(1) Academic honesty is essential to maintain the integrity of the university as an institution and to foster an environment conducive to the pursuit of knowledge. The Cleveland state university academic community values honesty and integrity and holds its members to high standards of ethical conduct. Academic dishonesty is, therefore, unacceptable, and students shall prepare to accept the appropriate sanctions for any dishonest academic behavior as outlined in this policy on academic misconduct. Academic misconduct refers to any fraudulent actions or behaviors that affect the evaluation of a student's academic performance or record of academic progress. It includes:
(a) "Cheating" - Fraudulent acquisition and/or submission of another's intellectual property. This includes, but is not limited to, the unauthorized giving or receiving of a copy of examination questions, the use of unauthorized or fabricated sources in carrying out assignments, and copying the examination answers of others.
(b) "Plagiarism" - Stealing and/or using the ideas or writings of another in a paper or report and claiming them as your own. This includes but is not limited to the use, by paraphrase or direct quotation, of the work of another person without full and clear acknowledgment.
(c) "Tampering" - Altering through forgery, fabrication, deletion, and/or misrepresentation one's own or another's academic record. This includes but is not limited to the tampering of graded material, grade books, or electronic records of graded material and the misrepresentation of degrees awarded, honors received, or sanctions issued.
(2) For the purpose of differentiating the degree of seriousness of acts of academic misconduct and the sanctions that should be imposed, the following definitions apply:
(a) "Minor Infraction" - Minor infractions comprise those instances of cheating, plagiarism, and/or tampering which affect the grade of an individual class assignment or project of lesser (0 less than twenty-five per cent of grade) importance. Multiple instances of minor infractions within a course or across courses constitute a major infraction.
(b) "Major infraction" - Major infractions comprise those instances of cheating, plagiarism, and/or tampering which affect the overall course grade, such as a major/comprehensive exam, term paper or project, final grade evaluation, or academic standing and status. Major infractions automatically result in an entry on the student's permanent record that the student has engaged in academic misconduct. See paragraph (B)(2)(b) of this rule.
(3) Any member of the university community can raise allegations of cheating, plagiarism or tampering. However, appropriate action for alleged instances of academic misconduct, as spelled out in the procedures and sanctions sections below, should be conducted by the faculty member of record or the instructor (hereinafter referred to as the "faculty member") or the department chairperson or college dean (hereinafter referred to as the "academic administrator") in accordance with the circumstances. That individual shall inform the student of all allegations and proposed sanctions immediately upon their determination. A resolution may be reached through an informal meeting between the faculty member or academic administrator and the student charged with academic misconduct, with the student satisfied that the allegation was accurate and that the sanction imposed was appropriate. If the student disagrees with the charge made by a faculty member or academic administrator, or with the sanction imposed, the disagreement shall ordinarily be resolved through the normal academic channels of the department chairperson and college dean.
(4) If no resolution is reached at these levels, the student has the right to a hearing and resolution of the matter before the academic misconduct review committee (hereinafter referred to as the "review committee.") See paragraph (D) of this rule.
(1) Initial incident.
(a) At the time of the incident, the faculty member or academic administrator weighs the evidence and determines the appropriate sanction as specified in paragraph (C) of this rule. However, academic suspension or expulsion shall be invoked only by recommendation to and confirmation by the review committee. See paragraphs (C)(2)(b) and (C)(2)(c) of this rule.
(b) If the review committee confirms the recommended suspension or expulsion from the university, this recommendation is forwarded to the president of the university who may decide to support the recommendation or impose an alternate sanction.
(2) If, after discussing the infraction with the student suspected of academic misconduct, a faculty member or academic administrator concludes that misconduct did occur, that individual shall choose an appropriate sanction and inform the student in writing of the decision, the basis for the decision, and the penalty imposed.
(a) If the misconduct is course-related, a copy of this letter shall be sent to the chairperson of the department in which the course is offered. If the infraction is not course related, the letter shall be sent to the chairperson of the student's major department.
(b) For major infractions, the chairperson of the department shall confirm, in a mailed correspondence to the student, the infraction and sanction. A copy of this letter shall also be sent to the college dean and to the university registrar. The registrar shall make an entry on the student's permanent record that the student has been disciplined for academic misconduct. This notation shall remain on the permanent record for a period of three years from the date of entry or until the student's graduation, whichever comes earlier. Thereafter, the entry is to be removed from the student's permanent record, from any existing copies thereof, and from all student files in which the notation may have been placed, provided that the student has not been found guilty of a second instance of academic misconduct.
(3) If, after meeting with the faculty member, the student feels that she or he is innocent of the charge or is being unreasonably penalized, the first redress is to the chairperson of the department in which the course is offered (for course-related misconduct) or to the chairperson of the student's major department (for misconduct that is not course related). The faculty member shall coordinate a meeting between him/herself, the student, and the chairperson. The matter may be resolved at this level through informal discussion, with both faculty member and student presenting their cases.
(a) If the chairperson concurs with the student by determining that no violation has occurred, and the faculty member is in agreement, the notation placed in the permanent record shall be removed and destroyed.
(b) If the chairperson concurs with the faculty member by determining that an infraction has occurred, and the student is in agreement, the chairperson may impose the recommended sanction. The chairperson shall inform the student in a mailed correspondence of this decision. For a course-related infraction, a copy of the letter is also sent to the instructor of the course. In the case of a major infraction, a copy of the letter is also sent to the college dean and to the university registrar, who shall make an entry on the student's permanent record as described in paragraph (B)(2)(b) of this rule.
(4) If, after meeting with the chairperson, the student feels that she or he is innocent of the charge or is being unreasonably penalized, or the faculty member is not in agreement with the chairperson's decision, the issue shall be submitted in writing by the chairperson to the dean of the college in which the course is offered. If the charge of academic misconduct does not involve a course, the issue shall be submitted in writing to the dean of the college in which the student is admitted. The dean shall hear both the instructor and the student. The matter may be resolved at this level through informal discussion with both faculty member and student presenting their cases.
(a) If the dean concurs with the student by determining that no violation has occurred, and the faculty member is in agreement, the notation placed in the file shall be removed and destroyed.
(b) If the dean concurs with the faculty member by determining that an infraction has occurred, and the student is in agreement, the dean may impose the recommended sanction. The dean shall inform the student in a mailed correspondence of this decision. A copy of the letter is also sent to the instructor of the course and the department chairperson. In the case of a major infraction, a copy of the letter is also sent to the university registrar, who shall make an entry on the student's permanent record as described in paragraph (B)(2)(b) of this rule.
(5) If after such prior proceedings, the student or faculty member is dissatisfied with the findings, the sanction, or the nature of the notation in the student's file, the student or faculty member may, within twenty days of the student being informed, in writing, of the college dean's decision, petition the review committee for a hearing. Neither the finding of misconduct nor the sanction previously suggested or imposed shall in any way limit the options available to the review committee, and the hearing shall be in the nature of a de novo proceeding. The burden of submitting all relevant evidence to the review committee is on the student, faculty member, or academic administrator petitioning for review. The review committee shall not gather evidence to investigate the charge independently.
(a) If the review committee determines that no violation occurred, the notation placed in the file shall be removed and destroyed.
(b) If the review committee finds that a violation has occurred, it shall impose the appropriate sanction as specified in paragraph (C) of this rule.
(6) This Chapter shall not be applicable to professional schools at the graduate level, which have adopted misconduct codes of their own which are consistent with high academic principles and the standards of their professions or their accreditation organizations.
The sanction options listed in this section and the basis for invoking these sanctions are guidelines for the faculty member and academic administrators, designed to achieve uniformity throughout the university in dealing with academic misconduct. Options within infraction classifications are not mutually exclusive and may be employed in combination.
(1) Minor infractions
(a) "Reprimand" - A written statement of the student's violation of a university regulation placed in the student's disciplinary file within the major department and college.
(b) "F" Grade on assignment" - "F" grade on an individual assignment or project in which an incidence of academic misconduct occurred.
(2) Major infractions
(a) "F" Grade in the course" - "F" grade in the course in which an incidence of academic misconduct occurred. The "F" grade is not open to the grade dispute process, having been reviewed by the department chairperson and made available for assessment by the review committee. A course in which an "F" is issued due to academic misconduct is not open to late withdrawal through college or university petition, having been reviewed by the college dean and having had the potential to be reviewed by the review committee.
(b) "Recommendation of suspension" -Recommendation to the president for separation of the student from the university for a period of no less than one semester and not to exceed three (including summer semester). A student shall be suspended from the university only by review committee recommendation after consultation with the college in which the student is enrolled and with the support of the president. The president shall respond to the recommendation of the review committee within five working days of notification of the sanction. A second suspension may result in dismissal from the university, upon recommendation by the review committee.
(c) "Recommendation of expulsion" - Recommendation to the president for a permanent separation from the university, without readmission to the institution. A student shall be expelled only by review committee recommendation after consultation with the college in which the student is enrolled and with the support of the president. The president shall respond to the recommendation of the review committee within five working days of notification of the sanction.
(D) Academic misconduct review committee.
The review committee is a standing committee of two faculty members elected at large by the faculty, drawn from the entire university faculty, one student member of the university judiciary, elected by the members of that body, and the judicial affairs officer, as a non-voting, ex-officio member. The jurisdiction of the review committee is limited to academic misconduct grievances between a student and faculty member or academic administrator. In any matter brought before it the review committee, with due notice, shall hear the matter. The student charged shall have the right to be present, with or without counsel, and to examine all evidence and witnesses. The hearing shall be closed to the public unless the student specifically requests in writing that it should be open. The judicial affairs officer shall serve as the repository of the records of this committee.