Academic Integrity

Honesty Statement

The faculty and administration expect that RVC students are serious and honorable scholars.

Academic integrity is a part of the learning process which is infused throughout the student’s

experiences at RVC, both in and out of the classroom. Additionally, support resources on campus

exist to aid students in their pursuit of academic excellence.

Students are expected to do their own, original work, except when collaboration on projects

is directed by faculty as part of the course or specific assignment. Students are expected to

observe the commonly accepted standards of academic honesty at all times and in all learning

environments. This includes but is not limited to face-to-face, hybrid, and online class meetings;

experiential learning opportunities; clinical and lab sites; alternative testing environments like the

Testing Center; and, crucially, the production of homework and major and minor projects.

Students who commit any of the forms of academic misconduct as outlined below are subject to

the penalties and sanctions agreed upon by the faculty and administration of Rock Valley College.

Acts of Academic Misconduct

Plagiarism: Plagiarism is the representation of someone else’s intellectual property (words, ideas or data) as one’s own. When a student submits work for credit that includes the work of others, the source of that information must be properly acknowledged through complete, accurate and specific references. If verbatim statements are included, quotation marks must be used and the source must be cited.

Cheating by Copying: Students may not copy or purchase any part of another student’s or entity’s assignment, computer program, or examination. No unauthorized communication is allowed between students during an examination. No student is permitted to keep books, papers, calculators, computers, cell phones or the like, or notes during an examination, unless permitted by the instructor or proctor.

Dishonest Collaboration: Collaboration in the completion of assignments is prohibited unless explicitly permitted by the instructor. Students must acknowledge any collaboration and its extent in all submitted course work.

Fabrication: Fabrication is the intentional use of invented information or the falsification of research or other finds with the intent to deceive.

Other acts of academic dishonesty include, but are not limited to: Giving or receiving information during an exam; aiding cheating or other acts of academic dishonesty by providing material or information to another student with the knowledge that this material or information will be used improperly.

Academic Integrity Considerations

In online learning environments, students are expected to be mindful that any consultation of apps, services, or resources without the instructor’s approval will be considered “cheating by copying.” In some courses, students will be required to use online proctoring for quizzes, tests, or other exams. Online proctoring allows students to complete tests in the Testing Center or on their own personal device.

When academic misconduct has been identified, faculty members will exercise their best judgment about the consequences and will, at all times, consider what the student should take away from the experience. In some cases, a failing grade on the assignment or the course will achieve these goals. Faculty are encouraged to outline in the course syllabus the range of consequences students might face if academic misconduct is discovered.

In addition to the penalty assigned, faculty members should report all incidences of academic dishonesty to the Dean of Students Office, even if the penalty is a warning, so that students may receive support to correct the academic integrity concerns.

Students who have been reported multiple times for committing acts of academic misconduct (by a single instructor or by multiple instructors) will be required to discuss with the appropriate Vice President in Academic Affairs necessary measures to better understand Academic Honesty and appropriate resources to use prior to pursuing the appeal process. In extreme cases, a suspension or expulsion might be warranted. Students should refer to the Student Handbook and Student Code of Conduct for complete procedures for addressing academic misconduct and the academic appeal and review process.

The following link is meant to be a quick reference for both prospective and current students at Rock Valley College: Defining and Avoiding Plagiarism

Procedures for Addressing Academic Misconduct

Action Taken by Instructors

1. A faculty member has the original jurisdiction over instances of academic misconduct that occur in their course; the faculty member’s jurisdiction is subject (in some cases) to departmental policy.

2. When academic misconduct by a student is identified by an instructor, an appropriate academic penalty will be assessed by the faculty. The Dean of Students and the Academic Dean should be informed of both the nature of the offense and the action taken. The instructor may impose one or more of the sanctions:

An oral reprimand
A written reprimand
An assignment to repeat the work, to be graded on its merits
A lower or failing grading for the exam, paper, or project
A lower grade for the course
A failing grade for the course

3. The instructor will report the violation and action taken to the Dean of Students Office for the purpose of centralized reporting and review. The online referral form is available at: File Academic Misconduct Referral Report

4. Accordingly, an instructor or designated proctor who has witnessed an act of academic misconduct or who has other evidence that academic dishonesty has occurred, will advise the student involved that there is reason to believe that the student has committed a violation of academic integrity and a report has been made to the Dean of Students Office.

5. A letter will be sent from the Dean of Students Office to the student’s RVC email address acknowledging this report. If this incident has occurred previously with the same student, the student will first be referred to the appropriate Academic Vice President for a consultation regarding multiple incidents of academic misconduct.

6. The request to appeal should be made within 10 business days of the notification letter from the Dean of Students Office or the student forfeits the right to appeal.

Academic Appeal and Review Process

Student Appeal Process

If the student does not agree to the action taken by the faculty member, the student should contact the faculty’s Dean. After meeting with the Dean, if the student chooses to request a formal appeal by an Academic Conduct Hearing Panel, the student will follow these steps:

Student submits, in writing, a request to appeal the faculty member’s allegation. Student should include any supporting documentation. Student submits request to the Dean of Students
Student will be provided a written notice of the allegation(s) from the Dean of Students. The notice will also include the date, time, and place of the Academic Conduct Hearing Panel.
The Academic Conduct Hearing Panel will consist of the Dean of Students (facilitator, non-voting member), the appropriate Academic Dean, two (2) faculty members from the same academic discipline as the faculty member bringing the charge. If two additional faculty members do not exist within that department, the Dean of Students will consult with the Academic Dean to select other faculty members within the Division that teach a similar or related subject, one (1) faculty member from outside that department, and one (1) Student Development administrator; all five (5) will be chosen by the appropriate Associate Academic Vice President in consultation with the Dean of Students
If the student does not attend the Academic Conduct Hearing Panel as scheduled or notify the Dean of Students Office of their inability to attend the panel within 48 hours of the date selected, the student forfeits their right to appeal and the assigned sanction stands as is.

Faculty Review Process

If a faculty member feels a penalty greater than an “F” in the course is warranted:

Faculty member consults with Academic Dean.
If Faculty member chooses to request a formal review, they will contact the Dean of Students to initiate the Academic Conduct Hearing Panel process.

Academic Conduct Hearing Procedures

Any documentation should be submitted to the Dean of Students Office within 48 hours of the scheduled Academic Conduct Hearing Panel for consideration. The student will meet individually with the Panel first. After the student has met with the Panel, the faculty member making the allegation will meet individually with the Panel.
Legal counsel shall not be permitted; however, a non-attorney representative from within the college shall be permitted for both faculty and student for support and may speak, only when addressed by the facilitator.
The Panel shall have the right to examine all documents presented, and question all participants.
The Panel will reach its decision, in closed session, within three to five (3–5) business days. Both the student and faculty member will be informed, in writing, by the Dean of Students of the results of the Panel’s decision. Decisions of the Academic Conduct Hearing Panel are final.

Penalties

If, as a result of the hearing, the student is found responsible for the violation, one or more of the following penalties* may be assigned by the Academic Conduct Hearing Panel:

Faculty member’s original penalty remains in place.
The Academic Conduct Hearing Panel may impose the following sanctions:

Withdrawal from course;
Dismissal from program, or withdrawal from the course;
Suspension from the college.

If the student is found not responsible, the Panel will consult with the faculty member regarding the removal of the penalty.

* The prior disciplinary record of a student may be considered in establishing an appropriate sanction but not in establishing a student’s responsibility.

Please contact the Dean of Students Office for questions regarding the Academic Misconduct Procedure.

Academic Procedure Revisions: June 2010; August 2012; June 2013