No set of written guidelines can anticipate all types and degrees of violations of academic honesty. To the extent that the examples below are not exhaustive, duly appointed representatives of the University will judge each case according to its merits. They will be guided by the principle that academic dishonesty involves misappropriation of academic or intellectual credit to oneself or to the discredit of others. Instances of such dishonesty include:
Presenting the work of another person as one’s own work (including papers, words, ideas, information, computer code, data, evidence-organizing principles, or style of presentation of someone else taken from the Internet, books, periodicals or other sources). Plagiarism includes:
Giving or receiving unauthorized help before, during or after an examination. Examples include:
Submitting substantial portions of the same work for credit more than once, unless there is prior explicit consent of the instructor(s) to whom the material is being or has been submitted.
Collaboration on projects, papers, computer programs or other academic assignments that has been prohibited by the instructor.
Misrepresenting or fabricating material, including misleading citation of sources as well as falsified or fabricated data or results from experiments or other analyses. Misrepresenting facts related to academic performance, including the justification of absences, late assignments and other activities.
Imitating another person’s signature on academic documents (for example, an academic advising form or one’s own paper that is signed with respect to the time of submission) or other official documents that have an effect on academic credit (for example, a medical form submitted in support of taking a make-up examination).
Deliberately impairing, destroying, damaging or stealing another’s work or working material. Examples include destroying, stealing or damaging another’s laboratory experiment, computer program, term paper, examination or project; removing uncharged library materials with the effect that others cannot use them; defacing or damaging library materials with the effect that others cannot use them; hoarding or displacing materials within the library with the effect that others have undue difficulty using them; interfering with the operation of a computer system so it has an adverse effect on the academic performance of others.
Offering or receiving any service or article with the purpose or effect of receiving a grade or other academic benefit that was not earned on the merits of the academic work.
Each school of Binghamton University, including the Graduate School and the Division of Health and Physical Education, will implement the Student Academic Honesty Code and adjudicate all matters related thereto (except as noted below) through its own committee structure. All reports of findings of guilt (either by admission or by adjudication) will be reported to the Provost’s Office for archival purposes.
For cases involving graduate students in the five professional schools, initial implementation shall occur in those schools. For graduate cases in Harpur College of Arts and Sciences, initial implementation shall occur in the cognizant department or program. Any graduate programs temporarily residing in the Graduate School will report and adjudicate all cases through the Graduate Council’s Academic Standards Committee. At its discretion, the Academic Honesty Committee in any department or school may consult with the Graduate Council’s Academic Standards Committee about unusual or complicated cases. When an act of academic dishonesty violates the University’s policy on ethical research, the procedures outlined in the Policy on Responsible Conduct of Research, as found in the University Bulletin, apply.
Students will receive copies of the code during Orientation, when they will discuss its importance and its meaning. They will acknowledge the code and their intent to abide by its terms each semester when they log onto the registration system. Faculty will ensure enforcement of the code.
Violations of the code vary in severity, so that the appropriate punishments vary. Some violations (Category I) may be handled by the instructor and student(s) involved. However, violations requiring more severe penalties (Category II) are appropriately dealt with by the Academic Honesty Committee of the relevant school in accordance with procedures laid out in the Rules of Student Conduct. Category I violations are serious but may be dealt with by the instructor. Category II violations may result in letters of reprimand, probation, suspension or expulsion from the University. Behavior explicitly permitted in a course syllabus or explicitly permitted by the instructor for a specific assignment is not a violation of the code.
This may be either a Category I or Category II violation, depending on the amount of material that is plagiarized and the degree of premeditation. A Category I violation involves small amounts of plagiarized material — for example, a single passage or a relatively minor idea. Category II violations occur when more material is plagiarized or where central ideas are plagiarized. Category II violations may involve more planning and premeditation.
This may be either a Category I or Category II violation, depending on the level or amount of unauthorized help given or received on the examination and the degree of premeditation. Category I includes looking at another’s examination or collaborating on a small portion of the examination. Category II violations involve cheating on most or all of an entire examination — for example, providing a copy of an examination to another student or allowing another student to take an examination in one’s place. Category II violations may involve more planning and premeditation.
This is a Category I violation, unless it also involves Category II offenses.
This is a Category II violation.
Note that misconduct involving forgery, sabotage and bribery refers only to such offenses when committed for an academic purpose as defined in the Student Academic Honesty Code; any violations involving other aspects of student life or subject to federal, state and/or local law are dealt with through the University judicial system.
Each school should develop its own procedures, consistent with these guidelines. These procedures may vary, depending on the size of the school and other relevant factors. The appropriate procedures for addressing the two categories of violations are as follows.
If an instructor discovers one of these violations, the instructor should first communicate with the student regarding the nature of the charge and the evidence on which the instructor has relied in reaching the conclusion that a violation has occurred. The student should be given the opportunity to respond. If the instructor remains convinced by the preponderance of evidence that a violation has occurred, the instructor may check to see if there is a record of a previous violation by the student. Students who are accused of a second Category I offense will be treated as being charged with a Category II offense and referred to the committee of the school in which the offense occurred.
If there is no previous violation, the faculty member should impose the appropriate penalty. The instructor should then fill in a Report of Academic Dishonesty Form describing the violation that occurred and the evidence supporting that finding. The form will also explain to the student the procedures whereby the student may appeal the decision. The student will be asked to read and sign the form and will be provided with a copy. If the student chooses not to sign the form, the case goes to a hearing before the committee of the school in which the offense occurred. The instructor will then forward the Report of Academic Dishonesty Form along with the supporting evidence to the chair of the appropriate committee, who will send a copy to the Provost’s Office, where it will be kept on file. Records of Report of Academic Dishonesty forms should be retained until the student' s graduation, or for six years following the semester or term of the violation in the case of a student who departs from the University without graduating.
If an instructor discovers a Category II violation, the instructor should first communicate with the student regarding the nature of the charge and the evidence on which the instructor has relied in reaching the conclusion that a violation has occurred. If the instructor remains convinced that a Category II violation has occurred, he or she should submit a detailed written charge with supporting evidence to the honesty committee of the school in which the offense occurred. The student will be notified of the charge and the date of the hearing and will receive a copy of the committee procedures. The instructor should assign an Incomplete grade for the student’s work, pending the outcome of the hearing. If, after the hearing, the committee concludes that the charges were unproven, the faculty member should re-evaluate the student’s work in light of that finding. In determination of any penalty for Category II violations, committees will consider all relevant factors, including the nature of the violation and any previous violations that may have been committed by the student. The chair of the appropriate committee will report any guilty findings to the Provost’s Office, where they will be kept on file. Records of hearing cases should be retained for six years following the semester or term in which the hearing is held. If a hearing case is appealed, the six years would begin after the semester or term in which the appeal decision is made.
Note: This ends the section of the Bulletin and information applicable to Student Academic Honesty Code.
If a student has a complaint about a grade or other academic grievance, the first step is to talk to the instructor involved. If the matter is not settled satisfactorily, the student should contact the department chair or division director about the complaint and submit the complaint through the formal grievance procedure established by the department. The department decision may, if the student still feels aggrieved, be appealed to the appropriate dean.
Students should be aware that copyright laws cover photocopying and other reproductions of materials. Students should contact faculty members or library staff for information regarding these laws.
Any instructor may exclude from attendance any student who, in the instructor’s judgment, has seriously impaired the class’s ability to achieve the objectives of the course.
The student may appeal the instructor’s action to the department or school via the department’s grievance procedure. If the student is not satisfied with the ruling or recommendation emerging from the grievance hearings, an appeal may be brought to the appropriate dean.
Students are expected to attend all scheduled classes, laboratories and discussions. Instructors may establish their own attendance criteria for a course. They may establish both the number of absences permitted to receive credit for the course and the number of absences after which the final grade may be adjusted downward. In such cases it is expected that the instructor stipulate such requirements in the syllabus and that the syllabus be made available to students at or near the beginning of classes. In the absence of such statements, instructors have the right to deny a student the privilege of taking the final examination or of receiving credit for the course, or may prescribe other academic penalties if the student misses more than 25 percent of the total class sessions. Excessive tardiness may count as absence.
The Public Health Service and National Science Foundation require recipients of grants to develop policies on scientific misconduct and adopt procedures to both uncover acts of research fraud and examine allegations of misconduct in the conduct of research. On the advice of the Graduate Council and its Advisory Committee for Scholarship and Research, the University has adopted the following policies regarding the responsible conduct of research in all fields throughout the University.
Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification or plagiarism in proposing, conducting or reporting research and creative scholarly activity. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data.
The University has established a procedure to review reports of research misconduct. The principles associated with Binghamton’s policy and procedure are as follow:
The vice president for research (VPR) has primary responsibility for overseeing research integrity, and shall appoint a research integrity officer (RIO), who will be primarily responsible for the correct observance of the procedures set forth below. The RIO will normally be the operations manager of the Research Foundation at Binghamton.
Reports of misconduct shall be handled in a four-stage process:
3. Finding
4. Actions
1. Criminal Activities: If any criminal activities are discovered or claimed during inquiry or investigation, University Counsel shall be informed.
2. Federal-Sponsored Research: Federal agencies will be kept informed of all inquiries and investigations as required contractually. Specifically:
— an immediate health hazard;
— need to protect sponsor resources;
— need to protect human or animal subjects;
— need to protect person reporting misconduct.
1. Students who intend to contact private, voluntary or governmental agencies as part of their research in an academic project should first ask the faculty member who assigned the project to secure permission and cooperation from University and agency officials.
2. Students engaged in research, independent study, internships or other courses/projects involving human subjects must be made fully aware of their ethical, legal and moral responsibilities and their potential legal/financial liabilities when participating in such activities. Students planning research and/or course work involving human subjects should consult their faculty adviser for project design and methodology. The University’s Human Subjects Research Review Committee (HSRRC) reviews and must approve all research activities involving human subjects; HSRRC approval must be obtained prior to the initiation of the research. The Division of Research staff provides the appropriate review forms and guidance to initiate the human-subjects research review process.
3. Students planning research and/or coursework involving live vertebrate animals should consult their faculty adviser for project design and methodology. In addition, the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) must first review and approve such projects to ensure compliance with University, state and federal regulations regarding the humane care and treatment of vertebrate animals. For appropriate review forms and guidance, contact the coordinator for animal care at 607-777-6136.
4. Students planning projects involving the use of recombinant DNA molecules must consult with their faculty adviser for proper project protocol. The Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC) oversees all research on campus involving the use of recombinant DNA molecules in order to ensure compliance with both University and federal regulations. IBC approval must be obtained prior to the initiation of any research involving the use of recombinant DNA molecules. Further information and guidelines are available from the Division of Research at 607-777-6136.
5. Students planning research projects involving the use of radioactive materials must consult with their faculty adviser for proper project protocol. The Radioactive Safety Committee oversees all research on campus involving the use of radioactive materials. For further information, contact the radiation safety officer at 607-777-4370.
The following is a reproduction of section (213b) of the Education Law of New York State, concerning the illegal sale of term papers, theses or dissertations:
The Freedom of Information Law (New York State Public Officers Law, Article 6) provides rights of access to University records, except those that fall within one of the nine categories of deniable records [Public Officers Law § 87(2)].
Written application for examination and copying of accessible records must be made during regular business hours on an approved form, by written or electronic correspondence, addressed to the Records Access Officer, Office of University Counsel, 609 Couper Administration Building, or scarlett@binghamton.edu. Appeals of a denial of requested information may be taken within 10 days to Stacey Hengsterman, Office of the Vice Chancellor and Secretary of the University, State University of New York, State University Plaza, Albany, NY 12246.
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA), commonly known as the Buckley Amendment, provides students with access to their files and assures them of the confidentiality of their records. Undergraduates’ main academic files are kept in the University Registrar’s Office. Graduate records are kept in the Graduate School. The University is not required by legislation to make available to students files kept in the office of the New York State University Police, Binghamton; Binghamton University Counseling Center or the Student Health Center. Students with files in these offices should contact the appropriate office with any questions.
There is to be no oral or written release of personally identifiable information from any student’s educational record without the signed and dated consent of the student, except to:
Information printed in the University Directory and information routinely released to the public, such as Commencement listings, election results and rosters of athletic teams, is regarded as public or “directory information” and, as such, may be released without student consent.
The following information is defined as directory information and may be routinely released unless specified differently by the student:
Students should be aware that even though they may request and receive directory exclusion status, it is a federal requirement that the University promptly provide lenders and guarantee agencies with any information it has regarding the last known address, surname, employer and employer address of a borrower who attends or has attended the University.
Information that is not classified as directory information and may not be released to third parties without written consent of the student includes (but is not limited to) the following:
Third-party sources requesting to know a student’s course schedule for “emergency purposes” should be referred to the New York State University Police, Binghamton. University Police will attempt to ascertain the nature of the emergency and contact the student with the message.
Other information occasionally released in a routine manner to appropriate representatives of various media for publicity purposes includes:
Students with questions about their records or wishing to withhold their names from the University Directory should contact the Registrar’s Office at 607-777-6087.
In accordance with New York State Education Law 224-a, student absences may be excused as follows: