The mission of University of Maryland Global Campus ("University") is to improve the lives of all learners by developing the needed skills, competencies, and capabilities of its students to realize their professional aspirations. The University is committed to fostering and sustaining a culture of integrity in which the entire University community - students, faculty, and staff - are accountable to the highest standards of ethicality, treat one another respectfully, and promote authentic education. The University is committed to fairness, equity, and due process. This Policy promotes a culture of integrity aligned to the University's Code of Civility and the Philosophy of Academic Integrity. This Policy also defines misconduct that undermines integrity and is prohibited at the University.
Scope and Applicability
All allegations of violations of this Policy reported on or after the start date of the Fall 2020 term, will be reviewed and decided according to this Policy and the accompanying Procedures for Reports of Academic Misconduct.
The University will apply the definitions of prohibited misconduct from the previous version of this Policy if the Academic Misconduct was considered to have occurred prior to the Fall 2020 term; however, this Policy and Procedures will be used to review and decide all possible policy violations.
This Policy applies to all current and former students and aligns with the University System of Maryland ("USM") Policy III-1.00 Policy on Faculty, Student and Institutional Rights and Responsibility for Academic Integrity, approved on November 30, 1989.
Definitions for Policy and Procedures Throughout this Policy, and in the accompanying Procedures, the capitalized terms listed below are defined and used as follows:
"Academic Assessment" – any submitted assignment, paper, assessment, evaluation, examination, discussion post, answer, lab work, or other coursework that will be used to determine credit, a grade, or academic performance.
"Academic Misconduct" – any action or attempted action, such as the prohibited acts specified in this Policy, that may result in an unfair academic advantage for oneself or any other member(s) of the University community.
"Business Day" – Monday through Friday between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time excluding weekends, University holidays or University planned and unplanned closures.
"Case Manager" – an employee of the University's Office of Academic Integrity and Accountability ("OAIA") trained to investigate Reports and determine responsibility. When appropriate, another employee of the University, or, in rare circumstances, an individual who is not employed by the University, may be appointed as a Case Manager, as determined by the Chief Academic Officer.
"Consequence" – any action that is taken by the University in response to a Student being found responsible for Academic Misconduct, including Educational Remediation and Disciplinary Consequences.
"Deadline" – the date by which the Student or another individual must respond to a communication in writing; the time period required for a response begins on the next Business Day after the communication is sent. Any response that is due by a Deadline and is sent by postal mail must be postmarked by that Deadline.
“Educational Intervention” - an alternative to filing a Report that may include formative feedback and opportunities for revision of coursework to address lower-level academic misconduct at the discretion of Faculty and/or as directed by OAIA Case Managers.
"Educational Remediation" – a non-disciplinary Consequence that may be used by the University to assist Students with gaps in knowledge, skills, or abilities, as determined by a Case Manager, and to move forward in their education with enhanced understanding of practices that promote integrity.
“Faculty” – an individual contracted by the University with the primary or exclusive responsibility of teaching a course or courses for Students.
“Full Review”– a process used by the University, following a Report, to gather information regarding what happened with respect to a possible policy violation and to determine whether the Student is responsible for Academic Misconduct.
“Documentation”– information used to determine whether a violation of University policy occurred. Documentation may take various forms, such as oral or written statements, video or audio recordings, written documents, physical objects, or data.
"Record Removal”– the removal of transcript notation of academic misconduct.
“Hearing” - a meeting between the Student and a Case Manager for review of Documentation, for the student to be heard in response to Documentation, and for the student to provide additional information and Documentation.
"Notice" – the document that specifies the possible policy violations and the section(s) of this Policy that may have been violated.
"OAIA" – the University's Office of Academic Integrity and Accountability.
"Panel" – the two (2) University employees appointed to consider a request for Record Removal and conduct an interview of the Student for that process.
"Initial Inquiry" – the process to determine one or more of the following situations: 1) whether the concerns outlined in a Report should proceed to a Full Review, 2) whether Privacy and Security Measures should be issued, and/or 3) whether the apparent misconduct potentially violates another University policy. If the third situation applies, then the Initial Inquiry will also be used to determine how the process for review and the determination of responsibility will occur.
"Premises" – Buildings, grounds, Web sites, or computer networks owned, leased, operated, controlled, or supervised by UMGC.
"Privacy and Security Measures" – any action taken by the University in response to possible policy violations that include Academic Misconduct that could result in a security threat to any student’s personally identifiable information or to the University in some other way. Privacy and Security Measures are intended to be used only until a Full Review can be conducted and a final determination is made.
"Report" – any possible policy violation(s) regarding Academic Misconduct that is/are made to the University.
"Reporter" – the individual(s) or source of the allegations in the Report.
"Retaliation" – taking negative action against an individual because they submitted a Report or participated in the Full Review of or Decision about a Report.
“Staff” – an individual employed by the University with responsibility for carrying out administrative or non-instructional tasks for Students.
"Step Up Authentication" – a process for online identity verification that temporarily blocks access to the online classroom(s) or other University computing resources, as defined in the University's Acceptable Use Policy, until the Student is able to verify their identity.
"Student" – any person who is eligible to enroll in courses, is enrolled in courses, or was previously enrolled in courses at the University and has been under review for possible Academic Misconduct at the University or in a University course.
"Written" or "in writing" – in the form of a letter, document, email, or electronic communication or transmission. If a communication is sent by the University to a Student via email, it may be sent to the Student's University-issued email address as well as any preferred email addresses recorded in the University's systems.
Guidelines for Academic Integrity
Academic Integrity begins with choosing to engage in behaviors that result in authentic learning. In its ideal form, authentic learning is an active process of acquiring new knowledge and skills rather than simply completing an assignment, earning a grade, or meeting the minimum requirements for a credential. Although the University recognizes that these activities are a necessary part of the educational process, it is authentic learning that results in demonstrable and sustainable growth for individuals in school, work, and life. This Policy prioritizes student learning and promotes fairness in the University's approach to situations in which students have engaged in prohibited actions.
As a member of the International Center for Academic Integrity("ICAI"), the University subscribes to the following definition of integrity: "a commitment, even in the face of adversity, to six fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage." At UMGC, these values are demonstrated by:
Expressing the truth, without deception, duplicity, cheating, or fraud;
Fulfilling commitments and meeting expectations in authentic ways;
Treating students, Faculty, and Staff according to the University's standards and policies;
Fostering an environment that enables honest and open communication with respect and appreciation for alternative points of view and the diversity of our academic community;
Making authentic contributions that, ideally, prioritize the development of demonstrable knowledge, skills, and abilities;
Using source materials appropriately in academic work; and
Behaviors that lead to authentic learning are described in detail in the University's learning resources.
Prohibited Academic Misconduct
The following conduct is prohibited as Academic Misconduct:
"Alteration of University Records" – using access to University computing resources or other types of University digital or physical materials to alter academic documents or records or forge a signature on an academic document or record.
"Breach of the Online Classroom" – sharing credentials or otherwise allowing another unauthorized individual to access the online classroom, which is a violation of the University's Acceptable Use Policy.
"Bribery" – offering money, goods, services or anything of value by a Student or on behalf of a Student in exchange for an academic advantage (e.g. passing grade(s), transcript(s), diploma(s)).
"Cheating" – using deceit or fraud in an Academic Assessment, including but not limited to:
Copying or attempting to copy from others on any Academic Assessment.
Allowing others to copy from a Student on any Academic Assessment.
Communicating answers, collaborating, or otherwise obtaining or giving aid to others for any Academic Assessment without prior approval from the Faculty member, when it is against the stated rules of the course.
Using any unauthorized materials such as prepared answers, textbooks, written notes, or formulas for an Academic Assessment. Authorized materials are those that the Faculty member for the course has specifically approved for use for an Academic Assessment.
Using any information found, requested, exchanged, or purchased on the internet (or elsewhere) that may include UMGC Academic Assessment materials or responses to those materials (i.e., answers to assessment questions or projects completed by someone else).
Creating and/or transmitting responses to Academic Assessments or projects, using methods that allow these responses to potentially be submitted to UMGC or another institution by someone else.
Copying, recording, or disclosing UMGC Academic Assessments or project material to anyone else, including copying for another person’s personal use or for disclosure on websites, blogs, and other social media.
Allowing others to complete an Academic Assessment or portion of an Academic Assessment for a Student.
Purchasing or attempting to purchase any materials for the purpose of submitting any portion of these materials as one's own work on any Academic Assessment.
Submitting work generated by artificial intelligence as one’s own work (including, without limitation, text, images, artwork, graphics, video, and audio) without proper attribution (i.e., quotation marks, in-text citation, and/or reference list citation).
Obtaining unauthorized assistance in the preparation, research, or completion of any Academic Assessment.
Submitting a substantial portion of a previously submitted Academic Assessment for another Academic Assessment without prior written approval from the current Faculty member.
"Fraud" – engaging in any act, expression, omission, or concealment to obtain an unauthorized benefit by misrepresentation in an Academic Assessment.
"Improper Use of Course Materials" – selling, distributing, displaying, posting, uploading, publishing, downloading, or obtaining any course materials owned by the University or using such materials outside of typical classroom usage without the express written permission of the Faculty member or the University. Assessments, examinations, quizzes, and other similar evaluation materials developed by UMGC employees are the intellectual property of UMGC.
"Misrepresentation" – any act or omission that is intended to deceive a Faculty member or other University employee for academic advantage.
"Plagiarism" – using material produced by another person or presenting another person's idea(s) or work as one's own in any Academic Assessment without providing proper citation or attribution, including but not limited to:
Word-for-word copying of significant portions of another's written work in any Academic Assessment without using quotation marks or other methods to show who originally wrote the work, including such work created by generative artificial intelligence tools, information, or materials (including, without limitation, text, images, artwork, graphics, video, and audio).
Repeated failure to cite sources in any Academic Assessment according to assessment guidelines and course materials when using or paraphrasing others’ work, ideas, views, opinions, creative works, and research.
Falsifying or inventing citations and/or other information or data in an Academic Assessment.
If a Student, Faculty member, Staff member, or third party has knowledge of or suspects that a Student has engaged in Academic Misconduct, the individual may submit a Report to OAIA as provided in the Procedures.
Faculty and OAIA Case Managers may address lower-level academic misconduct with Educational Intervention as outlined in the Procedures prior to submitting a Report.
A UMGC employee may submit a Report using the process outlined on the University’s intranet. Reports can also be triggered by University computing resources that are used to monitor data. To protect the integrity and security of University's computing resources, as well as student and employee data and the University's intellectual property, the University may use Step Up Authentication according to the Procedures.
Upon receipt of a Report, a Case Manager will be assigned to conduct an Initial Inquiry.
A Case Manager will not be assigned to a Report if the Case Manager is a Faculty member for a class in which the Student is currently enrolled.
Case Managers, in their sole discretion, may remove themselves from assignment to a Report if appropriate to do so.
According to the Procedures, when a Report is received, the Case Manager may consult with the Reporter and will conduct an Initial Inquiry to determine whether the information contained in the Report could lead a person to reasonably conclude that a violation of this Policy may have occurred and a Full Review is needed.
If the Report is anonymous, the Case Manager will determine whether an Initial Inquiry is possible. When a Report is made anonymously, the Initial Inquiry may be limited, and therefore, the University may not be able to conduct a Full Review or take any action regarding the Report.
If the Case Manager determines that a Full Review is not needed, the Case Manager may close the Report and refer the Faculty member to teaching, coaching, or other resources. If the Report is closed, the Case Manager will remove any identifying information regarding the Student from the University's case management system.
If the Case Manager determines that a Full Review is needed, the Case Manager will send out a Notice to the Student. See Section VIII below on Notice to the Student for more information.
If the Case Manager determines that the Report contains possible violation(s) of another University policy, the Case Manager will consult with the appropriate office(s) to determine how the additional possible policy violations should be reviewed.
Privacy and Security Measures
During the Initial Inquiry, the Case Manager will consult with University Information Security and Data Protection experts to consider whether a possible policy violation might be a security threat to any student's personally identifiable information or otherwise to the University. If so, Privacy and Security Measures will be implemented to address that threat.
The Case Manager may, at their sole discretion, issue Privacy and Security Measures during the Initial Inquiry or at any time during the Full Review. The Case Manager shall notify the Student in writing if they determine that Privacy and Security Measures are needed. If the Case Manager issues Privacy and Security Measures to a Student, the Case Manager will notify the Assistant Vice President of OAIA (AVP-OAIA) or designee in writing within one (1) Business Day of issuing the Privacy and Security Measures.
Privacy and Security Measures may include, but are not limited to:
Suspending a Student on a Privacy and Security basis.
Prohibiting access, in person or electronically, to the classroom(s) or University computing resources.
Opportunity to Be Heard Regarding Privacy and Security Measures
The Student will be given an opportunity to be heard regarding the issuance of any Privacy and Security Measures by submitting an appeal according to the Procedures.
The decision to uphold, modify, or reverse the issuance of Privacy and Security Measures is final and cannot be appealed or grieved.
The Student will not receive a grade or a refund for any course that was in progress when a Privacy and Security suspension was issued and where the final Consequence issued is Failure in the Course, Suspension, Dismissal, or Expulsion.
No Appeal of the Initial Inquiry
The Case Manager will, at their sole discretion, determine whether the Report warrants a Full Review.
The Student or the Reporter may not appeal or grieve the determination at the Initial Inquiry stage.
Notice to the Student
If the Case Manager determines that a Full Review should occur, the Case Manager will send a Notice to the Student in writing that includes:
Information regarding the possible policy violations being reviewed;
The policy section(s) relevant to the possible violations under review;
A link or copy of the relevant policies and procedures that include possible Consequences;
The name and contact information for the Case Manager;
Notice of Privacy and Security Measures, if any;
Notice that an objection to the Case Manager and/or an appeal of Privacy and Security Measures is permitted;
A statement prohibiting Retaliation; and
The Deadline for the Student's written response.
If the Student wishes to respond to the Notice, the response to the Notice is due within five (5) Business Days of the Notice being sent to the Student.
The Student's Response may include any documents or other information the Student believes may be relevant to the possible policy violations under review according to the accompanying Procedures.
The Student will not be permitted to drop or withdraw from any course(s) once a Report has been referred for a Full Review. If the Student attempts to drop or withdraw from a course while a Full Review is ongoing, the Student will be placed back into the course.
Objection to the Case Manager
Upon receipt of the Notice, the Student may submit an objection regarding the assigned Case Manager based on a perception of bias against the Student. The objection should indicate the reason(s) for the Student's objection.
The Student may submit an objection in writing from the date the Notice was sent to the Student through the review of documentation according to the Procedures.
Knowledge of the possible policy violations or a prior case of misconduct is not a sufficient basis to show that a Case Manager is biased.
The objection will be evaluated by the AVP-OAIA or designee.
The AVP-OAIA or designee notifies the student of a decision within two (2) business days after the student sends a written objection. The AVP-OAIA or designee’s decision is final and cannot be appealed or grieved.
Once the Notice has been sent to the Student, the Case Manager, in the Case Manager's sole discretion, will conduct a Full Review by:
Gathering Documentation, such as text similarity reports, coursework submissions, communication records, education records, information generated by University computing resources, and information from individuals who may have relevant knowledge regarding the possible policy violations, such as the Reporter and the Faculty member for the course(s) in which Academic Misconduct was alleged to have occurred.
At the conclusion of the Full Review, the Case Manager will prepare a Documentation Summary according to the Procedures.
The Case Manager will send a copy of the Documentation Summary to the Student in writing.
Opportunity to Be Heard
The Student will have an opportunity to review and respond to the Documentation Summary and provide any additional information or Documentation to address the possible policy violations before a final decision is made as noted below.
The Deadline for the Student to respond to the Documentation Summary in writing ("Response") is six (6) Business Days from the date the Case Manager sent a copy of the Documentation Summary to the Student according to the Procedures.
A Response that simply denies the possible violations without providing the Student's position or supporting information will not be considered.
If the Student does not submit the Response by the Deadline, the Case Manager will make a decision without the Student's participation unless the Student can show a valid reason, as determined by the Case Manager, for failing to respond.
If the Student responds, the Case Manager, in the Case Manager's sole discretion, may determine that additional fact-gathering is needed. If so, the Case Manager may resume the Full Review according to the Procedures.
The Case Manager will consider the Documentation and any Response from the Student and will determine whether the Student is responsible for the possible Academic Misconduct indicated in the Notice to the Student. The Case Manager will make a decision based on whether the information in the Documentation Summary makes it more likely than not that the student is responsible for a policy violation.
If the Case Manager finds the Student responsible for Academic Misconduct, the Case Manager will review the Student's academic and disciplinary records to assess whether any additional circumstances may be considered in determining Consequences.
Circumstances that may decrease a Consequence include, but are not limited to, the following:
The situation in which the Academic Misconduct occurred;
Absence of past disciplinary record;
Length of time since last Consequence, if any;
Post-secondary educational experience;
Whether the Student has acknowledged responsibility or remorse for the Academic Misconduct;
Sincere insight into the nature of the harm caused and a willingness to reduce or repair the effect of the harm; and/or
Any steps the Student has taken to address the behavior.
Circumstances that may increase a Consequence, include but are not limited to, the following:
The situation in which the Academic Misconduct occurred;
Past disciplinary record, including Consequences issued against the Student for similar Academic Misconduct;
Prior Educational Remediation;
Harm to other students' learning;
Length of time since last Consequence, if any;
Extent of negative impact to an individual or the University community;
Post-secondary educational experience; and/or
The nature and importance of the Academic Assessment.
Educational Remediation is a form of non-disciplinary Consequence that is meant to help the Student improve knowledge, skills, and abilities relating to academic performance, authentic education, and academic integrity in response to the Student's Academic Misconduct. Educational Remediation may include one or more of the following activities, or other similarly appropriate activities:
Requiring the Student to write a reflection paper or apology letter;
Requiring the Student to have a conversation about academic integrity with the Faculty member of the course in which misconduct occurred;
Requiring the Student to complete additional training about academic integrity;
Requiring the Student to repeat an Academic Assessment or submit an alternative Academic Assessment; or
Assigning a lowered or failing grade to an Academic Assessment.
The written Notice that Educational Remediation has been issued will include a Deadline for completion of the Educational Remediation. If the Student does not satisfactorily complete the Educational Remediation by the Deadline, the Case Manager may modify the Educational Remediation or require a Disciplinary Consequence.
The Case Manager may issue both Educational Remediation and a Disciplinary Consequence, at the Case Manager's discretion.
Disciplinary Consequences include, but are not limited to, the following:
Failure in the Course – a grade of F in the course in which the Academic Misconduct occurred.
Disciplinary Probation – a status for a specified length of time ("Probationary Period") during which the Student must comply with all conditions specified in the Consequence notification in order to remain enrolled in the University.
If the Student is found to violate any University Policy or Procedure during the Probationary Period, the Student may receive a more severe Consequence(s) for the violation committed while on Probation, as determined by the Case Manager.
The Probationary Period will not exceed three (3) consecutive academic terms.
Suspension – separation of the Student from the University for a specified length of time ("Suspension Period"), after which the Student is eligible to return if the Student complies with all conditions specified in the Consequence notification.
A Student who has been suspended is ineligible to register for or attend classes at the University or, according to institutional policy and practice, another USM institution, during the entire Suspension Period.
If suspended during enrollment in a course(s), the Student may not receive a grade or a refund for any course(s) that was/were already in progress unless the Case Manager determines that the Suspension can be delayed to permit the Student to complete courses in which there has been no finding of Academic Misconduct.
The Suspension Period will not exceed two (2) consecutive academic terms.
Prior to a Consequence of Suspension being imposed, the Student will be offered a Hearing according to the Procedures.
Expulsion – the separation of Student status at the University with the permanent loss of all Student rights and privileges.
Invalidation of Credit – the removal of academic credit from the Student's transcript for the course(s) in which the student was found responsible for Academic Misconduct.
Revocation of Credential – the invalidation of an academic credential(s), including a degree, certificate, or any other credential offered by the University.
All Disciplinary Consequences will be noted on the Student's transcript.
The Case Manager may issue more than one (1) Consequence, at the Case Manager's discretion.
A Student who receives a Consequence will not receive a refund for any course impacted by the Consequence.
The Case Manager will send a decision in writing to the Student and to the Faculty member(s) for any courses that are affected by the decision. The Decision will include, but is not limited to:
A summary of the facts that the Case Manager used to determine responsibility for any policy violations and an explanation of the Documentation used to determine those facts;
The Consequence issued, if any;
A notification of the Student's right to appeal and a copy or link to the appeal procedures;
A link to this Policy, including a reference to the Records Removal section; and
The Deadline for the Student to submit an appeal.
If Consequences are issued, the Case Manager will notify all offices involved in the implementation of each Consequence.
The Student may request to appeal the Decision by emailing the Case Manager at email@example.com within five (5) Business Days of the date the Decision was sent to the Student according to the Procedures. The AVP-OAIA will review the Student’s Appeal Request and will determine if at least one grounds for appeal is met. If the Appeal Request submission is granted, the student has five (5) Business Days to submit a written Appeal to the AVP-OAIA according to the Procedures. If the student’s request for appeal does not meet at least one ground for appeal, the appeal request will be rejected, and the Decision is considered final.
Grounds for Appeal
The grounds for appeal are limited to the following:
New or significant information relevant to the policy violation that was not reasonably available at the time of the Full Review; and/or
Documented and specific deviations from the University's Policy and/or Procedures.
Dissatisfaction with the Decision and/or Consequence is not a valid basis for appeal.
Decision Appeal Panel
A Decision Appeal Panel will be convened if it is determined that a Student’s request for appeal meets at least one of the allowable grounds for appeal. A Decision Appeal Panel will include three (3) UMGC employees from at least two (2) different departments and will include at least one (1) member with expertise relevant to the type of academic misconduct case that is the subject of the Appeal. The AVP-OAIA will send written notice to the Student with the names and titles of Appeal Panel members and instructions for contacting the Appeal Panel in accordance with the Procedures.
Objection to Decision Appeal Panel Member(s)
The Student may submit an objection in writing regarding the assigned Decision Appeal Panel member(s) to the Deputy Chief Academic Officer ("DCAO") or designee due to bias against the Student. The Student must include the reasons for the objection according to the Procedures and submit the objection within three (3) business days of receiving the names of the Appeal Panel members.
The decision of the DCAO or designee regarding an objection to the Decision Appeal Panel member(s) based on bias is final and cannot be appealed or grieved.
The Student is responsible for explaining and documenting why the arguments in the Written Appeal are valid.
The Decision Appeal Panel may only consider the written materials provided during the Full Review and any new information or documentation provided by the Student.
The Appeal Panel will issue a written decision on the Appeal ("Appeal Decision") that indicates whether any Decision or Consequence will be changed as well as an explanation for the Appeal Decision.
The Appeal Panel will send the Appeal Decision to the AVP-OAIA within fifteen (15) Business Days from the date that the Case Manager submitted the Appeal and Documentation to the Appeal Panel.
Within two (2) business days, the AVP-OAIA will send a copy of the Appeal Decision in writing to the Student.
Modified Consequences cannot be appealed.
An Appeal Decision is final, unless the Appeal Panel indicates that further review is needed according to the Procedures.
These Policies and Procedures are not considered legal proceedings.
Parties may not make audio or video recordings of interviews, meetings, hearings, or any part of the process.
OAIA will retain records relating to Academic Integrity according to the Procedures.
The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act ("FERPA"), 20 U.S.C. § 1232g et seq., is a federal privacy law that prohibits disclosure of student education records, such as student disciplinary records and records related to the Full Review, unless a student consents or other legal basis shows that disclosure is needed.
University business practices and certain privacy laws, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), the Higher Education Act of 1965, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), the Maryland Public Information Act, and the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, prohibit disclosure of certain student records, which may include student disciplinary records, absent a student's consent or other legal basis for disclosure.
Academic Misconduct Record Removals
The University believes that Students can and do learn from their interactions with the Integrity process and that self-reflection and accepting responsibility for one's actions may warrant restorative justice and an opportunity to remove a Student's academic misconduct record (“Record Removal”).
Record Removals are discretionary and will not be granted automatically.
Record Removal is only available for Consequences up to and including Suspension and is not available for Dismissal, Expulsion, Invalidation of Credit, or Revocation of a Credential.
A Student may not request Record Removal until two (2) years have passed since the date the Consequence for Academic Misconduct was completed.
To request a Record Removal, the Student must submit a written request for Record Removal (“Written Request for Removal”) to firstname.lastname@example.org according to the Procedures.
A Written Request for Removal is not an opportunity to object to the Decision or Consequence.
Once the Written Request for Removal is received, the AVP-OAIA or designee will review the request and appoint a Panel to conduct an interview with the Student and consider the Written Request for Removal.
The Panel may consider the following factors:
The nature of the violations;
The number of violations;
Whether the Student completed all Consequences issued by the deadline imposed;
The Student's acceptance of responsibility for the underlying policy violations;
The Student's behavior after the policy violation(s);
The Student's reasons for requesting the Record Removal;
The Student's explanation of how they changed behaviors to avoid academic misconduct and integrated the principles of integrity into their education, job, and/or volunteer experience after receiving the Consequence; and
Any other relevant factors.
The Panel will determine, in its sole discretion, whether the academic misconduct transcript notation records will be removed.
No appeal of this decision is permitted, and the Student may not grieve the Panel’s decision.
If a Record Removal is granted, the disciplinary record will be maintained but not reported on the Student's transcript.
Record Removal will not change grades on the Student’s transcript.
If a Student is found responsible for another violation of this Policy after a record is removed, then the notation of academic misconduct may be placed back on the Student’s transcript.