Oakland University Senate

Wilson Hall
371 Wilson Boulevard
Rochester, MI 48309-4486
(location map)

Academic Conduct Committee - 2000-2001

Annual Report

2000-2001

 

The Senate's charge to the Academic Conduct Committee (ACC) is "to review, propose, and implement policies concerning academic dishonesty." The work of the ACC lies mainly in hearing cases of possible academic misconduct and imposing sanctions on those found guilty.  During the period from the Summer term 2000 through the Spring term 2001, the committee heard a total of 32 cases involving 44 students.  This represents a sharp increase in the number of cases over the 1999-00 academic year:

Year            Cases          Students

1997-98         12                  19

1998-99         19                  28

1999-00         22                  37

2000-01         32                  44

Of the 44 students that were involved, 39 were found guilty, three were found not guilty, and two were dismissed for lack of supporting evidence.

Committee Caseload. The distributions of the number of cases and students brought to the ACC by academic unit and term are as follows:

ACADEMIC UNITCASESSTUDENTS
Biological Sciences  22
English                      99
Women’s Studies12
Sociology/Anthropology12
Rhetoric, Communication and Journalism11
Psychology11
History11
Education22
Business Administration24
Political Science33
Nursing23
Modern Language/Literature12
Accounting13
Mathematics/Statistics14
Center for International Programs23
Chemistry11
Art and Art History11
Totals3244

Term                       Cases

Summer 2000             1

Fall 2000                    12

Winter 2001               15

Spring 2001                4

Plagiarism was charged in 16 cases involving 16 students. In 11 cases where cheating was alleged, 19 students were charged. In two cases of cheating/collaboration on projects, four students were involved. In one case of collaboration on a project, three students were implicated. Two students were charged with falsifying records in two cases.

Sanctions. The ACC has a range of sanctions that it may impose on guilty parties. The sanctions include, in order of severity, academic reprimand, probation, suspension, and expulsion. Of the students found guilty, the following penalties were assigned:

Sanction        Students

Reprimand          0

Probation            13

Suspension         24

Expulsion            2

Periods of suspension ranged from 1 to 2 terms. Persons suspended are also routinely placed on probation for the remainder of their Oakland academic career.

Other ACC Business. The ACC constantly reviews its procedures to insure confidentiality of the proceedings and fairness to all those involved. To these ends, the ACC implemented an administrative hearing option:

Administrative Hearing (Academic): If the alleged violation is of an academic nature, the accused student, with the agreement of the faculty member, may choose an administrative hearing conducted solely by the Chair of the Academic Conduct Committee. The Dean of Students, the faculty member bringing the case, the student or students will also be present. The academic administrative hearing is used when the student fully accepts responsibility for the alleged violation by pleading guilty. The hearing is to decide on the appropriate sanction. If all the Chair of the Academic Conduct Committee, Dean of Students, the faculty member and student agree on a sanction, the case is concluded and all appeal rights are waived. If the parties cannot agree on a sanction, the Academic Conduct Committee will hear the case (2001-2002 Student Handbook, p. 158).

Two cases involving four students were heard in 2000-2001 utilizing the administrative hearing process. All four students completed projects related to their respective coursework and were placed on academic disciplinary probation. Three students will also complete 40 hours each of community service.

Acknowledgements. The ACC would not be able to function without the excellent administrative support provided by the Dean of Students Office. Karen Lloyd is indispensable to the ACC. Her duties range from juggling the schedules of the ACC members to scheduling the cases to meeting with and advising accused, scared and often angry students to distributing case materials to the faculty before the hearings. It is not an exaggeration to say that without Karen, ably assisted by Roxanne Kolar Knudson, the ACC would be severely hindered in carrying out its mission. David Herman long provided valuable guidance, wisdom and served as the institutional memory of the ACC. He will be missed. His role will be filled ably by Glenn McIntosh, who attended and contributed to several hearings at the end of the 2000-2001 year.The hearings of the ACC are often arduous and can be agonizing. The responsibilities of sitting in judgment and imposing sanctions that will affect the rest of a student's academic life are taken very seriously by all the members of the ACC. The other members of the ACC during the 2000-2001 year, all of whom carried out its charge with dedication, sensitivity and fairness, were Nicole Buffard-O’Shea, Aniesha Mitchell (Student Congress Rep), David Herman, Suha Al-Oballi Kridli, Beth Marcoux, (co-chair), Michael Mitchell, Diane Norris, Kathleen Pfeiffer, Daniel Ring, John Seeley, Satish Walia, Floyd Willoughby and Chris Wolf (Student Congress Rep). Many thanks to all for a very difficult job well done.

Submitted by
Michael A. Latcha
September 10, 2001