Academic Conduct Policy and Procedures

Topic: Academic Honesty and Student Appeals
Approval Authority: Senate
Approval Date: June 27, 2024
Effective Date: September 1, 2024

1. Preamble

Academic integrity is fundamental to a university’s intellectual life. The mission of York University is the pursuit, preservation, and dissemination of knowledge. Central to this mission, is the relationship between teaching and learning. Honesty, fairness, and mutual respect must form the basis of this relationship in the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge in the University. York University embraces the International Centre for Academic Integrity’s definition of academic integrity as acting in all academic matters with honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility, and the courage to act in accordance with these values (ICAI, 2021).

2. Purpose
This policy establishes standards for academic honesty and academic conduct to protect academic integrity in the University and to promote learning for students who might find themselves in difficult academic conduct situations.

The Policy:

i. outlines the roles and responsibilities of the University community (including students, faculty, and staff) for practicing good scholarship;

ii. provides information on available educational resources to support the practice of good scholarship;

iii. identifies a range of actions that constitute academic misconduct;

iv. establishes sanctions for academic misconduct; and outlines the procedure and process to be followed in cases of suspected breaches of academic integrity.

3. Scope and Application

3.1 This Policy applies to allegations of breach of academic conduct committed by a student, unless otherwise stated below.

3.2 This Policy does not apply to non-degree studies in Faculties and in the School of Continuing Studies. Faculties and the School of Continuing Studies must establish policies and procedures on academic conduct for non-degree studies.

3.3 Academic units may establish a process to implement this policy within their jurisdiction. Such process must be approved by the relevant Faculty Council and Senate by way of the Senate Academic Standards, Curriculum and Pedagogy (ASCP) Committee, and the Senate Appeals Committee (SAC).

3.4 This document is to be read in conjunction with other University policies, procedures, regulations and guidelines including but not limited to the following:

i. Code of Student Rights & Responsibilities

ii. Senate Policy on Responsible Conduct of Research

3.5 In place of or in addition to procedures under this Policy, the University may also, where necessary or applicable, invoke other University policies and any civil, criminal or other remedies that may be available to it as a matter of law.

4. Definitions

In this policy:

Academic Dishonesty: means inappropriate academic conduct. It includes impersonation, plagiarism, cheating and copying the work of others.

Academic Integrity: The International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) defines Academic Integrity as comprising the fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility, and the courage to uphold these values. These values are interrelated and are the foundation of an ethical community.

Academic Misconduct: means any action or attempted action that may result in creating an unfair academic advantage for oneself or an unfair academic advantage or disadvantage for any other member or members of the academic community. This includes but is not limited to a wide range of behaviour including cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation of identity or performance, fraudulent conduct and research misconduct.

Bias: means the existence of a lack of neutrality, which may have the outcome of influencing or affecting the application of this Policy and its associated procedures in an unfair manner.

Course Director (CD): means the instructor and/or director of a course, or member of a supervisory committee.

Expulsion: means a sanction permanently terminating a person’s right both to continue as a student in the University, and to reactivate their registration.

Expulsion from the University may be imposed only by a Faculty-Level Appeals Committee/Panel, which is recognized by a Faculty Council as the responsible body to assign this sanction.

Faculty-Level Appeals Committee(s)/Panel(s): means the committee(s) or panel(s), recognized by the Faculty Council in each Faculty, as the responsible body for considering academic conduct appeals relating to any decision taken by the person of primary responsibility (PPR) or their Designate.

Faculty-Level Appeals Committees/Panels must have a minimum of three members, at least one of whom must be a student and the majority of whom must be faculty members. For the purpose of this Policy these bodies are referred to as the Faculty Appeals Committee/Panel, though individual Faculties may assign this role to bodies with a different title.

Graduate Supervisor: means the faculty member responsible for primary supervision of a graduate student’s research.
High Volume Academic Misconduct: means allegations of academic misconduct involving 10 or more students within one course where the breach is of the same nature and results in consistent outcomes.

Impartiality: means freedom from bias or prejudice, ensuring fairness and neutrality in the application of this Policy and its associated procedures.

Person of Primary Responsibility (PPR): refers to the person or panel, identified by the Dean’s Office in each Faculty, who will coordinate the implementation of this Policy in their Faculty or unit.

The PPR will normally be an Associate Dean who is knowledgeable about Academic Conduct matters. The Faculty PPR is responsible for coordinating the activities of PPR Designates, ensuring the consistent implementation of the Policy and reporting annually to Senate, as required. The University Registrar will identify a PPR who will coordinate the implementation of the Policy within the Office of the University Registrar for breaches falling under the auspices of the Office of the University Registrar.

Person of Primary Responsibility (PPR) Designate: refers to the person or group delegated authority, by the PPR for certain academic conduct matters.

A PPR Designate may include, but not limited to, an Undergraduate Program Director (UPD), Graduate Program Director (GPD), or Chair of a department.

Senate Appeals Committee: refers to the Senate Committee responsible for hearing appeals of decisions made by Faculty Appeals Committees on matters concerning academic regulations, grade re-appraisals and charges of academic misconduct.

Student: refers to any person admitted to the University who was previously, or who is currently, enrolled and/or registered at the University.

Student File: refers to the official record of a student’s academic misconduct case, kept in the student’s home Faculty.
Student Record: refers to a student’s academic history as electronically recorded in the University’s central Student Information System.

Student Transcript: refers to the official record of a student’s academic history at the University, providing a comprehensive summary of course enrolment, grades earned and academic decisions.

Support Person: refers to a person who may provide support and advice to a student involved in an academic misconduct process, and who may speak on behalf of the student. The support person may be internal or external to the University and may include legal counsel, a peer or family member.

Suspension: means a sanction of a variable but limited period during which the student’s enrolment and registration in courses at the University are prohibited. A student who is otherwise eligible to graduate, but is suspended, may not graduate until the suspension is lifted.

Suspension from the University may be imposed only by a Faculty-Level Appeals Committee/Panel, which is recognized by a Faculty Council as the responsible body to assign such sanction.

Undocumented/Unreferenced: refers to undocumented and/or unreferenced quotes, passages, sources, and other missing or improper citation of work submitted for evaluation.

University Community: means students, faculty, instructors, staff, and invigilators, all of whom have responsibility for the cultivating and upholding good academic conduct in all elements of academic life, including research, teaching, learning and administration.

5. Policy

5.1 All members of the University Community are to cultivate and maintain the highest standards of academic conduct by avoiding behaviours which create unfair academic advantages. As a clear sense of academic integrity and responsibility is fundamental to good scholarship, all members of the University are to foster and uphold the highest standards of academic integrity, and to be informed of and adhere to acceptable standards of academic conduct articulated in this policy.

5.2 Breaches

It is a breach of this Policy to engage in any form of academic misconduct, including but not limited to the range of behaviours that are listed in this section. The behaviours described below are not mutually exclusive.

a. Cheating – the attempt to gain an unfair advantage in an academic evaluation. Forms of cheating include but are not limited to:

i. Using an undocumented or unreferenced content generator, including the use of text-, image-, code-, or video-generating artificial intelligence (AI);

ii. Obtaining assistance by means of documentary, artificial intelligence technology, electronic or other aids that are restricted by the instructor (see Section 6.2.c);

iii. Obtaining a copy of all or parts of an examination, test or course material before it is officially available;

iv. Copying another person’s answer(s) to any submitted assessment including examination questions, assignments, and lab reports;

v. Consulting an unauthorized source in the completion of an assessment such as a test, quiz or exam;

vi. Deliberately disrupting an academic evaluation by any means;

vii. Changing a grade, score or a record of an assessment;

viii. Submitting the work one has done for one class or project to another class, or as another project, without the prior informed consent of the relevant instructors;

ix. Submitting work prepared in whole or in part by another person, whether for money or otherwise, and representing that work as one’s own;

x. Submitting work prepared in collaboration with a third party when collaborative work on an assessment has not been authorized by the instructor/supervisor, and goes beyond correction of grammar, idiom, punctuation, spelling and sentence mechanics;

xi. Preparing work in whole or in part that is to be submitted by another student for appraisal;

xii. Circumventing the anti-cheating safeguards when completing in-person or remote exams, tests or assignments; Representing another’s substantial editorial or compositional assistance on an assignment as the student’s own work (See 5.2.a.i and ii); and

xiii. Taking any action which can reasonably be interpreted as intending to encourage or enable others to commit an offence of academic honesty.

b. Plagiarism – the appropriation of the work of another whether published, unpublished or posted electronically, attributed or anonymous, without proper acknowledgement. This includes but is not limited to:

i. Presenting all or part of another person’s work or ideas as something one has produced where work includes, but is not restricted to, text, code, technical and creative production, paragraph and essay structure and organization, and other forms that constitute intellectual property;

ii. Paraphrasing another’s writing without proper citation;

iii. Representing another’s artistic, technical work or creation as one’s own;

iv. Reproducing without citation the student’s own work originally presented elsewhere; and

v. Failing to attribute sources, or failure to attribute sources properly.

c. Misrepresentation of personal identity or performance includes but is not limited to:

i. Submitting all or part of work, for assessment, which is stolen, donated or purchased from unsanctioned sources such as a tutor, website, or other students;

ii. Impersonating someone or having someone impersonate you to confer or gain an unauthorized academic advantage, whether in person, in writing, or electronically; and

iii. Falsifying one’s identity, academic record or other admissions-related material for the purposes of gaining admission to the University or a program, to access a course, or to reactivate one’s registration.

d. Fraudulent conduct includes but is not limited to:

i. Selling, offering for sale or distributing essays or other assignments, in whole or in part, with the reasonable expectation that these works could be submitted by a student for appraisal or used as an unauthorized resource;

ii. Submitting altered, forged or otherwise falsified medical or other certificates or documents to gain a deadline deferral, extension, postponement or other advantage under false pretences;

iii. Altering or having another person alter a grade on academic work after it has been marked;

iv. Altering, stealing or destroying the academic work of another to gain academic advantage or to disadvantage another;

v. Accessing without authorization, stealing or tampering with course-related material or with library materials; and

vi. Using the intellectual property of others for distribution, sale or indirect profit without permission or licence from the owner of rights in that material, including slides and presentation materials provided in a class or course.

e. Student Research Misconduct refers to any action or attempted action of misconduct in the collection, use or dissemination of research including but not limited to:

i. Dishonest reporting of investigative results from original research or course-based activities, either through fabrication or falsification;

ii. Taking or using the research results of others without permission or acknowledgement;

iii. Misrepresentation or improper selective reporting of research results or the methods used;

iv. Knowingly publishing information that will mislead or deceive readers, including the falsification or fabrication of data or information, the failure to give credit to collaborators as joint authors or the listing as authors of others who have not contributed to the work;

v. Disseminating data or other products of research done by, or with, a faculty member or another student for publication or presentation without permission and due acknowledgement;

vi. Using or releasing ideas or data of others, without their permission, which were given with the express expectation of confidentiality; and

vii. Listing of potential collaborators without their agreement.

f. Violation of specific departmental or course requirements – refers to academic misconduct related to requirements included in a course outline/syllabus, where such requirements are consistent with this policy.

5.3 Jurisdiction

a. Allegations of academic misconduct in a course will be dealt with by the Faculty offering the course. Where allegations of misconduct occurs under joint York programs or where allegations arise in more than one Faculty, the PPRs of the respective areas will determine which program or Faculty will have jurisdiction over the proceedings.

b. Allegations of misconduct in a graduate course or in the process of working towards a graduate degree, will be dealt with by the PPR or PPR Designate and the appropriate committee(s) of the Faculty of Graduate Studies.

c. Allegations of academic misconduct pertaining to the falsification of one’s identity, academic record or other related materials used for the purposes of gaining admission to a program or course at the University, or for reactivating registration, will be dealt with by the Office of the University Registrar.

d. Should a matter arise for which there appears to be no clear Faculty jurisdiction, the Senate Appeals Committee shall determine which Faculty or unit will have carriage of the matter.

e. Where appropriate, academic misconduct allegations will be communicated to relevant units, such as a student’s home Faculty or an academic program connected to the one in which the student is enrolled by way of cross-listed courses or joint programming.

f. If the student is suspected of having committed academic misconduct in work related to a funded research project, the Office of Research Services will be notified. In these instances, the academic misconduct process will be determined by the granting agency working with the President’s Office.

g. If the student is an employee at York and is suspected of using information or resources from their employment to commit academic misconduct, the matter may also be investigated in accordance with appropriate collective agreement and Human Resources procedures.

h. Allegations of academic misconduct may be referred to the Office of Research Ethics (ORE) for independent review at the outset of the academic misconduct process or after a finding of breach, whereas it is a requirement to refer a case of suspected breach of the Responsible Conduct of Research Policy to the ORE.

i. All findings of academic misconduct shall be communicated to the PPR and/or PPR Designate in the student’s home Faculty.

5.4 Investigations

a. Where there are reasonable grounds to believe academic misconduct has occurred, the matter will be dealt with in accordance with principles of procedural fairness and natural justice.

b. Findings of academic misconduct are made according to a balance of probabilities and not bound by formal rules of evidence applicable in courts of law.

c. The PPR may delegate authority for certain Academic Conduct matters to PPR Designates. Such delegations may vary according to the size of the Faculty, its internal governance structure, and its disciplinary standards for academic conduct.

d. Investigations of allegations of academic misconduct of a student may be conducted by a PPR, PPR Designate or appropriate Faculty or University-level body to be identified by the Senate Appeals Committee, according to associated Procedures.

e. Investigations must be initiated in a timely manner, normally within 10 business days of the alleged misconduct being brought, in writing, to the attention of the PPR or PPR Designate.

f. An investigation may encompass multiple allegations of academic misconduct involving the same student.

g. Cases of High Volume Academic Misconduct will be resolved in accordance with the process outlined in the associated Procedures.

h. Normally, a decision is in force as soon as it is officially communicated to the student.

5.5 Records and Notations of Decisions

a. A record of each finding of academic misconduct will be maintained by the student’s home Faculty and shall be kept separate from any other of the student’s records. The purpose of this record is to allow access to information on previous offence(s) and to aid in determining sanctions in the event a new case is opened. This record of offence(s) shall not be used for any other purpose.

b. Sanctions will be noted on the student’s record in the following manners:

i. sanctions noted in 5.6(a)(i) to (v) inclusive, will remain on the student record for five years or until the student graduates, whichever is less; and

ii. sanctions noted in 5.6(a)(vi) to (xv) inclusive, will remain on the internal record permanently.

c. If, at any time in the investigation or process, it is determined that misconduct did not occur, the allegation will be dismissed and all records of the allegation destroyed.

d. If a student from another institution is found to have committed academic misconduct while enrolled at York via a joint program or while on a Letter of Permission, the Office of the University Registrar shall report the finding to the student’s home institution.

e. Disclosure of a student’s record of academic misconduct will only be disclosed by the University Registrar on direction of a Faculty Dean; such direction by a Dean will be based on the advice of University Counsel.

5.6 Sanctions

a. Violations of this Policy may lead to one or more sanctions, which may be imposed for an individual violation or for combined violations. Sanctions may include, but are not limited to the following:

i. written warnings or reprimands;

ii. educational development: requirement to complete a remedial education activity such as a workshop, an academic honesty assignment and/or a related assessment. If the activity is not completed, higher-level sanctions may be applied;

iii. resubmission of the piece of academic work in which the violation was committed, for evaluation with or without a grade sanction;

iv. completion of a make-up assignment or other form of assessment;

v. a lowered or failed grade, including a grade of zero, on the assignment in question;

vi. a lowered grade in the course;

vii. failure in the course (with permanent grade of record);

viii. a permanent grade of record wherein the grade assigned shall remain as the one grade of record for the course even if the course is repeated;

ix. research-based sanctions:

• completion of a required research survey paper;
• confidential Referral to the Office of Research Ethics with appropriate disclosure; and
• denial of permission to use certain facilities of the University, including computer facilities, studios, and laboratories, for a Designated period of time.

x. suspension from the University for a definite period ranging from one term to up to six consecutive terms (two years), effective either immediately or at the conclusion of the academic session during which the sanction is imposed; students may or may not be permitted to complete courses that are ongoing at the time of a decision but will be withdrawn from any courses in which they have registered and which would begin during the suspension;

xi. expulsion from the University;

xii. withholding or rescission of a York degree, diploma or certificate, or another credential;

xiii. rescission of admission to the University;

xiv. transcript notation, which may be permanent or for a specified period of time and may be combined with any sanction, but will always be included with suspensions, expulsions and the withholding or rescission of a degree, diploma, certificate or other credential; and

xv. suspension or expulsion from the University and withholding or rescinding a degree may only be imposed by a Faculty Appeals Committee. The Faculty Appeals Committee is required to report expulsions to the Senate Appeals Committee.

xvi. When a Faculty decides to rescind a degree, diploma or certificate, or applies another penalty that may be considered negatively transformational, the decision, with supporting documentation, must be forwarded to the Senate Appeals Committee for approval on behalf of Senate.

b. Sanctions will take into account all the circumstances of the case, including but not limited to:

i. whether it is a first or subsequent offence;

ii. the relative weight of the assignment in question;

iii. student’s academic experience;

iv. the severity of the conduct;

v. whether the student accepted responsibility for the conduct;

vi. the extent to which the integrity of the student evaluation process was impaired;

vii. the extent of the harm caused to the University, one or more of its members, and/or third parties;

viii. academic misconduct by a graduate student will generally result in more severe consequences than for undergraduate students;

ix. extenuating circumstances or aggravating factors that may help explain the action taken by a student.

5.7 Appeals

a. Appeals of decisions taken by the PPR or PPR Designate in relation to this Policy may be appealed to the Faculty Appeals Committee (see definitions). The process associated with Appeals is set out in the associated Procedures.

b. Requests from students for a stay of sanction pending appeal may be addressed to the Chair of the Faculty Appeals Committee who will make a determination.

c. When no period is specified for a transcript notation, a student may petition to the relevant Faculty Appeals Committee to have the notation removed after a period of five years from the date at which the notation was entered; a transcript notation of expulsion from the University and withholding or rescinding a degree, diploma, certificate is not appealable.

d. A student may submit a petition to the relevant Faculty Appeals Committee for the destruction of permanent records of offences. Such a petition will not be considered until at least five years after the decision was taken. If the petition is granted, however, the record shall not be destroyed before the student is eligible to graduate.

e. Appeals of decisions of a Faculty Appeals Committee are considered by the Senate Appeals Committee. The process associated with such appeals is set out in the Senate Appeals Committee Procedures.

6. Roles and Responsibilities

6.1 All members of the University community (students, faculty, instructors, staff, and invigilators) have responsibility for upholding the standards of good academic conduct as set out in this policy. All members of the University have the responsibility to:

a. identify and report incidents of academic misconduct in a timely manner to the relevant unit or Faculty Dean’s office;

b. provide assistance and cooperation in investigations and adjudication processes; and

c. engage in the promotion of education and related remedial activities associated with this Policy.

6.2 It is the responsibility of students to:

a. read and become familiar with this Policy and to comply with the principles and practices of good academic conduct set out herein;

b. become familiar with related educational resources including, but not limited to those offered through the office of the Vice-Provost academic; York University libraries; York University Writing Centre, and at the Faculty level.

c. follow their instructors’ expectations for using text-, image-, code-, or video-generating artificial intelligence (AI); referencing sources; group work and collaboration, and be proactive in pursuit of clarification and resources to support these expectations;

d. take necessary precautions to prevent their work from being used by other students;

e. use course and exam software in a manner that is consistent with this policy; and

f. act in accordance with this policy and/or the Policy on Responsible Conduct of Research when conducting and reporting research.

6.3 It is the responsibility of course directors and graduate supervisors to:

a. read and become familiar with this Policy and comply with the principles of good academic conduct set out herein;

b. communicate with and support students in following instructors’ expectations for using text-, image-, code-, or video-generating AI; referencing sources; conducting group work and collaboration;

c. encourage and support students to uphold the principles and standards of good academic conduct when conducting and reporting research;

d. include a statement on academic integrity on course syllabi. Menu of possible statements will be made available on the Academic Integrity page on the Vice-Provost Academic website.

e. consider regular course revisions to cultivate an environment that supports upholding good academic conduct;

f. identify and report all suspected incidents of academic misconduct to the Faculty PPR or PPR Designate; and

g. collect or assist in the collection of necessary information; participate in an investigation and be prepared to act as a witness at any hearing of the matter in order to fulfil the duty to comply with procedural fairness and natural justice.

7. Review

This policy will be reviewed every five years or at such shorter interval as Senate deems necessary.

8. Procedures

8.1 Where there are reasonable grounds to believe academic misconduct has occurred, the matter will be dealt with in accordance with principles of procedural fairness and natural justice:

a. the student will first be informed by the PPR or PPR Designate of the allegations against them and then will normally have access to any available evidence against them;

b. the student will be informed of their right to have a Support Person throughout the process;

c. the student will be provided with an opportunity to respond to the allegations and evidence against them;

d. while admissibility is not governed by the formal rules of evidence, appropriate weight will be given to evidence based on its credibility or reliability; and

e. the student will have the right to request leave to appeal a decision.

8.2 Reporting Suspicion of Academic Misconduct

a. Any person who believes academic misconduct has occurred has a responsibility to report the matter to:

i. the Course Director of the course in which the misconduct has occurred, who will in turn undertake to report the matter to the Faculty PPR or PPR Designate, or

ii. the PPR or PPR Designate of the Faculty or unit in which the misconduct occurred; if not course related, the PPR or PPR Designate will ensure the matter is reported to the appropriate University office;

iii. the PPR or PPR Designate in the Faculty of Graduate Studies on matters involving academic misconduct of a graduate student that are not course related. The PPR or PPR Designate in the Faculty of Graduate Studies will undertake to inform the relevant graduate supervisor or graduate program;

iv. the Office of the University Registrar in the case of suspected falsification of one’s identity, academic record or other admissions-related material for the purposes of gaining admission to the University, a program or course, or reactivating registration.

8.3 Responsibility for Initiating and Conducting an Investigation

a. In course-related cases of suspected academic misconduct, the responsibility for the decision to conduct an investigation lies with the PPR or PPR Designate, who will invite the course director (CD) to provide evidence and to attend any subsequent hearing on the matter.

b. In cases of suspected falsification of one’s identity, academic record or other admissions-related material for the purposes of gaining admission to the University, a program or course or reactivating registration, the PPR or PPR Designate in the Office of the University Registrar will initiate and conduct an investigation.

c. In cases where the PPR or PPR Designate do not have clear jurisdiction, the Senate Appeals Committee will identify an appropriate Faculty or University-level body to initiate and conduct an investigation.

8.4 Procedures for Initiating and Conducting an Investigation

a. Where there are reasonable grounds to believe there has been a breach of this Policy and an investigation is being initiated, the responsible authority as outlined in Section 8.3 will notify the PPR or PPR Designate (if the responsible authority is not the PPR or PPR Designate).

b. Upon receipt of notification, the PPR or PPR Designate will:

i. post a block on enrolment activity in the course, effectively barring the student from dropping the course, withdrawing from the University or obtaining transcripts. A request by a student for a transcript to be sent to another institution or to a potential employer will be processed but, if the student is found to have performed academic misconduct, the recipients of the transcript will be provided automatically with an updated transcript;

ii. notify the PPR or PPR Designate in any other relevant unit, as required, such as a student’s home Faculty or an academic program connected to the one in which the student is enrolled by way of cross-listed courses or joint programming, normally on the same day the student is notified.

c. Once it is determined that there are reasonable grounds to begin an investigation and a block on enrollment is initiated, the individual undertaking the investigation (PPR or PPR Designate) will notify the student in writing (by email or by registered mail) at the first available opportunity, normally within five business days of the block on enrollment, communicating:

i. the allegation and a summary of the evidence available and the possibility that a sanction will be imposed;

ii. that they will not be permitted to withdraw from the course in question and that a hold will be placed on their record;

iii. their right to provide a response to the allegations in writing or in person, or to discuss the allegations with the investigator (in person, by phone or videoconference), and if a response is not received within 10 business days, the PPR or PPR Designate may continue and conclude the investigation without the student. The PPR or PPR Designate may extend the student’s response timeline beyond the 10 business days if/as deemed necessary.

iv. their right to be assisted by a Support Person (if they choose), who may provide support and advice and speak on behalf of the student; and

v. that they will be provided any additional evidence that becomes available over the course of the investigation and afforded the opportunity to respond.

vi. that the student, or the PPR or PPR Designate, may elevate the matter to the Faculty Appeals Committee for review of the outcome of the investigation

d. If the student does not provide a response within 10 business days, the PPR or PPR Designate may continue and conclude the investigation. The PPR or PPR Designate may extend the student’s response timeline beyond the 10 business days if/as deemed necessary.

e. The PPR or PPR Designate will assess all available evidence, including but not limited to:

i. reviewing documents and other records, including a written or verbal response from the student, if provided;

ii. reviewing audio or video recordings or photographs;

iii. reviewing evidence produced by plagiarism or cheating detection software;

iv. interviewing the student;

v. interviewing witnesses; and

vi. examining physical evidence.

f. Once the investigation is complete, the PPR or PPR Designate will determine, on a balance of probabilities, whether a breach occurred.

g. Where the PPR or PPR Designate believes the evidence gathered points to academic conduct grave enough to warrant a suspension, expulsion, or other penalties that are negatively transformational, the PPR or PPR Designate shall refer the matter in the first instance to the Faculty Appeals Committee for review. In such instances, the Faculty Appeals Committee process will take effect, otherwise the process outlined hereunder 8.4 will be continued by the PPR or PPR Designate.

h. If it is determined that a breach occurred, the PPR or PPR Designate will initiate a check for past offences.

i. The PPR or PPR Designate will take into account the circumstances of the case in deciding appropriate sanction(s) in accordance with the Policy.

j. The decision will be provided to the student in writing (sent by email or registered mail), and will include the following:

i. a summary of the investigation process including relevant timelines;

ii. a summary of the key evidence obtained during the investigation, including the response of the student to the allegation;

iii. an indication of which key evidence was considered credible and reliable;

iv. the decision reached on a balance of probabilities and the reasons for the decision;

v. the sanction, if any, being imposed including a rationale for the sanction;

vi. if a sanction is being imposed, information regarding the student’s right to appeal and path for appeal; and

vii. a request that the student acknowledge receipt of the decision via email contact information provided in the decision letter or email sent to the student.

k. Absent the receipt of student acknowledgement within 10 business days, the decision will stand. The PPR or PPR Designate may extend the student’s response timeline beyond the 10 business days if/as deemed necessary.

l. The decision will be provided to the PPR in the student’s home Faculty if it differs from the Faculty or unit in which the investigation was conducted.

8.5 High Volume Academic Misconduct

a. The PPR or PPR Designate will investigate at least five of the alleged breaches of misconduct using the procedures set out in section 8.4.

b. If the PPR or PPR Designate concludes on a balance of probabilities after a minimum of five investigations, that academic misconduct of the same nature occurred in the majority of the cases, the decision may be applied to the other students implicated in the investigation.

c. The PPR or PPR Designate shall communicate the decision to the students in writing (sent by email or registered mail), addressing the items set out in Section 8.4(j). The names of any other students involved will not be disclosed.

d. Upon receipt of the decision, the student may request, within 10 business days, that their case be reviewed individually by the PPR or PPR Designate. The PPR or PPR Designate may reassess the evidence and, if the original decision is confirmed, will confirm the original sanction.

8.6 Records of Academic Misconduct Findings

a. Records of academic misconduct findings will be kept in accordance with Section 5.5 of the Policy.

b. In cases where a finding results in a sanction of transcript notation, the following language will be used:

i. For the withholding or recission of a degree: “York degree withheld/rescinded by the University on (date of decision).”

ii. For suspension from the University: “Suspended by the University for academic misconduct for ___ months effective (date suspension starts).”

iii. For limitations on students’ registration: “Registration limited by the University for (dates of the terms for which limits were applied).”

iv. For removal from the student’s program of study: “Removed from program of study by the University for academic misconduct for ___ months effective (date suspension starts).”

v. For expulsion: “Expelled by the University for academic misconduct (effective date).”

vi. If an imposed sanction requires an alteration of a student’s academic record, a copy of the decision will be sent from the Faculty Dean’s office to the Office of the University Registrar for implementation. The decision will be retained by the Office of the University Registrar for a time consistent with Section 5.5 of the Policy.

8.7 Appeals

a. Appeals relating to any decision taken by a PPR or PPR Designate in relation to this Policy shall be considered by the Faculty Appeals Committee.

b. If the student wishes to appeal the decision, the student must submit a notice of appeal to the Faculty Appeals Committee within 10 business days of receiving the decision.

c. Upon receipt of a notice of appeal, the Faculty Appeals Committee will notify the PPR or PPR Designate and give them an opportunity to submit a response to the notice of appeal. The PPR or PPR Designate shall normally respond within 10 business days.

d. All documents considered by the PPR or PPR Designate will be considered by the Faculty Appeals Committee and a copy of the evidence, as set out in Section 8.4(e), will be given to the student. Both the student and the PPR or PPR Designate may submit additional supporting documentation by no later than two business days prior to the hearing.

e. The Faculty Appeals Committee will provide the student with a copy of the Committee’s procedures.

f. All parties will receive not less than 10 business days notice of the time and location of the hearing, which may be held in person or by videoconference.

g. All parties must inform the Faculty Appeals Committee of their intention to call witnesses and file names of these witnesses at least five business days prior to the hearing.

h. Only the Faculty Appeals Committee members and Secretary, PPR or PPR Designate, the student and their Support Person, and the witnesses may be present at a hearing. The faculty member(s) or person(s) who reported the academic misconduct or other persons with knowledge of the allegation may attend as witness(es). Committee members are expected to act with impartiality (as defined in section 4).

i. Witnesses shall be present at the hearing only while testifying, but exceptions may be made at the discretion of the Faculty Appeals Committee. The Chair of the Committee has full authority to assure an orderly and expeditious hearing. Any person who disrupts a hearing, or who fails to adhere to the rulings of the Committee may be required to leave. Witnesses will be reminded about the expectation of confidentiality.

j. If a student fails to appear at a hearing, the hearing may proceed, and the Faculty Appeals Committee may issue a decision. The Committee may postpone the hearing if the student can establish, in advance of the hearing and to the satisfaction of the Committee, that there are circumstances beyond their control which make an appearance impossible or unfairly burdensome.

k. Electronic recordings of hearings may be permitted if all parties agree. The Secretary of the Faculty Appeals Committee is responsible for coordinating and maintaining, within the Faculty Dean’s office, the sole electronic record of the hearing.

l. The Faculty Appeals Committee shall consider the facts and circumstances of the case and determine, on a balance of probabilities, whether a breach has occurred and/or whether the sanction imposed by the PRR or PRR Designate is appropriate.

m. If the Faculty Appeals Committee confirms the original finding, it may maintain the original sanction, or it may change the sanction.

n. If a sanction is imposed that requires an alteration of a student’s academic record, a copy of the decision of the Faculty Appeals Committee will be sent to the Office of the University Registrar for the sanction to be implemented. The decision will be retained by the Office of the University Registrar for a time consistent with Section 5.5 of the Policy.

o. A record of the proceeding will be kept in the student’s file to be housed in the student’s home Faculty, Dean’s office. The Record of the Proceeding shall include:

i. the allegation of academic misconduct and all documentary evidence filed with the Faculty Appeals Committee;

ii. the notice of the Hearing; and

iii. the decision of the Faculty Appeals Committee.

p. The Faculty Appeals Committee Secretary is responsible for ensuring all relevant records of the proceeding are included in the file and filed appropriately.

q. The student may subsequently appeal the decision of the Faculty Appeals Committee to the Senate Appeals Committee (SAC) on the grounds for appeal set out in the Senate Appeals Committee Procedures.

Legislative History: Approved by Senate 27 June 2024
Date of Next Review: June 2029
Policies Superseded by this Policy: Senate Academic Honesty Policy (as of September 1, 2024)
Related Policies, Procedures and Guidelines: