Integrity of scholarship is essential for an academic community. The University expects that both faculty and students will honor this principle and in so doing protect the validity of University intellectual work. For students, this means that all academic work will be done by the individual to whom it is assigned, without unauthorized aid of any kind. Instructors, for their part, will exercise care in planning and supervising academic work, so that honest effort will be upheld.
The following policies apply to academic coursework for both undergraduate and graduate students. A separate policy exists governing integrity of research. Medical students are governed by policies specified in the Handbook for School of Medicine Advisors and Students, as formulated by the School of Medicine Committee on Educational Policy.
Instructors' Responsibility
At the beginning of the term the instructor shall state in writing (e.g., in the syllabus, information sheets, or website) what graded assignments and exams will be required of students. If there are any course-specific rules required by the instructor for maintaining academic integrity, the instructor shall also inform students in writing what kinds of aid and collaboration, if any, are permitted on graded assignments and exams. The UCSD Policy on Integrity of Scholarship states the general rules for student integrity.
Students' Responsibility
Students are expected to complete the course in compliance with the instructor's standards. No student shall engage in any activity that involves attempting to receive a grade by means other than honest effort; for example:
No student shall knowingly procure, provide, or accept any unauthorized material that contains questions or answers to any examination or assignment to be given at a subsequent time.
No student shall complete, in part or in total, any examination or assignment for another person.
No student shall knowingly allow any examination or assignment to be completed, in part or in total, for himself or herself by another person.
No student shall plagiarize or copy the work of another person and submit it as his or her own work.
No student shall employ aids excluded by the instructor in undertaking course work or in completing any exam or assignment.
No student shall alter graded class assignments or examinations and then resubmit them for regrading.
No student shall submit substantially the same material in more than one course without prior authorization.
A student acting in the capacity of an instructional assistant (IA), a category including but not limited to teaching assistants, readers, and tutors, has a special responsibility to safeguard integrity of scholarship. In this role the student functions as an apprentice instructor, under the tutelage of the responsible instructor. An IA shall equitably grade student work in the manner agreed upon with the course instructor. An IA shall not make any unauthorized material related to tests, exams, homework, etc., available to any student.
Responsibility for Disposition of Cases of Academic Dishonesty
The responsibility for maintaining the standards of academic honesty rests with two University authorities:
The faculty and the administration. Under the Standing Orders of the Regents, discipline is the exclusive responsibility of the campus administration, while authority over courses and curricula is delegated to the faculty through the Academic Senate. When a student has admitted to or has been found guilty of a violation of the standards of academic honesty, two separate actions shall follow.
(1)
The instructor shall determine the student's grade on the assignment and in the course as a whole. Any breach of academic honesty may be considered grounds for failure In the course, although less serious consequences may be incurred in less serious circumstances.
(2)
The appropriate administrative authority shall impose a disciplinary penalty. For undergraduates, the appropriate administrative authority is the Council of Deans of Student Affairs. For graduate students, the appropriate administrative authority is the Assistant Dean of Graduate Studies. Sanctions will be imposed in accordance with guidelines authorized by the Committee on Educational Policy.
Procedures for Disposition of Cases of Academic Dishonesty
The procedure for disposition of cases of academic dishonesty is divided into three phases (A, Initial Phase; B, Decision and Resolution Phase; C, Appeals Phase):
A.
The Initial Phase: When an instructor has reason to believe that a student has violated UCSD's Policy on Integrity of Scholarship, the instructor should proceed in one of two ways:
(I)
Call the student to a meeting to discuss the suspected violation. If the instructor decides that there is evidence of academic dishonesty, he or she must report the suspected violation to the Office of the Academic Integrity Coordinator (AIC).
(II)
Notify the AIC directly that there is a suspected violation of academic integrity.
Once the AIC has been notified by the instructor, the AIC shall notify the appropriate dean that a student is suspected of a violation of academic integrity and initiate record keeping to track the disposition of the case. For graduate students, the appropriate dean is the Assistant Dean of Graduate Studies. For an undergraduate student who is alleged to have acted alone or in concert with students from his or her own college, the appropriate dean is the Dean of Student Affairs of the student's college. If students from more than one college are allegedly involved in the same incident, the AIC will direct the case to the chair of the Council of Deans of Student Affairs. The chair will then appoint one of the deans to proceed with the case for all students, regardless of college.
The dean shall contact the instructor and discuss the evidence in the case. If the instructor decides to proceed with the charges, the dean shall notify the student of the charges in writing and inform the student of the procedures for processing cases of academic dishonesty under the UCSD Policy on Integrity of Scholarship and of where to obtain advice and assistance, such as from Student Legal Services. If the instructor is absent, the instructor's department chair or program director may represent the instructor.
B.
The Decision and Resolution Phase
The student shall have ten (10) business days following notification by the dean to meet with the dean to discuss the charges and possible administrative penalties. The student shall then decide whether:
(I)
to accept the charge of academic dishonesty.
(II)
to deny the charge of dishonesty and to proceed to a formal hearing.
Consequences of each of these decisions are presented below. If the student fails to respond to the written notification of alleged misconduct and does not meet with the dean, he or she shall be presumed to have taken decision (I)
Decision I (Student accepts charge of academic dishonesty):
If an undergraduate makes decision I, the dean shall notify the AIC of the student's decision. The AIC shall notify the instructor and, if the course has been completed, request a grade assignment. The instructor shall assign a grade for the course and notify the AIC of the grade
The dean shall also make a recommendation of any administrative penalty to the Council of Deans of Student Affairs. The Council of Deans of Student Affairs shall decide the administrative penalty and notify the AIC of the decision. Notification to the AIC of the administrative penalties should take no longer than 30 business days from the time the dean is notified by the AIC of the charge.
Within (10) ten business days of being notified by the Council of Deans of Student Affairs, the AIC shall notify the student, the dean, and the instructor of the administrative penalty. Once the course has been completed and the AIC has been notified of the grade by the instructor, the AIC will notify the student, the dean, and the Registrar of the grade.
If a graduate student makes decision I, the Assistant Dean of Graduate Studies shall decide the administrative penalty and the instructor shall decide the course grade. Both shall notify the AIC of their decisions. The AIC shall then notify the student, the dean, and the Registrar of the grade, and the instructor of the administrative penalty.
A record of the administrative penalty shall be maintained in the office of the appropriate dean, the Council of Deans, and the AIC. A statement of the final disposition of the case shall be sent by the AIC to the chairperson of the department or program in which the violation occurred.
Decision II (Student denies charge and requests a formal hearing):
If the student denies having committed the alleged act of academic dishonesty (decision II), he or she must submit a written request for a formal hearing to the appropriate dean within ten (10) business days of being notified of the charges by the dean. The dean shall transmit the written request to the AIC. Within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of the request, the AIC shall schedule a formal hearing of the case by the Academic Dishonesty Hearing Board ("Hearing Board"). The AIC shall provide at least ten (10) business days' notice to the student and the instructor of the time, date, and location of the hearing. The AIC shall be available to advise the instructor of the procedures and options for presentation of the case and, if the instructor so chooses, to present the case to the Hearing Board.
The Standing Hearing Board shall be composed of three faculty members appointed by the Academic Senate, one graduate student appointed by the Assistant Dean of Graduate Studies, one upper division undergraduate student appointed by the Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, and a college dean, who shall serve as the presiding officer. Members shall normally serve a two-year term. The presiding officer shall conduct the hearing and advise the Hearing Board on procedure, but shall not vote. If the student is enrolled in the same college as the presiding dean, a dean from another college shall serve as the presiding officer.
The Hearing Board shall be governed by the general UCSD rules of procedural due process. The Academic Senate will appoint a panel of six standing and seven alternate faculty members eligible to serve on the Standing Hearing Board. When standing members are not available, the formal hearing may be conducted with alternates appointed from the appropriate panel as listed below. To proceed with the hearing, however, the Hearing Board must have three of the faculty members present, at least one of which must be a member of the standing board. The AIC shall select alternates to the Hearing Board from the following panels:
1. A panel of 7 faculty members appointed by the Academic Senate Committee on Committees.
2. A panel of 5 graduate students to be appointed by the Assistant Dean, OGSR.
3. A panel of upper division (junior or senior) undergraduate students, one from each college, appointed by the college dean. Members of this panel should have completed at least one year on a standing judicial board at UCSD.
The Hearing Board shall hold a formal hearing and decide on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence whether the student engaged in academic dishonesty. In cases in which the Hearing Board deems that expert advice is essential its judgment, the Hearing Board, in consultation with the Committee on Committees, may appoint an ad hoc committee to advise it. The ad hoc committee shall consist of three faculty members with knowledge of the field in question. The members of the ad hoc committee shall be present at the hearing and shall advise the Hearing Board during the Board's deliberations. The final judgment on the case shall rest with the Hearing Board. Within five (5) business days from the date on which the hearing is completed, the presiding officer shall forward the Hearing Board's findings to the appropriate dean, with copies to the AIC, department chairperson or program director, the instructor, and the accused student.
If the student is found guilty of academic dishonesty, the appropriate administrative authority (for undergraduate students the Council of Deans of Student Affairs; for graduate students the Assistant Dean of Graduate Studies) shall then decide the administrative penalty and shall inform the student in writing within ten (10) business days after receipt of the notice of the Hearing Board's final judgment. They shall also notify the instructor, the AIC, and the department chair or program director. The instructor shall then assign a grade for the course and notify the AIC of the grade within ten (10) business days. The AIC shall notify the student, the dean, and the Registrar of the grade.
If the Hearing Board finds the evidence insufficient to sustain the charge of academic dishonesty, the administrative authority and the instructor shall dismiss the matter without further action against the student, who shall be permitted either to complete the course without prejudice or to withdraw from it. The student shall notify the AIC of his or her decision, and the AIC shall notify the Registrar of the student's decision. If the student withdraws from the course, it shall not be listed on his or her transcript.
C.
The Appeals Phase: (Section I describes the appeal of the judgment of the Hearing Board, and Section II describes appeals of the academic action, administrative penalty, or both.)
(I).
Appeal of the Judgment of the Hearing Board: If the Hearing Board sustains the charge of academic dishonesty, an undergraduate student may appeal the judgment by writing to the Council of Provosts. Appeals must be made within five (5) business days of formal notification of the final disposition of the case. The Council of Provosts will consider the appeal within ten (10) business days from the date of appeal.
A graduate student or IA may submit an appeal to the Dean of Graduate Studies.
The basis for appeal of the Hearing Board's judgment shall be: (i) that the standards of procedural fairness were violated, e.g. that the student did not have sufficient opportunity to present his or her side of the case; or (ii) that there exists newly discovered important evidence that has substantial bearing on the findings of the Hearing Board. If the appeal is sustained, the case shall be referred back to the Hearing Board for a new hearing. Except for such appeals, the judgment of the Hearing Board shall be final.
(II).
Appeal of the Academic Action, Administrative Penalty, or both: Within five (5) business days of receipt of the AIC's notification, the student may appeal the instructor's grade assignment, or the administrative officer's administrative penalty, or both, by submitting a written request as provided below:
Request for Modification of Academic Action: A request for review of the grade assignment may be directed to the CEP Subcommittee on Grade Appeals. If the case has been heard by the Hearing Board, the CEP Subcommittee on Grade Appeals shall receive the report of the Hearing Board and accept its findings as to the facts of the case.
Request for Reduction of Administrative Penalty: An appeal of the appropriate authority's administrative penalty under the provisions of paragraphs A or C shall be directed by an undergraduate student to Council of Provosts. The Council of Provosts will evaluate the student's appeal and make a final decision within ten (10) business days of receiving the appeal. An appeal by a graduate student shall be directed to the Dean of Graduate Studies.
Policies for Student Records and Timeline Extensions
Once an instructor has decided to proceed with a charge of academic dishonesty, he or she will refrain from assigning a course grade for the student until the charge has been resolved. If the course concludes before the charge is resolved, the instructor will assign an "IP" on the course grade sheet for the student's grade and will indicate in the memorandum column that this IP is for a "Pending Charge of Academic Dishonesty". Academic Records will note in attached text to the course (i.e., not on the student's transcript) that the hold is for a "Pending Charge of Academic Dishonesty". The student's transcript will show an "IP" for the course until the charge is resolved. While a hold is in effect, the student shall not drop the course. The faculty hold shall not be removed by the Registrar until notification from the AIC, who shall release the hold once the charge is resolved and a grade has been assigned by the instructor. If a passing grade is assigned and a conflict arises with a duplicate, cross-listed, or equivalent course taken after the charge has been recorded, the AIC will direct the Registrar to drop the student from the duplicate course or remove the grade for the duplicate course from the student's record.
If the student accepts the charge of academic dishonesty or is found guilty by the Hearing Board, the grade assigned by the instructor will be counted in the student's GPA even if the course is retaken. Academic Records will permanently note in text attached to the course (i.e., not on the student's transcript) that the grade was given as a result of "Academic Dishonesty".
If the student withdraws from UCSD before the final disposition of the case, the following policy shall govern. If the student is found to have committed an act of academic dishonesty, and the instructor assigns him or her a final grade in the course, this grade shall be permanently entered on the transcript. If the administrative penalty is dismissal, the transcript shall bear a notation that readmission is contingent upon the approval from the Chancellor. Any administrative penalty less severe than dismissal shall be imposed when the student returns to the University.
If a case of suspected academic dishonesty is also the subject of an administrative inquiry under the Policy on Integrity of Research, then the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Hearing Board, may make such modifications in procedure as are necessary to coordinate the two inquiries.
If the final decision in the case results in dismissal of the student, a record of the case and its outcome shall be established in the office of either the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs or the Dean of Graduate Studies, depending on the registration status of the student. If the administrative penalty is suspension or dismissal, the fact that the student was suspended or dismissed for academic dishonesty must be posted on the academic transcript for the duration of the penalty.
The AIC may extend any timelines in this policy when practical exigencies so dictate. If a delay is imposed, the affected individuals will be notified.
Reporting, Record Keeping, and Review of this Policy
The AIC shall report annually to the Academic Senate Committee on Educational Policy, the Council of Provosts, and the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs on the number and character of misconduct, the pattern of decision-making (contested or uncontested), the severity of sanctions, both administrative and academic, and other relevant matters as decided by the Committee on Educational Policy.
