A. Academic Misconduct

The academic misconduct procedures address two key issues: (1) whether academic misconduct, as defined in the Code, has occurred, and (2) if so, what sanctions are appropriate.

As set out more fully below, various people and offices play specific roles in resolving these two issues. Whether misconduct has occurred in a particular course, and if so, whether a particular academic sanction (failing grade, repeating an assignment, etc.) is an appropriate response to a finding of misconduct in the course, is handled by the faculty member involved and, if a student appeals the faculty member’s determinations, by a hearing board within the school in which the misconduct allegedly occurred (College of Arts and Sciences, School of Business, etc.).

The Office of the Dean of Students serves two roles with respect to academic misconduct. First, that office serves as the centralized record keeper throughout the process. Second, after a final determination within a school that a student has committed academic misconduct, the Dean of Students and / or Designee determines whether an additional, university-wide sanction (disciplinary probation, suspension, or expulsion) is appropriate based on the nature and severity of the misconduct and/or prior violations by the student.

The Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs or Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education convenes Campus Review Boards to hear two types of appeals for graduate and professional, and undergraduate students, respectively: first, a limited appeal by the student that a serious procedural error deprived the student of a full and fair opportunity to present their response to the misconduct charge; and second, an appeal by the student asserting that a university-wide sanction imposed by the Dean of Students and / or Designee is arbitrary or disproportionate.

Informal Conference Initiated by Faculty Member

1. Faculty member informs student of alleged misconduct
2. Student given opportunity to respond
3. Faculty member makes decision of Responsible/Not Responsible based on a preponderance of evidence
4. Academic sanction assigned by faculty member
5. Faculty member submits written report form within 5 business days (defined in this document as days when the institution is open / when we can expect people are working to conduct business) of the academic sanction assigned by the faculty member to the Dean of Students and / or Designee, who sends report to student, Academic Dean and / or Designee in which student is a major, and Academic Dean and / or Designee where course is offered

If Student Wishes to Appeal Faculty Decision/s

1. A student may request a review of the faculty member’s decision within 7 business days after receiving a faculty member’s written report sent by the Dean of Students, by submitting a request in writing to the Academic Dean of the school or unit within which the offense occurred. A student may appeal a faculty member’s decision on the basis of preponderance of the evidence not being met, alleged bias, due process error, or arbitrary/disproportionate outcome. The student’s written appeal must include the evidence supporting their reason for appeal. The Academic Dean reviews submitted appeals and can reject any appeal that does not allege lack of preponderance of the evidence, bias, due process error, or arbitrary/disproportionate outcome.
2. Academic Dean notifies Dean of Students that appeal received
3. Academic Dean discusses matter with both student and faculty member, either separately or together, at their discretion
4. If no resolution within 7 business days of concluding individual meeting with student and faculty member, case is considered by unit hearing board

Unit Hearing Board (audio recorded)

1. Formal hearing with unit hearing board (three faculty and two students)
2. Scope: proportionate sanctioning/bias;
3. Decision: dismiss/sustain/sustain with lesser sanction
4. Within 7 business days after hearing, presiding officer sends decision in writing to Academic Dean of unit in which offense occurred, Dean of Students, student, faculty and Academic Dean of school in which student is a major
5. If student or faculty believes substantive procedural error, may appeal to Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs or Vice Provost for Undergraduate education in writing within 7 business days from receipt of decision

Appeal to Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs or Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education

1. Scope: due process error, alleged bias, or arbitrary/disproportionate outcome
2. Decision: sustain/return case to unit board to correct error/overturn
3. Vice Provost talks with student, faculty, and presiding officer of unit hearing board
4. If not resolved, Campus Review Board considers the record of the unit hearing board
5. If serious procedural error found to have occurred, case returned to unit board to correct error
6. Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs or Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education may appoint advisor to assist unit hearing board
7. If no finding of serious procedural errors, appeal dismissed; decision is final

Dean of Students Action

1. Scope: university-wide sanction
2. The academic unit, faculty, or Review Board is responsible for determining responsibility for academic misconduct. The Dean of Students decides whether or not to consider additional university-wide sanction.
3. Dean of Students provides written notification to student within 7 business days
4. If additional sanction likely, student has conference with Dean of Students
5. Dean of Students consults with Academic Dean of student’s school
6. Decision: no additional sanction, disciplinary probation, suspension, deferred suspension, expulsion

If Student Wishes to Appeal Dean of Students Sanction to Campus Review Board

1. Scope: disproportionate sanction
2. Decision: uphold/overturn/modify
3. Student submits written request for appeal within 7 business days of receipt of Dean of Students decision to Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs or Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education
4. Campus Review Board considers whether sanction is warranted - may uphold or impose lesser sanction
5. Decision is final