Revised:
11/17/2004
Honor Code UPPS
No. 07.10.01
Issue No. 5
Effective Date: 08/16/2004
Review: June 1 E4Y
01. POLICY
STATEMENTS
01.01 The purpose of this UPPS is to provide policies
and procedures related to academic honesty, pursuant to the Rules and
Regulations, Board of Regents, Texas State University System, effective May
2003. See Section VI, Subsection 5.36
of the Regents Rules.
01.02 Texas
State University-San Marcos expects students to engage in all academic pursuits
in a manner that is beyond reproach. Students found in violation of the Honor
Code are subject to disciplinary action.
01.03 To
support the goal of maintaining a climate of academic honesty, Texas State has
adopted a modified Honor Code (see Attachment
I).
02. DEFINITIONS
02.01 "Academic
work" means the preparation of an essay, thesis, report, problem,
assignment or other project submitted for purposes of grade determination.
02.02 "Violation
of the “Honor Code" includes, but is not limited to, cheating on an
examination or other academic work, plagiarism, collusion and the abuse of
resource materials.
a.
"Cheating" means engaging in any of the following activities.
1) Copying from another student's test paper,
laboratory report, other report, or computer files, data listings, or programs.
2) Using, during a test, materials not authorized by
the person giving the test.
3) Collaborating, without authorization, with another
person during an examination or in preparing academic work.
4) Knowingly, and without authorization, using,
buying, selling, stealing, transporting, soliciting, copying or possessing, in
whole or in part, the contents of an unadministered test.
5) Substituting for another student or permitting
another person to substitute for oneself in taking an examination or preparing
academic work.
6) Bribing another person to obtain an unadministered
test or obtain information about an unadministered test.
7) Purchasing, or otherwise acquiring and submitting
as one's own work any research paper or other writing assignment prepared by an
individual or firm. This section does not apply to the typing of the rough or
final versions of an assignment by a professional typist.
b.
"Plagiarism" means the appropriation of another's work and the
unacknowledged incorporation of that work in one's own written work offered for
credit.
c.
"Collusion" means the unauthorized collaboration with another
person in preparing written work offered for credit.
d.
"Abuse of resource materials" means the mutilation,
destruction, concealment, theft or alteration of materials provided to assist
students in the mastery of course materials.
02.03 Following
are definitions of persons, their titles and responsibilities, who shall have,
or be involved in, the jurisdiction over the Honor Code.
a.
"Coordinator" means the Coordinator of Student Justice.
b.
"Instructor" means a faculty member with the responsibility
for teaching a particular academic course, regardless of that person's academic
rank, e. g., professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor,
assistant instructor, lecturer or graduate teaching assistant.
c.
"Student" means any person enrolled in a course, whether a
full-time or part-time student, whether for credit or audit, and whether in
residence, or by extension or any form of distance education.
d. “Honor
Code Council” means a committee made up of seven faculty members and seven
students, one from each college, except the University College and the Graduate
College. The faculty will be appointed
by the Faculty Senate to serve two-year staggered terms with two appointees
designated as Chair and Vice Chair. The
students will be selected on an annual basis through the Associated Student
Government and approved by the Vice President for Student Affairs. The
committee must include an equal number of faculty, including the Chair or Vice
Chair, and students with a minimum of three each to hear an appeal. Prior to
serving, the Council members will attend an orientation session presented by
the Dean of Students office.
02.04 "Academic
penalty" means one or more of the following sanctions which may be imposed
in cases involving violation of academic honesty.
a. A
requirement to perform additional academic work not required of other students
in the course.
b. A
reduction to any level of the grade in the course, or on the examination, or
other academic work affected by violation of the Honor Code.
c. A
requirement to withdraw from the course with a grade of "F" or a
"W".
02.05 "Disciplinary
penalty" means any penalty which may be imposed in a student disciplinary
matter pursuant to The Official Texas State Code of Student Conduct.
*03. PROCEDURES
03.01 The
following procedures are outlined in Attachment
III.
03.02 When a
faculty member reasonably suspects that a student under the faculty member’s
supervision has violated the Honor Code, the faculty member will follow these
procedures. The faculty member’s
proceedings are informal and are not adversarial. The faculty member may consult with his or her chair regarding
the matter.
a. The
faculty member will summon the student orally or in writing to a private,
personal conference. At the meeting the
faculty member will explain to the student both the suspected code violation
and the evidence that supports the suspicion that the violation occurred. The faculty member may rely on documents and
other written statements. If the faculty member relies on documents or other
written statements the faculty member will provide the student with copies of
such documents.
1) The faculty
member will give the student at least three calendar days to respond to the
suspected code violation. The student
may respond in writing or in person at a subsequent meeting with the faculty
member, as determined by the student.
The student may bring present witnesses, either by written statements or
in person. However, neither the faculty
member nor the student may be represented by legal counsel at any meeting.
2) If the
student fails to respond in the time that the faculty member provides, the
faculty member may proceed to determine the matter as provided below.
b. The faculty member, after considering the evidence
and the student’s response, will determine whether the student violated the
Honor Code and will notify the student of his or her determination and of any
academic penalty assessed. The faculty
member will also advise the student that the student may accept or reject
either the faculty member’s determination or any academic penalty.
1) If the
faculty member is not convinced that the student violated the Honor Code, the
matter will end.
2) If the
faculty member is convinced that the student violated the Honor Code, the
faculty member may assess an academic penalty as defined in Section 02.04.
3) In addition
to an academic penalty, a faculty member may recommend additional disciplinary
action.
4) On the
Honor Code Review Form (see Attachment
II), the faculty member shall:
(a) note his or her determination and any
academic penalty;
(b) note any
additional disciplinary penalty recommended;
(c) give the
student an opportunity to indicate the student’s acceptance or rejection of the
faculty member’s determination;
(d) sign and
date the form; and
(e) deliver
the form to the Coordinator of Student Justice with copies to the student and
the faculty member’s dean.
03.03 The dean
of the college will convene the Honor Code Council if (1) the faculty member
recommends an additional disciplinary penalty; (2) the student rejects the
faculty member’s determination; or (3) the student has a record of a previous
violation of the Honor Code.
a. When the Honor Code Council convenes, it will give
the student notice of he reported code violation, notice of the evidence that
it has to support that violation, and an opportunity to respond, according to
these procedures.
1) Reviewing Academic Penalties. When the Honor Code Council reviews an academic
penalty it will ask the faculty member to submit, in writing, the documentation
and evidence that supports the suspected offense, as well as any mitigating
evidence. The Council will then provide
the student with a copy of the faculty member’s materials and an opportunity to
respond to those materials within a reasonable time determined by the Council.
The Council may request additional written materials from either party. The
Council will consider all material submitted and make its recommendation as
provided below.
2) Reviewing Disciplinary Recommendations. When reviewing a recommendation for a disciplinary
penalty, the Council will follow the applicable procedures for hearings in
Section 03.05 of the Code of Student Conduct. These procedures include notice
to the student of the charges and evidence of an Honor Code violation and an
opportunity to respond to the charges and evidence at a hearing.
3) Reviewing Cases Involving Both Academic Penalties and
Disciplinary Recommendations. When
reviewing cases that involve both an academic penalty and a recommendation for
a disciplinary penalty, the Council will review the academic penalty under the
procedures in subsection 1 above, and will review the disciplinary
recommendation under the procedures in subsection 2 above.
b. After
conducting its review, the Council will submit its findings and recommendations
to the dean of the college where the alleged violation occurred. The dean will make a determination as to
whether the student violated the Honor Code and if so, as to whether to impose
any academic or disciplinary penalty on the student.
1) If the dean
is not convinced that the student violated the Honor Code, the matter will end
and the dean will remit the student’s work to the faculty member for evaluation
and grade assignment with supervision from the dean or the dean’s
representative.
2) If the dean
is convinced that the student violated the Honor Code, the dean may assess an
academic penalty, a disciplinary penalty, or both.
03.04 Within
five days of receiving the dean’s written decision, the student may appeal in
writing to the Provost and Vice President for Student Affairs. As provided in the Rules and Regulations of
the Board of Regents, Texas State University System (Chapter VI, Section 5.36),
the Provost will hear appeals of academic decisions and the Vice President for
Student Affairs will hear appeals of disciplinary decisions. To appeal, the student should send written
appeals to both officials. In both
cases, grounds for appeal are limited to allegations that:
a. proper due
process procedures were not followed.
However, deviations from prescribed procedures will not necessarily
invalidate a decision or proceeding unless they caused significant prejudice to
the student;
b. the penalties assessed are not commensurate with the
code violation committed; or
c. the University has violated a right guaranteed the
student by the constitution or laws of the United States or the State of Texas.
03.04 The
Provost and Vice President for Student Affairs will render their decisions on
the appeals within a reasonable time and will inform all parties, including the
student and the faculty member, of their decisions.
Note: If any conflict arises, the Regent’s Rules
and Regulations will prevail.
04. REVIEWERS OF THIS UPPS
04.01 Reviewers
of this UPPS include the following:
Position Date
Dr. Perry Moore June
1 E4Y
Provost
Dr. James Studer June
1 E4Y
Vice President for Student Affairs
Dr. Rod Fluker June
1 E4Y
Coordinator of Student Justice
Chair, Faculty Senate June
1 E4Y
05. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
This UPPS has been approved
by the following individuals in their official capacities and represents Texas
State policy and procedure from the date of this document until superseded.
Dr. Perry Moore, Provost;
senior reviewer of this UPPS
Dr. Denise
Trauth, President