Fill - Free fillable CP 3.3.1 ACADEMIC HONESTY Related Board of Trustees (Craven Community College) PDF form

CP ‒ 3.3.1

ACADEMIC HONESTY

Related Board of Trustees Policy: BP 3.3

OPR: Vice President for Instruction

Approval: January 2012

Revision: August 27, 2019

ACADEMIC HONESTY

Honesty and integrity are essential elements of academic endeavors, including the free exchange of ideas

and knowledge. Students share in the responsibility to cultivate and maintain an environment where the

pursuit of new knowledge is deeply valued in a way that always acknowledges prior original works this

knowledge builds upon.

The College publishes a Student Code of Conduct (Code) to educate individuals about their rights and

responsibilities as members of the student body, which includes the requirement for students to exercise

academic honesty in all courses of study. This Procedure sets forth the processes to investigate potential

violations, ascertain relevant facts, and provide due process steps for student to present evidence and

appeal decisions. This procedure applies to students in curriculum and non-curriculum (workforce

development) courses. (Note: Allegations of Code violations not involving academic honesty are

addressed by College Procedure 3.3.2.)

College disciplinary proceedings may be instituted against a student charged with violation of a law if the

violation occurred at the College or College-sanctioned activities. Additional proceedings under this

procedure may be carried out prior to, simultaneously with, or following, civil or criminal proceedings

that take place off-campus.

If, during any step of this procedure, an instructor or appellant authority determines the alleged breach of

academic honesty is so severe as to warrant consideration of student suspension or expulsion, or likely to

be part of a broader pattern of misconduct, actions in this procedure are be suspended to allow for a more

comprehensive investigation using CP 3.3.2, Student Discipline. The instructor or appellant authority

refers the case, in writing, to the Dean of Student Services and forwards all case information collected to

date. Upon completion of CP 3.2.2. actions, the instructor or appellant authority will determine whether

resuming action under this procedure is appropriate, or to close the academic dishonesty case as having

been rendered moot.

Definitions

Plagiarism. Representing the work, words, images, or ideas of another’s as one’s own. Plagiarism

includes, but is not limited to

 Copying written material, images, or data from a source without quotation marks and/or

attribution;

 Failure to provide citation of works used;

 Paraphrasing material without proper citation for information that is not common knowledge.

Fabrication. Intentional use of material invented with the intent to deceive in obtaining academic

advantage. Fabrication includes, but is not limited to

 Submission of a paper, lab report or academic exercise with falsified, invented or fictitious data;

 Citation of information or data not actually in the source indicated;

 Listing sources in a bibliography not used in the submission;

 Submitting as one’s own work that which was prepared in part or total by another person

(including on-line sources).

Cheating. The attempt to obtain credit for work or knowledge dishonestly or deceptively, or to aid another

person in such an attempt. Cheating includes, but is not limited to

 Copying from another’s test, assignment, or homework;

 Taking or receiving unauthorized copies of examinations, quizzes, or other academic material;

 Using unauthorized study or reference aids (e.g., “crib notes,” “cheat sheets,” etc.), particularly

with respect to a test, evaluation or practicum;

 Fraudulently allowing any person to represent a registered student in any class meeting,

activity, test, evaluation or practicum.

Procedural Steps

1. Detection of Academic Dishonesty. Most often, the faculty member conducting the course of

instruction initially detects instances of academic dishonesty. The College uses a variety of safeguards to

encourage ethical student behavior and to assist in detecting deviations, to include exam proctoring,

cameras, audio tools, anti-plagiarism software, and so forth. Occasionally, another student or college

employee may report suspected dishonesty to an instructor.

2. Initial Evaluation. The course instructor exercises professional judgment in evaluating the

severity of the infraction (e.g., a momentary glance at a neighbor’s paper versus preparation and use of a

“crib sheet”). The instructor may consider whether the student’s actions were accidental (e.g.,

misunderstood testing instructions), inadvertent (e.g., a missed citation), or intentional (e.g., use of

fraudulent lab data). The instructor may also consider the actual or potential impact of the infraction

(e.g., a single test answer received versus the need to invalidate an exam for the entire class). Finally, the

instructor may consider the incident relative to the student’s overall academic conduct, to include any

previous instances of academic dishonesty and imposed sanctions, having occurred in any course taken by

the student at the College. When deemed necessary, the instructor may collect evidence or statements

from other students, staff, and faculty to facilitate making an appropriate evaluation.

3. Student Notification. The course instructor will notify the student (either verbally or in writing)

as soon as practical of an allegation of academic dishonesty. The notification to the student includes, but

is not limited to

 The dishonest action suspected or detected;

 The instructor’s initial evaluation;

 The resolution and/or sanction the instructor proposes, if applicable, warranted by the

academic dishonesty;

 Notification of the student’s rights to dispute the allegation and/or evaluation, to present

evidence in one’s defense, to reject the instructor’s proposed resolution or sanction, and to

appeal a subsequent decision.

4. Instructor Reconsideration. If the student does not dispute the instructor’s evaluation and

accepts the proposed resolution or sanction, the instructor will implement, and the instructor may close

the incident. Alternatively, if the student so chooses, the student may present information and evidence

for consideration by the instructor. The instructor may set a deadline for the student to present material,

especially when in the interest of minimizing adverse impacts to the student, to classmates, or to overall

class conduct and continuation.

5. Instructor Determination. The instructor will consider all timely statements, information and

evidence submitted by the student. Using this information, the instructor may uphold or modify the initial

evaluation, or dismiss the case. Upon reaching this determination, the instructor may affirm, modify, or

remove the proposed resolution and/or sanction. The instructor will notify the student, in writing, of the

final determination and resulting decision. The instructor will also notify their supervisor and a notation

will be made in the student’s electronic record.

6. First Student Appeal. The student may accept the Instructor Determination and the

accompanying resolution/sanction. The case is then closed and the resolution/sanction is implemented.

The student may choose to appeal the Instructor Determination, the resolution/sanction, or both. The

student may appeal, in writing, by completing and submitting Form 3.3.1a., “Student Appeal – Academic

Honesty”, within seven work days of notification of the Instructor Determination. The first appeal is

made to the appropriate Program Director or Department Chair. The student may request a personal

meeting, present written materials, or both. The appeal must specifically address why the student believes

the instructor’s decision(s) is in error. An appeal that is limited to a restatement of previous information

submitted will not be considered.

7. Program Director/Department Chair Decision. The program director/department chair will

meet with the student (if requested) and review all materials related to the instructor’s determination and

the student appeal. The program director/department chair may meet with or request additional materials

from the instructor, student, or witnesses to facilitate the review. A decision to either uphold or overturn

the Instructor Determination will be made within seven work days following receipt of meeting with the

student or receipt of the student’s appeal materials, whichever is later, and written notification sent to the

student. The program director/department chair’s decision may also include reducing part or all of the

imposed sanction. The program director/department chair will make a notation of the decision in the

student’s electronic record.

8. Second Student Appeal. The student may accept the Program Director/Department Chair

decision and the accompanying resolution/sanction. The case is then closed and the sanction is

implemented. The student may choose to appeal the Program Director/Department Chair decision, the

sanction, or both. The student may appeal, in writing, by completing and submitting Form 3.3.1a.,

“Student Appeal – Academic Honesty,” within seven work days of notification of the Program

Director/Department Chair decision. The second appeal is made to the appropriate Academic Dean. The

student may request a personal meeting, present written materials, or both. The appeal must specifically

address why the student believes the first appeal decision is in error. An appeal that is limited to a

restatement of previous information submitted will not be considered.

9. Academic Dean Decision. The Academic Dean will meet with the student (if requested) and

review all materials related to the instructor’s determination and the student appeals. The Academic Dean

may meet with or request additional materials from the instructor, student, or witnesses to facilitate the

review.

The Academic Dean may elect to convene an Academic Honor Committee to perform a more

comprehensive review of the student’s appeal. The committee will consist of six members—the Student

Government Associate President (or designee), two at-large students (who are not classmates of the

appealing student), two faculty members (not including the course instructor, with at least one from

outside the program director’s supervision), and a Student Services staff member. A faculty member

(from outside the program) will chair the committee, and will notify the student to afford the student an

opportunity to appear before the committee. The committee will meet within seven working days of the

Academic Dean’s receipt of the appeal. The committee will review all case materials, and may interview

any individuals who may provide relevant information. The committee will provide the Academic Dean

its conclusions and recommendations within seven working days of having convened.

The Academic Dean may accept, reject or modify the Academic Honor Committee’s conclusions and

recommendations. All materials from the committee, include conclusions and recommendations, are

made part of the case record.

A decision to either uphold or overturn the First Appeal will be made within seven work days following a

meeting with the student, receipt of the student’s appeal materials, or receipt of the Academic Honor

Committee report, whichever is later, and written notification is sent to the student. The Academic

Dean’s decision may also include reducing part or all of the sanction imposed following the first appeal.

The Dean’s Office will make a notation of the decision in the student’s electronic record.

10. Final Student Appeal. The student may accept the Academic Dean decision and the

accompanying resolution/sanction. The case is then closed and the sanction is implemented. The student

may choose to appeal Academic Dean’s decision, the sanction, or both. The student may appeal, in

writing, by completing and submitting Form 3.3.1a., “Student Appeal – Academic Honesty, ” within

seven work days of notification of the Academic Dean decision. The final appeal is made to the

appropriate Vice President for Instruction (Chief Academic Officer). [Note: The appeal of academic

honesty decisions made by the Dean of Workforce Development is also made to the Vice President for

Instruction.] The student may request a personal meeting, present written materials, or both. The appeal

must specifically address why the student believes the second appeal decision is in error. An appeal that

is limited to a restatement of previous information submitted will not be considered.

11. Chief Academic Officer Decision. The Vice President for Instruction will meet with the student

(if requested) and review all materials related to the instructor’s determination and subsequent appeals.

The Vice President for Instruction may meet with or request additional materials from the instructor,

student, or witnesses to facilitate the review. A decision to either uphold or overturn the Second Appeal

will be made within seven work days following receipt of meeting with the student or receipt of the

student’s appeal materials, whichever is later, and written notification sent to the student. The Chief

Academic Officer’s decision may also include reducing part or all of the sanction imposed following the

second appeal. The Chief Academic Officer’s decision is final and not subject to further appeal.

Sanctions

Student sanctions may be imposed as a result of academic dishonesty. The primary purpose of sanctions

are to serve as remediating teaching and learning tools, to discourage further instances of dishonesty and

to cultivate ethical and honest habits of academic inquiry. The student’s instructor, having immediate

knowledge of the student including current and past conduct, and having the best estimation of the

student’s prospects for remediation and future success, is most relied upon judgment in selection of the

appropriate level of sanction. The instructor should consult the Dean of Student Services to ascertain

whether there are previous significant incidents of academic honesty in the student’s record. Sanctions,

listed in order of generally increasing severity include, but are not limited to

 Re-accomplishment. The student may be directed to re-accomplish the task, assignment, quiz,

test, or practicum in a manner that removes or excludes material that was judged to have been

academically dishonest.

 Supplemental Assignment. The student may be directed to accomplish a task, assignment, quiz,

test, or practicum supplemental to other coursework to re-enforce appropriate academic habits.

 Grade Penalty. Student is given a grade penalty (reducing the awarded grade by a specified

amount) for the task, assignment, quiz, test, or practicum that was impacted by the academic

dishonesty.

 “0” Grade. The student is given a zero grade for the task, assignment, quiz, test, or practicum

that was impacted by the academic dishonesty. The instructor sends a memo to the Dean of

Student Services to include the sanction in the student’s record.

 “F” Course Grade. The student is given a failing grade for course impacted by the academic

dishonesty. The instructor sends a memo to the Dean of Student Services to include the sanction

in the student’s record. Note: The Grade Appeal Process does not apply—appeals are processed

in accordance with the foregoing section.

 Student Suspension and Expulsion. Instances of academic dishonesty that are so severe as to

warrant consideration of suspension or expulsion are referred to the Dean of Student Services to

be investigated and processed under CP 3.2.2., Student Discipline.

Return to Table of Contents

STUDENT APPEAL – Academic Honesty

Students should refer to College Procedure 3.3.1, “Academic Honesty,” which describes the steps taken to address

allegations of academic dishonesty—how reports are made and investigations conducted; how decisions are rendered;

sanctions that may be imposed; and student due-process rights, including appeals.

FORM 3.3.1a. Student Appeal – Academic Honesty Page 1 Revision: August 2019

STUDENT INFORMATION

Student Name:

Student ID:

Course Name:

Date of Appeal:

LEVEL OF APPEAL

First Appeal of Instructor Determination

Second Appeal of Program Director / Department Chair Decision

Final Appeal of Academic Dean Decision

TYPE OF APPEAL

(Appeal must be made within seven (7) working days of the prior decision or appeal.)

Appeal of Decision Appeal of Imposed Sanction Appeal of Both Decision and Sanction

STUDENT NARRATIVE

Describe why the decision regarding academic honesty should be modified or overturned and/or the sanction that was

imposed should be removed or modified. Attach additional pages as needed.

Student Signature:

Date:

FORM 3.3.1a. Student Appeal – Academic Honesty Page 2 Revision: August 2019

RECEIPT OF APPEAL

Received By (Name):

Date Received:

_______________

________________

Position Title:

APPEAL REVIEW CONDUCTED

(Check all that apply; provide detailed information in narrative section and attach pages as needed.)

☐ Review of student case file (including any prior appeals)

☐ Review of new written information from appealing student (attach pages)

☐ In-person interview with appealing student Date: _

☐ In-person interview(s) with additional individuals ☐ Student(s) ☐ Faculty ☐ Staff ☐ Other

☐ Review of new written information received from ☐ Student(s) ☐ Faculty ☐ Staff ☐ Other

☐ Academic Honor Committee Convened Date:

Committee Recommendation Received Date:

APPEAL REVIEW NARRATIVE

(Provide amplifying information of appeal review. Attach additional pages as needed.)

APPEAL DECISION

(Decision within seven (7) working days of the date the appeal

or Academic Honor Committee recommendation was received.)

☐ ACADEMIC HONESTY DECISION IS AFFIRMED.

☐ Review of case history and submitted evidence, including new evidence submitted, supports finding that

the previous decision(s) of ☐ Instructor ☐ Program Director/Department Head ☐ Academic Dean was

correct and appropriate.

☐ Student appeal was limited to restatement of previous information; no new information was provided.

☐ ACADEMIC HONESTY DECISION IS OVERTURNED.

Review of case history and submitted evidence, including new evidence submitted, indicates the previous

decision(s) of ☐ Instructor ☐ Program Director/Department Head ☐ Academic Dean was flawed or

inappropriate.

☐ SANCTION(S) IMPOSED BY ☐ Instructor ☐ Program Director/Department Head ☐ Academic Dean

IS AFFIRMED.

☐ SANCTION(S) IMPOSED BY ☐ Instructor ☐ Program Director/Department Head ☐ Academic Dean

IS MODIFIED/REMOVED AS FOLLOWS:

Signature:

Date:

Download
Save PDF to desktop

Email
Email completed PDF

Send for Signing
Email for others to sign

Print
Print document

NAME

CP 3.3.1 ACADEMIC HONESTY Related Board of Trustees (Craven Community College)

View Audit Log
Print With Audit Log
Duplicate Document

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank CP 3.3.1 ACADEMIC HONESTY Related Board of Trustees (Craven Community College) Form

Related forms

Fillable CP 3.3.1 ACADEMIC HONESTY Related Board of Trustees (Craven Community College)

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank CP 3.3.1 ACADEMIC HONESTY Related Board of Trustees (Craven Community College) Form

Related forms

First 20 documents completely FREE!