FAQ

Academic integrity, in essence, is about engaging in academic work and activities honestly. For students, it includes: doing your own work; following the instructions and requirements of your professors and faculty; giving credit to others for their ideas; and engaging in honest and responsible scholarship and communication. Academic integrity provides a foundation for the "freedom of inquiry and exchange of ideas" fundamental to the educational environment at Queen’s University. Queen’s students, faculty, administrators and staff all have responsibilities for supporting and upholding the fundamental values of academic integrity. Academic integrity is constituted by the five core fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility (see International Center for Academic Integrity) and by the quality of courage.

Any behaviour that compromises these values is considered a departure from academic integrity and may be subject to the remedies and sanctions as established by Smith School of Business and Queen’s University.

A departure from academic integrity is any form of academic misconduct that could result in: gaining an unearned advantage over your fellow classmates; harm to the integrity of the course, program, University, or other person; a meaningful departure from the standards of professionalism, accreditation standards, civility, or ethics. It also compromises and violates the University's core values of academic integrity. The following list offers some common examples; a fuller list of departure types with definitions and more examples can be found in the About page:

Plagiarism (presenting another's ideas or phrasings as one's own without proper acknowledgement)

Examples:

• Copying and pasting from the internet, a printed source, output from generative artificial intelligence, or other resource without proper acknowledgement
• Copying from another student; using direct quotations or large sections of paraphrased material in an assignment without appropriate acknowledgement
• Submitting the same piece of work in more than one course without the permission of the instructor(s).

Unauthorized Content Generation (producing work using unapproved or undeclared human or technological assistance)

Examples:

• Response generation from artificial intelligence including, but not limited to, text-, image-, code-, or video-generating artificial intelligence tools when such use has been prohibited by your instructor
• Submitting assignments to online forums or websites for generating solutions.

Use of Unauthorized Materials (using or possessing materials that are not allowed)

Examples:

• Possessing or using unauthorized study materials or aids during a test or exam
• Copying from another's test paper
• Using an unauthorized calculator or other aids during a test
• Receiving answers from an exam or test bank website.

Facilitation (enabling another's breach of academic integrity)

Examples:

• Making information available to another student, including discussing questions or possible answers during an assignment or exam window
• Knowingly allowing one's essay or assignment to be used or copied by someone else
• Buying or selling of term papers or assignments and submitting them as one’s own for the purpose of plagiarism.

Deception (misrepresenting the accuracy of information, the authenticity of a document, one’s self, or one’s work)

Examples:

• Creating, causing to be created, altering, or submitting any falsified medical note or other document from a third party
• Altering any official academic documents, including transcripts
• Altering any information on documentation provided by a third party (such as a date on a medical note).

Unauthorized Collaboration (working with others on individual assignments contrary to instructions)

Examples:

• Working with others on in-class or take-home tests, papers, or homework assignments that are meant to be completed individually
• Communicating with another person during an exam or about an exam during the exam window.

When an instructor believes that a departure from academic integrity in your work may have taken place, it is the instructor's responsibility to investigate the situation and to include you in the investigation. The first step for the instructor is to inform you of their concern by sending an official Notice of Investigation (“NOI”) to your Queen’s email address.

An investigation does not automatically infer guilt and does not imply the instructor has come to a conclusion. It means that the instructor has a concern or a reason to think that you may have been involved in a departure from academic integrity and will look more closely into the situation. Looking into the situation includes giving you an opportunity to comment or respond.

• To seek the truth
• To clarify or explain events or actions
• To provide an open and fair forum to both the instructor and the student to explain their actions
• To make the best decision based on all of the available evidence
• To respect all parties in the process and ensure the requirements of procedural fairness are met.

Normally, an investigation is initiated by a course instructor. In some cases, the Academic Integrity Panel or other delegated decision-maker might be conducting the investigation (when “instructor” is referenced in these pages, please note that could include the Academic Integrity Panel or delegated decision-maker). The instructor's first step is to bring the matter to your attention. Using the Notice of Investigation form, the instructor will inform you of the following by email:

• The nature of the instructor’s concern
• The information on which the investigation is based (you should be supplied with all documents related to the investigation)
• The possible sanctions as outlined in the Queen’s University Senate Academic Integrity Procedures – Requirements of Faculties and Schools
• Your right to respond to the investigation in writing or in person (including by virtual meeting)
• Your right to have representation for any response made to the investigation.

• It is important that you participate in the investigation process. Your instructor will want to hear your perspective and be able to consider it in their decision
• Be aware of your rights and responsibilities – found in the Queen’s University Senate Academic Integrity Procedures – Requirements of Faculties and Schools
• Seek advice from knowledgeable people, such as an academic advisor or program manager
• Consult the resources available on the Office of the University Ombudsperson’s website
• Respond promptly and honestly to each request for a meeting or information
• Bring all information that you think is important to the meeting (e.g. study notes, rough drafts of papers, witness contact information, etc.) – or provide it to the instructor in advance. You are responsible for providing these materials. If you have made a mistake or an error in judgement leading to a violation of academic integrity, take responsibility for it. This allows the process to move to the important work of considering the appropriate remedy(ies) and/or sanction(s). Mitigating circumstances such as prompt admission of a departure from academic integrity, an expression of regret, and a willingness to undertake educative remedies will be taken into account by the instructor to ensure that the consequence imposed is fair, reasonable, and proportionate
• Tell the truth. Don't complicate matters by fudging the details. Dishonesty or misrepresentation during an investigation will lead to more serious consequences
• Trust the process. While it can be distressing to be involved in an investigation, try not to be defensive. If you aren't responsible, this will come out in the investigation. Remember the instructor who is investigating the situation is open to your explanation and perspective
• You have the right to appeal the finding and/or the remedy or sanction to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel or Smith Academic Appeals Committee. If you believe the decision-maker has made an error, you can appeal to have their decision reviewed by a committee.

• You have the right to know that you are being investigated for a departure from academic integrity, the nature of the academic integrity concern, the evidence upon which the investigation is being mounted, and the academic regulations that govern academic-integrity matters, including the possible sanctions or remedies
• You have the right to respond fully to the investigation. You may meet with the instructor in person and/or you may prepare a written response
• You have the right to obtain help in preparing your response
• If you wish to meet with the instructor, you may be accompanied by an advisor of your choice
• You have the right to be considered innocent of any misconduct until proven responsible by clear and convincing evidence
• You are entitled to a fair and unbiased decision-maker
• You have the right to know the reasons for the decision that is made
• You have the right to appeal the decision, if desired.

You have 10 business days after receiving the Notice of Investigation to contact the instructor to schedule a meeting or to indicate that you will respond in writing. If you receive a Notice of Investigation, ensure you take time to understand the nature of the instructor’s concern and the evidence they have shared with you. You do not need to respond immediately. Take time to consider your response, particularly if you opt to provide your explanation in writing only. Do make sure that you respond within the 10-business day timeframe; if you do not, the instructor will proceed to make a decision without your response.

When agreeing on a meeting date, give yourself enough time to review the evidence provided by the instructor, assemble all drafts and related materials relevant to the particular piece of work at issue, and seek advice (if desired) from an informed member of the Queen's community or anyone whose advice you trust and value (e.g. a friend, close relative, counselor, advisor).

Please ensure you maintain an open line of communication with your instructor. If you need more time to respond to the Notice of Investigation, let your instructor know as soon as possible and provide your rationale, including any supporting documentation necessary to establish the reason. The instructor is required to make reasonable attempts to give you an opportunity to have your explanation considered; however, the instructor is also required to make a decision in a timely manner. If, for example, you do not attend a scheduled meeting without providing a legitimate and compelling rationale, or if you signal your wish to meet with your instructor and then do not respond to their scheduling emails, the instructor can proceed with the investigation without your input.

The investigation process will proceed without your participation, and a decision will be reached without your input after the stated time for you to respond has elapsed. The instructor will base the decision on the available evidence.

The Office of the University Ombudsperson acts as a source of general information for students and faculty on matters pertaining to the academic integrity policies and procedures of the University, faculties, and schools. To help in understanding what a Notice of Investigation is and how the process of an Academic Integrity investigation works, the Office of the University Ombudsperson has information on its website to help you navigate this process.

An Academic Advisor in your program (for undergraduate students) or program advisor (for graduate students) may also be able to provide guidance about the academic integrity investigation process.

No. You may not drop the course while an investigation is underway. If your instructor, or the Academic Integrity Administrator or Program Office, becomes aware that you have dropped the course while under investigation, you will be reinstated pending a decision on the case. If the investigation result is a finding of a departure from academic integrity, and it is discovered that you dropped the course, you will be reinstated at that time.

If a finding of a departure from academic integrity is made, and a sanction impacts your grade in the course(s), you may not drop the course(s) at any time. You may not designate the course as a Personal Interest Credit (“PIC”) or be granted Credit (“CR”) or Aegrotat (“AG”) standing in the relevant course(s). If it is discovered that any of these designations have been granted in error, they will be changed to the grade that includes the academic integrity sanction.

The meeting is exploratory in nature. The purpose of the meeting is for the instructor to hear your perspective and also explain why they have initiated the investigation. Be prepared to discuss, in detail, the work or activity under question along with how the evidence came about and to explain your line of thinking in preparing the work the way you did. You may also choose to prepare something in writing to leave with the instructor, along with copies of drafts or other relevant information. If you don't wish to meet in person during the investigation process, you may provide your input in writing.

This meeting is your opportunity to discuss the situation and to explain your actions from your point-of-view. The instructor will be trying to establish the facts of the situation and examine evidence that will either demonstrate a departure took place or show that there is no basis for a finding. You can review the evidence the instructor has provided (e.g., the piece of work in question) and the reasons the instructor is concerned the evidence shows that a departure from academic integrity may have taken place. You will have an opportunity to respond and ask questions about the process.

Normally the instructor will not make a decision at the meeting, but will prepare a written decision for you following the meeting. The instructor should provide a written decision within 14 business days of meeting with you, or within a reasonable period of time as demanded by the complexity of the case. Before making a decision, the instructor will review the facts that came out at the meeting, any written response you may have provided, and the other evidence available. In some cases, the instructor may need to verify information you provided at the meeting.

Yes. To assist you with this investigation meeting you may invite any support person that you wish (e.g. a friend, family member, advocate, or legal support person of your choice) although the meeting is intended to be exploratory and not a legal proceeding. If you intend to bring a support person with you to the meeting, you must identify them and their relationship to you to your instructor in advance of your scheduled meeting time.

The role of the support person is to provide emotional or moral support and assistance. They may not be directly involved in the case (for example, as a witness) and do not speak on your behalf or advocate for you. If your support person is interfering with the meeting procedure or behaving inappropriately, the instructor may dismiss them from the meeting and reschedule.

If you decide to bring legal counsel, you should advise the instructor at least 48 hours in advance of the scheduled meeting time and identify the person. If you appear with legal counsel without prior or adequate notice, the instructor will re-schedule the meeting.

Please note that your instructor also has the right to have an advisor present (possibly a colleague with experience or a co-instructor), who, if the instructor wishes, may take on the limited role of chairing the meeting and/or providing clarification of the procedures related to investigations of possible departures from academic integrity.

If the instructor is satisfied with your explanation and determines that there are no grounds for a finding of departure from academic integrity, all documents related to the case will be destroyed and the instructor will inform you that the matter has been closed using an official Dismissal of Investigation (“DOI”) form.

If the instructor finds that there is evidence that a departure from academic integrity has taken place, the instructor will complete a Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity (“DFAI”) form and an appropriate sanction or remedy will be determined.

Note that any record you may have of a previous departure from academic integrity is not known to the instructor while they are carrying out their investigation (unless, for example, the instructor made the previous finding). It is only after they have determined there is a departure that any previous departures from academic integrity become relevant. After making a finding, and before determining a sanction, the instructor will check with the Smith Academic Integrity Administrator to find out if there is a previous finding on your record.

If you have a previous finding on record, the instructor will refer the case to the Smith Academic Integrity Lead for sanctioning. The instructor will use the DFAI form to notify you of the finding and the referral to the AI Lead.

If there is no previous finding, the instructor will set a remedy or sanction and use the DFAI form to notify you of the decision.

If you have a previous finding on record, the instructor will refer the new finding to the Smith Academic Integrity Lead for sanctioning. The instructor will use the DFAI form to notify you of the finding and the referral. The Academic Integrity Lead will review the case and the record of the previous departure(s) to determine the appropriate remedy(ies) and/or sanction(s).

Each case is treated individually; therefore, sanctioning will vary from case to case. Depending on the nature of the departure, a sanction may consist of an educational process or it may impact your grade in the course.

a) Instructor-imposed sanctions – Where there is a finding of departure from academic integrity, the instructor is expected to assign an appropriate remedy or sanction that reflects the extent and severity of the departure, and similar departures at Smith School of Business. The instructor may consult with the Smith Academic Integrity Administrator concerning the matter. The range of remedies or sanctions that the instructor can impose includes:

• An oral or written warning
• A learning experience involving a rewriting or revision of the original piece of work or the submission of a new piece of work
• The completion of other work
• The deduction of partial or total marks for the work or exam
• A deduction of a percentage of the final grade in the course
• A failing grade (down to a grade of zero) in the course.

b) Academic Integrity Panel or Lead-imposed sanctions – If the finding made by the instructor appears to warrant a sanction more serious than the instructor may impose, if you are a student from another Faculty/School, or if there is a previous finding of departure from academic integrity on your record, the instructor must refer the case to the Smith Academic Integrity Lead for sanctioning. In some cases, the Academic Integrity Panel will be the investigator (for example, if the possible departure involves more than one course or originates outside a specific course). The Panel or Lead may consider a range of sanctions including, but not limited to, the following:

• An oral or written warning
• A learning experience involving a rewriting or revision of the original piece of work or the submission of a new piece of work
• The completion of other work
• The deduction of partial or total marks for the work or exam
• A deduction of a percentage of the final grade in the course
• A failing grade (down to a grade of zero) in the course
• an official written warning that the penalty for a subsequent offence could be a requirement to withdraw from the University for a specified minimum period of time;
• the rescinding of University- or Faculty-awarded scholarships, prizes and/or bursaries;
• a requirement to withdraw from the University for a specified minimum period of time; or
• the revocation or rescinding of a degree.

Any sanction should reflect the extent and severity of the departure from academic integrity and be consistent with similar situations in the School of Business. Factors which should be considered in assigning a remedy or sanction include the following:

• the extent and seriousness of the departure;
• any educational measures that may be undertaken to ensure that the student understands the departure and what should have been the appropriate conduct in such circumstances;
• the value of the academic work in relation to the overall grade for the course;
• the experience of the student (for example, a first-year or an upper-year student; a student experienced in the discipline or a student in an elective course);
• any mitigating and/or aggravating circumstances; and
• possible direct injury to another student or the institution.

There may be occasions where there are relevant mitigating factors, that is, circumstances that warrant a lessening of the sanction. Although mitigating circumstances do not exonerate or excuse you from the finding of a departure from academic integrity, such factors should be taken into account to ensure that the penalty imposed is fair, reasonable, and proportionate to the gravity of the departure found and the context of the specific situation. The decision must outline the evidence supporting reliance on the mitigating circumstances. The onus is on the student to offer evidence of mitigating circumstances before the instructor makes their decision. The sorts of mitigating circumstances that may be relevant include:

• Documented evidence from an appropriate health professional of factors directly compromising the student's capacity to adhere to the standards of academic integrity at the relevant time
• Prompt admission to the alleged departure from academic integrity by the student and expression of contrition and willingness to undertake educative remedies
• Evidence that reasonable steps were not taken in the circumstances to bring the standards and expectations regarding academic integrity to the attention of the student at the relevant time.

Aggravating circumstances may also have an impact on the appropriate and reasonable remedy or sanction and should also be considered by the decision-maker. The impact of aggravating circumstances will typically be ensuring a robust consequence is imposed. Examples of aggravating circumstances that may be relevant include, but are not limited to:

• Evidence of a deliberate attempt to gain advantage;
• Evidence of an active attempt to conceal the departure;
• The departure has been committed by an upper-year student who ought to be familiar with the expectations for academic integrity in the discipline, department and/or Faculty/School;
• Conduct that intimidates others or provokes misconduct by others; or
• Direct harm to another student, individual, or to the University.

After considering the available evidence and your explanation, the instructor will make a decision within 14 business days of meeting with you (or receiving your written submission), depending on the complexity of the case. If the instructor makes a finding of departure of academic integrity, this will be sent to you with a copy to the Smith Dean's Office. The finding will include the following:

• The decision or finding of departure from academic integrity
• The remedy or sanctions
• The opportunity to appeal the finding and/or the sanction to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel or Academic Appeals Committee (the appropriate appeal body will be clearly identified)
• The deadline for appealing (10 business days from the date you receive the decision, unless otherwise specified)
• The resources available for consultation.

Information on where the finding will be retained and for how long is also included in the instructor’s decision letter.

If you believe the instructor’s decision is incorrect or that the decision process was flawed, you may appeal the finding of departure from academic integrity and/or the remedy(ies) and/or sanction(s) imposed to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel or Academic Appeals Committee (the appropriate appeal body will be clearly identified in the instructor’s letter). You have 10 business days from the date that the instructor’s decision was communicated to submit an appeal to the Academic Integrity Panel (or, if the Academic Integrity Panel or Lead was the first decision-maker, the Academic Appeals Committee).

If the decision on remedy or sanction was referred to the Academic Integrity Lead, the appeal cannot be submitted until a remedy or sanction is assigned. In such cases, the appeal must be submitted within 10 business days of the date that the notice of the remedy or sanction imposed was communicated by the Academic Integrity Lead. This means that, in cases where a referral is made, you will receive a decision about the finding but will have to wait until you receive a decision about the sanction before you can initiate an appeal.

In an appeal, the appeal body’s role is to review the decision that was made by the previous decision-maker (usually your instructor but possibly the Academic Integrity Panel/Lead). The appeal body will review all the evidence and decide whether the decision made was appropriate (that is, it was made by an appropriate decision-maker; the decision-maker was not biased; the decision-maker followed all the rules and procedures properly; the decision made was reasonable in that it was based on the evidence, facts, logical inferences and that the student was given an explanation of the decision).

Appeals are not an opportunity for you to receive a “new decision” by a different person or committee. In fact, an appeal body is not permitted to substitute its own decision if the initial decision is reasonable. The role of the appeal body is to review that previous decision and determine if there were any procedural or jurisdictional flaws in the making of the decision or the decision itself.

This is one of the reasons it’s so important that you fully respond to the initial Notice of Investigation carefully and with all the evidence, documents, and information you have. You will not normally be permitted to introduce new information that was available to you at the time of the initial investigation in an appeal.

To submit an appeal, you must complete an appeal form and email it to the individual specified in Section 5 of the DFAI form. Your appeal submission must clearly state whether you are appealing the finding, the remedy(ies) and/or sanction(s), or both. You must explain the reason(s) for your appeal, based on one or more of the Grounds for Appeal set out in section 4.1 of the Academic Integrity Procedures.

The grounds for appeal (i.e. the reasons you can appeal a decision) fall into two categories:

1. The decision-maker failed to act in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness. This means they:

• Were biased in some way;
• Didn’t follow the rules, regulations, or University policy in a way that adversely affected your right to a fair process;
• Didn’t make a reasonable decision. Note that a “reasonable” decision is one that is rational in that its findings are based on evidence, thought out and supported by facts and logical inferences from findings of fact. To be reasonable, the decision must contain adequate reasons for the conclusions.

2. The decision-maker acted without, or exceeded their, jurisdiction. This could mean they imposed a sanction that is reserved for the AI Panel/Lead, or that they should not have been making the decision at all.

Your appeal submission must include the Appeal form and any other documents necessary to establish the grounds for the appeal. You also have the option to submit a letter to accompany the appeal form if you wish to provide more detail to establish the grounds for your appeal.

Normally, the appeal body will meet with the student (and any advisor), the instructor (and any advisor), and witnesses (where appropriate) to conduct a thorough review of the evidence and to understand the reasons for your appeal. If you do not wish to meet with the appeal decision-maker and the instructor, you must so indicate in your appeal submission, and the appeal shall then proceed based on the written submissions.

Please see the Office of University Ombudsperson's website for more appeal resources.

When there is a finding of a departure from academic integrity categorized as Level I, the Academic Integrity Administrator creates and maintains a private file in the Smith Dean’s Office. Information in such files may only be released as permitted by University regulations (such as preparing annual reports or confirming a course drop or PIC request) or when there is a future finding with respect to the same student. These records are destroyed upon the student’s graduation.

Records of Level II findings form part of the student’s Official File in the Faculty/School Office and are retained for 10 years after the student’s graduation. Information in the Official File may only be released as permitted or required by the Academic Integrity Procedures or by other University regulations for administrative purposes, or with the student’s consent.

If you are Required to Withdraw from the University for a specified period of time, there will be a notation on your transcript indicating you were Required to Withdraw for a breach of academic integrity for the period of time. Once the period of time has expired, you may request to have the notation removed.

If you are a student studying at Queen’s on an exchange program or on a Letter of Permission and the departure is categorized as Level II, or if you are in a collaborative degree program offered jointly with another post-secondary institution (the “partner institution”), your home university or the partner institution, as applicable, will be notified of the finding and remedy or sanction if the finding is confirmed after all avenues of appeal have expired or been exhausted.