Grading Systems / Policies
Once the allegation of a violation is reported to the Office of the Provost, the student will be notified of the nature of the allegation and will be provided an opportunity for a hearing either before a designated hearing officer of the College or before the College Judicial Board. The type of hearing will be determined by the Provost. In most cases, a hearing officer will be assigned by the Provost and a disciplinary conference scheduled. However, cases will be sent to the College Judicial Board when a past history of similar charges exists or where the violation is egregious (e.g., the stealing of an exam). In such cases, the penalty for a guilty finding could include suspension or expulsion from the College. A Judicial Board hearing is required under the provisions of the College Code of Conduct.
Final Grades When a student is suspected of academic dishonesty and the case is not adjudicated prior to the official submission of final grades to the Registrars Office, a "Z" grade will be assigned by the instructor for the course involved, using a "Z" grade form.
Once a Z grade has been issued the Dean's Office will initiate communication with the student. It is the student's responsibility to respond to the allegation and fulfill whatever stipulations set forth for resolving the grade. If the Z grade is not resolved by the completion a grade adjustment form within one year the grade will be changed to an F on the student's academic transcript.
The following describes the individual hearing processes for violations of academic integrity:
Disciplinary Conference The procedures and procedural protections provided in this Catalog and the Student Handbook will apply. Both the complainant and the person charged will have an opportunity to appear before the hearing officer.
Judicial Board The procedures and procedural protections provided for in the Catalog and Student Handbook will apply. Charge letters will clearly indicate there is no option regarding the type of hearing. In certain cases where the mental or physical health of the person charged may be seriously affected by the public proceedings of the Judicial Board, a request for adjudication by private proceedings of the Judicial Board may be made in writing to the Provost. The decision to grant such a request lies solely with the Provost. All information pertaining to the case will be made available to the Judicial Board for review by the Provosts Office. (Note: In a Judicial Board proceeding, the complainant must appear to present the complaint. Only under the most unusual of circumstances would a notarized statement of complaint be allowed to serve in the place of the complainant.)
Sanctions In the case of a guilty finding after a disciplinary conference, penalties may range from an official warning or receipt of a failing grade on the suspicious paper or project, to a failure for the course. A student may also be penalized by being placed on disciplinary probation .The Judicial Board may impose the same penalties, suspension for a specified period, or expulsion from the College.
Appeal Procedures Persons found guilty of violations of academic integrity may appeal the decision either of a hearing officer or the College Judicial Board to the Provost, if certain circumstances exist. In the case where an appeal is filed, the imposition of the sanction may be delayed upon the written request in the appeal letter for such action The decision on the delay is solely at the discretion of the Provost.
The following procedures apply to appeals:
- Appeals must be submitted in writing to the Office of the
Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs within seven (7) business
days from the date of the letter of finding Failure to appeal
within the allotted time will render the original decision final
- Appeals shall be decided only upon the record of the original
proceeding and upon the written letter of appeal. Reversals
of decisions will occur only as follows:
- if sanctions are found to be grossly disproportionate to the offense,
- if specific procedural errors or errors in interpretations
of College regulations were substantial, or
- if new and significant evidence becomes available which could not have been discovered by a properly conducted investigation prior to or during the original hearing.
[ return to top ]