SWAG��Ƶ

Procedure for Reporting and Review of Alleged Academic Misconduct in the College of Arts and Sciences

The SWAG��Ƶ College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) values academic integrity as a cornerstone of the educational experience. The following describes the procedure for reporting, reviewing, and resolving suspected cases of academic misconduct in CAS, in alignment with the Code of Conduct outlined in the SWAG��Ƶ Student Handbook (PDF).

A course instructor who believes a student has engaged in academic misconduct will:

• Notify (by email) and meet with the student to discuss the suspicion of academic misconduct as well as next steps.
  • If, after this meeting, misconduct is no longer suspected, the instructor will email this outcome to the student, with a copy to the Academic Director (AD) and CAS Associate Dean (CASAD). No further action is taken.
  • If, after this meeting, misconduct is still suspected, the instructor will email the student’s name and a brief summary of the incident (including an assessment of whether it is a minor² or a major³ infraction) to their AD, the CASAD,⁴ with a copy to the student.

The CASAD will then:

• Determine if this is the student’s first or a subsequent infraction.
• Verify the scope of the incident (minor/major) by reviewing the submitted information and consulting with the instructor and/or AD as needed.
• Reply to the instructor, AD, and student with the identified pathway and to confirm next steps.
  • If the suspected misconduct is minor and it is the student’s first infraction, the procedure will follow the Educational Pathway (A) outlined below.
  • If the suspected misconduct is major and/or it is the student’s second or subsequent infraction, the procedure will follow the Sanctionable Pathway (B) outlined below.

(A) Educational Pathway

When a suspected case of academic misconduct is determined to be appropriate for the Educational Pathway, the CASAD shall:

• Collaborate with the instructor and AD to collect any additional needed information including supporting documentation.
• Review the submitted documentation.
• Meet with the student to discuss the incident.

If, during the meeting with the CASAD, the student states that they engaged with integrity, the case will transition to the Sanctionable Pathway (B) for evaluation. If the student admits to misconduct, the CASAD will:

• Report the outcome to the instructor and AD; the instructor will determine the academic outcome⁵ and communicate this to the student.
• Determine the educational opportunity and/or restorative justice path as appropriate and communicate this to the student.
• Follow up with the instructor and relevant unit(s) to ensure that the student has completed both the academic requirement and the educational/restorative justice path by the agreed-upon deadline(s).
  • If the student completes all required components with integrity, the name is kept on file with the CAS Dean’s Office and sent to the Office of Student Resolutions (OSR) only for tracking purposes. An email is sent to the instructor, AD, and student to confirm completion of the Educational Pathway requirements. Any subsequent incidents of suspected academic misconduct will proceed through the Sanctionable Pathway.
  • If the student does not complete all required components (educational/restorative justice exercise and any additional academic work), the student’s name is referred to the OSR (same outcome as Sanctionable Pathway) and no credit is given for the academic work (an academic penalty is enforced). An email is sent to the instructor, AD, and student to confirm this outcome.

(B) Sanctionable Pathway

When a suspected case of academic misconduct is determined to be appropriate for the Sanctionable Pathway, the AD shall:

• Review a written account of the incident (provided by the instructor), including all relevant documentation. The instructor may include a recommendation for the appropriate sanction (the minimum sanction is a failing grade on the assignment in question).
• Request a meeting with the student to discuss the charge and provide a window of five business days for the student to respond. If the student does not reply to the AD’s request for a meeting or attend the meeting within 10 business days, then the AD will proceed without input from the student.

After reviewing the documentation and meeting with the student, the AD will send the following items to the CASAD within five business days of meeting with the student:

• All relevant documentation.
• A description of their decision on the veracity of the charge.
• If necessary, a recommendation of an appropriate sanction.

If the AD has concluded the student has maintained academic integrity, the AD will:

• Communicate with the instructor to determine an appropriate course of action.
• Inform the student, instructor, and the CASAD of their decision.

If the AD concludes that academic misconduct has occurred, the CASAD will:

• Review the relevant documentation, the AD’s conclusion, and the recommended sanction.
• Make the final determination on the charge and the sanction if this is the student’s first infraction evaluated by the Sanctionable Pathway.
• Communicate with the AD to determine an appropriate course of action if there is disagreement between the AD and CASAD regarding the conclusion and/or recommended sanction.
• Notify (by email) the AD, instructor, Director of the Office of Student Resolutions, and student of the final decision and the sanction, if appropriate, within five business days of receiving the material from the AD.

Charges of academic misconduct that may result in a minimum of a failing grade on the assignment and a maximum of a two-week suspension are reviewed and sanctioned by the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences or their designee. Charges of academic misconduct that may result in greater sanctions are reviewed by the CASAD and then referred to the Director of the Office Student Resolutions for evaluation via the Student Resolutions Review Process as outlined in the SWAG��Ƶ Student Handbook.

Footnotes

¹ Meetings should be held in person whenever possible; however, under necessary circumstances, a videoconference, phone call, or email can serve as a substitute.

² Minor infractions may be misunderstandings about what constitutes academic misconduct and/or are not premeditated. Minor infractions could include but are not limited to unauthorized collaboration with a classmate on a homework assignment, lab report, etc.; minor plagiarism (e.g., incomplete citations, improper paraphrasing and/or use of quotations, or a brief passage used verbatim without proper attribution) and/or minor self-plagiarism; use of unauthorized resources on an assignment, homework, report, essay, or other similar work; multiple submissions of the same paper or report for assignments in more than one course without permission of each Instructor (includes different classes and course repeats); possession of an unauthorized resource during a quiz or exam but without direct evidence that it was used to aid the student.

³ Major infractions are more significant acts of academic misconduct, may be premeditated and/or involve multiple students, and are in direct violation of the Student Code of Conduct. Major infractions could include but are not limited to falsification or fabrication of data, reports, or sources; cheating, copying, or using unauthorized resources on an exam or quiz; major plagiarism (e.g., absence of citations, entire passages, or multiple phrases plagiarized); egregious cheating (e.g., hiring someone to do the work or use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools or platforms to do the work when expressly prohibited); falsification or fabrication of data, reports, or sources; unauthorized use of a faculty member’s instructional material (e.g., posting to an online site); actions that alter or destroy the work of another student; the acquisition and/or use of another student’s work without that student’s express permission; repeated minor infractions

Other factors (e.g., the student’s year in school, volume or significance of infractions in a given incident) may influence the determination of minor vs. major infractions. During the academic misconduct evaluation process, a student’s case may change from a minor infraction to a major infraction and vice-versa. The SWAG��Ƶ Student Handbook includes additional details and examples of actions representative of academic misconduct.  The Dean will make the final determination about minor vs. major infractions.

⁴ If the course instructor is also the Academic Director, the Associate Dean will designate an alternate to serve in this role. If the CASAD is the course instructor, another Dean in the College of Arts and Sciences will review the case at that level.

⁵ The student following the Educational Pathway may have the opportunity to minimize the academic sanction by revising and re-submitting the work (as applicable) or, if revise-and-resubmit is not possible, other options may be offered at the discretion of the Instructor.

If the student fails to complete a “redo” assignment or alternate work by the specified date, they will earn a grade of zero for that assignment and their name will be referred to the OSR (net outcome of Sanctionable Pathway).

If the student’s re-submission also involves a suspicion of academic misconduct, a new case is opened and evaluated by the Sanctionable Pathway.

Consistent with university policy, students¹ wishing to initiate a grade appeal must contact their course instructor with questions or concerns about their final grade. Students are advised to familiarize themselves with the course syllabus prior to initiating an appeal. 

If the matter is not resolved with the course instructor, the student should then contact the Academic Director of the school from which the course is offered.² The Academic Director (or designate) will consult with the course instructor and apply any specific course/program-level policies as necessary to render a decision on the grade appeal.

If the matter is not resolved at the school level, the student may bring their concern to the CAS Dean’s Office (casdean@une.edu). The CAS associate dean for Student Academic Affairs will consult with the course instructor, academic director, dean, and other campus units as needed, and render a decision based on the information available and in line with published university academic policies.

Footnotes

¹ Grade appeals must be initiated by the student within two semesters of when the grade was awarded per university policy.

² When the course instructor is the Academic Director of the school in which the course is housed, students may direct their concern to the CAS Dean’s Office if the matter is not resolved with the course instructor.