DATE:
December 2, 2024
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. M.B.
HEARING DATE:
December 8, 2022 via Zoom
PANEL MEMBERS:
Sabrina A. Bandali, Chair
Dr. Maria Rozakis-Adcock, Faculty Panel Member
Harvi Karatha, Student Panel Member
APPEARANCES:
Tina Lie, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Joseph Berger, Co-Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein, LLP
HEARING SECRETARY:
Nusaiba Khan, Quasi-Judicial Administrative Assistant, Office of Appeals, Discipline & Faculty Grievances
IN ATTENDANCE:
The Student
The Student was charged with knowingly representing as their own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another in connection with a term test in MAT133Y1 (the “Course”), contrary to section B.i.1(d) of the Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters, 2019 (the “Code”). In the alternative, the Student was charged with knowingly obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection with Test 1 in the Course, contrary to section B.i.1(b) of the Code. In the further alternative, the Student was charged with knowingly engaging in a form of cheating, academic dishonesty or misconduct, fraud or misrepresentation, contrary to section B.i.3(b) of the Code.
Neither the Student nor a representative for the Student attended the hearing. Counsel for the University asked that the Panel find that the Student had been provided with reasonable notice of the hearing and that the hearing proceed in the Student’s absence. On its review of the evidence, the Panel found that the University had made every reasonable effort to notify the Student of the hearing and the charges, by phone, email, and via courier, using the contact information in the student’s ROSI account. The Student did not respond to any of the correspondence. The Panel found that the University’s attempts to notify the Student were reasonable and complied with or exceeded the requirements of the Statutory Powers Procedures Act and the University Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. Accordingly, the hearing proceeded in the absence of the Student.
The Student was enrolled in the Course in Fall 2020 and Winter 2021 and was required, among other things, to complete six term tests worth 35% of their final grade, with the lowest score dropped. The first term test (the “Term Test”) was administered online, and students were permitted to consult course materials. Communication with other students or other persons was not permitted. After the exam was distributed to students, the instructors and teaching assistants in the Course found questions and answers from Test 1 on Chegg.com, a subscription-based website that allows students to post problems to the site which are in turn answers by other persons on the site. In reviewing the Student’s answers to several questions on the Term Test, the Course instructor found that their answers were very similar to those posted on Chegg.com. The Course instructor, in their affidavit, described several suspicious similarities between the Chegg.com answers and the answers supplied by the Student. On the basis of the evidence before it, the Panel concluded that the Student was guilty of representing as their own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another, contrary to section B.i.1(d) of the Code.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the Panel heard submissions from the University and reviewed relevant cases involving similar offences. The Panel also considered the sanctioning factors set out in the University of Toronto and Mr. C (Case No. 1976/77-3, November 5, 1976) but noted that it did not have any evidence in respect of the Student’s character, extenuating circumstances, or the likelihood of repetition. The Panel concluded however that the nature of the offence of plagiarism, the detriment to the University occasioned by the offence, and the need to deter others from committing a similar offence supported the penalty sought by the University.
The Panel ordered that the following sanction be imposed on the Student: a final grade of zero in the course; a two-year suspension from the University; a three-year notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript; and a report to the Provost for publication.