Penalties

Download as PDF
  1. When the Honor Council is satisfied that all pertinent testimony has been received, the accused student, the student adviser, and the investigator exit so that the panel may deliberate.
  2. The panel will proceed to discuss and decide the question of responsibility. The proof that a person is responsible for a charge must satisfy a “preponderance of the evidence” (or, more likely than not) standard. A majority of the six members of a full panel must vote "responsible" to find the accused responsible. All of the members of a small panel must vote “responsible” to find the accused responsible.
  3. If the accused is found responsible, the Honor Council determines a fitting penalty based upon all relevant information, to include:
    1. the flagrancy of the violation,
    2. premeditation involved in the offense, and
    3. dishonesty of the accused throughout the investigation and the hearing
  4. These three factors are each rated on a scale of low, medium low, medium, medium high, or high.
  5. Factors that are not considered include any and all corollary consequences that may result due to a student violating University policy, including, but not limited to, concerns about impact on study away, graduate study, career, or the like.
  6. Students found responsible for a violation are subject to the following penalties:
    1. The presumptive penalty for a first offense is failure in the course. After reviewing the flagrancy, premeditation, and dishonesty ratings of the accused, the Honor Council may, at its discretion, (1) reduce the penalty on a first offense to include an Honor Council reprimand and a recommendation for failure on the assignment or (2) increase the penalty to either (a) suspension for one or more semesters including a failure in the course or (b) expulsion.
    2. The minimum penalty for a second offense is failure in the course and suspension for not less than a semester. Depending upon the severity of the violation, the penalty may be suspension for multiple semesters or expulsion.
    3. The minimum penalty for a third offense is expulsion.
  7. A small panel may assign a penalty no greater than failure in the course and suspension for one semester. Each penalty requires a unanimous vote of the small panel.
  8. Prior to the hearing, the Director of Student Accountability, Community Standards, and Academic Integrity or their designee (Director) will determine if mitigating circumstances exist and may consult with relevant campus partners in reaching that determination. Mitigating circumstances are typically acute—not chronic—circumstances that impaired the judgement of the student at or close to the time of the violation, which can be supported by third-party evidence. If mitigating circumstances are found, the Director may present to the presiding officer a summary of the mitigating circumstances for the panel’s consideration upon a finding of responsibility to factor into the penalty.
  9. Expulsion must be approved by a vote of at least five of the six panel members. (Note that for a third offense, a vote of responsible by five of the six panelists imposes a penalty of expulsion automatically.) All other penalties require only a simple majority vote of the six members.
  10. Decision. The accused will meet with a Student Accountability staff member to receive their outcome letter, generally the next business day. Staff will share the Honor Council’s decision and the grounds for appeal.
  11. All findings of responsibility by the Undergraduate Honor Council, excluding expulsion, will be accompanied by an Integrity Action Plan. Integrity Action Plans are designed to help students learn and develop competencies related to the nature of the Honor Code violation. This may include completion of academic integrity seminars or mandatory referrals to campus resources. Students who do not complete their Integrity Action Plans will receive holds on their accounts or may be referred to Student Accountability for failure to comply.