Information for Students

An academic integrity investigation can be initiated by your course instructor or by the Academic Integrity Panel. The Academic Integrity Panel will be the investigator in certain situations, including: when the possible departure involves more than one course; the possible departure originates outside a specific course; in relation to international exchange application investigations; as delegated decision-maker if the contract term has ended for certain instructors). The person or body conducting the investigation is known as the decision-maker.

Using a Notice of Investigation (NOI) form, the decision-maker will inform you of the following by email to your Queen's email address

• The nature of their academic integrity concern
• The information on which the investigation is based (you should be supplied with all documents related to the investigation)
• Your right to respond to the investigation in writing or in person
• Your right to have representation for any response made to the investigation
• The information on the website of the Office of the University Ombudsperson about student rights and responsibilities and University policies and procedures.

You may not drop the affected course(s) while an investigation is under way. If the course is still in progress, please continue giving it your best effort. If you do drop the course, you will normally be reinstated in the course and be expected to complete it.

It is important that you respond to the investigation. Your response is part of the investigation, and you may have an explanation that addresses the concern or explains the situation. It is also your opportunity to take responsibility if you have made a mistake. If you don't respond, the decision-maker will make a decision on the available evidence, without the benefit of hearing from you. It is therefore in your best interest to ensure your perspective is taken into consideration.

To respond, you may choose one or both of the following options:

• To meet with your decision-maker to discuss the matter. If you prefer to meet, you must contact the decision-maker no later than 10 business days after receiving the NOI to arrange a mutually agreeable meeting time.
• To submit a written response to the decision-maker. If you prefer to respond in writing you must inform your decision-maker within 10 business days that you intend to respond in writing. You then have an additional 5 business days from the day that you informed the decision-maker to submit your written statement.

In advance of the meeting and/or in preparing your written response, you should:

• Review the concern and the evidence
• Collect (if applicable) all drafts and related materials relevant to the particular piece of work at issue
• (If applicable,) collect any other relevant documentation, such as evidence of mitigating factors, to support your explanation. You are responsible for bringing these materials to the meeting and/or sending them with your response
• Seek advice from an informed member of the Queen's community, such an academic advisor or program manager, or anyone whose advice you trust and value (e.g. parent, a close relative, friend, counselor).

Take these steps into consideration when estimating the time it will take you to prepare your response, whether it is in writing, in person, or both.

While the formality of the process may seem stressful, it is for your benefit. The decision-maker is able to share their concerns with you and give you time to understand the concerns before you are required to respond. You are able to respond to those concerns and the decision-maker is required to consider your explanation before they decide whether you have departed from academic integrity, and if yes, the appropriate remedy(ies) and/or sanction(s). If you choose to meet with the decision-maker, you may also decide to prepare something in writing to ensure you remember everything you want to say and to leave it with them for reference.

In situations where you did not depart from academic integrity, this is your opportunity to provide a detailed explanation of why the evidence is not as it seems and how the concerns in question came about. For example, you may explain your line of thinking in preparing the work the way you did and provide copies of earlier drafts of your work.

In situations where the decision-maker’s concerns are founded (that is, you did depart from the requirements of academic integrity), you are able to explain how and why you engaged in such activities and, if relevant, provide documented evidence of mitigating factors.

To accompany you to the meeting, you may invite an advisor such as a friend, advocate, or legal support person of your choice. If you decide to bring legal counsel, however, you must advise the decision-maker in advance and identify the person. Please note that course instructors also have the option of bringing an advisor to chair the meeting.

Most investigations are completed after this meeting. In a small number of cases the decision-maker may gather additional information following the initial meeting/written statement. This is often done through the process of confirming or verifying statements that you made or information you provided during the meeting. If new information is gathered, you will be provided with a copy of the new evidence. You will then have 5 business days to submit a written response to the new information before a decision is made.

The decision-maker shall decide whether to make a finding of a departure from academic integrity or to dismiss the case based on: the applicable rules, regulations, policies and procedures (including their course policies and instructions and the Queen’s University Procedures) related to academic integrity; the evidence that was considered; your explanations; and their own assessment of the credibility and strength of the evidence.

At this point in the investigation, the decision-maker is not entitled to know about any previous departure(s) from academic integrity by you, and any previous departure is not relevant to making a determination of whether there was a departure from academic integrity (i.e. making a “finding” of departure from academic integrity).

• If the decision-maker 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. You will be sent a “Notice of Dismissal of Investigation” (DOI) form that states the investigation has been dismissed and no record of the incident will be kept. A copy of the deidentified DOI is sent to the Academic Integrity Administrator for reporting purposes (your name and any identifying information do not appear on the DOI).
• If the decision-maker believes that there is sufficient evidence that a departure from academic integrity has taken place, they will make a finding of departure from academic integrity.

If your instructor has concluded that you have departed from academic integrity, they will then classify the departure as a minor (Level 1) or major (Level II) departure. If you have a prior finding on record then the sanction will automatically be categorized as a Level II.

Level I findings are retained in a separate academic integrity file in the Smith School of Business and are only accessed in the case of a subsequent finding. If you do not have a subsequent finding of a departure from academic integrity, the current finding will not be added to your official Smith School of Business file. Level I findings are destroyed upon your graduation.

Level II findings are retained in your official school file and are retained for 10 years after your graduation. Please see Sections 1.6.3 and 1.7 of the SAIP - RFS Oct 2021 for more information on who has access to your official file and when and how such information might be referenced in the future.

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 (see Section 3 of the SAIP - RFS Oct 2021).

Where there is a finding of departure from academic integrity, the decision-maker is expected to assign an appropriate remedy or sanction that reflects the extent and severity of the departure.

First, the decision-maker will contact the Smith Academic Integrity Administrator to determine if there have been any previous departures from academic integrity. If there is, the matter will be referred to the Smith Academic Integrity Lead for consideration of a sanction. Your case will also be referred to the Smith Academic Integrity Lead for sanctioning if you are a student in another school or faculty and/or the departure is sufficiently serious that a sanction outside those instructors may assign is warranted. If there are no previous findings, an instructor may consult with the Smith Academic Integrity Administrator to determine an appropriate sanction.

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

If the remedy or sanction affects your grade in the course, you may NOT drop the course regardless of the drop deadlines, and you will normally be reinstated in the course if the course was dropped prior to the finding being decided. Regardless of whether you are permitted to drop the course with which the finding is associated, the finding will remain on file in the appropriate location given its categorization as a Level I or Level 2 finding.

The decision-maker must complete the “Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity” (DFAI) form to provide you with:

• the details of the finding,
• the reasons for the finding, the evidence upon which the finding was made,
• (as applicable) a copy of any email correspondence with you related to the investigation, your written response, a summary of the statements provided by you during a meeting and/or any documentation provided by you as part of the investigation, and
• the categorization of the departure as Level I or Level 2

When the decision-maker decides that the finding warrants a remedy or sanction within the scope of those available to them and the case is not being referred to the AI Lead, the decision-maker must also include the following information in the finding form:

• the remedy(ies) or sanction(s);
• the reasons for the remedy(ies) or sanction(s), including any mitigating or aggravating circumstances considered;
• your right to appeal the finding and/or the remedy(ies) or sanction(s) to the Academic Integrity Panel or, in some cases, the Academic Appeals Committee;
• the deadline for appealing to the Academic Integrity Panel or Academic Appeals Committee;
• the information on the website of the Office of the University Ombudsperson about student rights and responsibilities and University policies and procedures; and
• if you are studying at Queen’s on an exchange program or on a Letter of Permission and the departure is categorized as Level 2, or if you are in a collaborative degree program offered jointly with another post-secondary institution (the “partner institution”), that the 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.

The finding form will be emailed to you at your Queen's email address.

If your case has been referred to the Academic Integrity Lead for sanctioning (because it is not your first finding on record, the departure is sufficiently serious to warrant a sanction beyond what an instructor can assign, and/or you are located in another faculty in the school), the AI Lead will review the evidence and explanations in the decision letter received from the decision-maker, any prior violations, and/or consult with the AI Lead in your home faculty or school to determine an appropriate sanction.

Once this has been done, the AI Lead will email a letter to you at your Queen's email address with the following information:

• the remedy(ies) or sanction(s);
• the reasons for the remedy(ies) or sanction(s), including any mitigating or aggravating circumstances;
• your right to appeal the finding and/or the remedy(ies) or sanction(s);
• the deadline for appealing;
• the information on the website of the Office of the University Ombudsperson about student rights and responsibilities and University policies and procedures; and
• if you are studying at Queen’s on an exchange program or on a Letter of Permission and the departure is categorized as Level 2, or if you are in a collaborative degree program offered jointly with another post-secondary institution (the “partner institution”), that 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

If considering an appeal, you are encouraged to review the resources available on the Office of the University Ombudsperson’s website. Before deciding to appeal:

• Consider why you are pursuing an appeal; simply not being satisfied with the outcome is typically not a ground of appeal
• Review the rules and regulations of the Smith School of Business and the appeal body who will be hearing your appeal. It is your responsibility to inform yourself of the rules and regulations, ask questions for clarification, and follow the appeal process
• Be mindful of any dates, deadlines and specific processes you must follow
• What are the impacts of proceeding with your appeal? Weigh the pros and cons
• Seek advice from an academic advisor or program manager to discuss the appeal and review your academic plan

You may appeal the finding, the remedy/sanction, or both. The grounds for submitting an appeal are limited to cases in which a student is able to establish:

• A breach of procedural fairness, which could include such things as failing to:
  • Permit a student to be heard by an unbiased decision-maker. An example would be that the instructor made a finding without seeking your response or the instructor was demonstrably biased against you
  • Follow applicable rules, regulations, or university policy in a way that adversely affected a student’s right to a fair process. An example could be that the instructor failed to provide you with an opportunity to respond to evidence they used in their decision
  • Make a reasonable decision. 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. A decision will not be overturned if it falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes. If the decision is “reasonable”, the decision-maker deciding the appeal is not permitted to substitute their opinion for that of the decision-maker whose decision is under appeal. An example of an unreasonable decision could be one that relies on unjustifiable conjecture rather than facts
• The decision-maker whose decision is being appealed acted without, or exceeded their, jurisdiction. An example could be that an instructor imposes a sanction which is only available to the School AI Lead, such as a requirement to withdraw.

You may appeal the decision and/or the sanction imposed by the instructor in writing to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel, within 10 business days of receiving the instructor’s decision. If the Smith Academic Integrity Panel or AI Lead made the initial decision, you may appeal in writing to the Smith Academic Appeals Committee, within 10 business days of receiving the decision.

The Smith Academic Appeals Committee’s decision is normally final. If, however, a student believes that there are grounds for an appeal on other than academic grounds, the student may initiate an appeal to the University Student Appeals Board (USAB), as described in the Senate's Policy on Student Appeals, Rights and Discipline.

The submission of an appeal to higher levels generally includes the following:

• A copy of the Notice of Investigation
• Any evidence supplied by the instructor or you during the investigation
• A copy of the Finding of Departure form that states the remedy or sanction decision
• An appeal form
• (Optional) a written appeal letter explaining the reasons for your appeal and the ground(s) for appeal
• Any additional supporting documents.

More information about higher levels of appeal will be provided in decision letters of the Academic Integrity Panel or Academic Appeals Committee.