allegations of solicitation, misuse of printing resources, and involvement with a Student Support Letter for the non-tenure faculty contract , according to Xi. The Support Letter led to Xi’s immediate ban from campus and the museum, which became permanent Dec 23.
The grievance revolves around allegations of policy violation and infringement on academic freedom. Xi said she was targeted for supporting student anti-war movements and engaging in lawful political activities, including organizing and creating educational materials for student collective actions, such as a SITE exhibition, a Palestine teach-in, zines, and a student walkout. . According to legal documents procured by F Newsmagazine, the provost initiated an investigation into Xi’s printing activities, accusing her of non-academic use, which Xi contests. She said she used printing resources to support student organizations, protests, and educational initiatives — a common practice in academic settings, according to Xi.
SAIC quietly released a new demonstration policy at the beginning of the school year that bans students, employees, and staff from distributing “non-museum or school sanctioned materials on its premises.”
Xi said the investigation lacked due process, as it was removed from her department head’s jurisdiction and passed on to John Pack, the head of campus security. F Newsmagazine reached out to Pack for comment regarding the investigation but did not hear back directly by the time of publication. According to a letter from theAmerican Association of University Professors looking into SAIC’s violation of due process and academic freedom,Xi was not informed of specific allegations, and her union representative was misled regarding the nature of the meeting with the provost, infringing her Weingarten rights.(Weingarten rights ensure workers to have a representative be present in any meeting with a supervisor that they believe could lead to discipline.)
SAIC’s director of communication and marketing Bree Witt responded to questions directed to President Jiseon Isbara and Provost Martin Berger regarding the violation of the Weingarten rights, violation of student privacy, and the administrations motivations behind Xi’s case. Witt said, “It is our practice not to comment on personnel matters, just as we would not comment on student disciplinary issues to the press; however, I can definitively state that we have never violated anyone’s Weingarten Rights in the course of disciplinary proceedings. We have a long history of civic engagement and supporting members of our community who wish to express their views, as long as they do so in a way that does not violate our policies.”
Xi said she believes surveillance footage of her activities was used improperly during the investigation to discredit her integrity one month after the event in question. In a notice from Xi’s lawyer to the school, the legal team alleged that Pack tracked every one of Xi’s print jobs dated from May 3.
According to Xi, student supporters are allegedly also under disciplinary investigation by Pack for expressing solidarity in a letter of support for the non-tenure track faculty contract — using Google Drive surveillance to frame organizing activity as theft. In response to F’s questions, Witt said, “No student has been disciplined for any extracurricular activities where there was no policy violation.” The school administration has not shared what the policy violation in question is.
Xi has requested a full report of the allegations and evidence, but she said communication has been blocked by Pack. Pack could not be reached for a comment to confirm this. She said that these actions undermine her right to academic freedom and freedom of expression, especially in the context of faculty-student solidarity and organizing, which the investigation has chosen to regard as Theft. Her case highlights concerns over retaliation, academic censorship, and the violation of faculty due process rights.
The following are excerpts from a few faculty letters supporting her right to grievance:
Kelly’s crime was an excessive use of the copy machine. She had used the school’s copier in
order to support students protesting the genocide in Gaza. She was there to help them exercise
their freedom of speech and express their horror at the events they were witnessing unfolding in
Palestine.
I find the school’s reaction — criminalizing one of its best and most dedicated lecturers and top
alumni, exerting such brutal and humiliating dismissal tactics — utterly shameful. It undermines the values the school professes to stand behind: of tolerance, plurality of voices, diversity of views, freedom of expression, and creative support of our students.
Tirtza Even,
Professor, The School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Kelly was my student at SAIC before she was faculty here, and I learned very quickly how brilliant, articulate, creative, committed, and vital she was. She earned my admiration even further because her energies were directed by an acute sense for global and local injustice. Of course, she has been involved in the student encampment for Palestine! Of course, she has been involved in the unionization efforts! Anyone who isn’t should at the very least understand that we have the right to do so, and they should not unfairly persecute those students and faculty members willing to direct their efforts in such necessary ways.
I have always applauded Kelly, and I will continue to. I am horrified by her treatment at the hands of the SAIC administration: an institution where I myself was a student long ago, and where I have been proud to teach for the past two decades. I am not so proud now.
Lori Waxman
Senior Lecturer, Department of Art History
Kelly has a gift for connecting with students where they are, talking to them with sensitivity for
their place and experience. I spoke to a number of students about her in preparation for this
letter. What follows are some of the things they told me. (Respecting student concerns, I’m not
using their names. I am quoting three students.)
“She is a teacher both inside and outside of the classroom. Whenever there’s a discussion, she’ll
send an essay or article, even creating syllabi. She is always prepared to give meaningful
answers and probing follow-up questions. … Every student who has worked with Kelly has picked up one or a dozen new lenses to be socially, politically critical in terms of the role of art and societal change.”
“One of the few faculty at SAIC that I would trust in any circumstance to put my needs as a
person, a student, before any kind of bureaucracy, red tape, any kind of inconvenience. I got to
know Kelly and ended up seeing her at art openings and get-togethers. She was always first to
offer me a ride home — so caring and concerned for other people.”
“Kelly’s passion, urgency, and eloquent reiteration of the need for justice has inspired me time
and again to not give up in building a liberated world. Her outspokenness, in spite of repeated
retaliation, gives me hope that modern conditions are only ephemeral, and could not, should not,
stay as they are.”
I want to add my personal reaction to the measures taken against Kelly.
I gather that the rule violation has to do with emails and printing for student artistic and organizing activity. Firing seems a grossly disproportionate response. It reduces Kelly’s significant contribution to the school community to a rules violation. Using school resources for student projects is theft if you’re thinking like Amazon warehouse managers, but treating it as theft looks very wrong in our art school, where it is common practice.
The chronology of the school’s surveillance has the distinct appearance of singling her out in
May for her support of student political expression. If she had been printing flyers for a student art show or celebration, would there have been an investigation? It seems clear that she was singled out in retaliation for her political and union activism.
Paul Elitzik,
Assoc. Prof., Adj. – Retd.
