Page History

...

1. Overview of Hearing Process
   1. Level 1 and 2 violations are adjudicated by the instructor and reported to the Office of the Provost. The Office of the Provost determines whether the student has committed a prior violation and adjusts the level of violation accordingly. The Academic Integrity Review Board annually reviews reports of Level 1 and 2 violations to confirm that classifications of violations and subsequent sanctions that were imposed were appropriate. Level 3 and 4 violations are referred directly to and adjudicated by the Academic Integrity Review Board.
   2. The possible findings and outcomes of hearings conducted by the Academic Integrity Review Board are summarized below. Academic Integrity Violation is abbreviated as AIV.

   3. Rowan University Academic Integrity Summary Table for Instructors rev 9-9-21.pdfAppeal of Level 1 Violation

      Possible Findings	Outcomes
      Student is not responsible for an AIV.	Student is cleared. Grade must be recalculated without the penalty for the alleged violation.
      Student is responsible for a Level 1 violation.	Level 1 sanctions are upheld or may be adjusted by the Office of the Provost. The Hearing Board may recommend a sanction for consideration by the instructor or Office of the Provost.

   4.  Appeal of Level 2 Violation

      Possible Findings	Outcomes
      Student is not responsible for an AIV.	Student is cleared. Course grade must be recalculated without the penalty for the alleged violation.
      Student is responsible for a lesser (Level 1) violation.	Student is responsible for a lesser offense. Penalty is lowered as appropriate and course grade is recalculated.
      Student is responsible for a Level 2 violation.	Level 2 sanctions are upheld or may be adjusted by the Office of the Provost. The Hearing Board may recommend a sanction for consideration by the instructor or Office of the Provost.

   5. Level 3 and Level 4 Sanction Hearings

      Possible Findings	Outcomes
      Student is not responsible for an AIV.	Student is cleared. Grade is recalculated without the penalty for the alleged violation and entered to replace the Incomplete.
      Student is responsible for a lesser (Level 1 or Level 2) violation.	Student is responsible for a lesser offense. Penalty is determined as appropriate. Course grade is recalculated and entered to replace the Incomplete.
      Student is responsible for a Level 3 violation.	Level 3 sanctions are recommended as appropriate.
      Student is responsible for a Level 4 violation.	Level 4 sanctions are recommended as appropriate.

2. Additional Procedural Guidelines
1. For matters not being adjudicated by the Academic Integrity Review Board (Levels 1 and 2), the Office of the Provost will conduct a review to determine whether the student has any prior violation and then determine appropriate additional procedures.
2. When applicable the Office of the Provost will be responsible for providing both the student and the instructor with proper notice concerning their participation in a hearing before the Academic Integrity Review Board. In addition, notice of the results of hearings will be provided. In the event that either the student or the instructor does not attend a scheduled hearing, the matter will be heard based on the written record and the information provided by the party in attendance.
3. Hearings conducted by the Academic Integrity Review Board will be closed to all members of the campus and outside community except those directly involved with the case.
4. The burden of proof rests upon the complainant, who must establish, on the basis of the standard of a "preponderance of evidence," that it was "more likely than not" that the accused student is responsible for the conduct violation based on the weight of the credible information presented.
5. Any student appearing at a hearing before the Academic Integrity Review Board for adjudication of an allegation of academic dishonesty may challenge the assignment of any member of the board to his/her case. Upon hearing the details of the challenge, the Chair will either uphold or deny the challenge.
6. A Board member will withdraw from adjudicating any case in which he/she cannot reach a fair and objective decision.
7. Because legal procedures will not be formally applied, the Chair will make all determinations on questions of procedure and admissibility of information presented and will not be excluded from hearings or Board deliberations except that s/he will not vote. The Chair will exercise control over the manner in which the hearing is conducted to avoid unnecessarily lengthy hearings and to prevent the harassment or intimidation of witnesses. Anyone who disrupts a hearing or who fails to adhere to hearing procedures may be excluded from the proceeding.
8. The accused student may submit a written statement to the Board prior to the hearing. Submission of such a statement is not a substitute for participation in the hearing. The student may also provide, in advance or during the hearing, additional documentation that is directly relevant to the case.
9. With advance approval from the Academic Integrity Hearing Board, the accused student is allowed to call witnesses to present testimony that is directly relevant to the case. Character witnesses are not permitted. The student must sign a FERPA waiver indicating consent to have the witness present. The witness will be called into the hearing only to present testimony and to be questioned by the Board. The student may not address the witness or the Board while the witness is present. If the witness is a Rowan University student, no immunity is implied; any information provided may be used in subsequent hearings. The witness will be informed that he/she cannot be compelled to appear, stay at the hearing, or give any testimony if unwilling. The witness will sign a statement to that effect.
10. The Board will review all materials and hear all information pertinent to the case from the complainant, the accused and all witnesses. Members of the Board, including the Chair, will be free to ask relevant questions in order to clarify information or resulting issues.
11. After hearing all the information, the Board will deliberate privately until a decision is reached by a majority vote. A tie vote will result in a finding of "not responsible."
12. If the student is found "responsible" the Board will recommend the appropriate sanctions to be imposed.
13. Cases heard by the Academic Integrity Review Board that result in a finding that the student is responsible for an academic integrity violation are automatically reviewed by the Vice President for Student Affairs, who reviews the case and findings and provides a final decision. This will be the final step in the adjudication process.
14. Following the hearing, the Office of the Provost will provide the accused student with written notification of the decision reached and a list of any sanctions imposed. If the student is found "responsible," a record of the decision will be maintained in the Office of the Provost.
    
    

ATTACHMENT 3

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY SUMMARY TABLE FOR INSTRUCTORS

ATTACHMENT 4

GUIDE FOR ACADEMIC INTEGRITY VIOLATION MEETINGS
(Download Form: Go to top of screen, Click down arrow on top right, the form will appear at the bottom left corner,
Click/Select boxes in the form, Print or email to the Provost.
 

ATTACHMENT 5
REPORT OF AN   INTEGRITY VIOLATION (RAIV)

All Reports of an Academic Integrity Violation (RAIV) must be submitted via Maxient. 

...