Academic Integrity Violation Procedure

To outline the process for identifying, investigating, reporting and responding to suspected academic misconduct in alignment with Cambrian College’s (“the College”) Academic Integrity Policy. This procedure supports a fair, consistent and educative approach to addressing Academic Integrity Violations across the College.

This procedure applies to all suspected cases of academic misconduct.

Academic integrity: the unwavering commitment to and demonstration of the values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage in all academic endeavors. It forms the ethical foundation of learning and research, requiring individuals to produce original work, give proper credit through accurate citation, and adhere to institutional policies. Academic integrity fosters a culture of accountability and scholarly excellence, even in the face of challenges or pressure.

Academic Integrity Office (AIO): the AIO provides guidance and education to faculty, students and staff on navigating the policy, procedure and related supports.

Academic Integrity Violation (AIV): a confirmed breach of the ethical standards, rules, or policies governing academic work, as established by the College. An AIV typically involves academic misconduct that allows a student to gain an unfair academic advantage, misrepresenting learning outcomes, or violating the principles of honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. AIVs compromise the integrity of scholarships and may result in academic or disciplinary consequences.

Suspected academic misconduct is not considered an AIV until it has been investigated and confirmed as such under this policy.

Academic Integrity Violation Form: the form used to report a suspected AIV; collects information about the student, faculty, course, nature of the violation, supporting evidence and additional contextual information.

Academic misconduct: refers to conduct that compromises the values of academic integrity, thereby undermining the credibility of credentials granted by the College. Academic misconduct includes, but is not limited to, actions that violate the rules or restrictions in an academic evaluation, result in an unfair academic advantage, or misrepresent a student’s achievement of learning outcomes. Examples of academic misconduct include plagiarism, cheating (use of unauthorized tools, materials, or resources), impersonation, misrepresentation, falsification, and fabrication of information.

Alleged academic misconduct is subject to formal investigation under the Academic Integrity Policy and this Academic Integrity Violation Procedure. Where, following investigation, it is determined that academic misconduct has occurred, the conduct is classified as an Academic Integrity Violation (AIV).

Discontinuance: the involuntary withdrawal of a student from a program or the College for academic or non-academic reasons.

Evaluation or assessment: structured activities designed to measure the extent to which a student has achieved established learning outcomes. Evaluations and assessments may include, but are not limited to, assignments, examinations, projects, tests, quizzes, presentations, and other forms of academic work. These activities encompass both formative assessments (which provide ongoing feedback to support learning) and summative assessments (which evaluate overall achievement at the conclusion of an instructional period). Evaluation and assessment are used interchangeably in the policy below.

Proctor/Invigilator: a designated individual responsible for overseeing evaluations/assessments, examinations or other testing environments to ensure fairness, security and adherence to academic integrity.

Sanction: a formal educative or disciplinary response to an AIV.

1. Identifying Academic Misconduct

1.1. This process commences when a student is observed engaging in suspected academic misconduct during an evaluation or submits an assessment that raises suspicion they may have engaged in academic misconduct. Academic misconduct may be observed by a faculty member, dean or chair, staff, proctor/invigilator or another student. Where the observer is not a faculty, they must notify the faculty and provide details of the observed behaviour.

1. During an active testing environment, the faculty or proctor/invigilator may confiscate any evaluation/testing materials.
2. During an active testing environment where other students are present, the faculty or proctor/invigilator may forgo confiscating the material until the testing period has ended or the student exits the testing environment to minimize the disruption to other students. The immediate confiscation of materials is not a requirement to proceed with reporting the conduct as an Academic Integrity Violation.

1.2. The faculty identifies the specific type of academic misconduct (see Academic Integrity Policy, Appendix A).

2. Investigating Academic Misconduct

2.1. The faculty undertakes a preliminary investigation of the misconduct and gathers supporting information and/or evidence of the misconduct and related materials. A preliminary investigation may include, but be not limited to, review of the evaluation materials, technology logs, the submissions of other students for comparison, and requesting information from the student to validate the authenticity of their assessment or to obtain the student’s account of the events, particularly in the case of evaluations where testing was synchronous with other students.

2.2. The faculty determines if there is reasonable belief that academic misconduct has occurred.

1. Where there is no reasonable belief, the matter is considered closed and the faculty takes action as necessary to grade the original submission or allows the student to complete the evaluation/assessment (if evaluation materials were confiscated during an active testing environment), or an alternative evaluation at the faculty’s discretion.
2. Upon forming a reasonable belief that academic misconduct may have occurred, the faculty must provide written notification to the student outlining the nature of the suspected misconduct and any supporting evidence. This notification shall be delivered via email or the College’s learning management system. The faculty may also offer the student an opportunity for a follow-up verbal discussion to clarify the facts or respond to the allegation; however, such discussions do not replace the requirement for written notification.
3. The written notification must outline the nature of the allegation. Details such as the context, the assessment in question, and any supporting evidence should be provided. This communication is intended to be investigative and non-adversarial, focussing on an information exchange and to provide the student an opportunity to respond to the allegations. This communication should also not be used to implement sanctions (such as retesting) ahead of a decision on whether the conduct amounts to an AIV.
4. The student must respond within 3-business days with their response. This response may be an admission of misconduct, an explanation of the situation and/or evidence to counter the allegation. This timeline may be extended at the faculty’s discretion with written notice to the student of the extension.
5. The student may request to meet with the faculty within this 3-business day period to discuss the situation. If the student does not respond within the 3-business day period, the faculty will proceed to the next step.

2.3. The faculty determines, based on the available information/evidence and response from the student (if provided) whether there is sufficient basis to support a reasonable belief that academic misconduct has occurred.

1. If there is not sufficient basis, the matter is considered closed and the faculty takes action as necessary to grade the original submission or allow the student to complete the evaluation (if evaluation materials had been confiscated during an active testing environment), or an alternative evaluation at the faculty’s discretion. The faculty may require the student to complete educational training or seek support around the course content and/or academic integrity.
2. If there is sufficient basis, the faculty proceed with reporting the misconduct as an Academic Integrity Violation (AIV).

3. Reporting an Academic Integrity Violation (AIV)

3.1. The faculty reports the academic misconduct to the Chair responsible for the course using the Academic Integrity Violation Form.

1. The faculty must provide student, course and evaluation/assessment information and a description or copy of the evidence and supporting documentation.
2. The faculty may recommend which sanction(s) be applied based on the perceived severity of the misconduct and the overall evaluation/assessment worth. In recommending sanctions, the faculty will assume this is the student’s first AIV.

4. Determining the Result of an Academic Integrity Violation (AIV) The Chair

4.1. Reviews the reported Academic Integrity Violation Form and gathers additional information from the faculty and/or student as needed.

4.2. Determines if the contextual information and supporting documentation/evidence reasonably supports the claim of academic misconduct according to the balance of probabilities decision-making framework (see Academic Integrity Policy, Section 4). For an AIV to be confirmed based on the information available, it must be established that, it is more likely than not that the student engaged in academic misconduct.

1. If the Chair disagrees with the conclusion of the faculty, then the alleged AIV investigation will be considered to be at an end, and the Chair will engage with the faculty to provide instructions for completing the student’s evaluation/assessment.
2. If the AIV is confirmed by the Chair, the Chair determines the appropriate sanction(s) to be applied, which may be a combination of educational requirements and academic penalties (refer to the Academic Integrity Policy, Section 5).

• The Chair informs the student and faculty of the decision and the sanctions to be applied.
• If it is the student’s fourth confirmed AIV, regardless of severity, assessment worth, or impact, the sanction applied will be a suspension from College programs for a period of 2 calendar years. The Office of the Registrar notifies the student and provides a letter outlining the terms of the suspension and the procedure for returning.

5. Applying Sanctions

5.1. The faculty applies academic penalty sanctions related to the course and/or specific evaluation/assessment (e.g. grade penalty, remedial actions, discontinuance).

5.2. The student must complete the required educational sanctions and provide evidence of completion (or confirmed appointment to complete) to the Chair within ten (10) business days of receiving notice of the sanctions.

1. If the student does not complete the sanctions within the time prescribed by the Chair, then the Chair may apply additional sanctions or extend the required completion date at their discretion.

6. Appealing an Academic Integrity Violation Decision

6.1. To appeal a decision on an Academic Integrity Violation case, the student must refer to the Academic Appeal Policy and follow the Academic Appeal Operating Procedure.