1. Academic Integrity
  2. Code Overview

Code Overview

Fall 2021 Updates

Code of Student Academic Integrity Updates - Effective August 31, 2021

The Code of Student Academic Integrity has been revised to clarify the definition of "cheating" and help faculty members identify the appropriate, more specific charge for a student's behavior; to add the adjudication option of “In Absentia Resolution" to allow for a case to be resolved in a student’s absence if they have not responded to meeting requests; and to clarify that for fairness and equity purposes, all resolutions, even informal ones, will be a part of a student’s academic integrity record.

Access the updated Informal Resolution form here. 

Summary

The University recognizes that academic misconduct detracts from the value of a UNC Charlotte degree and has influence beyond the University community, including relationships with employers, other educational institutions, the business community, the UNC system, and the community at large.

The purpose of the Code is to:

  1. support and promote an ethical learning environment;
  2. create consistent standards for all members of the academic community;
  3. assist Students in learning responsibility for one’s own academic work;
  4. protect the academic environment of the University community; and
  5. clarify Student values and how they relate to the behavior in question.
     

The current version, which may be revised from time to time, shall be available from Student Conduct & Academic Integrity or online at https://legal.uncc.edu/policies/up-407 (Code of Student Academic Integrity). Click here for .pdf version.

For a student to be found responsible for academic misconduct under the Code, the information must establish that the student is responsible for academic misconduct by a preponderance of the evidence—that it is more likely than not that the student engaged in academic misconduct as charged. This determination must be based solely on the information presented, which may include, but is not limited to, pertinent records (e.g., assignment, syllabi), exhibits (e.g., photographs, audio/video information, social media information), and written/oral statements.

Jurisdiction under the Code may be exercised with respect to all academic work, whether in the classroom, online, through distance education, or in-person. Academic work subject to the Code may be either inside or outside the context of an academic course, including in the preparation of materials submitted as a program or degree requirement or other non-course-related academic contexts.

Academic work that is submitted in a grant application or for publication, or in the case of a thesis or dissertation, submitted to ProQuest, falls under the jurisdiction of the Research Misconduct process. Prior to initiating an Academic Misconduct case in which research integrity might be implicated, the Research Integrity Officer and the Chair of the AIB should discuss the case and make a mutual determination about the appropriate process to be applied. See University Policy 309, Responding to Allegations of Misconduct in Research and Scholarship.

Students are integral members of the academic community and are responsible for their academic work, abiding by the Code, and will be held responsible for their academic misconduct. As responsible members of the University, students are expected to take an active role in encouraging other members of the academic community to respect the standards set forth in the Code. Should a student suspect academic misconduct, they should make the suspicion known to the faculty member or Student Conduct & Academic Integrity.

If a student who is charged with academic misconduct fails to appear at a Hearing after being notified pursuant to the Code, the Hearing will continue in the absence of the student.

The student has the following rights:

  • to be provided a fundamentally fair process;
  • to be presumed not responsible for a violation of the Code until determined otherwise;
  • to be given notice of any allegation(s) of Academic Misconduct;
  • to review the information that will be presented in any case resolution, provided that the information may be given to the Student in a redacted format;
  • to present relevant information on their behalf;
  • to obtain support, advice, or assistance pursuant to relevant sections in Chapter 7 of the Code;
  • if found responsible, to have sanction(s) imposed on the basis of the guidelines set forth in the Code;
  • to be informed of the final decision and results of a proceeding;
  • to request reasonable accommodations under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act through the Office of Disability Services;
  • to confront, in some manner, the allegations and information presented relevant to the formal charge(s) against them, which in all cases will be brought forward by the University;
  • to request that a member of a Hearing Panel be excluded from the Hearing on the basis of a conflict of interest, bias about, or interest in the case;
  • to pose reasonable questions, verbally or in writing, to any witness appearing at a Hearing;
  • to have prior Academic Misconduct excluded from information presented during a Hearing Panel’s deliberation of findings for any charge(s);
  • to appeal any decision of a Hearing Panel, pursuant to Chapter 9 of the Code; and
  • to have supervised access to a recording of the Hearing proceedings.

Faculty Members are responsible for the academic instruction and evaluation methods for all academic exercises. As such, faculty members should ensure, to the best of their ability, that all work submitted by students is consistent with academic standards, including being free from the adverse impacts of academic misconduct. To that end, faculty members are obligated to:

  1. Publish, review, and enforce their expectations for academic conduct in course work.
  2. If the Faculty Member suspects that Academic Misconduct has occurred and determines that the information is sufficient to warrant an adjudication, report all such cases of suspected Academic Misconduct using the appropriate adjudication method outlined in the Code of Student Academic Integrity so a central record may be kept. Faculty are expected to participate as needed in the adjudication of the suspected misconduct.
  3. Engage mechanisms that discourage Academic Misconduct, such as exam monitoring, online submission of materials, etc. (See examples.)
  4. If a Faculty Member who has referred an Academic Misconduct case fails to appear at a Hearing after being notified pursuant to the Code, the Hearing will continue in the absence of the Faculty Member. 

The Faculty Member or Referring Party have the following rights:

  • to be provided a fundamentally fair process;
  • to review the information that will be presented in any case resolution, provided that the information may be given to the Faculty Member or Referring Party in a redacted format;
  • to present relevant information on their behalf;
  • to obtain support, advice, or assistance pursuant to relevant sections in Chapter 7 of the Code;
  • to be informed of the final decision and results of a proceeding;
  • to request reasonable accommodations under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act through the Office of Disability Services;
  • to be provided the same opportunities as the Student to address any University official involved with the resolution of the complaint, including being present during the findings stage of the Hearing;
  • to request that a member of a Hearing Panel be excluded from the Hearing on the basis of a conflict of interest, bias about, or interest in the case; and
  • to have supervised access to a recording of the Hearing proceedings only to which the Faculty Member or Referring Party has an opportunity to participate.