SBU students are expected to be engaged in preparation for professions with the highest standards. Each profession guides its members with both ethical responsibilities and disciplinary limits. To assure the validity of the learning experience, SBU establishes clear standards for student work.
In any presentation – creative, artistic, or research – each student’s ethical responsibility is to identify the conceptual sources of the work submitted. Failure to do so is dishonest and is the basis for a charge of cheating or plagiarism, which is subject to disciplinary action.
Cheating includes but is not necessarily limited to plagiarism explained below:
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to, failure to indicate the source with quotation marks or footnotes where appropriate if any of the following are reproduced in the work submitted by a student:
Initial review, decision, and action shall remain local and involve the instructor(s) or academic supervisor(s) directly involved with the course, assignment, or project. If appropriate, the instructor(s) or academic supervisor(s) may decide to consult with a third party from the faculty, the department/program head or associate head, or any member of the SBU staff. Instructors are free to discuss alleged violations informally with the student(s) alleged to be involved but should avoid revealing the identity of other students involved unless necessary. Suspected violations that would result in a penalty should be handled by the instructor(s) in direct communication with the student(s) involved within one (1) week of discovering the suspected infraction and before the imposition of a penalty.
After discussion with the student(s) involved and their response, the instructor(s) shall conclude, within one (1) week of discovery of the infraction and, based on available evidence, whether the suspected violation(s) occurred. Instructors are encouraged to consult with their department/program head about the nature of the alleged violations, the evidence to support or refute these violations, and the range of penalties under consideration. If the conclusion is that the suspected violation(s) did occur, the instructor(s) shall also choose an appropriate penalty.
The most severe penalty available at this level of review and action shall be a failure in the course or dismissal from a project. However, instructors may also recommend a more severe penalty to the student’s department/program head, who retains the option to impose more severe penalties (e.g., suspension or dismissal from the program) at this level. Elements to consider in making this decision include prior incidents of academic disciplinary action in a student’s record, available from the head of student affairs. The department/program head may discuss the issue with the student(s) and choose to convene a disciplinary hearing per the department/program procedures.
The student shall be notified immediately and in writing of this decision, its basis, and (when applicable) the penalty imposed. Depending on the penalty involved, this notification will come from the instructor and/or department/program head. Students whose penalty is a failure in the course in question will be informed that they are not allowed to drop the course. Students will also be informed at this time of their right to appeal.
The head of student affairs will maintain the central record of academic disciplinary violations and actions. If the head of student affairs is aware of information on prior incidents of academic disciplinary actions in the student’s record, they will communicate this information to the department/program head and provide the department/program head the opportunity to impose an appropriate sanction.
A second-level review of the initial decision may emanate from one or more of the following three sources: (1) appeal by the student(s) involved because the student deems the penalty inappropriate and/or believes that improper procedure has been followed, (2) recommendation by the instructor and the department chair that the student be permanently expelled from the University, (3) recommendation by the Head of Student Affairs for a review.
Where an appeal is made, or a second-level action appears warranted, the Admissions Office will determine what action should be taken. The Admissions Office may decide to deny the appeal or waive the opportunity for a second-level action, to remand the case to the department/program head for additional consideration, to order a new or different penalty, or to convene a Review Committee for further investigation of facts and/or determination of appropriate sanctions.
Students who want to appeal an academic disciplinary action must state in writing their intention to do so within one (1) week of the penalty date in question and then must present their appeal to the dean no later than two (2) weeks after said penalty date. Students who fail to meet these deadlines for filing a proper and timely appeal will forfeit or waive their right to appeal any academic disciplinary action. Appeals must be in writing and include appropriate documentation.
If the Admissions Office department determines that a second-level review is warranted and that a Review Board should be convened, the dean or his/her designee shall immediately form and convene a Review Board and designate a chair. The board will include faculty from the college of the student involved, a graduate student from the college, the dean of student affairs, and others deemed appropriate by the Admissions Office. If a student appeal and a review of a recommendation for second-level action occur simultaneously, both shall be considered by this Review Board simultaneously. Where appropriate, it is expected that the instructor(s) from the course/project involved (or appropriate representatives designated by the department) will be available for participation or at least for consultation. The chair of the board shall inform the student(s) involved, in writing, of this step.
Copies of this letter should go to:
The Review Board shall (a) review the facts of the incidents involved and (b) make a recommendation about second-level action to the provost or his/her designee. The Admissions Office shall then render a decision subject only to appeal to the president of the university.
Complaint: An expression of dissatisfaction about an academic or administrative issue that does not involve a violation of policy or law.
Grievance: An expression of dissatisfaction about an academic or administrative issue involving an alleged policy or law violation.
SBU recommends that the complainant first attempt to resolve the matter directly and informally with the student, faculty, or staff member. Many issues, problems, and concerns can be addressed and possibly resolved by an initial conversation with the affected members. SBU understands that due to the specific nature of the complaint, this approach may not always be possible, appropriate, or acceptable to the complainant. If the complainant chooses not to try to resolve the matter in this initial conversation or if the initial discussion does not result in a satisfactory resolution of the matter, the complainant can pursue a formal resolution process by filing a complaint or grievance.
A complaint or grievance should be initiated as soon as possible after the issue/concern/problem has occurred, but in no cases more than five (5) working days from the date of the occurrence of the incident.
The complainant must file a written complaint within five (5) working days of any incident. SBU will investigate the complaint and respond to the student within thirty (30) working days from the date the complaint is received.
The appeal process for the following student complaints:
For matters related to an alleged violation of any student issues listed above, the student must file a written appeal with the Admissions Office. If the Admissions Office resolves the matter to the student’s satisfaction, the complaint is closed. If the Admissions Office does not resolve the matter to the student’s satisfaction, the matter is referred to the president of SBU. If the president resolves the matter to the student’s satisfaction, the complaint is closed. If the president does not resolve the matter to the student’s satisfaction, the student may file a written request for a hearing by the Appeals Board. All parties involved in the complaint will be invited to provide written documentation to support their case.
The Appeals Board will evaluate whether to proceed with the student’s complaint. If the Appeals Board decides to hear the case, a hearing will be scheduled, and a final decision will be issued. The decision by the Appeals Board is final and cannot be appealed further at SBU. The complaint will be considered closed. If the Appeals Board decides not to hear the case, the decision of the president of SBU will stand, and the matter will be considered closed. The matter is regarded as a final resolution and cannot be appealed further at SBU.