Popular Searches
Skip to content

Resolution of Academic Integrity Violations

Incidents of academic integrity violations are reported to the department Chair, and a report by the Chair is submitted to the CAI Officer. The method of resolution of the violation may be either informal or formal. Students who are found to have violated the Touro University System’s Standards of Academic Integrity are subject to the sanctions listed above.

Should a student action be of such a serious nature that it is felt that he/she may be considered a danger in a clinical setting, the CAI Officer or the Chair may remove such a student from a clinical assignment, not to exceed fourteen (14) days pending the outcome of a formal resolution. A student shall not be removed from a didactic course while an allegation of an academic integrity violation is ongoing. It is the responsibility of the student to work with their program to make up any time missed from clinical assignments.

INFORMAL RESOLUTION

After consulting with the Chair and the CAI Officer (as per “Reporting a Case of Suspected Plagiarism or Cheating”), the faculty member may attempt to resolve the issue informally with the student. Once an informal resolution is agreed to between the faculty member and the student, the faculty member must present such resolution to the department Chair for approval. The faculty member, in consultation with the Chair, may impose any range of Class C sanctions, but must include requiring the student to take additional ethics tutorials intended to assist that student to avoid future misconduct. Once accepted by the student, the informal resolution is binding on both the student and faculty member, and cannot be appealed by the student.

If the student is found to have committed an academic integrity violation, the outcome of the informal resolution should be reported in writing by the Chair to the CAI Officer, who will maintain the record for the duration of the student’s academic career. NOTE: Some Touro schools may be required to report the violation to outside licensing agencies.

The informal resolution process is not available to individuals who have previously committed an academic integrity violation.

FORMAL RESOLUTION

In the event that (1) the accused student denies the charge, (2) the student and faculty member do not agree to informal resolution, (3) the student has been previously found guilty of a similar infraction, or (4) for any other reason for which informal resolution is not appropriate as determined by the CAI Officer, then the matter shall be submitted for formal resolution.

To institute formal resolution, the following procedures shall be followed:

  • The Chief Academic Integrity Officer receives a written statement from the instructor, proctor, student, or any other complainant, as the case may be.
  • The written statement must include the name of the involved student(s), the name and position of the reporting person, and the nature of the alleged act.
  • The CAI Officer shall arrange a hearing which, generally speaking, should take place no earlier than five (5) calendar days and no later than twenty (20) calendar days after notification that informal resolution was unsuccessful or not pursued.
  • The hearing shall take place before the designated Committee on Academic Integrity of the School. If the hearing involves a student in a dual-degree or joint-degree program, then the Hearing Committee should have representatives from both programs.
  • The Committee shall receive the written statement, and any documents submitted by the student or reporting person.
  • All persons involved in a hearing shall be given notice of all hearing dates, times and places. Such notice, which will be sent by e-mail will be given at least two (2) business days prior to any hearing, unless waived by the parties involved.
  • Postponements of Committee hearings may be made at the discretion of the Committee Chair. Either party may be granted a postponement only if pertinent information or interested parties cannot, for good cause, be present at the appointed time. Any postponement may not extend beyond a one-month period and any delay may affect the student’s ability to progress in the program.
  • The accused student and the accuser will be afforded the following opportunities:
    • To review, but not copy, all pertinent information to be presented to the Committee. The length of time for review shall be reasonable, as determined by the Committee Chair.
    • To present fully all aspects of the issue before the Committee.

Committee Hearings will proceed under the following guidelines:

  • All Committee hearings and meetings are closed to the public.
  • The Committee may hear the student, the faculty member or proctor, and any other individual who may be knowledgeable or may have information to share with the Committee regarding the suspected offense. Each person will meet with the Committee on an individual basis.
  • The Committee may consider relevant written reports, discussions with involved parties, examinations, videos, papers, screen shots, social media posts, or other related documents.
  • The Committee must be comprised of a minimum of three people, who must be present either in person or via video-conference, and may not be the faculty member of the course in question.
  • All decisions shall be made by majority vote.
  • The student has the right to appear before the Committee, in person or via video conference, in order to present his/her case, but, after proper notice of a hearing, the Committee may proceed, notwithstanding the student’s absence.
  • The hearing is academic in nature and non-adversarial. Student representation by an attorney or other representative at the hearing is not permitted. However, the student may bring a support person to accompany them and be present in an anteroom, put not participate, in the hearing.
  • Audio recordings of the hearing are not permitted and transcripts are not required.
  • All information supporting the charges made against a student shall be presented first. Following this presentation, the student who has been accused of a violation will present his/her side of the matter by submitting to the Committee information that he/she chooses to submit to support their stance or position. The CAI Officer, his or her designee, Office of Institutional Compliance or other members of the faculty and Administration may also meaningfully participate in this information exchange. Pursuant to the Touro University Code of Conduct, the student is expected to conduct themselves harmoniously so as not to obstruct the investigation or proceedings.
  • The student, his/her accuser, the Committee, and/or Touro University System’s representatives may raise questions about the information under review so that all aspects of the case are clarified.

The Committee shall reach a decision using the following guidelines:

  • The Committee will meet in closed session to reach a decision, including recommended sanctions, if applicable. Such meeting shall generally be held immediately after the hearing or within one Touro business day (a Jewish Day of Observance as delineated on the Touro calendar does not count as a business day).
  • If the Committee seeks additional information following commencement of its deliberations, it will notify the parties within two (2) Touro business days, and reconvene the hearing within five (5) Touro business days of the conclusion of the original hearing. The Committee's final decision must then be made.
  • The Committee may impose a range of Class A, B, or C sanctions.

The Committee’s decision must be based solely on the evidence presented at the hearing and will be the final disposition of the issues involved, including sanctions. The decision of the Committee will be presented in writing to the CAI Officer, the student, and the Chair. The Committee’s letter will contain the following elements: Charge; Hearing Date; Findings; List of Sanctions; and the Right to Appeal and to whom. In the event the case involved a student in a dual-degree or joint-degree program, the CAI Officer of each relevant school should be informed of the decision.

Appeal Process

  • Following a Formal Resolution Hearing and notification of the Committee decision, either party may appeal the decision. An appeal may only be granted on the basis of: 1) evidence of bias of one or more of the members of the Committee; 2) new material documenting information that was not available at the time of the decision; 3) procedural error.
  • The appellant has three (3) business days within which to submit a formal written appeal of the decision to the Appeals Dean for the School. The appeal should be accompanied by the Hearing Committee’s letter and by a narrative explaining the basis for the appeal. The narrative should fully explain the appellant’s position and substantiate the reason(s) for their appeal.
  • The Appeals Dean may request to meet with the appellant.
  • After consideration of the Appeal, the Appeals Dean may accept, reject or modify the Committee’s decision, and will notify the student in writing of the decision.
  • The Appeals Dean, when notifying the student of the decision, shall inform the student of his/her right to appeal an adverse decision to the Chief Academic Officer.

A copy of the Appeals Dean’s final decision will be transmitted to the CAI Officer and the Chair.

A student has three (3) business days from receipt of written notification to submit a formal written appeal of the decision, that is discretionary in nature, to the Chief Academic Officer (CAO) (i.e., Provost) or his/her designee. In the event the CAO decides to consider the matter, the CAO may only sustain the appeal on the basis of one of the following:

  • Evidence of bias of one or more of the members of the Committee or of the Appeals Dean.
  • New material documenting information that was not available to the Committee or the Appeals Dean at the time of the initial decision.
  • Procedural error.

The CAO may, at his/her discretion, conduct interviews and review materials. The CAO will notify the student, the CAI Officer, and the Appeals Dean in writing of the appeal decision. The decision of the CAO shall be final.