| Academic Misconduct |
POLICY ON ACADEMIC MISCONDUCTThe University of Sioux Falls holds firmly to the conviction that personal and intellectual integrity should be fundamental values at a Christian university. For this reason, USF expects all students and employees of the university to act honestly, ethically, and fairly and to avoid activities that would compromise the academic mission of the university. To make this standard explicit, therefore, the university offers the following list of actions that it considers to be inappropriate, unethical, and harmful to the learning environment at USF.Although the following list is relatively comprehensive, it is neither complete nor uniformly enforceable. Nevertheless, by providing practical guidance for students on issues related to personal and institutional integrity at USF, the university is hoping to implement its mission "to foster academic excellence and the development of mature Christian persons. . . ." Abuse of ConfidentialityDefinition: Revealing, using, or discussing confidential information that one acquires during classroom discussions, service projects, internships, practice teaching assignments, work-study employment, or other activities sponsored by the university.Examples:
CheatingDefinition: Using or attempting to use unauthorized assistance, material, or equipment while preparing for or working on an examination or other academic assignment.Examples:
Dishonesty, Destruction or Theft of Academic Resources, Obstructing Access, or Other Acts that interfere with another person's workDefinition: Seeking to gain an unfair advantage by lying, stealing, restricting access to facilities and data, destroying or damaging resources, corrupting the research environment, or otherwise interfering with someone else's work; preventing or attempting to prevent another person from utilizing authorized assistance and resources.Examples:
FabricationDefinition: Presenting or submitting fraudulent information (i.e., information that has been altered or created for the purpose of deceiving one's audience, readers, instructors, or colleagues).Examples: · padding a bibliography by inventing sources or including sources one has not consulted
ImpersonationDefinition: Posing or presenting one's self as another person or stealing the identity of another person. (Coercing or encouraging someone to assume the identity of a third party is similarly offensive to the integrity of the university as an academically and socially responsible community.)Examples:
Improper CollaborationDefinition: Attaching one's name to a group project without: (1) an authentic understanding of the work submitted, (2) a fair and proportional contribution to the efforts of the collaborating group, and/or (3) the ability to defend or interpret individually the work submitted.Examples:
Improper Use of ComputersDefinition: Using computers to obtain or distribute improper/illegal communications; degrading, compromising, or tampering with computer files, equipment, and systems; circumventing systems that are protected; using computers to cheat.Examples:
Misrepresentation of Academic RecordsDefinition: Submitting incomplete or altered transcripts, grade reports, standardized test scores, or other records that one knows to be inaccurate or incomplete.Examples:
Multiple SubmissionDefinition: Fulfilling requirements in a second/subsequent course by submitting substantially similar work from a previous course, unless permission was obtained in advance from the second/subsequent instructor. (If the same/similar work would be submitted in courses meeting concurrently, permission must be obtained in advance and separately from each instructor.)Examples:
PlagiarismDefinition: Appropriating or imitating the words, ideas, data, and/or thoughts of others and using them as if they were one's own (i.e., without appropriate attribution).Examples:
Procedures for Handling Incidents of Academic MisconductFirst Review ProcessAs a rule, acts of academic misconduct should be addressed first at the level at which the incident occurred (e.g., course level). If an infraction occurred unwittingly or unintentionally, the faculty member may decide to handle the case as a "teachable moment." However, when a faculty member suspects that a student has with knowledge and intent violated the standards that govern academic conduct at USF, the faculty person shall document his/her suspicions and keep on file all evidence related thereto, including any material evidence, written work, written comments, e-mail, verbal exchanges, telephone calls, or any other contact he/she may have with persons involved in the case. The initial review shall be held no later than five business days after the alleged infraction was discovered. This meeting should include both the faculty member and the student whose conduct is in question. The review process should be completed as soon as possible, and the faculty member shall report his/her decision to the student in writing no later than forty-eight hours after concluding the initial review. The faculty member shall keep a copy of this letter on file and send duplicate copies to both the Senior V.P. for Academic Affairs and the Dean of StudentsSecond Review ProcessIf a student thinks the first review process was incomplete or unfair, she/he may ask the Chairperson of the Area in which the problem arose to review again the facts of the case and to provide an advisory opinion. This request must be submitted in writing to the Area Chairperson no later than five business days after the first review process was completed. Students who request a second review may also choose a person from the university community to participate in discussions and to represent their interests during the second review process.Appeals ProcessThe Academic Policies Committee (APC) for undergraduate students or the Graduate Policies Committee (GPC) for graduate students serves as the appellate body for those students seeking appeal. This appeal must be in writing and must be received by the Senior V.P. for Academic Affairs within 14 days of the original decision. The decision by the APC or GPC is final.PenaltiesBecause circumstances will vary from one instance of academic misconduct to another, there is no prescribed penalty for each offense. As an alternative to a prescribed table of penalties, faculty members may attempt to match the severity of the penalty with the egregiousness of the misconduct. The following examples suggest a range of penalties that might fit offenses of various kinds.
|