WSR 14-13-038
[Filed June 10, 2014, 12:42 p.m.]
Original Notice.
Preproposal statement of inquiry was filed as WSR 14-07-118.
Title of Rule and Other Identifying Information: Adopting chapter 172-90 WAC, Student academic integrity, to codify rules related to academic integrity for students of Eastern Washington University.
Hearing Location(s): Eastern Washington University, Main Campus, Showalter Hall, Room 201, Cheney, WA 99004, on July 28, 2014, at 11:00 a.m.
Date of Intended Adoption: September 26, 2014.
Submit Written Comments to: University Policy Administrator, 214 Showalter Hall, Cheney, WA 99004, e-mail, fax (509) 359-7036, by July 25, 2014.
Assistance for Persons with Disabilities: Contact Trent Lutey by July 25, 2014, (509) 359-6322.
Purpose of the Proposal and Its Anticipated Effects, Including Any Changes in Existing Rules: These rules are needed to formalize university standards and processes for handling incidents of academic dishonesty.
Statutory Authority for Adoption: RCW 28B.35.120(12).
Statute Being Implemented: Not applicable.
Rule is not necessitated by federal law, federal or state court decision.
Name of Agency Personnel Responsible for Drafting: Trent Lutey, 214 Showalter, Cheney, WA 99004, (509) 359-6322; Implementation and Enforcement: Laurie Connelly, 214 Showalter, Cheney, WA 99004, (509) 359-2371.
No small business economic impact statement has been prepared under chapter 19.85 RCW. WAC revision does not impose a disproportionate impact on small businesses.
A cost-benefit analysis is not required under RCW 34.05.328. Chapter 172-121 WAC is not considered a significant legislative rule by Eastern Washington University.
June 10, 2014
Trent Lutey
University Policy Administrator
Chapter  172-90  WAC
WAC 172-90-010 General.
These rules establish standards for student academic integrity at Eastern Washington University (EWU). EWU expects the highest standards of academic integrity of its students. Academic integrity is the responsibility of both students and instructors. The university supports the instructor in setting and maintaining standards of academic integrity. Academic integrity is the foundation of a fair and supportive learning environment for all students. Personal responsibility for academic performance is essential for equitable assessment of student accomplishments. Charges of violations of academic integrity are reviewed through a process that allows for student learning and impartial review.
These rules apply to all EWU instructors, staff, and students admitted to the university, including conditional or probationary admittance, and to all departments and programs, in all locations, including online. These rules provide procedures for resolving alleged violations by students. All academic integrity review proceedings are brief adjudicative proceedings and shall be conducted in an informal manner.
WAC 172-90-020 Responsibilities.
(1) Vice-provosts: The vice-provosts responsible for undergraduate and graduate education, or their designees, have primary responsibility for the university academic integrity program. The vice-provosts shall:
(a) Oversee the academic integrity program;
(b) Appoint the chair and members of the academic integrity board (AIB);
(c) Maintain a system for academic integrity reporting and recordkeeping;
(d) Serve as the final authority in administering the academic integrity program;
(e) Maintain all academic integrity records per Washington state records retention standards;
(f) Coordinate academic integrity training for instructors and students, as needed or requested; and
(g) Develop and/or facilitate development of academic integrity program support resources, including guides, procedures, web presence, training materials, presentations, and similar resources.
(2) Academic integrity board (AIB): The academic integrity board is a standing committee of the faculty organization. The academic integrity board is responsible for administering and managing academic integrity functions.
(a) The AIB shall:
(i) Promote academic integrity at EWU;
(ii) Review academic integrity cases, make determinations as to whether a violation occurred, and impose academic and/or institutional sanctions;
(iii) Assist vice-provosts in development of academic integrity program support resources;
(iv) Respond, as appropriate, to campus needs related to the academic integrity program;
(v) Coordinate AIB activities with the vice-provosts; and
(vi) Continually assess academic integrity process outcomes to ensure equitability of sanctions vis-à-vis violations.
(b) The AIB is appointed by the vice-provosts (jointly), based on recommendations from represented groups (e.g., colleges, library, ASEWU). Board composition or membership may be modified to support university needs with the consent of the vice-provosts and approval of the provost. At a minimum, AIB membership will include:
(i) Two members from each college, one primary and one alternate. Both must hold or have held instructor rank. The primary and alternate must be from different academic departments. The alternate shall serve when a case involves an instructor in the primary member's own department. The alternate may also serve when the primary member is not available. One of the primary members shall also be designated as vice-chair.
(ii) One member representing EWU libraries.
(iii) One student member representing ASEWU.
(iv) One chair (does not vote except to break a tie).
(c) The AIB holds regular meetings every two weeks at fixed times and reviews cases at these meetings. AIB reviews are held in abeyance during holidays, academic breaks, and other times when no classes are scheduled. AIB reviews may be canceled in other circumstances with the consent of the AIB chair. Any member who is unavailable shall inform the AIB chair who will arrange for a replacement.
(d) A quorum shall consist of three voting members plus the chair/vice-chair.
(3) Instructors shall:
(a) Know and follow the academic integrity rules and policies of the university;
(b) Include, in each course syllabus, a reference to university academic integrity standards and a clear statement that suspected violations will be handled in accordance with those standards;
(c) Hold students responsible for knowing these rules;
(d) Foster an environment where academic integrity is expected and respected;
(e) Endeavor to detect and properly handle violations of academic integrity; and
(f) Support and comply with the determinations of the AIB.
(4) Students shall:
(a) Demonstrate behavior that is honest and ethical in their academic work; and
(b) Know and follow the academic integrity rules and policies of the university.
WAC 172-90-030 Standard of proof.
The standard of proof for cases of academic integrity violations is a preponderance of the evidence which is satisfied when the evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the accused person actually committed the violation.
WAC 172-090-040 Privacy.
Individual information in academic integrity matters is protected under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The protection and release of such information shall be as provided for in chapter 172-191 WAC, Student Education Records.
Reviser's note: The above new section was filed by the agency as WAC 172-090-040. This section is placed among sections forming new chapter 172-90 WAC, and therefore should be numbered WAC 172-90-040. Pursuant to the requirements of RCW 34.08.040, the section is published in the same form as filed by the agency.
WAC 172-90-050 Course drop/withdrawal suspended.
A student officially notified of charges of a violation of academic integrity may not drop or withdraw from the course while the matter is pending. Any attempt to drop or withdraw from a course under these circumstances will be considered a separate violation of these rules, unless the student is withdrawing for medical or military reasons, or other exceptional circumstances, as provided for in the university's registration policies.
If the student is found not responsible for violating academic integrity standards, the student will be permitted to withdraw from the course with a grade of "W" and with no financial penalty, regardless of the deadline for official withdrawal.
WAC 172-90-060 Continuation in course.
A student may continue to attend and perform all expected functions within a course (take tests, submit papers, participate in discussions, and labs, etc.) while a charge of a violation of academic integrity is under review, even if the instructor's recommendation is a failing grade in the course, suspension or expulsion. Full status as an enrollee in a course may continue until a final sanction is imposed. A student may not continue to attend any course in which a final sanction of a failing grade has been imposed.
WAC 172-90-070 Pending cases at end of term.
If a case cannot be resolved prior to the date that final grades must be reported, the instructor will assign a grade of "N." Upon resolution of the academic integrity process, the N grade will be modified accordingly.
WAC 172-90-100 Violations and sanctions.
(1) Violations: Violations of academic integrity involve the use or attempted use of any method or technique enabling a student to misrepresent the quality or integrity of any of his or her work. Violations of academic integrity include, but are not limited to:
(a) Plagiarism: Representing the work of another as one's own work;
(b) Preparing work for another that is to be used as that person's own work;
(c) Cheating by any method or means;
(d) Knowingly and willfully falsifying or manufacturing scientific or educational data and representing the same to be the result of scientific or scholarly experiment or research; or
(e) Knowingly furnishing false information to a university official relative to academic matters.
(2) Classes of violations:
(a) Class I violations are acts that are mostly due to ignorance, confusion and/or poor communication between instructor and class, such as an unintentional violation of the class rules on collaboration. Sanctions for class I offenses typically include a reprimand, educational opportunity, and/or a grade penalty on the assignment/test.
(b) Class II violations are acts involving a deliberate failure to comply with assignment directions, some conspiracy and/or intent to deceive, such as use of the internet when prohibited, fabricated endnotes or data, or copying answers from another student's test. Sanctions for class II offenses typically include similar sanctions as described for class I violations, as well as a course grade penalty or course failure.
(c) Class III violations are acts of violation of academic integrity standards that involve significant premeditation, conspiracy and/or intent to deceive, such as purchasing or selling a research paper. Sanctions for class III violations typically include similar sanctions as given for class I and II violations, as well as possible removal from the academic program and/or suspension or expulsion.
(3) Sanctions: A variety of sanctions may be applied in the event that a violation of academic integrity is found to have occurred. Sanctions are assigned based primarily on the class of the violation and whether or not the student has previously violated academic integrity rules. Suspension for violation of academic integrity standards will ordinarily take place immediately. Sanctions may be combined and may include, but are not limited to:
(a) Verbal or written reprimand;
(b) Educational opportunity, such as an assignment, research or taking a course or tutorial on academic integrity;
(c) Grade penalty for the assignment/test;
(d) Course grade penalty;
(e) Course failure;
(f) Removal from the academic program;
(g) Suspension for a definite period of time; and
(h) Expulsion from the university.
If a student was previously found to have violated an academic integrity standard, the sanction imposed for any subsequent violations should take into account the student's previous behavior. A subsequent violation may result in either suspension for one or two full terms, excluding summer terms, or permanent expulsion from the university.
(4) Sanctioning authorities:
(a) Instructors may impose reprimands, educational opportunities, grade penalties, and/or course failure sanctions and may recommend more severe sanctions.
(b) The academic integrity board has the authority to impose the same sanctions as an instructor, or to modify any sanctions imposed by the instructor. In addition, the AIB may remove a student from the academic program, with the concurrence of the instructor and the department chair. The AIB may also refer the student to student rights and responsibilities with a recommendation for suspension or expulsion under the student conduct code.
(c) The student disciplinary council may impose suspension or expulsion, subject to the approval of the dean of students and the vice-president for student affairs.
WAC 172-90-120 Initiation.
(1) Reporting: Each member of the university community is responsible for supporting academic integrity standards. Any person who suspects a violation of these rules is expected to report their suspicion to the course instructor or other appropriate university official.
A person who knowingly makes a false allegation that a violation of these rules has occurred, will be subject to disciplinary action as appropriate.
(2) Authority: The primary responsibility for bringing a charge of violating academic integrity standards rests with the instructor. Graduate assistants, teaching assistants, research assistants, student workers, exam proctors, online coordinators and any other persons who assist or support an instructor in teaching should report suspected violations of academic integrity standards to the instructor of record.
Instructors may be represented by their academic department chair in cases where the instructor is unavailable or otherwise unable to actively participate in the process.
(3) Contact student: If an instructor suspects that a violation has occurred, the instructor may elect to discuss the matter with the student prior to taking any other action.
(4) Instructor action: In response to a report or suspicion of violation of academic integrity standards, the instructor has the following options:
(a) Dismiss the matter: If the instructor concludes that there is no violation of these rules, the matter is over.
(b) Resolve internally: If the instructor believes that the student committed a class I violation of academic rules, the instructor may take one or more of the following actions without entering an official violation per subsection (5) of this section:
(i) Instruct the student on academic integrity standards and explain how the student failed to comply with those standards;
(ii) Allow the student to modify or redo the assignment; and/or
(iii) Provide the student with an educational opportunity to reiterate academic integrity (such as an assignment, research, course or tutorial on academic integrity).
If an instructor intends to impose any sanction that will affect the student's course grade, he/she must initiate the academic integrity process; internal resolution may not be used in such cases.
If the student does not cooperate with the internal resolution, the instructor should initiate the formal academic integrity process.
(c) Initiate the academic integrity process: If the instructor believes that the student violated academic integrity standards and internal resolution is not appropriate, the instructor shall initiate the academic integrity process by reporting the violation to the vice-provost per institutional practice.
(5) Report violation: To initiate an academic integrity action, the instructor provides information regarding the violation to the vice-provost, including:
(a) A description of the alleged violation;
(b) A summary of any conversations the instructor has had with the student regarding the violation;
(c) The sanction(s) imposed and/or recommended by the instructor; and
(d) The method of resolution chosen by the instructor (i.e., summary process or AIB review).
When reporting the violation, the instructor may also submit documents (e.g., syllabus, test, essay, etc.) that are pertinent to the violation being reported. Alternatively, the instructor may elect to defer providing such documents unless or until the materials are later requested by the student, vice-provost, or the AIB.
Instructors must initiate this process within seven calendar days after becoming aware of the suspected violation. In cases where the student has agreed to certain conditions to resolve the matter internally, per subsection (4)(b) of this section, and the student has failed to comply with those conditions, the instructor may initiate the process up to seven calendar days after the student has failed to meet a resolution condition.
(6) Vice-provost review. After a violation has been reported, the vice-provost will determine whether the summary process or the AIB review process will be used.
In cases where the student has any prior violation, the vice-provost must process the case for AIB review under WAC 172-90-160.
WAC 172-90-140 Summary process.
(1) Initiation: The summary process may be initiated when:
(a) The instructor and student both agree to the summary process; and
(b) The student has no prior violations of academic integrity.
(2) Student notification: The vice-provost will notify the student of the violation, proposed sanctions, and of their response options. Notification will be made to the student's official university e-mail address. If the student is no longer enrolled in the university, the vice-provost shall send the notification to the student's last known address. Notification will include:
(a) All information and documents provided by the instructor when the violation was reported;
(b) A description of the university's academic integrity rules and processes;
(c) A description of the student's options; and
(d) Contact information for the vice-provost's office where the student can request further information and assistance.
(3) Student response options:
(a) Concur: The student may accept responsibility for the stated violation and accept all sanctions imposed and/or recommended by the instructor. The student indicates their acceptance by following the instructions provided with the notification. The vice-provost will coordinate sanctioning with the instructor and/or the AIB as needed.
(b) Conference: The student may agree to meet with the instructor in order to discuss the alleged violation and/or proposed sanction(s). The instructor and student may discuss the matter by any means that is agreeable to both (e.g., in-person, telephonically, or via e-mail). The student shall contact the instructor to arrange a discussion time/method.
(i) In arranging a conference, the instructor shall make a reasonable effort to accommodate the student's preferences, but is not obligated to meet with the student outside of normal "office" hours. If the student and instructor cannot agree on a date/time to meet, the instructor may refer the matter to the AIB for review and board action.
(ii) During a conference, the instructor and student will attempt to reach an agreement regarding the allegation and sanction(s).
(iii) If the student and instructor come to an agreement, the instructor will inform the vice-provost of the outcome. The vice-provost will coordinate sanctioning with the instructor and/or the AIB as needed.
(iv) If the student and the instructor cannot come to an agreement, the instructor will inform the vice-provost and the matter will then be referred for AIB review and action.
(c) AIB review: The student may request that the matter be referred to the AIB for review and further action.
(d) Failure to respond: If the student does not respond to the notification within three instruction days, the vice-provost will send another notification to the student. Failure of the student to respond to the second notification within three instruction days will be treated as an admission of responsibility and acceptance of the proposed sanctions. The vice-provost will coordinate with the instructor to impose the appropriate sanction(s).
WAC 172-90-160 AIB review process.
(1) Initiation: The AIB review process will be initiated when:
(a) The instructor or student requests AIB review;
(b) The instructor refers the matter to the AIB because the instructor and student could not agree to a conference date/time or did not reach an agreement during a conference; or
(c) The vice-provost initiates a violation process against a student for repeated violations of academic integrity standards.
(2) Scheduling: Within five instruction days of determining that an AIB review is in order, the vice-provost shall schedule a review for the next available meeting of the AIB.
(3) Notification: The vice-provost will notify the student, instructor, and AIB members. Notification will include:
(a) All information and documents provided by the instructor when the violation was reported;
(b) The date/time of the AIB review;
(c) Instructions on how to submit documents, statements, and other materials for consideration by the AIB;
(d) A clear statement that the AIB review is a closed process (no student, instructor or person other than the board is present at the review);
(e) A description of the specific rules governing the AIB review process;
(f) A description of the university's academic integrity rules and processes; and
(g) Contact information for the vice-provost's office where the student and/or instructor can request further information and assistance. Notifications will strongly encourage the student to contact the vice-provost to ensure that the student understands the process, the violation, and the potential sanctions.
(4) Student and instructor response: The student must respond to the AIB review notice within three instructional days. The student responds by submitting a written statement to the review board. The student may also include any relevant written documentation, written third-party statements, or other evidence deemed relevant to the student's interests. The student may submit materials by submitting them to the vice-provost.
The instructor also submits materials to the AIB by providing the materials to the vice-provost. If the instructor has not already done so, the instructor should submit the syllabus, the relevant test/assignment, and other materials that are pertinent to the violation.
Neither the student nor the instructor is permitted to attend the AIB review.
(5) Failure to respond: If the student does not respond to the notification of the AIB review within three instructional days, the vice-provost will send another notification to the student. Failure of the student to respond to the second notification within three instruction days will be treated as an admission of responsibility and acceptance of the proposed sanctions. The vice-provost will coordinate sanctioning with the instructor and/or the AIB as needed. If a recommended sanction requires AIB or higher level authority to impose, the AIB will proceed with a review.
(6) Proceedings: The board's responsibility is to review the statements and other materials provided by each party, review other relevant records, information, or materials, and make a determination as to whether the alleged academic integrity violation occurred. The board primarily reviews written evidence. The board may, at its discretion, consult with the instructor, the student or others as deemed appropriate or necessary. All evidence collected in this process will be made available to the student and/or instructor upon request.
(7) Sanctions: The board will determine what, if any, sanctions will be imposed. The board may impose the same sanctions assigned and/or recommended by the instructor, or may impose greater or lesser sanctions. If the student has any previous violation(s) of academic integrity standards, the AIB may increase the sanction imposed to account for repeat offenses. The board may also refer the student to student rights and responsibilities with a recommendation for suspension or expulsion under the student conduct code.
(8) Conclusion: The board should conclude its review and issue a decision within thirty days after the violation was initially reported.
(9) Requests for review: Either the student or the instructor may request reconsideration by the vice-provost by submitting a request in writing to the vice-provost within twenty-one days after the board issues its written decision. The vice-provost shall allow the student and the instructor an opportunity to respond in writing to the student's request for review. The student and instructor's responses, if any, must be submitted within five instructional days of the request for review. After reviewing the responses and materials considered by the board, the vice-provost shall issue a decision in writing within twenty days of receipt of the request for review. The decision must include a brief statement of the reasons for the vice-provost's decision and notice that judicial review may be available. All decisions of the vice-provost are final and no appeals are permitted.
WAC 172-90-180 Administration.
After the resolution process, the vice-provost will coordinate sanctions and administrative actions, including:
(1) Notifying the parties of the results in writing;
(2) Creating or updating the student's academic disciplinary record;
(3) Updating academic integrity reporting and recordkeeping systems;
(4) Coordinating sanctioning; and
(5) Referring cases to the student disciplinary council as needed.
WAC 172-90-200 Failing grade.
A sanction of a failing course grade is recorded on the transcript as an "XF" and indicates a failure of the course due to violation of academic integrity standards. An XF is counted as a 0.0 for purposes of grade point average calculation.
(1) To petition to have an XF grade changed to an "F" (0.0), a student must submit a written request to the vice-provost. Requests will generally not be considered unless the following conditions are met:
(a) At least one year has passed since the XF grade was entered;
(b) The student has had no other violations of academic integrity standards; and
(c) The student has successfully completed a university sponsored noncredit seminar on academic integrity; or, for a person no longer enrolled at the university, an equivalent educational activity as determined by the AIB.
(2) The vice-provost will review the case and may consult with the referring instructor or academic unit head who originally reported the violation(s). If the vice-provost denies the request, the student may submit a new request one year later.