ROWAN UNIVERSITY POLICY
Title: Academic Integrity Policy
...
Responsible Officer: Provost / Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs
Adopted:
Last Revision:
...
02/
...
09/
...
2017
Last Reviewed: 08/01/2015
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of the academic integrity policy is to provide students, faculty, and staff with guidelines about what behaviors violate academic integrity expectations, and the process for addressing academic integrity problems.
...
- Attachment 1, Definition Examples
- Attachment 2, Classification of Academic Integrity Violations by Offense
- Attachment 3, Academic Integrity Review Board Procedures
- Attachment 4, Academic Integrity Flow Chart for Instructors
- Attachment 5, Report of an Academic Integrity Violation (RAIV)
...
DEFINITION EXAMPLES
- Attachment 6, Descriptions of the AIV Sanctions of Workshop versus Seminar
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT 1
DEFINITION EXAMPLES
- Cheating
- Examples of cheating include but are not limited to:
- Copying from another person's work.
- Allowing another person to copy your work.
- Using unauthorized materials such as a textbook or notebook during an examination or using technology to illicitly access unauthorized materials.
- Using specifically prepared materials such as notes written on clothing or other unauthorized notes, formula lists, etc., during an examination.
- Collaborating with another person during an examination by giving or receiving information without permission.
- Examples of cheating include but are not limited to:
- Plagiarism
- Examples of plagiarism
- Copying from another person's work.
- Allowing another person to copy your work.
- Using unauthorized materials such as a textbook or notebook during an examination or using technology to illicitly access unauthorized materials.
- Using specifically prepared materials such as notes written on clothing or other unauthorized notes, formula lists, etc., during an examination. Collaborating with another person during an examination by giving or receiving information without permission.
- Quoting, paraphrasing or even borrowing the syntax of another's words without acknowledging the source.
- Using another's ideas, opinions or theories even if they have been completely paraphrased in one's own words without acknowledging the source.
- Incorporating facts, statistics or other illustrative material taken from a source, without acknowledging the source, unless the information is common knowledge. Submitting a computer program as original work that duplicates, in whole or in part, without citation, the work of another.
- Examples of fabrication include but are not limited to:
- Citation of information not taken from the source indicated.
- Listing of sources in a bibliography or other report not used in that project.
- Fabricating data or source information in experiments, research project or other academic exercises. Misrepresenting oneself or providing misleading and false information in an attempt to access another user's computer account.
- Quoting, paraphrasing or even borrowing the syntax of another's words without acknowledging the source.
- Using another's ideas, opinions or theories even if they have been completely paraphrased in one's own words without acknowledging the source.
- Incorporating facts, statistics or other illustrative material taken from a source, without acknowledging the source, unless the information is common knowledge.
- Submitting a computer program as original work that duplicates, in whole or in part, without citation, the work of another.
- Fabrication
- Examples of fabrication
- Examples of academic misconduct include but are not limited to:
- Intentional deceptive action to gain an academic advantage.
- Submitting written work to fulfill the requirements of more than one course without the explicit permission of both instructors.
- Changing, altering, falsifying or being accessory to the changing, altering or falsifying of a grade report or form, or entering any university office, building or accessing a computer for that purpose.
- Stealing, buying, selling, giving away or otherwise obtaining all or part of any unadministered test/examination or entering any university office or building for the purpose of obtaining an unadministered test/examination.
- Coercing any other person to obtain an unadministered test.
- Substituting for another student or permitting any other person to substitute for oneself to take a test or examination.
- Altering test answers and then claiming instructor inappropriately graded the examination.
- Violating the Network and Computer Use Policy, also known as the "Acceptable Use Policy, Network and System Services" established by Information Resources. Currently available at: http://www.rowan.edu/toolbox/policies/network/.
- Below are some examples of violations listed in the policy. Students should refer to the policy for the full list of violations.
- Each user is solely responsible for all functions performed from his/her account(s) on any system.
- No user may violate Federal Copyright Law. This means he/she may not alter, copy, translate, transmit, or receive software, music, images, text, or any other information licensed to or copyrighted by another party unless the license or copyright explicitly permits he/she to do so.
- No user may attempt to monitor another individual's data communications, nor may he/she read, copy, change, or delete another individual's files or software, without the prior permission of the owner.
- No user may send messages that are likely to result in the loss of the recipient's work, system downtime, or otherwise compromise a remote user's system. This includes, but is not limited to, redistribution of computer viruses or trojan horses.
PlagiarismExamples of plagiarism include but are not limited to:
Fabrication
ATTACHMENT 2
CLASSIFICATION OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY VIOLATIONS BY OFFENSE
...
- Citation of information not taken from the source indicated.
- Listing of sources in a bibliography or other report not used in that project.
- Fabricating data or source information in experiments, research project or other academic exercises.
- Misrepresenting oneself or providing misleading and false information in an attempt to access another user's computer account.
- Academic Misconduct
- Examples of academic misconduct include but are not limited to:
- Intentional deceptive action to gain an academic advantage.
- Submitting written work to fulfill the requirements of more than one course without the explicit permission of both instructors.
- Changing, altering, falsifying or being accessory to the changing, altering or falsifying of a grade report or form, or entering any university office, building or accessing a computer for that purpose.
- Stealing, buying, selling, giving away or otherwise obtaining all or part of any unadministered test/examination or entering any university office or building for the purpose of obtaining an unadministered test/examination.
- Coercing any other person to obtain an unadministered test.
- Substituting for another student or permitting any other person to substitute for oneself to take a test or examination.
- Altering test answers and then claiming instructor inappropriately graded the examination.
- Violating the Network and Computer Use Policy, also known as the "Acceptable Use Policy, Network and System Services" established by Information Resources. Currently available at: http://www.rowan.edu/toolbox/policies/network/.
- Below are some examples of violations listed in the policy. Students should refer to the policy for the full list of violations.
- Each user is solely responsible for all functions performed from his/her account(s) on any system.
- No user may violate Federal Copyright Law. This means he/she may not alter, copy, translate, transmit, or receive software, music, images, text, or any other information licensed to or copyrighted by another party unless the license or copyright explicitly permits he/she to do so.
- No user may attempt to monitor another individual's data communications, nor may he/she read, copy, change, or delete another individual's files or software, without the prior permission of the owner.
- No user may send messages that are likely to result in the loss of the recipient's work, system downtime, or otherwise compromise a remote user's system. This includes, but is not limited to, redistribution of computer viruses or trojan horses.
- Examples of academic misconduct include but are not limited to:
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT 2
CLASSIFICATION OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY VIOLATIONS BY OFFENSE
Violations of academic integrity are classified into four categories based on the seriousness of the behaviors and the possible sanctions imposed. Brief descriptions are provided below. These are general descriptions and should not be considered as all inclusive.
- Level 1 Violations
- Level 1 violations may occur because of ignorance or inexperience on the part of the person(s) committing the violation and ordinarily include a very minor portion of the course work. A sanction for a level 1 violation will not exceed a failing grade on the assignment.
- Example: Improper footnoting or unauthorized assistance with academic work on the part of a first-year Rowan University student.
- Recommended Sanction(s): Make-up assignment at a more difficult level or assignment of no-credit for work in question, required attendance at an Academic Integrity Seminar and/or Academic Integrity Workshop (see Attachment 6 for descriptions), and/or an assignment designated by the instructor that will increase the student's awareness of academic integrity.
- Reporting Mechanisms: Matters involving Level 1 violations are normally adjudicated by the instructor and sanctioned accordingly. A record of this violation will be retained in the Office of the
- Level 1 violations may occur because of ignorance or inexperience on the part of the person(s) committing the violation and ordinarily include a very minor portion of the course work. A sanction for a level 1 violation will not exceed a failing grade on the assignment.
- Example: Improper footnoting or unauthorized assistance with academic work on the part of a first-year Rowan University student.
- Recommended Sanction(s): Make-up assignment at a more difficult level or assignment of no-credit for work in question, required attendance at an Academic Integrity Seminar, and/or an assignment that will increase the student's awareness of academic integrity. Reporting Mechanisms: Matters involving Level 1 violations are normally adjudicated by the instructor and sanctioned accordingly. A record of this violation will be retained in the Office of the Provost in accordance with State record retention guidelines. The student can appeal the determination in accordance with policy.
- Level 2 violations involve incidents of a more serious nature and affect a significant aspect or portion of the course. A second Level 1 violation will automatically become a Level 2 violation. A sanction for a Level 2 violation will not exceed a failing grade in the course.
- Example: Quoting directly or paraphrasing without proper acknowledgment on an assignment or failing to acknowledge all sources of information and contributors who helped with an assignment.
- Recommended Sanction(s): A failing grade in the course, Academic Integrity Probation and/or the imposition of other lesser sanctions as deemed appropriate.
- Reporting Mechanisms: Matters involving Level 2 violations are normally adjudicated by the instructor and sanctioned accordingly. A record of this violation will be retained in the Office of the Provost in accordance with State record retention guidelines. The student can appeal the determination in accordance with policy.
- Level 3 2 Violations
- Level 3 offenses are even 2 violations involve incidents of a more serious in nature and involve dishonesty on affect a more significant aspect or portion of course work, such as a major paper, hourly or final examination. If a student had previously been found guilty either of one or more violations at Level 2 or higher, or of two Level 1 violations, an additional violation at any level will automatically become at least a Level 3 the course. A second Level 1 violation will automatically become a Level 2 violation. A sanction for a level 3 Level 2 violation will not exceed suspension from the Universitya failing grade in the course.
- Example: Copying from or giving assistance to others Quoting directly or paraphrasing without proper acknowledgment on an hourly or final examination, plagiarizing major portions of an assignment, using forbidden material on an hourly or final examination, presenting the work of another as one's own, or altering a graded examination for the purposes of re-gradingassignment or failing to acknowledge all sources of information and contributors who helped with an assignment.
- Recommended Sanction(s): A failing grade in the course, Academic Integrity Probation , and suspension from the University for one or more semesters with a notation of "Disciplinary Suspension" placed on a student's transcript and/or and/or the imposition of other lesser sanctions as deemed appropriate.
- Reporting Mechanisms: Matters involving Level 3 2 violations are normally adjudicated by the Academic Integrity Review Boardinstructor and sanctioned accordingly. A record of this violation will be retained in the Office of the of the Provost in accordance with State record retention guidelines. The student can appeal the determination in accordance with policy.
- Level 4 3 Violations
- Level 4 violations are the most serious breaches of academic integrity. They also include repeat offenses below Level 4 violations and violations committed while already on or after returning from Academic Integrity Probation.
- Example: Forgery of grade change forms; theft of examinations; having a substitute take an examination; any degree of falsification or plagiarism relating to a senior or graduate thesis; using a purchased term paper; sabotaging another's work; the violation of the clinical code of a profession.
- Recommended sanction: Expulsion from the University and a permanent dismissal notation on the student's transcript and/or the imposition of other lesser sanctions as deemed appropriate.
- 3 offenses are even more serious in nature and involve dishonesty on a more significant portion of course work, such as a major paper, hourly or final examination. If a student had previously been found guilty either of one or more violations at Level 2 or higher, or of two Level 1 violations, an additional violation at any level will automatically become at least a Level 3 violation. A sanction for a level 3 violation will not exceed suspension from the University.
- Example: Copying from or giving assistance to others on an hourly or final examination, plagiarizing major portions of an assignment, using forbidden material on an hourly or final examination, presenting the work of another as one's own, or altering a graded examination for the purposes of re-grading.
- Recommended Sanction(s): A failing grade in the course, Academic Integrity Probation, and suspension from the University for one or more semesters with a notation of "Disciplinary Suspension" placed on a student's transcript and/or the imposition of other lesser sanctions as deemed appropriate.
- Reporting Mechanisms: Matters involving Level 3 violations are adjudicated by the Academic Integrity Review Reporting Mechanisms: Matters involving Level 4 violations are adjudicated by the Academic Integrity Review Board. A record of this violation will be retained in the Office of the Provost in accordance with State record retention guidelines.
Level 2 Violations
ATTACHMENT 3
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY REVIEW BOARD PROCEDURES
A. Overview of Hearing Process
- Level 4 Violations
- Level 4 violations are the most serious breaches of academic integrity. They also include repeat offenses below Level 4 violations and violations committed while already on or after returning from Academic Integrity Probation.
- Example: Forgery of grade change forms; theft of examinations; having a substitute take an examination; any degree of falsification or plagiarism relating to a senior or graduate thesis; using a purchased term paper; sabotaging another's work; the violation of the clinical code of a profession.
- Recommended sanction: Expulsion from the University and a permanent dismissal notation on the student's transcript and/or the imposition of other lesser sanctions as deemed appropriate.
- Reporting Mechanisms: Matters involving Level 4 violations are
- adjudicated by the Academic Integrity Review Board.
The possible findings and outcomes of hearings conducted by the Academic Integrity Review Board are summarized below. Academic Integrity Violation is abbreviated as AIV. - Appeal 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. |
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. |
5. Level 3 and Level 4 Sanction Hearings
- A record of this violation will be retained in the Office of the Provost in accordance with State record retention guidelines.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT 3
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY REVIEW BOARD PROCEDURES
A. Overview of Hearing Process
- 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.
- The possible findings and outcomes of hearings conducted by the Academic Integrity Review Board are summarized below. Academic Integrity Violation is abbreviated as AIV.
- Appeal 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 |
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.
. |
Student is responsible for a Level |
1 violation. | Level |
1 sanctions are |
upheld. |
B. Additional Procedural Guidelines
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- A Board member will withdraw from adjudicating any case in which he/she cannot reach a fair and objective decision.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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."
- If the student is found "responsible" the Board will recommend the appropriate sanctions to be imposed.
- 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 appealed to the Provost, who reviews the case and findings and provides a final decision. This will be the final step in the adjudication process.
- 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 placed in the student's advising folder.
ATTACHMENT 4
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY FLOW CHART FOR INSTRUCTORS
Rowan University Academic Integrity Flow Chart for Instructors
ATTACHMENT 5
REPORT OF AN ACADEMIC INTEGRITY VIOLATION (RAIV)
http://www.rowan.edu/provost/policies/proceduresForms.html
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. |
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. |
B. Additional Procedural Guidelines
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- A Board member will withdraw from adjudicating any case in which he/she cannot reach a fair and objective decision.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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."
- If the student is found "responsible" the Board will recommend the appropriate sanctions to be imposed.
- 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 appealed to the Provost, who reviews the case and findings and provides a final decision. This will be the final step in the adjudication process.
- 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 placed in the student's advising folder.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT 4
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY FLOW CHART FOR INSTRUCTORS
Rowan University Academic Integrity Flow Chart for Instructors
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT 5
REPORT OF AN ACADEMIC INTEGRITY VIOLATION (RAIV)
http://www.rowan.edu/provost/policies/proceduresForms.html
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT 6
Descriptions of the AIV Sanctions of Workshop versus Seminar
The Academic Integrity Workshop addresses skills needed to avoid plagiarism. Students learn and apply skills regarding proper citations, summary of information, appropriate paraphrasing, and synthesis of ideas. Workshops include in-class exercises (as opposed to a “take-home” assignment). The exercises present students with examples of plagiarism of source materials, and students learn to identify how the examples reflect plagiarism.
The Academic Integrity Seminar is ethics-based and includes group discussion regarding decision-making with respect to academic integrity principles. Students complete a “take-home” assignment for which they reflect on their violation and the strategies they will employ in the future to make better decisions with respect to academic integrity.