Part 4. Academic Integrity
§ 1‑403 Penalties for Infractions of Academic Integrity
(a) 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.)
(b) Faculty members act as fact-finders and determine penalties. In the role of fact-finder, 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 the student has committed an infraction before determining the penalty. 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.
(c) 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 student’s 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)
(d) The instructor may recommend to the department or unit executive officer (hereafter abbreviated DEO) that the student be suspended or dismissed from the University. Such a recommendation would be made in addition to penalties imposed by the instructor.
The 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 appointment.