Academic Integrity & Misconduct Policy

It is the responsibility of each student at Jacksonville University to know and abide by the standards and guidelines for academic integrity, as outlined above.

Instructors are expected to provide clear information regarding class assignments; however, it is ultimately a student’s responsibility to understand the amount of collaboration allowed in a specific assignment, to understand how to cite sources, and to never assume that working with others or using the student’s previous work or the work of others is acceptable without instructor permission.  

It is the responsibility of instructors to report all acts of misconduct, even if they believe those acts to be unintentional, so that students can benefit from special educational instruction and assistance to help ensure that they avoid committing such acts again in the future.  If the instructor is unsure whether a violation has occurred, the instructor is to consult with the Chair of the Academic Integrity Council.  

By reporting acts of academic misconduct through the Academic Misconduct Notification Form (available to instructors via the MyJU portal) at the time that they are detected, discovered, or known (hereafter referred to as the discovery date), instructors initiate a process that allows students to either accept all penalties or exercise the right to challenge the instructor’s determination of academic misconduct in a timely manner with the Academic Integrity Council.  This process is entirely separate from the Grade Appeals Process.  If an instructor should impose a penalty for an act of academic misconduct in a course, but fail to report the incident through the Academic Misconduct Notification Form within fifteen (15) business days of the discovery date when school is in session, the instructor’s action will be considered a violation of university policy. Therefore, if the student should initiate a grade appeal after receiving his/her final grade in the course, the instructor’s dean would automatically reverse the course-level penalty.    

If an instructor believes a student has committed an act of academic misconduct, the instructor is to meet with the student, if possible, to discuss the matter. This discussion may occur in person, via telephone, or video conference.   When it is not possible to meet with the student, the instructor is to contact the student by email.   This meeting or email contact should be initiated as soon as possible after the discovery date. The instructor is then to fill out the Academic Misconduct Notification Form within fifteen (15) business days of the discovery date when school is in session.  This form will generate a report that will be automatically transmitted via email to the student, the instructor, and the Director of Academic Integrity.  In addition to describing the incident on this form, the instructor will:  

1. Recommend that a “warning” be issued to the student.  See Section VI below for a full explanation of the possible consequences of a warning.  This “warning only” option may be chosen in any of the following circumstances:
   • The incident is a first offense in the class,
   • The affected assignment amounted to 10% or less of the total grade in the course,
   • An act of plagiarism occurred due to a technicality and was likely unintentional,
   • Mitigating circumstances suggest that the act of misconduct was not an overt attempt to gain an unfair advantage. 
2. Recommend that a “citation for academic misconduct” be issued to the student.  See Section IV below for a full explanation of the possible consequences of a citation.  

NOTE:  If the course-level penalty assigned by the instructor is failure for the entire course, the instructor is to indicate, on the Academic Misconduct Notification Form, that the Registrar’s Office will issue an “Academic Hold” which will prevent the student from withdrawing from the course in question (the student may still withdraw from other courses).  

There are two levels of penalties for incidents of academic misconduct.

1. A course-level penalty, which is assigned by the instructor, in line with the policies on the instructor’s syllabus.
2. A concurrent university-level penalty, which will include educational instruction and assistance, but may include placing the student on a probationary watch list, suspension, or even expulsion from the university, depending on the type of violation and/or the type and number of previous violations.

Upon discovery of an act of academic misconduct, the assigning of a course-level penalty is up to the discretion of the instructor. If the student requests an AIC hearing panel to review his or her case and is found innocent of the alleged misconduct, the instructor must retract any course-level penalties and re-grade the assignment(s) in question as if no academic misconduct occurred.

Unless the course-level penalty is failure for the entire course, the student may still withdraw from the course, provided that the deadline for withdrawing has not yet passed.

A course-level penalty on the affected assignment that incidentally results in the student failure in the course is not the same as imposing a penalty of failure in the course.

Once a student has accepted the consequences for an act of academic misconduct, or has been found to have committed an act of academic misconduct by a Hearing Panel of the Academic Integrity Council (see section XVI, “Actions Taken Upon an AIC Hearing Panel Decision” below), the university-level penalties below are to be imposed, and the student’s academic advisor is to be notified. If the student is an athlete, the Chief Athletics Officer and the Faculty Athletics Representative are to be notified.  If the student is a member of ROTC, his or her Commanding Officer is to be notified. 

WARNINGS:

• One warning will result in mandatory educational instruction and assistance, to help ensure that the student avoids committing such an act again.  
• A second warning will result in further mandated educational instruction and assistance, along with the student being placed on the probationary watch list, unless the two warnings occur concurrently, in which case they are to be treated as one warning.  
• When students receive a warning, that notation will remain on file in the office of the Chief Academic Officer, but it will not be entered on their permanent transcripts.
• Once a student has been placed on the probationary watch list, further incidents of academic misconduct may lead to suspension or expulsion, with the length of the suspension to be determined by the dean of the college in which the course was offered.

CITATIONS FOR ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT:

• One citation will result in mandatory education instruction and assistance, in addition to the student being placed on the probationary watch list.  This is to occur regardless of whether or not the student has received a previous warning.  In cases where the student has already received two warnings, however, and has hence already been placed on the probationary watch list, punishment will then be governed by the guidelines listed below.
• When students receive a citation, that notation will remain on file in the office of the Chief Academic Officer, but it will not be entered on their permanent transcripts.

NOTE: If a student’s first two offenses occur concurrently (as determined by a relevant Dean), whether they involve warnings, citations, or a mix of both, they are to be treated as one offense.  If these first two offenses are a mix of a warning and a citation, they are to count as one citation of academic misconduct.  If a student who has previously been free of academic misconduct suddenly commits more than two offenses in one semester, however, it is up to the judgment of the Director of Academic Integrity to decide whether those acts will count as one or more offenses.

EDUCATIONAL INSTRUCTION AND ASSISTANCE:

• The purpose of special educational instruction and assistance is to help ensure that students avoid committing acts of academic misconduct again.  
• A “training hold” will be placed on the student’s account to prevent the student from registering for classes, requesting transcripts, and / or graduating, until the educational training has been completed.  
• The student is still to be allowed to withdraw from the course in which academic misconduct occurred, prior to completing this educational training, provided that the course-level penalty determined by the instructor is not failure for the entire course and that the university deadline for withdrawing has not passed. 
• The mandatory educational instruction is to include 1) individualized educational counseling with the Director of Academic Integrity and 2) instruction about plagiarism. This instruction is to include both components, no matter the exact nature of the act of misconduct.

PROBATIONARY WATCH LIST, SUSPENSION, AND EXPULSION:

• When students are placed on the probationary watch list, that notation will remain on file in the office of the Chief Academic Officer, but it will not be entered on their permanent transcripts.
• Once the student has been placed on the probationary watch list, the default penalty for any further acts of academic misconduct, whether warning or a citation, will be suspension from the university, with the length of the suspension to be determined by the instructor’s dean.  If the instructor’s dean should determine that suspension is not appropriate, other punitive or remedial measures, as approved by the Chief Academic Officer, may be imposed. 
• If students are suspended for academic misconduct, that notation will remain on file in the office of the Chief Academic Officer, but it will not be entered on their permanent transcripts.  
• Once students have been suspended for academic misconduct, the default penalty for any further warnings or citations that occur upon their return will be immediate expulsion from the university.  If the instructor’s dean should determine that expulsion is not appropriate, other punitive or remedial measures, as approved by the Chief Academic Officer, may be imposed.
• Students who are expelled from Jacksonville University are unable to enroll in any future classes, and records of this expulsion are maintained on file in the office of the Chief Academic Officer. Official transcripts, however, do not record any mention of the reasons why students are expelled.

SPECIAL CASES:

• If the instructor’s dean in consultation with the Director of Academic Integrity judges a particular act of academic misconduct to be especially egregious, he or she may take the matter to the Chief Academic Officer, who may impose harsher penalties than those outlined above, including immediate expulsion from the university after just one act.
• If an act of academic misconduct committed in a course should go undetected at the time, and is only discovered later, during a subsequent semester, after the final grade has been issued in that course, it is up to the instructor’s dean in consultation with the Director of Academic Integrity to determine if that instructor should be allowed to file an Academic Misconduct Notification Form.  If a degree has already been conferred, and the act is judged to be especially egregious by the Chief Academic Officer, it is up to the Chief Academic Officer to determine whether or not that degree should be rescinded as part of the university-penalty for that act.  Former students will be contacted via certified mail and will be afforded the same right to challenge a determination of academic misconduct as current students (see sections X-XVII below). 
• If an act of academic misconduct involves a student not enrolled in the class as a participant in the misconduct, the instructor may, in consultation with their dean and the Director of Academic Integrity, be allowed to file an Academic Misconduct Notification Form. Note: in these cases there will be no course-level penalty imposed. All other processes will be followed as set forth in this document.
• Students in their last semester expecting to graduate will have their transcripts held until the required training is completed.
• International students who are in their last semester at the university may be denied the option for continued visa status for professional experiences post-graduation in lieu of suspension.

Once the Director of Academic Integrity has received the Academic Misconduct Notification Form from the instructor the following actions occur:

1. The faculty member is contacted to provide the documentary evidence and copy of the syllabus for the course in which the infraction occurred,
2. A hold is placed on the student’s account to encourage the student to address the situation. The hold may be released temporarily to allow the student to withdraw from the course (if the penalty is not “failure  in the course”), or to allow the student to register for classes.  The temporary release of hold must be requested by the student,
3. The student is contacted for their version of the events leading to the submission of the AMNF by the faculty,
4. The Director of Academic Integrity checks their files to determine whether the reported infraction is a first offense,
5. The dean, academic advisor, and if appropriate faculty athletics representative, Athletic Director, NROTC commander, and/or International Student office are notified that a student has been reported for an act of academic misconduct,
6. A description of the penalties and request for a decision regarding acceptance of the penalties or appeal of the reported infraction is sent to the student, and the Director of Academic Integrity informs the student that he or she has seven (7) business days from the postmark date (or email time stamp) of this notification to request a hearing with the Academic Integrity Council, or the student will be deemed to have committed the violation, an “Academic Hold” to encourage the student to address the issue prior to being able to withdraw from the course in question or register for courses in subsequent sessions

If the instructor has indicated “WARNING” only on the Academic Misconduct Notification Form, that instructor’s judgment is to be respected.  If the instructor marks “CITATION,” however, the instructor’s dean has the right to lessen that to a “WARNING” if, in his or her judgment, the infraction fits the guidelines for a warning.  Again, these guidelines include any of the following circumstances: 

• The incident is a first offense in the class,
• The affected assignment amounted to 10% or less of the total grade in the course,
• An act of plagiarism occurred due to a technicality and was likely unintentional,
• Mitigating circumstances suggest that the act of misconduct was not an overt attempt to gain an unfair advantage.

In cases in which the student accepts the penalties without an admission of misconduct, or fails to request a hearing with the Academic Integrity Council within the allotted seven (7) business days, the Director of Academic Integrity records a determination that the student has accepted the penalties.  The Academic Hold remains in place until required educational training (see Section VI above) has been completed.  

The Academic Integrity Council is chaired by the Director of Academic Integrity.

• The AIC Chair is a non-voting member who presides over all hearings of the AIC.  
• The AIC Chair is to serve as a neutral resource to both students and faculty.  
• The AIC Chair is to be a tenured faculty member, with administrative duties as the Director of Academic Integrity, appointed by the Chief Academic Officer.  

The other members of the Academic Integrity Council form a pool of members from which the AIC Chair draws to form Hearing Panels.

• At least three faculty members from each college are to be appointed to the AIC, with at least one faculty member coming from each academic school or division. These faculty members are to be tenured, unless the particular division or school they represent has fewer than two tenured faculty. In such cases, non-tenured faculty may be appointed to the AIC. These faculty members are to be appointed to the AIC by Director of Academic Integrity in consultation with the deans of each college and academic  unit adminstrators, to serve two-year terms, which may be renewed. Additional tenured faculty members may be appointed to the AIC as needed, from any academic division or school, at the discretion of the deans.  The terms of these faculty members are to be staggered, to ensure continuity.  
• At least three undergraduate students, to be selected from three different academic units, are to be appointed by the Director of Academic Integrity after consultation with the Chief Student Life Officer and Deans.  Students will serve one-year renewable terms on the AIC.  
• At least three graduate students, to be selected from three different academic units, are to be appointed by the Director of Academic integrity in consultation with the Chief Student Life Officer and Deans.  Graduate students serve one-year renewable terms on the AIC.  

A student can request a hearing with the Academic Integrity Council only after an Academic Misconduct Notification Form is submitted by the instructor.   If there is no Academic Misconduct Notification Form submitted by the instructor, the student will need to refer to information in the Grade Appeal Process in the JU Catalog.

If the student requests a hearing with the Academic Integrity Council, the Director of Academic Integrity meets (virtually, via telephone, or in person) with the student in a neutral, advisory role, to review the case and discuss the student’s options.  If the instructor who has charged the student with an act of misconduct is also the AIC chair, then the instructor’s dean will designate another faculty member serving on the AIC to meet with the student, and to serve as the AIC chair for that case.

The AIC Chair will explain the process and procedures involved in the hearing process.  At this time, the student will have another opportunity to accept the penalties.  If, after this meeting, the student still wishes to request a hearing, the AIC Chair is to make a reasonable effort to schedule one around the student’s schedule.  This hearing is to occur within the next fourteen (14) business days, if possible.  

When alleged violations occur at the end of a fall or summer semester, the hearing is to take place within thirty (30) days of the beginning of the next spring or fall semester, respectively.  When alleged violations occur at the end of the spring semester, the hearing is to take place no later than thirty days after the beginning of the following fall semester.

The AIC Chair will then select the participants of a Hearing Panel from the members of the AIC.  The Hearing Panel is to consist of three to five voting members (aside from the chair). 

Members of the AIC may disqualify themselves from participating in any particular Hearing Panel for any reason.  In such a case, it is up to the chair to find a replacement member according to the above guidelines. The instructor who has accused the student of academic misconduct cannot be a member of the hearing panel, nor serve as the AIC chair for that panel.  

The student, as well as the instructor are to be notified of the time and place of the hearing. Hearing panels may be held via electronic meeting.

If an accused student is either unwilling or unable to attend a Hearing Panel that he or she has requested, the AIC chair may opt to have five members of the AIC review the student’s case without requiring these members to attend a physical meeting.

AIC Hearing Panels have jurisdiction over one issue and one issue alone: determining whether reported students should be held responsible for committing the particular act(s) of academic misconduct related to the warning or the citation alleged by the instructor.  AIC Hearing Panels have no jurisdiction over the penalties imposed for violations, or whether the act in question merits a warning or a citation for academic misconduct.  

Only the instructor’s dean has the right to change a citation to a warning.  His or her decision on this matter is final.  If a student who has admitted an act of academic misconduct or been found to have committed such an act by a n AIC Hearing Panel should wish to contest the severity of a course-level penalty imposed by an instructor (on the basis that the penalty was not in accordance with the instructor’s stated syllabus policies), that student would need to follow the process outlined in the “Standard Procedures for Appeals of Grades and Sanctions” section of the Academic Catalog.

AIC Hearings are to be closed from the public.  Only the following people are to be allowed to attend:

• The Chair of the AIC, who is to preside over the proceedings, but not have a vote in determining the outcome.
• The members of the Hearing Panel, chosen by the AIC Chair 
• The accused student, who may elect to be accompanied by an advisor of his/her choosing.  The advisor must be a member of the University community (i.e., a current student, faculty, or staff member) and may not be an attorney for, or a parent of, the accused student. The accused student is responsible for presenting his/her own information, and therefore, advisors are not permitted to speak or to participate directly in the hearing. If the student is unable to attend the hearing, he or she may opt to submit a written statement for review by the panel.
• The instructor.
• Witnesses, if relevant, admitted at the sole discretion of the AIC Chair.

The instructor is strongly encouraged to attend the hearing.

The Chair of the AIC is to preside over the proceedings of the Hearing Panel.  

• The AIC Chair is to allow the student to present evidence.  
• The AIC Chair may allow the student to present witnesses, at his or her discretion.
• The AIC Chair may allow the instructor to give testimony and present witnesses, at his or her discretion.
• The AIC Chair is to allow panel participants to ask both the student and the instructor questions.

Formal rules of evidence need not apply.  If either the student or the instructor fails to attend the hearing, the hearing will still proceed.  The student has the right to hear the testimony and witnesses offered by the instructor, as well as to review all evidence submitted by the instructor.  At the sole discretion of the AIC Chair, the instructor may be excluded from any part of the panel proceedings.

All evidence presented will be considered objectively by the panel.  Both the instructor and the student are only to speak when prompted by the AIC Chair.  Once all evidence has been presented and panel members have finished with their questions, the Chair will ask everyone to leave except for the panel members, so that deliberations can occur.

Once the Hearing Panel is alone with the AIC Chair, the Chair will answer any questions that any member of the AIC Hearing Panel might have about the proceedings.  Then the Chair will leave the panelists alone to deliberate until they notify the chair that they are ready to vote.  The vote is to be private, submitted by paper or secret electronic ballot, and administered by the chair, with the majority determining the outcome.  In the event of a tie, the student is to be exonerated of the academic misconduct.

The AIC Chair is to keep a record of the proceedings and the outcome, documenting the names of all attendants along with the ultimate finding of the Hearing Panel. If the student has been found to have committed an act of academic misconduct, the AIC Chair is to record the finding in the office of the Chief Academic Officer. 

The AIC chair is to notify the student and the instructor of the outcome of the hearing panel.

If the hearing panel has found the student to have committed an act of academic misconduct, the AIC chair will inform the student’s academic advisor of the outcome.   The AIC chair will make the following additional notifications if relevant:  if the student is an athlete, the Chief Athletics Officer and the Faculty Athletics Representative are to be notified; if the student is a member of ROTC, their Commanding Officer is to be notified. The instructor’s dean or designee is also to inform both the student and the instructor of the finding and is to enforce all penalties, which may include expulsion from the university.  If applicable, the instructor’s dean or designee is also to notify the Registrar to place a “training hold” on the student’s account to prevent the student from registering for classes, requesting transcripts, and / or graduating, until he or she receives notification from the appropriate units (i.e., the Writing Center and the Academic Support Center) that any mandatory educational training (see Section VI above) has been completed.  

If the student is exonerated of the academic misconduct, the Director of Academic Integrity will release the Academic Integrity hold on the student’s academic records and  notify the instructor to retract any course-level penalties previously assessed and to re-grade the assignment(s) in question as if no academic misconduct occurred.

Decisions of an AIC Hearing Panel are final, unless the student can document that a serious procedural error occurred. This documentation must be submitted to the Chief Academic Officer within ten (10) business days of the hearing panel finding. The Chief Academic Officer will then review the student’s appeal, make a decision, and notify all parties of the decision and its rationale.  The decision of the Chief Academic Officer will be final.