Rackham Graduate School

• Home »
• Policies »
• Academic and Professional Integrity

Investigating Allegations of Academic and Professional Misconduct by Graduate Students

Approved by the Rackham Executive Board March 7, 2001

Contents

1. Procedures for Reporting and Investigating Allegations of Academic and Professional Misconduct by Graduate Students
   1. Basic Guidelines for Handling Allegations of Academic and Professional Misconduct
      1. To Whom These Procedures Apply
      2. Timeliness and Confidentiality
      3. Deciding Which Procedures to Use
      4. Reporting Allegations
   2. Procedures for Reporting and Investigating Allegations of Academic or Professional Misconduct in the Academic Units
   3. Procedures for Reporting and Investigating Allegations of Academic or Professional Misconduct in the Rackham Graduate School
      1. Choosing the Appropriate Venue for Review
      2. Rights of Graduate Students Charged with Academic or Professionally Relevant Misconduct
      3. Function of Rackham Integrity Boards
      4. Composition of Rackham Integrity Boards
      5. Guidelines for Rackham Integrity Board Hearings
      6. Reports of Findings and Recommendations
      7. Final Decisions
      8. Appeals
      9. Case File Maintenance
      10. Deadline Extensions
2. Addendum A. Guidelines for Issuing Sanctions

This policy statement has been written to affirm and clarify the general obligation of all Rackham students to maintain high standards of academic and professional integrity. It defines some of the serious offenses of academic misconduct and outlines, in general terms, the standards to which Rackham students are held relative to professional conduct.

I. Procedures for Reporting and Investigating Allegations of Academic and Professional Misconduct by Graduate Students

A. Basic Guidelines for Handling Allegations of Academic and Professional Misconduct

1. To Whom These Procedures Apply

These procedures are applicable anytime a person in any of the following categories is accused of misconduct: currently enrolled in a Rackham program, previously enrolled in a Rackham program, currently enrolled in a Rackham course, previously enrolled in a Rackham course, or completed a degree from a Rackham program. In addition, this policy shall remain applicable to formerly enrolled students with respect to incidents that occurred when the person was a student.

Rackham is also willing to make these procedures available to academic units in the University that administer graduate programs outside the Rackham Graduate School. Such programs may make standing arrangements for all such charges to be handled through Rackham’s procedures, or may request use of the Rackham procedures on a case-by-case basis.

2. Timeliness and Confidentiality

Every effort will be made to proceed through each step of the grievance procedure and the process as a whole in a timely fashion. If the procedure must take place during the spring and/or summer months, this time frame may need to be extended, at the discretion of the Rackham Resolution Officer. Great care will be taken to handle allegations of misconduct confidentially, providing information only to those with a need to know consistent with their official responsibilities.

3. Deciding Which Procedures to Use

For any given case of alleged misconduct, more than one University procedure for handling such allegations may be applicable. Should the question arise as to which set of procedures is most appropriate, the University shall decide, in consultation with the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel and appropriate University faculty and staff. Any academic unit at the University may develop procedures for formally investigating cases of academic misconduct that appear to be serious in nature. To ensure that such procedures incorporate due process and follow certain guidelines, they should be developed with appropriate guidance such as that available from the Rackham Resolution Officer and in consultation with the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel.

4. Reporting Allegations

Members of the University community as well as persons outside the University may report allegations of academic or professional misconduct by graduate students by contacting the Rackham Resolution Officer. Regardless of their source, allegations should be submitted in writing, whether by the source of the allegations or a third party, as soon as possible after the discovery of the alleged misconduct.

Likewise, any administrative or judicial body within the University that receives allegations of misconduct covered by this policy should bring them to the attention of the Rackham Resolution Officer. If the alleged misconduct occurred within a laboratory, library, computer facility, or other research unit, the head of the unit should notify the Rackham Resolution Officer, who will consult with the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel to determine which procedures will be used.

B. Procedures for Reporting and Investigating Allegations of Academic or Professional Misconduct in the Academic Units

With respect to maintaining high standards of conduct, it is important for students to feel accountable first and foremost to the faculty members from whom they take classes and under whom they do research. It is equally important for those faculty members to monitor student behavior in this regard and to take action if they observe alleged misconduct. Therefore, the position of the Rackham Graduate School is that misconduct allegations should be handled at the unit level wherever appropriate, particularly in instances of alleged misconduct for which informal intervention is likely to be sufficient.

Any such faculty member, however, may face a conflict of interest between his or her commitment to upholding high standards of integrity and his or her desire to have the student succeed. For this reason, in all cases of alleged misconduct the faculty member must consult with his or her department chair or program director, who may in turn wish to consult with the Dean of the student’s school or college. Any of these parties may consult with the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel.

Where there is agreement in the academic unit that the most appropriate course of action is to meet informally with the student to call the alleged misconduct to his or her attention and provide an opportunity to respond, the person in the unit who plans to handle the meeting should consult first with the Rackham Resolution Officer. This should be done to ensure that several important steps are followed to ensure due process.

If the offense is deemed to be minor or unintended, the faculty member should take informal remedial steps with the student to correct the infraction and avoid its recurrence. In such instances, no official response is required and no record need be kept. If, on the other hand, the student admits to having knowingly committed a violation of this policy, the faculty member should do one of the following.

• Decide on commensurate sanctions, in conjunction with his or her department chair or program director (see Addendum A of the Statement on Graduate Academic and Professional Integrity). The student should be notified of these sanctions in writing and a copy of this communication should be sent to the Rackham Resolution Officer for record keeping. The letter should also inform the student of his or her right to file an appeal of the decision with the Rackham Resolution Officer.
• OR Refer the case to Rackham Resolution Officer for a formal hearing or, if formal procedures exist in the department or program, to the appropriate person there.

C. Procedures for Reporting and Investigating Allegations of Academic or Professional Misconduct in the Rackham Graduate School

1. Choosing the Appropriate Venue for Review

When an allegation of misconduct is forwarded to the Rackham Resolution Officer, the following guidelines will be followed:

1. If the charge involves behavior covered under the University’s Policy Statement on the Integrity of Scholarship and Procedures for Investigating Allegations of Misconduct in the Pursuit of Scholarship and Research, the Resolution Officer shall refer it to the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR). (This document is available from the Office of the Vice President for Research.). If OVPR determines that its own policy is most appropriate, the allegation will be reviewed under OVPR procedures. Once the inquiry has been completed, the Rackham Resolution Officer will review it to determine whether additional charges, if any, should be filed under the Rackham procedures. If, on the other hand, OVPR determines that the Rackham Policy and Procedures for Academic and Professional Integrity are most appropriate, the case will be referred to Rackham’s Resolution Officer for handling.
2. If the complaint involves behavior that is most appropriately handled under the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities and/or by the police, the Resolution Officer will make the appropriate referral.
3. If neither the OVPR-administered policy nor the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities are relevant, the Rackham Resolution Officer will consult with appropriate persons in the academic unit in which the student is enrolled to decide on the best course of action.
4. If it is determined that the allegations should be handled by Rackham, the Rackham Resolution Officer shall undertake an initial inquiry to evaluate the seriousness of the allegation and to determine whether a formal hearing is warranted. If the allegation involves the use of data, the Resolution Officer shall consult with the General Counsel’s Office, as appropriate, to determine if suspect data should be sequestered. An inquiry consists of information gathering and initial fact-finding, based on contacts with appropriate University officials and others in the University. It is intended to separate serious allegations from frivolous, unjustified, or clearly mistaken allegations, and allegations that are based on insufficient evidence/information. Every effort will be made throughout to protect the confidentiality of the accused and the reporting witness. The Resolution Officer will prepare a written report that describes the evidence reviewed, summaries of the relevant interviews, and the conclusions of the inquiry as to whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant a formal hearing or take any further action. The Dean of the Graduate School, in consultation with the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel and others, will decide whether, based on the report, the student should be formally charged under this policy. If the inquiry concludes that a hearing is warranted, the student shall be given an opportunity to comment on the report in writing, which will become part of the report. In addition, the reporting witness may review and comment in writing on any portion of the report directly related to the testimony or other evidence brought forward by the reporting witness. If the Dean finds the evidence to be insufficient to warrant a formal hearing, the Dean or his or her designee will inform all persons who were involved in the initial inquiry to whom the name of the student was disclosed.
5. If a hearing by a Rackham Integrity Board is decided to be most appropriate, the Resolution Officer shall formally charge the respondent with misconduct and refer the case to a Rackham Integrity Board. Guidelines and procedures for formal charges of misconduct are outlined in sections 2 through 8 below.

2. Rights of Graduate Students Charged with Academic or Professional Misconduct Under the Rackham Policy Statement on Academic and Professional Integrity

A student who has been charged with academic or professional misconduct, hereafter referred to as the respondent: shall be presumed innocent until the allegations are found to be accurate based upon a preponderance of evidence; shall be provided with the following items:

• written notification of the charges against them;
• an opportunity to provide a written response to the charges, which will be due; within two weeks of the date on which the student receives the notification (if the student does not file a written reply to the charges, this shall not be construed as an acknowledgment of the alleged misconduct);
• a copy of the Rackham Resolution Officer’s written report based on the initial inquiry, where applicable (see item 1.c. above), or a summary of the evidence on which the charges are based;
• any written evidence that has been submitted; and
• a copy of this policy;

The respondent:

• has a right to meet with the Resolution Officer;
• shall be given notice of the date and location of the hearing(s) and a statement of the general format within which the hearing shall be conducted;
• may bring an advisor to the hearing, who may be an attorney (the advisor may advise the student but may not participate directly in the hearing);
• shall have an opportunity, within the parameters of the hearing guidelines, to respond fully to the charges by doing any or all of the following:
  1. presenting testimony and evidence,
  2. bringing witnesses,
  3. questioning any or all witnesses, including the reporting witness
  4. reviewing additional evidence provided during the hearing
  5. responding to statements made during the hearing;
• may choose to acknowledge the accuracy of charges against them. (In such instances, a Rackham Integrity Board will be convened in accordance with the procedures outlined below to evaluate the seriousness of the misconduct and recommend relevant corrective actions and/or sanctions. In this case the deliberation of the Board will focus not on whether the conduct occurred but on its degree of seriousness and therefore which sanction(s) the Integrity Board deems to be most appropriate.)

The Rackham Resolution Officer will ensure that the file includes written evidence that the materials mentioned above were delivered to the student.

3. Function of Rackham Integrity Boards

When a case is referred to a Rackham Integrity Board, the Board’s task is to gather information about the case and, after considering all the facts and circumstances, to decide whether misconduct occurred and submit their findings to the Dean of the Graduate School. If the Board finds the allegations to be accurate, they will also recommend sanctions. Following the hearing, the Board will deliberate in closed session to reach their findings. The Board will make every effort to reach consensus in regard to their recommendations. Otherwise, a majority vote is sufficient.

The Chair of the Board is responsible for assuring an orderly and expeditious proceeding. In that capacity, he or she has the right to discourage and exclude unduly repetitious or irrelevant evidence and testimony, to exclude any person who disrupts a hearing or fails to adhere to hearing guidelines, and to discontinue until a later time a hearing that has become disorderly.

4.Composition of Rackham Integrity Boards

Rackham Integrity Boards shall consist of two faculty members and one graduate student.

Faculty Members

Depending on the nature of the allegations, one of the two faculty members may be selected who has expertise relevant to the nature of the allegations. The Dean of the Rackham Graduate School will make this selection in consultation with leadership of the appropriate academic unit. However, the following people should generally not serve in such a capacity: the student’s employer or advisor, any member of the student’s doctoral dissertation committee, or any faculty member involved closely with the student’s training. The Resolution Officer will select a second faculty member at random from the Rackham Appeals Panel. Otherwise, the Resolution Officer will select two faculty members at random from the Rackham Appeals Panel. If enough members to complete the Board cannot be appointed from the Appeals Panel, the Dean of the Graduate School may appoint additional members to the Panel.

Graduate Student

The Resolution Officer will select a graduate student from the Rackham Appeals Panel at random. A student who is enrolled in the same program as the student who has been charged with a policy violation may not serve in this capacity. Therefore, if such a student is selected, the Rackham Resolution Officer will randomly select an alternate. Any member may ask to be excused due to conflict of interest. In addition, a member may disqualify himself or herself, or be challenged for cause by the reporting witness or the respondent. Grounds for disqualification include involvement in the case (as a party or witness) or any other substantial reason that would prevent the member from being impartial. A member shall be disqualified upon motion of either party unless the Board votes to retain the member. A member is not permitted to vote in connection with his or her own disqualification, but may make a statement. A vote to retain shall require a simple majority to pass. In the event of disqualification, the Rackham Resolution Officer shall randomly select another member from the Rackham Appeals Panel.

If the need to substitute a Committee member arises (e.g., due to scheduling conflicts), the Resolution Officer shall oversee the selection of a substitute, following the same procedures. After the members of the Board have been selected, the Dean shall select one of them to serve as Chair. The Resolution Officer will instruct all members in this policy and its implementation. Advice may also be provided by the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel.

5. Guidelines for Rackham Integrity Board Hearings

a. Department, Program, or School/College Participation

The primary department or program in which the student is enrolled, in conjunction with the Dean of the School or College or his or her designee, has the option of selecting a faculty member to attend the hearing but is not required to do so. This individual could be the reporting witness, if he or she chooses to participate in this way; a department Chair or program Director; a School or College faculty administrator, or any other member of the faculty deemed appropriate. In this document, this person shall hereafter be referred to as the department representative. This individual may bring an advisor to the hearing, who may be an attorney but who may not participate directly in the hearing. He or she will also be given the opportunity to:

1. introduce evidence
2. make an opening statement
3. give a response to the respondent’s opening statement
4. call witnesses
5. question the respondent and all witnesses
6. make a final statement when there is no further testimony or evidence to be presented

b. Attendance

The only persons allowed to attend hearings in their entirety are as follows: the Board members; the respondent (and one advisor); the program representative, where applicable (and one advisor); the Resolution Officer, and other individuals whose presence has been requested by the Board. Witnesses shall be present at the hearing only during their testimony or when being questioned.

c. Failure of Accused Student to Appear

If an accused student fails to appear at a hearing after proper notice, the hearing may proceed without the student’s participation. The Chair may make exceptions if the student can establish, in advance of the hearing and to the satisfaction of the Resolution Officer, that there are circumstances beyond his or her control that make an appearance impossible or unusually burdensome. If the student withdraws from the University while the allegations are under review, the University reserves the right to go forward with the hearing without the student’s participation. If the University decides to suspend the hearing process, the student must resolve the case before returning to the University.

d. Introduction of Evidence

Prior to the hearing, each party should provide any additional documents he or she wishes to present as evidence by a deadline to be determined by the Board. This information will be provided to the opposing party, the Board, and the Resolution Officer. At the discretion of the Board, documents may be provided for the first time at the hearing. No evidence will be heard or shared in the absence of any of the following: the respondent (except in cases where the student has failed to appear—see above); the department representative, where applicable; and the full membership of the Board.

e. Role of the Rackham Resolution Officer

The Rackham Resolution Officer will be asked to report on his or her initial inquiry, if one was undertaken, and will serve as a resource to the Board and to all involved parties.

f. Witnesses

The respondent; the department representative, where applicable; and the members of the Board will have an opportunity to present information and to call individuals before the Board to provide relevant testimony or evidence, hereafter referred to as witnesses. Witnesses can be asked to provide information that is relevant to the particular case itself as well as information that is relevant to the context of the allegations (e.g., information from individuals who are knowledgeable about standards for professionally relevant conduct within the field of the student’s training). Prior to the hearing, each party must provide a list of witnesses they wish to appear. The Board retains the right to decide which witnesses to call and the order of witnesses. The Board may, in its discretion, permit or call witnesses not on the witness lists.

In cases of alleged professional misconduct that took place while the student was carrying out his or her duties as an employee of the University, the Board may call as witnesses appropriate staff members in the Office of Human Resources and Affirmative Action. The respondent; the department representative, where applicable; and the members of the Board will be given the opportunity to question all witnesses. Since the purpose of the hearing is for the Board to gather information, the function of a witness at the hearing is to testify about the facts of the situation as she or he perceives them. Agreeing to appear on a party’s witness list does not, by itself, denote advocacy for that party. Witnesses may wish to make an opening statement but need not do so and will otherwise be asked to answer questions. No participant in a hearing is required to make a self-incriminating statement, including witnesses.

Generally, witnesses will appear in the presence of all in attendance at the hearing. However, there may be instances when the Board believes that an important witness should be heard outside the presence of the respondent and also, in some cases, his or her advisor, because a confrontation between the parties may be painful or dangerous for one or more of the parties. The Board may exercise this option at its discretion. If possible, a link shall be established, via video or audio hook-up, to allow the respondent to view and hear the testimony. At the very least, the substance of the information received from that witness must be disclosed to the respondent when the hearing is reconvened.

g. Record of the Hearing

All formal proceedings that are part of the hearing will be tape-recorded except the Board’s deliberations. The recording will be kept on file as part of the student’s educational record until six years after the respondent graduates from the School or College or until six years after his or her last registration. Failure to produce or preserve an audible tape will not be grounds for setting aside any determinations of the Board.

The Resolution Officer will keep a written record of the hearings with regard to attendance, date(s), location(s), and other basic information. The Board’s report to the Dean (see below) will serve as the written record of the Board’s recommendations to the Dean.

6. Reports of Findings and Recommendations

The Board will submit a report that includes the following:

1. the group’s decision as to whether the student engaged in misconduct
2. a summary of the findings of fact and how those facts contributed to the group’s decision
3. the recommended sanctions, if any
4. the rationale for the selection of those sanctions with respect to their being appropriate to the case

The following list of sanctions or types of sanctions can be used as a resource by the Board when allegations against a student are found to be accurate. It is not intended to be all-inclusive. Multiple sanctions can be applied in a single case of misconduct. Sanctions l, m, n, and o may be recommended by an academic unit but can only be imposed by Rackham in consultation with the appropriate School or College. For more detail, see Addendum A. Guidelines for Issuing Sanctions.

1. Restitution
2. Educational project
3. Service
4. Corrective action appropriate to the domain
5. Oral warning or reprimand
6. Formal reprimand
7. Grade change
8. Course repeat
9. Disciplinary probation
10. Restriction from employment at the University by way of recommendation to or in consultation with the Office of Human Resources and Affirmative Action
11. Restriction from particular activities, services, or locations
12. Withholding a degree
13. Suspension
14. Expulsion
15. Rescinding a degree

The Board also has the option of including minority opinions in the report, but they should be identified clearly as such. At the time the report is provided to the Dean of the Graduate School, copies of the report, either in its entirety or only the portions of it that are relevant to them, will also be sent to the reporting witness, the respondent, and the Rackham Resolution Officer. As noted previously, the report and recommendations are advisory in nature.

7. Final Decisions

After receiving the report, the Dean of the Graduate School will transmit the recommendations to the Dean of the School or College in which the student is enrolled. At the discretion of either Dean, the recommendations will also be provided to the head of the student’s department or program.

In a timely manner, the two deans involved in any particular case will decide jointly on corrective and/or educational sanctions, and/or actions. They will prepare a joint letter to the respondent outlining their decision and sanctions, if any. Based on their legitimate need to know consistent with their official responsibilities, copies of the letter or parts thereof will be provided to the department representative, where applicable; the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel; the Resolution Officer; and to other offices and parties at the University.

The Dean of the Graduate School may excuse himself or herself from the process due to involvement in the case (as a party or witness) or any other substantial reason that would prevent the Dean from being impartial. In this event, the Senior Associate Dean will serve in his or her stead.

8. Appeals

Grounds for an Appeal

The respondent may appeal the case on one or more of the following grounds:

1. there were violations of procedure that seriously compromised the proceeding
2. the evidence clearly does not support the findings
3. the sanctions are excessive relative to the violation
4. there is significant new evidence not reasonably available at the time of the hearing

Filing an Appeal

The respondent must file the appeal in writing with the Resolution Officer within fifteen business days following receipt of the decision by the Deans. Requests for exceptions to this deadline must be made within fifteen business days and will be considered by the Dean on a case-by-case basis. The appeal should include a statement of the grounds for appeal and the supporting facts.

After an appeal has been filed, the Dean of the Graduate School will forward it to the Senior Associate Dean or another of the Associate Deans in the Graduate School to review the content of the appeal and to determine, in consultation with others, whether there are sufficient grounds for the appeal. If the Associate Dean determines that the content of the appeal does not provide sufficient grounds for the case to be revisited, all decisions will stand and there shall be no further opportunity for appeal within the University. If the Associate Dean determines that there are sufficient grounds for the appeal, the Resolution Officer will select an Appeals Committee to review the case and make recommendations to the Dean.

Composition and Function of the Appeals Committee

The Appeals Committee shall be composed of two faculty members and one graduate student drawn at random from the Rackham Appeals Panel but not to include the members of the Rackham Integrity Board that heard the case previously. In addition, the same rules for disqualification from serving on the Appeals Committee will be followed as those provided in Section I.C.4.

The Appeals Committee shall evaluate the allegations outlined in the appeal and be given access to the case file. The Appeals Committee shall communicate in writing to the Dean of the Graduate School both its recommendations and its rationale for having reached those recommendations. The Appeals Committee can recommend

1. that the decision and the sanctions should stand
2. that the sanctions be revised and in what ways
3. that the case should be re-heard

Decision and Communication

Thereafter, the Dean of the Graduate School, in conjunction with the Dean of the school or college in which the student is enrolled, may decide to:

1. let all aspects of the original decision stand
2. alter the earlier decision and/or sanctions
3. conclude that the grounds for appeal warrant a re-hearing of the case

The Deans will prepare a joint letter to the respondent outlining their decision and revisions to the sanctions, if any. Based on their need to know consistent with their official responsibilities, copies of the letter or parts thereof will be provided to the department representative, where applicable; the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel; the Resolution Officer; and to other offices and parties at the University.

9. Case File Maintenance

Rackham shall maintain the case file for at least six years after the student’s final term of enrollment, as part of the student’s educational record.

10. Deadline Extensions

In exceptional circumstances, time deadlines in the policy and procedure may be extended at the discretion of the Dean or the Resolution Officer.

Addendum A: Guidelines for Issuing Sanctions

Some cases of alleged academic or professionally relevant misconduct are handled at the unit level. Other cases are referred to a Rackham Integrity Board. The decision about where allegations should be heard depends in part on the severity of the allegations and therefore on the sanctions that are likely to be selected if the allegations are found to be accurate. In addition, the following list of sanctions may serve as a resource during unit reviews of misconduct allegations.

The following sanctions can be selected to achieve one or more aims: correct or compensate for the student’s actions, educate the student, and/or discipline the student. Corrective actions, educational activities and/or sanctions against a student should be proportionate and relevant to the misconduct. They should also be fair not only to the person who has filed the allegation, but also to the student who has been charged with misconduct, to the other members of the University community, and to the professional community to which the student aspires to belong. Consistent with the educational mission of the Graduate School, educational activities that might remedy a student’s faulty understanding or knowledge should be recommended, wherever they are appropriate. These might include formal or informal course work, tutorials, counseling, preparation of written products, public service or other activities. Wherever appropriate, sanctions should also be recommended that might correct the specific negative outcomes of misconduct. These might include actions such as restoration or replacement of property or belongings, or corrections of fact or impression.

The following list of sanctions or types of sanctions can be used as a resource when allegations against a student are found to be accurate. It is not intended to be all-inclusive. In addition, multiple sanctions can be applied in a single case of misconduct. Sanctions l, m, n, and o may be recommended by an academic unit but can only be imposed by Rackham in consultation with the appropriate School or College.

a. Restitution

Compensation for loss, damage, or injury paid to the appropriate party in the form of service, money, or material replacement.

b. Educational project

This could include the completion of a class, workshop, or project to help the student understand why his or her behavior was inappropriate.

c. Service

Performance of one or more tasks designed to benefit the community and help the student understand why her or his behavior was inappropriate.

d. Corrective action

This could include such things as requiring retraction of research or writing, or notification to publishers of improper research or authorship credit.

e. Oral warning or reprimand

An oral reprimand to the student that he/she has violated the policy and that future violations will be dealt with more severely.

f. Formal reprimand

A written reprimand to the student that he/she has violated the policy and any future violations will be dealt with more severely. This sanction may or may not include placement of the written reprimand in the student’s file(s) at Rackham and/or in the administrative offices of the student’s department, program, school, or college.

g. Grade change

This could include assigning a grade record of No Report or Incomplete for a course or project, or assigning a lower or failing grade. Such a sanction could only be issued with the support of the course instructor, who would assign the grade or request the grade change.

h. Course repeat

Requiring that a course be repeated. In cases of more serious violations, more punitive sanctions such as the following may be recommended. Because they are more severe in nature than the sanctions listed above, the following sanctions can be imposed only after a Rackham Integrity Board has formally reviewed a case (see Section F). Such a Board can select from the entire list of sanctions, not just those that follow. However, only the Dean of the Graduate School has the authority under this policy to impose sanctions 12, 13, 14, and 15.

i. Disciplinary probation

Designating a period of time during which the student will not be in good standing with the University. The terms of the probation may involve restrictions of student privileges and/or set behavioral expectations. Consequences may also be spelled out if the student fails to meet the terms. Only the Dean of a school or college can request disciplinary probation. Such requests must be submitted to the University Registrar, who alone has authority to assign disciplinary probation.

j. Restriction from employment at the University

Prohibition or limitation on University employment.

k. Restriction from particular activities, services, or locations

l. Withholding a degree

Withholding a Rackham Graduate School degree (e.g., until the student has met all the sanctions).

m. Suspension

Temporary removal of a student from the program for a specified or unspecified period, which will be noted on the transcript. This normally includes placing an academic hold on the student’s record for the duration of the suspension. It can also include stipulated conditions for re-admission to graduate work.

n. Expulsion

Permanent dismissal from the program, which will be so noted on the transcript.

o. Rescinding a degree

Rescinding a Rackham Graduate School degree.