Academic & Disciplinary Sanctions: AAPPM G-9

Introduction:
Recognizing the intrinsic nature of academic integrity as a linchpin of the Penn State community, the University Faculty Senate adopted a new Academic Integrity policy, Spring 2000. The shared conviction represented in the procedures that follow is that academic integrity is best taught and reinforced by faculty as an element of the teaching and learning process. Only in the limited instances in which faculty believe that disciplinary, as well as academic, sanctions are called for should the process move from the realm of faculty and students to the Office of Judicial Affairs.

The associate dean or campus director of academic affairs maintains and makes available to students and faculty the academic integrity procedures adopted by the college's Academic Integrity Committee.
College Committees maintain guidelines on ranges of appropriate sanctions for given types of infractions. Academic sanctions range from a warning to removal from the academic program.

Procedures:

1. When Academic Dishonesty is Suspected
   1. The faculty member informs the student of the allegations while taking into account the need to respect each student's privacy and the goal of maintaining an environment that supports teaching and learn
   2. The faculty member next conveys to the student the grade or grade and disciplinary action to be taken and asks the student to sign the college's academic integrity form.
   3. The faculty member may provide a cooling-off period after confronting a student with the allegation that she or he violated academic integrity.
   4. The faculty member may opt also to pursue a disciplinary action in conjunction with the College Academic Integrity Committee and Judicial Affairs. Normally, however, it is preferable to settle issues between faculty and student, which means relying on the awarding of grades and course-related activities to support the learning process, rather than requesting additional disciplinary sanctions.
   5. Throughout the academic integrity process, grading authority remains the responsibility of the instructor.
   6. Once a student has been informed that academic dishonesty is suspected, a drop or withdrawal from the course will be reversed.
      
      
2. If the Student Accepts Responsibility for the Violation and the Proposed Academic Sanction
   1. The faculty member has the student sign the college's academic integrity form. This closes the academic sanction element of the case. The form is forwarded, through the appropriate associate dean, to the Office of Judicial Affairs for record keeping.
   2. When the student has a history of two or more previous academic integrity violations, or the faculty member recommends an Office of Judicial Affairs consideration of disciplinary sanctions, the student is informed at this time and it is indicated on the form that the disciplinary issues remain open.
   3. The signed admission of responsibility is forwarded to the associate dean for administrative review of:
      1. An instructor recommendation that a disciplinary sanction be applied by the Office of Judicial Affairs. The associate dean forwards the case to the College Academic Integrity Committee for review (without formal fact finding) of the faculty disciplinary sanction recommendation. When the College Academic Integrity Committee feels it is appropriate, the request for a disciplinary sanction is forwarded to the Office Judicial Affairs for review.
      2. The existence of past academic integrity violations. When a record of such violations exists (the dean checks with the Office of Judicial Affairs, which is the only body that maintains such university-wide records), the case will be forwarded to the Office of Judicial Affairs, which may levy a disciplinary sanction based on the cumulative record of repeat offenses.
         
         
3. If the Student Does Not Admit Responsibility for an Academic Integrity Violation
   1. The instructor forwards the case to the College Academic Integrity Committee.
      1. When the instructor has not recommended disciplinary sanctions, and the student does not have a record of two or more previous academic integrity violations, the College Academic Integrity Committee conducts fact finding in accordance with due process procedures. If the Committee finds that the student violated standards of academic integrity, the Office of Judicial Affairs is notified for record-keeping purposes. The College Committee notifies the faculty member to carry out academic sanction, as approved.
      2. If after administrative review, which does not include formal hearings or the questioning of witnesses, the committee finds (1) a record of two or more previous violations of academic integrity, and (2) the instructor and the committee are in agreement that a disciplinary sanction may be warranted, then the case is forwarded to the Office of Judicial Affairs, which conducts formal fact finding and seeks relevant input from the instructor and College Academic Integrity Committee.
      3. Office of Judicial Affairs will notify the faculty member to (1) carry out the proposed academic sanction if the Judicial Affairs finding warrants, or (2) grade the student based on a finding that no violation of academic integrity has occurred.
         
         
4. The "XF" Grade
   1. An "XF" grade is a formal University disciplinary sanction.
   2. "XF" sanctions are only awarded with the concurrence of the instructor, the College of Academic Integrity Committee, and Judicial Affairs. Reliance on the "XF" should be a rare occurrence and reserved for the most serious breaches of academic integrity.
   3. In any instance in which the instructor believes an "XF" sanction warranted, and whether or not the student has admitted responsibility, the case is forwarded to the College Academic Integrity Committee for review and then to the Office of Judicial Affairs for appropriate fact finding and judgment.
   4. The College Academic Integrity Committee must include with any recommendation of an "XF" grade to Judicial Affairs, conditions under which it would approve the removal by Judicial Affairs of the "XF" sanction from the transcript (with an academic F remaining). Such conditions must reflect both the circumstances of the individual case and consultation among the instructor, the college academic integrity committee, and the Office of Judicial Affairs.
      
      
5. Schreyer Honors College Students
   1. The college with authority for courses, including those designated Honors courses, in which an alleged violation of academic integrity occurs maintains responsibility for issuing academic sanctions and referring cases to the Office of Judicial Affairs.
   2. When a college finds that a Schreyer Honors College student has violated academic integrity, then the Schreyer Honors College will be notified and may invoke its own sanctions.
   3. The Schreyer Honors College maintains authority over alleged breaches of academic integrity for its students in all cases in which the violation concerns Schreyer Honors College work, such as thesis research, but in which the student is not enrolled in a course.
6. Record Keeping:
   1. The appropriate assistant or associate dean is responsible for convening Committees of Academic Integrity and seeing that students and faculty have ready access to such bodies. They also are responsible for seeing that all cases handled on the college level, in which a student is found responsible for dishonesty, are reported to Judicial Affairs.
   2. Judicial Affairs alone is responsible for central record keeping of all academic dishonesty cases.

   A Committee on Academic Integrity or dean may request information from Judicial Affairs on whether students found responsible for academic dishonesty have previously been sanctioned for other acts of academic dishonesty. This information may not be used as a basis for judging a student's guilt, but it may be used as a basis for imposing sanctions or deciding whether disciplinary action is warranted.

Approved: ACUI (1-5-78)
Revised: ACUI (5-19-83)
Revised: ACUI (3-29-84)
Revised: ACUE (7-26-96)
Revised: ACUE (11-2-00)
Revised: ACUE (7-5-01)”