The procedures described below are to be followed by all students and faculty in the event of a suspected or alleged violation of the Code of Academic Integrity. Subsequent to notification of an alleged/suspected violation of this code, email between the parties may not be used to communicate official matters related to these proceedings. While an Honor Code matter is pending, the student shall receive an ‘INC’ grade and/or not be awarded her/his degree.
Prompt notification of the suspected or alleged violation of the Code to the chair/program director is required. This notification must be specific as to the identity of the accused, the nature of the violation, and to the extent possible the evidence of misbehavior. While it is preferable that this notification be in writing, it is not required. No accusation made anonymously will be pursued. All communication regarding alleged infractions will remain confidential.
Within five business days of notification, the chair/program director will inform the vice dean and, if necessary, review the procedures to be followed and any prior history of Code violations by the accused student. If the matter would clearly warrant suspension or worse, the vice dean should initiate the formal hearing process immediately (see below).
Unless the accusation clearly warrants suspension or worse, the chair/program director should discuss the situation with the instructor. The chair/program director should arrange a meeting with the accused student (and with the instructor, if appropriate) to attempt to resolve the matter. This process should not take more than 10 business days. At this meeting, the student should be informed of the accusation and shown a copy of the procedures to be followed, as laid out in the Code of Academic Integrity. The student should be given the option of:
If the student wishes to continue, s/he should be shown evidence in hand and asked for his/her response and any additional information/evidence that is pertinent. The chair/program director should determine and inform the accused student of the appropriate action to be taken. Implications of this action should also be reviewed with the student – e.g., if the course is to be graded ‘F’, how this impacts her/his academic standing. If the student challenges the chair’s/program director’s determination and resolution, the matter should be referred to the hearing committee.
Within five business days following this discussion, the chair/ program director reports the outcome to the vice dean. If the matter is resolved at this stage, the chair/program director prepares a draft letter to the student for review by the vice dean. The letter will detail the accusation, the process followed, the agreed upon resolution, and the student’s right to appeal. The approved letter will be sent to the student and a copy retained by the vice dean.
If the accused misconduct warrants suspension or worse, or if the student prefers a more formal process, or if the student does not accept the chair’s/program director’s resolution, the vice dean will appoint a hearing committee within five business days of determination of need. This committee is to be composed of two students (one from the evening program and one from SLP or PT) and three independent faculty members, one of whom shall be the chair of the committee. The chair of the committee, within five days of appointment, should send a letter to the student describing the process to date (i.e., how the matter came to the committee), the procedures to be followed, including the student’s rights, and the date of a hearing. The hearing date should be not less than 10 or more than 20 business days from the post mark date of the letter.
The hearing committee will proceed with its investigation of the process to date and obtain any additional information it needs (witnesses, advice, documentation). It will hold a hearing at which this information is reviewed with the student. The student will be given the opportunity to make a statement. The student may be accompanied by a representative or advisor, but this representative/advisor may not address the committee or any witnesses. This hearing should be viewed as an opportunity for further fact-finding and clarification.
After the hearing, the committee has 5 business days to deliberate and agree on a resolution. At the end of this period, the committee prepares a draft letter for review by the vice dean detailing the hearing process, the committee’s findings, the action recommended, and, if appropriate, the student’s right to appeal. The approved letter is sent to the student not later than10 business days after the conclusion of the hearing. A copy of the letter and all supporting documentation is retained by the vice dean.
Any appeal of the outcome of the initial investigation or the hearing committee’s decision should be directed to the vice dean and must be post-marked no later than 15 business days after the date of the letter from the chair/program director or the hearing committee. The appeal must be in writing and must detail the bases for challenging the finding of facts and/or the sanctions imposed. The vice dean and an independent department chair will review all material and, if they determine it is necessary, request/grant an interview with the student (and his/her representative/advisor), seeking additional statements and clarification. This meeting, if needed, should occur within15 business days of the date of the appeal letter. If new evidence is presented, the vice dean should refer the matter back to the hearing committee. Otherwise, the vice dean with the aid of the independent department chair should present their findings and recommendation to the Dean. Upon the Dean’s acceptance of the findings/recommendations, the Dean notifies the student on the outcome of the appeal. Resolution of the appeal should occur within 20 days of the appeal letter or, if needed, the appeal meeting. This resolution is final.