Academic Senate

Allegations of Misconduct in Courses Below is an overview of the stages in the investigation and review process. Initiation of Cases (Faculty Member) Communication with the student regarding suspected misconduct and documentation of actions via the Graduate Academic Integrity Violation Referral Review Stage 1 (Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs)

• Initial Administrative Review

Review Stage 2 (Graduate Academic Integrity Committee-GAIC)

• Hearings for cases that are complex, egregious, and/or repeated cases of academic misconduct
• Appeals of decisions made at Review Stage 1

Review Stage 3 (Graduate Council)

• Appeals of primary decisions made at Review Stage 2

(Am 6 Dec 22)

Initiation of Cases If a Faculty member suspects that an act of academic misconduct has occurred, the Faculty member must promptly communicate with the student regarding the allegation and the information upon which it is based; the notification process must occur within 28 calendar days from the discovery of the alleged act. The Faculty member may make a request for an extension of time through the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs. If the discovery is made by a student, teaching assistant, reader, grader or tutor that individual should immediately communicate with the Faculty member in charge of the course, so that the Faculty member in charge can proceed with the investigation. Communication with the student can either be in writing or in the form of an in-person consultation. Written communication should be sent to the student’s University e-mail address. Consultations should be conducted in a manner that respects the student's privacy. When multiple students are involved, the Faculty member should communicate with each student separately. At the consultation, the Faculty member or the student may request the presence of the University Ombuds. The student must be given the opportunity to respond to the allegation of academic misconduct. Students will be given 14 calendar days to respond after the initial communication of the allegation. After conferring with the student and/or considering the student’s response, the Faculty member may determine that there has been no academic misconduct, in which case the Faculty member may dismiss the allegation and take no further action. If the Faculty member determines that it is more likely than not that the student committed an act of academic misconduct, regardless of the student’s intent to engage in misconduct or admission of responsibility, the case will be forwarded to the Associate Dean of Graduate Academic Affairs to begin initial administrative review. The Graduate Academic Integrity Violation Referral must be submitted and accompanied by all original documentation supporting the charge (including a copy of the course syllabus and other written communication that addresses academic integrity standards and expectations for the course, exam, or research compliance). Faculty members who will not be available to participate fully in resolving allegations (e.g., Individuals holding part-time or temporary appointments, those on sabbatical or other leave, or those leaving University employment) must provide a copy of all documentation to the immediate supervising administrator: department chair, program director, center director, or dean of school, who will serve as a proxy for the Faculty member to conclude the case. In the instance of research non-compliance, a university official responsible for research compliance may take on the role of a Faculty member and follow the same procedures.

Student Admits Responsibility If the student admits responsibility for the alleged academic misconduct, the Faculty member may immediately impose an appropriate academic sanction. Academic sanctions are appropriate outcomes of assignment grades, course grades, or exam results. For alleged research non-compliance, the Faculty member or university official may immediately impose an appropriate sanction. Sanctions for research non-compliance may include temporary suspension from the lab, halting of all research activity, publication delay or retraction, additional training, or NC grade in research units. The Faculty member or university official must document the case and the sanction on the Graduate Academic Integrity Violation Referral and send the form to the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs. The Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs will determine an appropriate educational/disciplinary sanction for the student to complete in addition to what has already been imposed within 14 calendar days of receiving the referral. The goal of the sanction is to improve the student’s knowledge regarding Academic Integrity for graduate students.

Student Does Not Admit Responsibility If the student does not admit responsibility, the Faculty member must note on the referral form the appropriate academic sanction if the student is found responsible. Academic sanctions are appropriate outcomes of assignment grades, course grades, or exam results. The Faculty member will evaluate the disputed assignment or examination on its merits and note the grade to be assigned if the student is not found responsible. If grades are due while the case is in progress, the Faculty member should assign a temporary grade placeholder of Grade Delay “GD” pending the outcome of the review process. For alleged research non-compliance, the Faculty member or university official must note the appropriate sanction on the referral form. Sanctions for research non-compliance may include temporary suspension from the lab, halting of all research activity, publication delay or retraction, additional training, or NC grade in research units. Upon receipt of the Graduate Academic Integrity Violation Referral, the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs will notify the student of the University of California Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline that was allegedly violated, the factual basis for the charges, and the plan to conduct an Initial Administrative Review of the case. The student will be advised that the Initial Administrative Review is intended as a thorough exposition of all related facts and written materials associated with the alleged academic misconduct, and that it is not intended as an adversarial criminal or civil legal proceeding. The student will also be informed of the student’s right to be assisted by an advisor of the student’s choice. Such written notification will occur within 14 calendar days of the receipt of the referral by the Associate Dean and will be sent to the student’s University e-mail address.

A student officially notified of alleged academic misconduct may not withdraw from the course until the determination of responsibility is made and any sanctions are imposed. If found responsible, a sanction for a violation of academic integrity that affects the course grade will be applied. If the student is found not responsible for academic misconduct, the student will be permitted to withdraw from the course in accordance with campus regulations.

The Initial Administrative Review, conducted by the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs, involves meetings with the student, the Faculty member, university officials, and others who may have relevant information. The student will have the opportunity to discuss any extenuating circumstances, causes, and motivations that may have contributed to the alleged academic misconduct. If the Associate Dean deems it necessary, a joint meeting will be scheduled at a time when the Faculty member or university official, and the student can attend. If the Faculty member or university official is unavailable for a timely Initial Administrative Review, the immediate supervising administrator will be asked to serve in place of the Faculty member or university official. (Am 6 Dec 22)

If the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs determines that it is more likely than not that the student is responsible for academic misconduct, the academic actions recommended by the Faculty member, as well as any educational/disciplinary sanctions will be assigned. The determination shall be forwarded by the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs in writing to the student within 28 calendar days of the Initial Administrative Review; notice will be sent to the student’s University e-mail address and communicated to the Faculty member, Graduate Advisor, and Chairperson of the student’s program in accordance with legitimate educational interest criteria as articulated by the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). In cases where the Faculty member has held a grade in abeyance pending the outcome of an Initial Administrative Review, the Faculty member shall submit a final grade to the Registrar that is consistent with the determination by the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs as to the question of academic misconduct. Either the student or Faculty member can appeal the decision of the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs. Cases involving a student with a record of previous academic misconduct or cases that are sufficiently complex or egregious to require additional consultation shall be referred directly by the Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs for a Stage 2 review by the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee (GAIC) for a formal hearing.

Review Stage 2 is reserved for cases involving a student with a record of previous academic misconduct, or cases that are sufficiently complex or egregious to require additional consultation by the GAIC for a formal hearing. Review Stage 2 also serves as the stage for appeals of decisions made at Review Stage 1. Appellate decisions at Review Stage 2 are final. The Academic Senate’s Committee on Committees will appoint faculty to the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee to serve threeyear terms, effective September 1-August 31, and will appoint one faculty member from the GAIC to serve as chair. The GAIC will consist of at least one member from each school/college and should include faculty who are available to participate in hearing during the summer months. In addition, the Graduate Division will solicit and review applications from interested graduate students and make recommendations to the Graduate Student Association of UCR regarding students to be appointed to serve on the GAIC for one-year terms, effective September 1-August 31. The final endorsement of student members will rest with the Committee on Committees. Students are not eligible to serve if they have been suspended or are on academic or disciplinary probation, have been evicted from University Housing for reasons related to conduct, or have a case pending before Student Conduct, the Graduate Division, GAIC, or Graduate Council. Faculty and student members should represent the disciplinary diversity within each college/school, whenever possible. Staff support for the committee will be provided by the Graduate Division (Am 6 Dec 22)

For each Stage 2 case, the chair of the GAIC will convene a hearing panel of GAIC members within 28 calendar days of receiving referral from the Associate Dean. A quorum is required for a hearing to proceed and consists of five people, including the chair, at least two Faculty members, and two students. The Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs or designee will serve as a non-voting member of the hearing panel. The GAIC chair shall rule on all questions of hearing procedure and evidence, including but not limited to the order of presentation of evidence, admissibility of evidence, applicability of regulations to a particular case, and relevance of testimony.

Hearing Procedures 1. Preparation: Prior to the hearing, panel members will receive and review a copy of the notification of charges and documentary evidence provided by the Faculty member, university official, and the student. 2. Introductory comments: At the beginning of the hearing, the chair will ask any panel members to disqualify themselves from participation if they believe that they cannot render a just and fair decision, and will permit the student to request that a member be disqualified if the student believes for an appropriate reason that a panel member cannot render a just and fair decision. If a student or Faculty member of the hearing panel is disqualified, another member will be appointed to fill the same role, if needed for a quorum. The chair will read aloud the charges of academic misconduct, and the student will be asked to respond to the charges by (a) accepting responsibility, (b) accepting responsibility and noting that there are mitigating circumstances, or (c) denying responsibility for the alleged violation of the University of California Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline. 3. Presentation of accounts: The Faculty member and the student will be given the opportunity to present their accounts of the incident and to present any witnesses or other individuals who may have relevant information about the alleged academic misconduct. Hearing panel members will be given an opportunity to ask questions of the Faculty member, the student, and witnesses. Each party will then be asked if there is additional information needed, or if any discrepancies or questions need to be presented or addressed. 4. Deliberation: The hearing panel will deliberate in private to decide, by a majority vote, if a preponderance of the evidence indicates that the student is responsible or not responsible for the alleged violation. 5. Determination of sanctions: If the student is found to be responsible for violations of policies, the hearing panel shall be informed of the student’s prior record of academic misconduct. Based on this information the committee will determine the educational/disciplinary sanctions to be assigned, and the conditions that must be met for the sanctions to be lifted, if any. 6. Notification of decision: Once the hearing panel has reached a decision, the outcome will be distributed in writing within 7 calendar days. The Associate Dean for Graduate Academic Affairs will send written notification to the student, the Faculty member, Graduate Advisor, and Chairperson of the student‘s program detailing the decision and the educational/disciplinary sanctions imposed by the hearing panel. The notification will also outline the appeal process. 7. Records: An audio recording of the hearing, but not the deliberations of the hearing panel, shall be made and retained by the Graduate Division as part of the record for as long as the disciplinary record is retained, or for seven years from the date of decision, whichever is shorter (see Section 06.05.06 below). The student may obtain a copy of the recording. Other than for the purpose of the official record as provided above, mechanical or electronic devices for recording or broadcasting shall be excluded from the hearing (Am Dec 6 22)

Review Stage 3 is reserved for appeals of primary decisions made at Review Stage 2. For each Stage 3 case, the Chair of the Graduate Council or designee shall select a 3-5 person subcommittee of current or former Graduate Council members to serve as an appeal panel. Each Stage 3 hearing will be conducted according to the Hearing Procedures described above in Section 06.05.04.03.02. (Am 6 Dec 22)

The Graduate Council additionally conducts annual assessments of cases adjudicated at Review Stages 1 and 2 for the purpose of providing oversight and ensuring that policies and procedures are appropriately and consistently applied. (En 6 Dec 22)