PAWSLibrariesGoSolaruLearnWebMailDirectoryMapEventsIndex

Academic Honesty


Academic Discipline


Scholastic Warning

Graduate students whose cumulative grade point average (GPA) falls below a 3.00 at the end of a term or who fails to maintain the level of academic performance required by the department of their major will be placed on scholastic warning. GPA will be calculated based on all attempts at courses numbered 6000 or higher and will include any such courses whether or not they are required in the students’ program of study. The original grade in a course that has been repeated is not dropped from the cumulative GPA for purposes of determining academic standing. Upon completion of the subsequent term of required coursework, if the cumulative GPA is at least 3.00, then the students will return to good standing. 

Students who wish to take a course or courses for personal enrichment or for other purposes not related to pursuit of a degree or certification program may audit those courses unless he or she wishes to have grades from that course or courses included in the cumulative grade point average for academic standing purposes. 

Graduate students on scholastic warning whose GPA is not at least 3.00 upon completion of the subsequent term of required coursework but whose latest term’s grade point average is at least 3.00 will remain on scholastic warning until the cumulative grade point average of 3.00 is achieved. At that time, the students will return to good standing. Students may not graduate while on scholastic warning. 

 

Scholastic Suspension 
Graduate students on scholastic warning whose grade point average is not at least 3.00 and whose latest term’s GPA is not at least 3.00 will be suspended from the university for one academic term. During the term of suspension, the students may petition for readmission by completing a Petition for Readmission After Scholastic Suspension form and a reentry form and submitting them to the Office of Academic Assistance and Graduate Admissions (300 College of Education Bldg) by the following deadlines: 

  • To reenter Fall Semester June 15 
  • To reenter Spring Semester October 15 
  • To reenter Summer Term March 1 

    • There is no guarantee that students will be readmitted. 


    Scholastic Probation
    Students who are reinstated after scholastic suspension will be on scholastic probation. If the students’ graduate grade point average for any term following reinstatement falls below 3.00, the students will be scholastically excluded from the College of Education. If the students’ cumulative GPA is less than 3.00, they will be given 12 semester hours in which to raise the cumulative grade point average to at least 3.00. 

     

    Scholastic Exclusion 
    Students may be scholastically excluded from the College of Education for one or more of the following three reasons: 

    1. The students completed an academic term in which they did not earn a term GPA of at least 3.00 while they were on academic probation. 
    2. The students did not achieve or maintain a cumulative graduate GPA of at least 3.00 by the end of the first 12 semester hours completed following reinstatement. 
    3. The students failed to maintain the level of academic performance required by the department of their major. 

     

    Students scholastically excluded from the College of Education will not be admitted to any College of Education program and may never enroll in any College of Education course offerings. 

     

    Policy on Academic Honesty

    1. Introduction

    As members of the academic community, students are expected to recognize and uphold standards of intellectual and academic integrity. The University assumes as a basic and minimum standard of conduct in academic matters that students be honest and that they submit for credit only the products of their own efforts. Both the ideals of scholarship and the need for fairness require that all dishonest work be rejected as a basis for academic credit. They also require that students refrain from any and all forms of dishonorable or unethical conduct related to their academic work.

     

    The University’s policy on academic honesty is published in the Faculty Affairs Handbook and the Student Handbook, On Campus, which is available to all members of the University community. The policy represents a core value of the University and all members of the University community are responsible for abiding by its tenets. Lack of knowledge of this policy is not an acceptable defense to any charge of academic dishonesty. All members of the academic community, including students, faculty, and staff, are expected to report violations of these standards of academic conduct to the appropriate authorities. The procedures for such reporting are on file in the offices of the deans of each college, the Office of the Dean of Students, and the Office of the Provost. In an effort to foster an environment of academic integrity and to prevent academic dishonesty, students are expected to discuss with faculty the expectations regarding course assignments and standards of conduct. Students are encouraged to discuss freely with faculty, academic advisors, and other members of the University community any questions pertaining to the provisions of this policy. In addition, students are encouraged to avail themselves of programs in establishing personal standards and ethics offered through the University’s Counseling Center.

    2. Definitions and Examples

    The examples and definitions given below are intended to clarify the standards by which academic honesty and academically honorable conduct are to be judged. The list is merely illustrative of the kinds of infractions that may occur, and it is not intended to be exhaustive. Moreover, the definitions and examples suggest conditions under which unacceptable behavior of the indicated types normally occurs; however, there may be unusual cases that fall outside these conditions which also will be judged unacceptable by the academic community.

    • Plagiarism
      Plagiarism is presenting another person’s work as one’s own. Plagiarism includes any paraphrasing or summarizing of the works of another person without acknowledgment, including the submitting of another student’s work as one’s own. Plagiarism frequently involves a failure to acknowledge in the text, notes, or footnotes the quotation of the paragraphs, sentences, or even a few phrases written or spoken by someone else. The submission of research or completed papers or projects by someone else is plagiarism, as is the unacknowledged use of research sources gathered by someone else when that use is specifically forbidden by the faculty member. Failure to indicate the extent and nature of one’s reliance on other sources is also a form of plagiarism. Failure to indicate the extent and nature of one's reliance on other sources is also a form of plagiarism. Any work, in whole or part, taken from the internet without properly referencing the corresponding URL may be considered plagiarism. An author's name and the title of the original work, if available, should also be included as part of the reference. Finally, there may be forms of plagiarism that are unique to an individual discipline or course, examples of which should be provided in advance by the faculty member. The student is responsible for understanding the legitimate use of sources, the appropriate ways of acknowledging academic, scholarly or creative indebtedness, and the consequences of violating this responsibility.
    • Cheating on Examinations
      Cheating on examinations involves giving or receiving unauthorized help before, during, or after an examination. Examples of unauthorized help include the use of notes, texts, or "crib sheets" during an examination (unless specifically approved by the faculty member), or sharing information with another student during an examination (unless specifically approved by the faculty member). Other examples include intentionally allowing another student to view one’s own examination and collaboration before or after an examination if such collaboration is specifically forbidden by the faculty member.
    • Unauthorized Collaboration
      Submission for academic credit of a work product, or a part thereof, represented as its being one’s own effort, which has been developed in substantial collaboration with or with assistance from another person or source, is a violation of academic honesty. It is also a violation of academic honesty knowingly to provide such assistance. Collaborative work specifically authorized by a faculty member is allowed.
    • Falsification
      It is a violation of academic honesty to misrepresent material or fabricate information in an academic exercise, assignment or proceeding (e.g., false or misleading citation of sources, the falsification of the results of experiments or of computer data, false or misleading information in an academic context in order to gain an unfair advantage).
    • Multiple Submissions
      It is a violation of academic honesty to submit substantial portions of the same work for credit more than once without the explicit consent of the faculty member(s) to whom the material is submitted for additional credit. In cases in which there is a natural development of research or knowledge in a sequence of courses, use of prior work may be desirable, even required; however, the student is responsible for indicating in writing, as a part of such use, that the current work submitted for credit is cumulative in nature.

     

    3. Information and Burden of Proof

    In determining whether or not academic dishonesty has occurred, the standard which should be used is that guilt must be proven by a preponderance of the information. This means that if the information which indicates that academic dishonesty occurred produces a stronger impression and is more convincing as to its truth when weighed against opposing information, then academic dishonesty has been proved. In other words, the information does not have to be enough to free the mind from a reasonable doubt but must be sufficient to incline a reasonable and impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than to the other. Information as used in this statement can be any observation, admission, statement, or document which would either directly or circumstantially indicate that academic dishonesty has occurred.

     

    4. Procedures for Resolving Matters of Academic Honesty

    The following procedure is the only approved means for resolving matters of academic dishonesty, except for matters arising in the College of Law which has its own Honor Code for handling such matters. It is available to all members of the academic community who wish to pursue an action against a student for academic dishonesty.

     

    5. Initiation of Action

    If a member of the academic community believes that a student has engaged in academic dishonesty in a course, on a test, or as a part of an academic program, that individual is responsible for initiating action against the student or bringing the matter to the attention of an individual who may initiate action against the student. In allegations of academic dishonesty involving course requirements, the course faculty member is generally responsible for initiating the action. If the alleged violation involves a departmental program requirement (e.g., comprehensive examination or language competency examination) or an institutionally-required test (e.g., test of Georgia/United States history or Georgia/United States constitutions), or if the individual who discovers the incident is not a faculty member, the individual should bring the matter to the attention of the faculty member and administrator who has responsibility of overseeing the activity (e.g., departmental chair, director of the Testing Office). If that administrator decides to bring charges of academic dishonesty against the student, then that administrator becomes the initiator. (Test proctors, laboratory assistants, and other individuals who are not course faculty members should bring any instances of alleged academic dishonesty to the attention of the course faculty member or their administrative superior. That individual, after weighing the information, may become the initiator by formally charging the student with academic dishonesty.)

    The channel of review, recommendation, and decision-making follows the administrative lines associated with the course or program requirement involved. In any instance, however, when the alleged incident does not occur within the context of a course and when it is unclear which college of more than one college involved should have jurisdiction in review and decision-making, either unit may initiate the case.

    For the sake of brevity the following processing procedures are written from an academic unit/college perspective. Nonacademic units (i.e., Testing Center) would substitute appropriate supervisory personnel at the respective levels. Herein the initiator will be referred to as faculty member and the administrative unit head will be referred to as chair, designating the departmental chair. Dean will refer to appropriate administrative supervisory personnel at the overall college or division level.

    While the matter of academic dishonesty is pending, the student will be allowed to continue in the course and register for upcoming semesters. Should a grade be due to the registrar before the matter is resolved, a grade of GP (grade pending) will be reported for the student in the course involved. Withdrawal from a course does not preclude the imposition of penalties for academic dishonesty.

     

    A. Penalties to be Imposed

    Penalties to be imposed in incidents of academic dishonesty are classified as academic or disciplinary. Academic penalties include such sanctions as assignment of a failing grade for a particular course requirement, or for the course itself, or for other tests or program assignments. They are set by the faculty member. Disciplinary sanctions can be sought in addition to those considered academic and could include, but are not limited to, the following penalties: suspension, expulsion, transcript annotations. Disciplinary penalties can be requested by the faculty member, in consultation with the chair; they must be reviewed by the University Senate Committee on Student Discipline and they are set by the provost.

     

    B. Action at Administrative Unit (Department Level)

    As soon as possible after the alleged incident, the faculty member should discuss the matter with the student. This discussion should be conducted in a manner which protects the rights and confidentiality of students. If the faculty member believes that academic dishonesty has occurred, the faculty member (with the advice of the chair if necessary) will determine the appropriate academic penalty. The faculty member will complete a notice of academic dishonesty form describing the incident and indicating the academic penalty imposed. Any recommendation for a disciplinary penalty must be reviewed in consultation with the chair.

    The faculty member will deliver to the student the notice of academic dishonesty which includes a statement of appeal rights. If there is difficulty in delivering the notice to the student, the faculty member/chair should request assistance from the college dean in determining the most expeditious way to inform the student that a notice of academic dishonesty has been filed.

    Once the student has been informed, the chair forwards the documentation, including the notice of academic dishonesty and an indication of when the student was informed, to the dean to be held pending possible appeal. Until the student has been given the opportunity to appeal, a grade of GP (grade pending) should be submitted for the student for the course involved.

     

    C. Student Action

    The student will have 20 business days after receipt of the notice of charges of academic dishonesty to submit a written appeal denying the charges and providing any rationale for the appeal. The appeal should be addressed to the college dean of the initiator. In the event the student is found guilty of academic dishonesty, the student does not have the right to appeal the academic penalty assessed by the faculty member, unless the student can prove that such penalty was arbitrarily imposed or applied in a discriminatory manner.

    If the student wishes to challenge a disciplinary penalty, the student must submit a written rationale for challenging the disciplinary penalty within 20 business days of receipt of the notice of charges of academic dishonesty. The statement of challenge should be addressed to the college dean. The college dean will forward the challenge to the dean of students for inclusion in the review of the disciplinary penalty by the University Senate Committee on Student Discipline. All disciplinary penalties are automatically reviewed by the University Senate Committee on Student Discipline, regardless of student appeal.

    If the student has also filed an appeal denying the charges of academic dishonesty, any review of disciplinary penalty recommended will be delayed pending review of the charges of academic dishonesty by the college hearing committee.

     

    D. College Action

    1. No Appeal by the Student. If the student does not submit a written appeal to the college dean within 20 business days, the dean will notify the chair/faculty member to post any pending grade(s) immediately. The dean will then forward the notice of academic dishonesty to the dean of students for inclusion in the student’s disciplinary file. Any recommendation of a disciplinary penalty will also be forwarded to the dean of students for appropriate review by the Senate Committee on Student Discipline.

    2. Appeal by the Student. If the student submits a written appeal within 20 business days, the dean will notify the registrar to issue a grade of GP (grade pending) for the course(s) in question on all transcript requests for the student pending outcome of the appeal. The dean will forward the charges of academic dishonesty to the chair of a college hearing committee and will notify the faculty member to set forth in writing a comprehensive statement describing the incident of academic dishonesty. This statement will be presented to the committee and to the student at least five (5) business days prior to the hearing.

    3. Student Hearing Committee Process. Guidelines that Govern the Hearing of the Appeal by the College Student Hearing Committee

     

    1. Within ten (10) business days after the committee receives the charges of academic dishonesty, a hearing date will be determined. The committee will notify the faculty member and the student of the time, date, and the place of the hearing. Copies of all charges of academic dishonesty and related materials for the hearing will be provided to the student at least five (5) business days in advance of the hearing.

    2. The faculty member and the student will be allowed to make oral presentations, call witnesses, and present any documentary information regarding the incident in question. The hearing will be recorded on audio tape. The hearing will not be open to observers.

    3. At the conclusion of the hearing, the committee will meet in closed session and will make its recommendation as to the guilt or innocence of the student based on a preponderance of information with respect to the charge of academic dishonesty. The committee chair will forward to the college dean its findings and recommendations in a written report within five (5) business days of the hearing.

     

    4. College Decision on Appeals. Within five (5) business days of receiving the committee’s written report, the college dean will make the final decision regarding guilt or innocence. The dean will notify all appropriate parties of the decision.

    If the dean finds the student not guilty, the matter will be terminated and no notice of charges will be filed with the dean of students. The dean will notify the chair to post the pending course grade promptly and will notify the registrar to remove the GP (grade pending) on the student’s transcript.

    If the dean finds the student guilty, the notice of charges of academic dishonesty will be forwarded to the dean of students for inclusion in the student’s disciplinary file. The academic penalty stipulated by the faculty member will be imposed. The dean will notify the chair to insure that any pending grade is posted promptly. The dean will notify the registrar to remove the GP (grade pending) on the student’s transcript if only an academic penalty was involved. If a disciplinary penalty has been recommended, the dean will notify the registrar to continue the GP (grade pending) annotation until the disciplinary penalty can be reviewed by the University Senate Committee on Student Discipline.

     

    5. Appeal of the Decision of the Dean. If the student or initiator wishes to appeal the decision of the college dean regarding guilt or innocence of the charges of academic dishonesty, the student or initiator may appeal to the provost. The subsequent appeal route would be to the president and then the Board of Regents. The student or initiator must submit a written statement of appeal to the provost within 20 business days of notification of the dean’s decision. The basis of the appeal must be on the grounds that the decision was arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory.

     

    E. University Senate Committee on Student Discipline Action

    In cases where a disciplinary penalty has been recommended, the Senate Committee on Student Discipline will conduct a hearing to review the disciplinary penalty. The committee will review the faculty member’s notice of academic dishonesty and the student’s statement of challenge of the disciplinary penalty, if any. The faculty member and the student will be allowed to appear at the hearing to discuss the imposition of disciplinary penalties. Only the recommendation concerning the disciplinary penalty to be imposed will be considered by this committee. Issues of guilt or innocence are determined at the college level (see II.4 C and D above).

    The Senate Committee will conduct the hearing in accordance with its regular hearing procedures. Copies of these procedures may be obtained from the Provost’s Office.

    The Senate Committee on Student Discipline will provide its recommendation within five (5) business days of its hearing to the provost regarding appropriateness of the disciplinary penalty recommended by the college and/or whether other disciplinary penalties are to be imposed in addition to or in lieu of those already recommended by the college.

     

    F. Provost Action

    1. Decision of the Provost. The role of the provost in handling student appeals regarding the charge of academic honesty has been explained (see II.E.5 above). Based on the recommendation, the Provost will render a decision within ten (10) business days of receipt of the recommendation of the Senate Committee. The provost will notify the student, the referring dean, the department chair and the faculty member of the Senate Committee’s recommendations and of the provost’s decision. At that time the provost will also notify the registrar to annotate the student’s transcript, if necessary.

    2. Appeal of the Decision of the Provost. If the student wishes to appeal the decision of the provost regarding the imposition of a disciplinary penalty, the student may appeal to the president, and then to the Board of Regents. The student must submit a written statement of appeal to the president within 20 business days of notification of the provost’s decision. The basis for such an appeal must be on the grounds that the decision was arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory.

     

    G. Students Involved in Two or More Incidents of Academic Dishonesty

    A student is subject to disciplinary action in addition to any already undertaken once it is determined that the student has been found guilty in a previous incident of academic dishonesty. In such cases, the dean of students will forward a report to the University Senate Committee on Student Discipline regarding the incidents of academic dishonesty which have been reported. The dean of students is responsible for initiating this report within twenty (20) business days of completion of the proceedings of any subsequent finding of academic dishonesty.

    The University Senate Committee on Student Discipline will review the report of the dean of students. The student may submit supplemental written documents for the committee’s review and may request to appear before the committee in its deliberations. After reviewing the matter, the committee will send a report to the provost with the recommendation for disciplinary penalty to be imposed. The provost will proceed as in G above.