Academic Honesty Policy and Procedure

This policy applies across all Decker College of Nursing and Health Sciences (DCNHS) divisions. It includes all Decker College courses, including those cross-listed with other programs/schools with a Decker College faculty member as the primary instructor.

View ¶¶Òõ¶ÌÊÓƵ's Academic Honesty Code in the (formerly, the Bulletin).

Student Academic Honesty Code 

Preamble

Like all universities, ¶¶Òõ¶ÌÊÓƵ depends on the honesty and integrity of its faculty, staff, and students to carry out its academic mission. To fulfill this mission, every member of the ¶¶Òõ¶ÌÊÓƵ community is charged with upholding the Code of Academic Honesty. Actions that breach the code erode the trust of those who look to universities for honest evaluations of academic work arrived at through honest processes. Violations also may cause individual harm, including under- and over-evaluations of performance and inaccurate reports of performance to post-graduate schools, professional societies, and employers. With so much at stake, collectively and individually, ¶¶Òõ¶ÌÊÓƵ views conduct in keeping with the traditions of academic honesty and integrity as the obligation of all faculty, staff, and student body members.

Faculty and staff are governed by provisions of the regarding professional standards on issues related to academic honesty. Questions regarding academic honesty involving faculty generally are overseen by the Professional Standards Committee of the Faculty Senate. Questions regarding academic honesty involving professional staff are typically directed to the Professional Employees Council and the vice president’s office appropriate to the staff member. Thus, this document refers primarily to students and the adjudication of issues of academic honesty for students.

¶¶Òõ¶ÌÊÓƵ strives to create a true academic community. Such a community values the worth of both individual and collaborative efforts that promote learning and discovery. Such a community also expects honesty and integrity in the work of all its members. The policy here speaks to the work of individual students within the community. It should not be construed as arguing against the important collaborations among students on campus. At the same time, faculty need to be clear with students about exactly when collaboration is appropriate and what types of collaboration are being fostered within their classes.

Actions outside the Boundaries of Academic Honesty and Integrity

No set of written guidelines can anticipate all types and degrees of violations of academic honesty. To the extent that the examples below are not exhaustive, duly appointed representatives of the University will judge each case according to its merits. They will be guided by the principle that academic dishonesty involves the misappropriation of academic or intellectual credit to oneself or the discredit of others.

Instances of such dishonesty include:

Plagiarism

Presenting the work of another person as one's own work (including papers, words, ideas, information, data, evidence-organizing principles, or style of presentation of someone else taken from the Internet, books, periodicals, or other sources).

Plagiarism includes:

  • quoting, paraphrasing, or summarizing without acknowledgment, even a few phrases;
  • failing to acknowledge the source of either a major idea or ordering principle central to one's own paper;
  • relying on another person's data, evidence, or critical method without credit or permission;
  • submitting another person's work as one's own using unacknowledged research sources gathered by someone else.

Cheating on Examinations

Giving or receiving unauthorized help before, during, or after an examination.

Examples include:

  • unauthorized collaboration of any sort during an examination;
  • reading of an examination before it has been given;
  • unauthorized use of notes, books, tapes, computers, or other aids during an examination;
  • allowing another person to take an examination in one's place;
  • looking at someone else's examination during the examination period;
  • allowing another person to use one's own examination during the examination period;
  • passing examination information to students who have not yet taken the examination.

Multiple Submissions

Submitting substantial portions of the same work for credit more than once, unless there is prior explicit consent of the instructor(s) to whom the material is being or has been submitted. This is a Category I violation.

Unauthorized Collaboration

Collaboration on projects, papers, computer programs, or other academic assignments that have been prohibited by the instructor. This is a Category I violation unless it also involves Category II offenses.

Fabrication and Misrepresentation

Misrepresenting or fabricating material, including misleading citation of sources as well as falsified or fabricated data or results from experiments or other analyses. Misrepresenting facts related to academic performance, including the justification of absences, late assignments, and other activities. This can be a Category I or II violation.

Forgery

Imitating another person's signature on academic documents (for example, an academic advising form or one's own paper that is signed with respect to the time of submission) or other official documents that have an effect on academic credit (for example, a medical form submitted in support of taking a make-up examination). This is a Category II violation.

Sabotage

Deliberately impairing, destroying, damaging, or stealing another's work or working material. Examples include destroying, stealing, or damaging another's laboratory experiment, computer program, term paper, examination, or project; removing uncharged library materials with the effect that others cannot use them; defacing or damaging library materials with the effect that others cannot use them; hoarding or displacing materials within the library with the effect that others have undue difficulty using them; interfering with the operation of a computer system so it has an adverse effect on the academic performance of others. This is a Category II violation.

Bribery

Offering or receiving any service or article with the purpose or effect of receiving a grade or other academic benefit that was not earned on the merits of the academic work. This is a Category II violation.

Publication and Dissemination of the Code

Students will receive copies of the code during Orientation, when they will discuss its importance and its meaning. They will acknowledge the code and their intent to abide by its terms each semester when they log onto the registration system. Faculty will ensure the enforcement of the code.

Interpretation of the Code

Violations of the code vary in severity, so the appropriate punishments vary. Some violations (Category I) may be handled by the instructor and student(s) involved. However, violations requiring more severe penalties (Category II) are appropriately dealt with by the Academic Honesty Committee of the relevant school in accordance with procedures laid out in the Rules of Student Conduct. Category I violations are serious but may be dealt with by the instructor. Category II violations may result in letters of reprimand, probation, suspension or expulsion from the University, transcript notation, and/or revocation of degree or honors. Behavior explicitly permitted in a course syllabus or explicitly permitted by the instructor for a specific assignment is not a violation of the code.

Plagiarism

This may be either a Category I or Category II violation, depending on the amount of material that is plagiarized and the degree of premeditation. A Category I violation involves small amounts of plagiarized material — for example, a single passage or a relatively minor idea. Category II violations occur when more material is plagiarized or where central ideas are plagiarized. Category II violations may involve more planning and premeditation.

Cheating on Examinations

This may be either a Category I or Category II violation, depending on the level or amount of unauthorized help given or received on the examination and the degree of premeditation. Category I includes looking at another's examination or collaborating on a small portion of the examination. Category II violations involve significant cheating on an examination and may involve more planning and premeditation.

Note that misconduct involving forgery, sabotage, and bribery refers only to such offenses when committed for an academic purpose as defined in the Student Academic Honesty Code; any violations involving other aspects of student life or subject to federal, state, and/or local law are dealt with through the University judicial system.

Enforcement Procedures

Category I Violations

If an instructor discovers one of these violations, the instructor should first communicate with the student regarding the nature of the charge and the evidence on which the instructor has relied in reaching the conclusion that a violation has occurred. The student should be given the opportunity to respond. If the instructor remains convinced by the preponderance of evidence that a violation has occurred, the instructor may check to see if there is a record of a previous violation by the student. Students who are accused of a second Category I offense will be treated as being charged with a Category II offense and referred to the committee of the school in which the offense occurred.

If there is no previous violation, the faculty member should impose the appropriate penalty. The instructor should then fill in a Report of Academic Dishonesty Form (see Provost's website for form link) describing the violation that occurred and the evidence supporting that finding. The form will also explain to the student the procedures whereby the student may appeal the decision. The student will be asked to read and sign the form and will be provided with a copy. If the student chooses not to sign the form, the case goes to a hearing before the committee of the school in which the offense occurred. The instructor will then forward the Report of Academic Dishonesty Form along with the supporting evidence to the chair of the appropriate committee, who will send a copy to the Provost's Office, where it will be kept on file. Records of Report of Academic Dishonesty forms should be retained until the student's graduation or for six years following the semester or term of the violation in the case of a student who departs from the University without graduating.

Category II Violations

If an instructor discovers a Category II violation, the instructor should first communicate with the student regarding the nature of the charge and the evidence on which the instructor has relied in reaching the conclusion that a violation has occurred. If the instructor remains convinced that a Category II violation has occurred, he or she should submit a detailed written charge with supporting evidence to the honesty committee of the school in which the offense occurred. The student will be notified of the charge and the date of the hearing and will receive a copy of the committee procedures. The instructor should assign an Incomplete grade for the student's work, pending the outcome of the hearing. If, after the hearing, the committee concludes that the charges were unproven, the faculty member should re-evaluate the student's work in light of that finding. In the determination of any penalty for Category II violations, committees will consider all relevant factors, including the nature of the violation and any previous violations that may have been committed by the student. The chair of the appropriate committee will report any guilty findings to the Provost's Office, where they will be kept on file. Records of hearing cases should be retained for six years following the semester or term in which the hearing is held. If a hearing case is appealed, the six years will begin after the semester or term in which the appeal decision is made.

Violations Concerning Honors Projects, Theses and Dissertations

In cases of alleged violations of the academic honesty code in honors projects, theses, or dissertations, a faculty member who was not part of the original honors, thesis, or dissertation committee may be appointed by the head of the academic unit to investigate. The investigation will be conducted in accordance with the policies stated above for Category II violations and under the guidance of the detailed procedures developed by each unit. In addition to possible sanctions mentioned above, there may be other sanctions as deemed appropriate, such as notation on the transcript, requiring students/graduates to revise and resubmit honors projects, theses, or dissertations for approval, and/or revocation of the degree or honors.

Hearing Process

An Academic Honesty Committee hearing will be held for students who do not sign the Category I form and for those accused of Category II violations.

A.  Hearing Committee Membership: The dean’s designee will convene the committee, consisting of three faculty members, preferably one from each school within Decker College of Nursing and Health Sciences and at least one of whom must be voting faculty, as well as two enrolled DCNHS student members. The committee will elect a chair from among its members by a simple majority vote. 

B.  Quorum: A committee quorum will consist of three or more committee members,
with the requirement that at least one be a student and two be faculty members. Any
member of the committee who brings a charge is automatically disqualified and
recused from that hearing, as is a member who may hold a bias against or have a
conflict of interest with either party in the honesty charge. Should a committee member refuse to recuse, the other members of the committee will decide, by written ballot, whether that member is disqualified from that hearing. The recused member will be replaced by a comparable committee member (student-for-student, faculty-for-faculty).

C.  Initiation of Action: Upon receipt of a signed charge against a student, the chair will convene the committee within ten (10) business days. Students who believe that they have been unjustly accused of academic dishonesty or that they have been wrongly penalized for alleged academic dishonesty by a faculty member may request that the case be heard by the committee within 30 calendar days of signing a Report of Academic Dishonesty form as directed in the ¶¶Òõ¶ÌÊÓƵ policy for
Category I violations. All such requests will be granted, and all hearings will be handled
in accordance with the sections below.

D.  Notification of Student: The committee chair or the chair's designee will notify the student(s) of the charges under consideration. This notification will be in writing and part of the committee record. It informs the student of the following with sufficient particularity, within five (5) business days, to ensure the opportunity to prepare for the hearing.

  1. The specific charges filed against the student.
  2. The time and place to appear before the committee for a hearing.
  3. The right to have one person of the student’s choosing to appear in an advisory, nonparticipating capacity. 
  4. The right to be present during any meeting portion when evidence is presented.
  5. The right to request that every person involved in the case be present either in person or via electronic method at the hearing.
  6. The right to timely challenge the impartiality of any member of the committee by Section B above.
  7. The right to question witnesses indirectly through the committee chair.
  8. The right, after receiving the dean’s decision, to appeal the decision as per the DCNHS Academic Honesty and Grievance Appeals Policy.

E. Format of the Hearing: The hearing will consist of three parts:

  1. The initial presentation of evidence by each party and questioning of each party by committee members. If a teaching assistant was involved in discovering the alleged academic dishonesty, both the faculty member and teaching assistant must be present, and both are subject to questioning by the committee. Students and faculty may direct questions to the committee, but not to each other.
  2. Discussion of the committee members with the parties involved, if appropriate.
  3. The assessment of the evidence by the committee and the formulation of its
    recommendation to the dean’s designee.

The student's/students' advisor may attend parts one and two of the committee meeting. If the student does not appear for the hearing, the case may be heard in absentia, provided the committee has made reasonable efforts to encourage the student to attend. Disruptive behavior by any party may result in removal from the proceedings after appropriate warnings by the committee chair. Only committee members may be present during part three, and no new evidence may be introduced. 

As soon as the student appears before the committee, the chair will review the
student's rights and privileges as per Section D above and acquaint the student with the purpose of the meeting, namely, to assess the evidence in the light of the full context in which the alleged dishonesty occurred to render a fair and equitable recommendation.

Recommendations of the Committee
The committee's recommendation will take place in part three of the meeting. The
decision will be based on an open vote of all members of the committee in attendance. The recommendation will be based on a majority vote of the members present. Members of the committee who do not concur with the majority vote have the right to submit a minority dissenting opinion with the recommendations.

The committee can recommend to the dean’s designee any one or more of the
following:

  1. A finding that no dishonesty occurred and no action should be taken against the student(s) involved.
  2. A letter of reprimand to be sent to the student.
  3. The student is to be placed on disciplinary probation.
  4. Denial of registration for a specified period (suspension).
  5. Expulsion with no opportunity to return to Decker College of Nursing and Health Sciences.
  6. Transcript notation.
  7. Revocation of degree or honors.

The dean’s designee reviews the committee’s recommendation and then submits the
Dean’s Designee’s Report to the dean. The dean’s designee has the option to agree,
agree partially, disagree, or disagree partially with the committee’s recommendation.
The committee, affected parties, and the University Provost’s Office will be notified of the dean’s disposition in writing. For all cases heard by the committee, except those resulting in expulsion, records will be kept in the dean’s confidential files for a duration in compliance with SUNY and NYS regulations. For cases resulting in expulsion, a permanent record will be kept.

Right to Appeal

A student or instructor may appeal the final decision of the Academic Honesty Committee after a Category 2 hearing has been concluded in accordance with the Decker College Academic Honesty and Grievance Appeals Policy.

The policy above was revised in October 2023.