欧美AV

Violations and Sanction Guidelines

Page Content

To better assist faculty in the process of reporting perceived academic integrity violations, the Office of Academic Integrity provides guidelines for determining the level of a violation and what sanctions may be considered. These guidelines are intended as a starting point for disciplinary and school conversations about integrity, how to encourage it, and appropriate responses to infractions that maintain the educational goals of the policies for students and ensure the value of credentials, degrees, and related outcomes for all university stakeholders. Further, this ensures that repeated offenses across multiple courses may be addressed to ensure the overall value of degrees and adherence to the policy throughout a student鈥檚 coursework in all attempted course enrollments.

Levels of Violations

LEVEL ONE

A Level I violation typically involves a low-stakes assignment as defined by the instructor of record. Possible sanctions include but are not limited to a reprimand, zero or reduced grade on the assignment, resubmission of additional or different work/assignment, taking a new exam, or lowered course grade.

Examples of Level I violations include but are not limited to:

• Cheating that is not premeditated on an assessment
• Plagiarism of five sentences or fewer on an assignment. Faculty are encouraged to consider scale and structure and scale this as they feel is necessary
• Signing an attendance roster for a student who is not in attendance or otherwise impacting the accuracy of attendance records
• Receiving inappropriate assistance on an assignment or collaborating when individual work is specified
• Minor (impacting less than 10 percent of the assignment, test, presentation, or other course-related material) use of unauthorized technologies and/or artificial intelligence

LEVEL TWO

A Level II violation typically involves a high-stakes assignment or work of significant import to the course as defined by the instructor of record, or a repeated violation in the same course. Level II violations require a facilitation meeting with the student, instructor of record, and an Academic Integrity Councilor.

The Level II violation can be sanctioned with an F or the XF grade for the course. The XF grade will be recorded on the academic transcript with the notation "failure due to academic integrity violation." The XF will be treated as an F for the purpose of calculating grade point average and class standing. The XF cannot be replaced by simply retaking the course in which it was earned; a student must first complete an approved remediation process (see above). In addition, an XF can be assigned in a pass/no pass course as well to indicate that an academic integrity violation occurred.

Examples of Level II violations include but are not limited to:

• Premeditated cheating on a test, project, or assignment
• Plagiarism of what the instructor considers to be substantial amounts of a paper, project, or submission of a paper written by another student
• Lying or falsification of data, including forgery for the benefit of academic gain
• Contributing to or advertising for sites that promote academic misconduct, such as note-selling websites, test bank websites, or third-party vendor
• Using unapproved materials including but not limited to cheat sheets, unauthorized aids (inclusive of electronic devices and cell phones if used without permission, inclusive of taking unauthorized photographs of tests), visiting or otherwise accessing materials on websites not authorized during an online examination, quiz, or other such activity; or other such violations as denoted by the instructor of record
• Committing conspiracy to cheat or plagiarize
• Engaging in acts of bribery (actual or attempted), coercion, intimidation, or other defined elements to influence a grade, score, or outcome related to an academic assignment, internship, or university-sanctioned activity
• Impersonating or allowing oneself to be impersonated in an online course
• Multiple submissions, without authorization by all instructors involved, of substantial portions of the same work across courses, on qualifying examinations, in capstone or dissertation works, or when repeating a course previously attempted for credit
• Stealing for the purpose of academic gain for self or others
• Acquiring information inappropriately, including photos or video recordings of examinations, quizzes, or assignments
• Use of artificial intelligence or prohibited technological devices that impact or are related to more 10% or more of a test, assignment, presentation, or other academic activity. Lower percentage levels may be assigned a level I violation.
• Any violation involving potential criminal activity for academic gain

LEVEL THREE

A Level III violation typically involves a high stake or culminating assignment as defined by the instructor of record and often, though not always, with disregard to formative feedback and mentorship in the course or program. Level III violations require a facilitation meeting with the student, instructor of record, and an Academic Integrity Councilor.

A Level III violation may be sanctioned with any and/or all of the following: removal of assistantship/fellowship, removal from the program, or an XF grade, if it occurred in a course. If the student is a graduate student who receives an XF, he or she may appeal and deny the violation. Still, if the XF is upheld, he or she may be dismissed from the program and the graduate school, depending on the degree program鈥檚 policy.

Level III Violations include but are not limited to:

• Any Level II action as decided by the instructor of record
• Falsification of documentation for admission to a program or to secure funding
• Falsification of data related to research or creative works
• Falsification of any information, data, or materials distributed, published, or performed by the University
• Plagiarism on qualifying exams, theses, dissertations, creative works, journal articles, professional presentations, or any other endeavor as it relates to the program or the profession
• Knowingly violating research or professional ethics of the student's area of study as defined by elements such as best practices, codes of practice, ethical standards, or other elements related to program-specific or national organization areas.

Sanctions

The Academic Integrity Policy outlines in Section 3.2 information about sanctions and outcomes commonly used. As noted in section 3.2, the faculty or instructor of record will make the initial determination of what sanctions will be appropriate for the discovered alleged academic integrity violation. Should faculty wish, they may consult with the Academic Integrity Office for assistance or guidance in this process.

In considering guidelines for selecting an appropriate sanction, faculty should work to align the sanction with the selected violation level they have discovered while also considering any previous known violations. While the goal of the academic integrity policy does include a dedication to being educationally purposeful in response, it also is meant to preserve academic integrity as a commitment to the university鈥檚 success, both factors that the instructor of record may wish to consider as they consider the sanction. Faculty should, thus, select the sanction they feel most appropriate for both the scale and level of the violation. During the facilitation and/or appeal process (if needed), changes may be made or required to the sanction.

As outlined in section 3.2, a variety of sanctions exist within the policy and scope of academic integrity policy enforcement, such as:

• Zero or reduced credit on an assignment
• Required resubmission of an assignment with or without reduced credit
• Tutorial session or other training assignment (i.e., meeting with student, online plagiarism tutorial)
• A grade of F for the course
• A grade of XF for the course with university remediation course
• Reduced credit for the assignment
• Academic probation
• Withholding honors
• Program dismissal
• Expulsion
• Revocation of degree

An XF sanction is a special grade entry that denotes academic misconduct on the student鈥檚 record. By assigning that as the sanction, faculty are indicating that the academic misconduct should equate to a failure of the course with a special notice of academic misconduct. As this sanction is unique to the academic integrity process, it places the grade of XF so that said grade appears in place of any other grade on the student鈥檚 transcript to indicate an egregious violation of academic integrity. The student鈥檚 transcript will note that the XF results from a breach or violation of the academic integrity policy. When an undergraduate student receives their first XF grade, they may complete the approved remediation course to remove the 鈥淴鈥� from the XF, leaving them with a grade of F on their transcript, permitting any repeat option to replace the grade if available to then be carried out. The removal of the X from an XF is only available to undergraduate students, and the removal of an X from an XF can only occur once during a student鈥檚 tenure at 欧美AV.

If a student withdraws from the university entirely during the semester of the academic misconduct incident(s), the student will still receive an XF for the course for which the academic integrity violation occurred while receiving W grades for all other courses.

Determining a Sanction in Relation to Violation Level

Ultimately, as the expert in the course, the faculty determines the sanction which is submitted to the Academic Integrity Office during the process, but many find it helpful to have some guidelines to consider what sanction should be used in what violation level. One way that the instructor of a course may approach this is to consider the overall impact of the assignment on a course. For instance, a student engaging in academic misconduct on a low stakes assignment is still a violation of the policy and should be reported and documented to ensure repeat violations will not occur but would not warrant an XF. Hypothetically, for instance, if an assignment is worth five percent of the final grade, sanctioning a student with a zero on the assignment may be reasonable as the assignment has less impact on the overall grade. However, suppose a student committed similar behavior on a final paper, cumulative test, or other assignment meant to indicate mastery of the subject. In that case, an XF might be a reasonable assigned sanction. Likewise, a third offense of a level I violation can be elevated to a level II or III violation and be cause for an XF even if the stakes are still lower. In these factors, the faculty are empowered and encouraged to think of the scope, type, intent, and outcome of the violation of the academic integrity policy. Further, faculty may always reach out to the Academic Integrity Office (integrityFREEMississippi) to request guidance if they are uncertain or if they have concerns about the student and possible concurrent or previous violations. The Academic Integrity Office supports the expertise and academic freedom of the faculty member to govern the sanctions within reason and will thus support and provide consultation as requested to ensure proper documentation and involvement.