Academic Integrity Policy


Preamble: 

Eastern Kentucky University is a community of shared academic values, foremost of which is a strong commitment to intellectual honesty, honorable conduct, and respect for others. In order to meet these values, students at Eastern Kentucky University are expected to adhere to the highest standards of academic integrity. These standards are embodied in this policy, which all students shall pledge to uphold by signing the Eastern Kentucky University Honor Code. By honoring and enforcing this Academic Integrity Policy, the University community affirms that it will not tolerate academic dishonesty.  This policy defines the various forms of academic dishonesty, and it outlines the consequences for each.  Additionally, this policy gives the method for appealing an instructor's belief that some form of academic dishonesty has in fact occurred.

Statement

Academic Integrity (AI) is a fundamental value for the Eastern Kentucky University community of students, faculty, and staff. It should be clearly understood that academic dishonesty and incidents of academic dishonesty will have serious consequences. Anyone who knowingly assists in any form of academic dishonesty shall be considered as responsible as the student who accepts such assistance and shall be subject to the same sanctions. Academic dishonesty can occur in different forms, some of which include cheating, plagiarism, and fabrication.

Pledge

Signing the Eastern Kentucky University Honor Code.  

The AI Pledge, below, is administered through the Terms of Usage for EKU Direct.

I hereby affirm that I understand, accept, and will uphold the responsibilities and stipulations of the Eastern Kentucky University Honor Code and Academic Integrity Policy.

Procedures for Dealing with Academic Integrity Cases:

Step 1 - When a Violation is Suspected

If an incident of alleged violation of the AI Policy is suspected, any member of the EKU community can initiate the process of review by reporting the incident, directly to the responsible faculty/staff member. The responsible faculty/staff member may elect to conduct his/her own review of the allegations (Option A) or may elect for the matter to be referred to the Academic Integrity Office (Option B).  Prior to selecting either option, the faculty/staff member should (1) contact the AI Office to determine if the student has a prior violation, and (2) inform the appropriate Department Chair of the incident.

If a mid-term or final grade is to be reported to the University during the pendency of the academic integrity procedures, the responsible faculty member shall report an "incomplete" for the involved student until the final resolution of the matter.

Option A: The Faculty/Staff Member Conducts Review

If the responsible faculty/staff member chooses to continue the review of the allegations autonomously, the faculty/staff member should obtain and assess the applicable information in determining whether a violation of the AI policy has occurred. If the faculty/staff member determines that an AI policy violation has occurred, a notification of the violation must be made to the Office of Academic Integrity for recordkeeping within 10 academic days of the alleged violation. At this point, the faculty/staff also notifies the student in writing of the allegation, the sanction, AND the right to contest the allegation and sanction according to the AI Policy procedure. If the student accepts responsibility for the violation and the sanction in writing, the case is closed. There is no appeal from this decision. Upon determination of responsibility, the Assistant Director for Student Conduct and Community Standards, for Academic Integrity (Assistant Director for AI) will enter the reported data in the database.  

Note: The faculty/staff involved in Step 1 should request information from the Assistant Director for AI regarding the student’s previous violations of the AI Policy prior to determining a sanction in this particular case.

If the student does not accept responsibility and chooses to contest the allegation and/or sanction, the faculty/staff member will refer the case to the AI Office, within five academic days of the meeting.  The Assistant Director for AI will meet with the student to discuss the allegation and/or sanctions and the right to contest these.  If the student chooses not to contest the allegation and sanction, the case is closed.  There is no appeal from this decision.  Notification of the violation is made by the AI Office into the database for record keeping.  If the student contests the allegation and/or sanction, the AI Office will schedule a hearing, as soon as practicable, with the specific College Academic Integrity Committee from which the incident occurred.

Option B: Faculty/Staff Member Refers the Case to AI Office

If a faculty/staff member chooses to refer the case directly to the AI Office, the faculty/staff member will send all information concerning the matter to the AI Office and the Assistant Director for AI will meet with the student to discuss the alleged violation. If the student chooses not to contest the allegation and sanction, the sanction is imposed; the case is closed. There is no appeal from this decision.  If the student contests the allegation and/or sanction, the AI Office will schedule a hearing, as soon as practicable, with the specific College Academic Integrity Committee from which the incident occurred.

Step 2 - College Academic Integrity Committee Hearing

At the College AI Hearing, both the student and the faculty/staff member will present their information. Both the student and faculty/staff member are permitted to bring witnesses with relevant testimony to the hearing in person.  At the College AI Hearing the faculty/staff member will only function as a witness and shall not serve in an adversarial capacity.  The committee members will review all of the information presented and then deliberate in private.  At the discretion of the Chair of the Committee, the proceeding may be extended to an additional meeting.  At this level of hearing and continuing throughout the process, the student has the option of having a Peer Advisor present.  Absent exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the student as determined by the Chair of the Committee, if the student who has been notified of the hearing fails to appear, the proceeding may take place in his or her absence; the Committee's decision will be binding.  If the Committee determines that the student has violated the AI Policy, before the sanctioning stage of the hearing, the Assistant Director for AI will provide the Committee information regarding whether the student has any previous AI Policy violations recorded or sanctions imposed.  The Committee will deliberate again in private in order to determine the appropriate sanction for this violation.  The Chair will announce the decision of the Committee, within five academic days, after the close of the hearing.

Step 3 - Appealing the Decision of the College Academic Integrity Committee

A student can appeal the decision of the College AI Committee to the University AI Committee. This appeal can only be made based upon irregularities in procedure, new evidence not available for the first hearing, or punishment not consistent with the violation. The student will notify, in writing, the AI Office of their request to appeal to the University AI Committee within five academic days of the College AI Committee’s decision, and a meeting of the University AI Committee will be scheduled as soon as practicable.

Step 4 - University Academic Integrity Committee Hearing

At the University AI Committee appeal review meeting, the Committee members will consider all the written information supplied by the student, and the material considered by the College AI Committee, including any response from the faculty/staff member. The Committee can modify or set aside the applied response including sanction, refer the case back to the College AI Committee, or uphold the decision. The decision of the University AI Committee is final, unless the Committee determines that suspension or expulsion is the appropriate sanction to be imposed.  The Chair will announce the decision of the committee, within five academic days, after the close of the hearing.

Steps 5 through 8

The following steps will ONLY be necessary if it is determined that the student may face the sanctions of suspension or expulsion for the alleged AI Policy violation. According to KRS 164.370, the Eastern Kentucky University Board of Regents may delegate its authority to suspend or expel a student.  The Board has designated the Student Disciplinary Council with the authority to suspend or expel a student.

KRS 164.370 provides that: "Each Board of Regents may invest the faculty or a committee of the faculty and students with the power to suspend or expel any student for disobedience to its rules, or for any other contumacy, insubordination, or immoral conduct. In every case of suspension or expulsion of a student the person suspended or expelled may appeal to the Board of Regents. The Board of Regents shall prescribe the manner and the mode of procedure on appeal. The decision of the Board of Regents shall be final."

Step 5 - Suspension, Expulsion, or "FX" Grade Recommendation

If the College AI Committee or University AI Committee or Assistant Director for AI recommends that the sanction of suspension or expulsion is appropriate or if the "FX" grade is recommended as a sanction for an AI Policy violation, the matter must be referred to the Student Disciplinary Council.  As soon as practicable, the AI Office will schedule a hearing before the Student Disciplinary Council.

Step 6 - Student Disciplinary Council Hearing

At the Student Disciplinary Council hearing, both the student and the faculty/staff member will present their information.  At the Student Disciplinary Council hearing, the faculty/staff member will function only as a witness and shall not serve in any adversarial capacity.  The Council will review all of the information presented and then deliberate in private.  Absent exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the student as determined by the Chair of the Council, if the student who has been notified of the hearing fails to appear, the proceeding may take place in his or her absence, and the Committee's decision will be binding.

If the Council determines that the student has violated the AI policy, before the sanctioning stage of the meeting, the Assistant Director for AI will provide the Council information whether the student has any previous AI policy violations recorded and sanctions imposed.  The Council will deliberate again in private in order to determine the appropriate sanction for this violation.  The Chair will announce the decision of the Council to those present at the conclusion of the hearing.

Step 7 - Appealing the Decision of the Student Disciplinary Council

If the student chooses to contest the allegation and/or sanction, the student can appeal to the Provost. The student will notify, in writing, the Office of the Provost of his or her request and grounds for such request, within five academic days of the Student Disciplinary Council’s decision. An appeal to the Provost can only be based upon irregularities in procedure, new evidence not available for the first hearing, or punishment not consistent with the violation. The Provost will render a decision, in writing, within ten academic days of receipt of the appeal.

Step 8 - Appealing the Decision of the Provost

If the Provost upholds the decision of the Student Disciplinary Council, and if the student chooses to contest the allegation and/or sanction, the student can appeal to the Board of Regents. The student will notify, in writing, the AI Office of his or her request and grounds for such request, within five academic days of the Provost’s decision. As soon as practicable, the AI Office will submit the appeal to the Board secretary.  An appeal to the Board of Regents can only be based upon irregularities in procedure, new evidence not available at the first hearing, or punishment not consistent with the violation; the decision of the Board of Regents is final. Go to top

Definitions:

Assistant Director for Student Conduct and Community Standards (Assistant Director for AI)

A faculty member who coordinates the implementation of the EKU Academic Integrity Policy. The Assistant Director for AI does not take part in any actual hearings, but is available to answer procedural questions. 

Cheating

Cheating is an act or an attempted act of deception by which a student seeks to misrepresent that he or she has mastered information on an academic exercise.  Cheating includes, but is not limited to, the following:

·         Giving or receiving assistance not authorized by the instructor or university representative

·         Participating in unauthorized collaboration on an academic exercise

·         Using unapproved or misusing electronic devices or aids during an academic exercise

·         Turning in substantial similar papers/assignments as other student(s)

College Academic Integrity Committee

The College Academic Integrity Committee is comprised of 5 members (1 faculty from the department where the incident arose, 2 faculty from the college at large, and 2 students from the college at large but not from the department where the incident arose.) If this case involves a graduate student, at least one of the students on the Committee will be a graduate student. One member, elected by the Committee, will serve as Chair. The College may form a standing committee for this purpose.

Day

In this document, day refers to a business day.  If the academic day occurs on a weekend, holiday, or University break or if the University is closed due to inclement weather, an action required within a specified number of academic days shall be due on the first day practicable on which University is open.

Fabrication

Fabrication is a form of deception and occurs when a student misrepresents written or verbal information in an academic exercise.  Fabrication includes, but is not limited to, the following:

·         Citation of information not taken from the source indicated.  This may include the incorrect documentation of secondary source materials.

·         Listing sources in a bibliography not directly used in the academic exercise

·         Submission in a paper, thesis, lab report, practicum log, or other academic exercise of falsified, invented, or fictitious data or evidence or deliberate and knowing concealment or distortion of the true nature origin or function of such data or evidence.

·         Submitting as your own any academic exercise (verbal, written, electronic, or artistic work) prepared totally or in part by another person

"FX" Notation

"FX" grade denotes failure in the course due to academic dishonesty.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism occurs when a student represents work taken from another source as his or her own.  It is imperative that a student give credit to information, words, ideas, and images that are integrated into his or her own work.  Acknowledgement of a source of information in any form should consist of complete, accurate, and specific references and, if verbatim statements are included, quotation marks as well.  Examples of plagiarism include, but are not limited to, the following:

·         Using words, ideas, or images from another source (including the Internet), whether in quotation marks or not, without giving credit to that source in the form a bibliographic citation

·         Using facts, statistics, or other supporting materials that are not clearly common knowledge without acknowledgement of the source

·         Plagiarism also includes presenting one’s own previously published work as new work now being submitted (self-plagiarism)

Provost

Refers to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs or the Associate Provost for Academic and Faculty Affairs.

Silent Advisor

A student who allegedly violates a policy has the right to have an attorney present at any proceeding at Step 2 and continuing through Step 8. The attorney is not permitted to speak in any hearing through this process.

Student Disciplinary Council

The Student Disciplinary Council is comprised of five members, two faculty, two staff, a student chosen from a body of 12 faculty, 12 staff and 3 students named by the President of the University. One member, elected by the Council for the hearing, serves as Chair.

Triviality

A case may be dismissed if it is found to be trivial. A trivial case is one with no possible consequences to a matter of legitimate concern of the academic community or one with no tendency to undermine trust within the community.

University Academic Integrity Committee

The University Academic Integrity Committee is comprised of six members. At the beginning of the academic year, there will be two names (1 faculty, 1 student) from each college and one name (faculty/staff) from the Library submitted to the President’s office for appointment to the Committee. For each AI hearing, the College from which the incident arose will have both the faculty and student serve as members of this specific Committee. The remaining members of the Committee will be randomly drawn from two separate categories in order for the make-up of the Committee to be three faculty and three students. One member, elected by the Committee, will serve as Chair. An appeal to this Committee can only be based upon irregularities in procedure, new evidence not available for the first hearing, or sanctions not consistent with the violation.

University

Eastern Kentucky University

Responsibilities:

Assistant Director for AI

The Assistant Director for AI is responsible for maintaining all records of all incidents involving the EKU AI policy.

College Academic Integrity Committee

The Committee is responsible for determining the facts, and, if the student is found to have violated the AI policy, the Committee must determine the appropriate sanction.  A minimum of 3 Committee members must be present.  To determine that a violation has occurred, 3 of the 5 Committee members must agree.  To determine the sanction, 3 of the 5 Committee members must agree.

University Academic Integrity Committee

The Committee is responsible for hearing appeals from the College AI Committee of AI policy sanctions.  It can modify or set aside the applied sanction, refer the case back to the College AI Committee, or uphold the decision.  A minimum of 4 Committee members must be present.  To determine that a violation has/has not occurred, 4 of the 6 Committee members must agree.  To determine the sanction, 4 of the 6 Committee members must agree.  The decision of the University AI Committee is final, unless the Committee determines suspension or expulsion or the awarding of the "FX" grade is the appropriate sanction to be imposed.

Violations of the Policy:

Minimum Sanction

The standard minimum sanction for an AI Policy violation shall be the assignment of an "F" for the test, assignment or activity in which an incident of academic dishonesty occurred.  At the discretion of the faculty member, the student may be allowed to retake or rewrite the test, assignment or activity.  A student assigned an "F" for the course will not be permitted to drop or withdraw from the course.  Successful completion of the Academic Integrity Education Program 1 on Blackboard.

Sanctions

In addition to the minimum sanctions for an AI Policy violation, other appropriate educational sanctions may be assigned; these sanctions may be given even if this is the first violation of the AI Policy.  Such sanctions could include, but are not limited to, the following:

·         Removal from the course

·         Educational sanctions

·         Community service

·         Precluded from graduating with Honors

·         An assigned "F" for the course

·         "FX" notation on transcript*

·         Suspension

·         Expulsion

*Note:  Per the Academic Integrity Policy 4.1.3, Eastern Kentucky University's Student Disciplinary Council is the only body authorized to make a permanent "FX" notation on transcript.

"FX" Notation

The "FX" grade is a final and permanent notation on the student's transcript.  The "FX" grade can only be imposed by the Student Disciplinary Council.  Upon exhaustion of the appeals process set forth in the Academic Integrity Policy, 4.1.3, the notation cannot be removed.  A student may retake the course where the "FX" notation is applied, and the new grade will replace the "FX" in the calculation of the student's GPA.  The "FX" notation, however, will remain on the student's transcript. Go to top

Open