Academic Integrity

An instructor who suspects that an incident of academic misconduct has occurred should first invite you to meet with them to discuss the matter. At the conclusion of this meeting, the instructor may choose to dismiss the matter and offer a teachable moment – an opportunity to learn from the incident with the aim of improving your overall work – or to forward the case to the Department Head for further review.

If the matter is dismissed by the instructor (and a teachable moment offered), no further action should be taken, other than the specific learning opportunity provided to you. In other words, an instructor cannot dismiss the matter and offer a teachable moment and give a grade of 0 on the suspected work.

If the case is forwarded to the Department Head for further review, you will likely be invited to meet with the Department Head to discuss the matter. At the conclusion of this meeting, the Department Head may choose to dismiss the matter and offer a teachable moment or to forward the case to the Associate Dean, Academic and Student Success, for further review.

If the case is forwarded to the Associate Dean, you will be invited to meet with the Associate Dean to discuss the matter. In this process of reporting academic misconduct, the Associate Dean is the final adjudicator and is the only person who can assign a sanction or penalty. Once the Associate Dean has concluded review and investigation of the case, both the student and the instructor will be notified of the decision and of the sanction to be applied, if warranted.

Things to Note:

• For meetings with the instructor, Department Head, and Associate Dean, students have the option of having a support person attend with them.

• No grade should be assigned to a suspected work until the Associate Dean renders a decision in the case.

• If final grades are being submitted with a case of academic misconduct still pending (either with the Department Head or Associate Dean), the instructor should assign a final grade of IN (Incomplete) to the student for the course.

Students who are accused of academic misconduct are often concerned that they will be asked to leave the university (suspension or expulsion) or will have a notation put on their transcript (censure) for all to see. While these are possible penalties under the sanctioning guidelines outlined in Bylaw 31: Academic Integrity, they are not the most common.

The most common sanctions for academic misconduct such as plagiarism and cheating include:

• Mark Reduction – reduced grade or mark of zero on the work in question
• Letter of Apology/or Reflection – formally acknowledging wrong-doing
• Admonition – notice of violation and that repeated misconduct will result in more severe disciplinary action
• Repeat Work for Assessment – student required to re-do assignment or re-sit the exam
• Educational Session – student required to attend an educational session The full list of sanctions available to the Associate Dean can be found in Appendix A – Sanctioning Guidelines of Bylaw 31.

Broadly speaking, using an AI tool such as ChatGPT to assist you in writing is much like using a calculator to assist you in doing math. Both are technological aids that do some of the heavy lifting in helping you create a more polished final product. Many of you already use aids like spell and grammar checkers in completing written work and may also use AI-driven design suggestions in creating slide shows or visual documents.

Using generative AI tools does not necessarily constitute academic misconduct; but, like anything else, this depends on whether using such tools to assist you with writing, doing math, making music, or generating images is permitted.

Before you use a tool like ChatGPT, you should consider the following:

• Has the course instructor stated (in class, on the course syllabus, in assignment guidelines) that generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, DALL-E 2, or MusicLM cannot be used? If so, using such a tool would constitute academic misconduct in the form of using an unauthorized aid in the same way that using a calculator when the course instructor does not allow it constitutes academic misconduct.
• If you cannot find information on whether the course instructor permits or does not permit the use of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, you should then ASK whether these tools are okay to use or not. Never assume that, because you didn’t hear it or didn’t read it, using generative AI tools is okay.
• If the course instructor says it is okay to use generative AI tools, follow-up by asking whether you should acknowledge use of such tools in your work through reference citation, footnote, or bibliography listing.

As generative AI tools become more accessible and sophisticated, these tools are likely to be increasingly used by university students in producing academic work. Part of being a student in the Faculty of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences at the University of Windsor is to understand how to use such tools ethically and responsibly.