Academic Misconduct
Academic Integrity
An understanding of academic integrity is integral to the University of Kansas School of Engineering. Academic integrity is a cornerstone of the university’s mission: to life students and society by educating leaders, building healthy communities and making discoveries that change the world. The vision of the university to be an exceptional learning community that lifts each member and advances society is supported by our values of integrity, respect, innovation, stewardship, and excellence. Academic integrity involves a commitment from engineering students, faculty, and staff to investigate, prosecute, and punish academic misconduct when it occurs. The aim of this guide is to inform students about the importance of academic integrity and the academic misconduct process.
Academic integrity is based on five fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility.
Honesty is the foundation of teaching, learning, research, and service and is the prerequisite for trust, fairness, respect and responsibility. It is more than personally not cheating on assignments; it is not tolerating cheating from anyone.
Trust encourages the free exchange of ideas. It is promoted when faculty set clear guidelines for assignments and for evaluating student work; by students who prepare work that is honest and thoughtful; and by schools that set clear and consistent academic standards.
Fairness is everyone's responsibility and a lapse by one member of the community does not excuse misconduct by another. Fair and accurate evaluation is essential in the educational process.
Respect is paramount to learning process and respecting people involves fairness and honest treatment. Students show respect by attending class, being on time, paying attention, listening to other points of view, being prepared, meeting academic deadlines and performing to the best of their ability. Faculty show respect by taking students' ideas seriously, providing full and honest feedback of their work, valuing their aspirations and goals and recognizing them as individuals.
Responsibility is being personally accountable for your behavior. Being responsible means taking action against wrongdoing, despite peer pressure, fear, loyalty or compassion. Responsibility is part of academic civility.
Procedures
Complainant (n): a person, group, or company that makes a complaint, as in a legal action.
Charged party (n): a person who is charged with an alleged form of academic misconduct.
Sanction (n): a penalty for disobeying a law, rule, or policy.
Hearing panel (n): composed of 3 faculty members and 2 students outside of the charged party’s engineering department that will hear the case and write a recommendation to the Dean and/or Associate Dean regarding the alleged academic misconduct.
Pursuant to Article 2, Section 7 of University Senate Rules and Regulations,
2.7.1 Academic misconduct by a student shall include, but not be limited to, disruption of classes; threatening an instructor or fellow student in an academic setting; giving or receiving of unauthorized aid on examinations or in the preparation of notebooks, themes, reports or other assignments; knowingly misrepresenting the source of any academic work; unauthorized changing of grades; unauthorized use of University approvals or forging of signatures; falsification of research results; plagiarizing of another's work; violation of regulations or ethical codes for the treatment of human and animal subjects; or otherwise acting dishonestly in research.
Academic misconduct by an instructor shall include, but not be limited to, grading student work by criteria other than academic performance, willful neglect in the discharge of teaching duties, falsification of research results, plagiarizing of another's work, violation of regulations or ethical codes for the treatment of human and animal subjects, or otherwise acting dishonestly in research.
An attempt shall be made to resolve the issue directly with the student. An instructor may impose a sanction of censure-warning, reprimand, or reduction of grade. The Dean or Associate Dean may impose more severe sanctions including: transcript citation of academic misconduct, suspension from a specific course, suspension from the University of Kansas, and expulsion from the University of Kansas.
After a charge of academic misconduct is filed, a hearing will only be scheduled if the student wishes to deny the charge and/or appeal the recommended sanction. If the student admits to the charge and does not wish to appeal the sanction, the sanction may be imposed immediately.
When an instructor determines that a student has violated academic integrity, the instructor may charge the student with academic misconduct by completing the academic misconduct form. The instructor must complete and submit the form within 21 calendar days from the point of the discovery. Any reduction in a student’s grade due to academic misconduct must be accompanied by the completed form.
Recommended sanctions by the instructor can include one or more of the following:
Censure-written warning or reprimand
Reduction of grade for specific work (Indicate grade: zero, F, D, or other)
Reduction of grade of the course (Indicate grade: zero, F, D, or other)
Not eligible for course repeat policy, withdrawal, or retroactive withdrawal
Alleged students will be notified of the charge of academic misconduct within 30 days of the instructor’s filing of charges. Alleged students are given 10 calendar days to review the document and determine their response. Failure to respond within 10 calendar days of notification is judged to indicate the student’s agreement with the charge and sanctions.
If a student admits to the charge and does not wish to appeal the recommended sanctions, the charge and sanctions are processed and imposed immediately.
If a student wishes to deny the charge and/or appeal the recommended sanctions, the Associate Dean and/or their academic integrity officer will schedule a hearing.
Each party may have a supportive friend or representative in attendance at the hearing. However, the academic integrity officer and/or the chair of the hearing panel must be informed at least 24 hours in advance of the hearing. If the representative is a lawyer, the University General Counsel will be informed and asked to attend the hearing. Witnesses are allowed. One witness as a time may be called by the complainant, the person charged, or the hearing panel.
A hearing may be held even if one or both parties fail to appear. The hearing shall be conducted with the following outline:
Introduce the hearing panel members, the complainant, the charged party, and any representatives.
Explain the hearing procedures.
The charged party may choose to remain silent and not reply to the charges.
Review the charges which led to the hearing, including possible sanctions.
Allow the complainant to explain the alleged incident or event which led to the charge of academic misconduct.
Allow the charged party to reply and explain the alleged incident or event.
Hear any witnesses.
The two parties may question one another and any witnesses appearing. Hearing panel members may also ask questions of either party and of any witness at any time.
The complainant has the responsibility to persuade the panel by a preponderance of evidence that an act of academic misconduct has occurred.
The hearing proceedings will be audio recorded.
Immediately after the hearing, the panel will reach a determination of their recommendations of specific sanctions, if any. The chair of the panel will compile comments, rationale, and recommendations in writing and forward them to the Dean and/or Associate Dean within seven calendar days.
The Dean and/or Associate Dean shall review the report from the hearing panel, its recommendation, and any other relevant information and may impose the sanctions of admonition, warning, or censure upon a student and reduction of grade, or disciplinary probation upon a student, and with notice of the Provost, a sanction of suspension or dismissal of a student. The determination of the charge and any sanction shall be communicated in writing to the two parties involved within 30 days of the hearing.
Within 30 days after receipt of notice of action, either party may appeal the action to the University Senate’s Judicial Board.
A student may initiate a grade appeal for a final course grade after the student has made an effort to resolve the problem by appealing directly to their instructor. This is in the case if the student believes there has been an improper application of the grading procedure announced for the course by the instructor, as explained in the course syllabus.
The appeal form must be completed within the two months following the first day of the subsequent semester (summer courses excepted) as outlined in the School of Engineering Rules & Regulations (3r.2.3). More information about the grade appeal process can be found in the University Senate Rules & Regulations (2.3.5).
School of Engineering Academic Integrity Committee
The Engineering Academic Integrity Committee plays an integral role in the adjudication of formal student academic misconduct cases and ensures students are given the opportunity to have their cases heard by members of the KU Engineering community. Representatives serve on hearing panels of five throughout the year to determine student(s) responsibility for alleged violations of academic misconduct and confirm appropriate sanctions if necessary. We rely on faculty and student volunteers to serve as panel members.
Confidentiality
All alleged instances of academic misconduct are to remain confidential between the student, instructor, hearing panel, and academic misconduct officer. Records are maintained in accordance with University policy through secure reporting platforms.
Contact Alex Pang with questions.