Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

THE JOHNS HOPKINS
BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
OFFICE OF THE DEAN

Date Effective: May 9, 1983
Date Revised: April 6, 1993
Date Revised: March 31, 1998
Date Revised: January 21, 2006
Date Revised: October 26, 2006

POLICY AND PROCEDURE MEMORANDUM STUDENTS - 1

SUBJECT: Academic Ethics

Table of Contents:

POLICY.
PROCEDURE.
CONSTITUTION OF THE ACADEMIC ETHICS BOARD OF THE BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH.
PREAMBLE.
ARTICLE ONE. VIOLATIONS OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY.
ARTICLE TWO. DEFINITIONS.
ARTICLE THREE. RESPONSIBILITIES OF STUDENTS AND FACULTY.
ARTICLE FOUR. THE ACADEMIC ETHICS BOARD.
ARTICLE FIVE. PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING SUSPECTED VIOLATIONS OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY.
ARTICLE SIX. HEARING PANELS.
ARTICLE SEVEN. PENALTIES.
ARTICLE EIGHT. RECORDS.
ARTICLE NINE. BYLAWS AND AMENDMENTS.
HEARING PANEL PROCEDURES.
Selection of Hearing Panel and Presiding Official
Rights and Responsibilities of Individuals Before a Hearing
Joinder of Charges
Individuals Present at Hearing
Hearing Procedure
Recesses of the Panel
ACADEMIC ETHICS BOARD BYLAWS.

POLICY

The faculty and students of the Bloomberg School of Public Health have the joint responsibility for maintaining the academic integrity and guaranteeing the high standard of conduct of this institution.

An ethical code is based upon the support of both faculty and students who must accept the responsibility to live honorably and to take action when necessary to safeguard the academic integrity of this University.

Students enrolled in the Bloomberg School of Public Health assume an obligation to conduct themselves in a manner appropriate to The Johns Hopkins University’s mission as an institution of higher education. A student is obligated to refrain from acts which he or she knows, or under the circumstances has reason to know, impair the academic integrity of the University. Violations of academic integrity include, but are not limited to: cheating; plagiarism; knowingly furnishing false information to any agent of the University for inclusion in the academic record; violation of the rights and welfare of animal or human subjects in research; and misconduct as a member of either School or University committees or recognized groups or organizations.

PROCEDURE

All members of the Johns Hopkins community are responsible for immediately informing the Academic Ethics Board of the Bloomberg School of Public Health of any suspected violations of its Constitution. The Ethics Board, composed of six students and four faculty members, is responsible for implementing its Constitution according to the procedures set forth therein. This includes formal hearings of suspected violations. Students and faculty should become familiar with the Constitution, copies of which are provided in student and faculty publications and materials, posted on the website of the School, and can be obtained at the office of one of the deans responsible for student affairs.

Allegations of fraud in research by students will be handled and resolved according to the policies and procedures specified in Faculty PPM 7 - Fraud in Research. Penalties for students who are found responsible for engaging in fraud in research under Faculty PPM 7 may be selected from among the penalties specified in the Student Academic Ethics Code (Student PPM 1) as appropriate.

Allegations of violations of academic integrity by students in the School are covered under the policies and procedures contained in PPM for Students - 1 (Academic Ethics) and the School’s Academic Ethics Code.

Allegations of sexual harassment are covered by the University’s Sexual Harassment Prevention and Resolution Program for faculty, staff, and students. The University encourages individuals to report incidents of sexual harassment and provides a variety of avenues, both formal and informal, by which individuals can report complaints of sexual harassment. Allegations of sexual harassment by students are covered under the JHU program and under the Student Conduct Code.

Allegations of unsatisfactory performance or unacceptable behavior by faculty are covered by PPM Faculty - 8 (Procedure for Handling Allegations of Unsatisfactory Performance or Unacceptable Behavior), and allegations of fraud or misconduct during the conduct of research by faculty are covered by PPM Faculty - 7 (Fraud in Research).

Allegations of misconduct by staff are covered by policies and procedures established by the University Office of Human Resources as stated in the Personnel Policy Manual.

CONSTITUTION OF THE ACADEMIC ETHICS BOARD OF THE BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH

PREAMBLE

It is the joint responsibility of faculty and students of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health to maintain the academic integrity of the School in all respects. An ethical code must exist in the School community to guarantee high standards of conduct and to limit membership in the community to those persons able and willing to maintain these standards.

An ethical code is based upon the support of the academic community, students, and faculty alike, who must accept two kinds of responsibility: Each member must live honorably and must also take action when necessary to ensure that the community is not injured by misconduct.

The School has the responsibility to provide students with access to this Code. Electronic access on the School’s website or paper copies available in the School’s Office of Student Affairs are acceptable means of providing the code. The student has the responsibility to read the Code, become familiar with its provisions, and complete any required academic ethics training in the time frame specified by the School. Thus, all students will be presumed to have knowledge of the provisions of this code as a consequence of enrollment in the Bloomberg School of Public Health. Lack of familiarity with the provisions of this code will not serve as a defense to any violation of academic integrity as defined by the code.

ARTICLE ONE. VIOLATIONS OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

Students enrolled in the Bloomberg School of Public Health of The Johns Hopkins University assume an obligation to conduct themselves in a manner appropriate to the University’s mission as an institution of higher education. A student is obligated to refrain from acts which he or she knows, or under the circumstances has reason to know, impair the academic integrity of the University. Violations of academic integrity include, but are not limited to: cheating; plagiarism; knowingly furnishing false information to any agent of the University for inclusion in the academic record; violation of the rights and welfare of animal or human subjects in research; and misconduct as a member of either School or University committees or recognized groups or organizations.

ARTICLE TWO. DEFINITIONS

Section One.
Cheating is broadly defined as using or attempting to use someone else’s work or ideas in a context where you are expected to provide your own. Absent instruction by the faculty member in charge of the course to the contrary, examples of cheating include but are not limited to: (1) using or referring to notes, books, devices, or other sources of information during an academic evaluation; (2) copying another student’s answers on an academic evaluation or allowing another student to copy answers; (3) discussing a question or exercise during an academic evaluation; (4) acting as substitute for another person or using another person as a substitute during an academic evaluation; (5) failure to comply with the designated time limits for an academic evaluation; (6) submitting an academic evaluation for re-grading after changing the original responses; or (7) submitting the same work for different courses without instructor knowledge or approval.

Section Two.
Plagiarism is defined as taking for one’s own use the words, ideas, concepts or data of another without proper attribution. Plagiarism includes both direct use or paraphrasing of the words, thoughts, or concepts of another without proper attribution. Proper attribution includes: (1) use of quotation marks or single-spacing and indentation for words or phrases directly taken from another source, accompanied by proper reference to that source and (2) proper reference to any source from which ideas, concepts, or data are taken even if the exact words are not reproduced.

Section Three.
Academic evaluation is defined to include, without limitation, (1) in-class examinations whether or not in writing, (2) laboratory reports, (3) take-home examinations, (4) research or term papers, (5) exercises, or (6) any other assignment intended to evaluate a student’s performance in a course.

ARTICLE THREE. RESPONSIBILITIES OF STUDENTS AND FACULTY

Section One.
All members of the academic community are responsible for the academic integrity of the University. Students and faculty alike must work together to minimize the possibility of violations of academic integrity.

Section Two.
The faculty is responsible for the conduct of examinations, for announcing the ground rules for all work in a course at the beginning of the quarter in which the course is offered, and for the security of examination papers and teaching laboratories. Proctoring is at the discretion of the instructor.

Section Three.
A student with knowledge of any violation of academic integrity governed by this Constitution has an obligation to report such violation, including the identity of the alleged violator(s), to the appropriate faculty member, to one of the deans responsible for student affairs, or to the Board. A student may not make a formal charge directly to the Academic Ethics Board. Formal charges to the Academic Ethics Board must be brought by the appropriate faculty member or by one of the deans responsible for student affairs.

ARTICLE FOUR. THE ACADEMIC ETHICS BOARD

Section One.
The Academic Ethics Board consists of six students elected by the Student Assembly and four faculty members selected by the Dean and, under extraordinary circumstances, ad hoc members selected by the Dean in accordance with Article Six, Section Three. The terms of service of members of the Board shall be specified by the Dean. Every effort will be made to select students and faculty from diverse disciplines, departments, and, in the case of students, academic programs. One member of the Board shall be a full professor.

Section Two.
The Board shall elect a chairman from among its members, and shall select other officers and staff as provided in its Bylaws.

Section Three.
The Board is responsible for the maintenance of the academic integrity in the Bloomberg School of Public Health for all matters concerning adherence to the ethics code, including, but not limited to: (1) receiving reports of suspected violations, (2) consulting with members of the University community on ways to reduce possible violations, (3) appointing hearing panels, (4) maintaining confidential records, (5) orienting new students to the philosophy and terms of the ethics code, and (6) informing the community of its work.

Section Four.
The Board shall find and use effective means to inform faculty and students of its activities on an annual basis.

Section Five.
The Board shall submit to the office of one of the deans responsible for student affairs a written annual report which shall not identify by name the individuals involved in its proceedings. The Committee shall disseminate this report to the Dean, faculty, and the Student Assembly.

Section Six.
The Board shall adopt, with the advice of the University’s General Counsel, as part of its Bylaws, rules of procedure for hearings conducted by its hearing panels.

ARTICLE FIVE. PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING SUSPECTED VIOLATIONS OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

Section One.
When evidence is found of a possible violation of academic integrity on the part of a student enrolled in the School, the faculty member in charge of the course or activity may attempt to resolve the case directly with the student to their mutual satisfaction, before any other action is taken, including submission of a grade to the Registrar. Proposed resolutions shall include only those sanctions specifically enumerated in Article Seven, Section One parts (b) - (j). Prior to a proposed resolution, the faculty member in charge of the course has the responsibility to check with one of the deans responsible for student affairs to determine if the student was part of an earlier resolution with a member of the faculty, or if the student was previously charged with a violation of academic integrity to the Academic Ethics Board. If it is determined that the student was part of a previous direct resolution with a faculty member and the present allegation is unrelated to the earlier allegation, the faculty member will forward the case directly to the Academic Ethics Board. A second or subsequent allegation against a student may not be resolved directly between the faculty member and the student.

If both parties agree upon a proposed resolution in accordance with this code, no further action regarding the ethics violation in question shall be undertaken by the University or its faculty. If a case is resolved between the faculty member and the student to their mutual satisfaction, the faculty member must communicate the resolution to the student’s advisor, to the student’s academic program director or department chair, and to one of the deans responsible for student affairs. The faculty member and student may co-sign a memo or other document that the case was resolved to the mutual satisfaction of each party. This resolution will not be placed in the student’s permanent academic record unless that was part of the resolution.

A student who engages in a direct resolution forfeits the right to withdraw from the course in question, switch from a graded course to the pass/fail option, or petition for a grade change.

If either party is dissatisfied with a proposed resolution, the faculty member shall make a charge to the Academic Ethics Board communicating the essential facts of the case in writing to the Board. Such statements must be made within 30 days of the alleged violation of academic integrity, or within 30 days of reasonable knowledge. All statements at this level shall be considered confidential. Failure to either resolve a matter or make a charge within 30 days will preclude any subsequent charge for the same violation arising out of the same set of facts.

Section Two.
Upon receipt of a charge of a violation of academic integrity, one of the deans, acting on behalf of the Academic Ethics Board, shall serve prompt notice of the charge on the accused by hand delivery, electronic communication, or by certified mail, return receipt requested. The notice shall contain:

a description of the alleged violation(s) of academic integrity including insofar as possible the time, date, and place of the alleged act(s);
a statement informing the accused student of the right to inspect at a designated place on campus and in advance of the hearing any documentary evidence intended for use at the hearing as well as the chance to provide documentary evidence intended for use at the hearing;
a copy of the Constitution and Bylaws of the Academic Ethics Board.

Section Three.
Upon receipt of a charge of a violation of academic integrity from a faculty member, the Academic Ethics Board shall appoint a hearing panel to consider the charge. The panel shall decide the issue of guilt or innocence and, if the student is found guilty, and shall impose an appropriate penalty from those specified in Article Seven.

Section Four.
In the event of a violation of academic integrity in which it is inappropriate for any one faculty member to act as the accuser, a designee of the Dean or one of the deans responsible for student affairs shall act as the faculty member as that term is used in this Article.

Section Five.
A student found guilty may appeal the decision of the hearing panel to the Dean of the Bloomberg School of Public Health or to a designee of the Dean within 5 days of the decision of the hearing panel. The appeal must be in the form of a written statement setting forth the grounds for the appeal. All materials collected as part of the proceedings of the Academic Ethics Board hearing shall be provided to the Dean. A full written report of the disposition of each appeal shall be made by the Dean within 14 days to the Academic Ethics Board. The Dean shall base a decision to overrule a finding by the hearing panel upon a determination that some procedural impropriety has unacceptably tainted the hearing process. In the event that the Dean does overrule the finding of the Hearing Panel, a new Hearing Panel shall be convened and the alleged violation reexamined. The Dean shall not reverse a penalty imposed by the Academic Ethics Board, nor impose a different penalty. The Registrar shall be notified immediately of an appeal to the Dean. Transcripts are not to be furnished until resolution of the matter. The same principles of confidentiality and behavior of the accused, accuser, the Hearing Panel and the Board shall apply during the appeal process.

ARTICLE SIX. HEARING PANELS

Section One.
When required under the procedures of Article Five, the Academic Ethics Board shall appoint a hearing panel of disinterested persons from among its members to consider a case.

Section Two.
A hearing panel shall consist of five persons and a nonvoting, presiding officer, all ordinarily chosen from the members of the Board, the ratio of faculty and students on the panel being the same as on the Academic Ethics Board.

Section Three.
Under extraordinary circumstances the Dean may appoint ad hoc members to the Board from among full-time faculty or full-time students from the Bloomberg School of Public Health who are not members of the Board. Such a circumstance might occur if a panel could not be constituted in a timely manner from among the members of the Board, if the workload of the Board was unusually heavy, or if enough students and faculty were excused.

Section Four.
Hearings of the panel shall be open to the person bringing charges, the accused, any witness called by either party, and not more than one representative of the accused affiliated with the Bloomberg School of Public Health (faculty, staff, and students of the School) subject to University Policy which prohibits representation by legal counsel. Hearings shall be confidential and shall be closed to spectators and the press. In the case of multiple accusers or accused individuals, the Hearing Panel shall make a determination of the optimal methods to conduct the hearing consistent with this Code and its bylaws.

Section Five.
The accused shall be presumed innocent until found to be guilty.

Section Six.
The decision of the hearing panel of guilt or innocence shall be based upon a preponderance of the evidence and shall be communicated promptly in writing to the Dean of the Bloomberg School of Public Health, the accused, and the accuser. A finding of guilt shall also be communicated to the accused’s advisor and to the accused’s department chair or academic program head.

Section Seven.
At least four votes of guilty are required for conviction.

Section Eight.
Hearings shall be conducted in accordance with rules of procedure provided for in the Bylaws of the Academic Ethics Board.

Section Nine.
If an accused student fails to appear for a hearing after having been duly served with notice or withdraws from a hearing before its conclusion without the permission of the hearing panel, and if the hearing panel determines that such action has been willful, immediate suspension of the accused from the University may be imposed. Such a suspension shall continue until the hearing can be concluded with the student present.

ARTICLE SEVEN. PENALTIES

Section One.
An accused student found guilty may have, at the discretion of the Ethics Board, the following comment placed upon the academic transcript: ACADEMIC ETHICS CODE VIOLATION, DATE OF ETHICS BOARD MEETING. At least one of the following penalties will be imposed upon students found guilty of violations of academic integrity:

Retake of the academic evaluation involved.
Score of zero in the academic evaluation involved.
Failure in the course.
Failure in the course with a notation on the transcript that the grade was for a violation of academic integrity.
Failure in the course with suspension from the University for at least one term as specified in the academic calendar.
Suspension from the University for at least one term as specified in the academic calendar with a notation on the transcript that the cause was a violation of academic integrity.
Failure in the course with suspension from the University for at least one term as specified in the academic calendar and notation on the transcript that the grade was for a violation of academic integrity.
Exclusion from a dissertation or thesis of all data collected under conditions that constitute a violation of the rights and welfare of animal or human subjects.
Suspension from the University for at least one term as specified in the academic calendar.
Expulsion from the University with a notation on the transcript that the cause was a violation of academic integrity.

After the hearing is conducted and if a finding of guilt has been reached but before any penalty is imposed, the hearing panel shall determine by investigation of its confidential records whether the violator has been found guilty of any prior violations of the academic ethics code.

A hearing panel shall make every effort to select a penalty appropriate to the severity of the offense, and may take into consideration any mitigating or aggravating circumstances such as inappropriate contact by the accused with members of the Ethics Board during a Hearing brought to its attention, penalties previously imposed upon other students for similar violations, as well as any record or absence of prior misconduct.

Section Two.
A finding of guilt in the first academic ethics hearing for a student who has previously not engaged in a direct resolution of an academic ethics violation shall result in the penalties selected from among (a) thru (j).

A finding of guilt in the first academic ethics hearing held for a student who has previously engaged in a direct resolution of

an academic ethics violation shall result in the penalties selected from among (b) thru (j).

A finding of guilt in an academic ethics hearing for a student who had previously been found guilty in an earlier academic ethics hearing shall result in penalty (j), Expulsion from the University with a notation on the transcript that the cause was a violation of academic integrity.

Section Three.
A student found to be guilty of a violation of academic integrity in a course forfeits the right to withdraw from the course or to change a graded course to pass/fail, or to petition for a grade change, and any withdrawal from that course or change effected prior to the finding of guilty shall be voided.

ARTICLE EIGHT. RECORDS

Section One.
The Academic Ethics Board shall maintain among its confidential records a list of names of students found to be guilty of violations of academic integrity. It is this list that is consulted to determine whether an offense is a first offense or is a second or subsequent offense.

Section Two.
The confidential records of the Academic Ethics Board shall be held in a locked file in the Dean’s Office.

Section Three.
Access to the confidential records of the Academic Ethics Board shall be limited to the Dean of the Bloomberg School of Public Health, to the deans responsible for student affairs, and to members of the Board.

Section Four.
A case file concerning an accused student shall be retained for seven years after the student’s last enrollment as a graduate student and shall then be destroyed.

Section Five.
The Deans responsible for student affairs shall maintain a central file of direct settlements of allegations of academic ethics code violations. Records of direct settlements shall be retained for seven years after completion of the case and kept in a central location accessible only to the deans responsible for student affairs.

ARTICLE NINE. BYLAWS AND AMENDMENTS

Section One.
The Academic Ethics Board shall adopt Bylaws to govern its operation.

Section Two.
Amendments to this Constitution shall take effect when they are adopted in identical language by the Administration, the Faculty Senate, and the Student Assembly and approved by the Advisory Board of the School.

HEARING PANEL PROCEDURES

Selection of Hearing Panel and Presiding Official
A hearing panel shall be convened from among the members of the Academic Ethics Board by consensus from among its members. Members of the Academic Ethics Board shall be informed of the name of the accused and the accuser(s), and may disqualify themselves if for any reason they believe their ability to consider the charges in an impartial fashion will be affected. One faculty alternate and one student alternate shall be chosen in the same way. Any student or faculty member having the same departmental affiliation as either the accused or the accuser(s) is ineligible from participating on the hearing panel.

All members of the Academic Ethics Board are eligible to serve unless their relationship with accused or accuser(s) is such as to call into question their ability to make an objective decision of guilt or innocence. The presiding official of the hearing panel shall be a student member who is agreed upon by consensus by the members of the hearing panel and who is available to conduct a fair and impartial hearing.

The document “Procedural Conduct of an Academic Ethics Hearing” was developed as a guide for the presiding official, and to acquaint all parties involved as to the procedures that may be reasonably expected during a hearing. A copy may be obtained from one of the deans responsible for student affairs.

Rights and Responsibilities of Individuals Before a Hearing

Section One.
The accused shall be notified in writing of a charge of a violation of academic integrity as provided in Article Five, Section Two of the Ethics Board Constitution. Written notice shall be served on the student personally, sent electronically, or sent to the student at the address appearing on University records. The names of hearing panel members, of the presiding official, and of the alternate members of the panel shall be included in the letter of notification. The accused has the right to two peremptory challenges.

Section Two.
The accuser(s) and the accused shall deposit with the presiding official any documentary evidence to be used at the hearing before the times given in Section Three of this Article.

Section Three.
The accused and one person affiliated with the Bloomberg School of Public Health (faculty, staff, or student) chosen by the accused to be his representative subject to University Policy which prohibits representation by legal counsel, may inspect all documentary evidence and, if practicable, will be furnished with copies of the evidence. The accuser(s) may also inspect all documentary evidence provided by the accused. If the Bloomberg School of Public Health is in session, inspection shall be permitted at least two days, excluding weekends and brief vacations, before the hearing. If the Bloomberg School of Public Health is not in session, inspection shall be permitted at least one week before the hearing.

Section Four.
Security of the documentary evidence is to be maintained by the presiding official and originals may be inspected only in the presence of the presiding official. The evidence shall be deposited in the office of the Dean of the Bloomberg School of Public Health. One of the deans responsible for student affairs may act on behalf of the presiding official to assure that the accused and accuser(s) have the opportunity to review the documentary evidence.

Section Five.
The hearing panel members shall not be informed of details of the charge before the hearing is convened and shall scrupulously avoid discussing the pending hearing either with the parties concerned, possible witnesses, or any other persons. Panel members shall not discuss the merits of the charges with each other prior to entering into a determination of the charges.

Section Six.
The accused, the representative of the accused, and the accuser(s) may discuss procedures with the presiding official but may not approach members of the panel concerning any matter directly or indirectly related to the hearing, nor should any member of the hearing panel approach the accused or the accuser(s) for any matter directly or indirectly related to the hearing.

Section Seven.
The Dean shall designate a member of his or her staff in consultation with the Presiding officer to provide administrative support to the Hearing Panel and Board. This designee shall have no special interest in the case.

Joinder of Charges

Students charged with misconduct arising from a single incident or occurrence may have their hearings joined at the instance of the presiding official. Each student shall receive his or her verdict individually, even if multiple students are accused and are participants in a single hearing.

Charges of academic misconduct against a single student arising from two or more incidents or occurrences may be heard at one hearing at the instance of the presiding official. When such a joinder of charge is made, the hearing panel shall make separate findings of innocence or guilt as to each change and make separate determinations of penalties for each charge. With respect to the determination of penalty under Article Seven, Section Two, the charge which occurs latest in time shall be considered the second or subsequent finding of guilt.

Individuals Present at Hearing

Section One.
The presiding official, who shall act as a recorder, and members of the hearing panel shall be in attendance throughout the proceedings.

Section Two.
The accused and the accuser(s) shall be present throughout the accused’s plea, the presentation of evidence, and questioning. The person affiliated with the Bloomberg School of Public Health (faculty, staff, or student) chosen by the accused, subject to University Policy which prohibits representation by legal counsel, may, as determined by the accused, be present throughout the accused’s plea, the presentation of evidence, and questioning.

Section Three.
The accused and accuser(s) may call witnesses for the purposes of providing evidence or corroboration of evidence. Witnesses shall be present at the hearing only for the purpose of giving testimony and only during the duration of their testimony. After testifying, witnesses shall remain available and shall inform the presiding official of their whereabouts and how they may be reached. The responsibility for informing witnesses about the hearing rests with the accused and/or accuser(s). Witnesses must uphold the confidential nature of the hearing process.

Hearing Procedure

Section One.
Record. A full and complete record shall be made of the proceedings by a tape recording or other suitable device. The accused shall be furnished a copy of the tape recording at his or her request for the purpose of preparing an appeal. No record of the deliberations shall be made. The hearing panel may, however, prepare a brief written report detailing the reasons for the findings of guilt or innocence and for any penalty imposed. Such reports shall be used only to help establish uniformity of verdicts and penalties and shall be written so as not to divulge, directly or indirectly, the identity of individuals.

Section Two.
Plea. After calling the hearing to order and introducing the panel, the presiding official shall read the charge(s) and ask the accused to state whether he or she is guilty or innocent.

In the case of more than one charge heard by the panel at a single hearing, if the accused pleads guilty as to any of the charges, the presiding member shall excuse the accuser(s), accused, and the accused’s representative. The hearing panel shall then proceed directly to the determination of guilt or innocence for each charge on which a guilty plea has been entered.

For each charge in which the accused enters a plea of innocence, the hearing panel shall proceed with the presentation of the evidence.

Section Three.
Presentation of Evidence.

If the accused asserts his innocence, the accuser shall present testimony and evidence in support of the charges. After the testimony of each witness, the accused, the representatives of the accused, the members of the panel, and the presiding official may ask questions.
Following the conclusion of the accuser’s presentation, the accused and the representative of the accused may present testimony and evidence in support of his or her innocence. After the testimony of each witness, the accuser, the panel, and the presiding official may ask questions. Any evidence or testimony relevant to the charge(s) specified in the notice may be admitted into evidence and heard by the panel.
After the presentation of both sides of the case, any person in attendance other than witnesses may recall witnesses for further questioning.
At the conclusion of all the evidence and testimony, the accused and the accuser(s) shall have the opportunity of making a closing statement.
Following the closing statements, all individuals except the presiding official and members of the panel are excused. The accused and the accuser(s) shall remain available and shall inform the presiding official of their whereabouts and how they may be reached.

Section Four.
Determination of Guilt or Innocence. Each member of the panel will be asked to give a preliminary opinion concerning the guilt or innocence of the accused. The case will then be discussed by the panel until each member is ready to vote. In the course of the deliberations the panel may review the documentary evidence or listen to the recording of the hearing or to any parts of the hearing. A single secret ballot will be taken on each charge. Four guilty votes are required for conviction. The presiding official will count the ballots, maintain an orderly discussion, and answer questions of act and procedure, but will not express an opinion on the merits of the case or vote. The accused, the accused’s representative (at the election of the accused), and the accuser(s) will be asked to return and the verdict will be announced.

Section Five.
Determination of Penalty. If the accused pleads guilty or is found to be guilty, he or she and the student’s representative may present any mitigating circumstances to the panel. Corroborating witnesses of the mitigating circumstances may be called by the guilty party.

If the hearing panel deems it necessary, it may obtain additional testimony from the accuser(s) or the accused. In the course of the deliberations the panel may review the documentary evidence or listen to the recording of the hearing or to any parts of the hearing. After the presiding official and the panel members have no further questions, the accused and the accused’s representative will be excused; and the panel will discuss the possible penalties until a secret ballot results in a majority vote for a penalty. The presiding official may not vote or express an opinion. The accused will be recalled to the hearing and the penalty will be announced.

If the accused pleads guilty or is found to be guilty, one of the deans responsible for student academic affairs will communicate the finding and associated penalty to the student’s advisor to the student’s academic program head or department chair.

Recesses of the Panel
he presiding official may recess the hearing when it is deemed necessary. During a recess of the hearing no discussion of the case by panel members will be permitted.

ACADEMIC ETHICS BOARD BYLAWS

The tapes of hearings conducted under the Ethics Code shall be maintained for a period of seven years after completion of the case in the offices of the Dean. After seven years the tapes will be destroyed.
Documentary evidence introduced at hearings conducted under the Ethics Code shall be maintained for a period of seven years after completion of the case in the offices of the Dean. After seven years the documentary evidence will be destroyed.
The records of proceedings at hearings conducted under the Ethics Code shall be deemed confidential.
The presiding official of each case shall prepare a synopsis of the case. Such synopsis shall specify the nature of the charge, the course in which the alleged violation took place, the determination of the hearing panel and penalty imposed, and the outcome of any appeal. The identity of the accused and accuser shall not be divulged.
A breach of confidentiality of a case shall cause the removal of an Academic Ethics Board member by a majority of the Academic Ethics Board. A breach of confidentiality by an accuser or by a witness during a hearing panel or appeal is prohibited.
The Ethics Code Hearing Panel Procedures and Bylaws may be amended by the approval of three of the four faculty members and four of the six student members at a meeting of the Ethics Board for which notice has been given at least one week prior to the meeting. The wording of the proposed amendment shall be included with the notice of the meeting.
The Academic Ethics Board shall elect officers as needed. Officers shall be elected by a vote of three of the four faculty members and four of the six student members. The term of each office shall expire at the end of each academic year.
A member of a Hearing Panel or the Board can be removed at any time by a majority vote of a panel or Board.
Due to the changing membership of the Board over the years, the Dean shall maintain a summary of previous Academic Ethics Board cases.