VII. Academic Integrity: Policies and Procedures
Students in the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences are expected to maintain the highest standards of integrity in pursuit of their education. Academic dishonesty in any form is a serious offense against the academic community in general and against Georgetown University in particular. Students found to have violated standards of academic integrity will be subject to academic penalties. These penalties may include, but are not limited to, suspension or dismissal from the University and revocation of degrees already conferred.
Effective August 29, 2007, academic integrity cases of graduate students in the McDonough School of Business will be adjudicated by a separate academic integrity system.
Full information is available at: http://msb.georgetown.edu/integrity/
Violations of Academic Integrity Standards
Plagiarism
Other Infringements of Academic Integrity
Procedure for Adjudicating Alleged Violations
Jurisdiction
Reporting allegations of academic misconduct
Standing Committee on Academic Integrity and Adjudication Committees
Investigating Infringements of Academic Integrity
Sanctions
Appeals
See also Information on Academic Integrity
Faculty have a special responsibility to mentor graduate students in the standards of academic integrity appropriate to their disciplines. The Graduate School urges faculty to take appropriate opportunities to teach standards of academic integrity and techniques of scholarly documentation, and to report to the Dean suspected cases of academic misconduct.
The Graduate School reserves the right to use all legal means, including submitting student work to electronic search engines, such as Turnitin.com, to investigate allegations of academic misconduct against graduate students.
Plagiarism is defined as the act of passing off as one's own the ideas, writings, or statements of another. Plagiarism is a serious breach of academic integrity standards, and anyone who is found to have committed plagiarism will be subject to disciplinary action.
Students are cautioned that the improper use of sources, whether intentional or unintentional, may be plagiarism and are expected to know the proper techniques for documentation. Every quotation from another source, whether written, spoken, or electronic, must be bound by quotation marks and properly cited. Every paraphrase (a recapitulation of another source's statement or idea in one's own words) or summary (a more concise restatement of another's ideas) must be properly cited. A bibliographic entry alone is not sufficient to avoid the imputation of plagiarism; nor is mere citation sufficient when use has been made of another person's words.
Students are responsible for educating themselves about the proper procedures for documentation. Questions about what references need documentation and how attribution should be made may be directed to the course professor or the thesis advisor. Such procedures are also outlined in a number of standard guides, most of which can be found in Lauinger and Dahlgren libraries. However, since methods vary among different disciplines, students should seek guidance from their department or program about proper and improper approaches to scholarly documentation.
Academic integrity may also be violated by acts of cheating, fabrication, or facilitating academic dishonesty. Cheating is the use or attempted use of unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in in-class examinations, take-home examinations, or other academic exercises. Fabrication is the falsification or invention of data, research results, citations, or any other information used in examinations, papers, experiments, or other academic exercises. Facilitating academic dishonesty is the assistance or attempted assistance of another to commit an act of academic dishonesty.
It is a violation of academic integrity to misrepresent or misuse otherwise valid academic work. For example, a paper submitted to satisfy the requirements for one course may not be submitted to satisfy a requirement for a second course without explicit permission of both professors. Students participating in joint projects or collaborative exercises are expected to make themselves aware of and to adhere to their instructor's expectations for individual contributions.
It is also a violation of academic integrity to attempt to deprive other students of equal access to educational resources, whether tangible (e.g., library or laboratory materials) or intangible (e.g., computer access to electronic resources ).
The procedure outlined below will be used to adjudicate all alleged incidents of academic misconduct.
Cases of alleged academic misconduct on the part of any student directly matriculated in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences shall be adjudicated by the Dean of the Graduate School through the procedures outlined below. The Dean of the Graduate School is the only person authorized to impose sanctions on a Graduate School student for violations of academic integrity committed in connection with a Graduate School program. Students matriculated in Graduate School programs that are concurrently offered with other Georgetown University academic units, such as the Law Center or the Medical School, will generally be subject to the academic disciplinary procedures of the Graduate School when alleged violations of academic integrity occur within the Graduate School sequence of the dual degree program. When students enrolled in dual degree programs are found to have violated standards of academic integrity within the Law Center or Medical School sequences of dual degree programs, the matter will generally be adjudicated by the other academic unit. However, the Graduate School retains the right to impose sanctions on graduate students who have been found to have violated standards of academic integrity by another academic unit, and to adjudicate any case another academic unit chooses not to pursue.
Cases of alleged academic misconduct on the part of Georgetown University Graduate School students who are enrolled in a course at another university, e.g., through the Consortium of Universities of the Washington Metropolitan Area, will be adjudicated at Georgetown and will be subject to the authority of the Dean of the Graduate School at Georgetown.
Students matriculated in graduate programs offered by other Georgetown University academic units (e.g., the Liberal Studies program offered through the School of Continuing Studies) do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Dean of the Graduate School. Cases involving these students shall be adjudicated by the academic unit in which their program is housed.
Anyone who has reason to believe that a graduate student has engaged in academic misconduct is urged to report such information in writing, along with any supporting evidence, to the Dean of the Graduate School. The student against whom allegations are made will be provided with a copy of the written report and all supporting materials.
Allegations of academic misconduct may be brought to the Dean’s attention at any time in the student’s academic career, even after the student’s graduation, regardless of when the alleged incident occurred.
All allegations of academic misconduct brought to the Dean will be referred to an Adjudication Committee, appointed by the Dean from among the members of a Graduate School Standing Committee on Academic Integrity (henceforth, the "Standing Committee”).
The Standing Committee will be composed of:
• Ten faculty, appointed to staggered 3-year terms
• Eight Graduate School students: four from master’s programs and four from Ph.D programs, each appointed to one-year terms with the possibility of reappointment for a second term
• One Graduate School associate dean, who will serve as the non-voting Investigating Officer
• One non-voting ex officio member of the University Research Integrity Committee, to be appointed by the Chair of the University Research Committee.
Faculty representatives on the Standing Committee will be drawn from the graduate Sciences, Social Sciences, Humanities, and professional master’s degree programs (e.g., MSFS, GPPI).
Each Adjudication Committee will be composed of
• Two faculty
• One student of the same level as the charged student (i.e., either a master’s or Ph.D.’s student representative, depending on the degree program the student under allegation is pursuing).
If specialized knowledge is deemed necessary to investigate a case, the Dean of the Graduate School will appoint an appropriate expert to report to the Adjudication Committee. The expert will serve as a consultant to the Adjudication Committee and will not deliberate with the Adjudication Committee or vote.
A Standing Committee member who is teaching a course or mentoring a thesis in which academic misconduct has been alleged may not serve on the Adjudication Committee handling that case.
At the discretion of the Dean, a representative from the Office of University Counsel may serve as an advisor to the Standing Committee or any Adjudication Committee.
The student against whom allegations are brought will be notified in writing of the membership of the Adjudication Committee. If the student objects to the appointment of one or more members of the Adjudication Committee, the student must notify the Dean in writing of the good faith basis for the objection before the hearing begins. The final decision regarding the membership of the Adjudication Committee will rest with the Dean.
The Adjudication Committee will review the allegations and, if the Adjudication Committee determines that the allegations do not warrant further investigation, the matter will be dismissed and no record of the allegations will be retained in the student’s academic record. If the Adjudication Committee believes that the allegations merit an investigation, one will be initiated under the direction of the Investigating Officer. This investigation will include consultation with any person and review of any materials the Investigating Officer believes is relevant to the allegations. Since the purpose of this investigation will be to make determinations of fact, it will be interrogatory rather than accusatorial in both format and approach. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer will issue a written report summarizing the steps of the investigation and its findings, which he or she will present to the Adjudication Committee.
The student against whom the allegations are brought will receive a copy of the Investigating Officer’s report, and shall have the opportunity to respond to the report in writing. This response will be provided to the Adjudication Committee.
The Adjudication Committee will review the original allegations, and all other relevant materials, which will include at least the materials submitted by the Investigating Officer and the student. At the student’s request, the Committee will hear testimony from the student and/or from any witnesses of the student’s choosing. The Committee may also interview any additional witness and/or review any additional material it believes would be helpful or relevant to its decision-making process. The student against whom the allegations are brought shall have the right to be present as an observer to all witness interviews conducted by the Adjudication Committee.
All interviews conducted by the Adjudication Committee will be recorded in a manner decided by the Graduate School.
The Adjudication Committee will determine whether it believes the student is responsible for academic misconduct, and will report its findings and any recommended sanctions in writing to the Dean of the Graduate School. Both the determination of responsibility and the recommended sanction will be determined by simple majority vote of the Adjudication Committee.
Upon receipt of the Committee’s report, the Dean of the Graduate School may
• accept the findings and recommendations of the Adjudication Committee; or
•. refer the case back to that Adjudication Committee for further investigation or more detailed written explanation of its findings and recommendations; or
• reject the Adjudication Committee’s findings and/or sanctioning recommendations.
The Dean of the Graduate School will provide the student against whom the allegations have been made with a written explanation of the final decision and, as appropriate, any recommended sanction.
A one-page summary report of the facts of the case and its outcome (devoid of any information that would identify the accused student) will be provided to the Standing Committee. These summaries will be maintained in a sanction precedent file by the Graduate School, and are intended to help build a body of precedent to guide future adjudication committees in establishing appropriate sanctions for comparable violations of academic integrity.
The student’s department or program must comply with the sanctions communicated by the Dean of the Graduate School. The department or program may not implement a penalty either more or less stringent that that authorized by the Dean of the Graduate School.
The Adjudication Committee may recommend sanctions in accord with sanctioning guidelines that will be maintained and updated by the Graduate School. The Standing Committee will define guidelines for sanctions, and will revise them as appropriate over time. When drafting and revising the sanctioning guidelines, the Standing Committee will consider the information maintained in the sanctioning precedents file.
Sanctions recommended by the Adjudication Committee may include but are not limited to a reduced or failing grade, suspension or dismissal from the University, and revocation of degrees already granted. The Dean’s letter imposing penalties for academic misconduct will become part of the student’s permanent file.
Sanctions that may be imposed directly by the Dean of the Graduate School include but are not limited to:
a. Suspension, to be noted on the transcript as “Suspension for Academic Misconduct”;
b. Dismissal, to be noted on the transcript as “Dismissal for Academic Misconduct";
c. Revocation of previously-awarded degrees, to be noted on the transcript as “[Degree] revoked for Academic Misconduct.”
Regardless of the sanctions that may be recommended by the Adjudication Committee and/or imposed by the Dean, if a student is found to have violated academic integrity in a graded activity, the faculty member involved may fail or reduce the student's grade, for either an assignment or for the entire course, at his or her discretion. If, however, the student is found not to have violated academic integrity, the faculty member may not penalize the student for academic misconduct.
The student may submit to the Dean a written request to appeal a decision; however, appeals will be considered only if the student is able to demonstrate that new evidence not available at the time the Committee considered his/her case has become available and/or that he/she was harmed by substantial procedural irregularity in the process. Such requests must be filed within 30 days of the date of the Dean’s letter imposing penalties, and include a description of the grounds for appeal. Dissatisfaction with the decision is not in itself sufficient grounds to warrant granting an appeal.
The Dean of the Graduate School will determine whether there are sufficient grounds for appeal. If the Dean determines there are not sufficient grounds for appeal, he or she will provide the student with a written explanation of the reasons for refusing to allow the appeal to proceed. If the Dean determines that there are sufficient grounds for an appeal, the case will be sent to the original Adjudication Committee for additional investigation. In extremely rare cases in which personnel changes or allegations of substantial procedural irregularities make it impossible or impractical to reconvene the original Adjudication Committee, a new Adjudication Committee may be convened.
Printable versions of the complete Graduate Bulletin: MS Word - or - Adobe Acrobat
Copyright 2007, Georgetown University
|
