|REGULATION ON ACADEMIC FRAUD||REGULATION ON THE ACCELERATED PROCESS FOR ACADEMIC FRAUD CASES|
REGULATION ON ACADEMIC FRAUD
1. Academic fraud is an act by a student that may result in a false academic evaluation of that student or of another student. Without limiting the generality of this definition, academic fraud occurs when a student commits any of the following offences:
- commits plagiarism or cheating of any kind (to obtain more information on plagiarism and how to avoid it, consult our Web site at www.uottawa.ca/plagiarism.pdf);
- submits a work of which the student is not the author, in whole or in part – except for duly cited quotations or references. Such work may include an academic paper, an essay, a test, an exam, a research report, a thesis, whether written, oral, or in another form;
- presents research data that has been falsified or concocted in any way;
- attributes a purported statement of fact or reference to a source that has been concocted;
- submits the same work or significant part thereof for more than one course, or a thesis or other work that has already been submitted elsewhere, without written authorization from the professors concerned and/or of the academic unit concerned;
- falsifies an academic evaluation, misrepresents an academic evaluation, uses a forged or falsified academic record or supporting document, or facilitates the use of a falsified academic record or supporting document;
- undertakes any other action for the purpose of falsifying an academic evaluation.
2. A student who has committed or attempted to commit academic fraud, or who has been a party to academic fraud, is subject to one or more of the following sanctions:
- a written reprimand;
- the mark of F or zero for part of the work concerned;
- the mark of F or zero for the work concerned;
- the mark of F or zero for the work concerned and the loss of additional marks for the course concerned;
- the mark of F or zero for the work concerned, with no more than the passing grade as a final mark for the course concerned;
- the mark of F or zero for the course concerned;
- the loss of all or part of the credits for the academic year concerned (the courses for which credits were withdrawn remain in the student’s file – they are included in the grade point average and must be repeated or replaced by other courses at the discretion of the Faculty);
- an additional requirement of 3 to 30 credits added to the student’s program of studies (additional credit requirements that are added to the student’s program of studies as part of an academic fraud sanction will also apply to any subsequent program of the same level in which the student registers);
- the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the Faculty for one year;
- the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the Faculty until graduation;
- suspension from the program or from the Faculty, for at least one session and at most three academic years;
- expulsion from the Faculty;
- the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the University for one year;
- the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the University until graduation;
- expulsion from the University for at least three years, it being understood that three years after being expelled, the student concerned may ask the Senate Appeals Committee to review his or her case, with the possibility, where applicable, of having the notice of expulsion withdrawn from the student’s transcript – if the student reapplies for admission, the regular admission process shall apply;
- cancellation or revocation of a degree, diploma or certificate where the offence relates to the eligibility to receive such degree, diploma or certificate, and which was discovered or determined after its award;
- inclusion of the following statement in the student’s academic transcript: “Sanction pursuant to contravention of the University regulation on fraud.”
3. Sanctions stipulated in sections 2(a) to 2(k) are imposed by the Faculty in which the student is registered. Sanctions 2(l) to 2(q) are imposed by the Saint Paul University Interpretation of Academic Regulations Committee for undergraduate students and by the University of Ottawa Senate Appeals Committee for graduate students upon the recommendation of the Faculty. Decisions shall take effect immediately, notwithstanding appeal.
4. Allegations of fraud are submitted in writing by the professor, with supporting documentation, to the dean of the Faculty that offers the course in question.
5. If the dean or the dean’s representative decides that the allegation is founded:
- the dean informs the student in writing of the allegation made against him or her and provides a copy of all supporting documentation – if the student is eligible for the accelerated process, he or she will be asked to choose whether to follow the process described in the present regulation or the accelerated process;
- the dean provides a copy of the present regulation and, when required, the Regulation on the Accelerated Process for Academic Fraud Cases;
- if the student is not eligible for the accelerated process or if the student is eligible for the accelerated process but has opted for the process described in the present regulation, the file is referred to a committee of inquiry consisting of at least three persons appointed by the dean.
6. The committee of inquiry:
- invites the student to present, in writing, within a prescribed time limit, any information or documents relevant to the allegation which has been made and, if it deems it appropriate, invites the student to appear before the committee;
- solicits any other information that it considers relevant to its inquiry.
7. On the basis of this documentation and information, and once the student has been given the opportunity to be heard in writing and/or in person, the committee of inquiry:
- either concludes that the allegation is not sufficiently founded and that no further action is to be taken; or,
- concludes that the allegation is founded and prepares a summary report for the dean, which shall include a recommendation for the appropriate sanction.
The student is informed by the dean of the conclusions reached by the committee of inquiry and of the next procedural steps. The dean informs the student that he or she may submit comments on the report of the committee of inquiry, provided that such comments are made in writing within 10 working days following the date at which the report was sent.
8. The report of the committee of inquiry and, if applicable, the written submissions made by the student, are submitted to the executive committee of the Faculty or its equivalent, which either decides or recommends the sanction to be imposed to the Interpretation of Academic Regulations Committee or the Senate Appeals Committee, as the case may be.
9. If the sanction is one the Faculty has the power to impose, the decision of the executive committee of the Faculty or its equivalent shall take effect immediately, notwithstanding appeal.
10. The dean informs the student in writing of the decision or the recommendation made by the executive committee of the Faculty or its equivalent, and of the procedure to be followed should the student wish to appeal.
11. A student who decides to appeal the decision of the executive committee of the Faculty (or its equivalent) or its recommendation to the Interpretation of Academic Regulations Committee or to the Senate Appeals Committee, must so inform the Saint Paul University Office of the Vice-rector Academic and Research (undergraduate students) or the University of Ottawa Office of the Vice-President, Governance (graduate students) and provide the reasons for the appeal, within 10 working days following the date at which the decision or recommendation was sent.
12. The Office of the Vice-rector Academic and Research or the Office of the Vice-President, Governance transmits the file to the Interpretation of Academic Regulations Committee or to the Senate Appeals Committee which:
- invites the student to appear before the committee and/or submit in writing any information the student considers relevant;
- solicits any other documentation or information it considers relevant.
13. The decision of the Interpretation of Academic Regulations Committee or the Senate Appeals Committee is final and cannot be appealed.
14. When the allegation of fraud involves students from different faculties, the case is submitted to the Faculty that offers the course, in accordance with the procedure set out in this regulation.
15. A student who has been suspended from a program shall not be awarded any credit for courses otherwise acceptable as part of the student’s program or as part of the overall requirements of the program, when such courses are taken, at the University or elsewhere, during the period of suspension which has been imposed. A mark of F (zero) will be assigned retroactively, if applicable, to any course so taken at the University, and tuition fees will not be refunded.
16. At the end of the period of suspension, the student will be authorized to continue the program once he or she has registered in accordance with the conditions applicable at that time.
REGULATION ON THE ACCELERATED PROCESS FOR ACADEMIC FRAUD CASES
All students alleged to have committed academic fraud are eligible for the accelerated process of academic fraud cases, with two exceptions:
- if it is a second or repeated offence;
- if the offence is serious enough to merit sanctions going as far as sanction 2(i) of the Regulation on Academic Fraud (i.e. the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the Faculty for one year) to sanction 2(q) (i.e. inclusion in the academic transcript).
1. As stated in sections 4 and 5 of the Regulation on Academic Fraud, if the allegation is founded and if the student is eligible for the accelerated process (i.e. that the case is not one of the exceptions that must follow the regular process), an email is sent to the student requesting he or she choose either the accelerated process or the regular process. The student has five working days to provide a response.
By accepting this accelerated process, the student acknowledges a contravention, whether voluntary or involuntary, of academic regulations and accepts that a sanction will be imposed.
2. If the student chooses the accelerated process, a meeting is organized between the person in charge of the accelerated process for academic fraud cases and the student. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the situation and sign an agreement whereby the student acknowledges having committed a contravention, whether voluntary or involuntary, of the academic regulations and accepts the imposed sanction. The student is allowed two working days to sign and return the agreement to the person in charge of the accelerated process for academic fraud cases.
The student can be accompanied by the person of his or her choice at this meeting, as can the person in charge of the accelerated process for academic fraud cases. However, both the student and the person in charge of the accelerated process for academic fraud cases must provide the other with the name of the person who will be accompanying them beforehand.
Normally, the sanctions are those of the Regulation on Academic Fraud, from sanction 2(a) (i.e. a reprimand) to 2(h) (i.e. an additional requirement of 3 to 30 credits to be added to the student’s program of studies).
3. The person in charge of the accelerated process for academic fraud cases forwards the results of the accelerated process, including the imposed sanction, to the professor who made the allegation and the director of the academic unit. A copy, to be signed by the student, is also included in the student’s file.
The accelerated process for an academic fraud violation normally takes no longer than 15 working days from when the allegation is made to when the agreement is signed.
4. The student can put a stop to this process at any point prior to signing an agreement — the normal process then follows.
The person in charge of the accelerated process for academic fraud cases can also put an end to this process if he or she deems that no agreement is possible, for example, in circumstances such as:
- When emails and/or telephone messages remain unanswered, or the process is being unduly prolonged;
- When the student refuses to acknowledge that a contravention of academic regulations has been committed;
- When the student refuses the proposed sanction;
- When the student does not attend the meeting.
If the regular process is initiated:
- All information disclosed by a student in the accelerated process is to be considered privileged and is not to be disclosed to any member of the committee of inquiry established under the regular process;
- The fact of the occurrence of an accelerated process or of a student’s exploration thereof is not to be disclosed to the committee of inquiry established under the regular process;
- No person (other than the student) participating in the accelerated process is to participate in a committee of inquiry established under the regular process, unless the student agrees otherwise.
5. A student who wishes to file an appeal after he or she has signed an agreement may submit this appeal to the Saint Paul University Interpretation of Academic Regulations Committee for undergraduate students and to the University of Ottawa Senate Appeals Committee for graduate students within 10 working days from the date of said agreement.