3.3 The Academic Integrity Process

Anyone may raise an academic integrity concern by bringing the concern to the Instructor or, where an Instructor cannot be identified or is unavailable, to the relevant Dean, and should do so as soon as possible after becoming aware of the concern.

The instructor may raise an academic integrity concern with a student and make any inquiries about the concern as they deem appropriate.

As soon as possible after becoming aware of a potential violation of the SAIP, the Instructor will provide to the Dean (or their Delegate) a detailed account of the events that transpired, a brief explanation for their recommendations and supporting documentation or other information relevant to the situation.

The Instructor may recommend to the Dean that the academic integrity concern be addressed through (i) non-disciplinary accountability options; or (ii) a complaint process.

The Instructor may also include suggestions for specific non-disciplinary or disciplinary outcomes, depending on the overall approach they have chosen to recommend. If a non-disciplinary accountability option is recommended, the Instructor should include any ways in which they would be willing to participate.

Upon receiving an academic integrity concern, the Dean (or their Delegate) will consider the information and Instructor's recommendation as to whether the matter should be addressed through non-disciplinary accountability options (NDAOs) or a Complaint process.

As soon as possible, the Dean will offer the student the opportunity to provide a brief written explanation of their views on whether the concern should be addressed through non-disciplinary accountability options or through a complaint process. The student may provide any information to the Dean that is relevant to the decision on how to address the concern. The Dean will also advise the student that they may consult with and be accompanied by an advisor at any point during an academic integrity process and provide the student with information about on-campus assistance.

The Dean may also offer to meet with the student, in-person or virtually.

In deciding how to address the academic integrity concern, the Dean may consider i) the information and the Instructor's recommendation, if any; ii) the views and information provided by the student; iii) the student's participation in a prior NDAO and/or prior history of academic integrity violations, if any; and iv) any other relevant information. The Dean is not bound by either the Instructor's recommendation or the student's views. The Dean's decision is final and binding.

Where a student wants the academic integrity concern to be addressed through a complaint process, the Dean must comply.

Where the Dean offers to address the academic integrity concern through NDAOs, the Dean will determine what actions and/or assignments the student will undertake. NDAOs are voluntary. The student's agreement to them will be confirmed in writing.

The Dean will monitor the student's performance of the actions and/or assignments and determine whether and when the student has successfully completed them by the deadline noted in the agreement.

Where the student completes their NDAO expectations successfully, the academic integrity concern will be considered resolved and cannot subsequently be referred for a decision under the complaint process. A record of the NDAO is maintained by the Faculty; no official disciplinary record is generated for NDAOs.

Where the Dean determines that the student has not successfully completed the NDAO as agreed, the Dean will refer the matter to a Faculty Decision Maker to address the academic integrity concern through a complaint process.  If the student believes they were successful in completing the NDAO agreement, they have 5 working days to submit an appeal to the Office of Student Conduct and Accountability. The Student Conduct Officer's decision is final and binding.

The Faculty Decision Maker (FDM), acting on the delegated authority of the Dean of the Faculty that offers the course that the academic integrity concern took place in, will offer the student a hearing to determine whether the student agrees with or disputes the facts of the academic integrity concern as disclosed by the instructor. The hearing may take the form of a written document exchange or a meeting (virtual or in-person).

The FDM will review the matter and complete further investigation as necessary to arrive at a finding as to whether the student is in violation of the SAIP or not.

If the FDM has determined on the balance of probabilities that the student has committed an offence, they will contact the Appeals Coordinator to determine if there is a previous NDAO or discipline record for the student. Only when considering what would be an appropriate sanction may the FDM take into account the NDAO / disciplinary record, if any, of the student.

Having completed consideration of the matter, the FDM prepares a written decision. The decision is sent to the student; a copy is sent to the Appeals Coordinator, the Dean of the student’s Faculty (if different than the Faculty that charged the student), the instructor who has initiated the discipline process, and, in the case of a graduate student, the Graduate Coordinator.

A discipline decision may be appealed by a student who has been found to have violated the SAIP.

The written appeal must be presented to the Appeals Coordinator in University Governance within 15 working days of the deemed receipt of the decision by the student or applicant.

The finding that an offence has been committed, the sanction imposed, or both may form the basis of appeal. The written appeal must also state the full grounds of appeal and be signed by the Appellant.

The FDM (acting as the Respondent) writes a response to the appeal.

The Appellant has 5 working days to reply to the Respondent; the Respondent then has 5 working days to reply to the Appellant.

A hearing is then held, in the form of a written document exchange, with a panel consisting of three University Appeal Board (UAB) members: an Academic Staff Member, who also serves as the Chair, and two students. The Chair normally submits the written decision of the UAB within 10 working days of the decision being reached.