Procedures for Addressing Cases of Academic Dishonesty

Transcription

1 Procedures for Addressing Cases of Academic Dishonesty A Manual for Academic Deans, Chairs, and Program Administrators Office of the Provost Miami University

2 RESOURCE INFORMATION Procedures for Addressing Academic Dishonesty Miami University INTRODUCTION In this manual you will find resources that will be helpful to you should you be required to report, adjudicate, or provide advice to a student regarding a case of academic dishonesty at Miami University. Chapter 5, Academic Integrity, of the Miami University Student Handbook outlines the procedures for addressing alleged cases of academic dishonesty on this campus. The University Senate approved substantive revisions to these procedures in 2009, 2010 and The revisions are intended to make the adjudication process more manageable for administrators and faculty who must address cases of academic dishonesty, make the process as clear and fair to students as possible, make the adjudication of these cases standard across departments, and integrate Miami s systems for addressing dishonesty in and outside of the classroom. You will find in this manual material that will make your participation in addressing these cases more effective and efficient, and you will find templates for all the correspondence that is part of this process on the University s integrity webpage In the first section of this manual, you will find Chapter 5, Academic Integrity, of The Student Handbook. The sections that follow address how to implement the provisions outlined in Chapter 5. For further information on Miami s academic integrity initiatives, see If you have questions about how to implement these procedures, you are encouraged to call one of the following persons: Lucille Hautau Assistant to the Provost Robin Parker University Counsel Susan Vaughn Director, Office of Ethics and Student Conflict Resolution Page 1

3 Student Handbook Part 1, Chapter 5 Academic Integrity CHAPTER 5. Academic Integrity 1.5.A Introduction The rights and responsibilities that accompany academic freedom are at the heart of the intellectual integrity of the University. Students are expected to behave honestly in their learning and in their behavior outside the classroom. Cheating and other forms of academic dishonesty undermine the value of a Miami education for everyone, and especially for the person who cheats. Misunderstanding of the appropriate academic conduct will not be accepted as an excuse for academic dishonesty. If a student is in doubt about appropriate academic conduct in a particular situation, he or she should consult with the instructor in the course, the department chair/program director, or the academic dean in the appropriate division in order to maintain the highest standards of academic honesty. 1.5.B Criteria Academic dishonesty is defined as any activity that compromises the academic integrity of the institution or subverts the educational process. Examples of academic dishonesty include, but are not limited to: 1.5.B.1 Conduct with respect to and during a quiz, examination, or similar evaluation a. Possessing, referring to, or employing open textbooks or notes or other devices not authorized by the instructor. b. Looking at or using information from another person s paper. c. Communicating with, providing assistance to, or receiving assistance from another person in a manner not authorized by the instructor. d. Possessing, buying, selling, obtaining, or using a copy of any unauthorized materials intended to be used in the preparation of a quiz or examination or similar evaluation. e. Taking a quiz or examination or similar evaluation in the place of another person. f. Utilizing another person to take a quiz, examination, or similar evaluation in place of oneself. g. Violating procedures prescribed to protect the integrity of a quiz, examination, or similar evaluation. h. Changing material on a graded examination and then requesting a re-grading of the examination. 1.5.B.2 Written and other assignments a. Submitting an assignment purporting to be the student s original work that has been wholly or partly created by another person. b. Presenting as one s own the work, ideas, representations, or words of another person without customary and proper acknowledgment of sources. c. Knowingly permitting one s work to be submitted by another person as if it were the submitter s original work. d. Submitting the identical or substantially the same assignment to fulfill the requirements for two or more courses without the approval of the instructors involved, or submitting the identical or substantially the same assignment from a previously completed course to fulfill requirements for another course without the approval of the instructor of the later course. e. Violating procedures prescribed to protect the integrity of the assignment. 1.5.C Procedures for Reporting and Adjudicating Cases of Academic Dishonesty 1.5.C.1 Procedures for reporting alleged academic dishonesty. Course instructors who believe a student has engaged in academic dishonesty shall report the alleged incident to their department chair/program director. Other persons, including students, who believe they have knowledge of academic dishonesty, should report the alleged dishonesty to the instructor of the course in which the dishonesty is alleged to have occurred. If, after reasonable inquiry, the course instructor finds the report credible, he or she will report the alleged incident to his or her department chair/program director. a. In reporting the alleged incident to the department chair/program director, the course instructor shall provide an account of the incident and include all relevant documentation. b. In cases of alleged academic dishonesty involving proficiency or waiver examinations, the person in charge of the examination shall file the report. 1.5.C.2 Procedures for notifying accused student(s). The department chair/program director shall notify the accused student in writing of the charge of academic dishonesty and will schedule a hearing with the accused student. The department Page 2

4 chair/program director will notify the student, via the student s University electronic mail address, of the hearing no fewer than seven class days prior to the hearing. (Note: any reference to class days in this manual includes final exam week.) a. The notification will include the instructor s charge and a copy of the instructor s report with all supporting documentation, the date, time and location of the hearing, and will refer the student to the procedures outlined in this section. b. In the notification, the student also will be informed that if he or she has been found responsible for a prior violation of academic dishonesty or for a violation of Section 102 (Dishonesty) of the Code of Student Conduct, that suspension from the University for a semester is the minimum sanction that will be imposed if the student is found responsible for the alleged incident. c. The student also will be informed that he or she may request to meet with the chief departmental adviser or the department chair/program director in which the academic dishonesty is alleged to have occurred to review these procedures and the charges against him or her. d. If the case of dishonesty involves a student serving as a substitute for someone else in meeting a course expectation (e.g., taking an examination), both the student enrolled in the class and the student alleged to have provided prohibited academic assistance will be charged, and the charges may, at the discretion of the department chair/program director, be addressed in a single hearing during which both students are present. 1.5.C.3 Procedures for conducting the hearing. Department chairs/program directors may conduct the hearing on the academic dishonesty charge or they may identify a designee to conduct the hearing. The designee need not be from the department/program in which the charge originates. The department chair/program director must, at the request of the student, identify a designee to conduct the hearing. a. The instructor who submitted the charge of academic dishonesty will be present at the hearing. b. Accused students may have a member of the University community present to advise them. At the hearing the instructor shall present the accused student and department chair/program director or designee with the documentation of academic dishonesty, including any supporting witnesses or information. The accused student will have the opportunity to respond, submit a written statement, invite witnesses to attend on his or her behalf, and ask questions of witnesses called by the instructor, 1.5.C.4 Procedures for adjudicating cases of academic dishonesty. Following the hearing, the department chair/program director or designee shall determine whether the student has committed an act of academic dishonesty. The greater weight of the evidence is sufficient for the department chair/program director or designee to conclude the student committed academic dishonesty. If the department chair/program director or designee concludes that the student did not commit academic dishonesty, the department chair/program director or designee will inform in writing the student, the faculty member bringing the charges, and the dean or his or her designee of the division in which the violation was alleged to have occurred. If the department chair/program director or designee concludes that the student committed academic dishonesty, the department chair/program director or designee, after conferring with the faculty member, will determine a recommended sanction to be made to the dean or his or her designee of the academic unit in which the violation occurred. a. The department chair/program director or designee will first determine if the student has been found responsible for any previous acts of dishonesty. The department chair/program director or designee will contact the Office of the Provost to determine if the student has been held responsible for any previous acts of academic dishonesty or violations of the Code of Student Conduct Dishonesty. b. If the department chair/program director or designee determines that the violation of academic dishonesty is the first instance of dishonesty for which the student has been found responsible, the department chair/program director or designee will recommend to the dean or his or her designee of the academic unit in which the alleged academic violation occurred one of the following three sanctions: i. A letter grade of F, the numerical grade of zero, a percentage grade of zero (0) percent, or a reduced grade for any project, paper, quiz, or interim or final examination, or any other portion of the course; ii. A reduced grade for the entire course, including the possible specification of a course letter grade of F; iii. A letter grade of F for the entire course with transcript notation of academic dishonesty. The following sanctions may be applied: iv. Participation in an academic integrity workshop conducted by Miami University. The student will be required to pay for the workshop. Failure to complete the workshop will result in a hold being placed on a student s ability to register for subsequent semesters or to change a class schedule. v. Suspension. In extraordinary circumstances, the recommendation for suspension may be forwarded. Page 3

5 c. If the department chair/program director or designee determines that the student has been found responsible previously for an act of academic dishonesty or for previously violating the Code of Student Conduct Dishonesty, the automatic sanction will be suspension for at least one semester. If the student is held responsible for an act of academic dishonesty and previously has been suspended for dishonesty, the automatic sanction will be dismissal from the University. d. If the case involves two students, one of whom substituted for another in completing a part of the course, the automatic sanction will be suspension of both students the student enrolled in the course and the student providing prohibited assistance. e. The department chair/program director or designee will provide a report to the dean or his or her designee of the division in which the alleged violation occurred and will notify the student in writing of his or her decision. i. The notice to the dean or his or her designee will include the name of the student, the student s identification number, full details of the case, and the recommended sanction. ii. The notice to the student will be sent to the accused student via the student s University electronic mail address. The notice will include a statement of the student s right to appeal the decision of the department chair/program director or designee as outlined in Section 1.5.D. 1.5.D Appeals of the Department Chair/Program Director or Designee s Finding and Recommendations A student found responsible for an act of academic dishonesty by a department chair/program director or designee may appeal the decision in writing to the dean or his or her designee of the division in which the alleged violation occurred within five class days following the student s receipt of the notice of the findings of the hearing from the department chair/program director or designee. (Note: any reference to class days in this manual includes final exam week.) 1. Appeals may be made on three grounds: (1) inappropriate sanction, (2) procedural defects, either or both of which were sufficiently substantial to have affected the outcome of the case, or (3) new evidence. 2. If the dean or his or her designee concludes there were procedural defects or new evidence was available which was sufficiently substantial to have affected the outcome of the case, the dean or his or her designee will order a new hearing by the department chair/program director or designee. The department chair/program director or designee shall identify a designee to hear the case anew. 3. If the dean or his or her designee concludes the sanction was inappropriate, the dean or his or her designee will impose the appropriate sanction. 1.5.E Sanctions After acting upon any appeals and giving due consideration to the recommendation of the department chair/program director or designee, the dean or his or her designee will impose the final sanction. Should the dean or his or her designee disagree with the recommendation of the department chair/program director or designee, he or she will consult with the department chair/program director or designee and faculty member prior to changing the recommended sanction. If the dean or his or her designee concludes that failure for the course is the appropriate sanction, the Office of the Registrar will record the grade of F for the course with a transcript notation of academic dishonesty. If the student officially withdraws from the course and the recommended sanction was failure for the course, a grade of F shall be imposed with a transcript notation of academic dishonesty. If the dean or his or her designee concludes that suspension is the appropriate sanction, the Office of the Registrar will place the notice Suspension for Dishonesty on the student s academic record. Similarly, dismissal for academic dishonesty shall be noted on the student s academic record as Dismissal for Dishonesty. 1. In imposing the sanction of suspension, the dean or his or her designee may suspend the student either immediately or at the close of the current academic term. A sanction of dismissal will take effect immediately. 2. Suspensions will not be for less than the remainder of the current academic term nor more than the remainder of the current academic term plus up to two succeeding semesters (not including summer terms). Suspended students may not attend summer school at Miami during a period of suspension. 3. Academic credit earned elsewhere during a period of suspension will not be accepted in transfer. Incomplete grades may not be removed during periods of suspension or dismissal. The dean or his or her designee will notify the student via the student s University electronic mail address of his or her decision. The dean or his or her designee will send copies of the finding as well to the instructor filing the initial complaint, the department chair/program director or designee who conducted the hearing, the Office of the Registrar, the Office of the Provost, and the Page 4

6 Office of Ethics and Student Conflict Resolution. No sanctions will be imposed until any appeals of the decision by the dean or his or her designee are resolved. 1.5.F Appeals of the Dean s Sanction Students suspended or dismissed from Miami University by a dean or his or her designee for dishonesty may appeal the decision to the University Appeals Board. The student must file the appeal within five University class days of the student s receipt of the dean s or his or her designee s notification of his or her decision. (Note: any reference to class days in this manual includes final exam week.) Requests for a review by the University Appeals Board may be filed for the following reasons: 1. Inappropriate sanction; 2. Procedural defect in the adjudication of the case; 3. New evidence. If the appeal alleges that the sanction was inappropriate and the University Appeals Board finds the sanction to be inappropriate, the University Appeals Board may increase or reduce the sanction. If the appeal alleges that there was a procedural defect in the adjudication of the case or new evidence is presented, and the University Appeals Board finds that there was a procedural defect in the adjudication of the case or new evidence was presented which was sufficiently substantial to have affected the outcome, the University Appeals Board will order a new hearing. 1.5.G Records of Academic Dishonesty The Office of the Provost is responsible for maintaining records of any adjudication of academic dishonesty. Records of these hearings are kept confidential to the extent permitted by law. 1. Records of hearings regarding academic dishonesty resulting in a finding of not responsible will be maintained in the Office of the Provost until the end of the academic year in which the finding is made at which time they are destroyed. 2. Records of disciplinary actions resulting in a finding of responsible and sanctions other than suspensions or dismissals are maintained by the Office of the Provost for seven academic years following the date the finding is made at which time they are destroyed. 3. Records of disciplinary actions resulting in a finding of responsible and a sanction of suspensions or dismissals are maintained indefinitely by the Office of the Provost. A notation of suspension or dismissal is reflected on the student s official University academic record (transcript) maintained by the Office of the Registrar. 4. Academic credit earned elsewhere during a period of suspension or dismissal shall not be accepted in transfer. Incomplete grades may not be removed during periods of suspension or dismissal for dishonesty. 5. At any time after seven years from the date of the finding in which a sanction less than dismissal was imposed, a student or former student may petition the Provost or his or her designee to have the person s records of academic dishonesty expunged. In consultation with the Dean of Students, the decision to expunge will be based on the severity of the violation(s), the person s disciplinary record as a whole (including incidents adjudicated by the Office of Ethics and Student Conflict Resolution), and evidence of good behavior since the violation(s). If the record is expunged, any notation of academic dishonesty or suspension for academic dishonesty will be removed from the official academic record maintained by the Office of the Registrar. 6. A student who has been dismissed from the University may not request to have his or her record expunged. However, the Provost has the authority to expunge the record and remove the notation in extraordinary circumstances any time after seven academic years from the date the finding was made. 1.5.H Graduation All Miami University academic integrity charges against a student must be resolved and sanctions completed before a student is eligible to graduate. 1.5.I Interpretation of the Academic Integrity Policy Any question of interpretation or application of the Academic Integrity Policy shall be referred to the Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs or designee for final determination.. Page 5

7 Overview of Key Parts of the Academic Dishonesty Adjudication Process REPORTING AN ALLEGED CASE OF DISHONESTY Course instructors who believe a student has engaged in academic dishonesty should report the incident to the course instructor s departmental chair or program administrator. The report should be structured as follows: September 10, 20XX To: From: Re: Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English John Jones, Course Instructor, ENG112 Alleged act of academic dishonesty by David Doe, Banner ID +xxxxxxxx On September 8, 20XX, I received a bluebook from David Doe for an in-class exam in ENG112. The exam contained an accumulation of scattered sentences or phrases that appear to be copied verbatim from various web sites without proper citation. A copy of the student s exam with the relevant passages highlighted is attached. Also attached are printouts from the web sites with the identical material highlighted and a copy of the exam questions. Attachments Copies of the exam submitted by David Doe Printout of web sites NOTIFYING STUDENT OF A HEARING ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 1: REPORT OF ALLEGED INCIDENT OF ACADEMIC DISHONESTY As outlined in Section 1.5.C of Chapter 5 of The Student Handbook, the chair or program director, upon receiving a report of alleged academic dishonesty, shall notify the student or students involved of the charges and schedule a hearing. The following are important parts of this notice. The student must be notified via the student s University electronic mail address of the date, time, and location of the hearing at least seven class (or examination) days prior to the hearing. The notice should include a brief description of the act of academic dishonesty in which the student is alleged to have engaged. The student must be told that if she or he has been found responsible for a prior violation of academic dishonesty or for a violation of Section 102 (Dishonesty) of the Code of Student Conduct, that suspension from the University for a semester is the minimum sanction that will be imposed if the student is found responsible for the alleged incident. If the student wishes to learn more about the adjudication process and about the charges the student faces, the student may ask to meet with the chair or program administrator or the chief Page 6

8 departmental adviser prior to the hearing to discuss the process that will be followed in adjudicating the student s case. If the student asks to meet with the department chair or program administrator who sent out the notice and who will hear the case, the conversation should be about the process the chair will follow in adjudicating the case. The chair should not get into the merits of the allegations at this meeting, asking the student to save those statements or arguments for the formal hearing. In the hearing notice, accused students should be told they can bring a member of the University community to advise them at both the meeting outlined in the previous bulleted section and at the formal hearing the chair or department head will conduct. If the student feels the department chair or program administrator cannot be fair or impartial in conducting the hearing, she or he may ask chair or department head to appoint a designee to conduct the hearing. The designee need not be from the chair s department. For example, the chair may ask another chair experienced with these cases to conduct the hearing. The following is recommended wording for the notice. September 13, C To: From: David Doe Student Identification Number +xxxxxxxx Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English On September 10, 20XX, I received a report from Dr. John Jones, Associate Professor of English and the instructor of ENG112, that you are alleged to have committed an act of academic dishonesty for including on your exam in ENG112 on September 8, 20XX, sentences or phrases that appear to be copied verbatim from various web sites without customary and proper acknowledgment of sources. You will find attached the report I received from Professor Jones and the supporting evidence he provided me. Miami University s policies regarding academic dishonesty are outlined in Chapter 5, Academic Integrity, of The Student Handbook, available at: I have scheduled a hearing to determine if you have violated Miami s academic policies for Wednesday, September 22, 20XX at 4:00 P.M. in my office in Bachelor 356. Professor Jones will attend the hearing. You may ask a member of the University community to advise you. Your adviser may not speak for you, but may provide you with any advice you might find helpful. If you have questions about these charges or the procedures I will use to address them, you may meet with me to review the process I will follow in adjudicating this case. If you prefer, you may meet instead with Professor Maynard Wilson, chief departmental adviser for the Department of English, to discuss these procedures. Your adviser may attend this meeting as well. The purpose of this meeting will be to give you an overview of Miami University s procedures for addressing academic dishonesty. The merits of the allegations will not be discussed at this meeting. If you feel that I cannot be fair or impartial in conducting the hearing, you may ask that I appoint a designee to conduct the hearing. If you do not wish to have me hear this case, please notify me at least five days before your hearing so that I can designate an alternate hearing officer. You have the right to submit a written statement prior to or during your hearing, and you may bring any witnesses you believe have knowledge of this incident and can provide information on your behalf. Following the hearing, I will make a decision whether you have committed an act of academic dishonesty, and if I find you responsible, I will report the incident and make a recommended sanction to the Dean of the College of Arts and Science. If you previously have been found responsible for a violation of academic dishonesty or for violating Section 102 (Dishonesty) of the Code of Student Conduct, suspension from the University for at least one semester will be the minimum sanction imposed if you are found responsible for this incident. C Jack Able, Dean, College of Arts and Science Office of the Provost ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 2: NOTICE OF HEARING Page 7

9 HEARING The hearing is structured to allow the department chair, program administer or designee to determine if the student committed the alleged act of dishonesty. It is not a legal proceeding, but instead a focused conversation the hearing officer will have with the persons involved to determine what happened--to determine if the student is responsible for the alleged actions. These hearings are serious but need not be overly formal. Within limits, hearing officers may shape them in the way that makes the most sense to them. The following is a suggested hearing structure. The hearing officer (department chair, program administrator, or designee) begins by stating the purpose of the hearing: that the hearing officer has received a report of a possible act of academic dishonesty by the student and will determine after hearing the available evidence whether the student is responsible. If the accused student does not appear for the hearing, the hearing officer should conduct the hearing in the student s absence. Reasonable accommodations should be made if for legitimate reasons (e.g., the hearing was scheduled for a time when the student is in class) a student wishes to reschedule the hearing. Ask persons attending the hearing to introduce themselves. The student may have a member of the University community present to advise her or him. The instructor submitting the charges also will be present. In rare instances, parents may ask to sit in on the hearing, particularly if a finding of responsible may result in suspension. If parents ask to be present, the hearing officer should invite them to participate as observers. In some instances, particularly towards the end of the hearing, parents may have questions about the process and wish to make an observation. The hearing officer should listen courteously to their comments or respond to their questions, but except in limited instances such as these, parents or other family members are to be silent observers. Lawyers also in rare instances may ask to be present at the hearing. An attorney may ask to be involved, for example, if the student is also being charged criminally for the student s actions (e.g., sold stolen tests over the internet). If the hearing officer knows in advance of the hearing that a lawyer will be present, she or he should contact Robin Parker, University Counsel, for information on how to handle the attorney s involvement. In general, the attorney is to be present only to offer the student advice. The attorney does not represent the student by asking questions for the student, cross examining witnesses, etc. Given their training and normal practice, attorneys may resent or object to being put in the role of adviser instead of being an advocate. At the beginning of the hearing, the hearing officer should prescribe their role. (Again, participation of attorneys in these sorts of cases is rare.) Page 8

10 The hearing officer should then ask the instructor making the charges to describe to the hearing officer and the accused student the alleged incident of dishonesty and provide any documentation. In some instances, the instructor may want to call witnesses. Witnesses should remain outside the room until called for their testimony. After the instructor testifies, the student has the right to ask questions of the instructor. Similarly, after each witness, the student also may question him or her. Throughout this process, the hearing officer should feel free to ask any questions that will clarify the situation. After the instructor has presented the case, the hearing officer should invite the student to respond with the student s account of the situation, provide any written material or statements the student wishes to submit, and call any witnesses that the student has brought. Throughout this process, the hearing officer should ask any questions that will help clarify what occurred. After the hearing officer has heard all the information presented, the hearing officer will end the hearing, telling those present that she or he will be reflecting on the information the participants have presented; determine if the student is responsible, and if so, what should be the appropriate sanction to recommend to the dean; and will notify the student shortly of her or his decision and recommendations. In determining if the student is responsible for the alleged act of dishonesty, the standard of greater weight of the evidence is sufficient to determine that the dishonesty occurred. In other words, if the hearing officer concludes it is more likely than not that the student committed the alleged act, the hearing officer should hold the student responsible. The following is suggested wording for a notice of not responsible. September 22, 20XX To: From: David Doe Student Identification Number +xxxxxxxx Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English On September 22, 20XX, I met with you and Professor John Jones to determine if you committed an act of academic dishonesty when you submitted an in-class exam that appeared to contain passages copied verbatim from multiple web sites without customary and proper acknowledgment of sources. After listening to everyone s statements and studying all the material presented to me during the hearing, I have concluded that you were not responsible for the alleged violation. If you have any questions about this process or my decision, you may contact me at 529.xxxx or at my address. I wish you well in your continued academic work at Miami. c John Jones, Instructor Jack Able, Dean, College of Arts and Science Office of the Provost ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 3: NOT RESPONSIBLE LETTER Page 9

11 SANCTIONS Student honesty and integrity, both in and outside the classroom, should be a hallmark of the Miami student experience. To emphasize this principle, Miami s honesty regulations specify that any student who commits two acts of dishonesty in this community, regardless of whether these acts occurred in or outside of the classroom, will be suspended for at least one semester. Therefore, if the administrator adjudicating a case of academic dishonesty concludes that the student did commit an act of academic dishonesty, the hearing officer s next step in deciding on a sanction will be to contact the Office of the Provost to determine if the student has been found responsible for any previous acts of dishonesty in or outside the classroom. To determine if a student has been found responsible for any previous act of dishonesty, the hearing officer (department chair, program administrator, or designee) will contact the Office of the Provost at Provost@MUOHIO.edu for this information. The request should be worded as follows: In a recent academic dishonesty hearing, I have found Mr. David Doe, Student Identification Number +xxxxxxxx responsible for an act of academic dishonesty in ENG112, Fall Semester 20XX. Please inform me if David Doe has been found responsible for any previous acts of dishonesty at Miami University. Jane Smith, Department of Physics ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 4: INQUIRY TO PROVOST S OFFICE ABOUT PRIOR DISHONESTY VIOLATIONS A staff member in the Office of the Provost, most likely Lucille Hautau, after checking her own records in the Office of the Provost and the student s conduct record in the Office of Ethics and Student Conflict Resolution, will inform the department chair, program administrator or designee whether the student has been found responsible for any previous violations of Miami s honesty regulations. She will report any previous violations in the following manner: Professor Smith, Chair, Department of English On April 13, 20XX, David Doe was found responsible for a previous act of dishonesty when he was held responsible for violating Section 102 (Dishonesty) of the Code of Student Conduct for using a fake ID in uptown bars. Lucille Hautau, Office of the Provost If the hearing officer learns that the student has been found responsible for a previous violation the automatic recommended sanction will be suspension for at least one semester. This suspension may be either immediately or at the close of the current semester. Page 10

12 If the hearing officer learns that the student has no previous record of dishonesty, the hearing officer will recommend to the dean of the hearing officer s division one of the following three sanctions: A letter grade of F, the numerical grade of zero, a percentage grade of zero (0) percent, or a reduced grade for any project, paper, quiz, or interim or final examination, or any other portion of the course; A reduced grade for the entire course, including the possible specification of a course letter grade of F; A letter grade of F for the entire course with transcript notation of academic dishonesty. The following sanctions may be applied: Participation in an academic integrity workshop coordinated by Miami University. The student will be required to pay for the workshop. Failure to complete the workshop will result in a hold being placed on a student s ability to register for subsequent semesters or to change a class schedule. Suspension. In extraordinary circumstances, the recommendation for suspension may be forwarded. In most instances, the sanction is likely to be failure for a portion of the course an assignment or test coupled with mandatory attendance at an academic integrity workshop. Mandatory attendance at an academic integrity workshop should not be the single recommended sanction. It should be combined with one of the other sanction. The sanction or sanctions the hearing officer selects are recommendations that the hearing officer makes to the dean of the division in which the dishonesty was alleged to have occurred. The dean imposes the final sanction. At this point the hearing officer should communicate his or her decision and recommended sanctions in two ways: (1) a report to the dean of the division of the class in which the academic dishonesty occurred, and (2) notification to the student involved in the incident. The notification to the dean should include the following: The name of the student, The student s identification (plus) number, Details of the case, The hearing officer s recommended sanction. Along with the letter, the hearing officer should forward to the dean a copy of the file of correspondence and material related to the case. The notice to the dean should be comparable to the following example: Page 11

13 September 22, 20XX To: From: Jack Able, Dean, College of Arts and Science Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English On September 22, 20XX, I met with Mr. David Doe, Student Identification Number +xxxxxxxx, to address the charges made by Professor John Jones that Mr. Doe committed an act of academic dishonesty when he submitted an exam in ENG112 that contained multiple passages copied verbatim from web sites without customary and proper acknowledgment of sources. After listening to the accounts of Professor Jones and Mr. Doe and studying the written material both Mr. Doe and Instructor Jones provided to me, I concluded that Mr. Doe did commit an act of academic dishonesty. You will find the documenting material attached. In making my decision, I noted that the passages included on the exam were identical to those on the web sites. Furthermore, the student admitted that he did reference web sites on his exam, but was uncertain how to properly cite them. I recommend the following sanctions for Mr. Doe: A letter grade of F on the exam taken in ENG112 on September 8, 20XX Participation in an academic integrity seminar conducted by Miami University In my notice to Mr. Doe of my decision and recommendation to you, I have informed him that he has until 5:00 P.M. Wednesday, September 29, 20XX to submit an appeal of my decision to you. C John Jones, Instructor Enc. Academic dishonesty adjudication file for David Doe ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 5: REPORT OF HEARING OUTCOME TO THE DEAN The notice to the student, sent via the student s electronic mail address, must inform the student of the sanctions the hearing officer is recommending to the dean of the division in which alleged violation occurred. The notice also should include a statement of the student s right to appeal the hearing officer s decision. If the student chooses to appeal, the student must do so within five class (or examination) days following the student s receipt of the hearing officer s notice. The following is a recommended structure for the notice to the student: September 22, 20XX To: From: David Doe Student Identification Number +xxxxxxxx Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English On the basis of the information presented to me at an academic dishonesty hearing with you on September 22, 20XX, I am finding you responsible for an act of academic dishonesty when you submitted an exam on September 8, 20XX in ENG112 that contained passages copied verbatim from web sites without customary and proper acknowledgment of sources. I appreciate your honest admission of plagiarism, and direct you to for more information on proper citation of sources. After reviewing all the information related to this case, I am recommending to Dr. Jack Able, Dean of the College of Arts and Science, that you receive the following sanctions: A letter grade of F on the exam taken in ENG 112 on September 8, 20XX Mandatory participation in academic integrity seminar conducted by Miami University You have the right to appeal my decision as outlined in Section 1.5.D Appeals of the Chair/Program Director or Designee s Finding and Recommendation of The Student Handbook, available at Please note that if you elect to appeal my decision, you must submit your appeal in writing to Dean Able within five University class days of this notice in this instance, by 5:00 P.M. Wednesday, September 29, 20XX. C John Jones, Instructor Office of the Provost Jack Able, Dean, College of Arts and Science ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 6: REPORT OF HEARING OUTCOME TO THE ACCUSED STUDENT Page 12

14 APPEALS OF THE CHAIR/ PROGRAM DIRECTOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION The student has five University class days to appeal the decision of the chair/program director on the following grounds: 1) New evidence that was sufficiently substantial to have affected the outcome of the case; 2) Procedural defect that was sufficiently substantial to have affected the outcome of the case; 3) Inappropriate sanction. The dean will review any written appeal the student has submitted as well as the summary of the case submitted by the chair before making a final decision on sanctions. Students submitting appeals rarely use the first ground for appeal-- new evidence. Instead, most will argue that there was a substantive procedural defect and, at times, that the sanction was inappropriate. A letter of appeal from a student might be structured as follows. September 23, 20XX To: From: Jack Able, Dean, College of Arts and Science David Doe I am appealing the decision Professor Jane Smith, Chair of the Department of English, made following a hearing she conducted with me regarding charges of academic dishonesty Instructor John Jones made against me. I am appealing on two grounds: procedural error and inappropriate sanction. Although I asked to reschedule the hearing to give me more time to prepare, she declined my request, which I believe was a procedural error. If I had more time, I could have made a better case. I also have never been in trouble for academic misconduct, and I feel her recommended sanction is too severe given my good academic record on this campus. I am appealing the sanctions, believing they are too severe. I hope you will either change the sanctions or allow me more time to prepare for another hearing. C Professor Jane Smith If the dean concludes that the chair/program director did commit a substantive error (e.g., not notifying the student in sufficient time of the date of the hearing, not permitting the student to bring an adviser, refusing to allow a witness to present evidence, etc.), the dean will order a new hearing to be conducted by a different hearing officer. (See Section 1.5.D of The Student Handbook.) If the hearing officer levies a sanction that in dean s experience is either far more or far less severe than the sanctions imposed in similar cases, the dean may increase or decrease the sanction. The dean shall write the student of her or his decision regarding the appeal, in a manner like the following. If the dean concludes there were no grounds for appeal, the dean will levy the final sanction in the same notice. Page 13

15 September 24, 20XX To: From: David Doe Student Identification Number +xxxxxxxx Jack Able, Dean, College of Arts and Science I have reviewed the letter you submitted to me on September 23, 20XX in which you appeal the decisions Dr. Smith, Chair, Department of English, made following a hearing she conducted with you to address the acts of academic dishonesty in which you were alleged to have engaged when you submitted an exam on September 8, 20XX in ENG112 that contained multiple passages copied verbatim from web sites without customary and proper acknowledgement of sources. You argue that Dr. Smith made procedural errors in the case that were sufficiently substantive to have affected the outcome of the case and you argue that the sanction Dr. Smith recommended was too severe. After studying the material both you and Dr. Smith submitted to me regarding the case, I find no evidence of a procedural error sufficiently substantive to have affected the outcome of the case. Neither do I conclude the sanction was inappropriate. Therefore, I concur with the recommended sanctions: You will receive a grade of F on the exam taken in ENG112 on September 8, 20XX, You must complete an online academic integrity seminar conducted by Miami University by Friday, November 6, 20XX. David, Miami University takes student honesty very seriously. We expect you to act with integrity during all parts of your involvement on this campus. If you are found responsible for a second act of dishonesty either in or outside the classroom the automatic sanction imposed on you will be suspension from Miami for at least one semester. c John Jones, Instructor Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English Office of the Provost Office of the Registrar Office of Ethics and Student Conflict Resolution Academic Integrity Seminar: The University has arranged for and now assigns you to complete an online academic integrity seminar. You will have an individual instructor and tutor who will not review or have access to any disciplinary file in your case. Mr. Greg Pavela at MiamiUacademic@academicintegrityseminar.com to register for the seminar. Mr. Pavela serves as an off-campus consultant to the University. Be sure to properly identify yourself as a Miami student. Please remember that all communications from Mr. Pavela or any tutor he assigns to you will also be copied to the Office of the Provost. The cost for this seminar is $200 and will be charged to your bursar account. Failure to complete these sanctions will result in a hold being placed on your ability to register for subsequent semesters or to change a class schedule. All Miami University academic integrity charges against a student must be resolved and sanctions completed before a student is eligible to graduate. FINAL SANCTION BY THE DEAN ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 7: DEAN S RESPONSE TO STUDENT APPEAL If the student does not appeal the decision of the hearing officer, the dean will levy the final sanction. In most instances the dean will select the sanction recommended by the hearing officer (the department chair, program administrator or designee). In rare instances, if the dean concludes the sanction is not sufficiently severe or too punitive, the dean may alter the recommended sanction. In these instances, the dean must first confer with hearing officer and the professor bringing the charges before making the final decision. Page 14

16 If the final sanction the dean selects is less than suspension from the University, the letter should read as follows: September 24, 20XX To: From: David Doe Student Identification Number +xxxxxxxx Jack Able, Dean, College of Arts and Science I have received a notice from Professor Jane Smith, Chair of the Department of English, that she found you responsible for committing an act of academic dishonesty when you submitted an exam on September 8, 20XX in ENG112 that contained multiple passages copied verbatim from web sites without customary and proper acknowledge of sources. Given the seriousness of this incident, I have imposed the sanctions Professor Smith recommended to me: You will receive a grade of F on the exam taken in ENG112 on September 8, 20XX, You must complete an online academic integrity seminar conducted by Miami University by Friday, November 6, 20XX (see details below). David, Miami University takes student honesty very seriously. We expect you to act with integrity during all parts of your involvement on this campus. If you are found responsible for a second act of dishonesty either in or outside the classroom the automatic sanction imposed on you will be suspension from Miami for at least one semester. c John Jones, Instructor Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English Office of the Provost Office of the Registrar Office of Ethics and Student Conflict Resolution Academic Integrity Seminar: The University has arranged for and now assigns you to complete an online academic integrity seminar. You will have an individual instructor and tutor who will not review or have access to any disciplinary file in your case. Mr. Greg Pavela at MiamiUacademic@academicintegrityseminar.com to register for the seminar. Mr. Pavela serves as an off-campus consultant to the University. Be sure to properly identify yourself as a Miami student. Please remember that all communications from Mr. Pavela or any tutor he assigns to you will also be copied to the Office of the Provost. The cost for this seminar is $200 and will be charged to your bursar account. Failure to complete these sanctions will result in a hold being placed on your ability to register for subsequent semesters or to change a class schedule. All Miami University academic integrity charges against a student must be resolved and sanctions completed before a student is eligible to graduate. ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 8: DEAN S DECISION LETTER FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE NOT SUSPENDED Page 15

17 If the dean imposes suspension or dismissal as the sanction, the letter should read as follows. September 23, 20XX To: From: David Doe Student Identification Number +xxxxxxxx Jack Able, Dean, College of Arts and Science I have received a notice from Professor Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English, that she found you responsible for committing an act of academic dishonesty when you submitted an exam on September 8, 20XX in ENG112 that contained multiple passages copied verbatim from web sites without customary and proper acknowledge of sources. Since this is the second instance in which you have been found responsible for an act of dishonesty while you have been a student at Miami University, the automatic sanction is suspension from the university for at least one semester. Given the seriousness of this incident, I have imposed the sanctions Professor Smith recommended to me: You will receive a grade of F on the exam taken on September 8, 20XX in ENG112. You are suspended from Miami University beginning at the end of this semester through the end of Spring Semester 20XX. You have the right to appeal my decision to the University Appeals Board as outlined in section 1.5.F of The Student Handbook, available at: Please note that your appeal to Professor John Grant, Chair of the University Appeals Board, must be received in the Office of the Provost within five class days of your receipt of this notice, in this instance, by 5:00 P.M., October 1, 20XX. No penalties related to this incident will be imposed until you have had the opportunity to complete any appeal you may make of my decision. C John Jones, Instructor Jane Smith, Chair, Department of English Office of the Provost Office of the Registrar Office of Ethics and Student Conflict Resolution John Grant, Chair, University Appeals Board ACADEMIC DISHONESTY TEMPLATE LETTER 9: DEAN S DECISION LETTER FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE SUSPENDED Page 16

18 Frrequenttlly Asked Questtiions ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT HOW DO WE DEFINE ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT? Academic misconduct is defined as any activity that tends to compromise the academic integrity of the institution or subvert the educational process. For a listing of some of the types of academic misconduct, see the introduction to Chapter 5, Academic Integrity, of the Student Handbook. These are examples only. You are not constrained by this list. The charge DOES NOT have to be one of the listed examples. The faculty member is responsible for setting and enforcing the academic standards for his or her class. The faculty member decides, at least in the initial assessment, if conduct constitutes academic misconduct. IS IGNORANCE AN EXCUSE? No. Misunderstanding of the appropriate academic conduct will not be accepted as an excuse for academic misconduct. If a student is in doubt about appropriate academic conduct in a particular situation, he or she should consult with the instructor in the course, the department chair, or the academic dean in the appropriate division so as to avoid the serious charge of academic misconduct. WHAT IF TWO STUDENTS CHEAT TOGETHER? CAN WE HAVE ONE MEETING FOR BOTH STUDENTS? Yes, if the students consent in writing to one meeting. Consider carefully whether you want to have a joint meeting. Separate meetings often give a student the chance to implicate the other student while attempting to exonerate him or herself. Information gathered in the first meeting may be useful for the second. These sorts of hearings can get complicated. Our recommendation is that you confer with Robin Parker, University Counsel, or Susan Vaughn, Director of the Office of Ethics and Student Conflict Resolution, in deciding how best to proceed. Note: If you are going to rely on one student s account at a separate hearing that student should be available for the second hearing. WHAT BURDEN OF PROOF SHOULD I USE IN DETERMINING RESPONSIBILITY? Academic misconduct cases are required to be supported by the greater weight of the evidence. What does that mean? Simply who has submitted the most credible information? Often in the instructor said/student said cases the question is who do you believe. Page 17

19 MUST I ALLOW WITNESSES TO BE A PART OF HEARINGS? Yes, but they are only present when giving information. The accused student may submit a written statement, may invite witnesses to attend on his or her behalf, and may ask questions of witnesses called by the instructor. No anonymous accusations shall be admitted in evidence against anyone. IF THE ALLEGED MISCONDUCT OCCURES DURING EXAMS, SHOULD I HOLD THE HEARING OVER WINTER BREAK OR DURING SUMMER RECESS? If all participants (chair or designee, instructor, proctor-if applicable- and student) agree, then hearing may be held. Otherwise wait for the next instructional period to begin. Obviously for graduating seniors the hearing should occur as soon as possible. HOW DO I KNOW WHICH PENALTY TO IMPOSE? HOW DO I KNOW IF THIS IS THE STUDENT S FIRST, SECOND OR THIRD OFFENSE? After the meeting if you determine the student is responsible then you should contact the Provost s Office (Provost@muohio.edu) to determine the student s record. DO I HAVE TO IMPOSE A MANDATORY MINIMUM PENALTY? If you find the student committed academic misconduct you must impose any mandatory minimum penalty that may apply to the case. You may impose a greater penalty but not a lesser penalty. WHAT IF I DISCOVER EVIDENCE OF ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT AFTER A STUDENT HAS GRADUATED? We can proceed with a degree revocation process- contact the Office of General Counsel for more information. Page 18