Academic Integrity Committee

February 26, 2004 Minutes

 

Present: Thomas Morley (Faculty Member), Russ Callen (Faculty Member), Adam Bernstein (Undergraduate Representative), John Dean (Honor Advisor Council – HAC – Chair), Wes Angel (Visitor – HAC), and Karen Boyd (Senior Associate Dean of Students)

 

Absent:  Magnus Egerstedt (Faculty Member), Cheryl Contant (Faculty Member and Honor Committee Chairperson), Graduate Representative

 

Meeting called to order at 2:05

 

Suggested Academic Integrity Violation Sanctioning Guidelines

 

Sanctions should include the following aspects –

o        The Disciplinary Standing (reprimand, warning, probation, suspension, expulsion)

·         A Learning Experience (8 hour course, re-write of paper, community service, etc.)

·         An Academic Impact (F in the course, some reduction of over all grade, etc.)

 

When developing the sanction, the following should be considered for each aspect of the sanction:

 

Disciplinary Standing Considerations

·         The more aggravating the circumstances, the more serious the standing.

·         Reprimand is extremely rare and should only be used in the most minimal of circumstances.

·         The sanction will not likely include suspension in the first offense.  However, in a case with serious aggravating circumstances, suspension is likely even for the first offense. A second violation will most likely result in suspension.

·         Aggravating circumstances include; but are not limited to:

o        Premeditation

o        Multiple actions of misconduct with in a single incident or multiple incidents discovered at one time

o        Certainty of benefits (ex. Forged change of grade form, false regrade request, etc.)

o        Direct academic injury to another student

o        Element of criminal conduct

o        Conduct reasonably causing intimidation

o        Presence of bribery

o        Significance of the work in question to the final grade

 

Learning Experience Considerations

Ordinarily a first academic integrity violation would include assignment to the 8 hour Academic Integrity Seminar. Variations should be determined in consultation with the Office of Student Integrity.

 

Academic Impact Considerations

·         The academic consequences of an academic integrity violation on a student’s final grade must be greater than if the student had not completed the work.

·         The common academic impact – The work in question is assigned a grade of “0”.  In addition, the value of that work is further deducted from the students’ final class average. Variations should be determined in consultation with the Office of Student Integrity.

 

Example 1 -  Student A cheated on an assignment worth 20% (or 200 points toward his A)  of his final grade. He made a perfect grade 100% (800 points) on each of his other assignments.  A student must get 1000 points to be given an A for the course. If he is found responsible for cheating, the student receives 600 points towards his A – the value of the work in question (200) is considered not submitted bringing the grade to 800 points and is then once again subtracted for the final grade of 600 points.

 

Example 2 – Student B cheated on an assignment worth 2% of her final grade.  She made a 90% on her other assignments (which is barely; but still an A).  The original 2% is removed from the possible final grade and then an additional 2% is removed.  The student is then given a grade of 90% of the possible 96% or she is assigned a final grade of 87.4%, which is a B.

 

Z = Y [100-X (2)]

 

X = value of the assignment on the final grade as stated in the course syllabus

Y = maximum grade possible for the course as stated in the course syllabus

Z = final course grade assigned student after academic impact applied

 

(Italics represent recommendations made by Dean Boyd to promote clarity and finalize the guidelines.)

 

Next Meeting 

·        March 19, 2004 217 Student Services Building

·        How to Communicate the new process – Develop list of questions, role play, sanctioning model, etc.

·        Review, amend and approve the sanctioning guidelines.