| 33. |
Academic Integrity--All Students
Preamble
The University has the responsibility for maintaining academic integrity so as to protect the quality of education and research on
our campus and to protect those who depend upon our integrity. It is the responsibility of the student to refrain from infractions of
academic integrity, from conduct that may lead to suspicion of such infractions, and from conduct that aids others in such infractions. It is
the responsibility of the faculty to establish and maintain an environment that supports academic integrity. An essential part of this
faculty responsibility is the enforcement of existing standards of academic integrity; where faculty do not discourage and act upon violations
of which they become aware, this has the effect of undermining respect for those standards. Faculty members should provide students with
a clear statement of their expectations concerning academic integrity. In these regulations, "faculty" includes an instructor or
authorized staff member who supervises any academic endeavor.
Students have been given notice of this rule by virtue of its publication. Regardless of whether a student has actually read this rule,
a student is charged with knowledge of it. Ignorance of a rule is never a defense.
This rule applies to course-based infractions by both undergraduate and graduate students, except as noted under section III. It does
not apply to infractions of academic integrity in organized research (which includes funded research, research intended for publication,
work performed as a research assistant, or theses and dissertations). Infractions committed as part of organized research activities are
addressed by the campus Policy and Procedures on Academic Integrity in Research and Publication.
| I. |
Infractions of Academic Integrity -- Definitions7
| A. |
Cheating
Using or attempting to use in any academic exercise materials, information, study aids, or electronic data that the student knows
or should know is unauthorized.
Comments:
| 1. |
Faculty members need to make in advance a clear statement of their policies and procedures concerning the use
before examinations of shared study aids, examination files, and related materials and forms of assistance. Such advance notice
is especially important in the case of take-home examinations.
|
| 2. |
During examinations, students should assume that external assistance (e.g., books, notes, calculators, conversation with others)
is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the instructor.
|
| 3. |
Students must not allow others to conduct research or prepare any work for them without prior authorization from the
instructor. This includes, but is not limited to, the services of commercial term paper companies.
|
| 4. |
Substantial portions of the same academic work may not be submitted
for credit more than once or by more than one student
without authorization. |
| 5. |
Special exams and tests. Infractions of academic integrity that occur "outside the classroom" during proficiency tests taken
after enrollment shall be dealt with in the manner described in this regulation. (Cases of pre-enrollment violations are covered by Rule 11 on bases for discipline and Rule 14 on falsification.)
|
|
| B. |
Fabrication
Unauthorized falsification or invention of any information or citation in an academic endeavor.
Comments:
| 1. |
"Invented" information may not be used in
any laboratory experiment or other academic endeavor without
notice to and authorization from the instructor or examiner.
It would be improper, for example, to analyze one sample
in an experiment and covertly "invent" data
based on that single experiment for several more required
analyses. |
| 2. |
Reliance upon the actual source from which cited information
was obtained must be acknowledged. For example, a writer
should not reproduce a quotation from a book review without
indicating whether the quotation was obtained from the
review or from the book itself. |
| 3. |
Fabrication also includes altering the answers given
for an exam after the examination has been graded. |
| 4. |
Fabrication also includes submitting false documents
for the purpose of being excused from a scheduled examination
or other academic assignment. |
|
| C. |
Facilitating Infractions of Academic Integrity
Helping or attempting to help another to commit an infraction of academic integrity, where one knows or should know that
through one's acts or omissions such an infraction may be facilitated.
Comments:
| 1. |
Allowing another to copy from one's work during an
examination would be committing a breach of academic integrity.
|
| 2. |
Taking an exam by proxy for someone else is an infraction
of academic integrity on the part of both the student
enrolled in the course and the proxy or substitute. (See
Rule 14.) |
| 3. |
Unauthorized removal of an examination or quiz from
a classroom, faculty office, or other facility would be
committing a breach of academic integrity. |
|
| D. |
Plagiarism
Representing the words or ideas of another as one's own in any
academic endeavor. This includes copying another student's paper
or working with another person when both submit similar papers
to satisfy an individual, not a group, assignment, without authorization.
Comments:
| 1. |
Direct Quotation: Every direct quotation must be identified by quotation marks or by appropriate indentation and must
be promptly cited in a citation. Proper citation style for many academic departments is outlined in such manuals as the
MLA Handbook or K. L. Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses and
Dissertations. These and similar publications are available in
the University bookstore or library.
Example: The following is an example of an uncited direct quotation from a case in which the student in question was found
guilty of plagiarism.
Original Source: To push the comparison with popular tale and popular romance a bit further, we may note that the measure
of artistic triviality of works such as "Sir Degare" or even "Havelok the Dean" is their casualness, their indifference to all but
the simplest elements of literary substance. The point is that high genre does not certify art and low genre does not preclude
it. (From Robert M. Jordan, Chaucer and the Shape of
Creation, Howard University Press, 1967, page 187.)
Student Paper: To push the comparison with popular tale and popular romance a bit further, you can note that the measure
of artistic triviality in some works of Chaucer's time period is their casualness. Their indifference to all but the simplest elements
of literary substance. The point is that high genre does not certify art and low genre does not preclude it.
|
| 2. |
Paraphrase: Prompt acknowledgment is required when material from another source is paraphrased or summarized in whole or
in part. This is true even if the student's words differ substantially from those of the source. To acknowledge a paraphrase
properly, one might introduce it with a statement such as "To paraphrase Locke's comment . . ." and conclude it with a citation
identifying the exact reference. Or the concluding citation might say, "The last paragraph (two paragraphs, etc.) paraphrases statements by . .
." and then give the exact reference. A citation acknowledging only a directly quoted statement does not suffice as
an acknowledgment of any preceding or succeeding paraphrased material.
Example: The following is an example of unacknowledged paraphrase that could warrant a charge of plagiarism.
Original Source: The era in question included three formally declared wars. The decision to enter the War of 1812 was made
by Congress after extended debate. Madison made no recommendation in favor of hostilities, though he did marshal a "telling
case against England" in his message to Congress of June 1, 1812. The primary impetus to battle, however, seems to have come from
a group of "War Hawks" in the legislature.
(From W. Taylor Reveley III, "Presidential War-Making: Constitutional Prerogative or Usurpation?"
University of Virginia Law Review, November 1969, footnotes omitted.)
Student Paper: During this period three wars were actually declared by Congress. For instance, in 1812 a vehemently
pro-war group of legislators persuaded Congress, after much discussion, to make such a declaration, despite the fact that Madison
had not asked for it, though, to be sure, he had openly condemned England in his message to Congress of June 1, 1812.
|
| 3. |
Borrowed Facts or Information: Information obtained in one's reading or research that is not common knowledge should
be acknowledged. Examples of common knowledge might include the names of leaders of prominent nations, basic scientific laws,
etc. Materials that contribute only to one's general understanding of the subject may be acknowledged in the bibliography and need
not be immediately cited. One citation is usually sufficient to acknowledge indebtedness when a number of connected sentences in
the paper draw their special information from one source.
|
|
| E. |
Bribes, Favors, and Threats
Infractions of academic integrity include bribing or attempting to bribe, promising favors to, or making threats against any person
with the intention of affecting a record of a grade or evaluation of academic performance. This includes a student who conspires
with another person who then takes the action on behalf of the student.
|
| F. |
Academic Interference
Tampering with, altering, circumventing, or destroying any educational material or resource in a manner which deprives any
student of fair access or reasonable use of that material or resource.
Comments:
| 1. |
Educational resources include computer facilities, electronic data, required/reserved readings, reference works, or other
library materials.
|
| 2. |
Academic interference would also include the situation where the student committing the infraction personally benefits from
the interference, regardless of the effect on other students.
|
|
| G. |
Computer-Related Infractions
Computer-related infractions defined by applicable laws, contracts, or University policies (such as unauthorized use of
computer licenses, copyrighted materials, intellectual property, or trade secrets).
|
| H. |
Unauthorized Use of University Resources
Unauthorized student use of University resources for noneducational, private, or commercial purposes.
|
| I. |
Failure to Comply with Research Regulations
Infractions of academic integrity include failure to comply with research regulations such as those applying to human
subjects, laboratory animals, and standards of safety.
|
|
| II. |
Penalties for Infraction of Academic Integrity
The variety of academic settings encountered in the University precludes establishing uniform penalties for all infractions of
academic integrity. The faculty member makes this judgment in light of the nature of the class, the kind of tasks assigned to other students,
the student's behavior during the semester, prior warnings to the student, etc. Students have the right to an appeal of findings
and/or penalties for infractions of academic integrity. (Such an appeal cannot be filed as a grievance unless a condition specified
under Procedures for Grievances and Complaints exists.)
| A. |
The faculty member is viewed here as having the dual role
of fact-finder and determiner of penalty. In the role of finder
of fact, the instructor has broad powers to determine whether
an infraction has occurred (through collecting relevant evidence,
questioning other students, etc.). As the determiner of penalty,
the faculty member should feel certain that an infraction has
been committed by the student. This decision may be based not
only on the facts revealed by the investigation, but other factors
that are relevant in the best judgment of the faculty member.
| 1. |
In judging whether an academic infraction has occurred,
the existence of specific knowledge and intent to cheat,
plagiarize, etc., is not necessarily a factor; for example,
quoting work without citation is inappropriate whether
or not one intended to plagiarize, or even knows what
"plagiarism" is. Furthermore, sometimes an infraction
may be the result of carelessness or neglect, rather than
specific intent. |
| 2. |
A lack of knowledge or intent shall be a factor in
determining whether an infraction should be penalized,
or what sort of penalty is appropriate. In cases where
a violation of the rules has been brought about by circumstances
that a student did not know about, and could not have
been reasonably expected to know, no penalty shall be
assessed against that student. |
| 3. |
In determining an appropriate penalty, the instructor
shall also take into consideration aggravating circumstances,
such as whether the student's conduct was designed not
only to advance his or her own grade, but to hinder the
academic performance of others. |
|
| B. |
The instructor may impose one or more of the following penalties
for an infraction of academic integrity:
| 1. |
a written notice of warning with a copy to the studentÕs
file in the office of the college in which the student
is enrolled and to the Senate Committee on Student Discipline;
|
| 2. |
a reduced grade on the assignment; |
| 3. |
a failing grade (zero if graded numerically) for the
assignment; |
| 4. |
a reduced grade for the course; |
| 5. |
a failing grade for the course; |
| 6. |
a denial of credit for the proficiency exam; or |
| 7. |
any other penalty negotiated and agreed to, in writing,
by both parties (not subject to appeal) |
|
| C. |
The instructor may recommend to the department or unit executive
officer (hereafter abbreviated DEO8)
that the student be suspended or dismissed from the University.
Such a recommendation would be made in addition to penalties
imposed by the instructor. |
|
| III. |
Procedures
The college or equivalent academic unit in which the course or examination
is conducted shall be the body of adjudication for findings involving
penalties pertaining to course grades. (In cases where the course
is cross-listed, this refers to the controlling department.) If
the penalty is a failing grade for the course, this is also the
college to which an appeal of the decision should be made. The college
or equivalent academic unit in which the student is enrolled is
the body of adjudication for findings involving a penalty of suspension
or dismissal. (Whenever reference is made to the "dean"
in this or subsequent sections, it shall refer to the dean or the
dean's designee.)
These rules and procedures concerning course-based infractions
of academic integrity apply in all colleges except where specified
otherwise by the bylaws of a college (for example, in the Graduate
College and some professional colleges which operate under rules
and procedures governing infractions of academic integrity which
have been approved by the Senate Committee on Student Discipline).
| A. |
An instructor who believes a student guilty of one or more
infractions of academic integrity listed in this rule shall
notify the student in writing of the basis for the belief and
then allow the student eight working days to respond to the
allegation.
| 1. |
If the final deadline for reporting grades occurs prior
to the time the instructor allows for the student response,
the instructor should, with the permission of the student's
college, assign the student an EX, to be changed after
the case has been resolved. After such written notification,
the student may not drop the course until after the case
has been resolved. |
| 2. |
If the student is found guilty of an infraction and
the penalty is a lowered or failing grade within the course,
the student may drop the course before the usual deadline
for dropping the course. The student may drop the course
after that date only if the infraction occurred before
the deadline but the case was resolved after the deadline.
After the usual deadline for dropping a course, a student
may not withdraw from the course. In either instance,
of dropping or withdrawing from the course, a permanent
record of the infraction will remain in the student's
file. If the penalty is a failing grade for the course
as a whole, the student may not drop or withdraw from
the course. |
|
| B. |
If, after the student has had an opportunity to respond to
the allegation, the instructor concludes that the student is
not guilty of an infraction, the instructor shall inform the
student in writing of this conclusion within eight working days.
The instructor shall also notify any other individuals who were
notified of the instructor's original claim that the infraction
had occurred. The student shall be permitted:
| 1. |
to be reinstated in the course and be given whatever
grade the student is entitled to without regard to the
charge of an infraction of academic integrity; |
| 2. |
to drop the course at any time of the semester; or
|
| 3. |
to change sections in the course, if possible. |
|
| C. |
If, after the student has had an opportunity to respond to
the allegation, the instructor concludes that the student is
guilty of an infraction, the instructor shall decide which of
the penalties listed in section II.B is warranted. After a penalty
has been determined, the instructor shall notify the student
and the DEO in writing of the penalty imposed and the reasons
for it, within eight working days. |
| D. |
When two or more students have been accused of cooperating
in an academic infraction, their cases should be handled separately.
Any fact-finding inquiries should establish their independent
guilt, and the penalties for each individual should be decided
separately. When one or more of the parties to an infraction
is not enrolled in the course affected, their cases should be
forwarded to the Senate Committee on Student Discipline for
appropriate action. |
| E. |
The student may appeal a finding and/or penalty by indicating
this desire in writing to the DEO within fifteen days of notification
of the right to appeal. If the student does not appeal, the
matter shall be closed unless the penalty is suspension or dismissal,
in which case section III.I below applies. In a case in which
the penalty is a failure for the course, the DEO shall notify
the dean, and the dean will forward a request to record a failing
grade for the course to the Office of Admissions and Records. |
| F. |
The procedures for appeal and the requirement for review
of a finding, recommendation, and/or penalty beyond the level
of the instructor shall depend upon whether the penalty falls
within one of three levels of severity.
| 1. |
Categories 1 - 4 in section II.B (a penalty of less
than a failing grade for the course).
For penalties less than a failing grade for the course,
appeals of the finding and/or the penalty shall be heard
within the department according to the procedures established
by that department. A copy of these procedures shall
be available to the student in the department office.
In no case shall this departmental appeal result in
a harsher penalty than the one originally assessed by
the instructor.
If the department consists of nine or fewer full-time
faculty members, the appeal will be directed to a similarly
constituted committee of the school or college. If the
instructor of the course is a member of the committee,
that instructor shall be disqualified from the consideration
of that appeal.
|
| 2. |
Categories 5 and 6 (a penalty of a failing grade for
the course or denial of credit for the proficiency exam).
If the penalty to be recommended by the instructor is
a failing grade for the course, or if the penalty is
a denial of credit for a proficiency exam, appeal of
the finding and/or the penalty shall be heard at the
college (or equivalent academic unit) level in accordance
with section III.G below.
|
| 3. |
Suspension or dismissal from the University.
In a case deemed sufficiently serious to warrant suspension
or dismissal from the University, the instructor shall
notify the DEO and submit to the officer evidence of
the violation of academic integrity. The DEO, after
separate discussions with the instructor and the student,
shall decide whether to recommend to the dean of the
college in which the student is enrolled that the penalty
be assessed. In cases of repeated violations, a review
for possible suspension or dismissal can also be initiated
by the student's college or the Senate Committee on
Student Discipline. All cases recommending suspension
or dismissal are automatically appealed within the student's
home unit and include a formal review by the Senate
Committee on Student Discipline (see section III.I below).
|
| Comments: |
| 1. |
Note that the seventh penalty (II.B.7), which is one
negotiated and agreed to by both instructor and student,
is not subject to appeal. For the others, the appeal or
review procedures can be summarized as follows: Categories
1 - 4 are appealed through the procedures of the department
in which the course or exam is conducted (III.F.1); categories
5 and 6 are appealed within the college in which the course
or exam is conducted, through the procedures spelled out
in section III.G; cases involving suspension and dismissal
are heard within the student's home unit, through the
procedures spelled out in section III.I, including final
review by the Senate Committee on Student Discipline. |
| 2. |
In cases where a penalty on a course, exam, or assignment
is accompanied by a recommendation for suspension or dismissal,
the appeals are treated separately: the appeal of the
penalty on the course, exam, or assignment is reviewed
within the college in which the course or exam was offered;
the appeal of the recommendation for suspension or dismissal
is reviewed by the student's home unit. These appeals
are independent, and each could be upheld or overturned
regardless of the other. |
|
| G. |
If the student notifies the DEO of a desire to appeal a finding
and/or penalty, in cases where the penalty is a failing grade
for the course or denial of credit for a proficiency exam, the
procedure will be as follows:
| 1. |
The DEO shall gather all relevant information from
the instructor and student and transmit the information
to the dean of the college in which the course was offered.
|
| 2. |
The dean shall convey the appeal information to the
hearing committee formed in accordance with guidelines
in section IV.
|
| 3. |
The hearing committee shall deliberate the appeal according
to the hearing guidelines outlined in section IV.
|
| 4. |
The hearing committee shall render a recommendation
on the appeal to the dean. |
|
| H. |
All reviews and appeal processes within a college concerning
findings and/or penalties should be completed in a timely manner;
a final decision should be rendered, if possible, within six
working weeks after the filing of the appeal. |
| I. |
In all cases involving possible suspension or dismissal,
except those initiated by the Senate Committee on Student Discipline:
| 1. |
The DEO shall discuss the finding separately with the
instructor and the student. If the DEO decides that suspension
or dismissal is warranted, the DEO shall so recommend
to the dean of the college in which the student is enrolled. |
| 2. |
ThThe dean of the college shall charge the hearing
committee to consider the merits of the recommendation.
The hearing committee shall deliberate according to the
hearing guidelines in section IV. The hearing committee
shall inform the dean of its decision. If the hearing
committee concurs with the recommendation, the dean shall
forward the recommendation to the Senate Committee on
Student Discipline. The decision of the college on the
facts of the breach of integrity shall be final. The sole
question before the Senate Committee on Student Discipline
is whether the breach of integrity in question is of such
a nature as to warrant suspension or dismissal from the
University. |
|
| J. |
If a course or proficiency exam is offered directly under
the auspices of a college or equivalent unit rather than a department,
the dean shall perform the procedural role otherwise performed
under these rules by the DEO.
| 1. |
If a proficiency exam is not administered under the
auspices of a college or department, the dean of the college
in which the student is enrolled shall perform the DEO's
role. |
| 2. |
If in performing that role the dean recommends suspension
or dismissal, the dean shall designate an independent
person to perform the dean's role as presiding officer
under section IV. |
|
|
| IV. |
Appeal Hearing Guideline9
| A. |
Each college or equivalent unit shall appoint annually a
standing academic disciplinary committee composed of at least
four faculty members and at least two students. The faculty
and student members of hearing committees to consider individual
academic disciplinary cases under section IV.B below shall
be selected from the members of the standing committee (unless
conflicts of interest or other exigent circumstances require
the special appointment of others).
Comments:
|
| |
In these appeal procedures, "dean" refers to the
dean of the college in which the course was offered, except
in hearings involving possible suspension or dismissal, in which
case it refers to the dean of the student's college. |
| B. |
The chairperson of the standing academic disciplinary committee
of the college or equivalent unit shall select a hearing committee
to consider an appeal concerning a course offered by that unit
or any cross-listed course for which the instructor is affiliated
with that unit. The hearing committee shall consist of four
members. The dean or designee shall serve as the presiding officer,
but shall be a nonvoting member. The dean of the college shall
charge the hearing committee to consider the merits of recommendations.
The presiding officer will gather all documents and/or depositions
and will conduct the hearing. One of the three voting members
shall be a student, and a final recommendation shall require
the majority of voting members. |
| C. |
Those persons entitled to a hearing shall be informed of
the hearing date at least five working days in advance. |
| D. |
The hearing committee shall be convened by the dean of the
college or unit in which the infraction occurred or, in cases
of suspension and dismissal, in the college or unit in which
the student is enrolled. |
| E. |
Both the student and the instructor shall be entitled to
be present throughout the hearing and to present any evidence,
including testimony by other persons, relevant to the matter
in dispute. Both the student and the instructor shall have an
opportunity to question or refute any evidence presented. The
confidentiality of all evidence shall be preserved. The student
and the instructor may each be accompanied by a person to assist
them in presenting evidence. Prospective witnesses, other than
the instructor and the student, may be excluded from the hearing
during the testimony of other witnesses. All parties shall be
excluded during hearing committee deliberations. The session
shall not be open to the public. |
| F. |
Any person who disrupts a hearing or who fails to adhere
to the rulings of the presiding officer may be excluded from
the proceeding. |
| G. |
Should additional oral testimony be useful, the presiding
officer may invite appropriate witnesses. Formal rules of evidence
shall not be applicable. |
| H. |
The final recommendation of the hearing committee to the
dean must include a summary of the testimony and shall be sufficiently
detailed to permit review. |
| I. |
For cases involving an appeal of penalties in categories
5 and 6 in section II.B, the hearing committee may concur
with the instructor's finding and imposed penalty, it may
recommend a different interpretation of the facts and/or a
different penalty, or it may recommend that the student is
not guilty. The committee may find the student not guilty
only if the student proves to the committee that the finding
of the faculty member is erroneous.
Comments:
| 1. |
The intent of this section is to formalize the following
view: A student is considered innocent until the instructor
has determined that an infraction has occurred and has
communicated the evidence for this determination and the
reasons for the penalty to the student. If the student
appeals, the burden of proof that the finding of the faculty
member is erroneous is on the student. |
| 2. |
This section intentionally does not establish a formal
standard of proof. Deference is paid to the instructorÕs
right to have discretion over his or her own classes.
|
|
| J. |
In cases involving an appeal of penalties in categories 5
and 6 of section II.B, if the hearing committee agrees with
the action taken by the instructor, the dean shall so inform
the instructor and the student in writing, and the matter shall
be closed. In cases involving suspension or dismissal, dean
shall so inform the instructor and the student in writing, and
the matter shall be forwarded to the Senate Committee on Student
Discipline for review (see IV.M). |
| K. |
In cases involving an appeal of penalties in categories 5
and 6 of section II.B, if the hearing committee recommends a
different interpretation of the facts and/or a different penalty,
or recommends that the student is not guilty, the dean shall
so inform the instructor and attempt to reconcile the differences.
| 1. |
If the instructor accepts a compromise, the student
shall be notified and the new penalty, if any, imposed.
|
| 2. |
If the instructor refuses to compromise, the dean shall
notify the student and permit the student to withdraw
from the course. However, a record of the infraction in
accordance with section V.A shall be made a part of the
student's permanent file. |
| 3. |
In no case shall the committee be empowered to levy
a harsher penalty than the one originally imposed or recommended
by the instructor. |
|
| L. |
In cases involving an appeal of penalties in categories 5
and 6 of section II.B, if the hearing committee concludes that
the student is not guilty, the dean shall permit the student:
| 1. |
to be reinstated in the course and be given whatever
grade the student is entitled to without regard to the
charge of an infraction of academic integrity; |
| 2. |
to drop the course at any time of the semester; or
|
| 3. |
to change sections in the course, if possible. |
|
| M. |
In cases involving an appeal of a recommendation of suspension
or dismissal, the sole question before the hearing committee
is whether the facts of the case support that recommendation;
this should include an investigation into the facts of the case
as well as a judgment on whether suspension or dismissal is
warranted. If the hearing committee concurs with the recommendation
that the student be suspended or dismissed from the University,
the dean shall forward the recommendation to the Senate Committee
on Student Discipline. The decision of the college on the facts
of the breach of integrity shall be final. The sole question
before the Senate Committee on Student Discipline is whether
the breach of integrity in question is of such a nature as to
warrant suspension or dismissal from the University. |
| N. |
If the hearing committee or the Senate Committee on Student
Discipline do not concur with the recommendation of suspension
or dismissal, the dean shall inform the instructor and DEO of
the unit in which the infraction occurred of this decision. |
|
| V. |
Following All Reviews and Appeals
| A. |
Records for any case of infraction of academic integrity
will be forwarded to the student's college and to the executive
director of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline by the
DEO and held on file for the period required by the University
statutes or regulations. These records are available for inspection
in accordance with state and federal regulations. |
| B. |
Once a violation of academic integrity has been found and
a penalty assessed, and after all appeal procedures have been
completed (or the time limit for appeals has expired), the
DEO (in consultation with the other participants) shall prepare
a report of the violation. This report shall describe: (a)
the nature of the alleged breaches of academic integrity;
(b) if applicable, the appeal procedures followed and the
recommendation of any hearing committee; and (c) the ultimate
penalties imposed. The DEO shall send a copy of this report,
including the studentÕs name and social security number, to
the college or equivalent academic unit in which the student
is enrolled and to the executive director of the Senate Committee
on Student Discipline. Consistent with other university policies
on student discipline, these records will be kept on file
for a period of six years, and then expunged.
Comments:
This report is necessary in order to maintain a record of
whether a student has been found guilty of repeated instances
of academic misconduct.
|
| C. |
Upon receipt of a letter describing a student's first breach
of academic integrity, the executive director of the Senate
Committee on Student Discipline shall send a letter to the student
explaining that repeated violations of this rule may result
in further disciplinary actions, including possible suspension
or dismissal from the University. If a letter is received describing
an additional breach of academic integrity for the student,
the executive director will refer the case to the Senate Committee
on Student Discipline for appropriate action. This could include
the initiation of a hearing within the disciplinary system and
the possibility of disciplinary action up to and including suspension
or dismissal. A student's college may also refer students who
have been found to have repeatedly violated this rule to the
Senate Committee on Student Discipline for appropriate action.
Hearings on such cases will be conducted in accordance with
the procedures of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline. |
| D. |
At the end of each academic year, the executive director of
the Senate Committee on Student Discipline shall compile an
annual report to the senate on the number and severity of such
infractions of academic integrity, without identification of
the individuals involved, and make that report available for
open distribution and publication across campus. |
|
__________
7Most of these definitions were adapted
from a model code of academic integrity found in 8 School Law Journal
55 (1978).
8The DEO may choose to designate another
department or unit administrator to represent him or her in these matters.
In all instances in this rule, "DEO" should be read as "DEO
or designee," and refers to the DEO of the faculty member's primary
academic appointme
9See Rule 26 on procedures for review of alleged
capricious grading.
|