Policy on Academic Integrity - University Policy Manual

Printable Version in PDF Format (PDF, 129KB)(Get Adobe Acrobat)

History

Policy Number: SA.01.003/SP.19.001
Version: New
Drafted By: Chelsee Bente/Gregory Wood
Approved By: Richard Yao
Approval Date: 4.26.21
Effective Date: 4.26.21
Supercedes: Revises SP 13-06 (revision of SP 02-01, Academic Dishonesty)

Purpose

To update the academic dishonesty policy to be consistent with CSU Executive Orders (EO) 1037 and 1098 and to clarify the reporting and investigation procedures for such cases.

Background

Promoting and maintaining a culture of academic integrity is an integral part of California State University Channel Islands’ (CSUCI) mission to providing a high-quality, student-centered education, and is a shared responsibility of students, faculty, staff, and administrators. Furthermore, promoting and maintaining a culture of academic integrity is essential to ensure that our students graduate with a degree that is respected within and beyond the academic community as a product of honest practices and academic rigor, values that we hold dear.

The current practice has faculty reporting cases to the Provost’s office and the Vice President for Student Affairs’ office (VPSA). However, reporting of cases to one office or the other is not consistent, and cases reported to the Provost’s office are not tracked. In addition, definitions are not included in the current policy causing challenges to have a common definition of the various forms of academic dishonesty for classes and for students.

CSU EO 1098 stipulates that academic dishonesty cases “shall be handled by faculty members” and that faculty “shall promptly notify the VPSA (or designee) and Student Conduct Administrator”. Note: CSU Executive Order 1037 and SP 12-02, the Forgiveness of Previously Earned Grade Policy, stipulates “Grade forgiveness shall not be applicable to courses for which the original grade was the result of a finding of academic dishonesty.” This updated policy provides clarity to maintain compliance with these policies.

POLICY: SP 19-01 (revises SP 13-06 (revision of SP 02-01, Academic Dishonesty))

Policy

Accountability

Vice President for Student Affairs office, Dean of Students office (designee to the VPSA office), Registrar’s Office, Academic Affairs, Extended University

Applicability

All CSUCI students, faculty, staff, and administrators

Definition(s)

Cheating: to use or consult unauthorized materials (including electronic materials) or to use unauthorized equipment or devices on tests, quizzes, assignments, or examinations.

Contract Cheating: to utilize a third-party entity, business or person for the purposes of completing an assignment, essay, or course or purchasing an assignment, essay or course and submitting the work as one’s own.

Fabrication: to falsify or invent any information, data, results, numbers or citation in an assignment or a document submitted for excusal from academic commitments.

Facilitation: intentionally or knowingly helping or attempting to help another engage in some form of academic dishonesty.

Plagiarism: to submit academic work that includes the words, ideas or statements of another without quotation and/or when the substantive work of another is used without properly crediting the source with appropriate citation.

Unauthorized Collaboration: to give unauthorized aid to another CSUCI student (whether enrolled in the class or not) or receive unauthorized aid from another CSUCI student (whether enrolled in the class or not) on tests, quizzes, assignments, or examinations.

Unauthorized Dual Submission of Previous Academic Work: to use any material portion of a paper or project to fulfill the requirements of more than one course unless the student has received prior permission to do so from the appropriate instructor(s).

Text

Course instructors have the initial responsibility for detecting and dealing with academic dishonesty. Instructors who believe that an act of academic dishonesty has occurred are obligated to discuss the matter with the student(s) involved. Instructors should possess a preponderance of evidence (more likely than not) that an act of academic dishonesty occurred. If special circumstances prevent consultation with the student(s), instructors may take action (subject to student appeal) they deem appropriate. Consultation with the chair of the program or Dean is recommended, but not required when confronted with acts of academic dishonesty.
Following the discussion with the student, instructors shall present the student with a grade penalty or other consequences they deem appropriate in proportion to the violation for that assignment. Instructors may consult with the Academic Sanction Guideline for recommended grade penalties or other consequences; however, they are not required to follow the Academic Sanction Guideline.
Instructors shall file an Academic Dishonesty Report that includes a description of the incident, any relevant documentation, course syllabus, and any additional relevant information with the Dean of Students office to consider the totality of the circumstances involving a student and to determine if the reported matter is part of a larger pattern of misconduct. The Dean of Students office shall address the academic dishonesty in accordance with Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations Section 41301 and CSU Executive Order 1098 Student Conduct Procedures.
If the grade/sanction for the course in question results in the student earning an F or No Credit (NC) in the course due to academic dishonesty, per CSU Executive Order 1037 Policies on Repetition of Courses, while the student may retake the course for credit, the student is not eligible for grade forgiveness. The Dean of Students office shall document with the Registrar’s Office the incident of academic dishonesty that will prevent the student from earning grade forgiveness.
In the event that the student wants to dispute the instructor’s decision on academic dishonesty, they must bring their request to the attention of the Dean of Students office during the first seven weeks of the regular semester following the assignment of the grade (as per Grade Appeals Policy SP 03-02). The instructor shall be provided a copy of the student appeal. The Dean of Students office will submit the case to the University Appeals Committee, which is the committee charged with reviewing grade appeals. This is a subgroup of the Academic Appeals Committee that reviews disqualification appeals. Per SP 03-02, point 4, the “University Appeals Committee shall consist of faculty and at least one student.” This committee will generate a finding or non-finding of academic dishonesty. This committee will also review or assign a grade penalty for the assignment and, in the case of a non-finding, apply a grade change if necessary.
The committee will inform the instructor, student(s), and Dean of Students office of the outcome of the review. The Dean of Students office shall address the academic dishonesty in accordance with Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations Section 41301 and CSU Executive Order 1098.
All records involving academic dishonesty shall be maintained by the Dean of Students office in accordance with the CSU Records Retention and Disposition Schedule.

Exhibit(s)

Academic Sanction Guideline
This document is designed to aid faculty members in their consideration of sanctions for violations of academic integrity. These are intended to be considered as guidelines.

There may be some mitigating factors that will influence the sanction that the faculty member chooses to assign. Academic sanctions included in these guidelines range from a warning or reduced grade on a single assignment to failure for the course. In all instances, a faculty member should submit an Academic Dishonesty Report to the Dean of Students office.

Type of Offense:

Minor offense: in general, minor offenses involve errors in judgment without a clear intent by the student to violate the academic dishonesty policy.
Moderate offense: in general, moderate offenses can be unpremeditated or premeditated dishonest acts that directly affect only one student.
Major offense: in general, major offenses are premeditated dishonest acts that directly affect the grade of other students.

Violation	Considerations	Offense: Academic Sanction Range
Copying: examples include a student looking at another student’s work during an exam, a student copying an assignment from another student, students exchanging color-coded exams for the purpose of copying.	In determining severity, consider the weight of the exam or the assignment as related to total percentage of course grade, the frequency of copied answers or amount of copied material, whether or not it was premeditated or spontaneous, and any other significant factors.	Minor: Reduced exam or assignment grade to 0 for assignment or exam Moderate: 0 for assignment or exam to reduced course grade Major: F for course
Submitting Another Person’s Work As Your Own or Submitting Another Person’s Work Without Proper Citation: for example, a student submits work created by another person as their own; a student presents information indicating it is not the student's own work, but fails to properly cite the source. These are commonly referred to as plagiarism.	In determining severity, consider the weight of the assignment as related to the total percentage of course grade, whether or not the fabrication or plagiarism was a substantive portion of the assignment, and attempt to determine whether this was a clear case of intentional dishonesty or careless scholarship.	Minor: Redo the assignment with reduction in grade to 0 for assignment with or without redo of assignment Moderate: Reduction in final course grade in addition to 0 for assignment Major: F for course
Unauthorized Test Possession, Purchase, or Supplying: for example, when a student possesses an exam without the instructor’s permission; a student purchases or steals an exam; a student fails to return an exam which was requested to be returned; a student makes a copy of an exam; or sells an exam.	With rare exception, this form of misconduct is premeditated and deceptive with the intent to defraud. The manner in which the exam was obtained is critical in determining appropriate action. A student may access old exams and not be aware viewing the exam is a violation. In other instances, a student may have stolen an exam or is found in possession of an exam knowing it is not permitted.	Minor: 0 for exam Moderate: Reduction in course grade to F for course Major: F for course
Contract Cheating or Ghosting: for example, a student takes a quiz or exam or completes an exercise or assignment on behalf of another student and is paid or unpaid for the work. NOTE: it is possible that students involved in such violations may not be enrolled in the instructor's class and there is not an option to assign an academic sanction. In such instances, the instructor should notify the Dean of Students office.	Although this form of misconduct is inherently premeditated and deceptive, severity should be assessed based on the percentage of course grade that the violation entails. Faculty may also consider the nature of the deception - for example, signing in for another student in order to gain class participation points vs. having another student complete an assignment or take an exam for a student.	Minor (primarily used when ghosting was for participation points or in-class low credit assignment): 0 for participation points; 0 for assignment to reduced grade for course participation credit Moderate: 0 for quiz or exam and reduction in course grade Major: F for course
Altering Exams or Assignments: for example, a student changes incorrect answers and requests a favorable grade adjustment when instructor returns graded assignments/exams for review; a student changes the letter and/or numerical grade on an exam/assignment after the instructor has assigned the final grade.	This form of misconduct is deceptive with the intent to defraud and may also affect the credibility of an instructor. Consideration should be given to whether the act was premeditated or spontaneously committed out of panic. In determining severity, consider the extent to which the exam or assignment was altered, the weight of the exam as related to total percentage of course grade, and other significant factors.	Minor: 0 for exam or assignment Moderate: Reduced course grade to F in course Major: F for course
Improper Use of Technology: for example, a student possesses and/or uses a cell phone when one is not permitted; a student uses software or electronic aides such as calculators, computers, handheld devices, etc. when not permitted by the instructor.	When sanctioning, consider if the technology was used for misconduct. Also consider whether the misconduct was premeditated, the impact it potentially had on student’s course grade, and the level of dishonest activity in which the student engaged.	Minor: Warning to Reduction in assignment or exam grade Note: When students possess an unauthorized electronic device but there appears no evidence of intended use, a faculty may issue a warning and not reduce the student's course grade Moderate: Reduced course grade Major: F for course
Facilitating Academic Dishonesty by Others: for example, a student permits another student to copy an exam or assignment; a student provides a completed assignment to another student and allows the student to submit it as their own; a student writes another student’s paper or completes another student’s assignment and then provides it to the student so they may receive credit; a student shares information about an exam with another student who has not taken the exam. NOTE: it is possible that students involved in such violations may not be enrolled in an instructor's class and the instructor may not have the option to assign an academic sanction. In such instances, the instructor should notify the Dean of Students office.	For students who are enrolled in the class, consider the impact their actions had on the grade of the student they were assisting in measuring the severity of the violation.	Minor: Reduced assignment grade for what the student submitted Moderate: 0 for assignment student submitted Major: Reduced grade in course
Submitting Work Previously Used Without Permission: for example, a student submits work completed previously for another course or assignment without the instructor's permission. *This violation assumes that the work submitted is the student's own work, submitted on more than one previous occasion.	Students appear to be less informed regarding this form of academic dishonesty, and in some cases, you may find that this breach occurs to some degree in an inadvertent manner as compared to other forms of academic dishonesty.	Minor: Warning and Redo assignment to Redo Assignment and reduced grade for assignment Moderate: Redo assignment with reduced grade to 0 for assignment Major: 0 for assignment to F in the course
Unauthorized Collaboration: for example, working with another student on an assignment or exam without prior authorization from the faculty member.	When sanctioning, consider whether or not the misconduct was premeditated, the impact it potentially had on the student’s course grade, and the level of dishonest activity in which the student engaged. Faculty may wish to consider a more serious sanction when students were explicitly instructed not to collaborate.	Minor: Redo assignment. Reduced assignment or exam grade Moderate: 0 for assignment or exam Major: 0 for assignment or exam and reduction in course grade
Unauthorized Use of Study Aids: for example, using or possessing crib sheets; preprogramming an electronic device to provide solutions; using notes, texts, etc. without the permission of the instructor.	When sanctioning, consider whether or not the misconduct was premeditated, the impact it potentially had on student’s course grade, and the level of dishonest activity in which the student engaged.	Minor: Reduced exam grade if determined use is limited to failure of exam Moderate: Failure of exam to reduced course grade Major: F for course

Adapted from Sanctioning Guidelines for Violations of Academic Integrity (2019). Penn State: Academic Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual. Retrieved from: http://undergrad.psu.edu/aappm/sanctioningguidelines.html.