Academic Misconduct

The Cook School holds academic integrity to a high standard. Our policies help produce students who are rooted in honest and original academic work that exhibits their true potential and creativity.


Academic Misconduct Policy

Adopted by the Faculty on January 26, 2011

Academic Integrity

The University is a community of learning, whose effectiveness requires an environment of mutual trust and integrity, such as would be expected at a Jesuit, Catholic institution. As members of this community, students, faculty, and staff members share the responsibility to maintain this environment. Academic dishonesty violates it. Although not all forms of academic dishonesty can be listed here, it can be said in general that soliciting, receiving, or providing any unauthorized assistance in the completion of any work submitted toward academic credit is dishonest. It not only violates the mutual trust necessary between faculty and students but also undermines the validity of the University’s evaluation of students and takes unfair advantage of fellow students. Further, it is the responsibility of any student who observes such dishonest conduct to call it to the attention of a faculty member or administrator.

Examples of academic dishonesty would be copying from another student, copying from a book or class notes during a closed-book exam, submitting materials authored by or editorially revised by another person but presented as the student’s own work, copying a passage or text directly from a published source without appropriately citing or recognizing that source, taking a test or doing an assignment or other academic work for another student, tampering with another student’s work, securing or supplying in advance a copy of an examination without the knowledge or consent of the instructor, and colluding with another student or students to engage in an act of academic dishonesty.

Where there is clear indication of such dishonesty, a faculty member has an obligation to uphold the School’s standards of academic integrity and to apply the School’s academic misconduct policy. The faculty member bears primary responsibility for determining how acts of academic dishonesty will affect the student’s academic performance in the faculty member’s course. This is consistent with the responsibility of the faculty to determine when course requirements have been met and what grades will be assigned to individual students. While faculty members must not make prejudiced or capricious academic evaluations of students, they may apply academic penalties, including course failure, as appropriate sanctions for incidents of academic dishonesty.

Faculty members also are responsible to inform the Associate Dean of incidents which they believe constitute likely violations of the School’s standards of academic integrity. The responsible faculty member will determine, after consultation with the Associate Dean, whether the incident necessitates the filing of a formal complaint of academic misconduct. Such a complaint may then provide the basis for a disciplinary hearing. If the hearing then determines that a student has violated the School’s academic integrity standards, this finding may then provide the basis for further sanctions, which may include, but are not limited to, disciplinary probation, suspension, and dismissal from the University. The Dean of the Business School holds final authority regarding such further sanctions when the student or students affected are enrolled within the School of Business. In cases in which the student or students are members of another academic unit of the University (e.g., School of Arts and Sciences), the Dean of the Business School will recommend sanctions to the appropriate University officials.


 Procedures for Handling Complaints of Academic Misconduct

  1. Procedure for Handling Complaint of Academic Misconduct. Important: All matters pertaining to the complaint and the hearing of charges of academic misconduct are confidential.
  2. Filing the Complaint: A written complaint of student academic misconduct should be filed with the Associate Dean. The complaint should be filed as soon as is reasonable after the discovery of the event, which in most situations should not exceed ten working days. The complaint should describe as specifically as possible the alleged act of academic misconduct. 
  3. Associate Dean conducts a preliminary interview with the accused student at which time he/she:

Hearing Committee

  1. The purpose of the Hearing Committee is to hear accounts regarding the charge of academic misconduct and to determine if the alleged action is more likely to have occurred than not to have occurred.
  2. Membership: The Chair of the Academic Honesty Committee selects two faculty members and two students from the Business School (i.e., one undergraduate and one graduate student). If the chair is involved in the complaint, then the Dean will appoint another Chair from the faculty.
  3. Meetings: Meetings are held as needed to consider the charge of academic misconduct.
  4. Responsibilities: The Hearing Committee is to provide a written report with its decision regarding the charge, its recommended sanctions, and the basis for its decision.


Hearing Committe Chair

Requests the Associate Dean to provide the written statement of the complainant, summary of the preliminary investigation, and any other pertinent documents.
Informs the student in writing (with the administrative and clerical support of the Associate Dean’s office) of the:

  1. charges,
  2. purpose of the Hearing Committee,
  3. members of the Hearing Committee,
  4. the school’s policy on academic misconduct (this document).

Informs the student, complainant, Hearing Committee member and Associate Dean of the date, time, and place of the hearing.
Initiates the hearing by:

  1. introducing the parties present at the hearing,
  2. explaining the rules of the hearing,
  3. reading the charge of academic misconduct that is being considered.

Informs the student, complainant, and Associate Dean in writing of the decision of the Hearing Committee. 

Rights of the Parties

  1. The student’s rights concerning the hearing process include the right to:
    1. Be present at the hearing
    2. Have written notice of the charges and a list of possible witnesses prior to the hearing
    3. Testify at the hearing
    4. Have witnesses provide testimony at the hearing or in writing to the committee
    5. Question the complainant and witnesses at the hearing
    6. Respond to questions from the complainant and the committee
    7. Have present a personal advisor subject to University regulations concerning the advisor; the personal advisor cannot function as legal counsel.
  2. The complainant’s rights concerning the hearing process include the right to:
    1. Be present at the hearing
    2. Have a list of possible witnesses prior to the hearing
    3. Testify at the hearing
    4. Have witnesses provide testimony at the hearing or in writing to the committee
    5. Question the accused student and witnesses at the hearing
    6. Respond to questions from the complainant and the committee

Hearing Proceedings

Procedures of the hearing proceedings are not legal proceedings, and formal rules of procedure and evidence used by the courts do not apply. Hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the following procedures:

  1. The Committee may hold a hearing with at least three-quarters of the total Committee membership present.
  2. The parties allowed to be present before the committee for the duration of the hearing are the Associate Dean, the student, a personal advisor for the student, and the complainant.
  3. The student must inform the Hearing Committee chair in advance who he/she will bring as a personal advisor and submit a list of potential witnesses.
  4. The complainant must in advance submit a list of potential witnesses to the Hearing Committee chair.
  5. The sequence of the hearing is:Committee members may ask questions at any time.
    1. The complainant will explain the charge of academic misconduct being considered.
    2. The student will respond to the charge.
    3. The student may question the complainant.
    4. The complainant may question the student.
    5. Witnesses shall be sequestered during the hearing, called into the room one at a time and questioned. Witnesses shall be questioned first by whomever has called them. Each party may ask additional questions of the witness.
  6. The personal advisor for the student:
    1. cannot function as legal counsel,
    2. may speak only to the student. If after one warning the advisor speaks to the committee, a witness, or complainant, he/she will be required to leave the hearing.
  7. Pertinent records, exhibits, and written statements may be accepted for consideration by the committee at the discretion of the Hearing Committee chair. 

Post-Hearing Procedures

  1. After concluding the hearing, the committee shall determine by majority vote whether the student has violated the policy on academic misconduct and the sanctions to be imposed (see Appendix A for sanction guidelines). In case of a tied vote, the Hearing Committee Chair will break the tie. The committee’s determination should be made on the basis of whether the alleged academic misconduct is more likely to have occurred than not to have occurred. This determination shall be made with no one but the committee present.
  2. The Hearing Committee Chair will make a report to the Associate Dean in writing of the decision, any sanctions to be imposed, the reasons for the decision, and the right of appeal. The Chair will also maintain a copy of the Committee’s report. 
  3. The Associate Dean implements the recommendation of the Hearing Committee by informing the student of the decision, the sanctions to be imposed, and the right of the student to appeal, with copies delivered to the complainant, the members of the Hearing Committee, and the Dean.

Appeal of Sanctions

Any student found responsible for academic misconduct shall have the right to appeal as hereinafter provided.

  1. No sanction shall become effective until the appeal process has been concluded.
  2. Grounds for appeal to Dean:
    1. The Hearing Committee and/or Associate Dean failed to follow required procedures.
    2. Substantial new evidence unavailable at the time of the hearing has been discovered.
    3. Sanctions are unfair or inappropriate.


Procedure for Appeal

The student shall appeal to the Dean’s office in writing. The notice of appeal:

  1. Shall identify the student, contact address, and grounds for appeal, and
  2. Must be lodged in writing with the Dean within 5 working days after the student has received formal notification from the Associate Dean of the decision.

Disposition by the Dean

  1. Disposition should be made as soon as is reasonable after receipt of the student’s appeal, which in most situations should not exceed 10 working days.

  2. The Dean shall notify the student, the Hearing Committee Chair, and the Associate Dean that, after reviewing the file and notice of appeal, the original decision shall be:

Appendix A: Statement on Sanctions

Sanctions should be considered for imposition with three goals:

  1. to assist in the education of the responsible student,

  2. to maintain the integrity of the academic program and the rights of all individuals, and

  3. to encourage the fulfillment of the University’s mission.

The Hearing Committee may (by majority vote of members present) recommend the following sanctions:

  1. Informal warning: oral or written to student of findings of committee. No further action is taken.
  2. Formal warning: written letter of findings of academic misconduct and reprimand sent to student and to Associate Dean for inclusion in student’s academic file.



Probation is defined as a definite period of time up to two full semesters (excluding summer terms).

  1. The sanction shall be placed in the student’s academic file and removed upon satisfactory completion of probation.
  2. Conditions (any or all of the following):
    1. Avoidance of appearance of academic dishonesty.
    2. Supervision / mentoring
    3. Community service
    4. Reporting to Associate Dean (or designated supervisor)
    5. Loss of privilege(s)
    6. Avoidance of any other misconduct as defined in the student handbook.

Violation of Probation

  1. Definition: any violation of the conditions set.
  2. Violations shall be determined by the Associate Dean (or designated supervisor).


Consequences of Violation of Probation

The Associate Dean shall notify the student in writing of the consequences:

  1. Immediate suspension from the School for a period determined by the Associate Dean, or
  2. Immediate dismissal from the School.


Suspension is defined as involuntary separation (exclusion) from classes and other academic activities of the School for a definite period of time after which the student is eligible to return.

  1. The Hearing Committee may also recommend suspension from the University to the appropriate University officials.
  2. The period shall be stated in the Committee report to the Associate Dean with copies given to student and complainant.
  3. The sanction shall be a permanent part of the student’s academic transcript.


Dismissal is defined as permanent separation from the School without provision for return.

  1. The Hearing Committee may also recommend dismissal from the University to the appropriate University officials.
  2. A record of such separation shall be made a permanent part of the student’s academic transcript