Academic Integrity Policy Eastern Washington University - Draft
Preamble
Eastern Washington University (EWU) is committed to community and academic excellence which thrive
through honesty, trust, and mutual respect.
When faculty, students, and staff come to EWU, they join an academic community founded on the
search for knowledge. At the heart of that search is personal honesty that makes possible an open and
vibrant exchange of ideas. The intellectual health of the community depends on this honesty and
sustains itself through the trust and mutual respect of each of its members.
Academic integrity is at the heart of the University’s commitment to academic excellence. The EWU
community strives to communicate and support clear standards of integrity, so that undergraduate and
graduate students can internalize those standards and carry them forward in their personal and
professional lives.
Definitions of Violations
This policy applies to all EWU instructors, staff, and students admitted to the university, including
conditional or probationary admittance, any department, program,, or location. This policy provides a
due process resolution for alleged violations by students.
The Academic Integrity Procedures outlines and describes violations to this policy. The definitions do
not represent a complete list of possible violations of academic integrity; rather, they are intended to
provide a general range of conduct which constitutes violations. Included in this list are examples of
plagiarism, cheating, misrepresentation of academic experiences, abilities, or efforts; academic
interference; and unauthorized access to academic records or systems.
Definition
Charges at Higher Level – Faculty or instructors designee
Council refers to the Academic Integrity Council
Vice Provost refers to the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Affairs and Student Success
Faculty or instructor(s) refers to the instructor of record or the unit head if the conditions of “Charges at
Higher Levels” exist.
Instruction day – A day in a regular term when classes are taught, excluding finals week and summer
term.
Witten notice will be communicated through their official Eastern e-mail account.
1
Faculty and Students’ Responsibilities
Faculty
Faculty members are responsible for being aware of the EWU Academic Integrity Policy and contributing
to student development by promoting academic integrity, addressing dishonesty, and assisting in the
development of ethical reasoning. Such behavior includes:
1) Providing a clear and complete syllabus which describes course expectations, guidelines, and
standards of performance, as well as those of the university, concerning academic integrity
2) Holding students responsible for knowing these expectations and guidelines
3) Fostering an environment where academic integrity is expected and respected
4) Endeavoring to detect and properly handle breaches of academic integrity
5) Fostering a classroom environment in which all students are treated with courtesy and respect
6) Creating assessments that are effective evaluations of student mastery of course content
7) Evaluating student work based on its academic merit
8) Giving students timely and honest feedback
9) Being available to discuss appropriate academic matters
Students
Students are responsible for being aware of the EWU Academic Integrity Policy and demonstrating
behavior that is honest and ethical in their academic work. Such behavior includes:
1) Being responsible for knowing and following the academic integrity policy of the University.
2) Being responsible for knowing and following each instructor’s academic integrity policy as
defined in the course syllabus
3) Asking for clarification if the standards of academic performance are not clear
4) Asking for clarification from the instructor about the syllabus, assignments, or grading policies if
they seem unclear
5) Helping to foster an environment where academic integrity is expected and respected
6) Helping to foster a learning community that allows for different expressions of ideas in which
all students are treated with courtesy and respect
Rights of Students
Any student or student organization accused of or charged with any violation of the Academic Integrity
Policy has the following rights in conduct review proceedings:
1) The right to a fair and impartial conduct review hearing before the faculty member or the
Academic Integrity Council;
2) The right to prior written notice to attend a preliminary conference;
3) The right to remain silent during any conduct review proceeding;
4) The student has the right to request an Informal Hearing from the faculty member without prior
written notice.;
2
5) The right to prior written notice to attend a council hearing if the matter is not resolved
through an Informal Hearing process;
6) The right to know who is bringing the accusation(s) against them
7) The right to speak on his/her own behalf in all proceedings;
8) The right to consult an advisor;
9) The right to appeal; and
10) The right to be subjected to university disciplinary action only one time for the same incident
unless the student has been found to have pervious violations of this policy. In the event that
the student has previous incidents the current investigation will be reviewed by the council.
Any student or student organization appearing before a council hearing has the following additional
rights:
1) The accused has the right to hear all information and view all material to be presented against
them;
2) The accused and complainant have the right to present witnesses that will provide relevant,
probative, and credible evidence related to the allegations only.
3) The accused and complainant have the right to submit questions to be asked of the witnesses.
Allegations of Academic Dishonesty
Primary Responsibility for Bringing a Charge
The primary responsibility for bringing a charge of academic dishonesty involving academic work, other
documents or issues related to the academic environment submitted in a course rests with the faculty
or other instructors of record (hereafter called faculty). Graduate assistants, teaching assistants,
research assistants, student workers, exam proctors, online coordinators and any other persons who
assist or support faculty in teaching should report suspected instances of academic dishonesty to the
instructor of record. Academic Integrity Procedures outline responsibilities for bringing charges outside
a specific course including thesis, dissertation, placement/comprehensive exams; falsified documents;
and other instances of academic dishonesty. The procedures also describe how students can make an
ethical choice to report academic dishonesty issues.
Charges at Higher Levels: When the person who bears the primary responsibility does not bring a
charge within a reasonable time, the Department Chair or academic unit head may bring a charge with
that person’s written consent. The unit head may serves as the faculty designee.
Pending Charges in Courses : Once a student is notified, in writing, that a faculty member is
pursuing an allegation of academic dishonesty in a course the student may not change his or her
registration in the course while the matter is pending. Any attempt to withdraw from a course under
these circumstances shall be considered a separate violation of this policy.
3
Informal Hearing Resolution
Meeting with Student
If a faculty member suspects that a violation has occurred, the faculty or unit head may discuss
the circumstances with the student. If the faculty or academic unit head concludes that there is
no violation of this policy, the matter is over. If the faculty still believes a violation has occurred,
the faculty member will contact the Vice Provost to determine if the student has previous
violation(s), in which event the case must be referred to the Council for review by a Hearing
Panel. If the student has no previous violations, then the faculty member or academic unit head
and the student may pursue an informal resolution.
The faculty member shall notify the student in writing, of the basis of the belief that a violation
occurred and then allow the student five (5)instruction days to respond to the allegation. The
student may waive the right to written notice if they choose an informal hearing.
The student may accept responsibility for the alleged action and the sanction proposed
by the instructor or a sanction mutually agreed upon. If the student agrees to Informal
Resolution, the student and instructor will sign a "Resolution/Appeal Form" and forward
the completed waiver (including the sanction imposed) to the Vice Provost for recording
. The instructor will then implement the sanction.
Failure of the student to respond within five (5) university instruction days shall be
interpreted as admission of responsibility and acceptance of the instructor's proposed
sanctions. If a student fails to respond within five (5) instruction days, the instructor
shall impose the sanctions and forward a copy of the appropriately completed
Resolution/Appeal form to the Vice Provost.
If the student does not admit responsibility for the violation or disagrees with the
sanction to be imposed by the faculty, or does not agree to an informal hearing either
party may request that the case be referred to the Council. Either the faculty or student
may seek the assistance of the Department chair, and subsequently the Dean at the
informal resolution stage.
The faculty member bringing the charge is responsible for informing students of their option to
refer the incident to the Council for review at any time during the informal resolution.
Preponderance of Evidence


A decision-maker does not have to have 100% proof that a student(s) committed academic
dishonesty.
Decisions are based on a preponderance of evidence which means presenting facts “that there
is a reasonable probability that what he or she claims to have happen did occur”. (The Guide to
American Law: Everyone’s Legal Encyclopedia, 1984)
4
Sanctions Permitted
Sanctions permitted under informal resolution procedures include one or more of the following:








Formal warning
A reduction in grade for the assignment and/or reduction in the grade for the course
A failing grade for the assignment and/or reduction in the grade for the course
A failing grade in the course
A failing grade in the course with a transcript notation of academic dishonesty (XF grade)
Rescinding or changing a grade for a past course in which a violation occurred
Successfully completing a university sponsored non-credit seminar on academic integrity
Other sanction(s) as appropriate and agreed to in writing
Notification to the Academic Integrity Council and Vice Provost for Undergraduate
Student and Student Success’s Office
If both the student and faculty member agree to the student’s responsibility for the violation
and to the sanction to be imposed, the must submit an “Informal Resolution Form” to the Vice
Provost as the office of record the Vice Provost will copy form to the chair of the Council. The
faculty member is responsible for submitting the completed documents in the timeframe as
noted on the Informal Resolution Form.
All reports of academic dishonesty will be reviewed by the Vice Provost’s Office to verify
whether or not the student has been found responsible for any other act(s) of academic
dishonesty. Whenever the Vice Provost finds a repeat offense, the Vice Provost shall
automatically refer it to the Council for review by a Hearing Panel.
Formal Resolution
Cases not resolved through informal resolution will be referred for a hearing. A hearing is initiated when
the Vice Provost receives a request for a hearing by either the student or the faculty. In the case of online students or faculty whose physical presence at a hearing would impose a hardship, the hearing may
be conducted using technologies deemed appropriate by the Hearing Panel presiding officer. The
hearing will be reviewed by The Academic Integrity Council (Council).
The Academic Integrity Council
The Academic Integrity Council is a standing committee of the Faculty Organization, whose
responsibilities are to promote academic integrity at EWU and to oversee the judicial functions of the
Academic Integrity Policy by ensuring fair and efficient operation of hearing panels, serving as appellate
hearing panels, and deciding on petitions. Duties and responsibilities of the committee are outlined in
Academic Integrity Procedures.
The Hearing Panel Process
The purpose of a hearing is to explore and investigate the incident giving rise to the appearance of
academic dishonesty and to reach an informed conclusion as to whether or not academic dishonesty
5
occurred. All persons at a hearing are expected to assist in a thorough and honest exposition of all
related facts. Council Hearing Panel proceedings are administrative hearings not considered legal
proceedings.
The presiding Council officer shall notify the student of the allegation in writing, including the report of
the faculty member and will request a written response to the allegation from the student. Any written
response will become part of the record and be reviewed by the Hearing Panel in preparation for the
hearing.
Both the student and the faculty may submit a list of witnesses to appear at the hearing. The accused
and complainant have the right to present witnesses that will provide relevant, probative, and credible
evidence related to the allegations only the presiding officer shall determine in advance of the hearing
anyone who may be called as a witness.
Timelines shall be held in abeyance during Thanksgiving, winter and spring breaks, as well as any times
when no classes are scheduled. Timelines may be held in other circumstances only with the consent of
the presiding officer, but in no case shall exceed an additional 20 business days. Faculty not on summer
contract, on sabbatical, other leave, or otherwise unavailable may delegate authority to another faculty
member, including the department chair, to appear and act on their behalf. Any delegation shall be
reduced to writing and received by the presiding officer before the hearing.
Hearing in Absentia
Failure to reply to a summons from the Vice Provost or the Council Chair to appear before a Hearing
Panel will not preclude the Hearing Panel from hearing evidence and determining outcomes.
Academic Integrity Procedures
The detailed hearing procedures are not included in this academic integrity policy. Procedures will be
reviewed and updated annually prior to the Spring term by the Vice Provost, and approved by a majority
of the Academic Integrity Council. The review is designed to ensure the policy and procedures are fair
and impartial. Recommendation for edits and changes should be forward to the Vice Provost. Students,
faculty and Council members should review the procedures outlining the detailed procedures prior to an
Informal or Formal Resolution Hearing.
The procedures will include:






A method for faculty to report allegation of academic integrity infraction
A method for students to be informed of the, allegations and hearing options,
Timeframes for communications and decisions
Duties and responsibilities of the Academic Integrity Council and its members.
A method for reporting and implementing sanctions
A process for student and faculty appeal
6
The Failing Grade with a Notation of Academic Dishonesty
A failing grade will be recorded on the student’s transcript with the notation “failure due to academic
dishonesty.” The failing grade with a notation of academic dishonesty shall be treated in the same way
as a comparable failing grade for the purposes of grade point average, course repeatability, and the
determination of academic standing.
A student may file a written petition to the Council to have the notation of academic dishonesty
removed. The decision to remove the notation requires a majority vote of the Council provided that:

at the time the petition is received, at least twelve months shall have elapsed since the grade
and notation was imposed; and

at the time the petition is received, the student shall have successfully completed a university
sponsored non-credit seminar on academic integrity; or, for the person no longer enrolled at the
university, an equivalent educational activity to be determined by the Council; and

the Vice Provost’s Office certifies that no reports have been received indicating that the student
has been found responsible for any other act of academic dishonesty at the university or at
another institution.
Prior to making a decision, the Council will review the record of the case, and consult, if possible, with a
referring faculty or academic unit head who originally reported the violation(s). If the Council denies the
petition, the student cannot submit another petition for two years, unless the Council specifies an
earlier date.
Subsequent Allegations of Academic Dishonesty
In the event of a subsequent allegation of academic dishonesty, the Vice Provost will automatically refer
the case to the Council for review by a Hearing Panel. Ordinarily, a second finding of academic
dishonesty will result in either suspension for one or two full terms, excluding summer terms, or
permanent dismissal from the university.
Suspension for academic dishonesty will ordinarily take place immediately. In the case of an appeal, the
suspension is held in abeyance until the appeal process is completed.
In the event of extraordinary or extenuating circumstances, the Hearing Panel has the right to assign a
lesser sanction or to delay the suspension.
Appeals
A student may appeal the decision of the Hearing Panel to an Appeals Panel of the Council.
Additionally, the student can, request to revoke their decisions made at an Informal Hearing and
request a formal hearing as an appeal. The student may revoke their decision from the informal
hearing for any reason. Since the formal hearing would be considered an appeal the council’s
decision will be final.
7
The Appeals Panel shall consist of two (2) faculty and one (1) student members of the Council selected
by the Council Chair. A typewritten and signed appeal, including the reason(s) for appeal, and supporting
documentation, must be received by the Vice Provost within ten (10) instructional days of receipt of the
Hearing Panel decision or Informal Hearing. Appeals are limited to one or more of the following three
conditions:

There is new and significant evidence which was not available for the Hearing Panel or Informal
Hearing and which may further clarify and support the defense of the student. In this instance,
the case should be referred back to the original Hearing Panel for reconsideration.

There is clear reason to believe that the sanction is not consistent with the seriousness of the
violation. In such cases, the Appeals Panel may issue a different sanction.

There is substantial credible evidence that the initial hearing was not fair and impartial, or that
the established process was not followed. In this instance, the case should be referred back to a
new Hearing Panel to rehear the case.
If the appeal documentation does not fall into one of the permissible grounds or does not support the
claim, the appeal shall be denied.
In cases of academic dishonesty, the decisions of the Appeals Panel are final and may not be further
appealed.
C:\Users\clopez17\Desktop\Academic Integrity Policy draft.docx
8