Preamble
Academic integrity and careful attention to the ideals of academic honesty are crucial to colleges and universities and all the work that they do. Accordingly, academic dishonesty undermines the very basis upon which institutions of higher education are organized and function. All students at Claremont Graduate University are expected to meet the highest standards of integrity in all of their academic work and educational activities. Toward that end, standards of academic integrity, and procedures to enforce these standards fairly across all CGU students, are hereby adopted.
Standards of Academic Integrity
The Standards of Academic Integrity proscribe, among other things, the giving or receiving of unauthorized aid in examinations or on assignments, plagiarism and other unacknowledged or undocumented use of source material, purchasing or other procurement of academic work completed by others and submitted as one’s own, misrepresentation or falsification of academic history or credentials, and forgery.
Violations of Standards
A student shall be subject to discipline for any violation of the Standards of Academic Integrity. Actions constituting violations of academic integrity include, but are not limited to, the following:
- Cheating. Includes but is not limited to use of any assistance for academic work and use of sources beyond those authorized by the instructor in writing papers, preparing reports, solving problems, or carrying out other assignments; unauthorized or unethical use of digital tools, platforms, or environments to facilitate the completion of course requirements; acquisition, without permission, of tests or other academic material belonging to a member of the University faculty or staff.
- Collusion. Includes but is not limited to assisting another to commit an act of academic misconduct, such as paying or bribing someone to acquire a test or assignment, taking a test or doing an assignment for someone else, unauthorized group work, use of unauthorized electronic devices, or allowing someone to do these things for one’s own benefit.
- Fabrication. Includes but is not limited to falsifying data, information, or citations in completing an academic assignment or other institutional document, and includes providing false or deceptive information to an instructor concerning the completion of an assignment.
- Plagiarism. Includes but is not limited to use of someone else’s language, ideas, or other original material (not common knowledge), without attribution to the source. This definition applies to all student work, not limited to print materials, online materials, manuscripts, oral discussion, and the work of other students. Examples include submitting language, ideas, or materials created by another source as one’s own; inadequate paraphrasing, using paraphrasing or text generated by software as one’s own, copying words with minor alterations such that the substantive content is not affected, even if the source is identified; carelessly or inadequately citing ideas and words borrowed from another source; self-plagiarism, including the unauthorized submission of academic work that has been submitted for credit in another course; purchasing or otherwise obtaining academic work from a vendor, service or non-commercial online or artificial intelligence environment in which work may be shared, generated, or exchanged.
Disciplinary Sanctions
Sanctions should be appropriate to the violations and may include any of the following, among other things: an official reprimand; a point or grade reduction for an assignment; a requirement to repeat an assignment, an examination, or a course; a requirement to complete training on academic integrity or related issues; a requirement to complete an alternative assignment or examination; a failing grade for an assignment, an examination, or a course; suspension; dismissal from an academic program or the University; or revocation of a certificate or degree.
- Sanctions may be imposed upon any student, student organization, or student group found to be responsible for violating the Standards of Academic Integrity.
- More than one sanction may be imposed for a single violation.
- Sanctions may include, but are not limited to, the following:
- Educational Sanctions. The Respondent must complete tasks such as assignments, interviews, reflection papers, educational meetings, academic integrity training, or other educational activities intended to help students reflect on their conduct, become better informed, and develop skills to enable better decisions and actions in the future.
- Warning. Written notice that the Respondent has been found responsible for violating these Standards is provided with no further action required. Additional violations may result in progressive disciplinary action. A warning does not affect the Respondent’s disciplinary standing.
- Probation. For a specified period, any additional violations by the Respondent will result in progressive disciplinary action. During the period of probation, the Respondent is not considered in good disciplinary standing. Upon expiration of the probation period and fulfillment of other sanctions imposed (if any), the disciplinary probation will be lifted.
- Revision and/or resubmission of course work. The respondent will be required to revise and resubmit assignments, with or without an associated grade penalty.
- Grade penalty. The Respondent will receive a reduced grade on work that is deemed to have violated Standards without opportunity to revise, and/or the respondent will receive a failing grade for the work and/or for the class.
- Administrative Removal from a Class. The Respondent will be removed from a specific class but be allowed to continue in all other courses, unless otherwise restricted. The Respondent is responsible for any tuition as per CGU’s regular withdrawal timelines, and is not eligible for a non-standard tuition refund, and for any fees associated with the administrative withdrawal process.
- Loss of Privileges. The Respondent is denied specified privileges of being a student for a designated period of time.
- Suspension. The Respondent is temporarily dismissed from the University for a specific period of time. During the suspension period, the Respondent is not eligible for the privileges and services provided to enrolled students, including but not limited to registering, attending class, or accessing the virtual learning environment. During suspension, the Respondent is excluded /banned from the University, including from all University owned or controlled property, services, and facilities, and any University programs or activities. The Respondent will be responsible for any tuition and fees associated with the administrative withdrawal process including any financial aid status implications. Upon expiration of the suspension period, the Respondent must submit in writing a request for reinstatement to the Dean of Students Office or designee. The Respondent may be asked to provide a statement demonstrating readiness to return and successfully re-engage with the University community. If the Dean of Students Office confirms that all terms of the suspension have been met and the suspension is lifted, the Respondent may apply to be reinstated.
- Expulsion. The Respondent is permanently dismissed from the University. This means that the Respondent may not, at any time in the future: enroll in the University; be a member of any student club or organization; or register for, or participate in, any program, activity, or event sponsored or organized, in whole or in part, by the University. The Respondent is excluded/banned from University premises, which means the party may never again be present on University-owned or controlled property, or access the University’s virtual learning environment or other systems. The Respondent’s rights and privileges as an enrolled student at the University are immediately revoked. The Respondent will be responsible for any tuition and fees associated with the administrative withdrawal process, including any financial aid status implications.
- Registration Hold. Students who do not complete assigned sanctions within the time provided may be prevented from registering for classes until completion of those sanctions.
- Notation on Transcript. A notation may be placed on the Respondent’s academic transcript related to the party’s disciplinary standing. This may be used when the student is expelled.
Oversight Responsibility
The administration and oversight of this Policy is the responsibility of the University’s Committee on Academic Integrity (CAI) Coordinator, under the supervision of the Executive Vice President and Provost for Academic Affairs (hereafter “the Provost”) or designee.
The CAI Coordinator oversees the university’s overall compliance, and is:
- Responsible for oversight of the investigation and resolution of all reports of all forms of alleged Violations of CGU’s Standards of Academic Integrity
- Knowledgeable and trained in University policies and procedures
- Available to advise any individual, including a Complainant, a Respondent, or a third party, about the formal and informal courses of action available at the University
- Available to assist any University employee regarding how to respond appropriately to a report of an alleged Violation of CGU’s Standards of Academic Integrity
- Responsible for monitoring full compliance with all procedural requirements and times outlined in this Policy
- Responsible for notifying the Dean or Director if they believe policy or procedure has not been followed by a faculty member or student
- Responsible for maintaining and disseminating as appropriate all materials, records and communications related to all cases of alleged Violations of CGU’s Standards of Academic Integrity
Procedures
In cases of an alleged violation, regardless of when the alleged violation(s) occurred, these general procedures (with allowance made for deviations in the time standards below for good cause or as justified by extenuating circumstances in a given case) will be followed:
- A faculty member, staff member, or administrator who believes a student (or students) has violated one or more of the Standards of Academic Integrity will first confidentially notify the Dean or Director of their school (or their supervisor/manager in the case of a staff member or administrator), and the CAI Coordinator, who will provide consultation and guidance as needed. The reporting party should then promptly notify the student of the suspected violation and offer to discuss the suspected violation and the evidence suggesting the violation. It is highly recommended that the instructor discusses the alleged violation with the student prior to referring the matter to the CAI for adjudication. Efforts should be made to have a meeting with the student(s) or to otherwise obtain feedback from the student(s) about the alleged violation. The purpose of this meeting is to inform the student(s) of the concern and to provide them the opportunity to respond to, explain, or clarify the alleged violation. It is generally expected that any alleged violations noted by staff members, teaching assistants, or other students will be pursued by faculty members or administrators who have teaching or program responsibility or other relevant academic oversight. A student or any other party who seeks to report a violation may submit a report through the Dean of Students Office online reporting platform. Allegations of violations by students from outside CGU will be directed to the CAI Coordinator for prompt review and action.
- If, after learning the student’s response, it is determined that no violation occurred, no further action is required. However, if the faculty member or administrator continues to believe that a violation has occurred, the case shall proceed in one of the following ways:
- The faculty member or administrator may attempt to resolve the matter in a satisfactory manner, identify any sanction applied to the violation, and communicate all terms and conditions of the sanction to the student. In these cases, sanctions that affect only the academic assignment, course or other requirement in which the violation occurred may be applied. If the matter is so resolved, the faculty member or administrator must report the matter and its resolution in writing to the Provost’s Office, at ProvostOffice@cgu.edu, including any materials or evidence relevant to substantiating the violation (e.g., copies of student papers or exams), and any sanction(s) assigned. The Provost’s Office will refer these materials to the CAI for review and informational purposes but not for additional action. In addition, a record of the violation will be made and kept in the student’s confidential file in the Provost’s Office. The Provost’s Office will notify the student that this violation has been recorded, with copies of this notification going to the reporting faculty member or administrator, the Dean or Director of the school in which the student is enrolled, the Dean of Students, and the Registrar.
- If the faculty member or administrator cannot resolve the matter in a satisfactory manner, or chooses not to resolve the matter, that person will refer the case to the CAI, including information about the reasons for the belief that a violation has occurred and any materials or evidence relevant to substantiating the violation (e.g., copies of student papers, exams, reports from online plagiarism detection software, screenshots or other evidence taken from a learning management system). In referring the case, the faculty member or administrator may comment on the perceived severity of the alleged violation(s) and also recommend sanctions. The faculty member should restrict communication about their recommended sanctions to only the CAI and refrain from identifying sanctions to the student. Any student alleged to have committed more than one violation (either because of prior or concurrent instances of the same or different violations) will be referred to the CAI by the Provost’s Office and notified in writing that their case has been referred to the CAI. In these cases, the CAI will evaluate the separate allegations as needed, determine if there is a pattern of misconduct, and if so, suggest appropriate sanctions for the individual or combined violations.
- If the student(s) is not satisfied with the proposed disposition of the violation, the student(s) may request that their case be reviewed by the CAI, including submitting any additional materials or evidence that the student feels may be relevant or exculpatory.
- When a case is referred to the CAI, the student and reporting faculty member or administrator will be promptly notified and given the opportunity to submit written statements and materials for CAI review. The CAI can consult with these parties to determine the necessity for, or desirability of, collecting additional materials or holding a hearing either for determining whether a violation has been committed, or for making a recommendation about appropriate sanctions in the case of violation(s). For cases in which potential sanctions include suspension or dismissal from the program or University, the CAI is obliged to hold a hearing at which the responding student can ask and answer questions. Hearings on cases should be convened in as expeditious a manner as possible, and no later than 60 days from initial submission of the case to the CAI.
- The CAI may still proceed with the hearing in the absence of the responding student and may reach a determination of responsibility in their absence. If a responding student does not attend the hearing or respond to requests from the CAI (i.e. for a statement or additional information, etc.), they are waiving their participation in the hearing. The University will not provide an advisor to appear on behalf of the student, nor may the student send legal or other representation to serve as their proxy in a CAI hearing. The CAI cannot reach a determination of responsibility based solely on a student’s absence from the hearing or refusal to answer questions.
- A sub-committee of the CAI will review and adjudicate cases, promptly deciding whether a violation or violations have occurred and will submit a written report of its findings to the Provost. Decisions will be made on preponderance of evidence, meaning the Respondent more likely than not engaged in an alleged violation of this policy and procedure, and will be made by a majority vote. If the CAI decides that a violation or violations have occurred, it will include in its report its recommendation(s) of sanctions that it considers appropriate. The CAI will also submit the relevant files to the Provost.
- The CAI sub-committee empaneled to evaluate a case of an alleged violation of CGU’s Standards of Academic Integrity shall be made up of two faculty representatives, two student representatives and one administrative representative.
- When empaneling a CAI sub-committee, the Provost designee shall select representatives from schools other than that of the student alleged to have committed the violation.
- Furthermore, the Provost’s designee shall ensure that no real or perceived conflict of interest exists between any potential CAI sub-committee member and the student alleged to have committed the violation.
- Once the sub-committee has been identified, the student and the reporting party will be notified of the sub-committee composition. The student respondent and the reporting party shall each have the right to strike one member of the CAI sub-committee without cause. Such requests should be communicated to the Provost’s office designee coordinating the CAI within 5 working days of notice of the sub-committee membership.
- Within 14 working days, the Provost will then review the case and decide whether to accept or reject the recommendation of the CAI, to modify it, or to remand the case to the CAI for further determinations. The Provost will promptly notify the student, the reporting faculty member or administrator, the academic unit head or Dean of the school in which the student is enrolled, the Dean of Students, the Registrar, and the CAI in writing of the action taken.
- The student, as well as the reporting faculty member or administrator, may appeal the Provost’s decision to the President. This appeal must be made within 14 working days of notification of outcome, and should clearly state the grounds for the appeal, and include any additional or new materials or information that pertain to the matter.
- If an appeal is made, the Provost’s Office will promptly transmit all case material and determinations to the President. The President will make their determination within 14 days. The President may concur with the decision of the Provost, may choose to modify the decision, may dismiss the case, or may decide to remand the case to the CAI for further determinations. In all actions by the President, except remand back to the CAI, the case will be considered closed, and no further appeal will be considered.
- All case material and written determinations for alleged student violations of Standards of Academic Integrity will be permanently retained in confidential files in the Provost’s Office. For cases that result in expulsion from the academic program or University, a notation will be added to the student’s transcript that this action was taken due to academic misconduct.
- The responding student may be accompanied by an advisor or support person at any time during the process. The advisor or support person may not speak for the student or participate directly in any aspect of the process. The student may be accompanied by legal counsel, however, that counsel may not speak or otherwise participate in the CAI hearing.
Accommodations
The responding student(s) may request reasonable accommodations from the CAI Coordinator for documented disabilities during the process. Accommodations will be granted if they are appropriate, reasonable, and do not fundamentally alter the process. The CAI Coordinator will not affirmatively provide disability accommodations that have not been specifically requested by the student even where the student may be receiving accommodations in other CGU programs and activities. However, at the request of and with the consent of the impacted student, the CAI Coordinator will collaborate with the Dean of Students’ Office to ensure that any applicable reasonable accommodations are honored throughout any related CAI process.
Committee on Academic Integrity
A Committee on Academic Integrity (CAI) is established by the Faculty Executive Committee and the full faculty.
Its primary purposes shall be, in accordance with the procedures outlined below and above, to receive and evaluate evidence of alleged violations of the Standards of Academic Integrity and to make recommendations for the disposition of cases involving alleged violations, including recommending sanctions for cases in which a violation is deemed to have occurred. The Committee shall also make recommendations to the Provost and to the Faculty (through the Faculty Executive Committee) for changes in standards and procedures, as it deems appropriate, and shall report annually to the Faculty Executive Committee.
All full-time CGU faculty members (tenure track and term appointments) who have achieved rank of associate or full professor have an obligation to serve on the CAI if so requested. Individuals who have full-time or part-time administrative appointments are also eligible to serve. All currently enrolled and degree-seeking students in good academic standing and who do not have any pending Academic Integrity violations are eligible to serve.
A pool of potential CAI members will be identified and drawn from when empaneling separate sub-committees to evaluate cases of alleged violations. Specifically, the Dean/Director of each academic unit is responsible for identifying a minimum of three faculty members to serve two-year staggered terms, and, in consultation with the Student Senate a minimum of three students to serve two-year staggered terms. If a department is insufficient in size to meet the three committee member requirement, the Dean or Director will make a determination of number of appointees in consultation with the Provost. Deans/Directors should attempt to ensure that there is diversity among the individuals identified and in the broader pool in identifying potential CAI members. In addition, two to four members of the University administration recommended by the Provost will be assigned for duty on the CAI for two-year staggered terms.
When recommending members for the CAI, it is understood that the Dean or Director will consider individuals’ availability to serve for the duration of their term, taking under consideration, for example, department size, sabbaticals, teaching loads, and other faculty responsibilities.
It is also understood that the Dean or Director will discuss the appointment with the individual, confirming the nature and importance of the work of this Committee and ensuring their willingness to serve in this capacity.
Collectively, these individuals will serve as the pool of potential members of a CAI sub-committee. They are responsible for completing designated trainings on academic integrity issues, attending and participating in meetings. Members of the Committee on Academic Integrity Pool shall establish a set, monthly meeting time where cases may be adjudicated. If no cases are pending, or no designated training is scheduled, an individual meeting may be cancelled.
Due to the need to adjudicate cases in a timely way, Faculty and Student Representatives may be called upon to adjudicate cases during the summer in order to ensure that all cases are fully resolved within the required 90-day period. As such, it is recognized that service on this committee is especially noteworthy.
The Provost designee will manage the academic integrity process and empanel CAI sub-committees with attention to avoiding conflicts of interest and striving for diversity in committee membership insofar as practicable. Individuals who have an actual or, upon reasonable basis, a perceived conflict of interest with a pending case should not serve as members of the CAI sub-committee for that case.
Timing
Absent extensions for good cause or extenuating circumstances in a given case, the entire Academic Integrity process normally should be completed within 90 working days from the issuance of the official notification of the reported violation by the Office of the Provost. This includes the review of materials, compilation of additional evidence (if necessary), review by the CAI, outcome, and appeal process. As such, it is understood that individuals serving in the CAI Pool can be called upon to serve at any time during their term, even during the summer months or between semesters.
Failure to complete the Academic Integrity Process within this time period does not, in and of itself, constitute a procedural error. Any such argument of procedural error must also include an explanation as to how the delays materially impacted the outcome of the Academic Integrity Process
Degrees or Certificates Awarded
If evidence arises that an academic degree or certificate was earned in violation of the Standards of Academic Integrity, a faculty member, administrator, or the CAI may recommend to the Provost that the degree or certificate be revoked. The Provost may then refer the matter to the CAI for its recommendation. If the CAI recommends to the Provost that the degree or certificate be revoked, the Provost will forward their own recommendation to the CGU faculty, then to the President who, in turn, will forward their own recommendation to the Board of Trustees. The Board will have final authority in decisions regarding revocation of degrees or certificates.
|