POLICY ON ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT
The 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 Confidentiality
Definition:
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:
- discussing confidential information
about another person (e.g., private information about a person's health,
grades, financial affairs, or conduct requiring disciplinary action)
without authorization or the other person's permission, even if the
discussion is held in a private place or the person being discussed is a
close friend
- using or threatening to use
confidential information about another person to influence her/his
participation in classroom or campus activities
Cheating
Definition: Using or
attempting to use unauthorized assistance, material, or equipment while
preparing for or working on an examination or other academic assignment.
Examples:
- using a note card or "crib
notes" on an exam (unless expressly authorized by the instructor)
- copying another person's answers or
reading another person's work during an exam
- whispering or talking with another
person about the content of an exam before everyone has finished working
on the exam
- seeking the details of an examination
before taking the exam (unless such information is made public by the
instructor)
- altering a graded document and later
contesting its scoring
Dishonesty,
Destruction or Theft of Academic Resources, Obstructing Access, or Other Acts
that interfere with another person's work
Definition: 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:
- stealing, destroying, disabling
equipment necessary for academic research or instruction
- stealing, destroying, damaging, or
corrupting the products of academic work (e.g., tests, projects, lab
reports, research papers, data files)
- deleting or tampering with another
person's data or content in a project, test, or assignment
- attempting to diminish another person's
performance by creating disturbances or distractions during a presentation
or assignment
- seeking special consideration by
arranging/feigning loss of academic work through theft, tampering, damage,
or destruction
- obstructing another person's work by
"losing" data, concealing evidence, hiding information or
materials, lying, or creating any ruse that would prevent one person/group
from obtaining equal access to resources that other people/groups can use
freely .
Fabrication
Definition:
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
- padding an assignment or project by
falsifying, altering, or inventing evidence (i.e., data, references,
citations) to support one's argument or conclusions .
Impersonation
Definition: 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:
- taking a test or exam for another
student
- attending class or claiming attendance
for another student
- using another person's identification
card to take advantage of university services (e.g., checking out library
materials) without his/her permission
- submitting for course credit work that
was created by another person
- asking a third party to impersonate a
supervisor, teacher, doctor, parent, employer, or other person whose
report might help or hurt a person's evaluation
Improper
Collaboration
Definition:
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:
- claiming or submitting for credit
another person's work in a collaborative exercise
- including, citing, summarizing, or
paraphrasing another person's contribution without a proper understanding
of the other person's contribution, idea, or source
- including one's name on a project
without contributing significantly to its development
- pooling answers and working collectively
on a test or project when individual work is required
Improper
Use of Computers
Definition: 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:
- downloading or transmitting libelous
material, obscene or offensive messages, or threats
- using computers to harass, intimidate,
or make trouble for another person
- hacking, circumventing protection codes,
obtaining/using another person's password without permission, invading
protected files
- deleting, changing, or introducing
erroneous information into grade records, confidential files, or another
user's files (whether protected or not)
- constructing viruses or knowingly
introducing viruses into a system; attempting to halt the system or to
compromise its performance
- stealing software or copying programs
and data without written permission
- cheating, obtaining/using unauthorized
material, supplying/communicating unauthorized information to another user
- using a stand-in respondent or
substitute participant in an online course
Misrepresentation
of Academic Records
Definition:
Submitting incomplete or altered transcripts, grade reports, standardized test
scores, or other records that one knows to be inaccurate or incomplete.
Examples:
- failing to provide the Admissions Office
or the Registrar's Office with relevant reports or records from all
schools previously attended
- tampering with official records (e.g.,
changing grades) or inventing facsimiles of official records
- stealing or borrowing another person's
records and using them as if they were one's own
Multiple
Submission
Definition:
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:
- using the same paper or project in a
second course after it was used already to meet requirements in a previous
course
- altering a paper or project slightly,
but using essentially the same product (i.e., concepts, ideas, evidence,
supporting data, rhetorical devices, conclusions) to fulfill requirements
in separate courses
Plagiarism
Definition:
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:
- purchasing, borrowing, or stealing
material from published or unpublished sources (e.g., from the Internet,
books/articles, other students) and submitting it as one's own work
- failing to acknowledge the sources
for material or ideas in either written or oral presentations; failing to
use quotation marks, parenthetical documentation, and/or notes
appropriately
- inserting into one's writing any
material, even a small portion, written by someone else and claiming it as
one's own product
- using paraphrased or summarized material
without acknowledging the source; acknowledging the source of a paraphrase
or summary but using too many words and phrases from the original source .
Procedures for Handling Incidents of Academic Misconduct
First Review Process
As 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 Students
Second Review Process
If 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 Process
The 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.
Penalties
Because 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.
- requiring a student to rewrite or redo
an assignment
- giving a grade of F on a project, test,
or assignment
- issuing a disciplinary warning
- requiring a student to write a paper
about the offense
- giving a grade of F for a course
- putting a student on disciplinary
probation
- requiring a student to make restitution
for damaged data or equipment
canceling a student's
campus computer privileges or access to the campus computer network
|