Frequently Asked Questions - Students

Being proactive and professional is the best approach to handling a violation. Proactivity means checking your emails regularly and gathering evidence (early) that supports your claims. Professionalism means responding to any accusations in a respectful and organized manner. Showing a high degree of self– awareness about how your behaviors may have contributed to the allegations helps you to gain listeners’ empathy. 

The Academic Honor Policy states that a student has the right to be informed of all alleged violations and to be given access to all relevant materials pertaining to the case. Therefore, an instructor is to present all relevant evidence related to the alleged violation. Relevant evidence may be appropriately redacted to keep other students' information private. 

The instructor is to discuss the evidence of academic dishonesty, in as private and confidential a setting as possible, and explore the possibility of a resolution. This discussion may take place in a variety of ways (e.g., in person, phone, Zoom, email). During this discussion you can provide the information and any evidence that you have to support that the allegation is a misunderstanding to your instructor. The instructor may drop the charge if it appears to be unsubstantiated based on the discussion and evidence provided. However, even with information and evidence that you believe supports that the allegation is a misunderstanding, an instructor may still believe that a violation occurred and continue forward with the allegation.

The timing and schedule of instructors varies. The initial meeting can vary by instructor and their schedules and availability (e.g., in person, phone call, Zoom, email communication). There are times when instructors may have time and willingness to discuss the evidence at the initial meeting. There are also instances where instructors may wish for you to review the information they provided and schedule another time to discuss. It is appropriate for you to briefly share that you believe the situation is a misunderstanding and to ask if you can explain more at this meeting or if you should schedule a follow-up meeting to explain and/or present counterevidence.

Only a conversation with your instructor that convinces them that the allegation was a true misunderstanding or that the allegation should be dismissed will lead to a circumstance that does not go through the formal process. Keep in mind that it is your responsibility to request a review of information considerately. Failure to follow instructions the instructor clearly provided does not constitute a misunderstanding.

The instructor should briefly let you know which resolution options are available to you. The instructor is not responsible for discussing the Academic Honor Policy and your resolution options with you in detail. If you have questions about your resolution options, you are welcome to email FDA-AcademicIntegrity@fsu.edu with your questions. An additional resource available to students who have questions related to FSU policies like the Academic Honor Policy is the University Student Ombuds Office.

You are welcome to reach out to administrators that facilitate the Academic Honor Policy at FDA-AcademicIntegrity@fsu.edu with questions about the Academic Honor Policy. Please note that the administrators who handle Academic Honor Policy violations need to maintain impartiality to support both students and instructors through the process. As a result, they can answer general questions about the policy nd process, but they are often not able to answer specific questions about your case.

There are faculty and staff who volunteer as Academic Honor Policy Advisors. You are welcome to reach out to the individuals to ask questions about resolution options, the process, and how to advocate respectfully for yourself in your specific situation.

Additionally, the University Student Ombuds Office is available if you wish to seek a safe, confidential space for advice, resources, and answers to questions about FSU policies, processes, and procedures, including the Academic Honor Policy.

You are not required to decide which resolution option you wish to follow at your initial meeting or communication with your instructor where the allegation and evidence are discussed. You are allowed time to review the information and evidence and provide any counter-information you may have. However, this should not drag out into an extended back and forth between you and your instructor. As a result, you need to decide which resolution option you wish to follow to resolve your case within 10 business days of the initial meeting or communication where you received the allegation and all relevant evidence.

You are encouraged to respond to communication from your instructor to schedule a meeting or to let your instructor know that you received the information and are reviewing it within 24 to 48 hours. You have up to 10 business days of the meeting or communication where the allegations and evidence were made available to you to decide with option you wish to follow to resolve your case. If you do not communication with and respond to your instructor within 10 business days, an academic hold may be placed on your student file which prevents transcript orders, course registration, and diploma/degree receipt until you select the option for a resolution and sign the Academic Honor Policy related form.

An instructor should not retaliate against you based on the option you choose to resolve an academic integrity case. An instructor following the academic honor policy and applying the sanction(s) available within the policy for a violation is not considered retaliation. 

If you believe your instructor is retaliating against you due to an academic honor allegation and/or your decision on which option to follow to resolve your case, this should be addressed through the general academic appeal process. In this process, you bring the complaint first to the instructor, then to the department chair, and finally to the academic dean for the course involved, stopping at the level for which the complaint is resolved. 

Yes, you should continue in the course in question, including attending class and completing all assignments, during the entire academic honor policy process.

Yes, you should continue in the course in question, including attending class and completing all assignments, if you are found "responsible" for violating the Academic Honor Policy. If your sanction is an “F” for the entire course, you are still entitled and encouraged to attend all classes and complete all assignments. This allows you to gain the full academic benefit and knowledge for which you enrolled. However, if you have been found responsible and your sanction is an “F” for the entire course, you have the option to stop attending class and completing assignments. Some students choose this path to focus their time and energy on their other courses. 

Yes, you should continue in the course in question, including attending class and completing all assignments. 

Once it is alleged that you violated the Academic Honor Policy, you are not permitted to withdraw or drop the course or request that the grading basis be changed to a “Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory” grade if the course is letter-graded. 

If you have been found "responsible" for a violation of the Academic Honor Policy, you are not permitted to withdraw or drop the course or request that the grading basis be changed to a “Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory” grade if the course is letter-graded.

If you have been found "not responsible" for a violation of the Academic Honor Policy, you may drop or withdraw from the course in alignment with normal policies for these actions outlined in the University Bulletin.

Once it is alleged that you violated the Academic Honor Policy, you are not permitted to request that the grading basis be changed to a “Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory” grade if the course is letter-graded. 

If you have been found "responsible" for a violation of the Academic Honor Policy, you are not permitted to request that the grading basis be changed to a “Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory” grade if the course is letter-graded.

If you have been found "not responsible" for a violation of the Academic Honor Policy, you may request that the grading basis be changed to a “Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory” grade if the course is letter-graded in alignment with normal policies for these actions outlined in the University Bulletin.

You are accorded privacy and confidentiality related to alleged Academic Honor Policy allegations and decisions. At times instructors will need to collaborate with their supervising faculty, Department Chair, and/or Dean's Office to determine consistency in sanctioning. There are times when incidents may require disclosure to a faculty member or administrator to fulfill their professional responsibilities for your educational purpose (e.g., when a course may have a lab or clinical experience that may be impacted). 

You are accorded privacy and confidentiality related to alleged Academic Honor Policy violations and decisions. There are times where academic honor policy allegations involve other students, and the instructor needs to communicate with these other students. Instructors should make every effort to keep your identity private and confidential in those communications or discussions and communicate about the alleged incident in a de-identified manner as much as possible.

Generally, academic honor policy allegations are confidential between you, your instructor, and the academic administrator responsible for the Academic Honor Policy process for your case in the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement. However, depending on the nature of the violation and option you chose to resolve your incident, other individuals will have access to the allegations against you. For example, if you chose the hearing process, the four hearing panelists will have access to the allegations, evidence, and counter-evidence. Another example, if you are a graduate student and the allegations involve a culminating milestone, the Vice President for Faculty Development, the academic dean, the Dean of the Graduate School, and the members of the committee deciding whether to submit the referral (the department chair and two faculty appointed by the academic dean) all must know about the academic honor policy allegations. 

Academic honor violation records are kept in a confidential database in a manner consistent with the University record retention policy and in compliance with Florida Public Records Law. Only academic administrators in the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement responsible for administering the Academic Honor Policy and individuals or entities you authorize (e.g., a licensure board) have access to the confidential database and details of your academic honor record.

However, certain information may be disclosed under specific circumstances. If a faculty member suspects you of a current violation, they may be informed that you have a prior violation to determine the appropriate procedural options. Similarly, while a Hearing Panel for a subsequent allegation cannot see your record during the deliberation phase, they will be granted access to inform sanctioning if you are found responsible. Finally, select campus offices (e.g., International Programs, Student Government Association, Athletics) may verify your "good standing," though they are never granted access to the specific details of your case.

If you do not have a prior violation, if the alleged violation is not egregious, and if the allegation is not related to a graduate level culminating milestone, then there are three options or procedures that you can choose between for the resolution of your alleged academic honor violation: the Student Instructor Resolution, Disputing the Sanctions, or Academic Hearing. 
 

The determination of whether an alleged violation is egregious is made by an academic administrator in the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement and by the instructor. Some examples of egregious violations are coercing or pressuring current classmates or former students in the course to provide exam questions or answers, stealing exam questions, disseminating exam questions, altering your grades or the grades of others, violating the Academic Honor Policy while completing or fulfilling one of your graduate program milestones. If your alleged violation is determined to be egregious, the Student Instructor Resolution and the Disputing the Sanction options are no longer available, and the case must be referred to a formal academic hearing.

For the vast majority of cases, the violation does not appear on the transcript. The major exception is a violation that results in a sanction of expulsion. Records involving an expulsion are retained permanently, and expulsion is noted on the transcript. While the Academic Honor Policy violation itself is usually confidential, if the academic consequence or sanction is a reduced grade for the course, that reduced grade is reflected on the transcript. 
 

When preparing answers for external entities related to academic integrity, we advise you to always prioritize honesty and to feel free to consult with our office about when your academic honor violation record may be expunged. Our office cannot advise you on the specific wording you should use, or whether a particular incident must be disclosed to outside entities. If you are unsure how an incident on your record affects an application, we recommend consulting a legal professional or personal advisor. 
 

Because each office or department has its own internal bylaws and standards, it is best to reach out directly to the specific office or department that oversees the activity you are interested in. They can provide the most accurate information regarding their specific requirements and how a prior violation might be handled during their review process. Whether having an academic honor violation impacts your ability to participate in activities, resources, amenities, or opportunities is at the discretion of the office or department overseeing that specific activity or resource. Key areas that do frequently verify a student’s good standing or violation history include international programs, student government, and athletics. 

The Student Instructor Resolution is one of the three options available for students resolving alleged violations of the Academic Honor Policy when the allegation is for a first, non-egregious offense. The Student Instructor Resolution allows for a straightforward resolution when a student admits responsibility for the violation and accepts the academic sanction proposed by the instructor.

The Student Instructor Resolution option is available for resolving cases involving a student’s first offense that is not considered an egregious violation of the Academic Honor Policy. Additionally, the student is admitting responsibility for the violation and accepting the academic sanction proposed by the instructor, when they select this option.

If a Student Instructor Resolution is available, the instructor must discuss or communicate the evidence of the alleged academic violation with you in as private and confidential a setting as possible and briefly present the resolution options available. What this discussion or communication looks like varies by instructor and by incident. As the Student Instructor Resolution option is the most straightforward, many instructors will have the First Offense form already filled out and encourage you to select this option. However, you have 10 business days to respond to the instructor’s outreach regarding the academic honor policy violation and choose a resolution. You may also contact an Academic Honor Policy Advisor or the University Student Ombuds Office for guidance during this process. 

Yes, if you select the Student Instructor Resolution option and finalize the agreement, you will have a confidential Academic Honor Policy violation on your record. The existence of this record is important because it affects your eligibility for future resolutions. If you have a prior record of academic honor violation, you are ineligible for another Student Instructor Resolution. If you are alleged to have a second offense, your case would be a referral to an Academic Honor Policy Hearing, the more formal resolution process. 

Disputing the Sanction is one of the three options available for students resolving alleged violations of the Academic Honor Policy. The Disputing the Sanction option allows for a third party (an administrator in the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement) to review the case and whether the proposed sanction should be imposed when a student admits responsibility for the violation but does not accept the academic sanction proposed by the instructor.

The Disputing the Sanction option is available for resolving cases involving a student’s first offense that is not considered an egregious violation of the Academic Honor Policy. Additionally, the student is admitting responsibility for the violation but disputing or not accepting the academic sanction proposed by the instructor when they select this option. 
 

If the Disputing the Sanction option is available, the instructor must discuss or communicate the evidence of the alleged academic violation with you in as private and confidential a setting as possible and briefly present the resolution options available. What this discussion or communication looks like varies by instructor and by incident. As the Student Instructor Resolution option is the most straightforward, many instructors will have the First Offense form already filled out and encourage you to select this option. However, you have 10 business days to review the evidence, the sanction proposed by the instructor, and respond to the instructor’s outreach regarding the academic honor policy violation and choose a resolution. You may also contact an Academic Honor Policy Advisor or the University Student Ombuds Office for guidance during this process. If you find that the proposed sanction is extraordinarily disproportionate to the offense committed, then within the 10 business days to decide, you will notify the instructor that you are choosing the Disputing the Sanctions option. You will sign selecting this option on the First Offense form. The finalized First Offense form, the syllabus for the course, the evidence of the violation gathered by the instructor, your statement and your evidence are submitted to FDA-AcademicIntegrity@fsu.edu for review. Many instructors submit the form, the syllabus, and the evidence they gathered to the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement. Then an administrator in the Office will reach out to you to gather your statement and evidence. Once all the evidence is gathered from the instructor and the student, an administrator will begin the review in as timely a manner as possible. However, depending on the work volume in the office, it can take up to four to six weeks for a review to be completed and decision communicated.  

The central focus of your statement must be to demonstrate why the instructor’s proposed penalty is too severe. Your statement must demonstrate specific reasons why you believe that the proposed sanction is extraordinarily disproportionate to the offense committed for any modification of the sanction to be considered. Merely claiming dissatisfaction and/or hardship are not justifications or reasons for modifying an academic sanction. You are strongly encouraged to submit supporting documentation/evidence with your written statement to support your claim that the sanction should be lessened. You have the right to be assisted by an Academic Honor Policy Advisor throughout the process. You can contact an Academic Honor Policy Advisor for guidance. These individuals receive training on the Academic Honor Policy and can help students navigate their options for resolution. The University Student Ombuds Office is another resource available, if you have questions related to the Disputing the Sanction process. 
 

If your request to dispute the sanction is denied, it means the administrator in the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement affirmed the instructor’s original sanction. The case is then officially closed, the sanction is applied, and a confidential record of the violation is created. It is important to note that the Disputing the Sanction decision is final. The right to appeal the outcome of an Academic Honor Policy Hearing does not extend to the final decision resulting from the Disputing the Sanction review.  
 

The administrator in the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement only has authority to affirm the instructor’s proposed sanction or to lessen the severity of the instructor’s proposed sanction. Therefore, if your request to dispute the sanction is denied, you will receive the original sanction proposed by your instructor, as the administrator has affirmed that sanction.

If your request is approved, the Vice President (or designee) will lessen the severity of the instructor’s proposed sanction as determined to be appropriate in the context or circumstances of the case. However, as you have taken responsibility for an academic honor violation there is still a confidential record of this violation.

Yes, if you select the Disputing the Sanction option and finalize the agreement, you will have a confidential Academic Honor Policy violation on your record. The existence of this record is important because it affects your eligibility for future resolutions. If you have a prior record of academic honor violation, you are ineligible for another Student Instructor Resolution or Disputing the Sanction. If you are alleged to have a second offense, your case would be a referral to an Academic Honor Policy hearing, the more formal resolution process. 

If you choose the Disputing the Sanction option, an administrator in the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement reviews the information and evidence provided by the instructor and the statement and evidence you provide to review the proposed sanction to determine whether the proposed sanction should be imposed.

The Academic Honor Policy states that the Disputing the Sanction decision is final. It is not subject to the appeal process outlined in the policy, which is reserved for the outcomes of hearings. 

The Academic Honor Policy hearing is the most formal option for resolving alleged violations of the Academic Honor Policy. It is a necessary resolution procedure in cases where the allegations are complex, severe, or where the student denies responsibility for the misconduct. 

The Hearing Process option is available when (1) the student denies the violation or does not accept responsibility for the alleged violation, (2) the student has a prior academic honor policy violation, or (3) the alleged violation is considered egregious. 

When a hearing is required or selected by the student, the instructor submits the Academic Honor Policy form along with all documentation of the alleged violation, the course syllabus, and specific instructions for the assignment. 

• The student is sent a charge letter that outlines the academic honor policy violation and provides all the evidence that has been received at that point in time.  

• Once the hearing is scheduled, a notice letter will be sent informing the student of the date and time and Zoom link for the hearing.  

• The student provides evidence and documentation up until two days prior to the hearing that can be incorporated into the Hearing Packet. The student may have an advisor or support person attend the hearing and has up until five days prior to the hearing to provide the name, email address, and title/occupation of the advisor or support person so the individual can be included in the hearing. Please note that the advisor or support person does not have any standing to speak at the hearing, but the student can consult with their advisor or support person during the hearing in a manner that is not disruptive to the hearing. 

• The time leading up to the hearing is the student’s time to build their case. This can be gathering and providing any evidence and also building the presentation of information. Students should be prepared to share a clear, organized presentation of their version of events with the hearing panel. 

• Students are encouraged to collaborate with an Academic Honor Policy Advisor or other advisor of their choice to organize their evidence, practice their statement, and understand the nuances of the policy. Additionally, the University Student Ombuds Office is available for confidential advice on university processes, including the Academic Honor Policy hearing process. 

• Once the hearing panelists are determined, a bias check will be conducted to ensure that the panelists are neutral and impartial.  

The following procedures are followed for Academic Honor Policy hearings: 

1. Introductions by all attending the hearing. 
2. Reading of the charge by the Facilitator. 
3. Brief statement regarding the nature of the class by the instructor, student statement (optional). No more than 5 minutes
4. Presentation of information by the instructor, including invited witnesses, if any. No more than 30 minutes
   • Panel members question instructor 
   • Student questions instructor (items not already asked by the panel) 
5. Presentation of information by the student, including invited witnesses, if any. No more than 30 minutes
   • Panel members question student 
   • Instructor questions student (items not already asked by the panel) 
6. Summary of information by the instructor, including response to the student’s presentation. No more than 5 minutes
   • Panel asks instructor final questions 
7. Summary of information by the student, including responses to the instructor’s presentation. No more than 5 minutes
   • Panel asks student final questions 
8. Instructor, student, advisor, and witnesses are dismissed. Panel deliberates. 

The hearing itself is scheduled for 2 hours. Depending on how much information and evidence the instructor and the student have gathered to present, it typically takes 45 to 60 minutes to complete the 8 steps of the hearing. The remaining time is for the panel to deliberate. 

The time it takes from an allegation of an academic honor violation to receiving a decision letter following a hearing can vary depending on many factors from the timeliness of submission of documents and information to the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement, to the volume of hearing referrals already received, to the schedules of the instructor and the student. The average may be approximately 10 weeks, but some can move through the process more quickly, and others can take longer.

Rather than one party being responsible for defending themself, the hearing is where both the instructor and the student are responsible for presenting their own documentation and evidence to the panel.

The hearing panel evaluates the presentation of information and the evidence provided using the “Preponderance of the Evidence” definition. This means the panel is not looking for proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but rather they are determining if it is more likely than not that a violation occurred based on the information provided. As a result, the quality and clarity of the evidence that is gathered and presented are important factors in the panel’s final determination.

The student is presumed innocent going into the proceeding. The hearing itself is the venue where both the instructor and the student present their respective documentation, testimony, and evidence. It is only after the panel has carefully reviewed all the information from both parties that they make a formal determination regarding responsibility. Think of the hearing as a collaborative fact-finding process rather than a trial with a predetermined lean. The panel’s role is to remain objective until the preponderance of evidence dictates a conclusion.

If a student is determined by the hearing panel to be "not responsible" for violating the Academic Honor Policy, the student does not have an Academic Honor Policy violation on record. 
 

If a student is determined by the hearing panel to be "responsible" for violating the Academic Honor Policy, the student does have an Academic Honor Policy violation on record. This information is kept in a confidential database.

While a hearing shares some similarities with a trial, it is a much more conversational and educational process. Like a trial, it follows a structured protocol where both the instructor and the student have opportunity to provide evidence to support their account of what happened. However, a major difference is that a hearing is not an adversarial legal proceeding. Students and instructors are not represented by anyone, and they must speak for themselves. On occasion a student or an instructor chooses not to attend the hearing and speak for themselves, in that instance the hearing panel makes a decision based on evidence that has been provided without a presentation from that student or instructor and without answers to any questions they have from that student or instructor. It is not our preferred way to hold a hearing, but it does happen on rare occasions. This is very different from a trial where different parties can be compelled to appear. The hearing panel takes an active role by asking questions of both the student and the instructor. So, there are differences between an Academic Honor Policy hearing and a trial. The most significant difference is the philosophy behind the process. While a trial seeks to punish, the Academic Honor Policy process is designed to be educational, focusing on integrity and learning, rather than being purely punitive.

The hearing process is educational and non-adversarial in nature. It focuses on the allegation and the evidence that has been provided. Character judgement or character assassination and other opinions that are unsubstantiated by behavioral, factual evidence are discouraged. If an instructor, student, or witness strays into commentary or areas that are not directly related to the evidence or allegation, the Facilitator will mute them and remind them that the presentation and information need to be focused on the allegation and evidence.

The hearing panel is a neutral group of individuals tasked with objectively reviewing the information and evidence presented by both the instructor and the student. Their role is twofold. First, they deliberate to determine if it is more likely than not that a violation of the Academic Honor Policy occurred. If the panel determines that a violation did take place, they then move to a second phase of deliberation to decide which sanction(s) are most appropriate given the specific circumstances of the case. 
 

A hearing panel is carefully structured to ensure a balanced and fair perspective and consists of four individuals. To provide both subject matter expertise and objective distance, the panel includes one faculty member or instructor from the department or unit where the course or academic work originated, and one faculty member or instructor from a different department or academic unit. The remaining two panel members are students to ensure a peer perspective is represented. These students are matched to the academic level of the student with the alleged violation. If the case involves a graduate student, two graduate students will serve on the hearing panel. If the case involves an undergraduate student, two undergraduate students will serve on the hearing panel.

For a student to be found responsible for an Academic Honor Policy violation, a clear majority is required. Since the panel is composed of four members, at least three of the four panelists must agree that a violation occurred. In the event of a split decision, where two panelists vote that the student is responsible and two vote that the student is not responsible, the tie goes to the student. In such a case, the final determination will be that the student is not responsible for violating the Academic Honor Policy. 

Yes, students are allowed to be assisted by a support person or advisor throughout the process, including during the actual hearing. This individual can be a friend, mentor, an AHP advisor, or even an attorney, if the student chooses. However, it is important to understand the role of the support person or advisor. A support person or advisor is there for guidance and moral support only. They may not speak on the student’s behalf or participate directly in the proceedings. Additionally, anyone serving as a witness in a case is not allowed to act as a support person or advisor in the same case. If a student does select an attorney to serve as their support person or attorney, please be aware that a representative from the University’s Office of the General Counsel will typically also be present at the hearing.  
 

The role of a support person or advisor (including if a student selects an attorney to serve as their support person or advisor) is strictly advisory and supportive, not representative. While a support person or advisor is welcome to attend the hearing, the individual cannot advocate or speak on behalf of the student during the proceedings. This means the support person or advisor is not permitted to address the panel, question the instructor, make a presentation, or provide a summary statement. Their presence is intended to provide the student with moral support and guidance. The support provider or advisor can silently message the student or meet with the student in a breakout room at a non-disruptive point in the hearing. However, the student is the one to present their information and evidence and answer the panel’s questions. The Academic Honor Policy process is intended to be educational in nature and values student voice.

Yes, a student may appeal the outcome of a hearing by submitting an Academic Honor Policy Appeal Request Form within 10 class days of receiving their decision letter. The appeal must outline the specific grounds for the request and include all supporting facts and documentation that the student wishes for the Faculty Appellate Officer to consider. It is important to note that during the appeal stage, the burden of proof shifts to the student to prove that an error occurred.

To be considered, the appeal must be based on one of the following four grounds: 

1. Due process errors involving violations of a student’s rights that substantially affected the outcome of the initial hearing. 

2. Demonstrated prejudice against the charged student by any panel member. Such prejudice must be evidenced by a conflict of interest, bias, pressure, or influence that precluded a fair and impartial hearing. 

3. A sanction that is extraordinarily disproportionate to the offense committed. 

4. The preponderance of evidence presented at the hearing does not support a finding of responsible. 

If a student chooses to appeal a hearing decision, an Academic Honor Policy Appeal Request Form and all supporting facts and relevant documentation must be submitted within 10 class days of the date of the decision letter.

First, the student initiates the appeal by submitting an Academic Honor Policy Appeal Request Form and all supporting facts and relevant documentation must be submitted within 10 class days of the date of the decision letter. Second, an Academic Honor Policy Faculty Appellate Officer will evaluate the Appeal Request, the original case materials, and any additional information they deem necessary. Third, the Appellate Officer makes a determination to affirm, reduce, or reverse the decision from the hearing panel or they may determine that a new hearing is to be held. This decision is the final action or decision. Fourth, the student will receive the final decision in writing within 30 class days of the decision by the Faculty Appellate Officer. 

An Administrative Case Resolution is an alternative to the Academic Honor Policy hearing where the student meets one-on-one with an administrator from the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement to discuss the case. The administrator then determines responsibility based on a preponderance of the evidence standard and imposes sanctions if necessary.

An Administrative Case Resolution is generally only an option for first offenses that are not considered an egregious violation where the case is straightforward and does not require much additional information, explanation, or evidence beyond what is in the charge letter and documented by the instructor. In some instances when an allegation of a second offense is made and the case meets these criteria and the student admits responsibility for the alleged violation, an Administrative Case Resolution may be appropriate. 
 

The student, the instructor, and the administrator from the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement must all agree that an Administrative Case Resolution is appropriate.

In certain cases when a second allegation against a student is straightforward and does not require extensive additional information, explanation, or evidence beyond what is provided by the instructor, especially if the student admits responsibility for the alleged violation, an Administrative Case Resolution may be appropriate. 

An Administrative Case Resolution is not available for an allegation of an offense that is considered egregious. 

The decision of whether an allegation is egregious is made by an administrator from the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement and the instructor. Some examples of egregious allegations are coercing current classmates or former course enrollees to provide exam questions and/or answers; stealing or disseminating exam questions and/or answers; operating an ongoing, organized scheme to help others violate the Academic Honor Policy; using analog or technological methods to alter grades for oneself or others; violating the Academic Honor Policy while fulfilling one’s graduate program milestones.

Allegations for an egregious violation are referred to an Academic Honor Policy hearing. The student does not have the option for a Student Instructor Resolution or to Dispute the Sanction(s).

No, the procedural steps of the hearing itself are the same regardless of whether the violation is egregious or non-egregious. However, if the hearing panel determines that the student is responsible for an egregious violation, the panel may decide upon more severe sanctions such as disciplinary probation, suspension, or expulsion, which are typically not on the table for hearings for non-egregious, first-time offenses. 

When an allegation is egregious, it is resolved through an Academic Honor Policy Hearing. The following sanctions are available in the Academic Honor Policy Hearing process and may be imposed singly or in combination: 

1. Additional academic work, including re-doing the assignment 

2. A reduced grade (including “0” or “F”) for the assignment 

3. A reduced grade (including “F”) for the course 

4. Educational activities. Examples include, but are not limited to, referrals to improve educational outcomes, tutoring regarding proper citation practices, development of an academic plan with the assistance of the Academic Center for Excellence, participation in ethics workshops, interviews with appropriate faculty or administrators, writing educational or reflective essays. Fees may be charged to cover the cost of educational activities. 

5. Restitution, letter of accountability, or other restorative acts 

6. Disciplinary Probation – a period of time during which any further violation of the Academic Honor Policy puts the student’s status with the University in jeopardy, If the student is found “responsible” for another violation during the period of Disciplinary Probation, serious consideration will be given to imposing a sanction of Suspension or Expulsion. Restrictions that may be placed on the student’s activities during this time period include but are not limited to: participating in student activities; representing the University on athletic teams or in other leadership positions; and participating in practice for athletic or other competitions. 

7. Suspension – Separation from the University for a specified period, not to exceed two years. 

8. Expulsion – Separation from the University without the possibility of readmission. Expulsion is noted on the student transcript. 

9. Withholding of diplomas, transcripts, or other records for a specified period of time. 

10. Suspension of degree, in cases where an offense is discovered after the degree is posted. 

11. Revocation of degree, in cases where an offense is discovered after the degree is posted. 

If it is a non-egregious, first offense and the student chooses the Student Instructor Resolution, Disputing the Sanction, or Administrative Case Resolution, the following sanctions are available and may be imposed singly or in combination: 

1. Additional academic work, including re-doing the assignment 

2. A reduced grade (including “0” or “F”) for the assignment 

3. A reduced grade (including “F”) for the course 

4. Educational activities. Examples include, but are not limited to, referrals to improve educational outcomes, tutoring regarding proper citation practices, development of an academic plan with the assistance of the Academic Center for Excellence, participation in ethics workshops, interviews with appropriate faculty or administrators, writing educational or reflective essays. Fees may be charged to cover the cost of educational activities. 

If a student has a non-egregious offense and chooses the Academic Honor Policy Hearing or defaults to a hearing because they have a prior violation, the following sanctions are available and may be imposed singly or in combination: 

1. Additional academic work, including re-doing the assignment 

2. A reduced grade (including “0” or “F”) for the assignment 

3. A reduced grade (including “F”) for the course 

4. Educational activities. Examples include, but are not limited to, referrals to improve educational outcomes, tutoring regarding proper citation practices, development of an academic plan with the assistance of the Academic Center for Excellence, participation in ethics workshops, interviews with appropriate faculty or administrators, writing educational or reflective essays. Fees may be charged to cover the cost of educational activities. 

5. Restitution, letter of accountability, or other restorative acts 

6. Disciplinary Probation – a period of time during which any further violation of the Academic Honor Policy puts the student’s status with the University in jeopardy, If the student is found “responsible” for another violation during the period of Disciplinary Probation, serious consideration will be given to imposing a sanction of Suspension or Expulsion. Restrictions that may be placed on the student’s activities during this time period include but are not limited to: participating in student activities; representing the University on athletic teams or in other leadership positions; and participating in practice for athletic or other competitions. 

7. Suspension – Separation from the University for a specified period, not to exceed two years. 

8. Expulsion – Separation from the University without the possibility of readmission. Expulsion is noted on the student transcript. 

9. Withholding of diplomas, transcripts, or other records for a specified period of time. 

10. Suspension of degree, in cases where an offense is discovered after the degree is posted. 

11. Revocation of degree, in cases where an offense is discovered after the degree is posted. 

It is common for a hearing panel to increase or strengthen sanctions based on a pattern of behavior and a preponderance of evidence standard found in more than one case.  

When a student is found responsible through any resolution route, a record is created and maintained in a confidential database for five years from the date of the final decision. The record is expunged following those five years, unless the student received a sanction of expulsion. 

A student may petition the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement for early expungement if they only have one violation on their record and are within one year of graduating, which is verified by official program-mapping documentation. The written input from the instructor of record whether they are supportive of the student being eligible for early record expungement will be the primary consideration taken into account of whether a student's record will be expunged early, if the student does not incur a subsequent violation.

If a student receives a sanction of expulsion, the record will be maintained permanently, and expungement is not available. 
 

The instructor should consider the seriousness of the violation, the student’s circumstances, and consistency with past allegations when determining if they support early expungement. It is not recommended for an instructor to determine if they support early expungement or not based on the resolution path the student selects. 

If the allegation is for a non-egregious, first offense the instructor should complete the First Offense form indicating whether the student should be eligible for early expungement if no further misconduct occurs prior to degree completion. If the allegation is for an egregious offense or a second+ offense, early expungement is not an option.

When a student is found responsible through any resolution route, a record is created and maintained in a confidential database for five years from the date of the final decision. The record is expunged following those five years, unless the student received a sanction of expulsion.

A student may petition the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement for early expungement if they only have one violation on their record and are within one year of graduating, which is verified by official program-mapping documentation.

Request for early expungement may be via the Early Expungement Request Form outlining what the student learned from their experience with the Academic Honor Policy. Expungement at five years does not need to be requested. This is completed through normal administrative processes by the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement. 
 

No entities have access to a student’s Academic Honor Record once it has been expunged. It is completely removed from the confidential database at expungement.