Academic Misconduct FAQs

If I am unsure if a violation occurred, should I still submit an allegation of academic misconduct?

Your decision depends on the circumstances surrounding your concern. The Office of Student Conduct has developed resources to help faculty understand and navigate the academic misconduct process. If you have uncertainty after reviewing the material, please contact Bridget Burnhisel, Director of Student Conduct, or Amy Steinbugler, Senior Associate Provost of Academic Affairs. If you decide to bring forward an allegation, please use the electronic form. Should you choose to make an allegation, know that bringing a case forward does not dictate the outcome. Students can be found “not responsible” for violating standards of academic integrity.

Once I decide to submit an allegation, should I speak with the student directly or submit the electronic form to the Vice President and Dean of Student Life Office?

The Office of Student Conduct prioritizes open and direct communication throughout the resolution of misconduct cases. We therefore urge you to contact the student before you submit your claim. This enables you to have a broader understanding of the student’s perspective and to know whether the student admits the behavior alleged in the claim. It also ensures that the student hears the allegation directly from their professor rather than receiving a notice letter from the Office of Student Conduct. If the student has questions about the process, please refer them to the Director of Student Conduct or to the student-focused resources online. In unusual cases where direct communication with the student is not possible or desirable, please note that standard outreach from the Office of Student Conduct informs the student of an allegation and ascertains whether they accept responsibility for the alleged misconduct.

What happens after I submit an Allegation of Misconduct form and indicate I am interested in pursuing an informal resolution?

• The Director of Student Conduct will confirm if the student is eligible to participate in an informal resolution. 
• The student receives a letter from the Office of Student Conduct outlining the informal resolution process and asking them to confirm in writing that they accept responsibility. 
• The Office of Student Conduct will facilitate scheduling the meeting between the student and the faculty member. 
• After the meeting, the faculty member shares the outcome(s) with the Office of Student Conduct (i.e., warning or re-do assignment).

What are the conditions that make a student eligible for an informal resolution?

• The facts are not in dispute
• The student accepts responsibility
• The faculty member does not seek an academic penalty
• The student has no prior misconduct history

Now that informal resolutions can be used to resolve academic misconduct cases, does that mean I can handle the situation myself without reporting it to that office?

No, the informal resolution is not a means of avoiding the misconduct process; it is an official mode of resolving misconduct allegations. If you believe that a student has violated the College’s academic integrity policy on a low-level assignment or exercise and the student has admitted to doing so, you may opt for an informal resolution. To exercise this option, you must submit an allegation of academic misconduct claim. If the student has no academic violations on record, the Office of Student Conduct will confirm with you that an informal resolution is appropriate. The Office of Student Conduct will schedule the meeting between you and the student and will check back with you after the meeting to inquire about the agreement to which you both consented. An “agreement” may simply mean that you warned the student of the seriousness of their mistake and allowed them to redo the assignment.

When the student and faculty member agree to an informal resolution, can the faculty member determine the penalty appropriate to the academic misconduct violation?

No, if the faculty member is wondering what kind of penalty to assign, they are no longer in the realm of informal resolutions. Informal resolutions are developmental conversations in which the faculty member issues a warning and explains how the student’s actions violated the College’s academic integrity policy. They are teachable moments, conversations geared towards helping the student learn. If a faculty member believes the student has violated integrity standards in a manner warranting significant penalties, the faculty member must pursue a formal resolution (an administrative hearing or a panel hearing). Academic penalties are assigned in administrative hearings and panel hearings, not by individual faculty members.

The academic misconduct policy states informal resolutions are appropriate for situations in which the faculty member does not seek an academic penalty; however,  these resolutions can sometimes result in the student redoing the assignment - is that not an academic penalty?

Students may see redoing an assignment as a kind of penalty. Still, from the perspective of the misconduct system, this is a developmental opportunity - it is a chance to learn from one’s mistake without losing credit on the assignment. In most cases, students are eager to find a solution that allows them to earn credit. If you, as the faculty member, hope to reach an agreement that includes redoing the assignment, and the student disagrees, the case should be resolved through an administrative or panel hearing.

How many informal resolutions to an academic misconduct violation can a student receive?

One. This is a developmental conversation that assumes in good faith a lack of awareness on the part of the student. Once a student has reached an informal resolution with a professor, any subsequent violations will result in a formal resolution (an administrative hearing or a panel hearing).

Who decides whether academic misconduct cases are decided through an administrative hearing – the faculty member, the student, the hearing board, or someone else?

The Senior Associate Provost, in collaboration with the Director of Student Conduct, reviews all incoming cases and uses key criteria to decide which resolution route is appropriate. These criteria include whether the student has accepted responsibility, whether the student has had a previous violation with the Student Conduct Office, and the context and severity of the violation.

What is involved in an administrative hearing?

An administrative hearing is an appropriate resolution method when an academic penalty may be assessed, the facts are not in dispute, the student accepts responsibility, and the student has no prior academic violations. Faculty and students can request a panel hearing if they do not wish to have an administrative hearing.

Who is considered a hearing officer?

The primary hearing officer is Amy Steinbugler, the Senior Associate Provost for Academic Affairs. Additionally, trained hearing officers include Amy Ward, as Dean of Library Services, and Melissa Sturm Smith, as Senior Associate Provost for Integrated Student Success.

What should I do if I strongly suspect that a student has misused Generative AI, but I don’t have concrete proof? Should I approach the student anyway? Should I submit a misconduct claim?

If you have strong suspicions that a student has used Generative AI on a course assignment, set up a meeting with the student. Remember that the tone and form of students’ written work can differ from how they speak in class. Trust your own familiarity and expertise with the range of students’ narrative voices. When you meet with the student, explain what concerns you and ask how they constructed the assignment. If the meeting does not allay your concerns, submit a misconduct allegation. If the student has taken responsibility for using GenAI, the claim may be resolved through informal resolution or administrative hearing. If the student has not accepted responsibility, the Office of Student Conduct will schedule a panel hearing. At a panel hearing, a three-person panel (a student, a faculty member, and the hearing chair) will consider the patterns in the writing and determine whether the student is responsible or not responsible.

The panel hearing is an opportunity to learn more about what happened. Panelists ask the student and the professor discerning questions. While faculty members have a particular local expertise (about the student, their class and its subject matter), panelists also have expertise. Panel members have heard misconduct cases arising from a variety of circumstances from across the College. The hearing brings together both forms of expertise. The result of these hearings is not a foregone conclusion. Students are found responsible or not responsible. A finding of “not responsible” does not mean the professor wasted the panel’s time. It means that when the panelists, well-versed in thinking through these issues, discussed the case, they were not absolutely convinced that a violation occurred. The hearing itself is designed to be a learning process.

Will I be notified if my advisee is facing charges of academic misconduct?

If a student has been found responsible for an academic violation, the academic advisor will be notified upon the completion of the hearing process. However, we encourage students to contact their advisor as soon as they are notified of the impending conduct proceedings to seek assistance and perspective. Throughout the process, the Office of Student Conduct strives to foster student accountability and self-advocacy. We ask for faculty partnership in achieving that goal. As faculty advisors, we share your interest in students’ success. As such, we may be able to share information as requested, but we will not volunteer information. Please contact Bridget Burnhisel, Director of Student Conduct, if you have specific questions regarding your advisee and/or the conduct process.