BCA Guidance: Honor Code Level-Setting

Section III.A.1.a of the Student Conduct Charter of 2023 states that “[t]he Board may specify in the Bylaws the level of review for particular allegations, and factors to be considered in determining the appropriate level of review.” Section III.B.3 of the Charter states that “[d]uring the investigation, the investigator may request that the Director or their designee assign a higher level of review for the concern, if appropriate.”

This By-Law provides guidance for setting the level of review for reported concerns.  The Director of OCS has authority to set a higher or lower level of review based on extenuating circumstances, recognizing that investigations are not conducted for concerns at the Alternative Resolution level.

I. Alternative Resolution

1. In general, Alternative Resolution is the appropriate forum for most first-time Honor Code concerns, including but not limited to the following:
   a. Giving or receiving unpermitted aid on an assignment or exam.
   b. Copying another’s work and submitting it as one’s own.
   c. Improper citation of sources amounting to plagiarism. 
   d. Submitting an assignment with falsified data.
   e. Claiming to be present at a lecture, lab, section, or other course component not attended, or assisting another student in such a deception.
   f. Submitting work for academic credit in multiple courses without the prior consent of each instructor (see dual submission policy).
2. A Concern is ineligible for Alternative Resolution if any of the following conditions obtain.
   a. The Responding Student has been found responsible for a previous concern.
   b. The Responding Student does not accept responsibility for (i.e., contests) the concern.
   c. The concern is specifically listed in this Guidance as appropriate for Mid-Level or High-Level Review.
   d. There appear to be aggravating circumstances that warrant investigation.

II. Mid-Level Review

1. In general, Mid-Level Review is appropriate for an Honor Code concern when the Responding Student has accepted responsibility for a prior violation and has been through the AR process.
2. Additionally, Mid-Level Review is appropriate for first-time Honor Code concerns that involve an aggravating factor, including but not limited to the following: 
   a. Stealing and claiming credit for another student’s work without that student’s knowledge (i.e., theft).
   b. Arranging for someone else to take an exam on one’s behalf (i.e., identity impersonation).
   c. Pervasive disregard for the Honor Code across multiple courses.
3. Finally, a Concern will be designated for Mid-Level Review when either: 
   a. Alternative Resolution is not available because the Responding party does not accept responsibility, or
   b. The Responding party has been found responsible in a previous Mid-Level Review but, in the view of the OCS Director, extenuating circumstances warrant a second Mid-Level Review. 

III. High-Level Review

A concern will be designated for High-Level review when either:

1. The Responding Student has been found responsible for an Honor Code violation in a previous Mid-Level Review and the OCS Director does not believe extenuating circumstances warrant a second Mid-Level Review; or  
2. The concern alleges unconscionable behavior toward the university community and/or egregious disregard for academic standards, including but not limited to the following:
   a. Plagiarism on a thesis, dissertation, or similar project.
   b. Falsifying data on a thesis, dissertation, or similar project.
   c. Receiving unpermitted aid on any academic work through fraud, intimidation, or unauthorized access.
   d. Attempting to cast blame for an Honor Code concern on an innocent student.
   e. Creating and submitting fabricated evidence to OCS.
   f. Threatening, harassing, or intimidating anyone associated with the conduct review process in connection with an OCS case.