Trial Division – s. B.i.1(d) of Code – plagiarism – plagiarism in connection to book reviews and essays in several courses – multiple offences – Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) – guilty plea – finding of guilt – Joint Submission on Penalty (“JSP”) – student’s efforts had their intended effect by going undetected by Turnitin – joint submission on penalty did not bring the administration of justice into disrepute – real risk that the Student will reoffend - grade of zero in three courses; four-year suspension; three years and six month notation on the Student’s transcript or until their graduation, whichever occurs first; and report to Provost.
Trial Division – ss. B.i.1(b) and B.i.1(d) of the Code – unauthorized aid – Student knowingly used or possessed an unauthorized aid or aids or obtained unauthorized assistance in a final exam – plagiarism – Student knowingly represented as their own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another in a question on a test – Agreed Statement of Fact (“ASF”) – Joint Submission on Penalty (“JSP”) – finding of guilt – final grade of zero in the course; two-year suspension; a three-year notation on the transcript; and a report to the Provost for publication.
Trial Division – ss. B.i.1(d), B.i.1(b), and B.i.3(b) of Code – plagiarism – unauthorized assistance – academic dishonesty and misrepresentation contrary – students submitted nearly identical assignments – one student submitted an assignment on behalf of the other student - letter of explanation containing lies – papers purchased online – grade of zero in the course; five-year suspension; six-year notation on the Students’ transcripts; and report to Provost for publication.
Trial Division – ss. B.i.1(d), B.i.1(b), and B.i.3(b) of Code – plagiarism – unauthorized assistance – academic dishonesty and misrepresentation contrary – students submitted nearly identical assignments – one student submitted an assignment on behalf of the other student - letter of explanation containing lies – papers purchased online – grade of zero in the course; five-year suspension; six-year notation on the Students’ transcripts; and report to Provost for publication.
Trial Division – s. B.i.1(d) of the Code – plagiarism – Student knowingly represented an idea or expression of an idea or work of another as their own in a mid-term essay – Student did not attend hearing – reasonable notice of hearing provided – Rules 9(c), 13 and 17 of the University Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”) – finding of guilt – second offence of plagiarism – plagiarism merits serious sanctions – final grade of zero in the course; three-year suspension; four-year notation on transcript; and a report to the Provost for publication.
Trial Division – ss. B.i.1(d), B.i.1(b), B.i.1(a) of Code – plagiarism – unauthorized aid – forged or falsified document – Student knowingly represented as their own an idea or expression of an idea, and/or the work of another in two assignments – Student knowingly used or possessed an unauthorized aid or obtained unauthorized assistance in connection with a test – Student knowingly submitted, on five occasions, forged or in any other way altered or falsified a document or evidence required by the University of Toronto, or uttered, circulated or made use of such forged, altered or falsified document, namely, a medical certificate – Agreed Statement of Fact (“ASF”) – Joint Book of Documents (“JBD”) – Agreed Statement of Fact on Penalty (“ASFP”) – Joint Submission on Penalty (“JSP”) – guilty plea – finding of guilt – University of Toronto and S.F. (Case No.: 690, October 20, 2014) – University of Toronto and M.A. (Case No.: 837, December 22, 2016) – University of Toronto and Y.K. (Case No.: 855, March 10, 2017 – a final grade of zero in the affected courses; a five-year suspension or until Governing Council makes its decision on expulsion, whichever comes first; a corresponding notation on the transcript; recommendation that the Student be expelled, as per s. C.ii.(b)(i) of Code; report to Provost for publication.
Trial Division – s. B.i.1(d) of Code – plagiarism – Student knowingly represented as her own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another in the final exam – Student did not attend hearing – reasonable notice of hearing provided – University Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”) – Statutory Powers Procedure Act (“SPPA”) – finding of guilt – a final grade of zero in the course; a two-year suspension; a three-year notation on transcript; and a report to the Provost for publication.
Trial Division – s. B.i.1(d) of Code – three counts of plagiarism – Student knowingly represented an idea or expression of an idea or work of another as their own in two essays and an exam – Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) – guilty plea – Joint Submission on Penalty – Joint Submissions on Penalty accepted – final grade of zero in all three courses; a three-and-a-half-year suspension; a three-and-a-half-year notation on the transcript; and a report to the Provost for publication.
Trial Division – s. B.i.1(d) of Code – plagiarism – Student knowingly represented as her own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another in the final exam – Student did not attend hearing – University does not need to prove actual notice – reasonable notice of hearing provided – University’s Policy on Official Correspondence with Students – Rules 9 and 17 of the University Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”) - ss. 6 and 7 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act (“SPPA”) – finding of guilt – concurrent penalty – a final grade of zero in the course; a two-year suspension; a three-year notation on transcript; and a report to the Provost for publication.
Trial Division – ss. B.i.1(d), B.i.1(f), and B.i.1(a) of the Code – plagiarism – Student knowingly represented an idea or expression of an idea or work of another as their own in an assignment – forged, altered or falsified document – submission of a Verification of Student Illness or Injury Forms (“VOI”) – concocted reference or statement of fact – Student did not attend hearing – reasonable notice of hearing provided – Rules 9 and 17 of the Tribunal Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”) - ss. 6 and 7 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act (“SPPA”) – University’s Policy on Official Correspondence with Students – finding of guilt – University did not prove the Student concocted a source - for an allegation of concoction to be proven on a balance of probabilities, the University needs to demonstrate that the source that was cited could not be validated – final grade of zero in the courses; four-year suspension; five-year notation on transcript; and a report to the Provost for publication.