Faculty: Frequently Asked Questions

What if my Teaching Assistant observed or identified a suspected incident of scholastic dishonesty?
Teaching assistants, graduate assistants, and proctors also play an important role in addressing academic dishonesty, and are often the first individuals to identify or observe suspected violations. With that in mind, you should emphasize to them the importance of promptly notifying you of any such incidents and providing you with the supporting evidence, including detailed accounts of their observations. As the faculty member, you however are the only person authorized to resolve this type of violation with a student through a Faculty Disposition or proceed with a Referral to Student Judicial Services of any unresolved matter. (Refer to Flow Chart of the Discipline Process.)

What if I need to submit a grade and the student's disciplinary matter is still pending?
If the disciplinary matter remains unresolved at the end of a semester (or summer session), you must assign a grade of "Incomplete" to the student.

What if more than one student is involved in a disciplinary matter?
In suspected incidents involving multiple parties, you may determine that there are differing levels of accountability. If so, assess penalties accordingly to the students who accept a Faculty Disposition, and refer to Student Judicial Services the disciplinary matters of those students who decline that resolution. At this point, it would be premature to inform any other students in the same group that their matters are being dismissed, even if you believe that they committed no wrongdoing. Decisions regarding their accountability should only be made after Student Judicial Services has completed an investigation of the alleged misconduct.

Is there an appeal process?
Yes. With either an administrative resolution or a University hearing, the student may appeal to the President. If the disciplinary matter is resolved administratively (i.e., through a Faculty or Administrative Disposition), the student may appeal the penalty within fourteen (14) days of that resolution. If the disciplinary matter is resolved through a University hearing, the student or Dean of Students may appeal the findings and/or the penalty within fourteen (14) days after being notified of the hearing officer's decision. (Refer to Flow Chart of the Discipline Process.)

Why are the outlined steps of the discipline process necessary?
You may wonder why attention to the outlined procedures is necessary, particularly when it is obvious (or at least appears to be obvious) that a student has cheated.

One reason is rooted in the consistent judicial interpretation of the guaranteed due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Unlike the highly subjective process of evaluating the quality of a student's performance on assignments, which has been afforded considerable judicial deference, an allegation of academic dishonesty is an assertion that a person has violated a University rule. Whether or not that assertion is true is a fact to be established, not assumed, even when such an assumption seems quite reasonable.

Confronting what appears to be impermissible behavior is certainly appropriate. But keep in mind that many students have difficulty acknowledging their involvement in academic dishonesty and may deny any wrongdoing, even when reportedly "caught in the act." Some students, in fact, are incredibly contentious despite compelling evidence against them. And students facing probable suspension (likely for repeated and/or egregious violations) may feel that they have nothing to lose in challenging allegations, notwithstanding the evidence. Students may also be inclined to shift the focus from the evidence of their misconduct to any possible missteps by the University in the disciplinary process.

Not surprisingly, courts have remained insistent that colleges and universities, at a minimum, follow their own procedures. Those in effect at The University of Texas at Austin have been designed to protect the interests of students, faculty members, administrators, and the institution. Fortunately, evidence so convincing to substantiate an on-the-spot determination that a student is cheating should remain sufficiently compelling after the incident if the accused student disputes the allegation.

In short, observing the established procedures for student disciplinary matters is essential, even if the outlined steps appear to be unnecessary and burdensome requirements for reaching an inevitable conclusion. Such legalities may at times cause understandable frustrations, but they are realities under which we are obligated to function. As a practical matter, however, following the proper steps rarely prevents us from arriving at an appropriate outcome. Our goal is to do so in a manner that is beyond reproach. This, of course, requires a collaborative effort by all of us at the University who place a high value on academic integrity.

Note: The official University policies concerning scholastic dishonesty and the disciplinary process are outlined in Chapter 11 of the Institutional Rules on Student Services and Activities, which may be found in Appendix C of the General Information catalog.