6,502: Academic Standards

Revised: August 2025

Introduction

Specific to the academic pursuits of students, the �鶹��ýAV, believes the maintenance of academic standards is a joint responsibility of the students and faculty of the University. Freedom to teach and to learn is dependent upon individual and collective conduct to permit the pursuit and exchange of knowledge and opinion. Faculty are responsible for creating an academic environment in which students may display their knowledge. This environment includes an orderly testing space and sufficient safeguards to inhibit academic misconduct. Students are responsible for relying on their knowledge and resources for completion of course assignments and in the evaluation process. The trust developed in the maintenance of academic standards is necessary for the fair evaluation of all students. This policy is intended to fulfill the purpose of UAM 3,002, which states the students shall have protection through orderly procedures as established by the President of the University against prejudice or capricious academic evaluation.

Academic standards

A student may receive academic and disciplinary sanctions for academic misconduct in the form of:

Cheating
Plagiarism, and/or
Other attempts to obtain or earn grades under false pretenses, in any University course.

Subsection A: Definitions

Plagiarism: For this policy, “Plagiarism” is defined as: (1) the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit; (2) the submission of ideas, processes, results or words not developed by the student specifically for the coursework at hand without the appropriate credit being given; or (3) assisting in the act of plagiarism by allowing one’s work to be used as described above.
Cheating: For this policy, “Cheating” is defined as (1) obtaining or providing unauthorized resources and/or information while executing, completing or in relation to coursework, through verbal, visual or unauthorized use of books, notes, text, technologies and/or technological devices, including but not limited to mobile devices, smart phones, cell phones, calculators, translators, software or other materials; (2) unauthorized use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) content generators or generative AI tools; (3) unauthorized collaboration on coursework; (4) turning in the same work in more than one class (or when repeating a class), unless permission is received in advance from the instructor; (5) taking an examination for another student, or arranging for another person to take an exam in one’s place; (6) altering or changing test answers after submittal for grading; (7) altering or changing grades after grades have been awarded; (8) altering or changing other academic records once these are official; and/or (9) facilitating or permitting any of the above-listed items. For this definition of cheating, the term “unauthorized” is not obtaining direct or explicit approval of the Instructor of Record. For this definition of cheating, the term “coursework” is an examination, laboratory experience or report, papers, homework or quizzes or any other class assignment or class activity.
Working Days: For this policy, “Working Days” are defined as calendar days, excluding University holidays and weekends.
Department Chair: For this policy, “Department Chair” is defined as the chair, the program director or program coordinator (where there is no chair or program director) of the department or program that is offering the course. In instances where the Department Chair is the instructor of record, the reporting shall go to the Dean or the Dean’s Designee instead of the Department Chair.
Instructor of Record: For this policy, “Instructor of Record” is the individual listed as the instructor of record in the current semester schedule.
Student: For this policy, “Student” refers to any person identified as a student because of their status as enrolled in the instruction on a part-time, full-time, or auditing basis.
Disability Resource Center Representative: A representative from the Disability Resource Center (DRC) may be present during the initial academic conference, preliminary meeting, and hearing processes to protect the interests and rights of the student and/or University pursuant to federal law.

Subsection B: General Overview of the Process for Undergraduate and Graduate Students

The process described in this policy applies to both undergraduate and graduate students.
To impose an academic sanction for suspected academic misconduct, the Instructor of Record must issue a Charging Letter as described in Subsection D(2). Any academic misconduct charge must be accompanied by a corresponding academic sanction in Subsection C.
Advisors
1. During the academic misconduct hearing, the student may be assisted by one (1) advisor of their choosing, if desired.
2. The student’s advisor cannot be a witness or have a conflict of interest in the matter, as determined by the Vice President of Student Affairs.
3. The advisor may be an employee of the DRC. If the student chooses to have both an advisor and a DRC Representative, these roles must be fulfilled by two different individuals.
4. The advisor may be an attorney.
5. The advisor serves as a supporter and provides advise directly to the student during the hearing.
6. The student, and not the advisor, is responsible for presenting the student’s own information, introducing witnesses, asking questions, answering questions, and all other procedures throughout the hearing.
7. The advisor has no right to participate or speak during the hearing, except to the student.
8. The student must notify the Assistant Dean for Student Conduct in writing and email their advisor’s first and last name and whether they are an attorney, at least five (5) Working Days before the hearing.
9. If the student chooses to have an attorney as their advisor during the hearing, the Instructor of Record may be accompanied by an attorney as their advisor during the hearing. j
10. The Instructor of Record may have an advisor, who is not an attorney during the hearing processes regardless of if the student chooses to have an attorney. The ole of an advisor is the same.
Disability Resource Center Representative
1. The Disability Resource Center Representative cannot be a witness or have a conflict of interest in the matter, as determined by the Vice President of Student Affairs or designee.
2. The student is responsible for presenting their own information, introducing witnesses, asking questions, answering questions, and all other procedures throughout the initial academic conference, preliminary meeting, and hearing processes.
3. The Disability Resource Center Representative does not question witnesses, speak to the Instructor of Record or the Academic Integrity Board regarding whether the student is responsible or not responsible, or advocate on behalf of the student outside the realm of their accommodation(s) during the initial academic conference, preliminary meeting, and/or the hearing.
Attempted Course Withdrawal or Audit
1. Students charged with violating academic misconduct policies may not withdraw from the course or change its status to avoid the charge or sanction and will be reinstated if they attempt to do so.
2. Students removed or ejected from a testing situation by the instructor or proctor for academic misconduct may not withdraw from the course and will be reinstated if they attempt to do so.
3. Exceptions for withdrawal may be requested to the Vice Provost of Undergraduate Education or Vice Provost of Graduate Education, as applicable.
Grade Replacement or Appeals
1. Students found responsible for Level C violations may not utilize grade replacement or grade appeals policies for the affected course.
2. In cases where a temporary Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory (“S/U”) grading policy is available, an “F” received for a Level C violation cannot be replaced with a “U”.
Violations by Non-Enrolled Students
1. Faculty or University staff who discover violations by non-enrolled students (e.g., aiding current students or completing work for them) must document and report the misconduct to the Office of Student Conduct.
2. Disciplinary sanctions may be imposed by the Office of Student Conduct, even if academic sanctions are not possible due to the student’s non-enrollment in the course.
Repeat Violations
1. If the student accepts responsibility or is found responsible for violating this policy two or more times during the student’s enrollment at the University, the Office of Student Conduct may pursue disciplinary action and impose disciplinary sanction(s) in alignment with the Student Code of Conduct.
2. Academic misconduct violations from a degree program cannot be used against a student in subsequent degree programs, except when violations occurred in an accelerated Bachelor’s/Master’s program.
Sanctions for violations of university academic standards for class misconduct may include academic and/or disciplinary sanctions. Academic sanctions for class misconduct may include temporary removal from the class by the Faculty Member or being dropped from the class. Dropping a student from a class shall be approved by the dean. The student shall not receive a refund for course fees or tuition.
Sanctions for violations of university academic standards for academic dishonesty may include academic and/or disciplinary sanctions. Academic sanctions for both undergraduate and graduate students may include: filing a final grade of “F”, reducing the student’s final course grade one or two full grade points; giving a reduced grade or zero on the coursework; or requiring the student to retake or resubmit the coursework. The academic sanction is to be determined by the extent of the dishonesty, in accordance with Subsection C. The academic sanction initially imposed by the Faculty Member as a result of the academic dishonesty charge may be subject to change if the student utilizes the procedures stated in Subsection D(3) of this policy.
An undergraduate or graduate student may also be subject to discipline for academic dishonesty pursuant to the provisions of the University’s Student Code of Conduct. Disciplinary sanctions for both undergraduate and graduate students may include the following: warning, reprimand, restitution, probation, suspension, expulsion, or revocation of degree. Students who violate this policy by helping others to cheat in a course in which they are themselves not currently enrolled are subject to disciplinary sanctions.

Subsection C: Violations and Sanctions

Sanctions for Cheating, Plagiarism, or False Pretenses
1. The severity of academic sanctions is determined by the severity and egregiousness of the academic misconduct.
2. Academic sanctions shall align with the level of the academic misconduct charge, as outlined below:
  - Level A Violations: Instances where the student’s actions constituted academic misconduct to a modest degree. Examples include, but are not limited to:
    1. Improper documentation of quoted text, unauthorized collaboration on coursework that does not rise to a Level B or C.
    2. Unauthorized use of artificial intelligence to a modest degree.
      - Sanctions include one of the following: (1) retake the exam or resubmit the coursework with a reduced grade on the replacement coursework, or reduced grade or zero on the original coursework.
  - Level B Violations: Instances where the student’s actions constituted substantial academic misconduct. Examples include, but are not limited to: multiple failures to document quoted text within an assignment, inappropriate paraphrasing of others’ written work, falsely signing in another student as present in class, submitting the same coursework for two different courses without instructor permission. Unauthorized use of artificial intelligence to a substantial degree.
    - Sanctions include Level A sanctions plus reducing the final course grade by one or more letter grades.
  - Level C Violations: Instances where the student’s actions constitute severe and egregious acts of academic misconduct. Examples include, but are not limited to: presenting work written predominantly by another as one’s own, presenting a central idea or theses that was previously formulated by another as one’s own, obtaining or distributing an exam without the instructor’s permission, submitting coursework completed by another person, or completing coursework for another person, copying answers, using cheat sheets, notes, books, or any type of unauthorized information during exams when expressly prohibited by instructor, falsification or fabrication of data. Unauthorized use of artificial intelligence to a severe and egregious degree.
    - Sanction: is assigning a permanent “F” for the course, which is ineligible for the grade replacement or appeal policies.

Subsection D: Academic Misconduct Procedures for Undergraduate and Graduate Students

The Initial Academic Conference (Optional)
1. An Instructor of Record who suspects that a student has committed an act of academic misconduct may notify the student in writing of the nature of the allegation and schedule an initial meeting with the student. This initial conference should occur within five (5) Working Days of discovery of the alleged violation. This conference is hereafter referred to as “Initial Academic Conference”.
2. The Notice of Initial Academic Conference shall inform the student of the following:
  1. The student may have violated the Academic Standards Policy;
  2. The meeting is voluntary;
  3. Any information shared by the student during this meeting may become part of the investigation;
  4. The investigation will continue regardless of whether the student participates in the initial academic conference; and
  5. The student may request a Disability Resource Representative to be present.
1. The Instructor of Record may use the Initial Academic Conference Template.
2. The Initial Academic Conference shall be between the student and the Instructor of Record and neither the student nor the Instructor of Record shall have the right to an advisor at the Initial Academic Conference, but the student may request a Disability Resource Center Representative be present.
3. At the conclusion of the Initial Academic Conference, the following results may occur:
  1. The allegation(s) are dismissed.
  2. The student accepts responsibility for the violation(s) and accepts the academic sanction(s).
  3. The Instructor of Record believes a violation occurred and the student does not accept responsibility for the violation(s) and/or academic sanction(s).
After the Initial Academic Conference, if the allegations are dismissed and the Instructor of Record decides not to pursue a charge of academic misconduct, the Instructor of Record shall notify the student and the Assistant Dean, Student Conduct in writing, within five (5) Working Days, that the Instructor of Record chosen not to charge the student with academic misconduct and will not impose an academic sanction due to suspected academic misconduct. If the Instructor of Record decides to pursue a charge of academic misconduct in accordance with Subsection C they will then proceed as described in Subsection D(2): Charging Letter.
Charging Letter (Required) The Instructor of Record has the right to decide whether to give a student an academic sanction. If the Instructor of Record wants to give a student an academic sanction, the Instructor of Record must comply with the process stated in this policy and specifically, Subsection C, including charging the student with academic misconduct. The potential outcomes of not charging a case of academic misconduct may include, but are not limited to:
1. inability to track multiple academic misconduct violations;
2. a request made by the student for concierge services;
3. ability of student to withdraw from the course;
4. ability of student to repeat course; and/or
5. administrative change or withdrawal of an academic sanction imposed without proper process as stated in this policy.
To charge a student with academic misconduct, the following procedures must be followed.
1. When a student is suspected of academic misconduct, the Instructor of Record shall notify the student of the academic misconduct charges, in the following manner:
  1. The Instructor of Record shall notify the student in writing via the student’s official University email (@unr.edu) and/or Webcampus. This notification shall be sent no later than twenty (20) Working Days after the Instructor of Record first suspected the student engaged in academic misconduct. This written notification is hereafter referred to as “Charging Letter”.
2. The Instructor of Record must use the Charging Letter Template.
3. The Charging Letter shall inform the student of all of the following:
  1. The specific charge(s) and the proposed academic sanction(s);
  2. The document(s) and/or evidence in support of the charges(s);
    1. The document(s) and/or evidence must be attached to or included with the Charging Letter.
    2. To the extent the evidence is eyewitness testimony, it must be specifically and sufficiently described in the Charging Letter.
    3. Only documents and/or evidence submitted with the Charging Letter or eyewitness testimony specifically and sufficiently described within the Charging Letter by the Instructor of Record shall be considered on behalf of the Instructor of Record.
  3. The date the Instructor of Record first suspected the student engaged in the alleged academic misconduct.
  4. The date an Initial Academic Conference was requested by the Instructor of Record, if any. If a Notice of Initial Academic Conference was sent, it shall be attached to or included with the Charging Letter.
  5. The Academic Standards Policy to be followed and where it is located;
  6. The student has the right to appeal the charge(s) of academic misconduct and if the student decides to appeal the academic misconduct charge(s) and wants a hearing before the Academic Integrity Board, the student shall notify the Department Chair in writing within ten (10) Working Days from the date of the Charging Letter;
  7. The student has the right to appeal the charge(s) of academic misconduct if the charging process as stated in Subsections D(1) and D(2) have not been met and request an administrative review. The student shall notify the Department Chair in writing within ten (10) Working Days from the date of the Charging Letter. If the student appeals the academic misconduct charge(s) or academic sanction(s), the student should continue attending and participating in the class pending the outcome of the appeal and the student cannot withdraw from the course in question to avoid the academic misconduct charge(s) and/or academic sanction(s).
4. The Charging Letter shall be to the student’s official University email (@unr.edu) and/or Webcampus. If the Charging Letter is delivered as prescribed it is deemed received. A copy of the Charging Letter also shall be sent to the Office of Student Conduct and the Department Chair.
5. The student has ten (10) Working Days from the date of the Charging Letter to appeal to the Department Chair and request a hearing before the Academic Integrity Board and/or request an administrative review before a Hearing Officer.
Student’s Response to Charging Letter
1. A student can respond to the Charging Letter in one of the following ways:
  1. schedule a preliminary meeting with the Instructor of Record to discuss the charge(s) and sanction(s) or to resolve the matter without a hearing;
  2. appeal the charge(s) and sanction(s);
  3. accept the charge(s) and appeal the sanction(s);
  4. accept the charge(s) and sanction(s); or
  5. appeal the charge(s) based upon an error in the charging process, as described in Subsections D(1) and D(2).
2. Preliminary Meeting: Students who wish to discuss the charge(s) and sanction(s) with the Instructor of Record or resolve the matter without a hearing, shall schedule a meeting, to occur as soon as practical, with the charging Instructor of Record to discuss the academic misconduct charge(s). The student shall email the Faculty Member and the Office of Student Conduct within five (5) Working Days from the date of the Charging Letter to schedule the meeting.
  1. The failure to include the Office of Student Conduct in the email does not waive the student’s right to file an appeal within the applicable time period for filing an appeal as stated in Subsection D(3)(c). The failure of the student to schedule and participate in the meeting with the Instructor of Record does not waive the student’s right to file an appeal within the applicable time period for filing an appeal as stated in Subsection D(3)(c) below.
  2. The student or the Instructor of Record may also request to have the Department Chair or Program Director, or their designee, present at the meeting.
  3. After the meeting, the Instructor of Record may maintain the charge(s) and sanction(s) as submitted in the Charging Letter, may withdraw the charge(s) and sanction(s), may lower the charge(s) to a lesser charge and/or may lower and/or change the academic sanction(s) to a lesser academic sanction or different sanction in the same level.
  4. The Instructor of Record shall notify the Office of Student Conduct in writing if the academic misconduct charge(s) has (have) been changed or withdrawn.
3. Appeal of the Academic Misconduct Charge(s) and Academic Sanction(s): If the academic misconduct charge(s) and sanction(s) is (are) not withdrawn and the student decides to pursue an appeal of the academic misconduct charge(s) presented in the Charging Letter the student shall appeal in writing to the Office of Student Conduct and request a hearing before the Academic Integrity Board within ten (10) Working Days to prepare for a hearing, but this period may be waived by the student in writing.
  1. Accept the Academic Misconduct Charge(s) and Appeal the Academic Sanction(s): The student may request the academic sanction(s) be reviewed if the academic sanction(s) is (are) not in alignment with the sanctions for academic misconduct described in this policy. The student cannot appeal the academic misconduct charge(s) and academic sanction(s) after they request an academic sanction review. The matter shall be reviewed by a Hearing Officer in accordance with Subsection D(3)(e), for charging deficiencies not in compliance with Subsections D(1) and D(2). The student shall appeal in writing to the Office of Student Conduct and request an academic sanction review before a Hearing Officer within ten (10) Working Days from the date of the Charging Letter. The Office of Student Conduct shall forward the student’s appeal and request for an academic sanction review to a Hearing Officer within two (2) Working Days of receipt of the request.
  2. The Hearing Officer has five (5) Working Days after the Office of Student Conduct forwards the student’s appeal and request for an academic sanction review to decide whether the academic sanction(s) will stand and notify the appropriate parties in writing.
  3. If the Hearing Officer determines the academic sanction(s) will not stand, the Hearing Officer shall impose academic sanction(s) consistent with this policy and inform the student, the Instructor of Record, and the Office of Student Conduct in writing.
  4. If the Hearing Officer determines the academic sanction(s) will stand, the Hearing Officer shall inform the student and the Office of Student Conduct in writing.
  5. The decision of the Hearing Officer is final. The student does not have access to the grade appeal process for the grade received as a sanction for academic misconduct.
4. Acceptance of Charges(s) and Academic Sanction(s): If the student accepts responsibility for the academic misconduct charge(s) and academic sanction(s) or does not appeal within the applicable time period, there can be no further appeal. The academic misconduct charge(s) and academic sanction(s) shall become a part of the student’s academic record. If the academic misconduct charge is a second or subsequent violation of this policy during the student’s enrollment at the University, the Office of Student Conduct may take up the matter for disciplinary action and sanction under the Student Code of Conduct, as appropriate.
5. Appeal of Charging Deficiencies: If the student appeals the Charging Letter on the basis that it does not meet the requirements for the charging process, as described in Subsections D(1) and D(2), a Hearing Officer shall be appointed to review the Charging Letter to determine if it is deficient. The Hearing Officer shall be appointed from the same names and in the same manner as chairs for academic integrity hearings, as described in Subsection E.
  1. Such appeals shall be in writing (Statement of Appeal) and emailed to the Office of Student Conduct within ten (10) Working Days from the date of the Charging Letter, who will then forward the appeal to the Hearing Officer. The Office of Student Conduct shall forward the student’s appeal and request for a charging deficiency review to a Hearing Officer within two (2) Working Days of receipt of the request.
  2. The appeal shall identify or state each error in the charging process as described in Subsections D(1) and D(2).
  1. The Hearing Officer shall review the appeal to determine if one or more of the stated grounds for an appeal have been met. The Hearing Officer has five (5) Working Days after the Office of Student Conduct forwards the student’s appeal and request for a charging deficiency review to decide whether the Charging Letter will stand and notify the appropriate parties.
  2. If the Hearing Officer determines that none of the stated requirements for the charging process have been met, the appeal shall be denied and the student and the Office of Student Conduct shall be notified in writing by the Hearing Officer. The student shall then have five (5) Working Days from the date of the Hearing Officer’s decision, to decide whether to accept the academic misconduct charge(s) and academic sanction(s) or appeal the academic misconduct charge(s) and academic sanction(s). If the student decides to appeal the academic misconduct charge(s) and academic sanction(s), they shall appeal to the Office of Student Conduct and request a hearing before the Academic Integrity Board within the given time period.
  3. If the Hearing Officer determines that one or more of the stated requirements for the charging process have not been met, the Hearing Officer shall dismiss the academic misconduct charge(s) and academic sanction(s) and notify the student, the Instructor of Record and the Office of Student Conduct in writing. No academic sanction(s) shall be imposed, and the academic misconduct charge(s) shall be expunged from the student’s record. The Instructor of Record shall change the grade assigned so that the charged academic misconduct does not factor into the coursework or course grade in any manner. The grade shall be changes by the Instructor of Record within five (5) Working Days after the Hearing Officer makes their finding.
  4. The decision of the Hearing Officer is final.
Violations of Academic Standards Policy by Students Not Currently Enrolled in the Course. The instructor of record or other party who identifies violations of this policy by students not currently enrolled in a course (e.g. a student from a previous semester provides completed work to current student, who submits it as their own; or a student completes work for another student) shall write a letter of complaint to the OSC in which the party 1) identifies the student now currently enrolled in the course who is alleged to have violated the policy and 2) provides documentation of the charge. Disciplinary Sanction: The OSC may impose a disciplinary sanction for a violation of this policy, both in instances when an academic sanction has been imposed and in instances when an academic sanction is not possible because the student was not enrolled in the course in which the violation occurred. Students who wish to appeal a disciplinary sanction may do so through the OSC, in accordance with the procedures stated in Section IV of the Student Code, Student Disciplinary Procedures.
Setting the Hearing The hearing process is as follows:
1. Hearing Deadline: The Academic Integrity Board shall be empaneled by the Office of Student Conduct. Within fifteen (15) Working Days after the matter has been referred to the Office of Student Conduct, the Office of Student Conduct shall set a hearing to be held as soon as practical.
  1. The student and the Instructor of Record are allowed one (1) continuance if made in writing to the Hearing Administrator at least one (1) Working Day prior to the hearing. Thereafter, the student or Faculty Member may be granted one (1) additional continuance upon showing of good cause by the requesting party. Failure to provide a written request for continuance in writing via email at least one (1) Working Day in advance may result in the denial of the requested continuance.
  2. The Hearing Administrator shall make the determination as to whether the continuance will be granted. The decision of the Hearing Administrator is final.
2. Multiple Students Involved: In instances where multiple students are involved in joint or concerted act(s) of academic misconduct, the Office of Student Conduct shall convene one hearing involving all students charged with the act(s) of academic misconduct.
  1. The Office of Student Conduct shall provide written notice to all students informing them that a joint hearing is to be held. Each student charged in the matter can request a separate, individual hearing for the charge(s) against the student.
  2. Each student shall have ten (10) Working Days from the date of the written notice of the joint hearing to provide written notification to the Hearing Administrator that the student wants a hearing separate from the joint hearing.
Academic Integrity Board Hearing Procedure The hearing procedure is as follows:
1. The student will be contacted by the Office of Student Conduct to appear before the Academic Integrity Board for a hearing on the academic misconduct charge(s). The hearing shall be closed.
2. The student has the right to be assisted by one (1) advisor, if desired. The Instructor of Record may be accompanied by one (1) advisor, if desired.
  1. The advisor serves as a supporter and provides advice directly to their respective party during the hearing. The student and Instructor of Record, and not their advisor, are responsible for presenting their own information, introducing witnesses, and answering questions throughout the hearing.
  2. The advisor has no right to participate or speak during the hearing, except to the person they are advising.
  3. The advisor may be an employee from the Disability Resource Center; however, if the student chooses to have both an advisor and a Disability Resource Center representative, these roles must be fulfilled by two different roles.
  4. The advisor may be an attorney.
    1. If the advisor is an attorney, the Assistant Dean, Student Conduct shall be notified at least five (5) Working Days before the hearing. The Instructor of Record may be accompanied by a University attorney if the student chooses to have an advisor who is an attorney. The Office of Student Conduct shall request an attorney from General Counsel’s Office on behalf of the Instructor of Record if the Instructor of Record wants an attorney as their advisor.
3. The student, the Instructor of Record and any advisors, and any Disability Resource Center Representative shall be allowed to attend all portions of the hearing at which information is received but shall not be present during the Academic Integrity Board’s closed sessions to deliberate and render a decision on the charge(s).
4. The Academic Integrity Board is allowed to have an advisor or an attorney at all hearings, regardless of whether the student requests an advisor or attorney. The Office of Student Conduct shall request an attorney on behalf of the Academic Integrity Board.
5. The student and Instructor of Record shall provide written notification of witnesses to the Office of Student Conduct no later than five (5) Working Days before the hearing.
  1. The student and Instructor of Record may provide relevant written documents, records, or other information that they intend to use at the hearing (hereafter referred to as “evidence”) to the Office of Student Conduct no later than five (5) Working Days before the hearing.
  2. The Instructor of Record shall not submit any evidence for the hearing not submitted with the Charging Letter.
  3. Any evidence and witnesses submitted past the applicable deadline for the student and/or Instructor of Record shall be excluded from the hearing.
6. The student and Instructor of Record have the right to review the witness names identified by each party and the evidence provided by each party to the Office of Student Conduct two (2) Working Days prior to the hearing.
  1. This review will take place within the Office of Student Conduct during normal working hours under the supervision of the Assistant Dean, Student Conduct or designee.
  2. All submitted evidence is considered confidential and will not be reproduced or released for review by the student or Instructor of Record outside the Office of Student Conduct.
7. If the student, after receiving notice, does not appear at the hearing, the information in support of the Charging Letter shall be presented, considered and acted upon regardless of the student’s presence. The Academic Integrity Board also can review any evidence which has been submitted by the student.
8. If the Instructor of Record does not appear at the hearing, the charge(s) of academic misconduct shall be dismissed, no academic sanctions shall be imposed, and the student’s academic record expunged.
9. During the hearing, the chair of the Academic Integrity Board will state the content of the report of alleged academic misconduct and the specific charges made in the Charging Letter. Academic misconduct charge(s) may not be added for determination at the hearing if they are not stated in the Charging Letter.
10. The Instructor of Record shall appear before the Academic Integrity Board to present information that supports the academic misconduct charge(s).
11. The student shall appear before the Academic Integrity Board to present information that supports their dispute of the academic misconduct charge(s).
12. The Instructor of Record and the student shall each be allowed an opportunity to give a brief opening statement (i.e., summary), not to exceed five (5) minutes, about the nature of the case. The opening statement shall not be considered evidence in the case.
13. The chair of the Academic Integrity Board may call other witnesses who were disclosed by the parties to the Office of Student Conduct within the applicable time period.
14. Information and testimony presented by the Instructor of Record and the student shall be relevant to the specific charge(s) of academic misconduct. The Academic Integrity Board shall strike or exclude any information, evidence, or testimony not relevant to the specific charge(s) of academic misconduct.
15. The Instructor of Record and the student shall be given an opportunity to present a brief closing state (i.e., summary), not to exceed five (5) minutes, about their position regarding the academic misconduct charge(s) and what has been established during the hearing.
16. The Academic Integrity Board shall then meet in closed session to deliberate and render a final decision on the academic misconduct charge(s).
  1. The Academic Integrity Board’s sole responsibility during the deliberations on the academic charge(s) is to determine whether the student is responsible for academic misconduct as charged.
  2. The Academic Integrity Board’s decision shall be made on the basis of the preponderance of the evidence: whether it is more likely than not that the student committed the alleged academic misconduct.
  3. This decision is made through consensus when possible, and if not possible, then by a simple majority vote of the Academic Integrity Board members.
17. The hearing proceedings and the information, evidence, and testimony presented at the hearing are confidential.
18. The Academic Integrity Board shall re-open the hearing and present the findings to the student.
19. If the student is found not responsible:
  1. The hearing is concluded.
    1. No academic sanction(s) are imposed against the student.
    2. The academic misconduct charge(s) is (are) expunged from the student’s record.
    3. The grade shall be changed by the Instructor of Record within five (5) Working Days after the Academic Integrity Board makes its findings of non-responsibility at the hearing.
  2. The Instructor of Record shall change the grade assigned so that the charged academic misconduct does not factor into the coursework or course grade in any manner.
  3. The decision of the Academic Integrity Board is final, and the Instructor of Record cannot appeal against the decision.
20. If the student is found responsible:
  1. The academic sanction(s) imposed by the Instructor of Record will be upheld.
  2. If the sanction(s) is (are) not in alignment with the sanctions for academic misconduct described in this policy, the student may request the academic sanction(s) be reviewed by the Department Chair or Program Director.
    1. The student has ten (10) Working Days from the receipt of the notification of the Academic Integrity Board’s decision on responsibility to request this review in writing. The Department Chair or Program Director has five (5) Working Days to conduct a review, make the decision and if the sanction is not in alignment with the sanctions for academic misconduct described in this policy, impose academic sanction(s) consistent with this policy, inform the Instructor of Record and the Office of Student Conduct in writing of the decision and monitor the Instructor of Record’s compliance with the decision.
    2. The Department Chair or Program Director’s decision is final.
  3. The academic misconduct charge(s) and academic sanction(s) shall become part of the student’s academic record.
  4. If the academic misconduct charge is a second or subsequent violation of this policy during the student’s enrollment at the University, the Office of Student Conduct may take up the matter for disciplinary action and sanctions under the Student Code of Conduct, as appropriate.
21. The chair of the Academic Integrity Board has five (5) Working Days from the conclusion of the hearing to notify the Office of Student Conduct of the Academic Integrity Board’s decision, in writing.
22. The Office of Student Conduct shall notify all concerned parties (the student, Instructor of Record, Department Chair or Program Director) of the Academic Integrity Board’s decision within the next five (5) Working Days.
23. The hearing, except for deliberations, shall be taped or digitally recorded by the Academic Integrity Board Chair.
  1. No other taping or digital recording shall be allowed by any person in attendance at the hearing.
  2. The Academic Integrity Board Chair also has the right, at their discretion, to hire a court reporter, if necessary.
  3. The record shall be the property of the �鶹��ýAV, and maintained with the student’s confidential conduct records within the Office of Student Conduct.
  4. Upon request by the student, a written transcript shall be provided within a reasonable time, at the expense of the requesting party.
    1. Consistent with applicable law, personally identifiable information may be removed from the transcript.

Subsection E: Academic Integrity Board Composition

Standing Academic Integrity Board Committee
1. The Academic Integrity Board shall be a standing committee with a minimum of twenty-four (24) academic faculty (eight (8) of whom should be willing to serve as chair), twelve (12) undergraduate students and twelve (12) graduate students.
2. The standing Academic Integrity Board will meet on an as-needed basis throughout the year, including when faculty are not on contract.
3. Members of the standing Academic Integrity Board shall participate in training before being permitted to participate in a hearing.
Selection of Standing Academic Integrity Board Committee
1. Faculty on the standing Academic Integrity Board Committee shall be tenured/tenure-track or non-tenure track academic faculty on regular contracts.
  1. Each Dean’s Office/Academic Unit Equivalent (or its designee), excluding the Graduate School and �鶹��ýAV School of Medicine, shall recommend to the Faculty Senate Executive Board two faculty in their unit to serve on the Standing Committee, equating to twenty-four (24) total faculty.
    1. The Executive Vice President & Provost (or designee) shall select eight (8) faculty from the standing Academic Integrity Board hearings.
  2. Faculty will each serve a three-year term, with membership staggered, so that only eight (8) new members join the committee each year. Upon the expiration of a three-year term, the faculty can be appointed for additional and subsequent three-year terms.
  3. Faculty selected to the standing Academic Integrity Board Committee will complete the required Academic Integrity Board training.
  4. Faculty Senate shall be responsible for tracking membership terms of the academic faculty serving on the standing Academic Integrity Board Committee.
2. Undergraduate student membership:
  1. Undergraduate students shall serve on the Academic Integrity Board Committee only for cases involving undergraduate students. Undergraduate student members shall be appointed by the Office of Student Conduct from students who apply to serve on the standing Academic Integrity Board Committee.
  2. Undergraduate students shall serve at least a one-year term on the standing Academic Integrity Board Committee, which may be renewed by the Office of Student Conduct at its discretion.
3. Graduate student membership:
  1. Graduate students shall serve on the Academic Integrity Board Committee only for cases involving graduate students. Graduate student members shall be appointed by the Graduate Student Association from graduate students who apply to serve on the standing Academic Integrity Board Committee.
  2. Graduate students shall serve at least a one-year term on the Academic Integrity Board Committee, which may be renewed by the GSA at its discretion.
Selection of Academic Integrity Board members for a hearing
1. Academic Faculty:
  1. Two (2) academic faculty from the standing Academic Board Integrity Committee shall be appointed by the Office of Student Conduct; and
  2. A third academic faculty, from the list of chairs selected by the Executive Vice President & Provost (or designee) shall be appointed by the Office of Student Conduct to serve as chair of the hearing.
  3. To ensure the impartiality of the Academic Integrity Board, faculty shall be appointed from departments other than those in which the case originated, and in which the student accused of academic misconduct is majoring, or other conflict of interest.
2. Students:
  1. For a hearing involving an undergraduate student, two (2) undergraduate students from the standing Academic Integrity Board Committee shall be appointed by the Office of Student Conduct, and for a hearing involving a graduate student, two (2) graduate students from the standing Academic Integrity Board Committee shall be appointed by the Office of Student Conduct.
  2. To ensure impartiality of the Academic Integrity Board, student members shall be appointed from departments other than those in which the case originated, and in which the student accused of academic misconduct is majoring, or other conflicts of interest.