FILE:
Case # 1406 (2022-2023)
DATE:
May 24, 2023
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. J.Z. (“the Student”)
HEARING DATE(S):
April 4, 2023, via Zoom
PANEL MEMBERS:
Sana Halwani, Chair
Professor Joseph Clark, Faculty Panel Member
Jennifer Chen, Student Panel Member
APPEARANCES:
Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Ryan Shah, Co-Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
HEARING SECRETARY:
Nusaiba Khan, Quasi-Judicial Administrative Assistant, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty of Grievances
The Student was charged with knowingly using or possessing an unauthorized aid or obtaining unauthorized assistance in a quiz (“the Quiz”) for FSL105H5 under s. B.i.1(b) of the Code. The Student was additionally charged with knowingly submitting academic work containing a purported statement of fact or reference to a source which had been concocted in a term paper (“Term Paper”) in another course, contrary to s. B.i.1(f) of the Code. In the alternative to these two charges, the Student was charged under s. B.i.3(b) for knowingly engaging in a form of cheating, academic dishonesty or misconduct, fraud, or misrepresentation to obtain academic credit or other advantage.
The Student was enrolled in both courses during the Winter of 2021. The Quiz for FSAL105H5 was administered online, and the course syllabus indicated that students were prohibited from accessing unauthorized aids for assessments. The Student’s answers to the Quiz were near identical to the answers submitted by two other students in the course. The course instructor found the similarities suspicious, as the answers were incorrect in identical or near identical manners, with very unusual errors. The two other students in different meetings admitted to using a group chat in the course for assistance on the Quiz. They did not name the Student in this case, but the common mistakes indicate the Student was the third member in the group chat. With respect to the other course, the Student submitted their Term Paper online. The course instructor reviewed the Student’s Term Paper and found that descriptions of two sources in the paper did not reflect the actual contents of the sources. Upon further investigation, the instructor determined that one of the sources used in the Term Paper was clearly concocted.
The Student did not attend the hearing and was not represented by counsel. The Panel heard evidence that the University had made serious efforts to serve the Student with notice, through email and telephone, and through courier delivery. The Panel found that reasonable notice of the hearing was provided in accordance with the Statutory Powers and Procedures Act and the University Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. The Panel was content to proceed without the Student.
After considering the evidence presented for both charges, the Panel found the Student guilty of using unauthorized aid under s. B.i.1(b) of the Code and guilty of knowingly submitting academic work containing a reference to a source which has been concocted under s. B.i.1(f) of the Code. The University withdrew the alternative charge.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the Panel considered counsel’s submissions regarding the Provost’s Guidance on Sanctions and penalties in similar cases. The Panel considered the Student’s character, mitigating factors, and extenuating circumstances, finding that there was no evidence for either due to the Student’s absence in the proceedings. The Panel considered the likelihood of repetition of the offence, finding that the Student’s prior academic offence, held as an aggravating factor, necessitated specific deterrence, and justified a greater sanction. With respect to the nature of the offence, the need to deter others, and the detriment to the University, the Panel agreed with a previous case that the offence undermines the value of the University’s degrees and required sanction.
The Panel accepted counsel’s submissions and imposed the following sanctions: a grade assignment of zero in both courses; a three-year suspension; a four-year notation on the Student’s transcript; and a report to the Provost for publication.