Integrity Policy and Procedures
is an academic community within the society at large. All members within this
community are expected to accept the responsibility for academic integrity and
honestly. Academic dishonesty seriously erodes the quality of educational
pursuits and is unacceptable at IUP. The following policies and procedures have
been established to preserve the academic integrity of the university
community, while also providing a process that protects the rights of students
who allegedly violate these policies.
Academic Integrity Policy and Procedures
The university’s academic integrity policy is part of an ongoing
effort to develop a community where trust, honesty, ethical principles, and
personal integrity guide interactions with others, thereby providing for
orderly academic and scholarly processes.
The following policy and procedures have been established to
preserve the academic integrity of the university community, while also
providing a process that provides opportunities for students to respond to
allegations that the policy has been violated.
Types of Violations: Violations of academic
integrity include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Providing or receiving unauthorized
assistance in coursework, with lab work, theses, dissertations, or during
examinations (including qualifying and comprehensive exams) or quizzes.
2. Using unauthorized materials or devices,
such as crib notes, during examinations or quizzes.
3. Plagiarizing papers, theses, dissertations,
essays, reports, speeches and oral presentations, take-home examinations,
computer projects, or other academic exercises by misrepresenting or passing
off the ideas, words, formulas, or data of another as one’s own. Plagiarism is
dishonest and illegal. Writers are indebted to authors from whom they borrow
exact words, ideas, theories, opinions, statistics, illustrative material, or
facts (beyond common knowledge). Writers are also indebted if they summarize or
paraphrase in their own words material from sources. All quoted material
requires the acknowledgment of the source by the use of quotation marks or
indentation (if exact wording is incorporated). In addition, both directly
quoted and summarized material must be acknowledged by use of a note or
parenthetical citation that indicates the author and/or date of publication and
page number or numbers. If the writer indents a quotation, it must be clearly
set off from the body of the text and must be documented in the aforesaid
manner. To verify the various documentation procedures, writers should consult
the style sheet in the particular discipline for which they are preparing the
assignment (MLA,APA, Chicago, BC, etc.).
4. Using the same paper or work more than once
without authorization of the faculty member to whom the work is being
5. Possessing course examination materials
before the administration of the exam, without the prior knowledge or consent
of the instructor.
6. Intentionally evading IUP academic policies
and procedures; for example, improperly processing course withdrawals, grade
changes, or other academic procedures.
7. Falsifying information, including
falsification/fabrication of research data and/or statistical analyses, forging
signatures on various forms and documents, or altering or adding answers on
academic exercises or exams after work has been graded.
8. Computer dishonesty as addressed by
university computing policies including, but not limited to: using or
attempting to use computing accounts or other information for which the student
is not authorized; providing false or misleading information to obtain a
computing account or access to other information resources; attempting to
obtain information resource access codes (usernames, passwords, PINs, etc.) for
another user’s computing accounts; sharing information resource access codes
(usernames, passwords, PINs, etc.) with other individuals; attempting to
disguise the identity of a computing account or other information resource;
using or attempting to use university network resources to gain or attempt to
gain unauthorized access to remote computers including, but not limited to,
port scanning; violating the terms of intellectual property rights, in
particular, software license agreements and copyright laws; using information
resources to monitor another user’s data communications, or to read, copy,
change, or delete another user’s files or software without permission of the
owner; using or installing or attempting to use or install software not
9. Noncompliance by failure to comply with
previously imposed sanctions for academic violations under this policy.
10.Class behavior which significantly disrupts
the learning process or is a threat to others.
11.Buying, selling, stealing, or engaging in
unauthorized exchange of, or improperly using, any assignments, papers, or
12.Making fraudulent claims to gain academic
credit or to influence testing or grading.
The university reserves the right to discipline any student for
the above policy violations and any other action that an ordinary, reasonable,
intelligent college student knows, or should know, might lead to the issuance
of discipline. This means the university maintains the right to issue
discipline for reasonable cause.
Charges of academic integrity violations may be brought by a
faculty member or administrator. Students who observe or become aware of a
violation of academic integrity by another student are strongly encouraged to
report it to a university official. A faculty member/administrator who believes
that a student has violated an academic policy may elect to resolve the matter
by Informal Resolution, by Documented Agreement, or by Formal Adjudication.
Sanction(s) may not be imposed upon a
student believed to have violated an academic policy without following one of
these three procedures.
If charges are brought, the accused student shall have a fair
and reasonable opportunity to answer, explain, and defend against the charges.
The university shall have the burden of proof in all cases.
A. Options for Resolution: A
faculty member or administrator must use one of the following options to
resolve alleged violations of academic integrity:
1. Option I: Informal Resolution. The
faculty member/administrator shall notify the student of the charges and schedule
a meeting within ten calendar days of the observation or discovery of the
incident and agree at such meeting to resolve the issue without submitting any
formal documentation. If the violation pertains to work being judged or that
has been judged by a committee (examples might include dissertations, theses,
and comprehensive examinations, both oral and written), the meeting must
involve a majority of the committee and the resolution must be agreed to by a majority
of the committee. It is in the interest of the faculty member/administrator and
student to complete a statement that summarizes the incident, meeting, and
agreed-upon resolution. The factual statement should be signed by both parties
and copies provided to the student and the faculty member/administrator. If the
agreement is for the student to withdraw from the program, it must also be
stipulated that the student cannot reapply to any other program at IUP, and the
agreement must be documented as in Option II below. By resolving the charges informally, the
student waives his/her right to appeal sanctions which have been agreed upon in
the resolution process. If agreement cannot be reached, or at the discretion of
the faculty member/administrator, a more formal process as outlined in this
policy must be initiated by the faculty member/administrator.
2. Option II: Resolution by Documented
a. If no resolution is reached under Option I,
or if the faculty member/administrator deems this step to be more appropriate, the
faculty member/administrator may schedule a conference with the student in an
attempt to reach a mutually agreeable resolution. This conference must be
scheduled/requested within ten calendar days of the observation or discovery of
the alleged violation or of the failure to resolve through Option I. If an
agreement is reached, the faculty member/administrator must complete a Documented
Agreement Referral Form outlining the agreement and have it signed by both
parties: faculty member/administrator and student. If the violation pertains to
work such as a thesis or comprehensive examination being judged or that has
been judged by a committee, the conference must involve a majority of the committee
and the Documented Agreement Referral Form must be agreed to and signed by a
majority of the committee and the student. If the agreement is for the student
to withdraw from the program, it must also be stipulated that the student
cannot reapply to any other program at IUP.
Copies are distributed to the student, the faculty member/administrator
filing the agreement, the department chair, Graduate Admissions Office, and the
Office of the Provost. The Office of the Provost will file the official
documents with the Office of Student Conduct. The form must be filed within ten
calendar days of the conference.
b. By signing the agreement, the
student waives the right to appeal the sanctions agreed upon in the conference.
If the student fails to fulfill the written agreement, the faculty
member/administrator may file an academic integrity referral against the
student for noncompliance.
c. If a prior academic integrity
violation for the student is on record, the matter will be referred to an
Academic Integrity Board (see section D, Multiple Violations).
d. If a documented agreement is not
reached, the faculty member/administrator shall initiate the formal
adjudication process by filing an Academic Integrity Referral Form with the department
chair, within ten calendar days of the conference with the student.
3. Option III: Resolution by Formal
A faculty member/administrator should pursue formal adjudication
cannot reach, or chooses not to attempt, a mutually agreeable resolution with
the student regarding the facts of the case or sanctions to be imposed,
believes that the violation is so severe that it warrants the following
• awarding a failing grade on a project or exam (such as a
graduate qualifying for a comprehensive exam or dissertation) when resubmitting
the project or retaking the exam is not possible
• involuntary withdrawal
from one or more of IUP’s academic programs
rescission of a conferred degree
a. The faculty member/administrator
should file an Academic Integrity Referral Form with the department chair,
within ten calendar days of the observation or discovery of the violation or within
ten calendar days of the failure to reach a resolution through Option I or
Option II. If the violation pertains to work being judged by a committee, the
form must be signed by a majority of the committee. The form will contain a
description of the alleged violation, including the time, date, and place of occurrence,
and the recommended sanction if the student is found to have violated this
b. The department chair will forward a
copy of the Academic Integrity Referral Form to the student, within ten
calendar days of receiving notification of the allegation, and contact the
student to schedule a hearing to review the facts surrounding the allegation and
recommended sanctions if the student is determined to have committed a
c. The hearing should be scheduled so
as to allow the student a reasonable time to prepare a defense (within ten
calendar days of being notified of the allegation by the department chair).
d. This hearing
will involve the student, the department chair, the faculty
member/administrator, and the Dean of the School of Graduate Studies and
Research (or Dean’s designee); all parties may invite others with pertinent
information. The student and the faculty member/administrator must be given the
opportunity to submit and review written, physical, and testimonial evidence,
and to question witnesses.
e. The accused
student may identify an advisor, who may be an attorney, to be present at the
hearing. The advisor may only consult privately with the student.
f. The student
may waive his/her right to a hearing in writing. If so, the sanction
recommended by the person filing the referral will be imposed unless the
sanction is suspension, expulsion, or rescission of a degree. Suspension,
expulsion, or rescission of a degree must be implemented by the president’s
g. If the accused
student receives proper notification of the hearing and fails to appear when
the hearing has been scheduled, the hearing will be held in the student’s
absence and the department chair will render a decision based upon information
presented by the faculty member/administrator.
h. Following the
hearing, the department chair will render a determination based on the
information presented at the hearing. Within ten calendar days of the hearing,
the department chair will forward a written report summarizing the hearing that
includes the outcome, the factual basis for the determination reached, the sanction
to be issued, and the appeal procedures. The original report is sent to the
student with copies to the faculty member/administrator and Office of the
Provost. The Office of the Provost will file the official documents with the
Office of Student Conduct. If the outcome is for the
student to withdraw from the program, it must also be stipulated that the
student cannot reapply to any other program at IUP
i. In the event
that a department chair cannot or will not fulfill the above role, or in the
event that the person filing the referral is an administrator or department
chair, the Provost/designee will determine the appropriate individual to
fulfill the department chair’s role and inform the student and the faculty member/administrator
filing charges within ten calendar days of receiving notification of the
j. If a prior
academic violation for the student is on record, the case must be referred to
the Academic Integrity Board (see section D, Multiple Violations). Otherwise,
if there is no appeal, the recommended sanction will be imposed..
B. Academic Integrity Board (AIB): The
AIB may be asked to hear appeals of cases filed at Option III: Resolution by
Formal Adjudication. In addition, the AIB will hear all cases in which appeals to
the chair’s decision are accepted by the Provost/designee (see sections C.1. and C.2.,
Appeals). The AIB will also review sanctions in cases of multiple violations
(see section D).
1. For graduate-level hearings and reviews, the
AIB will be made up of four (4) faculty members, one of whom will chair the
board, and two (2) graduate students. For undergraduate hearings and reviews
the AIB will be made up of four (4) faculty members, one of whom will chair the
board, and two (2) undergraduate students. A quorum requires the presence of
four persons, at least one of whom must be a graduate student (for cases at the
graduate level) or an undergraduate student (for cases at the undergraduate
level). All members, including the chair, are voting members.
2. When an AIB hearing is called, the AIB will
be convened by the Provost/designee. The accused student shall be notified of
the time, date, and place of the hearing and the names of those AIB members
scheduled to review his/her case. If the hearing is an appeal, this
notification will also include details of the charges, including the time,
date, and place of the alleged offense and the recommended sanction. If the
hearing is a review of sanctions in a multiple violation case (see Section D),
the notification should also indicate that more severe sanctions might be
imposed. The hearing should be scheduled no sooner than ten calendar days from
the date of notification to the student.
3. Prior to the hearing, a student appearing
before an AIB may, with good cause, challenge any member on the board sitting
in judgment of his/her particular case. When such a challenge is made, an
alternate member will be appointed to the AIB.
4. The AIB will review all material and hear
all evidence pertinent to the case from the accused and all witnesses. Members
of the AIB shall be free to ask relevant questions to clarify information or resulting
5. The AIB will hear evidence appropriate to
the nature of its review (see section C, Appeals).
6. The student shall have a fair and
reasonable opportunity to answer, explain, and defend against information and
witnesses’ statements presented at the hearing. The student shall also have the
opportunity to submit written, physical, and testimonial evidence, and to call
relevant witnesses on his/her behalf.
7. The accused student may identify an
advisor, who may be an attorney, to be present at the hearing. The advisor may
only consult privately with the student.
8. After hearing all evidence, the AIB will
privately make its decision based upon the evidence presented and within the
scope of its review. A majority vote of the AIB shall be required for any decision.
If the AIB finds that the student more likely than not committed the misconduct
or infraction, and the student has not prior academic violation on record, it
may accept, reduce (but not increase), or modify the recommended sanction. If
the student does have a prior academic violation on record, the AIB may increase
the recommended sanction (see section D, Multiple Violations).
9. If the student
waives his/her right to a hearing in writing, or chooses not to appear at the
AIB hearing, the case will be
adjudicated based upon the evidence presented at the scheduled hearing.
10. All hearings are closed unless the student
requests an open hearing in writing. The AIB chair has the authority to make
the final decision regarding access of spectators at the hearing.
11. The AIB must submit a written report of the
decision within ten calendar days to the Provost/designee, who will forward the
decision to the involved parties.
Appeals: These appeal procedures apply to cases resolved through formal
adjudication. Cases of academic integrity that are resolved through Informal
Resolution or Documented Agreement cannot be appealed.
1. If, after receiving the department chair’s
report on the outcome of the hearing, the faculty member/administrator or the
student disagrees with the decision, the sanction, or both, he/she may appeal
to the Provost/designee within ten calendar days of receiving the report. This
appeal must be in writing and describe in detail the grounds for the appeal.
These reasons may include the following:
Denial of a fair and reasonable hearing
New evidence (applies when there is an acceptable reason why the information was not presented at the
Excessively harsh sanctions
2. The Provost/designee may deny the appeal or
direct the appeal to be heard by an AIB within ten calendar days. All appeals involving
sanctions of involuntary withdrawal from one or more of IUP’s academic programs,
suspension, expulsion, or rescission of a degree will be heard by an AIB.
3. Unless the recommended sanction is
suspension, expulsion, or rescission of a degree, the decision of the AIB is
final and will be implemented by the Provost/design
4. Suspension, expulsion, or rescission of a
degree may be recommended by the AIB but can only be implemented by the President’s
designee, who is responsible for verifying that due process was followed.
1. Information about prior violations is not
relevant to determining whether a student violated the policy in the current
case. However, such information is pertinent in determining the appropriate
2. If a student is found in violation of
academic integrity two or more times, all materials within the student’s past
and present academic integrity files shall be used in determining appropriate
sanctions. Students with multiple academic integrity violations of record may be
subject to additional sanctions, including possible suspension or expulsion
from the university.
3. For cases previously resolved by documented
agreement or through formal adjudication at the department chair’s level, an AIB
hearing will be scheduled. This hearing will review all information pertinent
to the determination of an appropriate sanction but will not reconsider the
issue of whether the policy violation occurred. After considering the severity
of the current and prior violations, the AIB may determine that a more severe sanction
4. The AIB should request information on prior
violations only after determining that a violation has occurred. Information on
prior violations should be used in determining the appropriate sanction.
5. The AIB must submit a written report of the
decision within ten calendar days of its decision to Provost/designee, who will
forward the decision to the involved parties.
6. The student may appeal any new sanction to
the Provost/designee. The Provost/designee may deny the appeal or, on the basis
of denial of a fair and reasonable hearing, new evidence, or excessively harsh
sanctions, direct the appeal to be heard by a second AIB.
following sanctions may be agreed upon by the student and faculty
member/administrator through Informal Resolution or Documented Agreement. All
grade reductions require the approval of the instructor of record. If the work
is graded by a committee, a grade reduction requires the approval of the
majority of the committee.
a. Single Grade Reduction: Reduction of grade or
failure on project, examination, quiz, or other academic exercise on which the
student is alleged to have cheated.
b. Course Grade Reduction: Reduction of course
grade or failure in the course. If the violation involves a project spanning
multiple courses (such as a dissertation or multiple semester internship), the
grade reduction may apply to all courses involved.
c. Constructive or Educational Task: A
task which requires the student to examine his/her dishonest behavior and which
may benefit the student, campus, or community.
d. Other: Sanctions deemed appropriate
and tailored to a specific violation as determined by the faculty member/administrator. Any reasonable sanction or combination of
sanctions for a given violation may be agreed upon by the student and faculty
2.In addition to the above, the following
sanctions may be imposed through formal adjudication.
Letter of Warning: A
warning letter may be issued indicating that the student has been found in
violation of an academic policy and that failure to comply with policies in the
future may result in further disciplinary action to be handled as a second offense.
The letter of warning will remain in effect for a period of time as specified
by the individual or board hearing the case.
Disciplinary Probation: Disciplinary
probation, which is for a period of time specified by the individual or board
hearing the case, is an indication that a student’s status at the university is
seriously jeopardized. If the student is found in violation of another IUP
policy during the probationary period, a more serious sanction will be levied,
including possible involuntary withdrawal from one or more of IUP’s academic
programs, suspension, or expulsion from the university.
Involuntary withdrawal from one or more of IUP’s
academic programs: A student may be denied the
right to participate in some segment of IUP’s programs. Such involuntary
withdrawal might be imposed on either a temporary or permanent basis.
Rescission of a degree: A
student may have his/her degree rescinded if found to have plagiarized or not
to have conducted his/her own research on an undergraduate thesis, graduate thesis,
or graduate dissertation.
student may be suspended from the university for a specified period of time,
not to be less than the remainder of the current semester. Suspension requires
that a student remove himself/herself from university premises, not attend classes
or social activities, and not be present on university or Student Cooperative
Association property during the period of suspension.
may be considered under any of the following circumstances: when there is a
very serious violation of the academic integrity policy, when a student is
proven to have violated the academic integrity policy on more than one occasion,
or when a student appears before the board after already having been suspended.
Expulsion from the institution is permanent. Appeals to the sanction of
expulsion must be submitted to the Office of the President. If necessary, the President
will consult with legal counsel in these cases. Suspension, expulsion, and
rescission of a degree can be recommended by a faculty member/administrator,
department chair, and AIB but can be imposed only by the President’s designee
for suspension, expulsion, and rescission of a degree; the designee is
responsible for verifying that due process was followed.
Other: Further sanctions,
including rescission of a graduate degree, may be recommended through written
agreement approved and signed by the faculty member and the Dean of the School
of Graduate Studies and Research.
Records and Recordkeeping:
Records of Informal Resolution. Although no official forms are filed at this level
of resolution, it is strongly recommended that a faculty member/administrator
and student who reach an informal agreement put the agreement in writing with a
copy to each participant. This protects each party in the event of any future attempt at
Records of Resolution by Documented
Agreement. Documented Agreement Resolutions are
filed with the Office of Student Conduct. They are not considered formal
disciplinary records until, and unless, the student is found in violation of
this policy a second time. They are internal university records used for monitoring
students for multiple violations only. If a second documented agreement form is
filed or a student is found in violation of the policy through formal
adjudication, the student will then have a formal disciplinary record which
includes records of both violations. This formal record is maintained according
to the IUP judicial system recordkeeping policies.
Records of Formal Adjudication. Records of academic integrity cases resolved
through formal adjudication are filed with the Office of Student Conduct. They
are maintained as formal disciplinary records in accordance with IUP judicial
system recordkeeping policies. Records of cases involving suspension, expulsion,
or rescission of a degree must be maintained for a minimum of seven years.
G. Operational Notes:
In cases where a violation is alleged at, or near, the end of
the semester and resolution by informal resolution, documented agreement, or
formal adjudication cannot be completed before grades are submitted, the
faculty member should submit a designation of “Incomplete” (I) for the student.
The “I” designation will remain on the student’s record until the case has been
resolved. Once the case has been resolved, the “I” designation will be replaced
with the appropriate grade.
If the violation is alleged during the semester when classes are
in session, the accused student should continue attending all classes and
continue to complete course requirements during the resolution of the academic
If the student has withdrawn and has
been found to violate the policy, another grade, including an F, may be placed
on the transcript. If the student has withdrawn and has not been found to
violate the policy, the “W” will remain on the transcript.
The ten-day requirement within this
policy is a period of time intended to reasonably assure swift notification of
an alleged violation and a swift response while allowing the student a reasonable
opportunity to prepare a response. Either a faculty member/administrator or
student may request an extension of time for good cause, which may be granted
by the Provost or designee.
The university may withhold transcripts, grades,
diplomas, or other official records pending the disposition of cases, if such action
is reasonably necessary to preserve its ability to enforce its rules.
Provost/designee may modify the procedural provisions of these rules by the
issuance of written orders to deal with particular unusual procedural
situations, so long as no order shall contradict the rules of the Board of
Governors of the State System of Higher Education governing due process for
students, and no such rule shall deny fundamental fairness to students by, for
example, effectively constituting a denial of notice or opportunity to be heard
7. This policy will
be reviewed by the Senate Academic Committee after five years.
The various forms described in this policy are available from
the Office of the Provost, the Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs,
deans’ offices, or department offices. Questions concerning the Academic
Integrity Policy and Procedures can be directed to the Office of the Provost.
Approved by University Senate on December 3, 2013
Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline
© 2007–15 Indiana University of Pennsylvania
1011 South Drive, Indiana, Pa. 15705 | 724-357-2100