The University of Southern Indiana is an engaged learning community advancing education and knowledge, enhancing civic and cultural awareness, and fostering partnerships through comprehensive outreach programs. The campus is dedicated to a culture of civility among students, faculty, and staff. Academic integrity is vital to the campus mission and culture. The academic integrity statement serves as an educational tool, defining academic integrity, violations of academic integrity, outlining sanctions for violations, and administration of academic integrity policy.
Academic Integrity:
Academic Integrity ensures:
Failure to uphold academic integrity:
The benchmarks of any great university are high academic standards and academic integrity. Academic integrity is the hallmark of truth and honesty in an engaged university community. Students have the right and responsibility to pursue their educational goals with academic integrity. All members of the University are accountable for their actions in maintaining high standards of academic integrity. Students are responsible for completing academic requirements without action and/or material that violates academic integrity.
Cheating is intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any academic exercise.
Examples of cheating include, but are not limited to:
Interference is behavior that detracts from a safe and quality learning environment of others' educational goals.
Examples of interference include, but are not limited to:
Fabrication is creating something for the purpose of deception.
Examples of fabrication include, but are not limited to:
Plagiarism is using the work and/or ideas of another person or source as if it is your own.
Examples of plagiarism include, but are not limited to:
Academic sabotage is an intentional impediment of others' academic progress.
Examples of academic sabotage include, but are not limited to:
Facilitating academic dishonesty is intentionally or knowingly helping or attempting to help another commit an act of academic dishonesty.
Examples of facilitating academic dishonesty include, but are not limited to:
Violations in this category include professional ethical codes, the University code of conduct, ethical research protocol, and/or any professional standard communication by a professor or program.
Examples of violations of research or professional ethics and/ or standards include, but are not limited to:
Violations in this category include actions such as theft, fraud, forgery, and/or distribution of unauthorized materials.
Examples of violations include, but are not limited to:
Students found responsible of multiple Academic Integrity related violations may be referred to the appropriate academic College dean’s office for further action. Being found responsible of multiple Academic Integrity violations may result in disciplinary probation, removal from the academic program, removal from the college, and/or expulsion from the University.
A student is considered to have violated the Academic Integrity Policy when the student:
The first step of any resolution should be at the lowest unit level between the student and the faculty member involved or the appropriate administrator. The faculty member involved, or the appropriate administrator should meet with the student to discuss the alleged violation. In the event an informal resolution is reached, the faculty will notify the appropriate academic college administrator (typically an associate or assistant dean) of the violation and the outcome and provide documentation. The college administrator will create an academic integrity conduct case file and send an official informal resolution letter to the student recapping the charge and the outcome. The student will have five (5) University business days after receipt of the letter to request a formal resolution if they do not agree with the outcome of the informal resolution.
If the student and faculty member or administrator are not able to reach an informal resolution or if the student requests a formal resolution within five (5) University business days of the receipt of the letter, the faculty member or administrator should notify the appropriate academic college administrator (typically an associate or assistant dean) who will send a formal charge letter to the student.
Charged students and complainants will be given every reasonable opportunity to present their information, including questions and presentation of additional testimony, during the complaint resolution proceedings. Students have the right against self-incrimination.
The standard of proof will be “more likely than not” a University policy has been violated. That proof need only show that the facts are more likely to be so than not so. Evidence, when considered and compared with that opposed to it, has more convincing force and produces in the hearing body’s mind the belief that what is sought is more likely true than not true (Journal of College and University Law).
The student and the complainant each have the right to an advisor. The student’s advisor must be a member of the University community—current student, faculty, administrator, staff, coach, recognized University affiliate, etc.
The role of the advisor is to provide support and to assist the student in preparing for the hearing. Since the complaint resolution process is not a civil or criminal court hearing, the advisor’s role is not that of an attorney representing the student. This person may not address the hearing officer or hearing board or ask questions of any witnesses. For assistance in securing an advisor, the student contacts the Provost's Office.
Witnesses, including the student accused of violating policy, are permitted in all complaint resolution proceedings. Witnesses may present information on behalf of the student or the complainant. It is the responsibility of the student or the complainant to secure their witnesses or witness statements. Witnesses may be questioned by the hearing administrator or hearing board members, by the complainant, and by the student. Witness(es) will be asked to provide information concerning only the violation(s) being adjudicated. Since the complaint resolution process does not have the authority to subpoena, witness statements may be submitted in place of having witness(es) present during the hearing.
All hearings are closed to the public. Only individuals involved in the situation may be present. Involved individuals may include:
*Witnesses will remain only for the duration of their own testimony
Generally, within ten (10) business days of receipt of the complaint, the academic college associate or assistant dean will notify the charged student. This notification will include:
The Provost's Office is charged with the development and administration of the University of Southern Indiana's academic integrity process. Under the supervision of the Provost’s Office, the following individuals will be charged with the execution of academic integrity proceedings:
These individuals are appointed and trained by the Dean of Students or their designee to hear cases involving student conduct or academic integrity. When the University hearing board is convened, the Dean of Students/ Associate Provost of Academic Affairs or their designee will comprise the board by members of the University hearing board pool:
In cases involving potential dismissal from an academic program or suspension or expulsion from the University, the student may request a hearing before the University Hearing Board (see 5.3.B.).
Most complaints are resolved via the administrative hearing process. An administrative hearing involves the student, the hearing officer (typically the academic department chair), and any other individuals necessary to determine whether the student is responsible for a violation of University policy. The advantages of an administrative hearing include a more timely resolution of the conflict and the involvement of fewer individuals.
An administrative hearing also may become necessary for those times when the full University hearing board is unable to meet. In such instances where the University hearing board would normally be convened, the Associate Provost for Academic Affairs or their designee will conduct the administrative hearing.
No member of the hearing board or no hearing officer who has a conflicting interest in a particular case may conduct an academic integrity hearing for said situation. Hearing board members and hearing officers with conflicting interests must recuse themselves from the proceedings. Either the student or the complainant may challenge a member of the hearing board or a hearing officer in writing with the Provost’s Office.
A hearing officer or the University hearing board will reach one of the following findings at the conclusion of the hearing:
A violation of academic integrity is a serious offense subject to sanction. The University of Southern Indiana classifies violations into three levels. Classification of violations depends upon several factors, such as premeditation/ planning, dishonest or malicious intent, first-time violation/ multiple violations, the academic experience, and the assignment. The classification of violations examines offenses in the context of the situation, facts, and evidence. Therefore, academic integrity violations committed by Graduate students often are more severely penalized than the same violation committed by an inexperienced undergraduate student. Violation of academic integrity, even a first offense, places the student in jeopardy of the most severe form of sanction—expulsion from the University.
| Severity of offense | Examples | Possible Sanctions |
|---|---|---|
| Level I |
|
|
| Level II |
|
|
| Level III |
|
|
Students found responsible for a violation of the Academic Integrity Policy may appeal. An appeal from any decision, either administrative hearing or University hearing board, must be made in writing within two (2) business days following the date the hearing record notification is assigned and notice received by the student.
The University Disciplinary Appeal Form
An appeal shall be written and contain the student’s name, the date of the decision or action, and the reason(s) for the appeal. The appeal letter must specify in detail one or more of the following bases for appeal:
The Dean of the academic College in which the alleged violation occurred will review appeals.
The appellate officer will review the written letter of appeal from the student and determine if one of the bases for appeal is present. If it is, a consideration of the appeal will be granted. The appellate officer shall review:
Appeals shall be decided upon the record of the original proceedings and upon the written briefs submitted by the parties. Decisions of the hearing bodies will be given great deference by the appellate decision maker. After reviewing these materials, the appellate officer may decide to do one of the following:
A crucial point in the appeals process is the shifting of the burden of proof. At the initial hearing, the burden of proof lies with the complainant. Once there is a finding of responsibility, the burden shifts to the petitioner. The decision on the appeal will generally be made within ten (10) business days of receipt of the appeal but may take longer during University recesses or in the event of complex cases.
If the Dean upholds the original decision, the appellant may request that the Dean’s decision be reviewed by the provost or their designee if the outcome is dismissal from an academic program or suspension or expulsion from the University. Persons wishing to pursue this review must submit a request in writing to the Provost’s Office within ten (10) business days after the date of receiving written notice of the Dean’s appeal decision. Upon receipt of this written request from the appellant, the Provost’s Office will request the complete file of the complaint and the dean’s appeal evaluation.
The Provost or their designee will review all documentation and evidence that was used in support of both the original complaint outcome and the appeal decision. The Provost or their designee will have the option to uphold the prior decision all or in part, to overturn and reverse the decision all or in part, or to refer all or part back to the department chair with recommendations for further action. Within ten (10) business days after receiving the request for review, the Provost or their designee will notify the student of the outcome.
Back to Student Rights and Responsibilities Homepage
This Student Rights and Responsibilities was approved on August 14, 2023, by Dean Laurie Berry, and implemented on August 15, 2023.