51�ԹϺ���

Expectations

By choosing to join the 51�ԹϺ��� community, students accept the Student Academic Integrity Policy and are expected to always engage in ethical decision-making. Faculty and staff are obligated to support student success and ensure that students are aware of and have access to the knowledge and resources necessary to uphold academic integrity. The principles of academic integrity are grounded in the International Center for Academic Integrity’s fundamental values of Honesty, Trust, Fairness, Respect, Responsibility, and Courage. All 51�ԹϺ��� community members share in upholding the 51�ԹϺ��� values of Access and Equity, Excellence and Integrity, Compassion and Inclusion, and Collaboration and Stewardship. Students enrolling in 51�ԹϺ��� assume the obligation to conduct themselves in a manner compatible with the principles of academic integrity and with 51�ԹϺ���’s values and its function as an institution of higher education.

Access & Equity

The 51�ԹϺ��� community fosters a sense of belonging by valuing transparency and fairness, while honoring and embracing diverse voices, skills, experiences, and abilities. As an academic community of integrity, we recognize the participatory nature of the learning process and honor and respect a wide range of opinions and ideas. Students and faculty must respect themselves and each other as individuals. All must show respect for the contribution of others by acknowledging their intellectual foundation.

Excellence & Integrity

The 51�ԹϺ��� community holds itself to the highest standards in all we do to cultivate an innovative, world class educational experience and workforce. As a prerequisite for excellence and integrity, honesty is foundational to teaching, learning, research, and service. Students should prepare their own original work for each academic exercise that is honest, thoughtful, and genuine. As students and faculty seek knowledge, they must be honest with themselves and others.

Compassion & Inclusion

The 51�ԹϺ��� community extends respect and understanding to students and colleagues, allowing everyone to fully engage in all aspects of the university. Through the exercise of compassion and inclusion, the 51�ԹϺ��� community fosters a climate of mutual trust and encourages the free exchange of ideas. Only with trust can the public believe in the social value and meaning of an institution’s scholarship and degrees.

Collaboration & Stewardship

The 51�ԹϺ��� community responsibly shares, gives credit for, and uses 51�ԹϺ���’s human, financial, physical, and educational resources including our people’s knowledge and ideas. Every member of an academic community – each student, faculty member and administrator – is responsible for upholding the integrity of scholarship and research. Members of academic communities must take responsibility for their own academic honesty and must not tolerate or ignore academic misconduct, even when confronting misconduct may result in negative consequences.

Academic Misconduct Violations - Definitions

Academic Misconduct is an attempt or any intentional or unintentional occurrence of the following:

1. Using the work, words or ideas of another, from any source, without proper citation of the source(s), commonly called plagiarism.
2. Receiving external assistance during an examination or any academic exercise for credit, unless authorized by the course instructor or designee. This includes, but is not limited to:
   1. Providing or receiving aid in connection with any academic assignment;
   2. Use or possession of devices, text messages, data, solution materials, materials from previous classes, commercial services, notes, or content generated by artificial intelligence during an academic evaluation or assignment;
   3. Communication in any manner with another individual;
   4. Working with others on graded coursework, including in-class, online and take-home examinations;
   5. Possessing, reading, buying, distributing, selling, or using any materials intended for an academic evaluation or assignment in advance of its administration; or
   6. Use of artificial intelligence or generative artificial intelligence.
   7. Violation of an Academic Department’s professional standards, provided those standards are published in the departmental/college handbook and distributed to students.
3. Submitting work that is not a student’s own, original work for any academic exercise, such as turning in the same work in more than one class (or when repeating a class).
4. Falsifying information for inclusion in an assigned paper, project, or exercise; including, but not limited to inventing or altering data from a laboratory or field project or creating fictional citations for a paper.
5. Attempting to influence or change any academic evaluation, assignment, or academic record for reasons having no relevance to academic achievement. This includes, but is not limited to: bribery, threats, and making unauthorized changes to any academic record.
6. Falsifying or misrepresenting attendance, hours, or activities in relationship to any class, internship, externship, field experience, clinical activity, or similar activity.
7. Acting as a substitute for another, or using a substitute, in any academic evaluation or assignment.
8. Facilitating, permitting, or tolerating academic misconduct.

Procedures for Handling Student Academic Misconduct

The following procedures are designed to encourage a community-centered and fair response to allegations of student academic misconduct. These procedures serve as a guideline and can be modified in individual cases for good cause, so long as the student is provided an opportunity to respond to allegations of academic misconduct within the prescribed time after the allegations have been made and the modifications do not violate fair process.

• Anyone who in good faith believes a student has violated this policy and has knowledge of the alleged violation is encouraged to report it to the responsible instructor, chair/director, dean, or appropriate designee within the academic unit. The person who pursues the allegation may be the responsible instructor or a designee appointed by the supervisor of the academic unit in which the course is located. Authority and jurisdiction for determination of whether to pursue academic misconduct and appropriate academic responses (or consequences; previously referred to as “sanctions,” see section V.) are with the primary instructor of the class/assignment or the individual designated by a department’s/college’s approved process. It is expected that appropriate review and notification to a supervisor, chair, or dean is a part of this process.
• A faculty member or primary course instructor who suspects that a student has committed an act of academic misconduct shall verbally or electronically offer the student an opportunity for a preliminary instructor meeting to informally discuss the allegation and to present any relevant information. This meeting may take place in-person, virtually, or via electronic communication. When feasible, this preliminary instructor meeting should occur within five (5) college working days of discovery of the alleged violation.
• The purpose of this preliminary instructor meeting will be to review and discuss the allegations before a decision is reached. The responsible instructor/designee may use documentary evidence, provided that the student is allowed to respond to it at the meeting.
• Proceedings in preliminary instructor meetings are informal and non-adversarial. If the responsible instructor/designee decides to schedule a follow-up, the responsible instructor/designee should provide the student with a written or electronic notice of the scheduled meeting. The responsible instructor/designee and the student may request a departmental observer (e.g., the department chair or another faculty member in the department), who does not speak on behalf of either, to be present for this meeting.
• In compelling circumstances, the preliminary instructor meeting may be referred to the Office of Student Rights & Responsibilities (OSRR). This option shall occur only after consultation with OSRR.
• At this preliminary instructor meeting, the following results may occur:
  • The allegations are dismissed.
  • The student accepts responsibility for the violation and accepts the academic response(s), if any.
  • The responsible instructor/designee believes a violation occurred with the student not accepting responsibility and requesting an Academic Integrity Appeal Board hearing.
  • The student accepts responsibility for the violation but does not accept the academic response(s) and requests an Academic Integrity Appeal Board hearing.
  • If the student does not respond to the offer for a preliminary instructor meeting within five (5) college working days, then the matter should be referred to OSRR.
• Upon completion of this preliminary instructor meeting, if the responsible instructor/designee believes academic misconduct has occurred at any level and any academic response as listed in Article VI. Responses for Academic Misconduct has been assigned, then they shall notify the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities (OSRR) for resolution of a 51�ԹϺ��� Student Conduct Code violation. Notification to OSRR should include a copy of the 51�ԹϺ��� Alleged Academic Misconduct Report form and copies of any relevant documentation used in determining the violation, including but not limited to: the course syllabus (which may include applicable academic responses), applicable departmental publications, and the student’s submitted work. The responsible instructor/designee should forward the 51�ԹϺ��� Alleged Academic Misconduct Report form and copies of relevant documentation within ten (10) college working days of discovery and/or the preliminary instructor meeting with the student.
• OSRR will notify the charged student per notification procedures specified in the 51�ԹϺ��� Student Conduct Code. The student will be informed of their applicable rights and the process(es) for accepting the academic decision, academic responses, and administrative and educational responses, or for appealing the academic decision or responses.

Hearing and Appeal Procedures for Academic Misconduct

In any case where a student requests an Academic Integrity Appeal Board hearing beyond the preliminary instructor meeting, it shall occur in the following order:

1. If the student wishes to appeal the findings of the responsible instructor or designee, the student must file an appeal of the decision or any academic or administrative and educational responses to the 51�ԹϺ��� Academic Integrity Appeal Board. This appeal must be filed within five (5) college working days of the student’s initial administrative informal meeting with OSRR or receipt of the offer of informal resolution from OSRR. 
2. The 51�ԹϺ��� Academic Integrity Appeal Board shall invite the student and responsible instructor or designee, and may allow for witnesses of each party.
3. If academic responses are explicitly described in an instructor’s class syllabus or a departmental publication, then the Academic Integrity Appeal Board should grant a level of deference to the prescribed responses.
4. The Academic Integrity Appeal Board will meet, and the decision regarding the allegation of academic misconduct and recommended response(s), if any, shall be made in writing by the board to the Vice President for Student Affairs (VPSA) or their designee within five (5) college working days of the conclusion of the board. The VPSA or their designee will review the recommendations from the board, following the Student Conduct Code, Section 3, Article V. Formal Resolution. The written decision from the VPSA or their designee will be sent to the student, instructor, and department/unit within five (5) college working days of receipt from the Appeal Board, and it will be subject to the appeal guidelines under the Student Conduct Code, Section 3, Article VI. Appeal Rights and Article VII. Appeal Procedures. 
5. In cases involving suspension, the Academic Integrity Appeal Board’s decision shall constitute a recommendation to the VPSA, who shall have final authority. In cases involving expulsion, the Academic Integrity Appeal Board’s decision shall constitute a recommendation to the President, who shall have final authority.
6. A student alleged to have committed academic misconduct is not permitted to withdraw from, audit, or change the grading option of the class in question if doing so would negate the academic response, unless the matter is resolved in the student’s favor, without the responsible instructor’s expressed permission.
7. If a student has not responded to OSRR outreach, OSRR has the option to have the case resolved via an Academic Integrity Appeal Board hearing process.

Responses for Academic Misconduct

Potential responses for academic misconduct may include, but are not limited to, any one of the responses listed below, singularly or in combination with each other:

Academic Responses

1. Warning
2. Resubmitting an assignment
3. Reduction of points/letter grade for the assignment
4. Permission to withdraw, audit, or change grading option for the class
5. Reduction of points/letter grade for the class
6. Failing grade for the assignment
7. Failing grade for the class

NOTE: Each of the academic responses above may be agreed upon at the preliminary instructor meeting.

Administrative and Educational Responses

1. Reflection Letter of Understanding
2. Skill Remediation
3. Academic Integrity Seminar
4. Letter of Warning
5. Conduct Probation
6. Loss of Privileges*
7. Transcript notation (approved by dean/academic unit equivalent)
8. Suspension or removal from program, school, or college (approved by dean/academic unit equivalent)
9. Suspension from the University
10. Expulsion from the University
11. Withdrawal of credit for previously-accepted course or requirement
12. Revocation of a degree, certificate, minor, honors, awards, or other credentials

* In instances where the resulting academic response includes a failing grade in the course, the student may lose the privilege of evaluating a course instructor.

Full definitions of responses for academic misconduct are found in the Student Conduct Code, Section 3, IX.

General Profits

• All time limits specified in this policy may be extended for good cause.
• This policy is not intended to address differences of opinion over grades issued by an instructor exercising good faith and professional judgment regarding a student’s work.
• Before any action is taken under this policy that may result in the withdrawal, suspension, or expulsion of an international student; both the student and the academic program are advised to consult with the 51�ԹϺ��� Office of International Student and Scholar Services (ISSS).

Academic Integrity Appeal Board

The Academic Integrity Appeal Board members will come from a variety of areas on campus. To create the overall campus-wide pool of Academic Integrity Appeal Board members:

• The faculty of each college/school will be encouraged to recommend:
  • Two (2) faculty members
• Each dean’s office/academic unit equivalent will be encouraged to recommend:
  • Two (2) administrative faculty
• Two (2) undergraduate students
  • Two (2) graduate students
• In addition, the following will be members of the pool:
  • All members of the 51�ԹϺ��� Faculty Senate Academic Standards Committee, during their term on the Committee
• Any college/school and dean’s office/academic unit equivalent may choose to allow OSRR Student Conduct Hearing Board members from their departments who have voluntarily received training (see VII.D. below) to represent their respective units.

When an appeal of an academic misconduct case is forwarded to the Academic Integrity Appeal Board, the hearing board for each case will consist of the following, drawn from the pool:

• One (1) academic faculty member
• One (1) student:
  • For cases involving a graduate student, the student board member may not be an undergraduate student.
• One (1) administrative faculty, classified staff, or Academic Standards Committee Member

Any member of the Academic Integrity Appeal Board pool may serve on a board unless there are compelling academic discipline issues to be addressed at such hearing. In such cases, specifically-designated pool members may be assigned from the college/school in which the alleged academic misconduct occurred. All efforts to eliminate or avoid conflict of interest and bias will be given in each case.

Before serving on an Academic Integrity Appeal Board hearing, members shall receive an orientation and training on academic integrity and misconduct and on the adjudication process.

Recruitment, training, and facilitation of the Academic Integrity Appeal Board will be the responsibility of OSRR, in collaboration with the 51�ԹϺ��� Faculty Senate; and with appropriate authority and jurisdiction being afforded to university designees as dictated in the NSHE and 51�ԹϺ��� Student Conduct Codes.

Transcript Notation for Academic Misconduct

In instances where it is determined that the academic misconduct is of both an intentional and egregious nature, the administrative response may be recorded on the student’s official and unofficial transcript with a transcript notation. The transcript of the student shall be marked “Disciplinary Notation due to Academic Dishonesty in (class) during (semester).” The transcript notation shall occur only upon completion of the student conduct proceedings. The conduct response notation shall not affect the grade point average, course repeatability, or determination of academic standing. This conduct response notation is intended to denote a failure to accept and exhibit the fundamental value of academic integrity.

Once a transcript notation is made, the student may file a written petition to the Academic Integrity Appeal Board to have the notation removed. The decision to remove the transcript notation shall rest in the discretion and judgment of a majority of a quorum of the Board; provided that:

1. At the time the petition is received, at least one calendar year following the student’s graduation or departure from the University shall have elapsed since the transcript notation was recorded; and,
2. At the time the petition is received, the student shall have successfully completed all responses associated with the case, as administered by OSRR; or, for the person no longer enrolled at the University, an equivalent activity as determined by OSRR; and,
3. OSRR certifies that to the best of its knowledge, the student has not been found responsible for any other act of academic misconduct or similar disciplinary offense at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas or another institution.

Prior to deciding a petition, the Academic Integrity Appeal Board will review the record of the case and consult with OSRR and the responsible instructor or appropriate chair/director/supervisor. The decision of the Appeal Board shall not be subject to subsequent Appeal Board reconsideration for at least one calendar year, unless the Appeal Board specifies an earlier date on which the petition may be reconsidered. Subsequent Appeal Board determinations pertaining to the removal of the transcript notation may be appealed to the VPSA. If the VPSA removes the notation from the student’s transcript, the VPSA shall provide a written rationale to the Academic Integrity Appeal Board.

No student with a transcript notation due to academic misconduct shall be permitted to represent 51�ԹϺ��� in any extracurricular activity, or run for or hold an executive office in any student organization which is allowed to use University facilities, or which receives University funds.