Emmanuel College is one of 140 local nonprofits to receive grants of $100,000 to $500,000 each through the Cummings Foundation’s $25 Million Grant Program.
Emmanuel College upholds the values and beliefs important to its founders, the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur, through it's mission of educating students in a dynamic learning community rooted in the liberal arts and sciences and shaped by strong ethical values and a Catholic academic tradition.
The College translates this mission into action through its commitment to rigorous intellectual inquiry and the pursuit of social justice in order to transform lives and make a better world. The Emmanuel College community encourages its members to share their knowledge, opinions, thoughts and experiences as this is an integral part of the educational process. An Emmanuel education develops individuals' capacities for critical thinking, ethical decision-making and contributing to the greater good. Our educational culture is characterized by values of academic integrity, ethics and trust.
Building and Sustaining a Community of Integrity and Trust
Academic integrity, ethics and trust are core values in the Emmanuel College community. These values should matter to all members of the community and should apply everywhere-in our classrooms, in the Library, in the Computer Labs, in the Student Center, in the dorms, in the cafeteria and in our offices.
An academic community where each member of that community upholds the values of academic integrity, ethics and trust is one in which faculty members, students, administrators and staff can achieve significant goals and make meaningful contributions. In such a community, people treat each other with respect and value the intellectual and real property of other individuals and of the community as a whole.
For specific assignments:
I pledge that I have upheld the Emmanuel College values of academic integrity, ethics and trust in this test/assignment.
Student signature and date
At the beginning of a course:
I pledge to uphold the Emmanuel College values of academic integrity, ethics and trust in the work I do for this course.
Faculty members will use the Community Pledge in their courses, but there are a number of ways this can be done. Faculty may elect the option that works best for their course(s).
In the event that a faculty member does not ask students to sign a Community Pledge, students are nonetheless responsible for work that is consistent with standards of academic integrity.
If a student does not sign the Community Pledge, the faculty member may initiate a conversation about not signing. The student may have omitted a signature in error, or the student may wish to talk with the faculty member about an academic integrity concern.
The Emmanuel College Academic Reporting System is to be used in all instances where an academic integrity infraction results in a lowered grade or failing grade for an assignment or for a course. The faculty member will complete and file an Academic Integrity Reporting Form (AIR Form) with the Academic Affairs office, which will share the form with the Registrar's Office, the student's advisor and the student.
The Reporting System: Role Responsibilities
The AIR Form is completed by the faculty member, in response to an academic integrity infraction, whenever a reduced or failing grade is given for an assignment or a course. The faculty member will complete and file an Academic Integrity Reporting Form (AIR Form) with the Academic Affairs office, which will share the form with the Registrar's Office, the student's advisor and the student. The faculty member keeps a copy and the student keeps a copy. The student signs and dates the AIR form to officially note their receipt of the form. The AIR Form, whenever possible, should be filed within two weeks of the infraction date.
In the case of online courses, the AIR form would be completed as an online form. Professors teaching face-to-face courses may also use online forms for some assignments that are turned in via EC Learn.
The Academic Review Board routinely reviews all AIR forms and designates the most serious cases for review by the standing Academic Integrity Board. The Academic Integrity Board, Academic Affairs Administration and/or the student, can ask to have the matter go to the Academic Integrity Board for a full hearing.
Dean or Academic Affairs Representative:
Convening the Academic Integrity Board:
When a Board hearing is to be held the student, the advisor and any professors or administrators with direct knowledge of the case are notified.
Responding to a student's dispute of an AIR Form:
If an AIR Form is filed, the student may dispute it by notifying the dean of his/her objection. The student has two weeks in which to file an objection after the AIR Form is submitted, unless it is filed during summer break or a vacation period. If the AIR form is filed over such a break in regular classes, a student has two weeks from the resumption or start of the next semester to file an objection. The academic dean or other Academic Affairs Administrative designee (in consultation with the faculty member, the Registrar, the Department Chair, etc.) will respond to the student within one week. If the student disputes the academic dean's response/conclusion, he/she has the right to a hearing by the Board. Within one week of receiving the dean's response to the student's objection, the student may initiate an AIB hearing by notifying the dean in writing to schedule a Board meeting.
The student receives a copy of any AIR Form being submitted by a faculty member. The student signs and dates the AIR form. Students have the right to dispute an AIR Form, either because they object to the finding of an academic integrity violation or because they challenge the severity of the consequence. The student has two weeks in which to file an objection after the AIR Form is submitted, unless it is filed during summer break or a vacation period. If the AIR form is filed over such a break in regular classes, a student has two weeks from the resumption or start of the next semester to file an objection. The student notifies the office of Academic Affairs of his or her objection. When the student receives a response from Academic Affairs, he/she has the right to ask for a hearing by the Board. This must be done within one week of receiving the academic dean's response to the student's objection.
If an Academic Integrity Board hearing is initiated by the office of Academic Affairs, the student and his/her advisor will be notified. Once the decision of the Board has been given to the student, he/she has the right to appeal to the Vice President of Academic Affairs. This must be done within one week of the student's receiving the Board's decision. The student, faculty, or administrator involved has the right to be present at any further discussion with the Vice President of Academic Affairs concerning the case. AIB members also are invited to be present at any formal discussion surrounding an appeal. There is no appeal after the Vice President of Academic Affairs has reviewed the case and issued his or her opinion.
Purpose: To act as the College's main body for determining outcomes after alleged acts of dishonesty within an academic setting.
The Academic Integrity Board will work with other committees on campus, including Academic Advising, the Mulvaney Leadership Institute and the Center of Campus Mission to educate the community on the standards of ethical practice in higher education.
a. To serve as the body responsible for education about the Community of Trust
b. To adjudicate all serious cases of Academic Integrity violations
c. To adjudicate all student appeals of their AIR (Academic Integrity Report) forms
d. To provide sanctions for any infractions of the Emmanuel College Community Code on Academic Integrity
e. To restore the Community of Trust after an academic violation has occurred
Membership:Committee is to be a standing committee, and members are to be established each year regardless of whether or not there are any pending hearings. The AIB meets regularly to oversee implementation of the Academic Integrity Policy and Honor Code on Campus. The AIB elects a chair. The AIB consists of at least five students (five undergraduates and up to three graduate students), three faculty members and appropriate dean or other designee from Academic Affairs. Faculty representatives will be elected by the Faculty and students chosen or elected via the SGA. Faculty will be chosen for two year terms and students will serve for two year terms unless they graduate before the end of their term. Students who graduate before their term ends will be replaced by a vote or appointment by the SGA. Both faculty and student members will be selected with an eye towards a wide representation of fields of study on campus.
In addition, five alternate student members and three alternate faculty members may be chosen. This allows for the replacement of a student or a faculty member in cases where there could be a conflict of interest or a perceived conflict of interest. This would also allow an alternate to serve if a regular member was unavailable. Alternates are not otherwise able to attend hearings, unless they are undergoing training.
The Graduate Student Advisory Board may also elect one to three members, if there is interest in serving among the student body. Nursing and Graduate Students only sit on cases that relate to Graduate and Professional Programs. For such cases, undergraduate student members of the board will be allowed to be present, but will not vote, during deliberations.
The appropriate dean or his or her designee presides over the Committee and votes only in the case of a tie. Representatives from Advising Staff and the College Registrar have no votes on the AIC.
At the Time of an Academic Hearing The Following Should be Present:
Academic Integrity Board Process
There are two ways that cases could come before the Board. The first would be when the student is brought before the Board because of the AIR report(s). A single AIR report may trigger a Board action, if the Academic Review Board, academic dean, or VPAA has significant concerns regarding the students' actions. The second would be when a student disagrees with a faculty member's decision and appeals to the Academic Review Board.
The process is as follows:
Academic Integrity Board Decisions
Bricault, D. 2007. Academic Dishonesty: Developing and Implementing Institutional Policy. Washington, DC: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers.
Gallant, T. 2008. Academic Integrity in the Twenty-First Century: A teaching and learning imperative. San Francisco, CA. Wiley.
McCabe, D. and L. Trevino and K. Butterfield. 2001. Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3): 219-232.
Appendix A: A Common Language
The Academic Integrity Committee proposes a set of definitions and examples to be presented to members of the community (including students and faculty) so that a common language can be developed for talking about academic integrity. Definitions and examples are adapted from those of the University of Pennsylvania and Penn State University.
Academic Dishonesty: Activities that have the effect or intention of interfering with education, pursuit of knowledge, or fair evaluation of a student's performance are prohibited. Examples of such activities include but are not limited to the following definitions:
A. Cheating: Using unauthorized assistance, material, or study aids in examinations or other academic work. Examples include crib sheets, using data from a cell phone, preprogramming a calculator, or using books or notes during a closed-book test, asking students who have already taken the test about questions and material on the test, or accessing unauthorized materials or people for papers and projects.
B. Copying on a test: Looking at the answers of another student, working together with another student to allow copying by one or both students, or discussing exam answers.
C. Changing exam answers: Changing incorrect answers when the test is returned and then asking for the test to be regraded.
D. Plagiarism: Using the ideas, data, or language of another source without specific or proper acknowledgment. Examples: copying another person's paper or problem solutions or computer work and submitting it for a class assignment, using phrases and ideas from a journal article or online source, using someone else's ideas without attribution, failing to use quotation marks and citations where appropriate, etc.
E. Tampering with Work: Changing one's own work or another student's work. Submitting contrived or altered information in any academic exercise or test. Examples: making up data for an experiment, fudging data, citing nonexistent articles, contriving sources, or altering another student's work.
F. Multiple submissions: Submitting, without prior permission, any work submitted to fulfill another academic requirement. Examples: Submitting the same paper twice, writing a second paper on a topic that you have already written on without properly referencing and citing the earlier paper as you would any other source material.
G. Misrepresentation of academic records: misrepresenting or tampering with or attempting to tamper with any portion of a student's transcripts or academic record, either before or after coming to Emmanuel College. Example: forging a change of grade slip, tampering with computer records, falsifying academic information on one's resume, etc.
H. Facilitating academic dishonesty: Knowingly helping or attempting to help another violate any provision of the Academic Integrity Policy. Examples: providing assistance to a student who is working on a "no outside help" take-home exam, permitting another student to copy exam answers.
I. Unfair advantage: Attempting to gain unauthorized advantage over fellow students in an academic exercise. Examples: gaining or providing unauthorized access to examination materials, obstructing or interfering with another student's efforts in an academic exercise, lying about a need for an extension for an exam or paper, continuing to write even when time is up during an exam, destroying or keeping library materials for one's own use, getting help on work which is meant to be an individual assignment.
* If a student is unsure whether his/her action(s) would constitute a violation of the Academic Integrity Policy, then it is that student's responsibility to consult with the instructor to clarify any ambiguities.
Emmanuel College is an educational community committed to academic integrity, ethics and trust. All members of this community share in the responsibility for building and sustaining a culture of high academic standards.
This Community Statement is intended to remind us that everyone is part of the effort to further enhance and sustain a culture of academic integrity, ethics and trust. It should appear on all College syllabi and could also be used in the Admissions process, during orientation, displayed in College buildings and recited at important ceremonial events on campus. "I willingly accept my role in this process" would be added to the Statement if it is recited or written out and signed.
In the event that a faculty member does not include the Community Statement on the syllabus, students are nonetheless responsible for work that is consistent with standards of academic integrity.