Student Handbook
- Home
- Administration & Faculty
- Academics
- Student Services
- Places to go
- Teams & Organizations
- Rules & Policies
site links
- Alcohol and Drug Compliance Services
- Associated Student Government
- Attorney for Students
- Leadership Institute
- Ombuds Services
- Student Emergency Services
- Student Foundation
- Student Justice
- Student Handbook
- Organizational Structure and Assessments
- Feedback (Concerns and Appreciations)
online services
Academic Honor Code
As members of a community dedicated to learning, inquiry and creation, the students, faculty and administration of our university live by the principles in this Honor Code. These principles require all members of this community to be conscientious, respectful and honest.
WE ARE CONSCIENTIOUS. We complete our work on time and make every effort to do it right. We come to class and meetings prepared and are willing to demonstrate it. We hold ourselves to doing what is required, embrace rigor and shun mediocrity, special requests and excuses.
WE ARE RESPECTFUL. We act civilly toward one another and we cooperate with each other. We will strive to create an environment in which people respect and listen to one another, speaking when appropriate, and permitting other people to participate and express their views.
WE ARE HONEST. We do our own work and are honest with one another in all matters. We understand how various acts of dishonesty, like plagiarizing, falsifying data and giving or receiving assistance to which one is not entitled, conflict as much with academic achievement as with the values of honesty and integrity.
The Pledge for Students
Students at our university recognize that, to ensure honest conduct, more is needed than an expectation of academic honesty, and we therefore adopt the practice of affixing the following pledge of honesty to the work we submit for evaluation:
I pledge to uphold the principles of honesty and responsibility at our university.
The Pledge for Faculty
and Administration
and Administration
Faculty at our university recognize that the students have rights when accused of academic dishonesty and will inform the accused of their rights of appeal laid out in the student handbook and inform them of the process that will take place. The statement is as follows:
I recognize students’ rights and pledge to uphold the principles of honesty and responsibility at our university.
Addressing Acts of Dishonesty
Students accused of dishonest conduct may have their cases heard by the faculty member. The student also may appeal the faculty member’s decision to the Honor Code Council. Students and faculty will have the option of having an advocate present to ensure their rights. Possible actions that may be taken range from exoneration to expulsion.
Definitions
A. “Academic work” means the preparation of an essay, thesis, report, problem, assignment or other project that is to be submitted for purposes of grade determination.
B. “Violation of the Honor Code” includes, but is not limited to, cheating on an examination or other academic work, plagiarism, collusion and the abuse of resource materials.
C. “Cheating” means engaging in any of the following activities:
1. Copying from another student’s test, paper, laboratory report, other report or computer files, data listing, programs, or from any electronic device or equipment.
2. Using, during a test, printed, audio or electronic materials not authorized by the person giving the test.
3. Collaborating, without author-ization, with another person during an examination or in preparing academic work.
4. Knowingly, and without author-ization, using, buying, selling, stealing, transporting, soliciting, copying, or possessing, in whole or in part, the contents of an unad-ministered test.
5. Substituting for another student, or permitting another person to substitute for oneself, in taking an examination or preparing academic work.
6. Bribing another person to obtain an unadministered test or obtaining information about an unad-ministered test.
7. Purchasing, or otherwise acquiring and submitting as one’s own work, any research paper or other assignment prepared by another individual or by a firm. This section does not apply to the typing of the rough or final versions of an assignment by a professional typist.
8. Submitting the same essay, thesis, report or other project, without substantial revision or expansion of the work, in an attempt to obtain credit for work submitted in another course.
9. Falsifying data.
D. “Plagiarism” means the appropriation of another’s work and the unacknowledged incorporation of that work in one’s own written, oral, visual or original perfor-mative work that is offered for credit.
E. “Collusion” means the unauthorized collaboration with another person in preparing any work offered for credit.
F. “Abuse of resource materials” means the mutilation, destruction, concealment, theft or alteration of materials provided to assist students in the mastery of course content.
G. “Instructor” means a faculty member with the responsibility for teaching a particular academic course, regardless of that person’s academic rank, e.g. professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, assistant instructor, lecturer or graduate teaching assistant.
H. “Student” means any person enrolled in a course, whether a full-time or part-time student, whether for credit or audit, and whether in residence, or by extension or any form of distance education.
I. “Honor Code Council” means a group made up of a minimum of 14 trained faculty members, two from each college except the University College and the Graduate College. Fourteen trained students representing at least five colleges must be appointed. The faculty will be appointed by the Faculty Senate to serve three-year renewable terms (with possible reappointment), with two appointees designated as chair and vice chair. Undergraduate and graduate students will be selected on an annual basis through the Associated Student Government (Senate and House) and approved by the Vice President for Student Affairs. Prior to serving, all council members must attend an orientation session presented by the chair or vice chair of the council.
J. The “Hearing Committee” means a group of representatives from the Honor Code Council that must include an equal number of faculty (excluding the chair or vice chair) and students, with a minimum of three each, to hear an appeal. A total of seven committee members must attend the hearing with the chair or vice chair serving as the hearing officer and not voting as a member of the committee. Roberts Rules of Order shall be used in conducting the hearing.
K. “Academic penalty” means one or more of the following sanctions that may be imposed in cases involving violation of academic honesty.
1. A requirement to perform additional academic work not required of other students in the course.
2. A reduction to any level of the grade in the course, or on the examination, or other academic work affected by violation of the Honor Code.
3. A requirement to withdraw from the course with a grade of F or W.
L. “Disciplinary penalty” means any penalty that may be imposed in a student disciplinary matter pursuant to the Official Texas State Code of
Student Conduct.
Student Conduct.
Procedures in Cases of
Academic Dishonesty
Academic Dishonesty
When a member of the faculty reasonably suspects that a student under the faculty member’s supervision has violated the Honor Code, the faculty member will follow these procedures. The faculty member’s proceedings are informal and are not adversarial. The student or faculty member may consult with the Honor Code Council chair regarding the matter, or with the associate vice president for Academic Affairs (AVPAA), on policy and procedural concerns.
A. Within a reasonable time frame, the faculty member will contact the student orally or in writing to set up a meeting to discuss the matter. Other communication may be arranged for exceptional circumstances. In the case of an online course, all processes may be conducted through electronic meetings. The faculty member will explain to the student both the suspected code violation and the evidence that supports the suspicion that the violation occurred. The faculty member may rely on documents, written statements or other evidence. If the faculty member relies on such evidence, the faculty member will provide the student with copies.
1. After conferring with the student, the faculty member will give the student three business days to respond to the suspected code violation. The student may respond in writing or in person, and may present evidence and witnesses in a manner determined by the student. However, neither the faculty member nor the student may be represented by legal counsel at
any meeting.
any meeting.
2. If the student fails to respond within three business days, the faculty member may proceed to determine the matter as provided below.
B. The faculty member, after considering the evidence and the student’s response, will determine whether the student violated the Honor Code and will notify the student of his or her determination and of any academic penalty assessed. The faculty member will also advise the student that the student may accept or reject either the faculty member’s determination and/or any academic penalty.
1. If the faculty member is convinced that the student did not intent-ionally violate the Honor Code, the matter will end and no further action is required unless the student requests written documentation of the faculty member’s determination.
2. If the faculty member is convinced that the student violated the Honor Code, the faculty member may assess an academic penalty as defined in Section K above.
3. In addition to an academic penalty, a faculty member may recommend additional disciplinary action to the Dean of Students.
4. On the Honor Code Review Form, the faculty member shall:
a. note his or her determination and any academic penalty;
b. give the student an opportunity to indicate the student’s acceptance or rejection of the faculty member’s decision;
c. sign and date the form; and
d. immediately deliver the form and copies of any evidence to the AVPAA with copies to the student and the faculty member’s dean.
Convening the Honor Code Council
The council chair will convene a hearing if (1) the student rejects the faculty member’s determination; or (2) the student has a record of previous violations of the Honor Code.
A. Once the chair is notified that the student rejects the faculty member’s determination, the chair will make every effort to schedule the hearing within 10 business days. Exceptions will be made by the chair on a case-by-case basis for extenuating circumstances. In the case of an online course, all processes may be conducted through electronic meetings.
B. Prior to the hearing, the council chair will give the student at least five business days notice of the reported code violation, make available the evidence he/she has to support that violation, and provide the date, time and place of the hearing. The student will have the opportunity to respond to the code violation and evidence during the hearing. In addition, the student is allowed to provide evidence to refute the allegation of code violation(s). The student should provide copies of any evidence at least three days prior to the hearing. If there is a “no-show” by the student, the hearing will be held without the student.
C. When the Hearing Committee reviews an academic penalty, it will ask the faculty member to submit, in writing, the documentation and evidence that supports the suspected offense. The Hearing Committee may request additional materials from either party. The Hearing Committee will consider all material submitted and make its recommendation as provided in Section K. The committee makes two assessments: whether the student is guilty of academic dishonesty and a recommendation as to whether or not the sanction should be upheld. A tie vote by the committee indicates the faculty member’s determination(s) are upheld. If there are multiple students challenging the same findings in a case, all evidence from all students involved will be heard and voted on separately, one at a time.
D. After conducting its review, the Hearing Committee will submit its recommendation to the student, faculty member, the dean of the college where the alleged violation occurred, and the dean of the college of the student’s major.
The dean of the college where the violation occurred may request all evidence materials from the Council chair. The dean has 10 business days to review and make a decision. After receiving the dean’s decision, the student or faculty member has five business days to file an appeal to the Provost.
Appeals
As provided in the Rules and Regulations of the Board of Regents, The Texas State University System (Chapter VI, Section 5.36), the Provost (or Provost’s designee) will hear appeals of academic decisions. The Provost has 10 business days to review and make a decision. Grounds for appeal to the Provost are limited to allegations that:
A. Proper due process procedures were not followed. However, deviations from prescribed procedures will not necessarily invalidate a decision or proceeding unless they caused significant prejudice to the student;
B. The penalties assessed are not commensurate with the code violation committed; or
C. The university has violated a right guaranteed the student by the constitution or laws of the United States or the state of Texas.
The Provost will render a final decision on the appeal within a reasonable time and will inform all parties, including the student, the faculty member and the dean(s) of the decision.
Join the Conversation