Departmental Level Procedures

Step 1. The instructor and student have no more than 10 academic days* following the filing of the request for the initiation of departmental proceedings to deliver evidentiary materials to the department chair. The instructor and student shall each provide the department chair with a written statement of evidence supporting his or her position, any relevant documentation, and the names of potential witnesses.
 
If the department chair is the faculty member who has brought the academic dishonesty charge against the student, or if a department is unable to assemble a committee because of a limited number of faculty or students, direct consideration at the college or school level may be requested.
 
Pending resolution, the instructor shall temporarily assign a grade of “I” (Incomplete). This “I” grade can only be adjusted by resolution of the case.
 
Step 2. Upon review of relevant materials (including all evidence and statements communicated during consultation), if the department chair does not deem it necessary to consider further the circumstances of the case, the department chair will notify the student (via certified, return receipt mail), the instructor, the cognizant academic dean, and the Dean of the Graduate School of his or her decision within 20 academic days* of receipt of the student’s appeal or instructor’s recommendation. If the sanctions imposed at this stage include recommendation of University sanctions (as listed in Consultative Resolution Step 2.6), decanal level procedures are required (see “Decanal Level Procedures”).
 
Alternatively, if the department chair deems it necessary to consider further the circumstances of the case, he or she shall convene the Departmental Adjudication Committee within 20 academic days* of the date the department office received the request for initiation of departmental proceedings (see Appendix A).
 
The department office shall convey all evidentiary materials to the Departmental Adjudication Committee, the student, and the instructor at the time the notice of the hearing is delivered. The student and the instructor shall be given at least 72 hours notice of the hearing.
 
At hearing(s), the Departmental Adjudication Committee shall provide sufficient opportunity for both principals to present their positions and shall allow each principal the right to question the presentation(s), written or verbal, of those who contribute information to the committee.
 
The hearing(s) shall be conducted in a fair and expeditious manner, but shall not be subject to the rules governing a legal proceeding. Each principal shall have the right to be present (under unusual circumstances, if either party is considered to pose a physical threat to the other or to the committee, the chair of the committee may request that either the student or instructor participate by phone) and to have one advisor present at all hearings.
 
The technical and formal rules of evidence applicable in a court of law are not controlling, and the committee may hear all relevant and reliable evidence that will contribute to an informed result. The Departmental Adjudication Committee shall only consider evidence presented at hearing(s). Discussion of a student’s formerly alleged or documented academic misconduct shall not be admissible as evidence to determine whether the student is responsible for breaching the university’s academic integrity code in the current case, although such history may be introduced and considered during the sanctioning phase. Hearings shall be confidential (see Appendix B).
 
The Departmental Adjudication Committee shall provide the department chair with a written statement of recommendations and reasons for recommendations within 10 academic days* after the final meeting of the committee. Recommendations may include:
 
1. Findings Overturned. Finding that no academic dishonesty took place and that no sanctions should be imposed.
 
2. Findings Sustained. Finding that academic dishonesty occurred, and the committee is in agreement with the sanction(s) previously imposed or recommended.
 
3. Finding of Different Sanction. Finding that academic dishonesty occurred, but that the sanction(s) previously imposed or recommended are inappropriate and that greater or lesser sanction(s) should be imposed.
 
Step 3. The department chair considers the Committee’s findings and recommendations and renders a final decision. The department chair’s decision and the student’s right to appeal that decision shall be submitted in writing from the department chair to the student (via certified, return receipt mail), the instructor, the cognizant academic dean, and the Dean of the Graduate School within 10 academic days* from receiving the Departmental Adjudication Committee’s statement of recommendations.
 
The department chair shall forward the record of the matter consisting of all written communications, all written evidence, an audiotape or other record of the hearing, and its statement of recommendations to the Dean of the Graduate School, where a confidential file will be maintained. The student shall have access to this file.
 
University Sanctions. If the sanction(s) imposed at the departmental level include recommendation of University sanctions (as listed in Consultative Resolution Step 2.6), decanal level procedures are required, and shall be initiated within 10 academic days* of the dean’s receipt of the statement of decision.
 
Right to Appeal. The student or the instructor may appeal the department chair’s findings. The request for an appeal, including specification of the grounds for appeal, must be submitted in writing to the department chair and to the cognizant academic dean no later than 10 academic days* after the department chair has notified the student of his or her decision.