Academic Integrity Procedures

These procedures apply to all students and instructors and other instructional staff participating in academic classes, programs, and research projects offered at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, i.e., all graduate, undergraduate, and Continuing and Professional Education programs including all online/distance learning courses.

The Academic Integrity Office is responsible for maintaining records, advising all concerned parties about their rights and responsibilities under this procedure, and convening hearing panels. As process manager, the Office has the discretion to extend timelines; if warranted, the Office may contract timelines (with the agreement of the parties)during sessions outside the regular academic year. The Academic Integrity Office shall maintain records of all allegations that come to its attention, and of all hearing panel proceedings in accordance with University record retention polices.

All cases of academic integrity infractions will be handled by the Academic Integrity Office except cases involvingpaid or sponsored work under the auspices of a research project led by a Principal Investigator employed at UMass, then research that they conduct in that context falls under the UMass Board of Trustees Responsible Conduct of Research Policy and the UMass Amherst Research Misconduct Procedures should there be an accusation of misconduct. If a student conducts research independently as part of class or degree work, then this activity falls under the Academic Integrity Policy. With the exception of cases falling under the UMass Amherst Research MisconductProcedures, the procedures outlined herein are the only official procedures for addressing charges of academic integrity infractions. No school, college, department, instructor, or office on the campus may impose any penalty for suspected academic integrity infractions, nor require a student to appeal, through any other procedure, except asotherwise noted in the previous sentence. Students shall not threaten, coerce, or pressure instructors to drop a charge as doing so may violate the Code of Student Conduct. Withdrawal from the course may not be used to avoid an informal resolution or a formal charge of an academic integrity infraction.

Procedures for reporting academic integrity infractions

Anyone who suspects that a student has committed an academic integrity infraction must first communicate with thestudent about the suspicion and intended penalty. No instructor may impose a penalty based solely on suspicion, without communicating with the student(s). Instructors should consider the seriousness of each specific incident and to recommend an appropriate sanction (see Appendix B: Infraction/Consequence Suggestions for support). Ifsanctions are filed, students have the right of appeal and the right to remain in the class until the issue is resolved.While a charge is pending (informal, formal, or appeal), a course grade may not be submitted. If action is pendingclose to the submission of grades deadline, the instructor, in consultation with the Registrar’s office, will enter agrade of NR. In pursuing allegations of academic integrity infractions, instructors are required to respect the student’s right to privacy as provided by the Family Educational Rights Privacy Act (FERPA).

Instructor-student outreach & communication:

An instructor suspecting an academic integrity infraction must offer the student a reasonable opportunity to discuss the situation prior to taking any action. When an instructor suspects dishonesty they must communicate with the student(s) within 10 business days of the discovery. If the notification is by email, it must be sent to the student’s official University email address. Notification should specify that students have five business days to respond. If students feel they need more time, they must communicate with their instructor, acknowledging receipt of the notification, and provide an explanation of how much additional time is needed and for what purpose.

1. The instructor may seek support from the college point-person (see Appendix F: The College PointPerson), especially in cases of suspicion of multiple cases of academic integrity infractions within one assignment and/or across one course. Instructors should maintain active communication with the student(s) throughout the process, even when soliciting support of the college point-person.
2. If the student meets with the instructor, the instructor may include the college point-person in the meeting; not including this person will not invalidate the process.

Proactive instructor-student communication: Genuine mistake/misunderstanding Upon communication withthe student, the instructor may conclude that no academic integrity infraction has occurred (See Appendix B:Infraction/Consequence Suggestions). Following such discussion, if the instructor is satisfied that no academicintegrity infraction has occurred, the instructor will evaluate the student’s work as though the suspicion of an academic integrity infraction had never been raised.

1. If a genuine mistake or misunderstanding has occurred, the instructor may choose to ask the student(s) to re-do the assignment.
2. If a genuine mistake or misunderstanding has occurred, the instructor may submit a referral to the Academic Integrity Office (see Appendix E: Forms for support).
3. This referral is not binding and has no grade or course consequences; its purpose is to support students who may demonstrate a pattern of misunderstanding or mistake-making and will be anopportunity to provide them with additional resources.

Proactive instructor-student communication: Informal process

1. When the instructor and student communicate, they may arrive at an agreement to resolve the matterinformally. If the student acknowledges that academic integrity infraction did occur, the instructor and student may choose to review the recommendations made in Appendix B: Infraction/Consequence Suggestions and come to a mutual agreement about the appropriate sanctions. Furthermore, instructors may consider supplemental assignments the student may complete to help them reflect upon their academic choices and ways to prevent academic integrity infractions in the future.
2. Instructors can only impose grade penalties via the Informal Process; no university sanctions will be imposedthrough the informal resolution process. No student may be forced in any way to agree to a proposed informal resolution of an allegation of an academic integrity infraction.
3. Informal resolutions of academic integrity infractions may not be appealed. If a student wishes to contest anallegation of academic integrity infractions rather than agree to an informal resolution, they may reject the process. The instructor will then issue a formal charge, which will trigger the hearing process.
4. Informal resolutions (see Appendix E: Forms for the Informal Resolution template) are to be forwarded to the Academic Integrity Office only, which will maintain a confidential record of all such resolutions. The Academic Integrity Office will maintain the Informal Resolution form. If 2 informal resolution forms are filedon one student, the Academic Integrity Office and the college point-person will reach out for further communication. If 3 or more informal resolution forms are filed on one student, the Academic Integrity Office, the college point-person, and the Dean of Students Office will reach out for further communication and possible university sanctions. The quantity of informal resolution forms will be documented over the tenure of a student’s time matriculated at UMass Amherst.

Non-communication by student

1. If after five business days from the initial instructor outreach the student has not responded and/or there are no known extenuating circumstances for why the student may be non-communicative, the instructor may begin the process of completing the Non Communication Form (see Appendix E: Forms).The instructor may consider reaching out to the student’s advisor and/or academic dean to see if there are extenuating circumstances that renders them non-communicative.
2. The instructor should attempt outreach at least one more time via email and provide the student with a limited and clear deadline for communication; if there is no response within the instructor’s timeframe, the instructor will complete and submit the Non-Communication Form to the Academic Integrity Office, with explanation of grade penalty incurred.
3. The Academic Integrity Office will maintain the Non Communication form. If 2 Non Communications formsare filed on one student, the Academic Integrity Office and the college point-person will reach out for further communication. If 3 or more Non Communication forms are filed on one student, the Academic Integrity Office, the college point-person, and the Dean of Students Office will reach out for further communication and possible university sanctions. The quantity of informal resolution forms will be documented over the tenure of a student’s time matriculated at UMass Amherst.

Proactive communication: Formal process

The formal process may have two separate or combined starting points:

1. When the instructor and student communicate, they may not arrive at an agreement to resolve the matter informally. In this case, the student and/or the instructor can reject the informal process, which will trigger the formal process.
2. If the instructor feels the instance of suspected academic integrity infraction is so egregious that both gradeconsequence and university sanctions must be applied.

To begin the formal process, the instructor must first attempt communication with the student(s). If all attempts at communication are exhausted and no agreement can be made, the instructor will file a formal charge and must notify the Academic Integrity Office of the intended sanction. The instructor may file a formal charge of academic integrity infraction by notifying the Academic Integrity Office within 15 business days of any of the following:

1. 1. The student admits to the alleged dishonesty, but the student and the instructor are unable to reach an informal resolution
   2. The student denies the allegation but the instructor continues to believe that the dishonesty has occurred
   3. The student does not respond to the allegation by the stipulated date and the instructor finds the suspected dishonesty so egregious that penalty via the Non Communication form feels too minimal.
   4. The instructor finds the suspected dishonesty so egregious that university sanctions seem most appropriate.

The instructor must submit written notification to the Academic Integrity Office via the Formal Resolution Charge (see Appendix E: Forms). The instructor’s notification to the Office must include a statement of the evidence that is the basis of the allegation and the recommended consequence, which may include failing the course. If theinstructor believes that the alleged dishonesty infraction warrants an additional sanction, the instructor may also recommend to the Academic Integrity Office that a University sanction be imposed, including, but not limited to, a letter of reprimand, University probation, suspension or expulsion (in the case of probation or suspension, duration must be specified). A recommendation for a University sanction must include the rationale for imposing an additional sanction and requires that a hearing be held.

Please note: If an informal agreement is reached after a formal charge has been forwarded to the Academic IntegrityOffice, the instructor must immediately notify the Academic Integrity Office in writing that the charge is withdrawn.

The college point person

In any of the above cases, the instructor may turn over all documents and processes to the college point-person(s) assigned to the college of the instructor’s course (See Appendix F: The College Point Person). The college point- person(s) for Academic Integrity are centralized positions that supports each college and serves as a partner for instructors working through the academic integrity process.

The college point-persons are intended to support instructors. In instances where handling cases of academicintegrity infractions on one’s own may have a negative impact on an instructor’s ability to continue teaching theircourse(s) and/or if the relationship between the instructor and the student(s) has disintegrated to a level where individual involvement may harm the process, the college point-persons will be provided with all documentation and will manage the process through the end. Instructors are encouraged, but not required, to remain an active part of the process.

The college point person is available to support any instructor who may need additional guidance throughout the process. In cases where instructors are dealing with multiple instances of dishonesty within one class/one assignment, they may submit student information and the informal resolution form to their college point-person to manage. The form will detail the infraction, the communication with the student(s), and the recommended sanction(s). In cases where the college point-person has taken over, they will meet with the student(s) to complete the process. Upon completion, the college point person (or their designee in any instance of potential conflict of interest) will submit the signed form(s) to the Academic Integrity Office. If there are instances of high quantities of infractions, the college point person may deputize persons within their college for additional support. The involved instructors may opt to stay informed about the progress of the case once it is handed to the college point-person. If the suspected academic integrity infraction goes to a formal hearing, the instructor and/or the college point-person (or their designee) may attend. Instructors need not go to the hearing, however, they will need to provide a narrative and all relevant details from which the college point-person will work. Instructors are encouraged to remain involved throughout the process; the college point-person takes on a support role for when, for example, the instructor will be unable to follow both the academic integrity process and maintain their teaching responsibilities.