Procedures for Academic Integrity May 3, 2007

I. Introduction

In the interest of shared governance and decision-making between the University administration and the faculty, the Faculty Senate has established policies and procedures to ensure faculty representation in all proceedings conducted by University administration with respect to allegations of breach of academic integrity brought against faculty members. To this end, the Faculty Senate has appointed a standing Academic Integrity Committee to assume responsibility for proceedings brought against any faculty member regarding breach of academic integrity.

The Academic Integrity Committee is charged with conducting independent investigations and making recommendations to the Provost as to the soundness, validity and gravity of charges of breach of academic integrity brought against any faculty member. Additionally, the committee chair and one other committee member participate with University administration in the decision-making process as to sanctions and penalties to be imposed on any faculty member if allegations of breach of academic integrity are proven.

The Academic Integrity Committee is also charged with safeguarding the rights, dignity and privacy of any faculty member against whom charges are brought through all phases of the process of investigation, recommendation, and decision-making. The parallel roles of conducting an investigation and making recommendations to the administration, while at the same time protecting the charged faculty member’s rights within the process, are complementary. The faculty body has two clear and related interests in this regard: responsibility for the integrity of the academic process, and dedication to a spirit of collegiality that includes a deep concern for the rights, dignity and privacy of fellow faculty members. Thus, while the committee rules on the veracity of charges of breach of academic integrity brought against any faculty member, it is also committed to carrying out all investigations with the utmost speed, confidentiality, impartiality and concern for the charged individual and his or her rights and dignity.

II. Definition of Academic Misconduct

All members of the University community are expected to observe high standards of academic integrity and ethical behavior in research and publication. Any practice or conduct by a member of the University community that seriously deviates from those ethical standards for proposing, conducting, and publishing research that are commonly accepted within the professional community constitutes academic misconduct in violation of University policy.


Academic misconduct includes, but is not limited to: [1]

1. Fabrication or falsification of data, including intentionally misleading, selective or deliberately false reporting of credentials or other academically related information;

2. Unacknowledged appropriation of the work of others, including plagiarism, the abuse of confidentiality with respect to unpublished materials, or misappropriation of physical materials;

3. Evasion of, or intentional failure after notice by the University or Federal, State or other appropriate agency to comply with research regulations or requirements, including but not limited to those applying to human subjects, laboratory animals, new drugs, radioactive materials, genetically altered organisms, and to safety;

4. In regard to students’ contribution to faculty research, improper or inadequate mentoring and supervision of research assistants, and lack of acknowledgement of student contribution to research;

5. Other conduct that seriously deviates from accepted ethical standards in scholarship and/or research.

Differences of interpretation or judgment, or honest error, do not constitute academic misconduct. Additionally, faculty members are entitled to freedom in presenting and discussing their subjects as long as such activity can be construed to contribute to student understanding of the course for which the faculty member has responsibility. See Faculty Guide 7.1c.

In considering charges of breach of academic integrity made against a faculty member, the Academic Integrity Committee recognizes that various offenses may be more or less serious. Also, charges brought against a faculty member may include multiple alleged offenses, which, if upheld, could be viewed as increasing the severity of the overall offense. To guide its deliberations, the committee considers the following breaches of academic integrity as ranging from less serious (#1) to more serious (#3):

1.  Carelessness or inadvertent error, e.g. forgetting to properly cite a source

2.  Intentional omission of facts or data, misrepresentation of facts, data, research or professional qualifications

3.  Falsification of data or attributing others’ work to oneself

III.  Procedure for Investigating Allegations of Academic Integrity

Each year, the Senate elects five tenured faculty members to sit on a standing committee to investigate and rule on allegations of breach of academic integrity according to the following procedure:

1.  An allegation initially is reported to the Dean of the charged faculty member’s college. Within ten days the Dean appoints a panel of three impartial faculty members to conduct a preliminary investigation to evaluate the credibility of the allegation.

2.  Within the same ten days, the Dean notifies by letter the faculty member about whom allegations have been made that an investigation is underway, provides a clear statement of the allegation(s) and requests a written statement from the faculty member explaining his or her position with regard to the allegations. The faculty member may at this point seek the guidance and assistance of the Academic Integrity Committee as to her or his rights within the process.

3.  The faculty panel appointed by the Dean rules on the credibility of the allegation within two weeks of receiving the faculty member’s statement. If a majority of the faculty panel find the allegation(s) credible, they so inform, in writing, the Dean. The Dean issues a written complaint within one week detailing the alleged violations of academic integrity and forwards it to the Provost. The Provost then forwards a copy of the complaint along with all supporting documents to the Faculty Senate Academic Integrity Committee within two days of receiving it.

4.  The Senate Academic Integrity Committee conducts an independent investigation of the complaint. The committee informs the charged faculty member in writing that it is investigating the complaint and that the faculty member is invited, but not required, to appear before the committee and/or to provide a written statement to a) explain his or her position; b) receive counsel and guidance about his or her rights within the process. In its investigation, the Committee looks at the complaint forwarded by the Dean, all supporting documents and any additional information it may deem necessary. All deliberations of the committee take place only in person, and no electronic communication is to be used in any part of the discussion. The Committee will consider the allegation valid if a majority of members finds conclusively that the charged faculty member’s action falls under one of the five criteria for academic misconduct as defined in Section II above.

5.  The Academic Integrity Committee formulates a statement upholding or rejecting the complaint and forwards it to the Provost, along with recommendations for appropriate action, within thirty days. The committee can request from the Senate an extension of an additional thirty days if it requires outside expertise to evaluate the complaint. If a majority of members of the committee determines that there has been no violation of academic integrity, the complaint is rejected and the Provost and the charged faculty member are so informed by letter; the matter ends and all records are destroyed. If the committee finds there has been a violation of academic integrity, it will rule on its severity according to the criteria spelled out in Section II. The chair and one other committee member meet with the Provost to discuss the committee’s recommendation and share in decision-making regarding appropriate action.

6.  The charged faculty member may request to be accompanied by a faculty representative support person of his or her choosing to all meetings with University representatives.

7.  Within ten days of receiving the committee’s recommendation, the provost will meet with the chair and one additional member of the Academic Integrity Committee and take action with regard to the allegations. Such action may include a) exoneration, in which case all documents related to the allegations will be destroyed; b) admonishment; c) suspension without pay for up to one semester; d) demotion in rank; e) non-renewal of contract for non-tenured faculty. Remedial action such as retraction, apology or correction may be required of the charged faculty member, and the Provost’s action may be made conditional upon the faculty member undertaking that remedial action. Consideration of dismissal for a tenured faculty member requires a separate proceeding, covered in Faculty Guide 3.7. The Provost will notify the faculty member of his action by letter.

8.  The charged faculty member may appeal the decision of the Provost to the President of the University within forty-five days.

4

[1] The following definitions are adapted from the Univ. of Illinois Policy and Procedures on Academic Integrity retrieved 9/26/2006 from www.research.uiuc.edu/ai/index.asp