Instructors may consult with their Departmental Undergraduate Advisor or Lisa Devereaux (Director, Academic Success and Integrity) if they have questions about the Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters or how to conduct the meeting with the student. It is essential that all allegations of academic misconduct be reported to the Office of the Dean. Outlined below are steps instructors are required to follow:
Contact your Departmental Undergraduate Advisor as soon as you suspect a student of engaging in academic misconduct. They will request a GWR (Grade Withheld pending Review) to be placed on the student's academic record which will also prevent them from dropping the course. The GWR will not be removed until the matter is resolved.
You must meet with every student facing an academic integrity allegation. A reasonable number of attempts by email or phone calls (during working hours) should be made to the student – ensure you document these attempts. The matter will be referred to the Chair/Director who will then forward the matter to the Office of the Dean if there is no response from the student.
The instructor should present the case and evidence objectively to the student. Instructors may also be advised to have a witness (e.g. another instructor, an Associate Chair, or the undergraduate advisor) present at this meeting. If the student admits guilt, the fact should be noted but, there is no need for a signed confession since this will be handled in subsequent correspondence or in the meeting with the Dean or their representative.
The instructor should prepare a brief written report as soon as possible and forward this, with the evidence, to the Chair/Director or Associate Chair. Include information such as the weight of assignment, the course outline, and any information given with regard to academic integrity. Your departmental Undergraduate Advisor can assist you with completing the case file.
- With plagiarism, instructors should make copies of the assignment and source(s) and highlight corresponding passages to include within the report.
- With cases of a student aiding and abetting another student, the instructor should make copies of both student’s assessments and highlight similarities.
- With cases of a student aiding and abetting another student in an exam or midterm, the instructor should make copies of both student’s exam or midterm and highlight the same/similar wrong answers.
- With cases of suspected Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) use, it is important to include a clear explanation of the suspected issues.
- If there is are concocted references or information, highlight them in the student’s assessment.
If there is any content that is far beyond the scope of the course or beyond the level of work a student has previously submitted, you can ask them to explain it. If the student encounters difficulties explaining their work, that information should be documented in your report.
Avoid submitting student's work into Generative AI software or detection software as this presents concerns about the rights of a student's intellectual property. Comparisons between student's work and Generative AI outputs cannot be considered as sufficient evidence in cases of academic misconduct.
Sanctions/penalties cannot be assigned by the instructor, and instructors should not suggest potential sanctions to the student.
The Chair/Director or his/her designate (e.g., Associate Chair) may handle the matter only if all the following criteria is met:
- the assessment is worth 10% or less of the final grade in the course;
- it is the student’s first offence;
- the student admits guilt; and
- the offence is not particularly egregious (e.g. forgery, impersonation or purchasing work)
Students may find the Academic Discipline Process difficult to manage; therefore, Mental Health Supports are available to assist them both on and off campus.
