Honesty is a core value at the University of New Hampshire. The members of its academic community both require and expect one another to conduct themselves with integrity. This means that each member will adhere to the principles and rules of the University and pursue academic work in a straightforward and truthful manner, free from deception or fraud.
Any attempts to deviate from these principles will be construed as acts of academic dishonesty and will be dealt with according to the rules of due process outlined below.
The value of honesty and the expectation of conduct that goes with it are intended to reinforce a learning environment where students and faculty can pursue independent work without unnecessary restraints. At the same time, the University recognizes its responsibility to encourage and inculcate values and standards of conduct that will guide its students throughout their careers.
The academic honesty policy provides standards of conduct for individuals only. Policies relating to recognized student organizations are described elsewhere. Such organizations, however, are expected to conform to the values and standards that govern their members as individuals within the UNH community. It is expected that students attending the University will conduct themselves in accordance with the rules and regulations of the University. Students must acknowledge the University’s right to take disciplinary action, including suspension or dismissal, for failure to comply with the expectations delineated by this policy.
This policy establishes the expectations of the University of New Hampshire for academic honesty and defines situations that constitute academic misconduct related to undergraduate and graduate coursework and undergraduate thesis and research projects. Finally, it presents the due process that follows should misconduct occur.
While it is impossible to list all cases that might arise, the following are provided as examples of academic dishonesty.
09.1 Written Classroom Examinations
Presenting the work of other students as one’s own, or assisting another student to do so, in a written classroom examination is considered to be cheating. Cheating may also occur when a student violates the conditions governing the examination.
Examples include, but are not limited to the following.
1. Using oral, written, visual, or other form of communication intended to give or receive improper assistance;
2. Looking at or copying another’s work;
3. Using unauthorized materials (texts, notes, etc.);
4. Having a surrogate take an exam;
5. Altering your work after an exam has been returned and before resubmitting it;
6. Obtaining and/or using an upcoming exam ahead of time.
09.2 Out-of-Class Work
Collaboration or aid on out-of-class work, when prohibited by the instructor, is considered to be cheating. Such unauthorized activity includes, but is not limited to the following:
1. Receiving outside help on take home exams;
2. Consulting with others about homework, laboratory reports, etc.;
3. Copying another’s homework, laboratory reports, etc., and submitting them as your own.
The unattributed use of the ideas, evidence, or words of another person, or the conveying of the false impression that the arguments and writing in a paper are the student’s own. Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to the following:
1. The acquisition by purchase or otherwise of a part or the whole of a piece of work which is represented as the student’s own;
2. The representation of the ideas, data, or writing of another person as the student’s own work, even though some wording, methods of citation, or arrangement of evidence, ideas, or arguments have been altered;
3. Concealment of the true sources of information, ideas, or argument in any piece of work.
The deliberate falsification of information substituted in place of the truth is misrepresentation and includes but is not limited to the following:
1. Having another person represent or stand in for oneself in circumstances where the student’s attendance and/or performance is required;
2. Leaving a class, laboratory, etc. without permission but after attendance has been taken;
3. Presenting false academic credentials;
4. Having another person author one’s written work;
5. Submitting work originally submitted for one course to satisfy the requirements of another course, without prior consent of the current instructor (it is assumed that the current instructor expects the work to be original);
6. Forging or using another’s signature;
7. Altering or destroying academic records and documents;
8. Presenting false data, experimental results, or physical results.
09.5 Academic Policy
Violations of academic policy that are considered as academic dishonesty include but are not limited to the following:
1. Removing materials from the library without proper authority;
2. Infringing on the rights of other students to fair and equal access to academic resources;
3. Duplicating course materials expressly forbidden by the instructor;
4. Ignoring or willfully violating class or laboratory instructions or policies.
Violations of computer codes of ethics distributed at the University will be considered academic dishonesty.
09.7 Procedures for Dealing with Academic Misconduct
A student shall be informed of any accusation of academic misconduct. The procedure for handling such cases shall be as follows:
1. Individual cases will be handled initially by the instructor of the course concerned, as required by the instructor’s professional responsibility to assess the performance of his or her students. The instructor will notify the student of the alleged infraction and what course of action and penalty the instructor believes is appropriate. Situations of honest error are to be considered in this process. The student must be allowed an opportunity to rebut the allegation. The initial notification and conference are to be conducted informally. The chair of the department offering the course should be apprised of any actions taken. The penalty imposed by the instructor may not exceed failure in the course, in which case the student should be informed in writing that a failing grade is being assigned for academic misconduct and that further appropriate action may be taken by the student’s college dean. Cases shall be reported to the student’s college dean at the discretion of the instructor and department chair, except when a failing grade in the course is assigned for academic misconduct, in which case the student’s college dean shall be notified of that fact.
2. Cases involving academic misconduct by students not enrolled in the course in question will be referred to the student’s college dean, in which case the procedures detailed in section (1) above will be followed.
3. The student’s college dean, when informed of an academic misconduct case as in (1) or (2) may take appropriate further action including suspension or dismissal; however, such action shall not take place before the student has been advised by the dean or his/her representative in writing in a timely fashion (normally before the semester succeeding the precipitating infraction) of the charges, and not before the student has been given an opportunity to explain or reply to the charges.
4. Any student penalized under those procedures may appeal the decision. In any appeal, the student involved has the right to the presence of an advisor of the student’s choice drawn from the University community.
(a) to appeal an instructor’s decision, a written request for appeal must be sent to the student’s college dean in a timely fashion, normally within 30 days, unless the student presents evidence of circumstances preventing such a timely response. Normally within two weeks the dean will schedule a meeting with the student to afford the student an opportunity to explain or reply to the charges. A dean’s appellate decision can be appealed further to the Academic Standards and Advising Committee, which will consider the appeal only on the basis of procedural irregularities. Any new data or evidence that becomes available will return the case to the student’s college dean.
(b) In cases where the student’s college dean is the primary respondent, or in cases where the student’s college dean imposes a significant further penalty beyond that imposed by the course instructor, appeals of the dean’s decision must be made in writing and in a timely fashion (as defined in 4(a)) directly to the Academic Standards and Advising Committee. The chair of that committee will respond normally within two weeks by scheduling a hearing to afford the student an opportunity to explain or reply to the charges. In such a case that committee will hear substantive as well as procedural complaints. In any such case the representative of the student’s college dean to the Academic Standards and Advising Committee will be excused from the committee’s deliberation.
As approved by the Faculty Senate (February 25, 1991)
5. The procedures and standards of the University’s Misconduct in Scholarly Activity (MISA) Policy will take precedence over the Code of Conduct and the 09.7 "procedures for Dealing with Academic Misconduct," for purposes of determining whether misconduct was perpetrated in connection with federally-funded research that falls within the purview of the MISA Policy. If a MISA proceeding concludes that a student violated the MISA Policy, the student will be referred for disciplinary action under SRRR Academic Misconduct protocols.
It shall be the responsibility of the student’s college dean to report to the Academic Standards and Advising Committee all actions and all appeals from students resulting from cheating cases.
Note: Cases involving graduate students are referred to the Associate Dean of the Graduate School. Appeals of the Associate Dean’s decision can be made to the Dean of the Graduate School who may, at his/her discretion, refer the case to the Graduate Council for review. Students who are dismissed by the Associate Dean and wish to appeal that decision should follow the procedures for graduate students dismissed for academic reasons.