The responsibility for preventing and detecting academic misconduct in an examination lies with the invigilators, although they may make use of reports from others to assist them in detection. In cases of suspected impersonation, the chief invigilator shall require the student concerned to remain after the examination until the student is satisfactorily identified. In other cases of suspected academic misconduct, the chief invigilator shall allow the student to complete the examination, but may take action by either:

• requesting that the student complete the examination in another location or setting when it is deemed that such action will cause the least disruption to those taking the examination; or

• confiscating the suspect material and requesting that the student make contact with the instructor once the examination period is over.

In any case, the chief invigilator shall give a full report, together with any confiscated material, to the instructor-in-charge of the course if the instructor is not the chief invigilator. In instances of open learning courses, the material will be submitted to the Director of Open Learning. This documentation is used in consultation with the chair/director when preparing a formal complaint.

The responsibility for detecting academic misconduct on term assignments, etc., lies with the person responsible for evaluation and discussion of the student's work (marker), although that person may make use of reports from others to assist in detection. Where academic misconduct is suspected, the marker:

• shall retain possession of suspect material; and

• may seek to interview the student to allay suspicion or to confirm it.

In any case, the marker shall give a full report in writing together with any confiscated material to the instructor-in-charge of the course, or to the advisor of the student's work, if the instructor/advisor is not the marker. This documentation is used in consultation with the chair/director when preparing a formal complaint.

The responsibility for detecting academic misconduct in the context of an academic environment that is not part of the formal examination or assignment process must rest with the entire university community. Where academic misconduct is suspected, but where it is unclear whether it is directly related to a specific course, or where the specific course is unknown, those with knowledge of an offence should attempt to contact either the chair of the student's department, the student's program counsellor, or the student's college dean. If the suspected offence appears to be related to a specific course, then the instructor of the course should be contacted

Where there is evidence of suspected academic misconduct associated with a specific course, the instructor-in-charge of the course should consult with the chair/director (Associate Director at the College) to help determine whether the offence and the associated evidence/documentation merit a formal complaint. At this stage, the student is likely to be interviewed, but there is no obligation to do so.

When it is determined that a formal complaint is appropriate, the chair/director (Associate Director at the College) shall make the complaint in writing to the dean of the college offering the course. The complaint shall include copies of all relevant material including a description of the method of evaluation as described in the course outline. A copy of the complaint shall be forwarded to Undergraduate Program Services. The dean of the college offering the course will take the initiative in determining whether to proceed with a complaint.

The complaint shall refer to how the offence is or is not directly related to the assessment format (for example, "plagiarism on the 50 percent term assignment"). If the formal complaint involves a final examination or final assignment, the grade submission for the student shall be delayed. In those cases where the suspected misconduct is not directly related to a specific course, the complaint may be made directly to the dean of the student's college.

The responsibility in all cases for deciding whether to process the formal complaint, deem a student guilty or not, and for determining any penalty, lies jointly with the dean (or Director at the College) of the college offering the course and with the dean (or Director at the College) of the student's college (or the Director of Open Learning, where appropriate), acting in consultation with the Provost and Vice-President (Academic), and where appropriate, the Dean of Graduate Studies. Either dean concerned may seek further information concerning any reported incident from the instructor or from any other person involved.

Should the dean(s) (or Director at the College) decide that the evidence/documentation or the offence does not merit any further action on behalf of the formal complaint, the dean(s) (or Director at the College) will return the formal complaint to its source and indicate the reasons for the return. A formal complaint not processed as an accusation of academic misconduct by the dean(s) (or Director at the College) has no official status as an accusation and no record of the complaint shall be maintained.

Once the decision is made to process the formal complaint as an accusation of academic misconduct, the dean of the college offering the course shall interview the student, unless the student is unavailable or unwilling.

The dean(s) (or Director at the College) may, after the appropriate inquiry and a guilty verdict, impose one or more of the penalties previously listed. The dean of the college offering the course shall contact Undergraduate Program Services, or the Dean of Graduate Studies, to ascertain if any record of previous academic offences exist.

The penalty is assessed by the dean(s) concerned (acting jointly) in consultation with the Provost and Vice-President (Academic), and where appropriate, the Dean of Graduate Studies.

If the student is deemed not guilty by the dean(s) (or Director at the College), no penalties will be assessed, no record of the suspected offence or formal complaint will be kept, and all parties will be informed of the final decision by the dean(s).

A student charged with academic misconduct in a particular course or courses will not be allowed to drop the course(s) in question during the period of the investigation. If the student is found to be innocent of the charge, or in the event the student is found guilty of academic misconduct and the penalty selected is an official warning, the student may drop the course(s) (subject to normal deadlines for dropping courses). If the student is found guilty of academic misconduct and is assessed a penalty other than an official warning, the student will not be allowed to drop the course(s).

1. Cases where Expulsion is not recommended - the dean or director of the college offering the course (or the Director of Open Learning in the case of Open Learning Program Students) shall inform the student in writing whether he/she has been found guilty, what penalty if any has been assessed, the effective date(s) of the penalty, and of his/her right to appeal.

   The dean or director shall also notify the instructor, the instructor's chair, Undergraduate Program Services, the dean of the student's college, the Dean of Graduate Studies, and the Provost and Vice-President (Academic).

   The penalty assessed shall stand unless the student appeals within 15 calendar days of notification.

   The student may appeal against the dean's or director's finding of guilt or the assessed penalty. The appeal procedure is described in the Regulations of the Senate Committee on Student Petitions.

2. Cases where Expulsion is recommended - the dean or director of the college offering the course (or the Director of Open Learning in the case of Open Learning Program Students) shall inform the student in writing and forward the matter to the Senate Committee on Student Petitions for disposition.

   At that time the student may request a hearing of the Senate Committee on Student Petitions.

   Whether or not a hearing is requested, the Senate Committee on Student Petitions will proceed with the case and inform the parties involved of its decision. The Senate Committee on Student Petitions may decide to uphold the recommendation to expel, in which case the recommendation will be forwarded to the President for final decision. Alternatively, the Senate Committee on Student Petitions may decide to impose a lesser penalty, in which case the President's assent is not required. When a recommendation is referred to the President, the President may: uphold the recommendation to expel, impose a lesser penalty, or refer the case back to the Senate Committee on Student Petitions for consideration of a lesser penalty.

3. Cases where Revocation/Rescinding of a degree is recommended - the dean of the student's (or former student's) college or the Director of Open Learning shall inform the student (or former student) in writing and forward the matter to the Senate Committee on Student Petitions for disposition.

   At that time, the student (or former student) may request a hearing of the Senate Committee on Student Petitions.

   Whether or not a hearing is requested, the Senate Committee on Student Petitions will proceed with the case and inform the parties involved of its decision. If the Committee confirms the recommendation of rescinding/revocation of a degree, the recommendation will be be forwarded to the President. If the President does not confirm the recommendation of rescinding/revocation of a degree, the President may impose a lesser penalty which will be final. If the President confirms the recommendation, the recommendation will be forwarded to the Senate for final decision with respect to revocation/rescinding. If the Senate does not confirm the recommendation of revocation/rescinding, the matter will be returned to the President for a final decision with respect to a lesser penalty.

If a student is charged with academic misconduct resulting in the dean's (or Director at the College) assignment of a penalty that consists of the loss of marks only, the student has the right to appeal first to the dean or director of his or her college. This right need not be exercised, and the student may appeal such a penalty directly to the Senate Committee on Student Petitions.

If a mark only appeal is not submitted to the dean or director within 15 calendar days of receipt of the notification, the mark penalty as assessed shall stand unless it is appealed directly to the Senate Committee on Student Petitions and changed as a result of such an appeal.

If the student is charged with academic misconduct, the student may submit a petition to the Senate Committee on Student Petitions. When there is no appeal of a mark penalty made to the dean or director, or when the penalties go beyond mark penalties, then the submission of a petition is to be made within 15 calendar days of the receipt of the initial penalty assessment. In the case of a mark only penalty, this petition may be made within 15 calendar days of receipt of an appeal decision by the dean or director. At the time of submitting the petition, the student may request a hearing for the next scheduled meeting of the Senate Committee on Student Petitions.

A review by the Senate Committee on Student Petitions involves an examination of all relevant documents to determine the appropriateness of a dean's or director's finding of guilt or of the assessed penalty. In the case where a petition is received after the 15 day limit and a mark penalty is the only penalty assigned, the committee will seek to determine whether the penalty was first appealed to the dean. The procedures for conducting a review and for holding a hearing are set out in the Regulations of the Senate Committee on Student Petitions.

Following a review or hearing, the Senate Committee on Student Petitions may take one or more of the following courses of action:

1. confirm a finding of guilt

2. reverse a finding of guilt (in which case no penalty shall apply)

3. confirm a penalty

4. assess a different penalty