The ideal of academic honesty is crucial to the integrity of a college or university; conversely, academic dishonesty undermines the very basis upon which institutions of higher education are organized and function. All students at Claremont Graduate University are expected to meet the highest standards of honesty in the performance of their academic work. Toward that end, Standards of Academic Honesty and procedures to enforce these standards fairly are hereby adopted.
STANDARDS OF ACADEMIC HONESTY
The Standards of Academic Honesty proscribe (but are not limited to) the giving or receiving of unauthorized help in examinations or other assignments, plagiarism and other unacknowledged or undocumented use of source material, and forgery.
VIOLATIONS OF STANDARDS
A student shall be subject to discipline for any violation of the Standards of Academic Honesty.
Sanctions available would be those appropriate to the violations and will include, but not be limited to, any one of the following: an official reprimand; a requirement to repeat an assignment, an examination, or a course; a requirement to complete an alternative assignment or examination; a failing grade for an assignment, an examination, or a course; suspension; expulsion from the Graduate University; or revocation of a certificate or degree.
COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC HONESTY
- A Committee on Academic Honesty (CAH) is established.
- Its primary purposes shall be, in accordance with the procedures outlined below, to receive and evaluate evidence of alleged violations of the Standards of Academic Honesty and to make recommendations for the disposition of cases involving alleged violations. The Committee shall also make recommendations to the Provost of the Graduate University (hereafter, the Provost) and to the Faculty of the Graduate University for changes in standards and procedures, as it deems appropriate, and shall report annually to the Faculty of the Graduate University.
- The Faculty Grievance Committee is charged with the responsibility of carrying out the duties of the Committee on Academic Honesty. In order to fulfill these duties and responsibilities, the FEC must empanel two faculty members from a stratified (by gender) random sample of tenured full professors according to the Faculty Grievance procedures, along with two graduate students recommended by the Graduate Student Council and a designated representative of the administration, as the Committee on Academic Honesty. If the Graduate Student Council fails to make a recommendation within a reasonable time (generally two weeks) the Provost will appoint students to the CAH. Individuals who have an actual or perceived conflict of interest with a pending case should not serve as members of the CAH.
In cases of an alleged violation, these general procedures will be followed:
- A faculty member who believes that a student has violated one or more of the Standards of Academic Honesty will promptly so inform the student and present the student with the reasons for this belief.
- If, after learning the student's response, the faculty member continues to believe that a violation has occurred, the case shall proceed in one of the following ways:
- If the faculty member deems the alleged violation to be minor, the faculty member may attempt to resolve the matter in a manner satisfactory to both the faculty member and the student. If the matter is so resolved, the faculty member shall report the matter and its resolution in writing to the Provost, including submitting any materials or evidence relevant to substantiating the violation (e.g., copies of student papers or exams). The Provost will note that the student has been found guilty of a violation; this note will be made in the student’s file but will not appear on the student’s transcript. In addition, the Provost will notify the student that this violation has been recorded, with copies of this notification going to the originating faculty member, the unit head or dean of the school in which the student is enrolled, and the dean of students.
- If the faculty member deems the alleged violation to be minor, but the student is not satisfied with the faculty member's proposed disposition of the violation, the student may independently appeal the issue to the CAH.
- If the faculty member deems the alleged violation to be serious, the faculty member will refer the matter to the CAH, normally within two weeks, giving reasons for the faculty member's belief that a violation has occurred and providing any materials or evidence relevant to substantiating the violation (e.g., copies of student papers or exams). In that report, the faculty member may recommend a penalty.
- Any student alleged to have committed more than one violation (either because of prior or concurrent instances of the same or different violations) will be referred to the CAH as a serious violation by the Provost.
- If a faculty member refers an alleged violation to the CAH, a student dissatisfied with the penalty imposed by a faculty member for an alleged minor violation appeals to the CAH, or if a student has multiple allegations or instances of violations recorded by the Provost, the CAH will promptly inform the student and the faculty member or Provost in writing, and will consult with them as to the necessity for or desirability of a hearing. If a hearing results from this consultation, the CAH will schedule one as soon as possible.
- The CAH will review materials submitted about the case and may also gather other materials and documents it deems relevant for determining whether or not a violation has been committed, and for making a recommendation about an appropriate penalty in the case of a violation.
- Following the hearing, or in the absence of one, the CAH will promptly decide whether the alleged violation has or has not occurred and will submit a written report of its findings to the Provost, normally within two weeks. If it decides that a violation or violations have occurred, the CAH will include in its report its recommendation of a penalty which it considers appropriate. This penalty may be the one recommended by the faculty member or some other penalty in conformity with paragraph 4. The CAH will also transmit the relevant files to the Provost.
- The Provost will then review the case and decide whether to accept or reject the recommendation of the CAH, to modify it, or to remand the case to the CAH for further determinations. The Provost will advise the student, the originating faculty member, the unit head or school dean in which the student is enrolled, the dean of students, and the CAH in writing of the action taken, normally within two weeks of receiving the case.
- If the Provost decides to impose a penalty (of whatever kind), the student, within a reasonable time (normally within two weeks but as specified in the written notice from the Provost), may appeal this decision to the President.
- If the student appeals, the Provost will promptly transmit the relevant file and the recommendation to the President. The President will act within a reasonable time (normally within two weeks), and may concur with the decision of the Provost, may choose to modify the decision, may dismiss the case, or may decide to remand the case to the CAH for further determinations. In all actions by the President but the last, the case will be considered closed.
If evidence arises that an academic degree was earned in violation of the Standards of Academic Honesty, a faculty member or the Dean of Students may recommend to the Provost that the degree be revoked. The Provost may then refer the matter to the CAH for its recommendation. If the CAH, after an appropriate hearing, recommends to the Provost that the degree be revoked, the Provost will forward his or her own recommendation to the Graduate University faculty, then to the President who, in turn, will forward his or her own recommendation to the Board of Fellows. The Board will have final authority in decisions regarding revocation of a degree.
Approved by the Graduate Faculty, 12/14/87
Edited to reflect title and organizational changes, 11/11/88
Edited to reflect change from Equity and Grievance Committee to Grievance Committee, 7/15/94
Edited Degree Awarded and approved by FEC and Faculty on 5/2010
Revisions to Committee on Academic Honesty approved by FEC 5/2/11, Faculty 5/9/11
Revisions to Disciplinary Sanctions, Committee on Academic Honesty, and Procedures approved by FEC 4/13/15, Faculty 4/20/15