(to be reported separately, not included)

K)o^ 2jd/\

Annual Report on Student Discipline Matters

September 1, 2011 - August 31, 2012

S.13-1

Statistical Summary — Non-academic Discipline Incidents*

(to be reported separately, not included)

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 Associate Vice-President Students

or designate, shall maintain a statistical summary 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 determines that cases or parts of cases should not be

disclosed. The Summary must not disclose the identities ofthe parties. A set of decisions which

does not disclose the identities of the parties shall be maintained in the office ofthe Secretary of

the UBSD and is available for review upon reasonable notice.

SFU

MEMORANDUM

SENATE AND ACADEMIC SERVICES

Student Enrollment, Student

TEL 778.782.5350

joah@sfu.ca

Services

FAX 778.782.45732

3104 Maggie Benston Centre

attention Senate

date December 13,2012

from

Kate Ross, Registrar and Executive

Director, Student Enrollment

RE:

ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE REPORT 2011-2012

This report covers terms from September 2011 to August 2012. 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 2011-2012 members

included: David Paterson (Chair), Lou Hafer, Rob Gordon, Elaine Fairey, 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. Twenty-nine of

thirty-nine academic units reported incidents.

Between September 2011 and August 2012, 498 incident report forms, representing .01% of all

students, were filed in the Registrar's office. Of the 498 reports, 185 were for domestic students

and 313 for international visa students. While the year over year comparison for overall incidents

has risen by 9%, the percentage increase is the greatest for international-visa students at 63%

compared to 53% over the same period last year. Twelve cases involving repeat offenders were

identified through the central database and dealt with either by the Registrar or the Academic

Head following established policy.

Jo Hinchliffe, the Academic Integrity Coordinator is coordinating a project to improve the

university's communication strategies related to academic integrity that will appeal to the student

population in general and international students in particular.

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

thinking of THE WORLD

An electronic version of the incident report form has been developed by Computing Science and

is used not only by FAS but also by Criminology and Philosophy. This format increases the

likelihood of reporting by instructors as it is more efficient.

Table 1 below lists the most common types of incidents that occur and Table 2 details the

breakdown

ofpenalties assigned. Table 3 looks at the breakdown of incident reports by Faculty.

TABLE 1

Type of Incident:

September 2011-

August2012

September 2010

to August 2011

Plagiarism

Examples:

A portion

of the final paper was

taken, lightly modified and

entirely un-credited, from a book

Copied submission from

YahooIAnswers and submitted it

as their own work

Portions of final essay and

thought piece plagiarized from

another student'sthesis and a

web site without citation

175

211

Cheating on exams or assignments

Examples:

- Received solutions to several

problems during final exam via

iPhone

Essay copied from a pay for use

essay service called "gradesaver"

Found studying notes in

washroom during exam

- Shared code with other students

and used code found online

277

238

Fraud/Misrepresentation

Examples:

- Possible bribe attempt/misuse

computer login/security

- Missed four labs but asserted

they were present and asked for

grades

- Submission offalse medical note

TOTAL

498

456

TABLE 2

Penalties

*Note: Students can receive more

than one penalty

September 2011-

August2012

September 2010 to

August 2011

Give the student a warning

Assign a grade penalty less harsh than

'F'for the work

Impose a failing mark for the work

333

291

Assign a grade less harsh than 'FD'

for the course

Assign a grade of "FD"

Re-do the work or do supplementary

work

Issue a formal reprimand

TABLE3

Faculty

Incident Reports

September 2011 to

August 2012

Incident Reports

September 2010 to

August 2011

BUS

EDUC

ENV

FAS

244

168

FASS

152

159

FCAT

HSCI

SCI

December 2012

University Board on Student Discipline

Reporting Period: September 1, 2011 - August 31, 2012

UBSD Membership

Faculty:

V. Gordon Rose (Coordinator), Psychology (January 2009 - December 2014)

Anne Macdonald, Business Administration (September 2006 - August 2012)

Kevin Douglas, Psychology (September 2010 - September 2013)

Wanda Cassidy, Education (November 2008 - October 2014)

Students: Kyle Vincent, Graduate, Statistics (September 2010 - September 2011)

Jocelyne Leszczynski, Undergraduate, Communications (October 2011 - May 2012)

Pasha Tashakor, Graduate, Engineering Science (September 2010 - June 2012)*

Kathryn McKay, Graduate, History (July 2008 - June 2012)

Heather Palis, Undergraduate, Communications (July 2012 - September 2012) *

Chad Johnstone, Undergraduate, Business (May 2012 - April 2013)

Sylvia Gajdics, Graduate, Education (July 2012 - June 2013)

Stacey Robinsmith, Graduate, Education (July 2012 - June 2013)

Robert Ennis, Undergraduate, Criminology (October 2011 - September 2013)

Staff:

Harriet Chicoine, Engineering Science (January 2010 - December 2012)

Tracy Bruneau, Computing Science (August 2004 - August 2013)

Donalda Meyers, Education (November 2005 - October 2014)

* These students resigned before the end

of their term.

Eight cases concerning academic dishonesty were submitted to the University Board on Student

Discipline in the period covered by the report.

A summary

ofthe cases is attached for information.

V. Gordon Rose

Coordinator, University Board on Student Discipline

Student Discipline Summary

File#

Nature ofOffence

11-9

Academic dishonesty - Cheating on

midterm exam by failing to take

reasonable measures to protect answers

from use by other students.

11-10

Academic dishonesty - Plagiarism on a

final paper in EDUC 833 that resulted in

a failing grade in the course.

11-11

Academic dishonesty - The student

contracted out five assignments in three

courses over two semesters to freelance

developers and received an FD grade in

all three courses. The student committed

a previous academic offense in the

Summer 2010 term and accepted

responsibility for actions.

12-1

Academic Dishonesty - Student applied

for a deferral ofexams based on medical

documentation that could not be

verified. Student received WE

(Withdrawal under Extenuating

Circumstances) notations previously for

six courses based on medical

documentation that is now in question.

The student'sresponse was there was no

academic dishonesty and that she was a

victim offraud

12-2

Academic Dishonesty - Student hired

others to complete his course work on

his behalf. Student had a previous

instance ofdishonesty, he did accept

responsibility for his actions and he had

a medical circumstance.

12-3

Academic Dishonesty - Plagiarism on

an assignment which resulted in a D

grade because

ofa 10% grade reduction

penalty.

12-4

Academic Dishonesty - Copying

answers from a fellow student during a

quiz in CMPT 120. There were two

other acts ofacademic dishonesty on

student'srecord

12-5

Academic Dishonesty - Two separate

acts in the same semester involving

copying substantial portions

ofanother

student'sexam papers. Student also had

a previous record

ofacademic

dishonesty.

Student does admit to dishonesty.

Outcome

Student appealed the departmental finding of academic dishonesty.

The Tribunal upheld the student'sappeal and instructed the

department to restore the student'smidterm exam mark to its pre-

penalty status.

Student appealed allegations and disciplinary action. The Tribunal

dismissed the student'sappeal and confirmed the department's

finding that the student had committed academic dishonesty.

The President accepted the recommendation ofthe UBSD that the

FD grades in CMPT 300,371 and 383 stand and that the student

receive a suspension for six semesters from the University.

After receiving a psychological assessment report on the student, the

President decided that the student should be suspended from SFU

until the student can demonstrate to SFU'ssatisfaction that she is

well enough to return to her studies. The WE grades were removed

from her academic transcript and replaced with her original grades.

The student is required to repay SFU the partial tuition refund she

received as a result of the WE grades granted.

The Presidentaccepted the unanimous recommendationof the

UBSD that the student receive FD grades in CMPT 376 and 431 and

a suspension offive semesters.

Student appealed allegations and disciplinary action. The UBSD

Tribunal concluded that the applicant had committed an act of

academic dishonesty and the penalty remained

The UBSD Tribunal concluded that it was not shown that the

student committed academic dishonesty in CMPT 120 to the

requisite standard of proof. The student then submitted an appeal to

have the academic dishonesty report for CMPT 120 removed from

his file. The appeal hearing is PENDING.

The President accepted the unanimous recommendation of the

UBSD that an F grade in MACM 201 and FD grade in MATH 232

were appropriate and that the student should receive a suspension of

three semesters.

Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals - SCODA

2012 Report

Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals

Reporting Period

September 2011 - August 2012

The

Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals (SCODA)

heard

six

appeals during the period

covered by this report, one involving the theft of a solutions manual, two involving charges of

plagiarism, and three involving charges of cheating on assignments or during an examination.

One case involved a graduate student and five cases involved undergraduate students.

SCODA Appeal No. 2010-04 (plagiarism)

Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, sections 2.1(i) (procedural error) and (iii) (excessive

penalty). At issue was a penalty of 10% of the grade for an assignment imposed by an

instructor after it was determined that approximately 80% of a unit plan submitted by the

student was copied almost verbatim from that of another student without attribution. The

student claimed that she had not been given an adequate opportunity to explain. Noting

the extent of the unacknowledged material and that the instructor met with the student for

half an hour to discuss the matter, the Committee concluded that there was no procedural

error and that the penalty was by no means excessive. The Committee confirmed the

original decision which remained unchanged.

SCODA Appeal No. 2011-05 (removing solutions manual, inappropriate conduct)

Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, sections 2.1 (i) (procedural error) and (iii) (excessive

penalty). At issue was a grade of "FD" assigned for a course after the student removed a

solution manual from a TA's office and engaged in inappropriate behavior toward the

TA. The student admitted his inappropriate conduct toward the TA but argued that the

Department was not entitled to rely on it in imposing a penalty for academic dishonesty

because the matter had been separately addressed based on the procedures established for

matters involving general misconduct in Policy SI0.03, Appendix 1. The Committee

agreed that, because it had already been dealt with, the inappropriate conduct should not

have factored into the penalty decision with respect to the removal

of the solution manual

from the TA's office. Although the Committee made clear that it in no way condoned the

student's behavior, it found in favour

of the student on this issue and varied the penalty to

substitute a grade of "D" for the course.

SCODA Appeal No. 2011-06 (cheating on assignments - purchasing solutions)

Appeal from UBSD Case No. 11-7 based on Policy SI0.04, section (iii) (excessive

penalty). At issue was a three-semester suspension imposed in addition to a grade of FD

based in substantial part on what the UBSD described as the "repeated nature

of the

conduct" after it found that two separate acts of academic dishonesty had occurred in the

same course. Both acts involved attempts to purchase a programming assignment, each

written in a separate computer language. The student argued that the UBSD should have

considered this a single course

of conduct. The Committee noted that each incident took

place at a different time during the semester and involved a separate series of actions. It

therefore confirmed the original decision which remained unchanged.

Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals - SCODA

2012 Report

SCODA Appeal Nos. 2011-07 (plagiarism)

Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, sections 2.1(i) (procedural error), (ii) (factual error) and

(iii) (excessive penalty). At issue was a grade of "F" imposed for a final paper submitted

by a graduate student after the instructordetermined that substantial portions of the paper

had been taken directly from an unacknowledged source. The student conceded that the

paper was copied verbatim from other sources but argued that it was submitted in error

by a family member who misunderstood his instructionsregarding what paper to email to

email to the instructor. Although this case arose from the same incident as USBD Case

11.10, it was not an appeal of the UBSD decision under Policy SI 0.03, sections 5.2 and

5.3, since it was not an appeal of a penalty imposed by the University President based on

the recommendation of the UBSD. The Committee agreed to consider the case because it

raised separate issues not before the UBSD regarding the basis on which the original

penalty was imposed. The Committee confirmed the original decision which remained

unchanged.

SCODA Appeal No. 2012-01 (cheating on assignments, accessing solutions manual)

Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, section

2.1 (iii) (excessive penalty). At issue was a grade

of "FD" imposed after it was determined that the student had unauthorized access to a

solutions manual from which she copiedanswers for four homework assignments and

submitted them as her own. The studentargued that the Departmenthad failed to take

into account the fact that this was a first offense. The Committee noted that the actions

for which the penalty was imposed involved not one but four separate acts of copying at

different times over the course of the semester. It confirmed the original decision which

remained unchanged.

SCODA Appeal No. 2012-02 (cheating on midterm examination, accessing online solutions)

Appeal based on Policy SI0.04, section 2.1 (iii) (excessive penalty). At issue was a grade

of "FD" imposed after it was determined that the student had unauthorized internet access

to solutions that had been posted online during a midterm examination taken on the road

while attending a sports competition. The student admitted at hearing that he used another

student's computer to access thesolutions when his coach briefly left the examination

room but argued that the fact that this was a first offense rendered the "FD" excessive.

The Department Chair stated that this was normally a factor he would take into account

but that he made the decision to impose an "FD" based on the fact that the student was in

a position of special trust given the arrangements that had been made to accommodate his

wish to attend the sports competition and that the solutions were accessed by a deliberate

internet search in direct violation of the conditions imposed in connection with his being

permitted to take the midterm on the road. The Committee confirmed the original

decision which remained unchanged.

SCODA Membership as of August 2012:

Chair:

Dr. Doug Allen, Department of Economics

Vice-Chair:

Dr. Andrea Geiger, Department of History

Faculty (Regular Members)

Dr. Andrea Geiger, Department of History

Dr. Abraham Punnen, Department of Mathematics

Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals - SCODA

2012 Report

Faculty (Alternate Members)

Dr. Sam Black. Department of Philosophy

Dr. Karan Kavanagh, Department of Physics

Students (Regular Members)

Ms. Ashley Pullman, Graduate Student

Ms.

Jennifer Brooks, Undergraduate Student

Ms. Nimisha Parekh, Undergraduate Student

Students (Alternate Members)

Mr. Marc Legacy, Graduate Student

Ms. Meaghan Wilson, Undergraduate Student

Secretary

Ms. Concetta Di Francesco, Student Academic Appeals

***r

Nov

3.0/

Andrea Geiger, Chair (2011-2012)

Date

K)o^ 2jd/\

Doug Allen, (Sfeair (2012-2013)

Date

20 v ^_