Catalog 2023-2024

Academic Integrity Policy

This policy was approved by Faculty Senate on April 24, 2020, and supersedes any academic integrity policies previously published by The University of Tampa. It is effective August 1, 2020.

Academic integrity stands at the heart of intellectual life and is a core principle that underpins how we live and learn in a community of inquiry. The University of Tampa is committed to the development of each student to become a productive and responsible citizen who embraces the values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility. The community at UT strives to instill values that uphold academic integrity and promotes an ethical standard that does not condone academic misconduct. To that end, this policy has been designed to educate enrolled undergraduate students about the expectation that each student at all times behave with academic integrity and avoid academic misconduct. 


At the outset, it must be understood that academic integrity is a core student responsibility that encompasses both the individual pursuit of knowledge in an honest manner and accountability for one’s actions in achieving academic objectives. Students are expected to act ethically in the pursuit of learning, and to avoid the types of behaviors that impair the effective assessment of learning through grades or other processes designed to quantify when successful learning has been achieved. To that end, students are expected to abide by this policy in all academic endeavors. This includes, without limitation, all course work, examinations, assignments or any activity for in-person, remote, hybrid or online education experiences that may affect a grade or in any way contribute toward the satisfaction of requirements for course completion, program completion or graduation. 

No policy is able to list every way in which an academic endeavor can be compromised. Changes in technology, the ease of access to information and even the ability to collaborate across multiple forums have exponentially increased the ways in which students can choose to engage in academic misconduct. Therefore, this policy details by general category the types of activities that are prohibited, regardless of the means or manner in which the prohibited conduct is carried out. Faculty members may consult with the Office of the Associate Provost or designee regarding procedures in dealing with academic integrity violations and academic misconduct cases. 


Academic misconduct can be defined generally as all acts of dishonesty in an academic or related matter. All forms of academic dishonesty and misconduct are considered academic integrity violations and are subject to sanctions. All examples offered below are illustrative only, and do not preclude the imposition of sanctions for other forms of academic misconduct behavior that do not fall within a given category listed below or that impact the classroom experience in any way.

Academic misconduct and/or an academic integrity violation includes, but is not limited to, the following categories of behavior:

  1. Cheating. Using or attempting to use unauthorized materials or sources in connection with any assignment, examination or other academic exercise, or having someone else do work for you when not expressly authorized by the faculty member.
  2. Unauthorized assistance or collaboration. Giving or receiving aid on an assignment, examination or other academic exercise without the express prior approval of the faculty member. Unauthorized materials often include online resources advertising their services as “study aids” or “online tutoring”. Students who utilize these services, whether free-of-charge or for a fee, without the express consent of the faculty member are in direct violation of the University policy.
  3. Inappropriate use of others’ work (plagiarism). Using the words, thoughts or ideas of another without attribution or the use of standard citation expectations applicable to the field of study, so that they seem as if they are your own. This type of misconduct can take many forms. The most blatant forms include copying someone else’s work word for word or turning in a paper written by another with your name as the author. Other examples include rewriting someone else’s work with only minor changes, or summarizing another’s work or taking another person’s ideas without acknowledging the source through proper attribution and citation.
  4. Compromising examination security or grade integrity. Invading the security maintained for the preparing or storing of examinations, circumventing security controls, tampering with exam-making or exam-taking software or discussing any part of a test or examination with a student who has not yet taken that examination but is scheduled to do so. Also, changing, altering, falsifying or being accessory to the changing, altering or falsifying of a grade report or form, or entering any university office, building or accessing a computer for that purpose.
  5. Multiple submissions. Submitting work you have done in previous classes at this or another institution as if it were new and original work. Although faculty members occasionally may be willing to let you use previous work as the basis for new work, they expect you to do new work for each class. Students seeking to submit a piece of work to more than one class must have the written permission of both instructors.
  6. Deception and misrepresentation. Lying about or misrepresenting your work, academic records, credentials or other academic matters or information, or fabricating academic materials. Examples of deception and misrepresentation include but are not limited to forging signatures, forging letters of recommendation, falsifying academic records, fabricating research, data, sources, giving false sources, misrepresenting contributions in group or team efforts, and altering test answers and then claiming the instructor inappropriately graded the examination. The category of deception and misrepresentation also encompasses any attempt to misrepresent oneself or provide misleading and false information in an attempt to access another user's computer account, and attempts to falsely represent or exaggerate your circumstances to either gain an academic advantage or to negate the effect of sanctions through policies like course forgiveness.
  7. Failing to respect copyright. Improperly reproducing copyrighted material rather than acquiring the material from an authorized source. This would include the unlawful copying of hardcopy materials and digital materials such as e-books and e-chapters.
  8. Electronic dishonesty. Using network or computer access inappropriately, in a way that affects a class or other students’ academic work. Non‐exhaustive examples of electronic dishonesty include tampering with another student’s account so that student cannot complete or submit an assignment, stealing a student’s work through electronic means or knowingly spreading a computer virus.
  9. Engaging in or facilitating academic dishonesty. Helping someone else to commit an act of academic dishonesty. This includes but is not limited to giving someone your work product to copy or allowing someone to cheat from your examination or assignment, substituting for another student or permitting any other person to substitute for you to take a test or examination, writing a paper or other assignment for another student either for free or for payment, stealing, buying, selling, giving away or otherwise obtaining without authorization all or part of any un-administered test/examination or entering any university office or building for the purpose of obtaining an un‐administered test/examination. Also prohibited is contributing to uploading a faculty member’s tests, assignments, notes, lecture slides, projects, solutions, old lab data or other material to websites where this material can be accessed by other students without the express permission of the faculty member.
  10. Coercion or retaliation. Attempting to obtain a test, examination or other academic information to which you are not entitled by coercive means, or harassing or threatening others for reporting or for cooperating with the investigation of possible academic integrity or academic misconduct violations. 


Faculty members are responsible for examining any instance of possible academic misconduct within the courses and academic endeavors they supervise. Individuals believing that a student or students have committed a violation of this policy shall report the matter to the faculty member in charge of the academic endeavor at issue. Alternatively, any such matter must be reported to the Office of the Associate Provost, who in turn will provide the information to the faculty member so the report can be assessed. The following are the procedures used in determining if academic misconduct occurred:


  1. Initial Assessment: After the faculty member gathers all supporting information/evidence pertaining to the violation, the faculty member will initiate the review process within ten business days. All AI violations have to be submitted within the semester in which they occur. However, if the violation is discovered close to the end of a semester (e.g., 2 days before the Registrar’s due date for grades), the Faculty member will have ten business days from that day within the semester when the violation was discovered to submit the AI violation. All summer sessions are treated as part of the overall Summer term (May Term, Summer I and II and Summer 12 weeks terms will be treated as one semester).
  2. Notification of Academic Misconduct Review Meeting
    1. After the initial assessment is completed by the faculty member, the student will be contacted via their University email account, and the student and the reporting faculty member will meet within five business days.
  3. Student Rights for Academic Misconduct Review Meeting
    1. Students accused of academic misconduct have the right to:
      1. Be notified in writing via their University e‐mail account regarding the alleged academic misconduct and academic misconduct procedures at least one (1) business day prior to their academic misconduct review meeting.
      2. Review any submitted complaint and evidence of academic misconduct during the academic misconduct meeting.
      3. Present information on their own behalf at the academic misconduct review meeting.
      4. Accept responsibility at the academic misconduct review meeting for the complaint of academic misconduct. If a student accepts responsibility at the academic misconduct review meeting, they will waive any procedural appeal rights upon accepting responsibility.
      5. Deny responsibility at the academic misconduct review meeting and request the Academic Integrity Committee determine responsibility for the alleged academic misconduct.
  4. Academic Misconduct Review Meeting
    1. The academic misconduct review meeting is a private meeting with the faculty member, the student who is responding to the alleged academic misconduct, and an academic witness. If these private meetings are unable to be held in-person, then these meetings may be conducted in a face‐to‐face virtual format using a University‐approved video conferencing platform when needed. The witness must be any full‐time faculty member. This witness is present as a neutral entity who may not make suggestions about the level of sanctions. This academic witness may answer any questions for the student or faculty member regarding the Academic Integrity Policy and these reporting procedures. The academic witness will also sign the reporting form, acknowledging that they understand their role and have acted accordingly.
    2. Parents and other parties are not permitted in this meeting, in person or otherwise. If the meeting is conducted using a face‐to-face virtual format, the instructor should state at the beginning of the meeting that no other persons than the instructor, student and witness may participate in the meeting. The student and witness should state no other persons are present. Violation of this process may result in a Student Conduct referral.
    3. Academic Integrity meetings will not be recorded.
    4. The faculty member will explain the alleged academic misconduct to the responding student.
    5. The faculty member will conduct an interview with the responding student and the responding student may accept responsibility for the academic misconduct. The faculty member may at that time assign appropriate sanctions. If the faculty member determines, after meeting with the student, that one or more policy violations have occurred, the student will be told of the sanction and asked to complete and sign the Academic Integrity Reporting form. Within the form, the student has the option to either accept the violation and proposed faculty sanction, or to request a determination of the academic violation by the Academic Integrity Committee. Determination of the academic violation by the Academic Integrity Committee does not constitute an appeal. If the student does not complete the form during the meeting, the student will have one (1) business day to return and complete the form. After the time has elapsed, the form will be submitted through Advocate for adjudication by the AIC.
    6. The faculty member may recommend the allegation of misconduct be dismissed.
    7. If a student is uncooperative (i.e., non-responsive, refusing to promptly meet or unwilling to sign the reporting form), the faculty member should submit the reporting form through Advocate for adjudication by the AI Committee.


5. Student Rights for Academic Integrity Committee Procedures

  1. Responding students have the right to:
    1. Be notified in writing via their university e-mail account about the alleged academic misconduct and Academic Integrity Committee procedures.
    2. Review any submitted complaint of academic misconduct that will be reviewed by the Academic Integrity Committee.
    3. Three (3) business days to submit information on their behalf regarding the academic misconduct violation to the Academic Integrity Committee. Information must be submitted electronically to the Office of the Associate Provost.

6. Academic Integrity Committee

  1. The Academic Integrity Committee will have a minimum of three (3) voting members to establish quorum during meetings.
  2. Academic Integrity Committee meetings are closed meetings. The Committee will review the submitted complaint of academic misconduct and will review information submitted by the responding student if applicable. Parties will not be permitted to appear before the Committee.
  3. The Committee will determine using the preponderance of the evidence standard whether a violation of academic misconduct has occurred. This decision will be made by a majority vote of the members reviewing the academic misconduct.
  4. The Committee will issue sanctions to a responding student if they are found responsible.
  5. The Committee will communicate the decision of responsibility to the appropriate educational parties.


When a responding student admits responsibility or is determined to be responsible by the AI Committee for academic misconduct, the Office of the Associate Provost or designee may review/revise sanctions by the assigned faculty member and Academic Integrity Committee to ensure the appropriateness of the sanction(s) for the violation of academic misconduct, and to ensure consistency for violation sanctions.

  1. Sanctions by a Faculty Member: A faculty member cannot sanction a student for an academic integrity violation without formally submitting a Reporting Form for Academic Integrity Violation or Academic Misconduct Violation to the Office of the Associate Provost. A faculty member can impose sanctions limited to the course where the academic integrity violation occurred. Depending on the severity of the academic integrity violation, sanctions may include:
    • Make-up assignment at a more difficult level
    • Reducing the grade on the student’s work containing the violation
    • Awarding no credit for the work in question
    • Reducing the course grade for the student regardless of accumulated course grade points
    • Fail the student from the course.
    • Also, faculty may use their discretion regarding additional sanctions such as requiring the student to complete some activity designed to strengthen and/or test the student’s understanding of the academic integrity policy.

When a sanction allows a student to continue in the course, the student will not be allowed to complete an evaluation of the faculty member at the end of the course.

When an academic integrity violation is so severe that the faculty member decides that sanctions at his/her level are insufficient, the faculty member can request the determination of sanctions by the Academic Integrity Committee.

  1. Sanctions by the Academic Integrity Committee: In all cases in which the student requests a determination by the Academic Integrity Committee, the Committee serves as the reviewer on whether the violation(s) occurred and also determines the sanctions imposed. The Committee may (1) Find the student responsible and support the instructor sanction, (2) Find the student responsible and modify the instructor sanction, (3) Dismiss the violation. In instances when the violation is dismissed, faculty have the authority to assign the student grade based on academic performance. Sanctions depend on the severity of the academic integrity violation and prior AI violations. Sanctions may include those suggested by the instructor such as reduction of an assignment grade, reduction of a course grade of failure of the course although the AI Committee may use its discretion in awarding alternate sanctions. The reporting Faculty Member may not change the sanction once the review by the AIC is complete and adjudication is done.
  2. The Office of the Associate Provost will inform the Committee of any previous violations for the student. If the Office of the Associate Provost informs the Academic Integrity Committee that the student has had a previous violation, then the Academic Integrity Committee may determine that the sanction should be a period of academic suspension or expulsion from the University. Depending on the severity of the violation, the Committee may suspend or expel a student for a first academic integrity violation.

Students who are found responsible for academic integrity violations may repeat the course, but are not eligible for Grade Forgiveness for the grade received in the course in which the academic integrity violation was committed.


If the Academic Integrity Committee finds a responding student responsible, the responding student may file an appeal of the decision of responsibility to the Office of the Associate Provost within two (2) business days from receiving notification of the decision to their University e-mail account. Appeals shall be limited to a review of the information provided within the original decision and any supporting documents submitted with the appeal for one or more of the following purposes only:

  • To determine whether the Academic Integrity Committee decision process was conducted in conformity with the prescribed procedures. If a procedural error occurred, it needs to be sufficient to alter the decision of the case.
  • To consider new information, sufficient to alter a decision, that was not available at the time of the Academic Integrity Committee decision because the information and/or facts could not have been known to the responding student at the time of the original decision.
    The Office of the Associate Provost or designee, in their sole discretion, will determine if the appeal is eligible for review by meeting the criteria outlined above. The appeal process will not involve additional hearings and no additional parties will be involved. The Office of the Associate Provost or designee has the authority to render the following decision:
  • Determine the appeal is not eligible for review
  • Return the case to the AI committee for reconsideration
  • Affirm the decision imposed by the AI committee
  • Modify the decision of the AI committee
  • Modify the sanctions imposed by the AI committee

All appeal decisions are final. Students will be notified in writing of their appeal decision via their University e‐mail account.


In general, a student will remain enrolled in and cannot withdraw from a course or participation in other academic endeavors pending the outcome of any process under this policy. Once an official violation accusation has been made, the student may not withdraw from the class until the accusation is resolved. The Office of the Associate Provost must notify the Registrar and/or the appropriate degree program director that the student cannot drop the class or withdraw from the University.

In cases where the AI processes continue beyond the Registrar’s grade deadlines, instructors should input grades of Incomplete for the student(s) with pending AI violations and change the Incomplete to the final grade once all adjudication is complete.
If the student is found not responsible, the student will be given a letter acknowledging that the student was not responsible for the alleged violation and the student may choose to withdraw from the course or from the University. If the published withdraw date has passed, the action of the Committee shall supersede the published drop date so the student will still have the opportunity to withdraw without any penalties by the university. Before making a withdrawal decision, students are encouraged to see student financial services to be sure they understand any consequences outside the University related to withdrawal that are as a result of the regulatory or other requirements associated with any financial aid.
If the student is found responsible for the academic integrity violation by the instructor, the Academic Integrity Committee or upon appeal found responsible by the Office of the Associate Provost or designee, the sanction will be imposed and the student will receive a grade in the course. If the student found responsible has withdrawn from the course, s/he will be re-enrolled, and a grade for the course recorded.
Moreover, if a possible violation is pending a determination when a student is scheduled to graduate, the student’s degree may be withheld at least until the matter is resolved. The Office of the Associate Provost will notify the Registrar and/or the appropriate degree program director, as needed, to effectuate this restriction.
If a student withdraws from the University before the academic integrity violation process has concluded, the University reserves the right to deny the student readmission to UT pending the conclusion of the process.


For the purposes of the Academic Integrity policy, “business day” is defined as a day in which The University of Tampa is open for normal business including time periods where the University is conducting business in a virtual capacity. This excludes weekends, University observed federal holidays and break periods for which the University is closed. Deadlines noted in the policy may be adjusted as needed by the Office of the Associate Provost.


All academic integrity records for which a student was found responsible are maintained by the Office of the Associate Provost. Records include but are not limited to reporting forms, supporting documents, appeal information and other associated documentation relevant to the Academic Integrity process and procedure. As of August 1, 2022 all academic integrity records will be maintained electronically in Advocate for five (5) years after the date of the last responsible violation. Records of actual sanctions imposed which appear outside the file (for example, an “F” grade) will continue to exist beyond the Office of the Associate Provost’s maintenance of the record. In instances when a student has been suspended or expelled as a result of an academic integrity violation, a student’s record may be maintained indefinitely.