Final Draft: May 25, 2016
Academic Integrity Committee Bylaws
1) Academic Integrity Committee (AIC)
a) The AIC is the CU Denver campus body charged with handling issues of student academic integrity and academic misconduct consistently and fairly. It operates on behalf of all students, faculty, and staff, in accordance with the CU Denver Academic Integrity Policy, and through partnership across schools and colleges and between the divisions of Academic Affairs and Student Affairs.
b) The AIC is a formal body, comprised of faculty, students, and staff, whose primary task is to conduct hearings and determine responsibility for alleged violations of the CU Denver Academic Integrity Policy that:
i) Have been appealed by the accused student after the school/college informal, faculty-directed resolution process has been exhausted;
ii) Involve an accused student who has been found responsible for academic misconduct in at least one prior case, or
iii) Have been referred to the AIC by the faculty/instructor (or school/college representative) for consideration of a university-level sanction.
c) The AIC is charged with secondary responsibilities, exercised at the prerogative of the AIC chair and members to: (1) provide input, recommendation and ideas regarding the Academic Integrity Policy, (2) educate students, faculty, and staff about academic integrity, and (3) consult or collaborate with student groups, academic units, and staff offices on information dissemination relevant to the mission of fostering a culture of academic integrity campus-wide.
d) The AIC is constituted, meets, and operates according to the procedures detailed in the University of Colorado Denver Academic Integrity Policy and Procedures, hereafter referred to as the “AI Policy” or “Policy.”
2) AIC Membership
a) Members of the AIC include:
i) AIC Chair: The Director of Student Conduct and Community Standards (SCCS) or his/her designee shall serve as a non-voting chair of the AIC and provide guidance regarding policy, procedure, and documentation.
ii) Liaisons to the AIC: Each school/college dean’s office shall appoint a liaison to the AIC to act as the point of contact with SCCS concerning AIC membership and matters. S/he may or may not also be a member of the AIC, at the discretion of the school/college.
iii) Student Representation:
(1) Each school and college will be invited to elect or appoint one or more students to serve as members of the AIC.
(2) SCCS may appoint student members, ideally one from each school/college.
(3) Students interested in serving may apply to their school/college or to the SCCS.
iv) Faculty Representation: Each school and college is responsible for electing or appointing a minimum of two faculty members to serve as members of the AIC. For each 1,000 students above a total enrollment of 1,000, the school/college will elect or appoint one additional AIC member (e.g., >2,000 and <3,000 = 3 total members).
b) Member Responsibilities
i) All AIC members should be prepared to serve on hearing panels to determine responsibility for academic misconduct for specific cases.
ii) All AIC members are expected to abide by confidentiality policies as established by FERPA. Online or in-person FERPA trainings will be available as needed.
c) Terms of Office
i) AIC members shall begin their terms at the end of the academic year, officially taking office on the day of Spring Commencement.
ii) The minimum term of office for student members is one year with no term limits, but reappointment must be approved by the AIC chair.
iii) The minimum term of office for faculty members is two years, with a limit of two consecutive terms.
iv) All new student and faculty members of the AIC will be required to participate in a training session or complete an online training module prior to assuming their duties. The AIC chair will direct new members to the appropriate training medium.
d) Removal of Members.
i) Members of the AIC will be automatically removed:
(1) if found in violation of AI Policy;
(2) if found to have breached the confidentiality expectations of the position as established by FERPA;
(3) if placed on academic or disciplinary probation by the University; or
(4) if found in violation of the Student Code of Conduct.
ii) A vote of two-thirds of the AIC is required to remove a member based on:
(1) abuse of office;
(2) dereliction of duty; or
(3) unsatisfactory performance of duty.
3) AIC Hearing Panel Make-Up and Selection
An AIC Hearing Panel normally will consist of six persons, including a non-voting chair. The AIC chair shall assign members to hear each matter based on availability and the school/college of the accused student. The AIC Hearing Panel shall be further selected as follows:
a) Two AIC student members; ideally this shall include at least one student associated with the accused student’s home school/college.
b) Three AIC faculty members; this must include at least one faculty member associated with the accused student’s home school/college.
c) AIC Chair (or his/her designee) is the non-voting chair of each AIC Hearing Panel. The chair shall provide guidance to all participants as to policy and procedure, and ensure appropriate documentation and communication of all proceedings.
4) Determination of Responsibility for Academic Misconduct
a) The primary task of the AIC committee is to conduct hearings and determine responsibility for alleged violations of the AI Policy and in accordance with the Policy’s procedures. Determinations of the AIC Hearing Panel will be made by majority vote.
b) During Part 4 of the Hearing, as detailed in the AI Policy, and after discussion, the Hearing Panel shall render its decision on the finding and the appropriate sanction. A finding of responsibility for academic misconduct and the assignment of appropriate sanctions must be based on a preponderance of evidence and must be reached by a majority vote of the Hearing Panel. The preponderance of evidence standard of proof requires evidence sufficient to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that the conduct constituting a violation of the Policy occurred. The hearing need not be conducted according to technical rules of evidence. Any relevant evidence may be considered if it is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs. No evidence other than that received at the hearing or in conjunction with the AIC process shall be considered.
c) If the student is found responsible for academic misconduct, the Hearing Panel will either:
i) Uphold the finding and sanction of the faculty or academic-unit representative .
ii) Uphold the finding of the faculty or academic-unit representative but lower the assigned sanction.
iii) Assign new sanctions beyond those initially assigned by the faculty or academic-unit representative. Additional sanctions assigned by the AIC Hearing Panel based on the severity of the offense and/or prior findings of responsibility for academic misconduct may include any of the following:
(1) Removal from major
(2) Suspension or dismissal from school/college
(3) Disciplinary probation
(4) Loss of good standing for purposes of extra-/co-curricular activities
(5) Suspension from the university
(6) Expulsion from the university.
d) If the student is not found responsible for academic misconduct, records of the allegation will only be maintained internally within SCCS and will not be included in the student’s educational record or shared with external parties.
5) Notification of Finding and Sanction
a) The Hearing Panel may announce the finding and sanction(s) immediately after deliberations, but a written decision shall come through an official form of University Communication.
b) The AIC Chair shall issue the written decision of the finding and any sanction(s) assigned within ten (10) business days after completion of the hearing, and shall e-mail copies of the decision to the student, the faculty member, academic program chair/director, and the appropriate dean’s office AIC Liaison, or provide copies by another official form of University Communication.
6) Appeal
Grounds for Appeal: The decision of the AIC generally should be considered final. In accordance with AI Policy, a student may petition for an appeal of the AIC hearing decision to the AI Appeal Body only if there is concrete evidence of bias, a failure to follow designated procedures that significantly impacted the outcome of the case, and/or an assigned sanction that is largely disproportionate to the finding of responsibility for academic misconduct. Minor deviations from designated procedures will not be a basis for sustaining an appeal unless there is a demonstrable adverse effect on the outcome of the AIC hearing. See Policy D. 13. and D. 14.
7) Multi Party Allegations
In situations where multiple students are accused of academic misconduct resulting from the same incident(s), the Hearing Panel may decide by majority vote to conduct a hearing on all the allegations collectively. Students may submit written testimony to the Hearing Panel if they believe they have a significantly different situation from the collective group and do not wish a hearing in conjunction with the other students accused in the incident(s).
8) Recusal of Members
a) Any member of the Hearing Panel who has a professional or social relationship with the accused or accuser should remove himself/herself from the Hearing Panel when necessary to avoid any possibility of impropriety or bias.
b) The accused student(s) may challenge the presence of any member of the Hearing Panel based on a pre-existing relationship that s/he believes may interfere with the impartiality of the process. Challenges will be submitted to the AIC Chair, who will take the appropriate action. The Chair will notify the accused student of the names of the Hearing Panel members at least 48 hours prior to the hearing, and the student must notify the Chair of any challenges within 24 hours of the hearing.
c) Upon the recusal of a member, the Chair will appoint an appropriate substitute from the Hearing Panel pool.
9) Recording / Record Keeping
a) Hearings may be audio or audio-visual recorded by any party.
b) Access to records is restricted to school officials with a legitimate educational interest as defined by FERPA.
c) Records will be kept indefinitely if a student is suspended or expelled.
d) Records will be kept for 5 years in cases where a student is issued any other sanction for a violation, measured from the conclusion of any appeal or the expiration of the time to file an appeal.
e) Records will not be released externally without a written request from the student to release the records, or as required by law.
f) If the student is not found responsible for academic misconduct, records of the allegation will only be maintained internally by SCCS and will not be included in the student’s educational record or shared with external parties. Records will eventually be expunged according to the SCCS Record Retention Procedures.
10) Revisions of the Academic Integrity By-Laws
The AIC will review and, if needed, update these bylaws every five years on decade and half-decade years. A majority vote of all members of the AIC is required to update.
4