Academic Honor Code

The Academic Honor Pledge

In accordance with the Academic Honor Code of Loyola University New Orleans, I pledge I will not cheat, lie, falsify, plagiarize, or participate in any form of unauthorized collaboration, misuse or misrepresentation of my academic work or the academic work of others in any manner.  I will be honest in all academic endeavors and conduct myself in a manner that protects and promotes the intellectual and ethical integrity of the University.

The Academic Honor Code

The Academic Honor Code of Loyola University New Orleans represents the University community’s commitment to the highest intellectual and ethical standards of honesty, integrity, fairness and justice. Violations of the Academic Honor Code include but are not limited to cheating, plagiarism, false citations, falsified data, falsification of academic records, unauthorized collaboration, misuse of electronic material, and violation of academic property laws. A student in doubt about whether a particular course of conduct might violate the University’s Academic Honor Code should talk with the course instructor before engaging in that conduct.

Cheating
Cheating is the fraudulent or dishonest presentation of work. Cheating includes but is not limited to:

  • using or attempting to use unauthorized materials in any academic coursework
  • copying, falsifying, destroying, or altering another student's work
  • submitting the same written work in more than one course without prior written approval from the instructors involved
  • dishonestly requesting to make up exams, extend deadlines for submitting coursework
  • plagiarizing in any form

Plagiarism
Plagiarism is defined by Alexander Lindley as “the false assumption of authorship: the wrongful act of taking the product of another person’s mind, and presenting it as one’s own” (Plagiarism and Originality). “Plagiarism may take the form of repeating another’s sentences as your own, adopting a particularly apt phrase as your own, paraphrasing someone else’s argument as your own, or even presenting someone else’s line of thinking in the development of a thesis as though it were your own.”

Unauthorized Collaborations
Unauthorized collaborating is completing coursework with other(s) without prior approval. Students are expected to consult with their instructor prior to engaging in cooperative activities.

False Citations
False citation is the attribution of intellectual property to an incorrect or fabricated source with the intention to deceive.

Falsified Data
False data are data that have been fabricated, altered, suppressed, manipulated, or contrived in such a way as to be deliberately misleading.

Falsification of Academic Records
Falsification of Academic Records is any attempt to forge or alter academic documentation, includes, but is not limited to, transcripts, letters of recommendation, certificates of enrollment or good standing, registration forms, and medical certification of absence.

Misuse of Electronic Materials and Violations of Academic Property Laws
Access and use of licensed electronic materials are governed by agreements between the University and publishers or sellers of the services.  Students must comply with the prohibitions stated below.

  • selling or public posting of material from these services  
  • sharing your login with anyone else or allowing access to unauthorized users
  • giving away or transferring information from these services to anyone not affiliated with Loyola University New Orleans 
  • systematic, large-scale downloading of information, including entire issues of electronic journals or entire electronic books

Other breaches of the Academic Honor Code include:

  • the misrepresentation of material facts or circumstances in relation to examinations, papers, or other evaluative activities
  • the unauthorized use of University academic facilities or equipment, including computer accounts and files
  • the unauthorized recording, sale, purchase, or use of academic lectures, academic computer software, or other course materials
  • the violation of Institutional Review Board (IRB) policies and procedures


Procedures

If a faculty or staff member finds that a student has committed an act of academic dishonesty, he/she should report the case in writing, with all supporting evidence, to their departmental Chairperson and the Associate Dean of the College in which the course is offered.  The faculty or staff member will recommend a penalty for the violation.  Defined below, potential consequences include a failing grade for assignment, a failing grade for the course, a letter of censure, academic suspension, or academic dismissal. The Associate Dean will review the case, determine the penalty, notify the student in writing and place all relevant documents in the student’s permanent Dean’s file in his or her college.If the faculty or staff member chooses to impose a sanction against a student without reporting to the Associate Dean, he or she must retain a record of all evidence, supply written notification of the sanction to the student, and notify the student in writing of their right to appeal the sanction through the Academic Integrity Council.

The Associate Deans will notify the Academic Integrity Council in writing of every case brought to their attention and if necessary will provide copies of all relevant materials for their review.  If a student wishes to appeal the accusation or the sanction, he or she may appeal his or her case to the Academic Integrity Council within two weeks of notification of sanction. If the Academic Integrity Council decides to hear the case, it will make a sanction recommendation to the Associate Dean of the College where the case originated. If the Academic Integrity Council finds that there was not sufficient evidence to demonstrate a violation, it will make recommendations as to how the student can complete the course and all records of the Academic Integrity Council’s finding will be put in the student’s permanent Dean’s file.

Potential consequences of violations of the Academic Honor Code

Failing Grade for Assignment or Course: A permanent failing grade may be assigned for the offending course work or for the final course.

Letter of Censure: The letter will clearly articulate the violation of which the student has been found guilty, reiterate the University’s Academic Honor Code, and clearly spell-out possible consequences if the student violates the Academic Honor Code in the future.  The Letter of Censure will be placed in the student’s permanent Dean’s file along with all supporting documentation regarding the case. 

Academic Suspension: Academic suspension is an appropriate recommendation for students found guilty in particularly egregious cases or students who have previously been found guilty of violations of the Academic Honor Code.
The recommendation of academic suspension should be submitted to the Dean of the student’s College for review.  If the Dean concurs with the recommendation, notification of the length of the academic suspension must be sent to the Office of Student Records.  A notation “Academic Suspension” will be placed on the student’s official transcript.  The decision to suspend a student for violating the Academic Honor Code should be made in consultation with the Provost and/or Vice-Provost for Academic Affairs.

Dismissal from the University: Dismissal from the University is the most severe recommendation that can be made and is reserved for the most egregious acts of academic dishonesty. Students found guilty of violating the University’s policy regarding academic integrity, especially if they have already been suspended from the University, should be considered for permanent dismissal. This recommendation should be sent to the Dean of the student’s college so that a decision may be rendered.  The decision to permanently dismiss a student from the University should be done in consultation with the Provost and/or Vice-Provost for Academic Affairs.  The notation “Academic Dismissal” will be placed on the student’s official transcript.  

Violations of the University Honor Code by students in the University Honors Program:  If an honors student is accused of any violation of the Academic Honor Code, whether or not the violation occurred in an Honors course, in addition to the procedures described above, the Director of the University Honors Program must be notified and receive all pertinent materials related to the case.  If an honors student is found guilty of violating the Academic Honor Code, the student will be placed on Honors probation, and the Director of the University Honors Program, in conjunction with the University Honors Advisory Board, will determine if the student will be allowed to remain in the Honors Program, and, if so, the requirements for removal of the probation status. 

Violations of the University Honor Code by students in the University’s Evening Division: If a student in the evening divisions is accused of any violation of the Academic Honor Code, in addition to the procedures described above, the Director of the Evening Division must be notified and receive all pertinent materials related to the case.

Monitoring and Recording Violations to the Academic Honor Code:
The Academic Integrity Council is responsible for recording and monitoring violations of the Academic Honor Code.  This data will be reported to the Provost’s office every semester. 


Appeals Procedures:

Once the Academic Integrity Council has agreed to hear a case, the student co- Chairperson of the Council is responsible for arranging the hearing, with administrative support from the office of the Provost.  Two weeks prior to the hearing, the accused student, the faculty or staff member who originally brought the charges, the Associate Dean of the student’s college, and the Academic Integrity Council members will receive written notification of the date, time, and location of the hearing, the charges, evidence and witnesses. For a hearing to convene at least three students and two faculty members must be present. All hearings will be recorded.
Rights of Accused Student:

  1. To be present at the hearing.
  2. To provide the committee with any evidence relevant to the charges.  All evidence must be provided to the committee at least one week before the hearing. It is the responsibility of the Academic Integrity Council Chairpersons to ensure that all Council members have this material before the hearing.
  3. To have a representative, either a full-time faculty or staff, attend the hearing. The role of the representative is that of an observer to ensure that the hearing has been conducted fairly and in accordance to the University’s policies.  Legal counsel is not permitted.
  4. To address the Academic Integrity Council and present evidence and/or witnesses.  If the accused student wishes to have witnesses address the Academic Integrity Council, he or she must provide the Chairpersons of the Academic Integrity Council with the names of the witnesses at least one week before the scheduled hearing.  It is the responsibility of the accused student to notify any witnesses of the date, time, and location of the hearing. 
  5. To receive, in writing, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Academic Integrity Council regarding his or her case. 
  6. If the accused party or his or her representative believes a procedural discrepancy has occurred during the hearing, the decision of the Academic Integrity Council may be appealed to the Provost.

Rights of the faculty or staff member who brought the original charges against the student:

  1. To be present at the hearing.
  2. To address the Academic Integrity Council and present evidence and/or witnesses.  If the faculty/staff that brought charges against the student wishes to have witnesses appear before the committee, they must provide the names of witnesses to the Academic Integrity Council at least one week before the schedule hearing. It is the responsibility of the faculty/staff member to notify any witnesses of the date, time, and location of the hearing. 
  3. To receive, in writing, the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Academic Integrity Council regarding their case.

Approved: University Senate - Fall 2013