Graduate Academic Integrity Policy
Policy on academic integrity:
The policy of The University of Tampa is to uphold the highest standards of integrity in research and creative activity among both our students and faculty. For the purposes of this policy, the terms “The University of Tampa”, “the University", and “the Institution” are used interchangeably.
Application of policy:
This Academic Integrity Policy (the “Policy”) is applicable to students enrolled in a graduate program of the University and to those students enrolled in a graduate level course of the University.
Timeframes and deadlines:
For purposes of this Policy, a “Working Day” means a calendar day, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, legal holidays, and any other day when university is not in session.
The college dean of the college in which the accused student is enrolled may modify or enlarge any timeframe or deadline in this Policy as deemed appropriate under the circumstances of a particular case.
Prohibited acts – definitions:
The following examples are prohibited. However, academic integrity can be compromised in a variety of ways. The examples below are provided to bring clarity regarding violations of academic policy, but these examples are not an exhaustive list of all types of violations of academic integrity.
1. Plagiarism: Presenting someone else's or other sourced work or ideas as your own, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement.
2. Cheating: Improper use of any information or material that is not specifically authorized by the instructor for use in an assignment or examination. This includes unauthorized interactions taken on any social media platform.
3. Unauthorized Group Work: Working collaboratively with others on any activity that is intended to be individual work, when such collaboration has not been specifically authorized by the instructor. This includes unauthorized interactions on any social media platform.
4. Fabrication, Falsification, and Misrepresentation: Unauthorized altering or inventing any information or citation that is used in assessing academic work.
5. Multiple Submissions: Submitting the same academic work (including oral presentations) for credit more than once without instructor permission for each submission.
6. Abuse of Academic Materials: Intentionally damaging, destroying, stealing, or making inaccessible library or other academic resource material.
7. Complicity in Academic Dishonesty: Intentionally helping another to commit an act of academic misconduct.
Sanctions for violations:
There are two types of sanctions that may be imposed if the student is found responsible for violation of this Policy: (1) Course Sanctions regarding the student’s standing in the course, which are imposed by the course instructor; and (2) Institutional Sanctions that are imposed by the University. Course Sanctions can range from assigning the student a lesser grade for the exam or assignment in question, to assigning the student a final grade of “F” for the course. Institutional Sanctions can range from placing the student on Academic Probation, to dismissal from their program of study, or dismissal from the University.
Confidentiality:
To the best of the institution’s ability, the accused student should expect privacy, confidentiality, and personal security during proceedings under this Policy.
Continuation in course:
The accused student may continue in the course in question during the entire process. However, once a student has been accused of violating this Policy, the accused student will not be permitted to withdraw or drop the course in question. Should no final determination be made before the end of the term, a grade of "Incomplete" will be assigned until a decision is made.
Course instructor responsibility – initiating the process:
A course instructor who determines that a student has violated this Policy shall first meet with the student who is suspected of the violation towards the goal of resolution of the matter through an agreement. If the course instructor and the accused student resolve the matter through an agreement, the matter will be closed without further action beyond consequences imposed within the course. The course instructor may consult with the program director on the alleged violation, resolution of the matter, and the process.
If the course instructor and the accused student do not resolve the matter, the course instructor shall, within 5 Days from reaching impasse with the accused student, gather the evidence and forward the evidence and specifics of the charge in writing to the Director of Graduate and Continuing Studies (the “Director”) for further proceedings under this Policy.
The Director is responsible for administration of this Policy and maintaining the file, including information from the course instructor and documentation from the entirety of the proceedings.
The Director shall notify the accused student in writing of the alleged violation of this Policy within 5 Working Days from receipt of the information from the course instructor.
Hearing panel:
The alleged violations will be heard by a panel comprised of three full-time tenured faculty members, one from each of the three colleges other than the college in which the accused student is enrolled (the “Hearing Panel”). Each academic year, the college deans will appoint a faculty member to serve as a panel member. The three Panel members shall select one of their own to serve as the chair of the Panel (the “Panel Chair”). The Director shall provide administrative support to the Hearing Panel in facilitating the process under this Policy.
Objections to the selection of a panelist by the student must be raised in writing and submitted to the Director of Graduate and Continuing Studies within 5 Working Days from selection of the panelists to serve on the Hearing Panel. Such objections shall then be referred to the dean of the college in which the student is enrolled. That dean shall make the decision on resolution of any alleged conflict or other objection to a panelist serving on the Hearing Panel.
Hearing on the allegations:
The Hearing Panel will schedule a hearing for consideration of the alleged violation of this Policy and the Panel Chair shall provide written notice to the accused student of the date, time, and location of the scheduled hearing. The hearing shall be no later than 30 Working Days following selection of the panelists to serve on the Hearing Panel. The Panel Chair may postpone or reschedule the hearing if necessary. The documentary evidence that will be offered against the accused student shall be provided by the Director to the accused student for review at least 5 Working Days before the commencement of the hearing.
At the hearing, the course instructor will present the evidence that demonstrates violation of this Policy. The Hearing Panel may ask questions of the course instructor. After receipt of all evidence offered to demonstrate the violation, the student may present evidence in defense. The evidence could be documentation or could be testimony from witnesses. The Hearing Panel may ask questions of witnesses and/or the student. The Panel may exercise discretion on how the hearing will be conducted except to the extent otherwise required by this Policy.
The accused student may request that an advisor assist with the process and attend the hearing, but the advisor may not speak during the hearing. The advisor may be any other person who is not a witness or otherwise a participant in the process except a family member or an attorney.
The hearing will be recorded by audio or stenographic means. The Director will maintain the recording in the file on the matter.
The accused student, the accused student’s advisor, the course instructor, the Director, and the stenographer (if any) may be present during the hearing. No others may be present other than the three panelists. Following the hearing, the Panel will deliberate confidentially and in private without anyone else being present.
Outcome following hearing:
After deliberation, the Hearing Panel will render a written decision within 5 Working Days from conclusion of the hearing indicating whether the accused student is responsible (or not) for the alleged violation of this Policy (the “Outcome Letter”). If the student is found not responsible for the alleged violation of this Policy, the matter will be closed, and the student record regarding the matter will be sealed. If the student is found responsible for the alleged violation under this Policy, the Outcome Letter will include an indication of the Institutional Sanctions. The Outcome Letter will be delivered via UT email to the accused student with a copy to the course instructor, the applicable college dean, and to the Director. The course instructor will separately indicate in writing any Course Sanctions. The course instructor’s decision on Course Sanctions, if any, will be delivered via UT email to the accused student with a copy to the applicable college dean and to the Director within 5 Working Days from date of Outcome Letter. The Director will take the administrative action necessary to effectuate the Panel’s decision in the Outcome Letter.
Right of appeal:
The accused student has 5 Working Days from the date of the Outcome Letter or date of the course instructor’s letter indicating Course Sanctions, whichever date is later, to indicate in writing sent to the Director that he or she wishes to appeal. If the accused student does not timely appeal, the Hearing Panel’s decision as indicated in the Outcome Letter is final.
The student may appeal for the following reasons: 1. Procedural error that materially prejudiced the outcome, or 2. Sanctions (Course Sanctions or Institutional Sanctions) are too severe.
The appeal will be submitted to the dean of the college in which the accused student is enrolled. The college dean shall review the entire record, including information submitted by the student on appeal. The college dean shall render a written decision on appeal that affirms, reverses, or modifies the Hearing Panel’s decision within 10 Working Days of receipt of the appeal. The decision of the college dean is final.
Designated representatives:
The college dean may designate another college official or faculty member to act as the dean’s designee under this Policy. Likewise, the Director may designate another college official or faculty member to act as the Director’s designee under this Policy. For purposes of this Policy, the designation of the “Dean” shall mean the Dean or Dean’s designee and the designation of the “Director” shall mean the Director or the Director’s designee.
Application of multiple policies:
If the allegations against the accused student implicate other University policies in addition to this Policy, the University may, in its discretion, choose to proceed under this Policy, another policy, or multiple policies, as the University determines is reasonable and appropriate in that case.