Frequently Asked Questions - Faculty and Instructors

Faculty or instructors are responsible for reinforcing the importance of the Academic Honor Policy in their courses. This includes clarifying in writing your expectations for collaboration, multiple submissions of work, acceptable use of outside resources or information, and any other course-specific academic integrity standards. Additionally, faculty or instructors should strive to use pedagogy and assessment techniques that actively support academic integrity and reduce the potential for violations.

Before meeting with the student, you should contact the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement (FDA-AcademicIntegrity@fsu.edu) to determine if the student has a prior record of academic dishonesty. This determines which resolution options are available and whether you should use the First Offense Form or the Second or Egregious Offense Form available on our website. The faculty or instructor should also inform their department chair about the allegation. Teaching assistants are to seek guidance from their supervising faculty member, and adjunct instructors are to seek guidance from their department chair.

The Academic Honor Policy provides students with the due process rights to 

1. Be informed of all alleged violation(s) and given access to all relevant materials pertaining to the case. 

2. Receive an impartial hearing or a meeting with an administrator where they have an opportunity to present information pertaining to the case. 

The Policy also provides students the following prerogatives: 

1. When possible and appropriate to discuss the allegations with the instructor. 

2. Privacy, confidentiality, and personal security. 

3. To be assisted by a support person who may accompany the student throughout the process but may not speak on the student’s behalf; a witness may not serve as a support person. 

4. To choose not to answer any question that they do not wish to answer. 

5. To dispute the sanctions of a Student Instructor Resolution and to appeal both the decision and the sanctions of an Academic Honor Policy hearing or an Administrative Case Resolution. 

6. To have an opportunity to provide information in writing to the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement administrator, prior to a hearing, if they have reason to believe any panel member would not be able to review the case objectively without bias or prejudice. 

Confidentiality is a priority. Faculty are to inform their department chair about allegations. Other than that, only other faculty or staff with a legitimate need to know to fulfill professional responsibilities should be informed. Teaching assistants should seek guidance from their supervising faculty member, and adjunct instructors should seek guidance from their department chair.
 

The meeting should occur in as private and confidential a setting as possible. The faculty member or instructor should present all of the evidence of the alleged violation and briefly outline the resolution options available to the student. While a synchronous meeting to discuss the allegation is advised, there are times with online or large classes when the meeting may need to be an asynchronous discussion over email.

Yes, students have a right to see all relevant evidence related to the case. However, faculty or instructors may appropriately redact evidence to protect the privacy of other students.

Once the faculty member or instructor has met with the student about the allegation and provided all relevant evidence related to the case, the student has up to 10 business days to choose their resolution option. The student cannot be required to decide during the initial meeting with you about the allegation.

If a student is not responsive or does not communicate a decision about which resolution option they are selecting, after 10 business days the faculty member or instructor can reach out to the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement (FDA-AcademicIntegrity@fsu.edu), and we will place an academic hold on the student’s account that prevents transcript orders, course registration, and diploma/degree receipt. The hold will last indefinitely, until the student communicates with the faculty member or instructor to resolve the allegation. 

A Student Instructor Resolution is available for a first offense that is not considered egregious. It is used when a student admits responsibility and accepts the academic sanction that the faculty or instructor of the course proposes.

The decision about whether an allegation is egregious is made by the faculty or instructor of the course and an Office of Faculty Development and Advancement administrator. The Academic Honor Policy provides some examples of egregious allegations, but it is not an exhaustive list. Some examples are: 

1. Coercing current classmates or former course enrollees to provide exam questions and/or answers. 

2. Stealing or disseminating exam questions and/or answers from an instructor. 

3. Operating an ongoing, organized scheme to help others violate the Academic Honor Policy in some manner. 

4. Using analog or technological methods to alter grades for oneself or others. 

5. Violating the Academic Honor Policy while completing or fulfilling one’s graduate program milestones. 

If it is the student’s first offense, the student may choose the “Disputing the Sanction” option. In this case, you submit the First Offense Form with the student signing the Disputing the Sanction option along with the documentation (e.g., evidence of the violation, assignment instructions, course syllabus) to the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement. An administrator will reach out to the student to gather a statement and documentation as to why the proposed sanction is extraordinarily disproportionate to the offense committed. The administrator will review the case and make a determination to either affirm or lessen the proposed sanction. 

The student should continue in the course in question during the Academic Honor Policy process. Once an alleged violation of the Academic Honor Policy is discovered or when a student has been found responsible for a violation, the student is 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 are uncertain about what sanctions to propose, some things to consider are: 

1. The seriousness of the violation, the specific circumstances of the student, and potential opportunities for the student’s learning. 

2. Consistency with past offenses for similar violations to ensure fairness. 

3. Seeking departmental guidance from your department chair to see if there are some general guidelines or practices in place in your department related to sanctions. 

Faculty and instructors are also encouraged to contact the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement (FDA-AcademicIntegrity@fsu.edu) if they would like any guidance on proposing sanctions or to understand the available sanction options.

When a student admits responsibility for an academic honor policy violation but requests that the incident stay off the record, it is important to clarify that this is not an option under the Academic Honor Policy. While a student’s honesty is appreciated and can be considered a mitigating factor when determining the appropriate educational sanction, the violation itself must still be formally documented and reported on the appropriate form to the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement.  
 
The policy does not allow for informal or off-book agreements for several reasons. First, centralized tracking ensures that all students are treated equitably across different departments and courses. Second, a formal record is the only way to determine if a student has a history of prior violations. This allows patterns to be addressed that an individual instructor would not be able to see. Third, the official documentation protects the rights of the student by ensuring the incident is handled through established university channels, providing a clear trail for any future appeals or reviews, if they were to arise. 
 
If this request were to arise, inform the student that while their acknowledgement of violating the academic honor policy is a positive step toward resolving the matter, the policy requires the violation be reported.

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

A student may not, under any circumstances, drop or withdraw from your course or request that the grading basis be changed to a “Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory” grade if the course is letter graded while an academic honor policy allegation is in process. This is also true when a student has been found responsible for violating the academic honor policy for an incident in the class. If you bring forward an allegation and the student is found not responsible, after the not responsible decision the student may drop or withdraw or change the grading basis in line with the general guidelines from the University Bulletin.

If a final determination has not been made in an Academic Honor Policy case before the end of the semester and grades are due, the grade of Incomplete should be assigned until a decision is made.

Academic Honor records resulting from a finding of “responsible” for violating the policy are kept in a confidential database by the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement for five years from the final decision of the case. After five years, the student’s record is expunged unless the student received a sanction of expulsion, in which case the record will be retained permanently. 

Students who have a single violation on their record and are within one year of graduating (as verified by official program-mapping documentation) may petition for early expungement. The policy indicates that the written input or recommendation from the instructor about early expungement will be the primary consideration taken into account when the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement determines whether a student’s record will be expunged early.

You may forward this request to the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement (FDA-AcademicIntegrity@fsu.edu). Our office processes these requests.

There are three instances that require an allegation be referred to a hearing. The first is when the student denies responsibility for the violation. The second is when the student has a previous violation. The third is when the allegation is determined to be egregious. 

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.

During the hearing, instructors provide a brief statement regarding the nature of the class to help provide the hearing panel with an overview, background, and context to understand the allegation. The instructor also presents information about the allegation and responds to any questions from the hearing panel and the student about the information and evidence of the allegation that they presented. The instructor also has opportunity to provide a summary of information, including a response to the student’s presentation.

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 following sanctions are available and may be imposed singly or in combination for a student who is found responsible via an Academic Honor Policy hearing: 

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. 

The policy indicates that if a student is found “responsible,” the hearing panel should uphold the faculty member or instructor’s proposed sanction unless there is clear justification for imposing a different sanction. 

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 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 10 to 12 weeks, but some can move through the process more quickly, and others can take longer.

A decision letter is sent to the student, approximately 2 to 3 weeks following the hearing. The instructor of record, the Department Chair, and the Associate Dean for the academic college are copied on the decision letter. 

Yes, a student has 10 business days or class days from the date of the decision letter to appeal the decision of the hearing panel. The only recognized grounds for appeal are: 

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 the evidence presented at the hearing does not support a finding of “responsible.” 

On appeal, the burden of proof shifts to the student to prove an error has occurred.

Generally speaking, the instructor is not involved in the appeal. The appeal is an administrative review completed by the Appellate Officer appointed by the FSU President. There are rare instances where the instructor or the student may be consulted for clarification of information for the Appellate Officer.