fsu seal Florida State University
Home >> Policy
   
 

FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC HONOR POLICY

PDF Version

Introduction


The statement on Values and Moral Standards at FSU says: “The moral norm which guides conduct and informs policy at Florida State University is responsible freedom. Freedom is an important experience which the University, one of the freest of institutions, provides for all of its citizens – faculty, students, administrators, and staff. Freedom is responsibly exercised when it is directed by ethical standards.” (Values and moral standards at FSU retrieved from the current General Bulletin located at http://registrar.fsu.edu/)

The statement also addresses academic integrity: “The University aspires to excellence in its core activities of teaching, research, creative expression, and public service and is committed to the integrity of the academic process. The [Academic Honor Policy] is a specific manifestation of this commitment. Truthfulness in one’s claims and representations and honesty in one’s activities are essential in life and vocation, and the realization of truthfulness and honesty is an intrinsic part of the educational process.” (Values and moral standards at FSU retrieved from the current General Bulletin located at http://registrar.fsu.edu/)

Guided by these principles, this Academic Honor Policy outlines the University’s expectations for students’ academic work, the procedures for resolving alleged violations of those expectations, and the rights and responsibilities of students and faculty throughout the process.

FSU Academic Honor Pledge

I affirm my commitment to the concept of responsible freedom. I will be honest and truthful and will strive for personal and institutional integrity at Florida State University. I will abide by the Academic Honor Policy at all times.

Academic Honor Violations

Note: Instructors are responsible for reinforcing the importance of the Academic Honor Policy in their courses and for clarifying their expectations regarding collaboration and multiple submission of academic work. Examples have been provided for the purpose of illustration and are not intended to be all-inclusive.

  1. PLAGIARISM. Intentionally presenting the work of another as one's own (i.e., without proper acknowledgement of the source).
     Typical Examples Include: Using another's work from print, web, or other sources without acknowledging the source; quoting from a source without citation; using facts, figures, graphs, charts or information without acknowledgement of the source.
  2. CHEATING. Improper application of any information or material that is used in evaluating academic work.
    Typical Examples     Include: Copying from another student's paper or receiving unauthorized assistance during a quiz, test or examination; using books, notes or other devices (e.g., calculators, cell phones, or computers) when these are not authorized; procuring without authorization a copy of or information about an examination before the scheduled exercise; unauthorized collaboration on exams.
  3. UNAUTHORIZED GROUP WORK. Unauthorized collaborating with others.
    Typical Examples Include:     Working with another person or persons on any activity that is intended to be individual work, where such collaboration has not been specifically authorized by the instructor.
  4. FABRICATION, FALSIFICATION, AND MISREPRESENTATION. Intentional and unauthorized altering or inventing of any information or citation that is used in assessing academic work.
    Typical Examples Include:     Inventing or counterfeiting data or information; falsely citing the source of information; altering the record of or reporting false information about practicum or clinical experiences; altering grade reports or other academic records; submitting a false excuse for absence or tardiness in a scheduled academic exercise; lying to an instructor to increase a grade.
  5. MULTIPLE SUBMISSION. Submitting the same academic work (including oral presentations) for credit more than once without instructor permission. It is each instructor's responsibility to make expectations regarding incorporation of existing academic work into new assignments clear to the student in writing by the time assignments are given.
    Typical Examples Include:     Submitting the same paper for credit in two courses without instructor permission; making minor revisions in a credited paper or report (including oral presentations) and submitting it again as if it were new work.
  6. ABUSE OF ACADEMIC MATERIALS. Intentionally damaging, destroying, stealing, or making inaccessible library or other academic resource material.
    Typical Examples Include:     Stealing or destroying library or reference materials needed for common academic purposes; hiding resource materials so others may not use them; destroying computer programs or files needed in academic work; stealing, altering, or intentionally damaging another student's notes or laboratory experiments. (This refers only to abuse as related to an academic issue.)
  7. COMPLICITY IN ACADEMIC DISHONESTY. Intentionally helping another to commit an act of academic dishonesty.
    Typical Examples Include:     Knowingly allowing another to copy from one's paper during an examination or test; distributing test questions or substantive information about the material to be tested before a scheduled exercise; deliberately furnishing false information.
  8. ATTEMPTING to commit any offense as outlined above.

Student Rights

Students have the following important due process rights, which may have an impact on the appellate process:

  1. to be informed of all alleged violation(s), receive the complaint in writing (except in a Step 1 agreement, described in the Procedures Section, where the signed agreement serves as notice) and be given access to all relevant materials pertaining to the case.
  2. to receive an impartial hearing in a timely manner where they will be given a full opportunity to present information pertaining to the case.


Students are also accorded the following prerogatives:

  1. when possible, to discuss the allegations with the instructor.
  2. privacy, confidentiality, and personal security.
  3. to be assisted by an advisor who may accompany the student throughout the process but may not speak on the student's behalf.
  4. to choose not to answer any question that might be incriminating.
  5. to contest the sanctions of a first-level agreement and to appeal both the decision and sanctions of an Academic Honor Hearing.

The student has the right to continue in the course in question during the entire process. Once a student has received notice that he/she is being charged with an alleged violation of the Academic Honor Policy, the student is not permitted to withdraw or drop the course unless the final outcome of the process dictates that no academic penalty will be imposed. Should no final determination be made before the end of the term, the grade of "Incomplete" will be assigned until a decision is made.

Students should contact the Dean of Students Department for further information regarding their rights.

Procedures for Resolving Cases


Step 1. Throughout the Step 1 process, the instructor has the responsibility to address academic honor allegations in a timely manner, and the student has the responsibility to respond to those allegations in a timely manner. For assistance with the Academic Honor Policy, students should consult the Dean of Students Department and instructors should consult the Office of the Dean of the Faculties.

If a student observes a violation of the Academic Honor Policy, he or she should report the incident to the instructor of the course. When an instructor believes that a student has violated the Academic Honor Policy in one of the instructor's classes, the instructor must first contact the Office of the Dean of the Faculties to report the alleged violation to determine whether to proceed with a Step 1 agreement. The instructor must also inform the department chair or dean. (Teaching assistants must seek guidance from their supervising faculty member.) However, faculty members or others who do not have administrative authority for enforcing the Academic Honor Policy should not be informed of the allegation, unless they have established a legitimate need to know. If pursuing a Step 1 agreement is determined to be possible, the instructor shall discuss the evidence of academic dishonesty with the student and explore the possibility of a Step 1 agreement. Four possible outcomes of this discussion may occur:

  1. If the charge appears unsubstantiated, the instructor will drop the charge, and all documents created in investigating the allegation will be destroyed. The instructor should make this decision using the "preponderance of the evidence" standard and should inform the Office of the Dean of the Faculties.

  2. The student may accept responsibility for the violation and accept the academic sanction proposed by the instructor. In this case, any agreement involving an academic penalty must be put in writing and signed by both parties on the "Academic Honor Policy Step 1 Agreement" form, which must then be sent to the Dean of Students Department. This agreement becomes a confidential student record of academic dishonesty and will be removed from the student's file five years from the date of the final decision in the case.

  3. The student may accept the responsibility for the violation, but contest the proposed academic sanction. In this circumstance, the student must submit the "Academic Honor Policy Referral to Contest Sanction" form along with supporting documentation to the Office of the Dean of the Faculties. The Dean of the Faculties (or designee) will review the submitted documentation to determine whether the instructor has imposed a sanction that is disproportionate to the offense. The Dean of the Faculties may affirm or modify the sanction as appropriate. The decision that results from this review is final.

  4. The student may deny responsibility. In this circumstance, the instructor submits the "Academic Honor Policy Hearing Referral" form along with supporting documentation to the Dean of the Faculties Office for an Academic Honor Policy Hearing. The student is issued a letter detailing the charges within ten class days of the receipt of the referral, and the schedule for the hearing will be set as soon as possible and within 90 days from the date of the letter. These timelines may be modified in unusual circumstances. Unless all parties agree, the hearing will not be held any sooner than 7 class days from the student's receipt of the charge letter. The process then proceeds to Step 2.

If the student is found to have a prior record of academic dishonesty or the serious nature of the allegations merits a formal hearing, the instructor must refer the matter to Step 2 for an Academic Honor Policy Hearing by submitting the Academic Honor Policy Hearing Referral form to the Office of the Dean of the Faculties.

Step 2. Academic Honor Policy Hearing. A panel consisting of five members shall hear the case. The panel shall include: one faculty member appointed by the dean from the unit in which the course is taught; one faculty member appointed by the Dean of the Faculties who is not from that unit; and two students appointed through procedures established by the Dean of Students Department. The panel shall be chaired by the Dean of the Faculties (or designee), who is a non-voting member of the committee.

The hearing will be conducted in a non-adversarial manner with a clear focus on finding the facts within the academic context of the course. The student is presumed innocent going into the proceeding. After hearing all available and relevant information, the panel determines whether or not to find the student responsible for the alleged violation using the “preponderance of the evidence” standard. If the student is found responsible for the violation, the panel is informed about any prior record of academic honor policy violations and determines an academic sanction (and disciplinary sanction, if appropriate). In some cases, a Step 1 sanction may have been appropriately proposed prior to the convening of an Academic Honor Hearing. If the student is found responsible in these cases, the panel typically will impose a sanction no more severe than that which was proposed by the faculty member. The panel is required to provide a clear written justification for imposing a sanction more severe than the sanction proposed in Step 1.

The chair of the Academic Honor Policy hearing panel will report the decision to the student, the instructor, and the Dean of Students Department. The Dean of Students Department will report the decision to the University Registrar, if appropriate. If the student is found "responsible," this outcome will be recorded with the Dean of Students Department and becomes a confidential student record of an Academic Honor Policy violation. Records in which suspension or a less severe sanction (including all academic sanctions) is imposed will be removed five years from the date of the final decision in the case. Records involving dismissal and expulsion will be retained permanently, except in cases where a dismissed student is readmitted. Those records will be removed five years from the date of the student's readmission.

Sanctions

Step 1

This Step 1 procedure is implemented with first-offense allegations that do not involve egregious violations. The decision regarding whether an allegation is egregious is made by the Dean of the Faculties (or designee) and the instructor. The criteria used by the instructor to determine the proposed academic penalty should include the seriousness and the frequency of the alleged violation. The following sanctions are available in the Step 1 procedure.
  1. additional academic work
  2. a reduced grade (including "0" or "F") for the assignment
  3. a reduced grade (including "F") for the course

Step 2

An Academic Honor Policy Hearing is held for all second offenses, for all first offenses that involve egregious violations of the Academic Honor Policy, for all offenses that involve simultaneous violations of the Student Conduct Code, and in all cases where the student denies responsibility for the alleged violation. The decision regarding whether an allegation is egregious is made by the Dean of the Faculties (or designee) and the instructor. In some cases, a Step 1 sanction may have been appropriately proposed prior to the convening of an Academic Honor Policy Hearing. If the student is found responsible in these cases, the panel typically will impose a sanction no more severe than that which was proposed by the faculty member. The panel is required to provide a clear written justification for imposing a sanction more severe than the sanction proposed in Step 1. Students will not be penalized solely for exercising their right to request a Step 2 hearing. The following sanctions are available in Step 2 (see the Procedures section) and may be imposed singly or in combination:

  1. additional academic work
  2. a reduced grade (including "0" or "F") for the assignment
  3. a reduced grade (including "F") for the course
  4. Reprimand (written or verbal)
  5. Educational Activities - attendance at educational programs, interviews with appropriate officials, planning and implementing educational programs, or other educational activities. Fees may be charged to cover the cost of educational activities.

    6.
  6. Restitution

    7.
  7. Conduct Probation -a period of time during which any further violation of the Academic Honor Policy may result in more serious sanctions being imposed. Some of the restrictions that may be placed on the student during the probationary period include, but are not limited to: participation in student activities or representation of the University on athletic teams or in other leadership positions.
  8. Disciplinary Probation - a period of time during which any further violation of the Academic Honor Policy puts the student’s status with the University in jeopardy. If the student is found “responsible” for another violation during the period of Disciplinary Probation, serious consideration will be given to imposing a sanction of Suspension, Dismissal, or Expulsion. The restrictions that may be placed on the student during this time period are the same as those under Conduct Probation.
  9. Suspension - Separation from the University for a specified period, not to exceed two years.
  10. Dismissal - Separation from the University for an indefinite period of time. Readmission is possible but not guaranteed and will only be considered after two years from the effective date of the dismissal, based on meeting all admission criteria and obtaining clearance from the Dean of Students or designee.

    11.
  11. Expulsion - Separation from the University without the possibility of readmission.

    12.
  12. Withholding of diplomas, transcripts, or other records for a specified period of time.

    13.
  13. Revocation of degree, in cases where an egregious offense is discovered after graduation.


Appeals

Decisions of the Academic Honor Policy Hearing Panel may be appealed to the Academic Honor Policy Appeal Committee, a standing four-member committee composed of two faculty appointed by the President and two students appointed by the Vice President for Student Affairs. The chair will be appointed annually by the President, and members will serve two-year renewable terms. In case of a tie vote regarding a case, the committee will submit a written report to the Provost, who will then make the final determination.

On appeal, the burden of proof shifts to the student to prove that an error has occurred. The only recognized grounds for appeal are:

  1. Due process errors involving violations of a student's rights that substantially affected the outcome of the initial hearing.
  2. Demonstrated prejudice against the charged student by any panel member. Such prejudice must be evidenced by a conflict of interest, bias,h pressure, or influence that precluded a fair and impartial hearing.
  3. New information that was not available at the time of the original hearing.
  4. A sanction that is extraordinarily disproportionate to the offense committed.
  5. The preponderance of the evidence presented at the hearing does not support a finding of responsible. Appeals based on this consideration will be limited to a review of the record of the initial hearing.

The procedures followed during the appeals process are:
  1. The student should file a written letter of appeal to the Office of the Dean of the Faculties within 10 class days after being notified of the Academic Honor Policy Hearing Panel decision. This letter should outline the grounds for the appeal (see 1-5 above) and should provide supporting facts and relevant documentation.
  2. The Academic Honor Policy Appeal Committee will review this letter of appeal and will hear the student and any witnesses called by the student, except in appeals based on consideration #5 above. The committee may also gather any additional information it deems necessary to make a determination in the case.
  3. The Appeals Committee may affirm, modify, or reverse the initial panel decision, or it may order a new hearing to be held. This decision becomes final agency action when it is approved by the Provost. In cases where the student is found responsible, the decision becomes a confidential student record of academic dishonesty.
  4. Appellate decisions are communicated in writing to the student, the instructor, the Office of the Dean of the Faculties, and the Dean of Students Department within 30 class days of the appellate hearing.

Academic Honor Policy Committee

An Academic Honor Policy Committee shall be appointed by the University President. The Committee will include: three faculty members, selected from a list of six names provided by the Faculty Senate Steering Committee and three students, selected from a list of six names provided by the Student Senate. The Dean of the Faculties or designee and the Dean of Students or designee shall serve ex officio. Faculty members will serve three-year staggered terms, and students will serve one-year terms. The committee will meet at least once a semester. It will monitor the operation and effectiveness of the Academic Honor Policy, work with the Faculty Senate and the Student Senate to educate all members of the community regarding academic integrity, and make recommendations for changes to the policy.


Amendment Procedures

Amendments to the Academic Honor Policy may be initiated by the Academic Honor Policy Committee, the Faculty Senate, the Student Senate, and/or the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Amendments to the policy must be approved by both the Faculty Senate and the Student Senate.

 

  
©Academic Integrity, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306 | 850/644-2428
Comments & broken link reports to email-contact