Responsibilities of Community Life: The Student Code

Appendix B: Academic Integrity in Graduate Education and Research

[Adopted November 1998]

The assurance of integrity in graduate education and research is of paramount concern. Academic and scholarly activity at the graduate level takes many forms at the University of Connecticut, including, but not limited to, classroom activity, laboratory or field experience, and artistic expression. The Graduate School of the University of Connecticut upholds the highest ethical standards in its teaching, research, and service missions.

The Hearing and Appeal Procedures that follow pertain to matters involving graduate academic and scholarly misconduct. Responsibility for such misconduct requires intent but is not excused by ignorance. Thus, it is important for students to be conversant with the tenets of this Code. Matters of a disciplinary nature in which graduate students may become involved are to be addressed by Part II of the University’s Responsibilities of Community Life: The Student Code, enforcement of which is within the purview of the Dean of Students.

The Dean of the Graduate School is charged with responsibility for coordinating the process by which an allegation of academic misconduct on the part of a graduate student is reported, investigated, and adjudicated. The Graduate Faculty Council, in accordance with the provisions of its By-Laws, is responsible for the formulation of policies and procedures pertaining to any and all matters of academic integrity in graduate education and research and to proper handling of allegations of violations. Members of the Graduate Faculty have primary responsibility to promote and to sustain throughout the University an environment in which the highest ethical standards of teaching, scholarship, research, and publication prevail. All members of the University community have a responsibility to uphold the highest standards of teaching, scholarship, research, and publication and to report any violation of academic integrity of which they have knowledge.

A. Forms of Academic and Scholarly Misconduct

There are many forms of academic and scholarly misconduct. Categories of academic and scholarly misconduct are identified below, and where appropriate illustrations are given. These categories and illustrations are not intended to be exhaustive.

• CHEATING could occur during a course (e.g., on a final examination), on an examination required for a particular degree (e.g., the doctoral General Examination, the Final Examination for the master’s or the doctoral degree, or a foreign language translation test), or at other times during graduate study.
• PLAGIARISM involves taking the thoughts, words, or ideas of others and passing them off as one’s own.
• MISREPRESENTATION could involve, for example, taking an examination for another student; submitting for evaluation work done by another individual; submitting the same work for evaluation in two or more courses without prior approval; unauthorized use of previously completed scholarly work or research for a thesis, dissertation, or publication; or making false, inaccurate, or misleading claims or statements when applying for admission to the Graduate School or in any scholarly or research activity, including publication.
• UNAUTHORIZED POSSESSION, USE, OR DESTRUCTION OF ACADEMIC OR RESEARCH MATERIALS, which include, for example, examinations, library materials, laboratory or research supplies or equipment, research data, notebooks, or computer files.
• COMPUTER VIOLATIONS include but may not be limited to unauthorized use, tampering, sabotage, or piracy of computer files or data and the like.
• FABRICATION OR FALSIFICATION IN RESEARCH could involve, for example, deliberate falsification of experimental results or tampering in any way with actual experimental results or research data.
• RESEARCH VIOLATIONS involving, for example, human subject violations (including ethical and social violations), animal care violations, inappropriate breaches of confidentiality, deliberate obstruction of the research progress of another individual, or deliberate disregard for applicable University, local, State, or federal regulations.
• CONFLICTS OF INTEREST such as, for example, unauthorized use of University or faculty academic or research facilities, materials, or resources for unapproved purposes; or allowing or attempting to use personal relationships (academic or otherwise) between a graduate student and any member of the University community to influence improperly academic judgments, scholarly evaluations, or decision making.
• TAMPERING with any document or computer file pertaining to academics or research, including, for example, student academic records, official transcripts, laboratory journals, examination papers, and the like.
• ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE IMPROPERLY, for example, by means of bribery or threat, any member of the faculty, the staff, or the administration of the University in any matter pertaining to academics or research.
• AIDING OR ABETTING another individual in the planning or the commission of any act of academic misconduct.
• ANY IMPROPRIETY OR ACT OF MISCONDUCT COMMITTED BY A GRADUATE STUDENT IN A TEACHING ROLE in the University, such as requesting or accepting a favor in exchange for a grade or engaging in any form of sexual harassment.
• DELIBERATE OBSTRUCTION of an investigation of any act of academic or research misconduct.

B. Academic Misconduct within a Particular Course

When an instructor believes there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate a clear case of academic misconduct within a particular course taught by that instructor, the instructor shall notify the student in writing, and also orally if possible, that unless the student requests a hearing to contest the instructor’s belief, the instructor shall impose the appropriate academic consequences warranted by the circumstances. This should occur within 30 days of discovery of the alleged academic misconduct. The appropriate academic consequence for serious offenses is generally considered to be failure in the course. For less serious offenses regarding small portions of the course work, failure for that portion is suggested, with the requirement that the student repeat the work satisfactorily for no credit.

The faculty member is responsible for saving the evidence of academic misconduct in its original form and need not return any of the papers or other materials to the student. Copies of the student’s work and information about other evidence will be provided to the student upon request.

The student is given seven days from this first written notice to respond. If the student confesses or does not respond to the written notice of the instructor’s belief of academic misconduct and appropriate consequences within the course, the academic consequences shall be imposed and a report submitted to the Dean of the instructor’s school or college and to the Dean of the Graduate School.

If a student chooses to contest the instructor’s belief of academic misconduct, the student must make a written request to the Office of the Dean of the Graduate School for a hearing to determine the facts of the alleged misconduct.

C. Allegations of Academic Misconduct

The following procedures apply in most instances where academic misconduct is alleged. In some cases, misconduct may be alleged for students who are supported through a federally funded fellowship or training grant program or through other federal grants (e.g., as a Research Assistant). In such instances, the procedures stipulated by agreements between the University and the federal government will prevail, including use of the University’s policy and procedures for review of alleged unethical research practices. The procedures described in this document will apply to those allegations not subsumed by such agreements. In addition, standards governing the professional conduct of students in particular fields may be relevant in certain settings (e.g., clinical, counseling, therapeutic, etc.). Allegations of professional misconduct based on such standards may be brought forward under this code.

Whenever an alleged violation of this code has been filed with the Office of the Dean of the Graduate School, the accused is to be notified in writing within ten working days. The written statement filed with the Office of the Dean should describe fully the alleged misconduct and the circumstances involved (i.e., the name of the individual alleged to be responsible for the misconduct; date, time, place of the alleged misconduct; name(s) of person(s) who might have been involved in or have knowledge of the alleged misconduct; and any other pertinent information). The statement must bear the signature(s) of the individual(s) submitting it, and it must be dated. A copy of the statement will be sent to the accused within ten working days of its filing. The Dean of the Graduate School will discuss the allegation of academic misconduct with the dean of the relevant school or college. The Dean of the Graduate School will then make a determination regarding whether the alleged violation should be resolved at the Graduate School level in accordance with the hearing and appeal procedures contained herein or whether the alleged violation should be referred to the field of study, academic department, school or college in which the infraction is thought to have occurred. (Such a determination will also be made when an Accused Student, pursuant to section B, requests a hearing.)

If the alleged violation is referred to the field of study, academic department, school or college, then it will be addressed and resolved in accordance with the applicable hearing and appeal procedures followed by that particular unit. The Office of the Dean of the Graduate School will notify the accused in writing of this determination. In the event that the alleged violation is referred to the field of study, academic department, school or college, the Office of the Dean of the Graduate School should be notified of any outcome of the case. In either event, the Dean of the school or college in which the alleged misconduct occurred is notified that a report of alleged misconduct has been received.

If the alleged violation is to be resolved at the Graduate School level, the report of alleged misconduct is referred to the Office of the Dean of the Graduate School, which confirms the allegation(s) and the existence of supporting evidence. The Office reviews the allegation(s) and the evidence to determine specifically which provision(s) of this Code is/are alleged to have been violated. If the allegation(s) cannot be supported, or if there is insufficient evidence to proceed with an inquiry, the matter is dropped. If the allegation(s) can be supported, and if sufficient evidence exists to warrant an inquiry, the Office of the Dean of the Graduate School notifies the appropriate Associate Dean (either the Associate Dean of the Graduate School at Storrs or the Associate Dean of the Graduate School at the Health Center). The Office also notifies the accused by Certified Mail of the charge(s). A copy of this Code is sent with the letter of notification to inform the accused of his or her rights and of the hearing and appeals procedures to be followed. The Office also notifies the Dean of the school or college in which the alleged misconduct occurred of the charges.

D. Graduate Hearing Committee

The Graduate Hearing Committee is composed of three voting members (two members of the graduate faculty and one graduate student). The Executive Committee of the Graduate Faculty Council selects them with advice from appropriate Deans. The appropriate Associate Dean of the Graduate School (Storrs or Health Center) conducts the hearing as a non-voting member. A member of the Hearing Committee cannot have a direct involvement in the case under consideration. The accused will be notified in writing of the composition of the hearing committee and will have the right to object to the appointment of any committee member on the grounds that the member’s participation would jeopardize the party’s right to a fair hearing. The Associate Dean conducting the hearing will determine whether any objections have merit and will judge whether a panel member will be seated.

The proceeding, although formal, is not a court proceeding and the Hearing Committee will not be bound by the procedures and rules of evidence of a court of law. The Committee’s decision is to be made by majority vote and is to be based on clear and convincing evidence submitted at the hearing, including evidence regarding intent.

The Associate Dean will conduct the hearing, ordinarily in private unless the Accused Student and accuser agree to an open hearing, using the following steps:

1. Identification of the Accused Student, the person bringing the allegation, any representative of the accused, and the hearing panel.
2. The Accused Student may make an opening statement.
3. The presentation of evidence by the person alleging the misconduct. Evidence includes written statements, testimony of the person alleging the misconduct, oral testimony of witnesses, physical exhibits, and evidence of intent.
4. Questioning of witnesses and accuser, and rebuttal of evidence.
5. Presentation of evidence by the Accused Student. Evidence includes written statements, testimony of the Accused Student, oral testimony of witnesses, physical exhibits, and evidence of intent.
6. Questioning of the Accused Student and witnesses, and rebuttal of evidence.
7. Recall of any hearing participants.
8. Summation statements by the person alleging the misconduct and by the Accused Student.

During the hearing the accused student:

1. May decline to make statements. Refusal to answer questions shall not be interpreted as evidence of guilt.
2. May decline to appear at the hearing. Refusal to appear shall not be interpreted as evidence of guilt. The hearing panel will consider the evidence in the absence of the Accused Student.
3. May be advised for consultation purposes during the hearing. The student’s consultant may not address the hearing panel or others at the hearing unless permitted by the Associate Dean conducting the hearing.

The hearing panel’s decision is to be forwarded to the student, the person alleging the misconduct, the Dean of the school or college in which the alleged misconduct occurred, and to the Dean of the Graduate School within two weeks from the date of the hearing.

If the student is found not to be responsible for graduate academic misconduct, then no academic consequence may be imposed and the case is considered officially closed, and all records associated with the hearing are removed from the student’s permanent academic file.

In the event that the student is found responsible for graduate academic misconduct, the panel may recommend to the Dean of the Graduate School academic and/or university sanctions. The Dean will examine the record of the hearing and will weigh the severity of the recommended sanction(s) against the seriousness of the student’s misconduct. The Dean then will meet with the student before making a final judgment about sanctions. The Dean may impose any academic sanctions and may recommend to the Dean of Students any university sanctions to be imposed.

Decisions of the Dean of the Graduate School can be appealed to the Provost by the student. An appeal is not a new hearing. It is a review of the record of the original hearing. The Accused Student and a consultant of his or her choice have the right to review the Accused Student’s file and other records of the hearing. An appeal may be sought on two grounds:

1. On a claim of error in the hearing procedure. Appeals on such grounds must be presented, specifically described, in writing within five days (excluding weekends and holidays) of the announcement of the decision.
2. On a claim of new evidence or information material to the case that was not available at the time of the hearing. Appeals on such grounds must be presented, specifically described, in writing within five days (excluding weekends and holidays) of the new evidence having been discovered.

The Provost shall have the authority to dismiss an appeal not sought on proper grounds.

If an appeal is upheld, the Dean of the Graduate School shall refer the case with procedural specifications back to the hearing panel.

APPENDIX: A graduate student is defined as any individual who holds admission to the Graduate School to pursue either a graduate certificate or a graduate degree, as well as any other individual enrolled in a graduate-level course who is not strictly an undergraduate degree or an undergraduate certificate student.

(Approved by the Board of Trustees 11/10/98)