Academic Regulations A-C
Academic Grievance
Policy
It is the policy of the Graduate School to address all grievances of an academic nature filed by enrolled graduate students. Graduate student grievances are heard by the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee.
Grievances must be filed with the Graduate School within 60 days of the alleged act and may involve the following:
a) violations of program, department, college or Graduate School policies related to final grades in courses or research (891 or 991);
b) violations of program, department, college or Graduate School policies related to the completion of any academic requirement including theses and dissertations, oral or written comprehensive examinations, and
c) graduate student assistantship employment including allegations that offers of assistantship appointments made during recruiting not honored after enrollment.
The Graduate Academic Grievance Committee will not hear allegations of discrimination based on age, color, disability, gender, national origin, race, religion, sexual orientation, or veteran’s status. All such allegations or complaints should be submitted to the Office of Access and Equity. The Graduate School will promptly refer any such complaints received to the Office of Access and Equity.
Committee Structure
The Graduate Academic Grievance Committee is a 20-person committee from which a six person panel, the Initial Grievance Review Board (IGRB), is selected. The Graduate Academic Grievance Committee consists of 15 faculty representatives, three from each college, and five student representatives, preferably one from each college.
Faculty representatives are selected by their colleges and serve three-year staggered terms. Student representatives on the committee are selected and approved by the Graduate Student Government through an application and interview process in the spring semester. Students serve one-year terms. No member of the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee may simultaneously be a member of the undergraduate academic grievance committee, nor may they be members of the undergraduate or graduate academic integrity committees. The selection of faculty and student membership on the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee will occur in April of each year as needed.
The chair of the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee will be a faculty member selected by the membership of the committee at its first meeting.
a) The Graduate Academic Grievance Committee. The Graduate Academic Grievance Committee is responsible for hearing student grievances forwarded to it by the IGRB, proposing resolutions, and, in the case of an appeal, preparing the file and forwarding recommendations to the dean of the Graduate School. Grievances are heard by 5-person subcommittees, three faculty and two graduate students. The Graduate Academic Grievance Committee will only hold hearings on cases referred to it by the IGRB.
b) Initial Grievance Review Board (IGRB). The Initial Grievance Review Board is responsible for determining which grievances will go forward to the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee. The IGRB is comprised of one faculty representative from each of the colleges, appointed for one-year terms. In addition, there is one graduate student representative on the IGRB, appointed for a one-year term. The members of the Initial Grievance Review Board are selected by and from the membership of the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee. The IGRB will select a faculty member to serve as its chair. Decisions will be made by majority vote.
Meetings of the Committee
The Graduate Academic Grievance Committee meets throughout the year, including during the summer, to dispense expeditiously with all grievances brought before it.
Procedure and Rules Governing Academic Grievances
Procedures for Student Filing a Complaint:
At any time prior to filing a grievance, the student may consult with the University ombudsman charged with mediation in cases involving graduate students (see “Academic Grievances, ombudsman”).
Step 1. Any student wishing to file a complaint must first make every attempt to resolve it within the college. The student must first take the complaint to the faculty or staff member(s) involved. If no resolution can be reached, the student should request assistance from the department chair and the dean of the college.
Step 2. If the grievance remains unresolved, the student may file the complaint with the Graduate School. The student must first meet with the associate dean of the Graduate School charged with oversight of the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee. The associate dean will describe the grievance process to the student. If the student wishes to proceed with the grievance, the associate dean will provide the student with Graduate School Form GS-g-A, “Request to File a Grievance,” which will enable the student to provide a written statement detailing the grievance and his or her attempts to resolve it at the college level by documenting a) the dates of consultations at the college level, b) the names of those persons consulted, and c) the signature of the collegiate dean attesting that no resolution could be reached. The student must return the fully executed FORM GS-g-A to the Graduate School within 30 days of receipt from the associate dean. Students who fail to file the grievance within this time frame forfeit their opportunity to proceed.
The student may seek external counsel (an advisor, an attorney, etc.) to assist with preparation of materials to submit to the Academic Grievance Committee. The student may request such individual accompany him or her to the hearing and may wish to proceed to prepare for this event. Questions concerning possible impacts on the student’s graduate status should he or she not be successful in the grievance may be discussed at this time with the associate dean of the Graduate School.
Procedures for the Initial Grievance Review Board (IGRB)
1. An associate or assistant dean (different from the associate dean above providing assistance to the student filing the grievance) of the Graduate School will serve in an advisory role to the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee and IGRB, if needed.
2. When a grievance is submitted to the IGRB, the chairperson will select a team of three persons (two faculty and one student) to read the grievance and make an independent assessment of the grievability of the complaint.
3. A majority decision of the IGRB team of readers is required to move the grievance forward. The chairperson will notify the appropriate associate dean of the Graduate School of the decision of the IGRB.
a) Nongrievable. If the IGRB finds the complaint to be nongrievable, the IGRB will execute its portion of Form GS-g-A, explaining its reasoning for its determination, and return the case to the associate dean with oversight of academic grievances. The associate dean will notify the student of the IGRB’s decision. The student may appeal this determination to the dean of the Graduate School within 10 days by requesting a review of the complaint. The student’s request to the dean must provide a convincing rationale for the appeal. This appeal must be in writing and will be attached to Form GS-g-A. The dean of the Graduate School may elect to uphold the IGRB’s decision or forward the case to the Academic Grievance Committee for a hearing. If the dean of the Graduate School upholds the decision of the IGRB (that the case is nongrievable), the Graduate School will notify the student and the University will take no further action. The associate dean of the Graduate School will notify all parties involved in the case of decisions of the IGRB and results of any appeal, including the chair of the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee, the student, and all department faculty and staff identified on Form GS-g-A.
b) Grievable. If the IGRB finds the complaint to be grievable, the IGRB will forward the case, through the associate dean of the Graduate School, to the chair of the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee.
Procedures for the Academic Grievance Committee
1. In the case that the IGRB recommends that the grievance be heard by the Graduate Academic Grievance Committee, hereafter referred to as the “Committee”. The associate dean of the Graduate School will appoint a subcommittee of five individuals (three faculty and two graduate students) to hear the case. The subcommittee members should be from departments different from the student filing the grievance and the faculty member against whom the grievance is filed. The subcommittee will select its chair and notify the associate dean of the Graduate School. The chair must be a member of the faculty. (The chair of the committee may choose to serve as one of the faculty representatives to the subcommittee.)
2. A copy of the recommendation of the IGRB, and all supporting documents related to the case, will be returned by the chair of the IGRB to the associate dean of the Graduate School who, in turn, will provide the materials to the subcommittee chosen to hear the case. Within five days of receipt, the subcommittee should meet to determine necessary documentation needed for their review.
3. Prior to convening the hearing, the chair of the subcommittee will contact the student who has filed the grievance as well as the faculty member against whom the grievance has been filed. The chair of the subcommittee will provide copies of the grievance to both parties and be available to answer procedural questions concerning the hearing that the parties may have.
4. The faculty member will be given 15 working days from the date of receipt of the grievance to submit any written documentation to the Graduate School that he/she believes to be relevant to the case or that has been requested by the subcommittee designated to hear the grievance.
5. The hearing on the grievance will be informal and will be closed. The chair will take whatever action is necessary to ensure an equitable, orderly and expeditious hearing. All parties to the grievance will be given an opportunity to be heard. In addition, the chair may request the presence of any other person who can supply information pertinent to the grievance. If any witness is unable to be present at the hearing, the chair may, at his or her discretion, accept a written statement from that witness to be presented at the hearing. Witnesses will not be present during the hearing except when they are called to speak before the subcommittee. The parties will be permitted to question all individuals who present information, including each other. The parties will be accorded the right to bring to the hearing one individual of their own choice to provide counsel; however, this individual will not be permitted to participate in the proceedings. Attendance at hearings is limited to designated participants.
6. Upon conclusion of the hearing, the subcommittee will reach, by majority vote, a recommended resolution to the grievance. The subcommittee chair will then formulate the findings in writing. Copies of the written findings and recommended resolution will be forwarded via return receipt-certified mail to the student filing the grievance. A copy will be delivered to the faculty member as well. If the faculty member’s office is on-campus, the copy may be hand-delivered. If the faculty member’s office is off-campus, the copy will be sent via return-receipt certified mail. Each party will be asked to indicate acceptance of the recommended resolution by signing and returning the letter to the Graduate School within 14 working days of its date. Failure to respond within 14 working days will constitute acceptance.
7. If all parties to the grievance accept the resolution recommended by the subcommittee, the matter of the grievance will be considered closed. The associate dean of the Graduate School will notify all involved individuals, including the IGRB and the committee that the case is resolved. The associate dean of the Graduate School will ensure that the resolution is effected and will notify the University registrar, if needed.
8. If either party fails to accept the recommended resolution to the case, all materials will be referred to the dean of the Graduate School. When grievances are referred in this manner, the dean of the Graduate School will make the final decision. The associate dean of the Graduate School will notify all parties included on Form GS-g-A of the decision of the dean and will ensure that the resolution is effected, including notification to the University registrar, if needed.
9. Should a grievance be filed against the dean of the Graduate School in his or her capacity as a member of the faculty; or, if the dean of the Graduate School has become in any way personally involved in the case, the substitution of the provost of the University must be made for the student wishing to appeal the finding of the hearing panel.
10. To the extent permitted by law, all records and discussions relevant to the grievance will be held in confidence; however, information will be available to succeeding chairs of the committee. The Graduate School will retain one complete file of each grievance in a locked file for the required length of time in accordance with state guidelines on retention of academic materials. At the conclusion of the case, materials provided to individual members of the Academic Grievance Committee will be returned to the associate dean for shredding.
11. The Committee will make every reasonable effort to resolve each grievance as expeditiously as possible.
12. These policies and procedures can be changed by recommendation from the membership of the Academic Grievance Committee with approval of the Graduate Advisory Committee, the Graduate Council and the Provost’s Academic Council. Such changes will not affect any case under consideration at the time of the change.
Academic Grievance Ombudsman
The ombudsman is an independent, confidential resource who provides assistance to faculty, graduate students, and postdoctoral students in resolving problems, complaints, and conflicts when normal procedures have not worked satisfactorily. The Ombudsman’s Office serves as a central information source on policies, procedures, and regulations affecting faculty, graduate students, and postdoctoral students. The office refers individuals to persons able to resolve problems or handle appeals at the lowest possible level. Where appropriate, the ombudsman can facilitate communication or mediate between parties.
The ombudsman strives to ensure that faculty, graduate students, and postdoctoral students receive fair and equitable treatment within the University system. He/she provides an independent point of view in an informal and confidential environment. The ombudsman will not identify the student or discuss the student’s personal concerns with anyone without the student’s permission. Private confidential meetings can be arranged at the student’s convenience. All communications will be treated with strict confidentiality, to the extent permitted by law.
The ombudsman works toward resolutions based on principles of fairness. He/she is neither an advocate for faculty, administration, or students, nor an agent of the University.
The Office of the Ombudsman is available to assist faculty members, graduate students, and postdoctoral students who
- need guidance in resolving a problem or a concern relating to the University
- need information about policies or procedures
- need someone to mediate between individuals or within the University
- feel the University has made an error in a particular case
- feel they have been victims of harassment or discrimination
- are unsure about which University policies, procedures, or regulations apply to a situation
- have specific academic problems that cannot be resolved by following regular University procedures
- feel they have been unfairly treated
- have a problem that requires someone to negotiate a solution or to help facilitate communication between parties
- feel that a University policy, procedure, or regulation has been applied unfairly or erroneously
Additional information is available at virtual.clemson.edu/groups/FacOmbudsman/.
Academic Integrity, graduate philosophy
An academic environment of integrity is one in which students, faculty and staff interact with each other from a position of mutual trustworthiness. Clemson University has committed itself to preparing a community of scholars dedicated to integrity in teaching, research, scholarship, mentorship and the acquisition and display of professional values of trust, honesty, fairness, responsibility and respect.1 It is an expectation that Clemson graduate students avail themselves of the many opportunities and resources both on and off campus to learn how to engage in professional practice with integrity. The Graduate School and the community of scholars engaged in graduate-level education will vigorously and expeditiously respond to charges of violations of academic integrity.
In order to promote an academic environment of integrity, all students, faculty and staff must commit to fostering honesty in academic work. Each individual has an important role in ensuring that Clemson’s policy on academic integrity is respected and used most effectively as a mechanism for teaching versus a mechanism for punishment. The Graduate School encourages all faculty and students to take a proactive role in eradicating ignorance of violations of academic integrity. Faculty must be clear on syllabi and in verbal instructions to students on the academic expectations for completing assignments. Graduate programs must engage students in discussions about disciplinary-specific issues and professional practice relative to academic integrity, and may include expectations, procedures and consequences aligned with professional licensing or certification requirements beyond those listed here. Faculty might inform students of national cases of academic dishonesty by other faculty and graduate students so as to heighten students’ awareness of the necessary seriousness of making a commitment to honesty in their work and implications of not doing so. Students must be proactive in asking for clarification on procedures for completing assigned work. As plagiarism appears to be the most prevalent type of violation of academic integrity observed and reported at Clemson University among graduate students, the Graduate School, in conjunction with the Rutland Center for Ethics and the Office for Teaching Effectiveness, will convene and encourage departments to convene seminars and workshops that all newly incoming graduate students attend as a requirement for receipt of a degree from Clemson.
Academic integrity, graduate policy and procedures
Policy: Violations of the principles outlined in the graduate philosophy on academic integrity will be pursued to the fullest extent according to the procedures outlined below. Violations of academic integrity include violations in coursework, research2, independent projects, practica, internships, comprehensive and qualifying exams, theses and dissertations and other publications3 or works submitted as requirements for receipt of a degree. Non-degree seeking students may also be charged with violations of academic integrity.
This policy broadly defines and provides examples of violations of academic integrity, categorizes the seriousness of violations into four levels4 and establishes guidelines for discerning appropriate sanctions for each. As there is no way to identify within the policy all of the possible violations of academic integrity, the policy and ensuing procedures are intended as a general guide for faculty in all colleges to enable consistent, reasonable and fair judgments of graduate student actions incongruous with the fundamental values and general philosophy described above. It further describes the steps to be followed by faculty bringing charges against graduate students for violations of academic integrity.
The authority to resolve cases of violations of academic integrity by enrolled graduate students is vested in the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee. Violations of academic integrity that are associated with research for theses or dissertations involving federal funds (NSF or PHS) or otherwise involve sponsored projects will be addressed in consultation with the University Research Integrity Officer in the Office of Research Compliance. A determination will be made at that time of the appropriate procedure to apply. In instances of violations of federal guidelines, the university research compliance policy will prevail.
A. Definitions, explanations and examples of violations of academic integrity
Violations of academic integrity may include, but are not limited to, the following:
Cheating. Cheating involves giving, receiving, or using unauthorized aid on any academic work submitted for grading including coursework, laboratory assignments, research projects, comprehensive and qualifying examinations, theses and dissertations or using computer center account numbers that belong to another person without the permission of the account owner. Unauthorized aid includes collaborating with classmates or others when explicitly prohibited, using on-line paper mills or paying individuals to prepare research papers, reports or projects, submitting identical work to satisfy the requirements of more than one class without the approval of the faculty, or using textbooks, notes, the web and other sources when instructed to work alone.
Fabricating/falsifying information. Fabricating or falsifying information involves actions such as making up data that were not collected, stating that studies were conducted that were not, indicating that original source material was read when information was obtained from secondary or tertiary sources, making up references not used or identifying sources that were not consulted (for example, telephone interviews).
Facilitating violations of academic integrity. Facilitating violations of academic integrity involves students intentionally assisting others to violate the principles of academic integrity (for example, allowing friends access to their work, or instructing students on ways to solicit aid on papers, projects, take home exams, tests for state and national licenses, etc).
Failing to cite contributors. Failing to cite an author or multiple authors involves not giving credit to individuals who have contributed significantly to a work (paper, research project, poster, etc.) and claiming the final product as one’s own.
Plagiarizing. Plagiarizing is theft of the work accomplished by someone else. It includes copying words, phrases, sentence structure, computer code or files, images, or ideas from any source and attributing the work to one’s own efforts. Blatant examples of plagiarism include failure to use quotation marks, to indent text of more than three lines and failure to cite consulted sources either in footnotes, endnotes or within the body of the text of a document. More subtle examples of plagiarism include paraphrasing or using others’ conceptual frameworks for developing creative works without acknowledgement or permission or citing a source within the text but then directly quoting the materials without the use of quotations marks or text indentation.
Thwarting others’ progress. Thwarting others’ progress involves editing, deleting or otherwise destroying computer files that belong to another person or intentionally stealing or destroying property which prevents others from using it to gain needed information to complete assignments, for example, library materials on reserve, materials on loan by a faculty member or reports and documents made available for student use by external companies, state and federal agencies, etc.
B. Levels of seriousness of violations of academic integrity and sample recommended sanctions5
At the graduate level, it is expected that students exhibit sophistication in understanding the tenets of academic integrity. Even so, it is clear that some types of violations are more serious in nature than others and that some types of violations require deliberate, calculated actions on the part of the student. This policy categorizes academic integrity violations into four levels. To provide guidance on the administration of sanctions, examples of violations of academic integrity are delineated below by the level of seriousness. This list is by no means exhaustive but is reflective of the types of violations that have been observed at Clemson. Guidance may be sought from the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee to determine the appropriate level of seriousness in unusual or highly complex instances.
Level One Seriousness and Sample Recommended Sanctions
Includes instances where it is determined that a first-year graduate student is essentially unaware of the principles of academic integrity at Clemson, where a student has misunderstood instructions from a professor, has committed an infraction impacting a minor portion of assigned work or has committed an infraction on an assignment of minor significance to the final grade. Level One violations are addressed by the professor.
Examples of Level One violations include the following:
1. failure to follow instructions to work independently;
2. plagiarizing affecting very minor portions of an assignment or project; or
3. first-time offenses by students unfamiliar with the academic integrity expectations at Clemson.
Sample recommended sanctions for Level One violations include one or more of the following:
1. failure on the assignment;
2. requirement to make all corrections and resubmit the assignment for grading;
3. verbal or written reprimand; or
4. assignment to attend a seminar on academic integrity and to write a paper on knowledge gained to be submitted for credit or no credit, at the professor’s discretion.
Level Two Seriousness and Sample Recommended Sanctions
Includes instances where a student is determined to be aware of the principles of academic integrity but may have inadvertently committed an infraction that impacts a moderate portion of an assignment, course, project, laboratory or research activity. Level Two violations are addressed by the faculty member, the graduate program coordinator and the department chair. Examples of Level Two violations include the following:
1. failing to acknowledge sources by use of quotation marks, footnotes, endnotes or indentations of lengthy, direct quotes;
2. cheating on in-class or take-home exams by using unauthorized aid (notes, books and other references, other students’ work, web sites, etc.) in violation of explicit instructions;
3. failing to acknowledge sources of materials paraphrased;
4. failing to acknowledge sources of assistance, or other contributors, in preparation of assignments, papers, posters or projects, etc.; or
5. using the conceptual frameworks of others in developing creative works without acknowledgement or permission.
Sample recommended sanctions for Level Two violations include one or more of the following:
1. failure on the assignment with no opportunity to amend;
2. assignment of a similar task with a higher level of difficulty and more stringent grading; or
3. receipt of zero on the assignment.
Level Three Violations of Academic Integrity and Sample Recommended Sanctions
Includes instances where it is determined that a student flagrantly and intentionally violates the principles of academic integrity in a significant portion of an assignment, course or research activity. Level Three violations are heard by the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee. Examples of Level Three violations include the following:
1. knowingly plagiarizing major sections of papers submitted for grading;
2. purchasing papers or reports and submitting them for grading;
3. thwarting others’ progress by destroying computer files, laboratory or library materials; or
4. devising means with classmates to cheat on exams of any sort (qualifying, preliminary, state exams for licensing, etc.)
Sample recommended sanctions for Level Three violations include one or more of the following:
1. receipt of an “F” in the course with the concurrence of the faculty member;
2. suspension from the University for one or more semesters;
3. termination of the student’s graduate assistantship and/or University fellowship;
4. notation in the Graduate School of the violation of academic integrity and the sanction; and
5. notation on the student’s permanent academic record (transcript) of the violation of academic integrity at Level Three and the suspension from the University, if applied.
Level Four Violations of Academic Integrity and Sample Recommended Sanctions
Includes instances where it is determined that a student has intentionally committed violations of the principles of academic integrity serious enough to constitute “academic fraud,” actions which have the impact of bringing the reputation of the institution itself into question. Level Four violations are heard by the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee and may involve interaction with the Faculty Senate, the University Office of Research Compliance and the vice president for research if sponsored research is involved.
1. fabricating data in research projects, papers and reports;
2. creating false sources for references, which in fact, do not exist;
3. plagiarizing in materials to be submitted for publication, including journal articles, theses and dissertations;
4. Falsifying transcript records, altering any supporting documents submitted to the University with the application for admission;
5. paying an individual or company to produce a thesis or dissertation; or
6. forging a faculty member’s signature on any document.
Sample recommended sanctions for Level Four violations include one or more of the following:
1. mandated permanent dismissal from the University with no possibility of academic renewal;
2. notation in the Graduate School of the violation of academic integrity and the sanction; and
3. permanent dismissal from the University.
NOTE: Repeated violations of the policy of academic integrity, irrespective of the level, may result in suspension from the University or permanent dismissal.
C. Structure of the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee
Faculty. Four tenured faculty members from each of the academic colleges serve staggered 2-year terms on the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee. Members of the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee should not simultaneously be members of the Undergraduate Academic Integrity Committee, nor the grievance committees of either the graduate or undergraduate programs. The purpose for having an expanded number of faculty is to ensure the ability of the committee to meet in a timely fashion when cases are brought forward and to attempt to have broad disciplinary representation on the committee. Faculty representatives are selected by college rules at the end of the spring semester to serve two-year staggered terms that begin in the fall.
Students. Five graduate students, one from each college, are selected and approved by the Graduate Student Government (GSG) through an application and interview process in the spring semester. These students are then recommended for one-year appointments to the associate dean of the Graduate School no later than the last spring meeting of the Graduate Student Government. Graduate student committee members must maintain minimally a 3.0 grade point average during the term of appointment and must have completed nine hours of coursework or research prior to being selected by GSG.
Chair. A chair will be elected from within the committee’s membership. The chair must be a faculty member and has a full vote on the committee.
Hearing Panel. Cases will be heard by a panel of five committee members consisting of two graduate students and three faculty members from different departments appointed by the chair of the committee. Decisions by the hearing panel require a majority vote.
Administrative Coordinator. The associate dean of the Graduate School serves as the non-voting administrative coordinator of the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee.
Meetings and Hearings. The committee convenes throughout the calendar year, including summers, when there is a case to be heard. The Graduate Academic Integrity Committee will meet to review and revise its procedures, if necessary, prior to the last day of classes of every spring semester. Revised procedures will go into effect on the first day of the subsequent fall semester.
Quorum. Seventy-five (75%) of the membership of the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee constitutes a quorum. A majority vote of the quorum is required to recommend suspension or dismissal of a student. At least one graduate student must be present to obtain a quorum.
Recusal. To avoid possible conflict of interest, faculty and graduate student representatives should recuse themselves from cases involving colleagues or peers in their immediate departments or programs.
D. Notification of a violation of academic integrity
1. When, in the opinion of a faculty member, there is evidence that a student has committed a violation of academic integrity, the faculty member will fully document the charge in writing in a statement delivered in a sealed envelope to the associate dean of the Graduate School. At the same time, at his or her discretion, the alleging faculty member is encouraged, but is not required, to privately inform the student charged of the nature of the allegation.
2. When, in the opinion of a student or staff member, there is evidence that a student has committed a violation of academic integrity, he or she should contact the faculty member for the course (including the research advisor or internship/practicum/co-op supervisor) to discuss the incident. After being contacted, if, in the opinion of the faculty member, there is evidence that the student has committed a violation of academic integrity, the faculty member will deliver a formal written charge in a sealed envelope to the associate dean of the Graduate School. At the same time, at his or her discretion, the alleging faculty member is encouraged, but is not required to, privately inform the student charged of the nature of the allegation.
3. When, in the opinion of anyone outside the University, there is evidence that a student has committed a violation of academic integrity, that person should bring this allegation to the attention of the associate dean of the Graduate School. The associate dean will contact the appropriate faculty representative of the student’s program (consistent with the alleged violation). The faculty member will determine if charges are to be brought against the student. If the faculty member determines sufficient evidence to file a charge, the faculty member will fully document the charge in writing in a statement delivered in a sealed envelope to the associate dean of the Graduate School. At the same time, at his or her discretion, the alleging faculty member is encouraged, but is not required to, privately inform the student charged of the nature of the allegation.
4. Within three working days from the date the associate dean of the Graduate School has received a formal charge of an alleged violation, he or she will provide the student with a copy of the charge and the procedures of the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee.
5. All charges of academic integrity will be forwarded to and addressed by the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee. Students who withdraw from courses after a charge has been filed eliminate the possibility of course-related sanctions but will still be subject to sanctions determined by the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee.
6. The associate dean will provide a copy of the charge to the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee chair and will indicate if this violation constitutes a first offense.
E. Procedures if the student chooses to waive his or her right to a hearing
1. The student must meet with the associate dean of the Graduate School to request to waive his or her right to a hearing.
2. If the student desires to waive his or her right to a hearing, the associate dean will allow the student to execute Form GS-ai-A, “Request to Waive Academic Integrity Hearing,” and will inform the student of the classification/level of the offense (level Two to Four). A student may not request a hearing for Level One violations.
3. A student who requests to waive his or her right to a hearing will have no right to appeal the sanction imposed.
4. The Graduate School will notify the professor of the decision of the student to waive his or her right to a hearing.
Application of sanctions in cases without a hearing
When the student has waived his or her right to a hearing, sanctions may be imposed by the faculty member if Level One, by the faculty member and department if Level Two, or by the Academic Integrity Committee hearing panel if Level Three or Four.
1. In cases of Level One violations, the professor should meet with the student and inform him or her of the sanction. The professor should provide an email notification to the associate dean of the Graduate School including the date of the meeting with the student and the sanction imposed. Level One violations will not become a part of the student’s permanent academic record at the University but will be recorded for data purposes only in the Graduate School. In keeping with the commitment to encourage students’ understanding and embracement of the tenants of academic integrity, Level One violations will be used as a warning and as a teaching opportunity.
2. In cases of Level Two violations, the professor and department chair should meet with the student and inform him or her of the sanction. The professor should provide an e-mail notification to the associate dean of the Graduate School including the date of the meeting with the student and the sanction imposed. Level Two violations will not become a part of the student’s permanent academic record at the University but will be recorded in the Graduate School as the student’s first offense of violation of the policies of academic integrity.
3. In cases of Level Three violations, the professor and department may choose to recommend a desired sanction to the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee’s hearing panel; however, the panel will make a final determination of appropriateness of the sanction. Once the chair of the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee has received the charge, the chair will convene the committee. The committee must convene within 15 working days of receipt of a charge.
i. If the committee accepts the recommendation of the professor/department, the committee will notify the associate dean of the Graduate School. The associate dean will then note the student’s file accordingly, forward a copy of the sanction to the student, professor, department and graduate dean. If the student does not appeal the decision of the committee within the allotted five working days (see appeals below), the Graduate School will notify the University registrar of the violation and the sanction, if suspension is imposed.
ii. If the committee does not accept the recommended sanction of the professor/department, the committee will make a determination of appropriate sanction and notify the professor, department chair and associate dean of the Graduate School. The associate dean will then note the student’s file accordingly, forward a copy of the sanction to the student, professor, department and graduate dean. If the student does not appeal the decision of the committee within the allotted five working days (see appeals below), the Graduate School will notify the University registrar of the violation and the sanction, if suspension is imposed.
4. In cases of Level Four violations, the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee will determine the sanction and notify the associate dean of the Graduate School. The associate dean will then note the student’s file accordingly, forward a copy of the sanction to the student, professor, department and graduate dean. If the student does not appeal the decision of the committee within the allotted five working days (see appeals below), the associate dean will notify the University registrar of the violation and the sanction, if dismissal is imposed.
F. Procedures if the student chooses to pursue a hearing
1. A hearing may not be requested for a Level One violation. Level One violations will be used as a teaching opportunity in the course/program/department, whichever is relevant, to discuss with the student the seriousness of failure to understand academic integrity issues at the graduate level.
2. If a student requests a hearing for a Level Two violation, the associate dean of the college will assist in assembling a 3-person hearing panel within the college. Decisions of the hearing panel will be final. Graduate student representation on this panel is not required.
3. The Graduate Academic Integrity Committee’s hearing panel (for cases identified to be Level Three or Four) will consist of five individuals – two graduate students and three faculty members from different colleges. The chair of the committee will select these individuals as cases are brought forward. Each hearing panel will select a faculty member to serve as chair of the hearing. At least one faculty member must have disciplinary expertise sufficient to fully comprehend the charges and the ensuing discussions in the case. For example, if the case involves advanced statistics, at least one faculty member with expertise in statistics must be available at the hearing. In order to ensure this expertise, the committee chair may request a tenured faculty member (either from among the Clemson faculty or external to Clemson, depending on the nature of the case) to serve as an ad hoc, non-voting consultant to the panel during the hearing.
4. The faculty member filing the charge must present a full written explanation of the charge to the associate dean of the Graduate School, who will forward it to the chair of the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee’s hearing panel within three working days of receipt. The Graduate School will also provide a copy of the charge to the student within the same time frame.
5. The student will then have five working days in which to provide a detailed written explanation on Form GS-ai-B, “Student Rebuttal of Charge,” in defense of himself or herself. This form will be submitted to the hearing panel through the Graduate School designated dean.
6. Within 15 working days of receipt of a charge, the chair of the hearing panel will convene the hearing.
7. The student and the alleging faculty member will receive at least five business days advance notice of the hearing date.
8. The hearing will be conducted in a closed session with only the student, alleging faculty member and hearing panel members present.
9. Only materials submitted to the hearing panel prior to the hearing may be introduced and/or explained during the hearing. If necessary, witnesses may be called to speak before the hearing panel and will only be present when speaking before the panel.
10. At the discretion of the chair of the hearing panel, the hearing may be suspended to accommodate the review by the panel of unanticipated new information.
11. Following the hearing, the parties will be excused and the hearing panel will deliberate in a closed session.
12. Decisions by the hearing panel will be by majority vote.
G. Findings of the Hearing Panel
1. If the student is found not in violation, the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee’s hearing panel will report this finding to the Graduate School on Form GS-ai-C, “Report of Finding.” The Graduate School will notify all parties involved of the finding by forwarding a copy of Form GS-ai-C to each.
2. If the student is found in violation, in cases at Levels Three or Four, the Graduate Academic Integrity’s hearing panel will report its decision and recommended sanction to the dean of the Graduate School on Form GS-ai-C, “Report of Finding.”
H. Appeals
The decision of the collegiate or Graduate Academic Integrity Committee’s hearing panel is final and no appeals may be filed except in cases resulting in suspension or permanent dismissal. In these instances, within five working days after receipt of written notification of a suspension or dismissal, a student may submit a written appeal to the dean of the Graduate School to review the decision. The decision of the dean of the Graduate School is final.
NOTE: Should the faculty member filing the charge be the dean of the Graduate School (in his or her capacity as a member of the faculty), the substitution of the provost of the University must be made for students wishing to appeal the finding of the hearing panel.
I. Administration of sanctions
The alleging faculty member will notify the student and the Graduate School of sanctions imposed for Level One or Two violations. The Graduate School will notify all parties of the decision of the Graduate Academic Integrity’s hearing panel for Level Three and Four violations and will oversee administration of any sanctions involving suspension or dismissal.
1. Level One sanctions are determined by the alleging faculty member. While the faculty member is not restricted to the limited suggestions of this policy, the sanction should be consistent with the suggested sanctions for Level One violations. The associate dean of the Graduate School may be contacted for assistance, if desired.
2. Level Two sanctions are determined by the faculty member in consultation with the graduate program coordinator and department chair. While these individuals are not restricted to the limited suggestions of this policy, the sanction should be consistent with the suggested sanctions for Level Two violations. The associate dean of the Graduate School may be contacted for assistance, if desired.
3. Level Three sanctions are determined by the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee’s hearing panel. If the violation is not the student’s first while enrolled at Clemson University, the student will automatically receive a grade of F for courses or research (891 or 991) or will receive a grade of “fail” on the comprehensive exam in question, and may be suspended from the University for one or more semesters. Students suspended for violations of academic integrity will also be terminated from graduate assistantships or University fellowships for the same period of the suspension from the date of suspension. The dean of the Graduate School will be notified on decisions involving suspension and will formally issue the suspension to the student.
4. Level Four sanctions are determined by the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee’s hearing panel. Level Four sanctions require that the student be permanently dismissed from the University.
5. The associate dean of the Graduate School is responsible for notifying the registrar and all other appropriate University personnel of suspensions and dismissals due to violations of academic integrity.
NOTE: An affirmative vote of 2/3 of the Academic Integrity Committee is required to determine if a specific notation: suspended or dismissed “for violation of academic integrity” is to be added to the student’s transcript, otherwise, the notation, “suspended” or “dismissed” will be noted on the transcript following current University guidelines.
J. Retention/disposition of files
The Graduate School will retain all files of academic integrity cases and their findings in accordance with the University’s records retention policy.
K. Confidentiality
All hearings are closed and cases are considered confidential. The Graduate School and members of the Graduate Academic Integrity Committee and hearing panels will keep all materials and discussions of the cases confidential to the extent permitted by law.
L. Retribution
In a community of scholars who respect and promote academic integrity, there is no place for retribution. Faculty should agree to support and uphold the decisions of their peers who serve as members of the Academic Integrity Committee and hearing panels as these individuals take seriously the responsibility to render objective decisions on cases brought before them. Faculty have a professional obligation to teach by example and to guide graduate students in practices of ethical judgment and building of personal and professional integrity.
1. The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity, The Center for Academic Integrity, October 1999.
2. It is possible that, depending on the research infraction, use of the policy on research be substituted for the academic integrity policy.
3. Ibid.
4. Used by permission, academic integrity model of Rutgers University, New Brunswick.
5. Rutgers University, http://teachx.rutgers.edu/integrity/policy.html.
