1.1 Purpose of the Policy

The Academic Honesty/Malpractice Policy of Stonebridge University establishes a framework to promote and uphold the highest standards of academic integrity within the university community. This policy outlines the principles and expectations regarding academic honesty and provides a structured process for addressing academic misconduct. Stonebridge University is committed to ensuring a fair and transparent system for evaluating student work, maintaining academic credibility, and fostering a culture of honesty, trust, and respect.

1.2 Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to all students, faculty, and staff members engaged in academic activities at Stonebridge University. It covers academic work in all formats, including but not limited to online submissions, examinations, group projects, research papers, and any other scholarly activities. The policy also extends to interactions involving collaborative work and research activities within and outside the institution.

1.3 Core Principles of Academic Honesty

The principles of academic honesty include:

• Respect for Others’ Work: Acknowledging the contributions and ideas of others through appropriate citation and referencing.
• Originality and Authenticity: Ensuring all submitted work is original and reflects the student’s efforts.
• Transparency and Accountability: Being open and honest about the sources and methods employed in academic work.
• Fairness and Responsibility: Understanding academic dishonesty’s implications and adherence to university standards.

2.1 Academic Honesty

Academic honesty refers to adhering to ethical principles and values in academic activities. These include presenting original work, properly acknowledging the contributions of others, and avoiding deceptive practices.

2.2 Types of Academic Malpractice

Academic malpractice encompasses any behaviour or action that undermines the integrity of the academic process. It includes but is not limited to the following:

1. Plagiarism: Presenting someone else’s work, ideas, or words as one’s own without proper acknowledgement.
2. Collusion: Unauthorized collaboration with others to complete assignments or exams.
3. Fabrication: Making up data, results, or references in academic work.
4. Cheating: Using unauthorised materials, information, or devices during an exam or assignment.

2.3 Plagiarism

Plagiarism involves using someone else’s work, ideas, language, or data, without giving due credit. It may include copying text from books, websites, or other sources without citation, paraphrasing without acknowledgement, or presenting others’ research findings as one’s own.

2.4 Collusion

Collusion occurs when students work together on assignments or projects without permission. It also includes allowing others to copy one’s work or aiding others in committing academic dishonesty.

2.5 Fabrication

Fabrication involves inventing or falsifying data, results, or sources. This can include making up research data, fabricating citations, or falsely claiming to have conducted specific research.

2.6 Cheating

Cheating refers to using unauthorised aids, materials, or devices in exams, tests, or assignments. It includes looking at another student’s work, using notes or electronic devices without permission, and submitting the same work for multiple assignments without approval.

3.1 Student Responsibilities

Students are expected to:

• Submit original work and appropriately cite all sources used.
• Avoid engaging in or facilitating academic misconduct.
• Understand and comply with the Academic Honesty Policy and related university guidelines.
• Seek clarification from instructors if unsure about what constitutes academic misconduct.

3.2 Faculty and Staff Responsibilities

Faculty and staff are expected to:

• Clearly communicate the university’s academic honesty expectations to students.
• Provide guidance on proper citation and referencing practices.
• Monitor for signs of academic misconduct and take appropriate action when necessary.
• Report incidents of academic misconduct using the university’s established procedures.

3.3 Institutional Responsibilities

The institution is responsible for:

• Providing resources and training on academic integrity for students, faculty, and staff.
• Implementing technology tools to detect and prevent academic misconduct.
• Ensuring that policies are regularly reviewed and updated to reflect best practices.
• Offering support services, such as counselling and academic advising, to assist students in understanding and adhering to academic honesty expectations.

4.1 Educational Programs on Academic Integrity

Stonebridge University offers various educational programs to promote academic integrity, including workshops, seminars, and online resources. These programs focus on developing students’ understanding of plagiarism, proper citation, and the consequences of academic dishonesty.

4.2 Promoting a Culture of Academic Honesty

The university fosters a culture of academic honesty by integrating integrity principles into the curriculum and creating an environment where ethical behaviour is valued and encouraged.

4.3 Use of Technology and Plagiarism Detection Tools

Stonebridge University utilises plagiarism detection tools, such as Turnitin, to identify potential cases of academic misconduct. Faculty members are encouraged to use these tools when submitting and evaluating written assignments.

4.4 Mentoring and Support Systems

Mentoring and support systems are in place to assist students in navigating academic expectations. Faculty mentors guide academic writing, research practices, and ethical standards.

5.1 Reporting Academic Misconduct

Students, faculty, or any member of the university community who suspects an instance of academic misconduct is encouraged to report it to the designated academic integrity officer. Reports should be detailed and include relevant information, such as the nature of the misconduct, the parties involved, and any supporting evidence. Reports can be submitted through the following channels:

• Email Submission: Send a detailed report to the designated academic integrity officer’s email.
• Online Reporting Form: Fill out an anonymous or signed report through the university’s academic integrity online portal.
• In-Person Reporting: Scheduling an appointment with the academic integrity officer to discuss the issue confidentially.

All reports will be treated with the highest level of confidentiality, and the identity of the person making the report will not be disclosed without their consent unless required by law or university policy.

5.2 Initial Investigation

Upon receiving a report of academic misconduct, the academic integrity officer will initiate an initial investigation to determine whether sufficient evidence supports the claim. The investigation will typically include:

• Review of Submitted Work: Analysing the student’s work for evidence of plagiarism, unauthorised collaboration, or other forms of academic dishonesty.
• Consultation with Faculty: Discuss the case with the faculty member(s) involved to gather their perspective and insights.
• Collection of Evidence: Gathering additional information, such as examination scripts, digital footprints, or communication logs, that may help establish the context of the alleged misconduct.
• Interviews with Relevant Parties: Conduct confidential interviews with the student(s) involved and any witnesses to obtain a comprehensive view of the situation.

If the initial investigation finds that the evidence is insufficient to support the claim, the academic integrity officer will dismiss the case, and no further action will be taken. The case will proceed to the formal hearing if sufficient evidence is found.

5.3 Formal Hearing Process

A formal hearing will be convened to address cases of academic misconduct that cannot be resolved through the initial investigation. The formal hearing committee will typically consist of the following members:

• Committee Chairperson: An impartial faculty member appointed to oversee the hearing and ensure it is conducted fairly.
• Faculty Representatives: At least two faculty members from different academic departments were chosen to provide an objective perspective on the case.
• Student Representative: A student member of the university’s academic integrity board, chosen to represent the student body.
• Academic Integrity Officer: The individual presenting the evidence and outlining the allegations against the student(s).

The student(s) accused of misconduct will receive a written notice of the hearing at least seven days in advance, outlining the nature of the allegations and their right to present evidence, call witnesses, and be accompanied by an advisor or representative. During the hearing, the committee will:

• Review Evidence: Examine all evidence presented by the academic integrity officer and the accused student(s).
• Hear Testimonies: Listen to testimonies from the student(s) accused, witnesses, and any expert witnesses, if applicable.
• Deliberate and Decide: Deliberate in a closed session to determine whether the student(s) is/are responsible for the alleged misconduct.

The hearing committee’s decision will be communicated to the student(s) in writing within five days of the hearing. The decision will include the findings, any sanctions imposed, and information about the appeals process.

5.4 Determining Sanctions and Penalties

Sanctions for academic misconduct will vary based on the severity and nature of the offence, as well as any prior history of misconduct. The following factors will be considered when determining sanctions:

1. Nature of the Offense: The type of academic misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, collusion, cheating) and its impact on the academic community.
2. Intent: Whether the misconduct was intentional, accidental, or due to a misunderstanding of academic integrity standards.
3. Extent of Misconduct: The scale and scope of the misconduct, such as the amount of plagiarised content or the number of students involved.
4. History of Misconduct: Whether the student has any prior instances of academic misconduct on their record.

Sanctions may include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Warning or Reprimand: A formal written warning or reprimand for minor or first-time offences.
• Grade Penalty: Reduction of the grade for the assignment or exam or failing the course.
• Academic Probation: Placing the student on academic probation with specific conditions that must be met during probation.
• Suspension or Expulsion: Temporary suspension or permanent expulsion from the university for severe or repeated offences.
• Revocation of Degree or Certification: The university may revoke a previously awarded degree or certification in severe academic dishonesty, such as falsifying research data or credentials.

Stonebridge University is committed to providing comprehensive support for students involved in the academic misconduct process. This support is designed to help students understand the academic honesty policy, address the factors that may have contributed to the misconduct, and develop the skills needed to succeed academically and ethically.

8.1 Counselling and Academic Support

Students involved in academic misconduct cases may experience stress, anxiety, or confusion. To support their well-being and academic success, the university offers the following services:

• Academic Counselling: Students can access academic counselling services to receive guidance on academic expectations, study skills, and time management. Academic counsellors work with students to develop strategies for avoiding academic misconduct in the future.
• Personal Counselling: Students can seek personal counselling services to address any emotional or psychological challenges they may face. Personal counsellors provide a confidential space for students to discuss their concerns and receive support.
• Advising Sessions: Academic advisors are available to discuss the academic honesty policy and clarify university expectations. They can also help students understand the implications of academic misconduct and explore options for resolving the situation.

8.2 Additional Resources and Workshops

Stonebridge University offers a range of resources and workshops to help students develop a deeper understanding of academic integrity and ethical scholarship. These resources are designed to provide students with the tools and knowledge needed to conduct research, write assignments, and complete assessments with integrity.

• Workshops on Academic Integrity: Workshops cover proper citation and referencing, avoiding plagiarism, and understanding academic misconduct. These workshops are available to all students and recommended for those involved in academic misconduct cases.
• Online Resources: The university’s academic integrity website provides access to articles, tutorials, and guides on academic integrity. These resources include interactive tutorials on citation styles, paraphrasing, and the use of plagiarism detection tools.
• Mentoring Programs: Faculty mentors are available to provide one-on-one support to students who need additional guidance on academic writing and research practices. Mentoring programs benefit students new to the university or from different educational backgrounds.

8.3 Peer Support Programs

Peer support programs connect students with trained peer mentors who can offer guidance and encouragement during the academic misconduct process. Peer mentors are fellow students who strongly understand academic integrity principles and can provide insight into navigating the university’s academic environment.

• Peer Mentorship Program: The peer mentorship program pairs students with peer mentors who can provide support and advice on academic expectations and university policies. Mentors are available to answer questions, share resources, and help students develop positive study habits.
• Peer-Led Workshops and Study Groups: Peer mentors facilitate workshops and study groups focusing on academic integrity topics. These sessions provide a collaborative space for students to learn from their peers and share best practices.

Data collection and reporting are critical components of the Academic Honesty Policy. They ensure that the university has accurate records of academic misconduct cases and that these cases are handled consistently and fairly. The data collected also serves as the basis for evaluating the policy’s effectiveness and making continuous improvements.

9.1 Record Keeping

The university maintains detailed records of all academic misconduct cases, including the nature of the misconduct, the investigation process, and the outcomes. These records are kept confidential and are used to monitor trends, inform policy decisions, and support the university’s commitment to academic integrity.

• Confidentiality of Records: All records related to academic misconduct are confidential and accessible only to authorised personnel. The university ensures that documents are stored securely, and that access is restricted following data protection laws and university policies.
• Retention of Records: Records of academic misconduct cases are retained for a specified period, typically five years from the resolution date, unless otherwise required by law or university policy. Records may be retained longer in severe cases that result in suspension or expulsion.

9.2 Annual Review and Reporting

The university conducts an annual review of academic misconduct cases to identify patterns and trends, evaluate the effectiveness of the Academic Honesty Policy, and implement changes as needed.

• Annual Report on Academic Integrity: The academic integrity officer prepares an annual report on academic integrity that is shared with the university’s executive leadership. The report includes data on the number of cases, types of misconduct, sanctions imposed, and appeal outcomes.
• Review of Policy and Procedures: The annual review includes assessing the policy and procedures to ensure they remain relevant and practical. Recommendations for changes or updates to the policy are submitted to the academic senate for approval.

9.3 Continuous Improvement and Policy Updates

Continuous improvement is a critical component of Stonebridge University’s approach to academic integrity. The university is committed to regularly reviewing and updating the Academic Honesty Policy to reflect best practices, address emerging challenges, and enhance the overall academic environment.

• Stakeholder Feedback: To inform policy updates, input from students, faculty, and staff is gathered through surveys, focus groups, and consultations. Feedback is used to identify areas for improvement and develop new initiatives that promote academic integrity.
• Integration of Best Practices: The university monitors developments in academic integrity and incorporates best practices from other institutions and professional organizations. Policy updates are based on research, case studies, and expert recommendations.
• Policy Revision Cycle: The Academic Honesty Policy is reviewed and revised on a three-year cycle, or more frequently, if necessary, to ensure alignment with the university’s mission and goals.

The Academic Honesty or Malpractice Policy at Stonebridge University is designed to uphold the highest academic integrity standards and foster a learning environment that values honesty, trust, and responsibility. By adhering to this policy, students, faculty, and staff contribute to the university’s academic excellence and ethical scholarship mission. In this procedure at Stonebridge University serves as a comprehensive guide to maintaining academic integrity and addressing academic misconduct. By establishing clear expectations, providing support and resources, and implementing fair procedures for handling misconduct, the university ensures that all academic community members are held to the highest standards of honesty and ethical behaviour. During the primary time, Stonebridge University was committed to fostering a culture of integrity, where students, faculty, and staff worked together to promote academic excellence and uphold the values that defined the university. Through ongoing education, support, and policy review, the university will continue to provide an environment that encourages ethical scholarship and prepares students to succeed in their academic and professional endeavours.

This document outlines the principles, procedures, and support systems in place to address academic misconduct and to promote a culture of integrity. Stonebridge University will continue to review and update this policy regularly to ensure that it meets the needs of the academic community and reflects the evolving landscape of higher education.

The university is committed to providing the resources, support, and guidance needed to help students succeed academically and to make ethical choices throughout their academic journey.

10.1. How to Report Honesty/Malpractice

Incidents of malpractice and maladministration may be reported in the following ways:

Members of staff employed by Stonebridge University may use one of the methods above or, alternatively, should speak in confidence to the Director of Quality, Training, and Development.

All reports of honesty or malpractice will be treated with the strictest confidence. Reports made anonymously will be treated with the same seriousness as all others.

1. International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI). (2014). Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity. Retrieved from ICAI Website.
2. McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in Academic Institutions: A Decade of Research. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 219-232.
3. Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). (2018). Accreditation and Academic Integrity: Guidelines for Institutions. Retrieved from CHEA Website.
4. Quality Assurance Agency (QAA). (2020). Guidance on Academic Integrity. Retrieved from QAA Website.
5. Eaton, S. E. (2021). Academic Integrity in Online Learning: Challenges and Opportunities. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 17(1), 1-12.
6. U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Enhancing Academic Integrity: Strategies and Policies for Higher Education. Retrieved from U.S. Department of Education.
7. Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., Wallace, M., Walker, R., James, C., Green, M., & East, J. (2011). Academic Integrity Standards: A Preliminary Analysis of the Academic Integrity Policies at Australian Universities. Journal of Academic Ethics, 9(2), 187-197.
8. University of Oxford. (2019). Academic Integrity Policy and Procedures. Retrieved from Oxford University Website.
9. Turnitin. (2020). Preventing Plagiarism: Best Practices for Educators. Retrieved from Turnitin Website.
10. Bretag, T. (2013). Challenges in Addressing Plagiarism in Higher Education. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 9(1), 3-18.
11. Australian Government Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). (2017). Good Practice Note: Addressing Contract Cheating to Safeguard Academic Integrity. Retrieved from TEQSA Website.
12. Quality Matters. (2018). Ensuring Academic Integrity in Online Courses. Retrieved from Quality Matters Website.
13. Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., Wallace, M., Walker, R., East, J., Green, M., & James, C. (2014). Institutional Practices to Address Contract Cheating in Australia. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(5), 669-684.
14. University of California, Berkeley. (2018). Academic Honesty and Student Conduct Policies. Retrieved from Berkeley University Website.
15. European Network for Academic Integrity (ENAI). (2020). Toolkit for Academic Integrity. Retrieved from ENAI Website.
16. McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2012). Cheating in College: Why Students Do It and What Educators Can Do about It. Johns Hopkins University Press.
17. University of Toronto. (2017). Academic Integrity Handbook. Retrieved from University of Toronto Website.
18. Bretag, T., & Mahmud, S. (2016). Student Plagiarism and Academic Integrity in Higher Education. In T. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp. 123-139). Springer.
19. Whitley, B. E., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2002). Academic Dishonesty: An Educator’s Guide. Psychology Press.
20. International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI). (2020). Creating a Culture of Academic Integrity: A Resource Guide. Retrieved from ICAI Website.
21. Texas A&M University. (2019). Academic Integrity: Policies and Procedures. Retrieved from Texas A&M Website.
22. Centre for Academic Integrity Research (CAIR). (2018). Addressing Contract Cheating: Strategies for Educators. Retrieved from CAIR Website.
23. Khan, Z., & Abdullah, M. (2019). Promoting Academic Honesty in Higher Education: A Framework for Academic Integrity Policies. Journal of Educational Research, 22(4), 189-200.
24. Association for the Assessment of Learning in Higher Education (AALHE). (2021). Assessment Strategies for Maintaining Academic Integrity. Retrieved from AALHE Website.
25. World Conference on Research Integrity (WCRI). (2019). Singapore Statement on Research Integrity. Retrieved from WCRI Website.

Appendix A: Examples of Academic Misconduct Cases

• Case 1: Plagiarism in Research Papers
  A student submitted a research paper that contained several paragraphs copied directly from an online source without citation. The case was investigated, and it was determined that the student did not intentionally plagiarise but did not understand proper citation practices. The student received a grade penalty and was required to attend a workshop on academic writing and citation.
• Case 2: Unauthorized Collaboration on Assignments
  Two students submitted identical assignments for a group project meant to be completed individually. An investigation revealed that the students had worked together without the instructor’s permission. Both students received a warning and a grade penalty for the assignment.
• Case 3: Cheating on an Exam
  A student was caught using a smartphone to access notes during an online exam. The student admitted to the violation and explained that they were unprepared for the exam. The student was placed on academic probation and required to complete an academic integrity workshop.

Appendix B: Templates and Forms for Reporting Misconduct

• Template 1: Academic Misconduct Reporting Form
  Includes fields for the reporter’s name, contact information, nature of the misconduct, date and time of the incident, description of the incident, and any supporting evidence.
• Template 2: Student Response Form
  Provides a structured format for students to respond to allegations of academic misconduct, including their perspective on the incident and any mitigating factors they would like to be considered.
• Template 3: Appeals Form
  Allows students to formally submit an appeal, including the grounds for the appeal, supporting documentation, and the desired outcome.

Appendix C: Student and Faculty Guidelines for Academic Integrity

• Guidelines for Students:
  Understand and follow the university’s academic honesty policy.
  Attend workshops and seminars on academic integrity.
  Use plagiarism detection tools to check your work before submission.
  Seek guidance from instructors and advisors if unsure about proper citation practices.
• Guidelines for Faculty:
  Communicate expectations for academic integrity to students.
  Use plagiarism detection tools and other technologies to monitor student submissions.
  Report suspected cases of academic misconduct using the university’s reporting procedures.
  Provide support and resources to help students develop academic integrity skills.

• Academic Dishonesty: Any action that violates the principles of academic integrity, including plagiarism, cheating, fabrication, and collusion.
• Academic Integrity: Adherence to ethical principles and standards in academic activities, including honesty, trust, fairness, and responsibility.
• Appeal: The process by which a student challenges a decision made regarding academic misconduct.
• Collusion: Unauthorized collaboration between students on an assignment or exam.
• Fabrication: Making up data, results, or citations in an academic work.
• Plagiarism: Using someone else’s work, ideas, or words without proper acknowledgement.
• Probation: A period during which a student must meet certain conditions to continue their academic status at the university.