Code of Student Academic Integrity

Summary

Academic integrity standards are the subject of University Policy 407: Code of Student Academic Integrity. The policy outlines prohibited behaviors, procedures for addressing suspected Academic Misconduct, possible sanction(s)/outcome(s), and the appeal procedures. Students and faculty members are expected to be familiar with the provisions of this policy.

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 of Student Academic Integrity (the Code) is to:

support and promote an ethical learning environment;
create consistent standards for all members of the academic community;
assist Students in taking responsibility for one’s own academic work;
protect the integrity of the academic environment of the University community; and
clarify Student values and how they relate to appropriate academic conduct.

The current version of the Code of Student Academic Integrity is available online. Click here for a pdf version.

Standard of Proof

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.

A Student is presumed not responsible for a violation of policy until determined otherwise through the Academic Misconduct Procedures.

Authority and Jurisdiction

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.

All procedural and interpretive questions concerning the Code will be resolved by the Director of Student Accountability & Conflict Resolution, in consultation with the Academic Integrity Board Chair. This includes, but is not limited to, whether a case is continued to be pursued under the Code. When necessary, Academic Misconduct procedures may be altered to protect the University community, property, or resources.

Academic work that is submitted in a grant application or for publication, or in the case of a thesis or dissertation, submitted to ProQuest (or the University’s then current dissertation database), 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 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.

Responsibilities

Faculty Member Responsibilities

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:

Publish, review, and enforce their expectations for academic conduct in course work, including written syllabus policy notices and/or written notices on exams and assignments.
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 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 Academic Misconduct.
Engage mechanisms that discourage Academic Misconduct, such as exam monitoring, online submission of materials, etc.

Student Responsibilities

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 community, Students are expected to:

Review and abide by expectations set forth by the Faculty Member for academic conduct in course work, including syllabus policy notices and/or notices on exams and assignments;
Seek clarification from a Faculty Member regarding expectations related to academic work; and
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 Director.

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 Accountability & Conflict Resolution.

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:

Publish, review, and enforce their expectations for academic conduct in course work.
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.
Engage mechanisms that discourage Academic Misconduct, such as exam monitoring, online submission of materials, etc. (See examples.)
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.