This post was updated Jan. 27 at 10:08 p.m.

The UC is asking students to complete a survey about their perceptions of on-campus discrimination and harassment, as mandated by the University’s 2024 agreement with the federal government to resolve civil rights investigations.

The University sent out the survey, conducted by nonpartisan research institute NORC – formerly the National Opinion Research Center – at the University of Chicago, to students via email Jan. 7.

The federal investigations came in response to complaints that the UC did not properly address discrimination based on Arab, Jewish, Israeli, Muslim and Palestinian identities, therefore violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The federal law prevents institutions receiving federal funding from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin or perceived national origin.

Those complaints originated from students and employees who claimed that during 2024 protests over the Israel-Hamas war, UCLA, as well as UC Davis, UC Santa Barbara, UC Santa Cruz and UC San Diego, failed to address identity-based discrimination on their campuses.

[Related: UC reaches agreement with Education Department over Title VI investigations]

UCLA students and others set up an encampment in Dickson Plaza in late April 2024 to demand that the UC divest from companies associated with the Israeli military.

Counter-protesters attacked the encampment April 30, 2024, throwing tear gas and fireworks into the area, as well as assaulting people inside the encampment. Mary Osako, UCLA’s vice chancellor for strategic communications, said in a 12:40 a.m. statement May 1, 2024, that UCLA called law enforcement for immediate support. Police did not intervene until more than two hours later.

Police swept the encampment May 2, 2024, arresting more than 200 protesters.

[Related: Pro-Israel counter-protesters attempt to storm encampment, sparking violence]

The Israeli military has killed more than 70,000 Palestinians – according to the Gaza Health Ministry – since the Oct. 7, 2023, attack in Israel, which was carried out by political party and militant group Hamas and killed about 1,200 people.

[Related: UCLA community organizes encampment in response to national call for escalation]

The survey, which is set to close in early February, includes several questions that ask about religious and identity-based discrimination and mistreatment based on political views.

One of the questions asks students, “Since beginning at your institution, have you experienced discrimination and/or harassment based on association with any of the following groups?” The question then lists the groups “Arabs,” “Israelis,” “Jews,” “Muslims” and “Palestinians.”

It includes a grid with the answer options “yes,” “no,” “don’t know” and “prefer not to answer” for each group.

The survey is confidential, and the UC will not receive any identifiable data, according to a Jan. 20 email sent to students by NORC. Any personally identifiable information will be deleted securely as soon as possible, it added in the email.

Miguel Craven, the UC student regent-designate, said while he was thankful the survey appeared nonpartisan, it also seemed very targeted.

“I’d just be really interested to see how many students actually fill it out because it does concern me a little bit that with the government wanting to look into us more and really wanting to have more oversight to the UC,” said Craven, an energy systems graduate student at UC Davis. “How can we ensure that the data that’s being collected about all this student information is going to be held securely?”

The United States Department of Justice alleged that UCLA has created a hostile environment for Jewish and Israeli students in a July 29 letter, which was issued by Harmeet Dhillon, an assistant attorney general at the DOJ, and addressed to then-UC President Michael Drake.

Aditi Hariharan, the president of the UC Student Association, said she believes the UC has a poor record with privacy, citing UC Berkeley sharing student data with the federal government as an example.

UC Berkeley released the information of about 160 of its faculty, staff and students to the federal government last August, according to the Daily Californian.

“There’s that general distrust students have with administration regarding, ‘how is my data collected, how is my data shared, what is stored and what steps is the UC taking to protect my specific student identifying information from landing in the hands of an administration that doesn’t really value student voice,’” said Hariharan, a fifth-year nutrition and political science student at UC Davis.

A UC Office of the President spokesperson said in an emailed statement that the insights from the survey will “inform anti-discrimination prevention, education, and response efforts across the University of California and support institutional efforts to foster inclusive campus environments.”

The spokesperson added that a summary of the results is expected to be released to the public but did not provide a date.

UCOP did not respond to the Daily Bruin’s question about student data privacy concerns in the statement.

NORC, an independent research institution, directed requests for comment to the survey’s website and UCOP.

Alex Alben, a lecturer at the UCLA School of Law who focuses on data privacy and cybersecurity, said the survey has a relatively standard privacy policy upon review.

Students should read the privacy policy, frequently asked questions page and other information that a survey organization provides to make an informed decision about whether they would like to participate, Alben added.

Mitchell Chang, a professor in the education and Asian American studies departments who was UCLA’s interim vice provost for equity, diversity and inclusion until June, said he received requests from outside organizations and experts to survey UCLA students while in his previous role. He declined the requests because he believed they were politically driven, he added.

Chang said he believes the survey may only help the UC understand “one slice of our discrimination.”

“It may be driven by some pressure, but at the same time, I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing to do,” Chang said. “But we shouldn’t do it in a way that only serves the interest of that political pressure. We should take this as an opportunity to broaden and extend it and to really try to understand all forms of discrimination across all our institutions.”