Annual Report on Student Discipline Matters
    September 1, 2010 - August 31, 2011
    S.12-1
    Statistical Summary - Non-academic Discipline Incidents*
    Statistical Summary - Academic Dishonesty Incidents*
    University Board on Student Discipline **
    Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals **
    Section 6.1 of Policy S10.03 states:
    The Registrar and the Senior Director, Student and
    Community Life, shall maintain a statisticalsummary of cases which are handled through their
    offices each year, and these data shall be included in the Annual Report on Student Discipline
    Matters.
    Section 6.2 of Policy S10.03 states:
    In addition to the data in 6.1, the Annual Report on
    Student Discipline Matters
    must contain a summary of the UBSD Tribunal's decisions, the
    President's decisions, SCODA's decisions and the penalties imposed. This report will be accessible
    to the University community and will be submitted to Senate for information except where the
    Tribunal, SCODA or the President determine that cases or parts of cases should not be disclosed.
    The Summary must not disclose the identities of the parties. A set of decisions which does not
    disclose the identities of the parties shall be maintained in the office of the Secretary of the
    UBSD and is available for review upon reasonable notice.

    SFU
    STUDKNT SKRVICKS
    Associate Vice-President Students
    MBC3118
    8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC
    Canada V5A 1S6
    TEL 778.782.4004
    FAX 778.782.4341
    trahilly@sfu.ca
    http://students.sfu.ca
    ATTENTION
    Senate
    DATE
    October 24, 2011
    FROM
    Tim Rahilly
    PAGES
    4
    Annual Report of Student Conduct:
    September 1, 2010 through to August 31, 2011
    According to the policy on Principles and Procedures for Student Discipline SI0.02, "The
    Registrar and the Associate Vice-President Students or designate must maintain a statistical
    summary of cases handled through their offices each year, and these data must be included in the
    Annual Report to Senate on Student Discipline Matters." This report outlines the period of
    September 1, 2010 to August 31st, 2011.
    Simon Fraser University is committed to creating a scholarly community characterized by
    honesty, civility, diversity, free inquiry, mutual respect, individual safety and freedom from
    harassment and discrimination. Each student is responsible for his or her conduct as it affects the
    University community.
    The procedures for
    handling student misconduct outlined in Policy SI0.01, Appendix 1. As per
    the policy, reports of misconduct are forwarded to the Associate Vice President Students or
    designate who will give the student an opportunity to meet and discuss the situation. The
    Associate Vice President or designate is empowered to take one or more of the following courses
    of action:
    i. seek an informal resolution;
    ii. recommend the student receive counselling or other professional assistance and, if
    necessary, assist the student in obtaining counselling or other professional services;
    iii. issue a formal written reprimand to the student;
    iv. assess and recover costs to rectify the damage or loss caused by the student;
    v. require the student to write a letter
    of apology to any person adversely affected by
    the student's behaviour;
    vi. require the student to perform up to 50 hours of community service;
    vii. terminate the student's scholarships or other financial support;
    viii. refer the matter to the University Board of Student Discipline (UBSD).
    This report does not include cases of student criminal activity which have taken place on campus
    that are currently before the courts. However, cases that have already been disposed
    of by the
    courts and are then followed up under the Code
    of Academic Integrity and Good Conduct policy
    are included.
    SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
    thinking of the world

    Table one provides a five year history of the number of cases dealt with under the Policy as well
    as categorized behaviors. Figure one shows this year's cases by the broad categories used in the
    Policy.
    Table 1 - Misconduct Cases from 2006 to Present
    2006/07
    2007/08
    2008/09
    2009/10*
    2010/11
    Disruptive or Dangerous
    24
    8
    17
    10
    13
    Damage or Theft
    13
    9
    3
    12
    11
    Fraud and Misuse
    4
    1
    3
    0
    0
    Unauthorized Presence
    1
    1
    1
    0
    0
    Misuse of Procedures
    1
    0
    0
    0
    0
    University Policies
    1
    2
    6
    1
    1
    Firearms & other Weapons
    0
    0
    0
    Illegal Conduct
    0
    0
    0
    TOTAL
    44
    21
    30
    23
    25
    Figure 1 - Percentage of Misconduct Cases by Category (September 1, 2010 - August 31, 2011)
    Non Academic Student Discipline
    Incidents
    • Disruptive or Dangerous
    • Damage or Theft
    University
    Policies
    44%
    4%
    52%
    Table two (next page) provides case-by-case outcomes for each incident reported. Generally, if a
    case was resolved by seeking informal resolution, there are no other resolutions reported. This
    year, there was one case where we did seek informal resolution but the student rejected this and
    under the Policy opted to bring the case to the University Board on Student Discipline (UBSD).
    In this case, ultimately, the student dropped the UBSD appeal and the case was resolved
    informally.
    Z

    Table 2 - Incident Type & Sanctions imposed (September 1,2010 - August 31,2011)
    Non Academic Student Discipline Incidents
    Incident
    Type
    %
    Resolut
    ion
    Seek
    Informal
    Resolution
    Recommend
    Professional
    Assistance
    Issue a
    Formal
    Reprimand
    Recover
    Costs
    Require
    Written
    Apology
    Require
    Community
    Service
    Terminate
    Financial
    Aid
    Refer
    to
    UBSD
    Disruptive or
    Dangerous
    Behaviour
    13
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    Damage,
    Destruction
    or Theft
    11
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    Fraud and
    Misuse
    Unauthorized
    Entry/
    Presence
    Violation of
    University
    Policies
    1
    X
    X
    TOTAL
    25
    2
    4
    19
    1
    17
    3
    0
    1
    Percentage*
    8%
    16%
    76%
    4%
    68%
    12%
    0%
    4%
    *
    Each case can result in multip
    e actions; ace
    wrdingly p(
    jrcentages will total more tha
    n 100%
    Finally, there are a few general observations I would like to share with Senate:
    • The prorated
    number of incidents is similar this year to last year.
    • As has been the practice in past years, cases clearly stemming from mental health issues are
    managed separately; provided the student agrees to that, the disciplinary process is not
    brought to bear. Nonetheless, there has been an increase
    of cases reported under this Policy
    Z
    U

    where students have been referred to counseling. There is no provision under the Policy that
    permits me to compel a student to follow the recommendation to seek counseling.
    • The use of alcohol remains a strong correlate to incidents of student misconduct.
    Respectfully Submitted,
    Tim Rahilly, Ph.D.

    SFU
    MEMORANDUM
    SENATE AND ACADEMIC SERVICES
    Student Enrollment, Student TEL 778.782.5350
    Services
    FAX 778.782.45732
    3104 Maggie Benston Centre
    attention Senate
    from
    Kate Ross, Registrar and Executive
    Director, Student Enrollment
    ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE REPORT 2010-2011
    date December 1,2011
    RE
    ioah(fl),sfu.ca
    This report covers the period from September 2010 to August 2011. The revised Academic
    Honesty
    and Student Conduct Policy effective May 2009 requires reporting of academic
    dishonesty incidents to the
    Registrar's office.
    There are 39 active
    Academic Integrity Advisors representing programs, departments and
    faculties coordinated by the Academic Integrity Coordinator in the Registrar's office. The
    Academic Integrity Advisory Committee reports to the Registrar and 2010-2011 members
    included: David Paterson, Lou Hafer, Rob Gordon, Elaine Fairey (chair), Jenny Fiorini, Kate
    Ross, Jo Hinchliffe, and two student representatives. It meets once each term.
    The Academic Integrity Coordinator in the Registrar's office collects and compiles data
    regarding academic dishonesty cases from units across all three campuses. Between September
    2010 and August 2011, 457 incident report forms were filed in the Registrar's office. Twenty-
    nine of thirty-four academic units reported incidents. Seven cases involving repeat offenders
    were identified through the central database and dealt with either by the Registrar or the
    Academic Head following established policy.
    Table 1 below lists the most common types of incidents that occur and Table 2 details the
    breakdown of penalties assigned. Table 3 looks at the breakdown of incident reports by Faculty.
    The Academic Integrity Advisory committee wishes to bring to the attention of Senate that 53%
    of students with academic dishonesty records in this period are international-visa students (up
    from 47%). Jo Hinchliffe, the Academic Integrity Coordinator is leading a project to review and
    develop communication and programmatic strategies related to the student population in general
    and international students in particular.
    SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
    i HIN KINn 0 F THE W0 R
    I
    D

    TABLE 1
    Type of Incident:
    January-
    August 2010
    September to
    August 2010-2011
    Plagiarism
    Examples:
    - Mainsection
    of paperwas taken
    from an on-line document
    without any reference to this
    source
    - Most of paperwrittenby tutor
    - Usedpatchwritingfor 60% of
    written assignment
    76
    211
    Cheating on exams or assignments
    Examples:
    - Completely filled the back of the
    calculator with data, equations,
    nomenclature and other aids
    - Notes found in washroom with
    student
    - Provided assignment solutions to
    another student
    - Two students handed in the same
    codes as their solution to the
    assignment
    - Used clickerregisteredto
    another student and answered
    quiz questions
    96
    238
    Fraud/Misrepresentation
    Examples:
    - Forged medical documents used
    to obtain a deferred final exam
    - Found to have taken several
    Chinese courses in high school
    in China
    - Missed four labs but asserted
    they were present and asked for
    grades
    Stole a manual
    7
    7
    TOTAL
    179
    456
    1

    TABLE 2
    Penalties
    *Note: Students can receive more
    than one penalty
    January to
    August 2010
    September to August
    2010-2011
    Give the student a warning
    27
    67
    Assign a grade penalty less harsh than
    'F' for the work
    25
    75
    Impose a failing mark for the work
    116
    291
    Assign a grade less harsh than 'FD'
    for the course
    24
    18
    Assign a grade of "FD"
    12
    11
    Re-do the work or do supplementary
    work
    17
    16
    Issue a formal reprimand
    8
    11
    TABLE 3
    Faculty
    Incident Reports
    January to August
    2010
    Incident Reports
    September to
    August 2010-2011
    BUS
    9
    21
    EDUC
    1
    12
    ENV
    0
    9
    FAS
    39
    168
    FASS
    83
    159
    FCAT
    4
    16
    HSCI
    4
    8
    SCI
    39
    64
    December 2011
    2

    University Board on Student Discipline
    Reporting Period: September 1, 2010 - August 31, 2011
    UBSD Membership
    Faculty: V. Gordon Rose (Coordinator), Psychology (January 2009 - December 2011)
    Wanda Cassidy, Education (November 2008 - October 2011)
    Anne Macdonald, Business Administration (September 2006 - August 2012)
    Kevin Douglas, Psychology (September 2010 - September 2013)
    Students: Anton Bezglasnyy, Undergraduate, Political Science (Sept 2009 - August 2011)
    Kathy McKay, Graduate, History (July 2008 - June 2012)
    Pasha Tashakor, Graduate, Engineering Science (September 2010 - September 2011)
    Kyle Vincent, Graduate, Statistics (September 2010 - September 2011)
    Staff:
    Tracy Bruneau, Computing Science (August 2004 - August 2013)
    Donalda Meyers, Education (November 2005 - October 2011)
    Harriet Chicoine, Engineering Science (January 2010 - December 2012)
    Seven cases concerning academic dishonesty, one case concerning student misconduct, and one
    case concerning misrepresentation were submitted to the University Board on Student Discipline
    in the period covered by the report.
    A summary of the cases is forwarded to Senate for information.
    V. Gordon Rose
    Coordinator, University Board on Student Discipline
    C!

    Student Discipline Summary
    File#
    Nature of Offence
    11-1
    Academic Dishonesty - Two separate
    acts of academic dishonesty, committed
    in consecutive semesters, following a
    previous instance of academic
    dishonesty in the prior semester.
    11-2
    Academic Dishonesty - An incident of
    plagiarism following two previous
    reported cases
    of academic dishonesty
    that occurred prior to 2009.
    11-3
    Case of Student Misconduct
    11-4
    Academic Dishonesty - An admission
    of academic dishonesty by a student
    who has a record at SFU for a previous
    act of academic dishonesty.
    11-5
    Academic Dishonesty - An admission
    of academic dishonesty by a student
    who has a record at SFU for two
    previous acts of academic dishonesty.
    11-6
    Misrepresentation - Prior learning
    experience in the Chinese language.
    11-7
    Academic Dishonesty - Student
    appealed an FD grade in CMPT 383 for
    academic dishonesty. Director is
    recommending that a greater penalty be
    imposed due to the student submitting,
    as his original work, two assignments
    that were purchased or acquired from
    another source.
    11-8
    Academic Dishonesty - An admission
    of academic dishonesty by a student
    who had copied work from a previous
    report submitted in 2010. Student had
    been previously disciplined for
    academic dishonesty.
    11-9
    Academic dishonesty. Cheating on
    midterm exam by failing to take
    reasonable measures to protect answers
    from use by other students.
    Outcome
    The student admitted to the academic dishonesty. The President
    accepted the unanimous recommendation
    of the UBSD that an
    appropriate course grade for CMPT 125 be re-determined by the
    Director of the School and that the student receive a three-semester
    suspension from the University commencing with the Summer 2011
    semester.
    The UBSD panel unanimously found that the alleged act of
    academic dishonesty was not established on a balance of
    probabilities.
    Student appealed allegations and disciplinary sanctions. Allegations
    and disciplinary sanctions 'withdrawnby the University. Student
    withdrew the appeal.
    The President accepted the unanimous recommendation of the
    UBSD that the student receive a suspension of five semesters to
    commence in the Fall semester of 2011.
    The President accepted the unanimous recommendation of the
    UBSD that the student receive a suspension of six semesters to
    commence in the Fall 2011 semester.
    Case withdrawn by applicant.
    The student continued to deny responsibility. The President
    accepted the unanimous recommendation of the UBSD that the
    student receive an FD grade in CMPT 383 and a suspension of three
    semesters to commence in the Fall 2011 semester. Appealed to
    SCODA.
    The President accepted the recommendation of the UBSD that the
    FD grade in ENSC 384 be confirmed and that the student receive a
    two semester suspension from the University to commence in the
    Fall 2011 semester.
    Student
    appealed
    the
    departmental
    finding
    of
    academic
    dishonesty.
    The Tribunal upheld the student'sappeal and instructed the
    department to restorethe student's midtermexam mark to its pre-
    penalty status.
    10

    Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals - SCODA
    2011 Report
    Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals
    Reporting Period
    September 2010 - August 2011
    The
    Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals (SCODA)
    heard
    seven
    appeals during the
    period covered by this report, four
    of which involved charges of plagiarism and three of which
    involved charges of cheating during an examination. Two cases involved graduate students and
    five involved undergraduate students.
    SCODA Appeal Nos. 2010-02 and 2010-03 (plagiarism)
    Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, section 2.1(iii) ("the penalty imposed on the student is
    excessive in all the circumstances of the case.") The penalties under appeal were grades
    of "FD" assigned to two students who were part of the same 2-person work group and
    submitted an assignment worth 5% of the course grade identical to that submitted by a
    third student in the course. The third student received a grade of "0" for the assignment,
    significantly less harsh than that imposed on the two students who appealed. Given the
    disproportionate nature of the penalties imposed even though all three students were
    equally involved in the incident, the Committee found in favour of the students and
    varied the penalties to substitute grades of "F" for the course in each case.
    SCODA Appeal No. 2010-04 (cheating during an examination)
    Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, section 2.1(i) ("a procedural error occurred of sufficient
    magnitude that it may reasonably be said to have affected the fairness of the process or
    altered the outcome of the case against the student") and section 2.1 (iii) ("the penalty
    imposed on the student is excessive in all the circumstances of the case.") The penalty
    under appeal was a grade of "FD" assigned to a student based on violation of SI 0.01,
    section
    4.1.2(e)(ii),
    prohibiting
    cheating
    during
    examinations
    by
    "providing
    answers
    to
    other students." The student was given the opportunity to discuss the incident with the
    instructor, but was not given an opportunity to discuss the matter with the Chair of the
    Department
    before
    the "FD" was imposed, as required by SI0.01, Appendix 3. For that
    reason, the Committee found in favour of the student on this issue, varying the penalty to
    substitute a grade of "F" for the course.
    SCODA Appeal No. 2010-05 (cheating during an examination)
    Appeal based on Policy SI 0.04, section 2.1(i) ("a procedural error occurred of sufficient
    magnitude that it may reasonably be said to have affected the fairness of the process or
    altered the outcome of the case against the student") and section 2.1 (iii) ("the penalty
    imposed on the student is excessive in all the circumstances of the case.") The penalty
    under appeal was a grade of "FD" assigned to a student based on violation of SI 0.01,
    section 4.1.2(e)(ii), prohibiting cheating during examinations by "using, or attempting to
    use, another student'sanswers." The student was given an opportunity to discuss the
    matter with the instructor. The Chair of the Department conceded, however, that he did
    not contact the student to give him an opportunity to discuss the matter
    before
    the "FD"
    was imposed, as required by SI0.01, Appendix 3. For that reason, the Committee found
    * |l

    Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals - SCODA
    2011 Report
    in favour of the student on this issue, varying the penalty to substitute a grade of "F" for
    the course.
    SCODA Appeal Nos. 2011-01 (plagiarism)
    Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, section 2.1(iii) ("the penalty imposed on the student is
    excessive in all the circumstances of the case.") The penalty under appeal was a grade
    of "F" assigned to a graduate student for a term paper, lengthy passages of which were
    copied almost verbatim from the original source with little or no attribution. The student
    conceded that the paper was plagiarized but argued that the copying was not intentional.
    The Committee confirmed the original decision which remained unchanged.
    SCODA Appeal No. 2011-02 (cheating during an examination)
    Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, section 2.1 (iii) ("the penalty imposed on the student is
    excessive in all the circumstances of the case.") The penalty under appeal was a grade of
    "0" assigned for a midterm worth 17.5% of the course grade after the instructor found an
    open notebook in the student's possession during the examination, in violation of SI0.01,
    section 4.1.2(c)(iii). The student admitted that he had an open notebook in his possession
    during the examination but asserted that he did not intend to cheat. The Committee
    confirmed the original decision which remained unchanged.
    SCODA Appeal No. 2011-03 (plagiarism)
    Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, section 2.1(i) ("a procedural error occurred of sufficient
    magnitude that it may reasonably be said to have affected the fairness of the process or
    altered the outcome of the case against the student") and section 2.1 (iii) ("the penalty
    imposed on the student is excessive in all the circumstances of the case.") At issue were
    three grades of "F" assigned to a graduate student for separate graduate courses after it
    came to light that substantial parts of major papers submitted for each were plagiarized,
    contrary to Policy SI0.01, section 4.1.2(a). The Department acted immediately to notify
    the student of the concern that had arisen in connection with the first paper and to give
    her an opportunity to discuss the matter. By the time the meeting took place a day later,
    the Department had learned that similar problems existed with two papers submitted for
    other courses. All three papers were discussed at the meeting; the Department informed
    the student that it would impose grades of "F" for the three courses based on academic
    dishonesty. In imposing penalty, the Department weighed the factors set out in SI0.02,
    section 1.9, including whether the academic dishonesty in each instance was part of a
    pattern of repeated acts. The Committee noted that if the plagiarism in the first paper had
    been discovered at the time it was originally graded, it would not yet have been part of a
    pattern of repeated acts and this particular factor might have been assigned less weight.
    The Committee therefore found in favor of the student on the issue of excessiveness with
    regard to the first paper, varying the penalty to substitute a grade of "0" for the paper but
    allowing the grades she had earned in the remainder of the course to stand, resulting in a
    "C+" in the course. The Committee concluded, however, that the grades of "F" assigned
    for the later courses were not excessive in all the circumstances of the case. It confirmed
    the original decisions with regard to these courses which remained unchanged.
    \2

    Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals - SCODA
    2011
    Report
    SCODA Membership as of November 2011:
    Chair:
    Dr. Andrea Geiger, Department of History
    Vice-Chair:
    Dr. Abraham Punnen, Department
    of Mathematics
    Faculty (Regular Members)
    Dr. Andrea Geiger, Department of History
    Dr. Geoffrey Poitras, Faculty of Business Administration
    Dr. Abraham Punnen, Department of Mathematics
    Faculty (Alternate Members)
    Dr. Doug Allen, Department of Economics
    Dr. Lorraine Halinka Malcoe, Faculty of Health Sciences
    Students (Regular Members)
    Ms. Christi Garneau-Scott, graduate student
    Mr. Jordan Kohn, undergraduate student
    Mr. Lucas McFadden-Gummeson, undergraduate student
    Students (Alternate Members)
    Mr. Ben Lee, undergraduate student
    Dr. Kamran Reayat, graduate student
    Secretary
    Ms. Concetta Di Francesco, Student Academic Appeals
    Andrea Geiger
    Chair, SCODA
    ndrea Geiger
    \
    Date
    '
    \3

    Back to top