Health Professions Academic Honesty Policy

INTERIM HEALTH PROFESSIONS ACADEMIC HONESTY POLICY (IHPAHP) 

Acts of academic dishonesty occurring within courses in the Health Professions professional curriculum (OT, PT, PA, Pharm D) fall under the Interim Health Professions Academic Honesty policy (HPAHP). The IHPAHP only applies to the adjudication of academic honesty violations (i.e., hearing procedures, academic leveling system, etc.).

The IHPAHP has been adopted and was approved by the University Council on February 26, 2022. It will remain in place until University governance adopts a new unified policy. Anyone with questions about the IHPAHP should contact the Assistant Director of Community Standards, Adam Centeno M.S., at acenteno@sju.edu. 

Prohibited Behaviors

Academic Dishonesty. Any act or attempted act of academic dishonesty including, but not limited to:

1. Fabrication. Presenting information for a classroom assignment, exam, or lab procedure that is fictitious or falsified. Examples include, but are not limited to, listing invented references for a report assignment or concealing the identity of the source of information presented in an assignment by omitting the secondary source identification.
2. Cheating. Deceiving or misrepresenting the acquisition of a skill or body of knowledge. Examples include, but are not limited to, copying from another student’s exam or assignment; aiding in the attainment of the answers to an exam or assignment; allowing another student to copy; impersonating another student during a class or exam; the use or possession of unauthorized materials (e.g. books, notes, calculators, “cheat-sheets”, electronic devices, etc.).
3. Plagiarism. Presenting, whether intentional or unintentional, the words or ideas of a source as if they are the student’s own words or ideas. This applies to unpublished and published material. Examples include, but are not limited to, presenting in a written report a direct quote without quotations and an appropriate reference; paraphrasing without providing an appropriate reference; copying the writings (sentence, paragraph, or an entire work) or graphic materials of a fellow student or another source and not giving credit to the author; reusing one’s own work developed for another purpose (self-plagiarism). Students should familiarize themselves with the specific standards of the University by referring to resources available in this Student Handbook, the Library, and academic departments. 
4. Unauthorized Collaboration. Collaborating without specific permission from an instructor or in a manner that does not allow the faculty member to determine individual work. Examples include, but are not limited to, working on a group project and then submitting the group work as your own or working with a partner to whom you were not assigned.
5. Facilitating Academic Dishonesty. Knowingly helping someone else to commit an act of academic dishonesty. Examples include, but are not limited to, giving someone a paper or homework to copy from, allowing someone to cheat from your test paper, signing another student into a class, and using another student’s clicker.
6. Abuse of Academic Materials. Any act that damages appropriates, or disables academic resources so that others cannot use them. Examples include, but are not limited to, destruction of books, journals, or periodicals; stealing books or articles; and deleting, or damaging computer files intended for others’ use.
7. Deception and Misrepresentation. Lying about or misrepresenting your work, academic records, or credentials. Examples include, but are not limited to, forging signatures; altering documents; forging letters of recommendation; falsifying credentials in an application; and providing false information to an instructor concerning a formal academic exercise (e.g., giving a false excuse for missing a deadline, falsely claiming to have submitted work, or falsifying information on a peer assessment).
8. Electronic Dishonesty. Using network access inappropriately, in a way that affects a class or other students’ academic work. Examples include, but are not limited to, using someone else’s authorized computer account to send and receive messages; breaking into someone else’s files; gaining access to restricted files; disabling others’ access to network systems or files; knowingly spreading a computer virus, and obtaining a computer account under false pretenses. For more information, please refer to the University Computing Policy in the Student Handbook.
9. Other Academic Dishonesty: Other types of academic dishonesty relevant to the work in particular disciplines or particular courses including failure to comply with academic directives, instructions, or syllabus. 

Overview of the Interim Health Professions Academic Honesty Policy

This section provides a general overview of how acts of academic dishonesty courses within the Health Professions programs are adjudicated. 

Students should be aware that the process outlined in this policy is quite different from criminal and civil court proceedings. Procedures and rights in student conduct procedures are conducted with fairness to all but do not include all of the same protections afforded by the courts. Due process, as defined within these procedures, assures written notice and the opportunity for a hearing before an objective decision-maker. No student will be found in violation of the Interim Health Professions Academic Honesty policy, without information showing that it is “more likely than not” that a policy violation occurred. Any sanctions will be proportionate to the severity of the violation and to the cumulative conduct history of the student.

When necessary, these procedures may accommodate concerns for the personal safety, well-being, and/or fears of confrontation of the complainant, respondent, and/or other witnesses during the hearing by providing separate facilities, using a visual screen, and/or by permitting participation by telephone, videophone, closed-circuit television, video conferencing, videotape, audio tape, written statement, or other means where and as determined appropriate by the Associate Dean of Students at the University City location or designee (“Associate Dean of Students”). 

Filing of Complaints

Any alleged act of academic dishonesty in a course within the Health Professions programs (OT, PT, PA, Pharm D) must be reported prior to any official action that may be taken against a student. The faculty member may speak with the student about the alleged violation, but may not penalize the student without submitting a report and going through the process. 

Reports under the Interim Health Professions Academic Honesty Policy, must be filed electronically by submitting this form.

The Associate Dean of Students (or designee) will review the complaint and will determine the initial course of action to be taken. If necessary, the Associate Dean of Students (or designee) may request that the complainant gather and/or submit additional information prior to determining how to proceed. If additional information is recommended, the goal is to have the alleged violation resubmitted within five business days to allow for a timely resolution.

Complaints should be submitted as soon as possible after the event takes place or becomes known, preferably within ten (10) days of discovery of the suspected infraction. No complaint will be forwarded for a hearing unless there is reasonable cause to believe a policy has been violated. Reasonable cause is defined as some credible information to support each element of the offense, even if that information is merely a credible witness or a victim’s statement. The Associate Dean of Student (or designee) may dismiss a complaint that fails to identify a violation of the Interim Health Professions Academic Honesty Policy.
 

File a report

Notice of Hearing

An attempt to notify the student by letter, e-mail, or phone must be made within 10 consecutive days of the discovery of the alleged infraction. University email is the primary means of communication with students. Notice of conduct action will be emailed to the student’s University issued email account. Once emailed, such notice will be presumptively delivered. Students are responsible for all communication delivered to their University email address. Alternate methods of delivery may be used to deliver the notice as necessary. However, cases in which the time frame cannot be met will not be dismissed for this reason alone. 

A scheduled hearing supersedes all classes, examinations, and University functions. Hearings will not be delayed due to scheduling conflicts for anyone except the respondent or complainant, who must obtain prior approval from the Associate Dean of Student (or designee). If either party fails to appear at the hearing without receiving prior appropriate approval, the hearing will be conducted in their absence. 

Withdrawal While Conduct Action Is Pending

Conduct action may be taken against a student who withdraws from the University.The University may choose to hold a hearing, even after the student has withdrawn from the institution. The student will be provided with notice of any hearing. In cases of academic dishonesty, withdrawal from the course is not permitted without the written approval of the responsible faculty member.

Hearing Procedures & Types

Depending on the nature of the complaint and circumstances involved, policy violations may be addressed by way of a Disposition Prior to a Hearing, an Administrative Hearing, or a Student Conduct Board Hearing.

Disposition Prior to a Hearing

Based on the severity of the alleged violation, student’s class year, and prior conduct history, a respondent may be provided the opportunity to accept responsibility without participating in a hearing.

When provided, the respondent will receive information pertaining to the alleged violation, along with a Conduct Agreement Form (CAF). The CAF gives the respondent the option of either accepting responsibility, along with the predetermined sanctions, or denying responsibility. The respondent has five business days to return the CAF with their decision. If the respondent does not return the CAF by the deadline or denies responsibility, an Administrative or Student Conduct Hearing will be scheduled.

Academic Administrative Hearing

During an academic administrative hearing, the parties have an opportunity to provide information related to the complaint, ask questions, and present witnesses. The Hearing Officer will facilitate a discussion between the parties. The Hearing Officer, however, cannot determine facts or render a decision in the case. If the parties reach an agreement on the outcome of an alleged violation, the decision is final. If the parties are unable to reach an agreement, a hearing with the Student Conduct Board will be scheduled to resolve the matter. 

Academic Administrative Hearing Procedures

1. Attendance is limited to only those individuals playing a role in the process including respondents, complainants, Conduct Advisors, witnesses, and representatives of the Office of Community Standards.
2. The parties to a hearing have the right to be accompanied by a Conduct Advisor. The Conduct Advisor must be a University Community member and may not be an attorney, except where required by law. The Conduct Advisor may confer quietly with their advisee, exchange notes, and suggest questions to their advisee. The Conduct Advisor does not have a speaking role during the hearing and may only speak to the person they were invited to support. The advisor may not make a presentation or otherwise represent either party during the hearing.
3. Both parties are permitted to bring witnesses to a hearing. If a witness is not able to attend a hearing, they may provide a written statement that will be presented at the hearing. In-person witnesses may be asked to leave the room before or after their testimony. The exception to this is a witness (referred to as an active witness) who was potentially a victim of the alleged violation. This exception will be made at the discretion of the Associate Dean (or designee). Questions of whether potential information will be considered shall be resolved by the Hearing Officer. Unduly repetitive witnesses can be limited at the discretion of the Hearing Officer.
4. Formal rules of evidence are not observed
5. The Office of Student Community Standards will collect and retain all records and documents submitted in connection with a hearing. In most cases, evidence will be held for a period of 45 days after a final resolution has been reached.
6. The Office of Community Standards will send official outcome letters to the complainant, the respondent, the university registrar, and the respondent’s academic advisor. If the case involves academic dishonesty, the Dean of the student’s college will be notified. Additionally, the OSC may send outcome letters to program directors, athletics, or other individuals deemed necessary, at the discretion of the Office of Community Standards. Individuals notified are responsible for maintaining confidentiality.
7. No audio recording will be made. 

Student Conduct Board Hearing

Conduct Board hearings are more formal than administrative hearings. Once scheduled, the Associate Dean of Students (or designee) will notify the complainant and respondent, in writing, of the alleged violation(s), the date/time of their individual pre-hearing meeting, and the date/time of the Student Conduct Board hearing.

Pre-Hearing Meeting

In advance of a Student Conduct Board hearing, separate pre-hearing meetings are scheduled for both parties. The pre-hearing meeting provides an opportunity to review the hearing stages, answer process-related questions, and inform the parties of the board members who will hear the case. If either party objects to a selected board member, they must submit their objection, in writing, to the Associate Dean of Students within two (2) business days of being informed. A board member will only be unseated if the Associate Dean (or designee) determines that their bias precludes an impartial hearing of the complaint.

Student Conduct Board Hearing Procedures

1. The composition of the Board shall consist of a hearing Chair, one faculty representative, one staff representative, and one student representative, drawn from the Community Standards Board. For cases involving allegations of academic dishonesty, a faculty member will chair the hearing.
2. Attendance is limited to only those individuals playing a role in the process including respondents, complainants, Conduct Advisors, witnesses, members of the Conduct Board, and representatives of the Office of Community Standards.
3. The parties to a hearing have the right to be accompanied by a Conduct Advisor. The Conduct Advisor must be a University Community member and may not be an attorney, except where required by law. The Conduct Advisor may confer quietly with their advisee, exchange notes, and suggest questions to their advisee. The Conduct Advisor does not have a speaking role during the hearing and may only speak to the person they were invited to support. The advisor may not make a presentation or otherwise represent either party during the hearing.
4. Both parties are permitted to bring witnesses to a hearing. If a witness is not able to attend a hearing, they may provide a written statement that will be presented at the hearing. In-person witnesses may be asked to leave the room before or after their testimony. The exception to this is a witness (referred to as an active witness) who was potentially a victim of the alleged violation. This exception will be made at the discretion of the Associate Dean of Students (or designee). Questions of whether potential information will be considered shall be resolved by the Hearing Officer. Unduly repetitive witnesses can be limited at the discretion of the Hearing Officer and/or Chair.
5. Formal rules of evidence are not observed. 
6. After all pertinent information has been presented, the Student Conduct Board shall deliberate and determine whether the respondent is responsible for any policy violations. The board will use the preponderance of the evidence standard, to make this determination. If the board determines that it is more likely than not that the responding student violated the Health Professions Academic Honesty Policy, they will be found responsible.
7. The Student Conduct Board shall be informed of a student’s prior conduct history, if any, during the sanction deliberations. Sanctions will be proportionate to the severity of the violation and to the cumulative conduct history of the student.
8. The Student Conduct Board has the authority to impose all sanctions including suspension or expulsion.
9. All records and documents submitted in connection with a hearing will be collected and kept according to the record retention policy of the University. 
10. Outcome letters will be sent to the complainant, the respondent, the respondent’s academic advisor, university registrar, and the Dean of the College of Health Professions of the student’s matriculated program.
11. The hearing will not be recorded. 

Student Conduct Board

The Associate Dean of Students is responsible for assembling the Student Conduct Board. The Board is made up of faculty, staff, and students. Faculty representatives to the Student Conduct Board are appointed by the University Faculty Senate, in consultation with the Associate Dean of Students. Staff and student representatives are selected in consultation with the Associate Dean along with the Student Conduct Board chairs and Associate Vice President/Dean of Students. If necessary, the Associate Dean of Students may work with the Academic Integrity Council and Academic Honesty Board on the Hawk Hill campus, to supplement membership for the Student Conduct Board/Appeals Panel.

Members of the Board are required to attend annual training prior to serving on a board hearing.

For each board hearing, the Board will be chosen from available members. A Quorum for a Board hearing consists of a Hearing Chair, one faculty representative, one staff representative, and one student representative. None of the members of the selected board should have a conflict of interest with either the respondent or the complainant. In the event that a quorum is not reached, all parties must agree to proceed without a quorum. If either party chooses not to proceed under such circumstances, the hearing will be rescheduled as quickly as possible. In exceptional cases—some examples include, but are not limited to, during University breaks, winter and summer breaks, or emergency situations— quorum can have at least two members and a Chair.

Hearings for academic matters will be chaired by a faculty member from the board. The Associate Dean (or designee) attends hearings to assure that the University procedures are followed throughout the hearing. 

During the deliberations process the faculty, staff, and student representative will deliberate and determine, by majority vote, whether it is more likely than not that the responding student has violated a policy. 

Sanctions for Academic Integrity Violations

There are four classification levels for all allegations of academic dishonesty. In general, Level 1 violations are considered less severe and typically occur due to a student’s inexperience or lack of knowledge regarding the principles of academic integrity, whereas Level 4 violations are considered the most severe or egregious. Levels are selected based on a number of factors, including, but not limited to: the nature and seriousness of the offense, how much of the course grade is affected, the student’s class year, and whether the student has any previous conduct history.

The Associate Dean of Students (or designee) will tentatively determine the applicable level prior to the commencement of any hearing. This tentatively determined level may change based on the information presented during the hearing process and will be affirmed prior to sanctioning if the student is found responsible or accepts responsibility for the violation(s).

Given the expectation of increased maturity and learning, a Level 1 classification will not be an option for any student (regardless of major) in the third year of a program (and above), or for graduate and professional students. If these students commit what would typically be considered a Level 1, it will automatically be considered a Level 2. The prohibited conduct currently listed as Level 3 or Level 4 will remain as such for these students.

Once assigned, the level will dictate which of the hearing types is available and which sanctions may be assigned. A description of each level is provided below. 

LEVEL 1

Description: A level 1 violation typically involves a small proportion (e.g., < 20%) of the total course work, is not extensive, and/or occurs on a minor assignment. These violations generally occur due to a student’s inexperience or lack of knowledge regarding the principles of academic integrity.

Resolution Options: May be resolved through any of the hearing types

Sanctions:

• Academic Sanctions (all students will receive one of the following):
  • No credit (“0”) for the assignment, quiz, exam, participation; or
  • Ability to complete a make-up assignment (with the student receiving only 50% of the earned credit)
• Other Sanctions: Additional sanctions may be imposed (not including suspension or expulsion) 

LEVEL 2

Description: A level 2 violation includes prohibited conduct that is characterized by dishonesty of a more serious nature or which affects a more significant proportion (e.g., 20<50%) of the course work. A student who has previously been found responsible (or accepted responsibility) for a level 1 violation, will automatically progress to at least level 2.

Resolution Options: May be resolved through any of the hearing types

Sanctions:

• Academic Sanctions (all students will receive one of the following):
  • No credit (“0”) for the assignment, quiz, exam, participation (grade must be used in calculation of final grade [i.e., this grade cannot be dropped, if applicable]); or
  • One letter-grade reduction in the final grade (e.g., B+ C+);
• Other Sanctions: Additional sanctions may be imposed (not including suspension or expulsion) 

LEVEL 3

Description: This prohibited conduct includes, but is not limited to, dishonesty that affects a major (e.g., ≥ 50%) or essential portion of work done to meet course/program requirements, and/or involves premeditation. A student who has previously been found responsible (or accepted responsibility) for a level 2 violation, will automatically progress to at least level 3.

Resolution Options: Level 3 violations will automatically go to a Conduct Board Hearing.

Sanctions:

• Academic Sanctions (all students will receive one of the following):
  • A grade of “D” for the course (this would be the highest grade that the student could earn in the course); or an “F” (if the course is a pass/fail course); or
  • A grade of “F” for the course; or
  • Failure of Program Requirement
• Other Sanctions: Additional sanctions may be imposed, including: 
  • conduct Probation (until 30 days prior to graduation from the University or until the student separates from the University); or
  • Suspension from the University for at least one-semester

LEVEL 4

Description: This prohibited conduct represents the most serious breaches of academic integrity. These cases will automatically go to a Conduct Hearing. A student who has previously been found responsible (or accepted responsibility) for a level 3 violation, will automatically progress to Level 4.

Resolution Options: Level 4 violations will automatically go to a Conduct Board Hearing.

Sanctions:

• Academic Sanctions (all students will receive one of the following):
  • A grade of “F” for the course; or
  • Failure of Program Requirement 
• Expulsion from the University

Appeals

Either party may request an appeal of a decision rendered by the Student Conduct Board by submitting a written request to the Associate Dean of Students or designee, subject to the conditions outlined below.

All appeals must be filed in writing to within five business days of the notice of the hearing outcome, barring exigent circumstances. Any exceptions are made at the discretion of the Associate Dean.

Grounds for Appeal Requests

Appeals are limited to the following grounds:

1. New Evidence: To consider new evidence, unavailable during the original hearing or investigation, that could substantially impact the original finding or sanction. A summary of this new evidence and its potential impact must be included. Evidence introduced that was not known by the respondent or complainant shall be considered new evidence. Evidence that was withheld by the respondent or complainant, or that a party chose not to bring or present, shall not constitute a “question of new evidence” and will not be considered upon appeal.
2. Procedural Error: A procedural error occurred that significantly impacted the outcome of the hearing (e.g. substantiated bias, material deviation from established procedures, etc.);
3. Sanctions: The sanctions imposed are substantially disproportionate to the severity of the violation and/or are substantially outside parameters or guidelines set by the University for this type of offense or the cumulative conduct record of the responding student. 

Appeal Procedures

The Associate Dean (or designee) will share the appeal by one party with the other party (parties), when appropriate under procedure or law (e.g., if the responding student appeals, the appeal is shared with the complainant, who may also wish to file a response, or request an appeal on the same grounds or different grounds). Any response to the appeal must be filed in writing within five business days of receipt of the original appeal. The original appeal and any response to the appeal will be forwarded to an Appeals Panel for consideration.

Appeal Panel Composition

A three-member Appeals Panel will be drawn from the Student Conduct Board and/or Academic Honesty Board. Each Appeals Panel will consist of one faculty representative, one staff representative, and one student representative. Members of the Appeals Panel may not have prior knowledge of the original case and may not have served on the Board for the initial hearing. The Associate Dean (or designee) will serve as a non-voting advisor to the Panel with the responsibility of providing the Panel with the record of the initial hearing, ensuring consistency with past practices, and safeguarding a fair process for the complainant and responding student.

Appeal Panel Review

The Appeals Panel will engage in a two-step process. First, the Appeals Panel will determine if the appeal is valid based upon the limited grounds for appeal through a review of the case materials, the written appeal, and any responses to the appeal. A review of the audio recording from the original hearing will only be conducted at the request of the Appeals Panel.

If the appeal fails to meet the requisite grounds, it will be dismissed and the original decision will stand. This decision is final and not subject to further appeal.

If the appeal is determined to be valid, the Appeals Panel may take one of the following actions:

1. Modify Sanctions: Where the sanctions are challenged, the Appeals Panel may modify the sanctions if they are found to be substantially disproportionate to the severity of the violation, or are substantially outside parameters or guidelines set by the University for the violation. The Appeals Panel may consider the cumulative conduct record of the responding student in making its decision.
2. Academic Sanction Modification: Any recommendations for changes to the originally approved course sanction will be reviewed by the faculty member, the faculty member’s department chair, and the Associate Dean of Students or designee. This review panel will make a final decision on the course sanction based on the level system. This decision is final.
3. Remand for Rehearing: The Appeals Panel may send a case back to the original hearing board or call for a new board to hear the case. In general, where new evidence is presented, the matter will be remanded back to the original hearing board to consider the new information. Where the original hearing board may be unduly biased by a procedural error, a new hearing board will be assembled to consider the matter. The decision as to whether a case is sent back to the original hearing board or if a new board will be assembled is made by the Appeals Panel.
4. If the Appeals Panel remands the case for a rehearing, the decision of the board hearing the remanded case is final. There is no opportunity to file another appeal for a case that has been remanded for a rehearing, except in the event of a significant procedural error.
5. Affirm Original Decision: The Appeals Panel may affirm the original decision of the Student Conduct Board.

The Associate Dean of Students (or designee) will inform the parties of the Appeal Panel’s decision within approximately 10 business days. The imposing of sanctions rendered during the original Conduct Hearing will be deferred while an appeal is pending.

Decisions of the Appeals Panel are final and are not subject to further review. Findings and/or sanctions of the student conduct process cannot be grieved.