Academic misconduct investigations

By: Justin Safayeni and Edward Marrocco

A university student accused of academic misconduct may receive less procedural due process than someone battling a parking ticket. Yet the consequences of a misconduct finding are far more severe: considering the fierce competition for jobs or graduate school positions, a curious mark of zero or an inexplicable “F” on a transcript — let alone a notation explicitly reflecting academic misconduct — can effectively eliminate career opportunities.

Students accused of academic misconduct need to understand their rights, and how to effectively navigate the investigation and hearing process. And they need to start thinking strategically at the earliest stages of the process, since the decisions made before being formally charged can often make or break the outcome of a case.

At McMaster, academic dishonesty is based on principles, not rules. This means that anything construed as acting (or failing to act) in a way that results, or could result, in unearned academic credit or advantage is capable of being an offence. Offences can even be committed unintentionally, if the offender “ought to have known” that what they were doing would or could result in an unearned academic advantage.

The process begins with an investigation. This is where the course instructor gathers evidence that may be used against you. The underlying allegation might be brought to the instructor’s attention by an informant, or the instructor may form their own grounds to believe that an offence has occurred.  In other words, an investigation can be initiated purely on the subjective suspicion of the course instructor.

Depending on the nature of the alleged offence and whether the student has any committed any previous offences, the instructor can either dispose of the matter themselves, or escalate it to the Office of Academic Integrity, which will then appoint a Faculty Adjudicator to conduct a formal hearing similar to a trial.

If the allegation is so serious that the instructor believes more severe penalties are required, or if the student has previously been found to have committed academic misconduct, the instructor will refer the matter to the Office of Academic Integrity — and will normally serve as the key witness if there is a formal hearing against the student.

Regardless of whether the instructor decides to resolve or escalate an allegation of academic misconduct, the student must first be given an opportunity to provide an explanation.

This meeting is fraught with risks. Unlike their instructor, a student going into the meeting may have little or no knowledge of what that investigation has uncovered to date. Another problem is that by the time this meeting occurs, the instructor will likely have already begun to form an opinion about guilt or innocence.

In light of these risks, the most important thing to do if you are accused of academic dishonesty is to think carefully before responding. This is harder than it sounds: the natural reaction, particularly if you are innocent or engaged in misconduct inadvertently, is to proclaim your innocence or explain your actions. But as soon as you start talking, you risk providing information or evidence that may fuel the case against you. At the same time, you have to be careful not to withhold a reasonable explanation because that may result in a charge being laid in circumstances where an informal resolution could have otherwise been achieved.

Regardless of whether you are guilty or innocent, everything you do in the course of responding to an allegation in the investigative stage can affect your case. The best way to protect yourself is to understand the academic discipline process before engaging in it. Whatever you decide to do, step carefully.