At the University of Rochester, academic honesty cases in Arts, Sciences and Engineering are handled through the Academic Honesty Policy and the Board on Academic Honesty. A case can be resolved through an Instructor Resolution with Penalty, or through a Board Resolution, which requires a hearing. Rochester’s policy is strict on one point many students don’t expect: it doesn’t take intent or misunderstanding into account when deciding responsibility. Rochester allows a support person from the university community, who may not act as an attorney.
A note on policies: universities revise their policies and procedures over time, and the process that governs any particular case is the one in effect for that case. This article describes the general structure of Rochester’s undergraduate process as the university has published it. The current Academic Honesty Policy is the controlling source. Rochester’s other schools may have their own procedures.
What Is an Instructor Resolution With Penalty?
An Instructor Resolution with Penalty is a way to resolve many undergraduate cases between the instructor and the student.
According to Rochester, if an undergraduate signs the Instructor Resolution with Penalty Form, the chair of the Board on Academic Honesty reviews the case, checks for prior violations, and either approves it or renegotiates the penalty with the instructor. Rochester’s policy states that this route can’t impose suspension, expulsion, or academic disciplinary probation, which are reserved for board actions after a hearing.
What Happens in a Board Resolution?
A Board Resolution requires a hearing before a Hearing Board of four members: two faculty members from the Board on Academic Honesty and two undergraduate representatives.
According to Rochester, the hearing board decides whether it is likelier than not that the student’s work failed to meet academic honesty standards. If so, it classifies the matter as improper conduct, which results in a warning letter, or as a minor, moderate, or major violation, and determines the sanction. Rochester states that the hearing board, not the instructor, decides the sanction. If the student doesn’t attend, the hearing board may proceed.
Does Intent Matter at Rochester?
No, not for responsibility. Rochester states that its policy does not take intent or misunderstanding into account when determining responsibility, and that a student who didn’t mean to violate the policy, or didn’t know they were violating it, can still be found responsible.
Can a Student Bring Someone to a Rochester Hearing?
Yes, a support person from the university community. According to Rochester, that person may speak to the student during the hearing but isn’t allowed to speak to the board, and should not be acting as an attorney.
Can a Rochester Decision Be Appealed?
Yes. Undergraduates can appeal the hearing board’s finding of responsibility, the sanction, or both to the Dean of the College, within the period stated in the decision letter. The dean’s decision is final.
Rochester’s FAQ states that potential outcomes of an appeal include upholding the decision or adjusting the sanctions, and that in some cases the dean may send the case back for an additional hearing. Rochester also notes that if an appeal contains suspected new violations, such as false information, the board treats that as a possible additional violation. For more on appeals generally, see appealing an academic misconduct decision.
Common Misconceptions About Rochester Cases
“I didn’t mean to, so I’m not responsible.” Rochester’s policy doesn’t consider intent or misunderstanding in determining responsibility.
“My instructor can suspend me.” Rochester reserves suspension, expulsion, and academic disciplinary probation for board actions after a hearing.
“My support person can argue for me.” Rochester states the support person may speak only to the student and should not act as an attorney.
“Skipping the hearing stops the case.” Rochester states the hearing board may proceed if the student doesn’t attend.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who decides academic honesty cases at the University of Rochester?
The Board on Academic Honesty, through a four-member hearing board, or the instructor and the board’s chair in an Instructor Resolution with Penalty.
Does intent matter in a Rochester academic honesty case?
No. Rochester’s policy doesn’t take intent or misunderstanding into account when determining responsibility.
Who sits on a Rochester academic honesty hearing board?
Two faculty members from the Board on Academic Honesty and two undergraduate representatives.
Can I get outside help with a Rochester academic honesty case?
Yes, behind the scenes. Rochester’s support person may not act as an attorney, but students can work with an outside advisor to prepare their statements, evidence, and any appeal.
Getting Help With a University of Rochester Case
Rochester’s academic honesty process is an internal university proceeding, not a court case, and Rochester states that the support person at a hearing should not act as an attorney. Richard Asselta is a student defense attorney who serves as an advisor to students in university academic integrity and disciplinary processes nationwide. He works with Rochester students behind the scenes, helping them decide whether to sign an Instructor Resolution, prepare their statements for a hearing, organize their evidence, and prepare any appeal. Every case turns on its specific facts and on the policies in effect at the time. Learn more about Richard Asselta or call 855-338-5299.