ACADEMIC CONDUCT POLICY

STANDARDS

ACADEMIC RESPECT FOR THE WORK OF OTHERS²

Plagiarism: representing in any academic activity the words or ideas of another as one’s own (whether knowingly or in ignorance) without proper acknowledgement. This principle applies to texts published in print or on-line, to manuscripts, to your own work, and to the work of other students. Acts of plagiarism include but are not limited to:

1. Paraphrasing ideas, data, or writing (for instance, from web or online databases, books, periodicals, monographs, maps, charts, pamphlets, and other electronic sources), even if it makes up only part of your written assignment, without properly acknowledging the source; or
2. Using someone’s words or phrases and embedding them in your own writing without using quotation marks and citing the source; or
3. Quoting material directly from a source, citing the source on the bibliography page, but failing to mark properly the author’s text or materials with quotation marks and a citation; or
4. Submitting as your own part of or an entire work produced by someone else;
5. Transferring and using another person’s computer file as your own; or
6. Obtaining papers, tests, and other assessment material from organizations or individuals who make a practice of collecting papers for resubmission; or
7. Using visual images, dance performances, musical compositions, theatrical performances, and other digital resources (PowerPoint presentations, etc.) as your own without proper acknowledgement.

ACADEMIC SELF-RESPECT

1. Allowing another student to copy from you; or
2. Providing material or other information to another student with knowledge that such assistance could be used in any of the violations stated above (e.g., giving test information to students in other sections of the same course); or
3. Taking a quiz, exam, or similar evaluation in place of another person; or
4. Signing on the attendance sheet the name of a student who is not present.

ACADEMIC HONESTY

Cheating: Improper application of unauthorized materials, information, or study aids, including but not limited to:

1. Obtaining unauthorized prior knowledge of an examination or part of an examination; or
2. Using resources or instruments on academic tasks not explicitly permitted by the supervising instructor (e.g., textbook, notes, formula list, calculator, etc.); or
3. Using any electronic device in an academic exercise or examination that is not explicitly authorized by the supervising faculty. This includes but is not limited to the Internet, cell phones, beepers, iPods, headphones, PDAs, and other wireless handheld devices; or
4. Altering a graded exam or assignment and then requesting that it be regraded; or
5. Collaborating by sharing information or requesting assistance, when such collaboration has been explicitly prohibited by the instructor; or
6. Making use of another person’s data or work without proper citation in an assignment; or
7. Allowing another person to take a quiz, exam, or similar evaluation for you; or
8. Submitting work with identical or similar content in concurrent courses without permission of the instructors; or
9. Resubmitting a work that has already received credit with identical or substantially similar content in another course without consent of the present instructor.

ACADEMIC ORIGINALITY

Fabrication: falsification or invention of any information or citation in an academic activity, including but not limited to:

1. Crediting source material that was not used for research; or
2. Presenting results from research that was not performed; or
3. Altering data to support research; or
4. Inventing excuses for missed assignments, exams, or classes; or
5. Altering or falsifying University documents or records related to academic matters.

ACADEMIC FAIRNESS

Sabotage: this is understood as stealing, concealing, destroying or inappropriately modifying classroom or other instructional material, such as posted exams, library materials, laboratory supplies, or computer programs.

DISCIPLINARY PROCESS

Once a student of the academic community of C.W. Post is accused of violating any of the Ethos principles above, the following disciplinary processes will be followed.

Level One

If an instructor suspects a student of academic misconduct, the following steps shall be taken:

1. The instructor shall meet with the student to explain the nature of the alleged violation and to determine the student’s awareness of the violation as well as his or her motivation or intent.
2. The instructor should consider the motivation behind the violation (dishonesty, ignorance, carelessness) before deciding whether:
1. a penalty is warranted. A penalty includes a failing or lowered grade for an assignment or for the course.
2. at the instructor’s discretion, he or she may seek a solution with the student. That solution might be providing correct documentation, rewriting the paper, retaking an examination, or failure for the assignment and/or the course.
3. if a penalty is assigned in the form of a failing or lowered grade, the student has the right to appeal this decision. (See “Appeals Process” below.)
3. The instructor may also require the student to take a workshop co-sponsored by the Writing Center and the Library.

Diagram of the Level One Disciplinary Process

Level Two

If (and only if) an instructor believes that the case warrants further institutional awareness or action beyond the assignment of a grade, the following process shall be followed:

1. The instructor fills out an Academic Misconduct Form pdf, doc and sends it to his or her chair (or program director).
2. The chair notifies the student in writing that an Academic Misconduct Form has been filed. The student has seven (7) business days to contact the chair and to arrange (if the student so desires) a meeting with the chair to discuss the situation.
3. The chair then considers the case. (The chair may choose to consult other members of his or her department informally or as part of a departmental meeting. Such procedures shall be determined by individual departments.) If the chair believes that the instructor’s case has merit, the chair then forwards a report of the case to his or her dean.
4. The dean reviews the case and if s/he believes that the case has merit, the Dean
1. forwards the report to the Director of Student Conduct and Community Education, which shall serve as the repository of reports of academic misconduct. And, if the case requires further action,
2. contacts the chair of the Committee on Academic Misconduct to inform him or her of the case.
5. The chair of the Committee on Academic Misconduct shall then
1. convene a meeting of the Committee in a timely fashion, and
2. inform the student that his or her case will be heard by the Committee.
6. The Committee on Academic Misconduct will then hold a hearing to review the case against the student for merit and will, if appropriate, impose a sanction. Statements from both the student and the instructor will be heard. The Committee will consider such matters as whether the violation was a result of ignorance, carelessness, or dishonesty before deciding whether a sanction is warranted. Sanctions may include suspension or dismissal from C.W. Post.
7. Notification of the decision and the sanction will be sent to the student, the appropriate chair and dean, and (if applicable) the Registrar within seven (7) business days. The student will be made aware of how s/he may appeal the decision.
8. The sanction goes into effect immediately. If the student requests an appeal, s/he will be allowed to continue attending class until the appeal is heard and a decision is rendered.
9. A copy of the decision of the Committee on Academic Misconduct shall be forwarded to the Office of Student Conduct and Community Education, which shall serve as the repository for these reports.

Diagram of the Level 2 Disciplinary Process

APPEALS PROCESS

Level One

A student accused of any academic violation has the right to an appeal. However, the student must be aware that for Level One violations, only the grade can be appealed. An appeal will automatically create a first offense even if the instructor had decided that no institutional awareness of this incident was necessary.

1. If the student disputes the instructor’s decision, s/he can seek a solution from the chair of the department involved.
2. If still not satisfied, student meets with appropriate dean or the dean’s designee for a solution. The student will be notified in writing of the dean’s decision within seven (7) business days.
3. If the student wishes to request an appeal to the outcome of his or her case, the student must submit an Appeal Request form pdf, doc to the Chair of the Faculty Student Appeals Board within three (3) business days after receiving the dean’s letter.
4. The Faculty Student Appeals Board shall convene a meeting, in a timely fashion, to consider the appeal. Statements from both the student and the professor will be heard. The decision of this Board is final.
5. The outcome of the decision will be communicated to the student, the instructor, the appropriate chair and dean, and (if applicable) the Registrar within seven (7) business days.
6. A copy of the decision of the Faculty Student Appeals Board shall be forwarded to the Office of Student Conduct and Community Education.

Diagram of the Level 1 Appeals Process

Level Two

A student accused of any academic violation has the right to an appeal. A student found to have committed a Level Two violation has the right to appeal the decision of the Committee on Academic Misconduct to the Faculty Student Appeals Board.

1. The student submits an Appeal Request Form pdf, doc to the chair of the Faculty Student Appeals Board within three (3) business days after receiving the decision of the Committee on Academic Misconduct.
2. The chair of the Faculty Student Appeals Board shall convene a meeting, in a timely fashion, to consider the appeal. The decision of this Board is final.
3. The outcome of the decision will be communicated to the student, the instructor, the appropriate chair and dean, and (if applicable) the Registrar within seven (7) business days.
4. A copy of the decision of the Faculty Student Appeals Board shall be forwarded to the Office of Student Conduct and Community Education.

Diagram of the Level 2 Appeals Process

STUDENT RIGHTS

Students have the following rights:

1. To be notified in writing of any alleged violations prior to the hearing.
2. To have the violation(s) explained at every level of the sanctioning and the appeals process by the dean or the dean’s designee.
3. To request information about the composition of the Board and to request the replacement of any member of the Board who may be biased.
4. To be advised by a person of their choice. Advisors must be members of the Campus community. Advisors may not speak during any proceedings.
5. To consult with an attorney but that right does not extend to active participation by the attorney at the proceeding.
6. To see all written statements concerning the charges.
7. To refute oral and written statements made against them.
8. To be advised of the appropriate appeal process.

STUDENT CONDUCT RECORDS

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 as amended guidelines will govern all communication and maintenance of all student conduct records.

¹Students are accountable for adhering to all regulations in the C.W. Post Student Handbook. An updated version of the Student Handbook can be found here. The most current version of the Student Affairs Code of Conduct can be found here.
²Definitions and descriptions are adapted from the UCLA Statement of Academic Integrity. We thank the Dean of Student Affairs in the Department of Student Affairs. Additional material was adopted from the SUNY Stony Brook Policies and Procedures Governing Undergraduate Student Academic Dishonesty. We thank the Office of Academic Judiciary at SUNY Stony Brook.