Academic Honesty Guide > Part I: Understanding Academic Honesty at Ģý > Section 1: Honesty in Academic Work
[Note: The following section, “Honesty in Academic Work,” is duplicate copy of the College’s academic honesty policy as it appears in the College Catalog, “Honesty in Academic Work.”]
When you study at the College, you join a conversation among scholars, professors, and students, one that helps sustain both the intellectual community here and the larger world of thinkers, researchers, and writers. The tests you take, the research you do, the writing you submit — all these are ways you participate in this conversation.
The College presumes that your work for any course is your own contribution to that scholarly conversation, and it expects you to take responsibility for that contribution. That is, you should strive to present ideas and data fairly and accurately, indicate what is your own work, and acknowledge what you have derived from other sources. This care permits other members of the community to trace the evolution of ideas and check claims for accuracy.
Failure to live up to this expectation violates the principles of academic honesty that underlie these intellectual conversations and contributions. Fundamentally, violation of these principles misrepresents another’s intellectual effort — whether derived from a machine-generated source or a person — as your own. Within the context of a course, it also can include misrepresenting your own work as produced for that class when in fact it was produced for some other purpose.
Behavior that violates these principles and Ģý’s academic honesty policy can include but is not limited to:
- Cheating on tests;
- Using without adequate citation material found on the Internet, including words, pictures, graphs, tables, and other graphics;
- Turning in written or graphic work without citing correctly the sources of ideas, words, data, or images;
- Copying from others on papers, tests, or other work;
- Copying a computer program or sub-process without acknowledging its sources;
- Presenting work in class, such as in a PowerPoint presentation, without correctly citing the sources of the words, ideas, or images;
- Quoting or paraphrasing language from a Large Language Model (LLM) or other AI service without citing this in the coursework you submit or present;
- Quoting a passage that does not exist, or citing a source that does not exist;
- Collaborating with others on projects where that is not allowed and/or collaborating without properly crediting that collaboration in a footnote or endnote;
- Manufacturing or falsifying data in the process of research;
- Submitting one paper to satisfy the requirements of two different courses without getting permission from both instructors;
- Knowingly and deliberately assisting a fellow student to violate the academic honesty policy;
- Using translation software or consulting with a speaker with advanced proficiency to do homework or other assignments without permission of the instructor.
Students who are found responsible for violating Ģý’s academic conduct standards, whether intentionally or through carelessness, will receive academic outcomes. The range of potential outcomes may include, but are not limited to, failure on the assignment, a lower course grade, ineligibility to graduate with honors, failure in the course, probation, suspension, and/or dismissal from the College. The Committee on Academic Standing’s Guidelines for Academic Honesty Outcomes are available upon request from the Office of the Registrar.
Assumptions About Work You Submit
In general, then, you should make the following assumptions about work assigned at the College:
- When you submit a piece of work (whether a paper or paper draft, report, examination, homework, computer program, creative project, or other assignment) for a grade, you are claiming that its form and content represent your own original work produced for this assignment, except where you have clearly and specifically cited other sources.
- Tests or examinations are closed-book unless the instructor states otherwise.
- Any assigned work is to be done independently unless the instructor states otherwise.
- If you collaborate on any phase of an assignment, you must indicate what work is your own and what emerged from the collaboration.
Ethical Use of Sources to Avoid Plagiarism
One particular type of academic misconduct — plagiarism — occurs when a writer uses sources, whether through quoting, paraphrasing, or summarizing, without clearly or sufficiently acknowledging the source. Thus, to avoid plagiarizing, you must cite the source of any expressions, ideas, or observations not your own, whether they come from a primary source, a secondary source, an electronic source, a textbook, a class discussion, a lab manual, or any other source of information.
Whenever you quote, paraphrase, summarize, or use an idea from a source, you must acknowledge that source through some system of citation. The exact system varies by discipline; your instructor will tell you whether to use the MLA, the APA, the Chicago style, or some other.
If you are found to have misused sources, you may be found responsible for plagiarism even when you have made no conscious effort to deceive. Therefore, you should cite your sources in a clear and consistent way; if you have any doubts about how to cite sources, ask your instructor.
Generally, in writing papers, you should comply with the following requirements for acknowledging sources:
- Quote sparingly and precisely: Brief quotations, included within your own clear analyses or interpretations, are far more effective than long, unanalyzed ones.
- Indicate quotations: Place quotation marks around any quotations you use in your text, even those consisting of only a phrase. In the case of long quotations, set them off in a block and follow the rules for indentation. In addition, cite the precise source of the quotation in a footnote, endnote, or in-text citation. You must use quotation marks around the directly quoted parts and cite the source even if you have rearranged the order of the sentences or have interspersed some of your own words and ideas.
- Paraphrase carefully: When you paraphrase — that is, when you put what a source says into your own words — you must not merely rearrange a few words from the source, but must recast the passage or sentence completely. In addition, you must specifically cite the source of any material that you have paraphrased or summarized, even when you have substantially reworded or rearranged it. It is not acceptable to explain similarities between your work and that of others by claiming that you read the source or sources long ago and have confused the phrases and ideas of the other author or authors with your own. Rule of thumb: When in doubt, cite.
- Cite ideas and data: You are also obliged to acknowledge, whether in an in-text citation or a footnote, any idea you have borrowed from another person or source. Scholars, researchers, and writers often engage in intense discussions, with each speaker confirming or modifying some aspect of another’s thought. Given these circumstances, it’s often difficult to credit the source for any given idea. However, such acknowledgment is part of how we honor each other’s words and work. Even though, at times, you may feel as if the distinction between your ideas and the ideas of others is unclear, you must make that distinction as clear as possible. This requirement to acknowledge the ideas of others applies whether the source is a faculty member, another student, a guest lecturer, an off-campus friend or relative, or any other source.
- Include a list of sources, including people consulted (this may be referred to as references, works cited, and/or a bibliography) at the end of your essay, lab report, research paper, or presentation. That is, in addition to using footnotes or parenthetical references to cite sources in the body of your work, you must provide a clearly structured record of all your sources at the end of your project.
Acknowledging Collaboration and Assistance
Your participation in a scholarly conversation often requires that you work with others in learning or creating knowledge. At Ģý, each instructor establishes rules about such collaboration for their course. Some will insist that all work be done individually (this is the default assumption); others may allow you to work together on part of a project but not the final product; others may encourage — or even require — collaboration throughout the project. If you are in doubt about the extent or nature of collaboration permitted in a specific course or on a specific assignment, ask your instructor to clarify the rules. To behave ethically, you must follow the rules of each instructor in each class.
When collaboration is permitted on work that is to be submitted individually, follow the instructions in the syllabus or assignment prompt regarding how collaboration should be indicated or recognized. If there are no specific instructions, the ideas or work of others must still be clearly cited. This includes assistance received from another person or from a Large Language Model or AI service. In other words, just as you cite written sources to tell the reader what words or ideas come from that source, you should acknowledge help you received so that the reader understands how your work was shaped by this assistance. For example, assistance might include help with brainstorming ideas, editing writing, or gathering data. It is good academic practice to acknowledge this assistance in a footnote or acknowledgments section offering thanks and describing the nature of the assistance. The failure to acknowledge assistance does not always rise to the level of an academic honesty violation but does so when it violates the rules of an assignment set by an instructor.
Your Responsibility as an Ethical Scholar
In sum, as a Ģý student, you now contribute to a conversation as a member of the global academic community. To do so responsibly, you must acknowledge your debt to others.
Other Ethical Issues
There are other ethical dimensions to being a member of the Ģý community beyond those of scholarly integrity, and even though failure to uphold these expectations may not constitute an academic honesty violation, they can have other serious consequences. For example, forging a faculty member’s signature on a document given to the Registrar’s Office could be referred to the Dean of Students for a conduct process. Attempting to mislead an instructor, say, by claiming to have forgotten to attach a paper to an email as a way of gaining additional time to work causes you to lose the valuable goodwill of the instructor.
Process for Review of Alleged Violations of the Honesty Policy
In submitting assigned course work (e.g., a report, paper, examination, project, homework assignment, or computer program), a student is stating that the form and content of the submission represents their own work, except where clear and specific reference is made to other sources. If an instructor finds evidence that a student’s submitted work may be in violation of the College’s honesty standards, the instructor must bring the concern to the attention of the Academic Integrity Officials (AIOs). Once the concern is reported, the instructor should not discuss the case with the student except under guidance from the AIO. The instructor will continue to teach and engage with the student as they would any other learner in the class.
A primary AIO will be assigned to each case and be responsible for managing the review process and making decisions for that case. If the AIO agrees that a possible violation of the academic honesty policy occurred, the AIO will provide a written statement to the student that describes the concern along with any relevant materials. The student may then elect to 1) participate in a facilitated conversation with the instructor and the AIO regarding the facts of the case, or 2) provide a written statement in response to the instructor’s concern in lieu of participating in a facilitated conversation. If the student chooses not to engage at any step of the process, a determination of responsibility will be made by the AIO based on available evidence. The AIO may, at the AIO’s discretion, impose deadlines for the student to select the method of resolution.
At any point in the process, the AIO may determine that a facilitated conversation is inappropriate or would be unproductive and will proceed by gathering information from the instructor and student separately; this would supersede a student’s choice of a facilitated conversation.
If a student requires accommodations to participate in any part of this process, they should contact the Office of Accessibility and Disability Resources.
Facilitated conversation: If the student elects to participate in a facilitated conversation, the AIO will schedule a meeting in a timely manner between the instructor, the student, and the AIO. The student may bring one non-participating observer, who must be either a currently enrolled Ģý student or employee; the observer cannot be a family member of any involved party. The AIO will gather information from the student and the instructor during this meeting, and there will be an opportunity for each to respond to the evidence provided by the other party. Following this meeting, the AIO will make a determination of responsibility.
Written statement: If the student elects to submit a written statement in lieu of a facilitated conversation, the statement must be submitted within 3 business days after notifying the AIO of this decision. The AIO may consult with the instructor prior to making a determination of responsibility.
At any point following the facilitated conversation or submission of a written statement and prior to the determination of responsibility, the AIO may communicate with the student, instructor, or member of the academic community with relevant expertise to gather additional information.
Students who are found responsible for violating the College’s academic honesty policy will receive academic outcomes based on principles approved by the faculty. The Committee on Academic Standing’s guidelines for outcomes for violating the academic honesty policy are available upon request from the Dean’s Office. The range of potential outcomes may include, but are not limited to, failure on the assignment, lower course grade, ineligibility to graduate with honors, failure in a course, probation, suspension, and/or dismissal from the College.
The AIO will notify both the student and the instructor of the finding and outcome in writing.
From the time that a student is notified that an academic honesty concern has been submitted until the AIO reaches a determination of responsibility, students may not drop or withdraw from the affected course. If the student is found responsible for a violation of the academic honesty policy by the AIO, they may not drop or withdraw from the affected course. If the student is found not responsible, they retain the option to drop or withdraw from the affected course, provided the course is within the drop or withdraw period for the term.
For a student who goes through this review process and is found not responsible for violating the policy, nothing is maintained in their official College record related to the case. For a student who is found responsible, a record of the responsibility and the outcome is maintained as part of the student’s official College record in the Office of the Registrar for the remainder of time the student is enrolled at Ģý and for five years after the last date of the student’s enrollment. For a student who is suspended or dismissed for academic honesty violations, that outcome is noted on the student’s transcript. If a suspended student re-enrolls, the transcript notation is removed from that point forward; for a dismissed student the notation remains.
Appealing an Academic Honesty Case Finding
A student may appeal the decision of the AIO involving an academic honesty violation by submitting a request for appeal in writing to the Dean’s Office within 5 business days following notification of the AIO’s decision. The request for appeal should include a clear description of the grounds for appeal and any additional evidence or supporting documentation. Upon receipt of an appeal, the Dean’s Office will convene an Appeal Hearing Board made up of three elected faculty members serving on the Committee on Academic Standing. If no appeal is received within the appeal timeframe, the Dean’s Office will take no further action and the outcome of the academic honesty violation will be final.
Appeals may be made only on the grounds of a) procedural error that may have substantively affected the determination or b) relevant new evidence that was not available at the time of the adjudication process.
If the Appeal Hearing Board determines that the grounds for appeal are met, they will conduct a new review of the case. Both the student and the instructor will be invited, separately, to meet with the Appeal Hearing Board to provide information. Either the student or the instructor may decline to attend this meeting and, if they wish, provide a written statement in lieu of attendance. Regardless of whether the student and/or instructor choose to meet with or provide information to the Appeal Hearing Board, a determination of responsibility will be made. If the Appeal Hearing Board finds the student responsible for violating the academic honesty policy, the same body will also determine appropriate outcomes.
The decision of the Appeal Hearing Board shall supersede any previous decision.
A student may appeal the decision of the Appeal Hearing Board directly to the Dean of the College within 5 business days following the notification of the Appeal Hearing Board’s determination. The decision of the Dean is final.
This procedure does not establish a contract of any kind. The College may depart from the process outlined in this policy at its discretion when good cause exists to do so.