FILE:
Case # 1446 (2023-2024)
DATE:
July 12, 2023
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. H.C. (“the Student”)
HEARING DATE(S):
April 13, 2023, via Zoom
PANEL MEMBERS:
Michelle S. Henry, Chair
Professor Vivienne Luk, Faculty Panel Member
Sterling Mancuso, Student Panel Member
APPEARANCES:
Tina Lie, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Janet Song, Co-Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Anja Kohlman Sawa, Representative for the Student, Downtown Legal Services
The Student
HEARING SECRETARY:
Samanthe Huang, Coordinator & Hearing Secretary, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty of Grievances
The Student was charged with separate offences related to two different courses. The charges under the first course (“MAT224”) are as follows. The Student was charged with three counts under s. B.i.1(b) of the Code for knowingly obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection Term Test 1 (“TT1”), Term Test 2 (“TT2”), and the final assessment in MAT224. In the alternative to the above charges, the Student was charged with three counts under s. B.i.1(d) of the Code for knowingly representing as their own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another. In the further alternative, the Student was charged under s. B.i.3(b) with knowingly engaging in a form of cheating, academic dishonesty or misconduct, fraud, or misrepresentation not otherwise described in the Code to obtain academic credit or advantage in connection with TT1, TT2, and the final exam in MAT224.
With respect to the second course (“PHL245”), the Student was charged with knowingly obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection with the final exam in PHL245 contrary to s. B.i.1(b) of the Code. In the alternative, the Student was charged with knowingly engaging in a form of cheating, academic dishonesty or misconduct, fraud, or misrepresentation not otherwise described in the Code to obtain academic credit or advantage in connection with the final exam in PHL245 contrary to s. B.i.3(b) of the Code.
The hearing proceeded based on an Agreed Statement of Facts. The Panel also received a Joint Book of Documents. The Student attended the hearing and was represented by counsel. In Winter 2021 the Student was enrolled in MAT224. TT1 was administered remotely and students were required to sign an academic integrity statement agreeing they had not received aid in the test. The Student submitted his test. When the instructors reviewed TT1, they found that virtually the entire test had answers similar to solutions posted on Chegg.com. TT2 was similarly administered, and the Student signed an academic integrity statement. When the Student’s TT2 was reviewed by instructors, they found that the test had answers with substantial similarities to answers posted on Chegg.com. The final assessment in MAT224 also required students to sign an academic integrity statement. When the instructors reviewed the Student’s submission, they found substantial similarities between the Student’s answers to certain questions and answers posted on Chegg.com. The Instructors noted that students could have answered questions in all three of the assessments in various ways. The fact that the Student had the same steps and omitted the same steps as the answers on Chegg.com was unlikely to have occurred by coincidence.
In Fall 2021 the Student was enrolled in PHL245. The final exam in PHL245 was administered remotely and students were not permitted to consult outside sources. Each question on the final exam had two versions. When grading the Student’s exam, the instructor noted that the Student’s answers to one of the questions contained the variant used in an alternative version of the question that the Student had not received.
In August 2022, the Student met with the Dean’s Designate. During the meeting the Student admitted to using Chegg.com in TT1, TT2, and the final assessment in MAT224, and that he discussed the questions with other students in the final exam in PHL245.
After deliberation and consideration of the ASF and the JBD, the Panel accepted the Student’s guilty pleas. The Panel found the Student guilty of knowingly obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection with TT1, TT2, and the final exam in MAT224 contrary to s. B.i.1(b) of the Code. The Panel also found the Student guilty of knowingly obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection with the final exam in PHL245 under s. B.i.3(b) of the Code.
The University and the Student submitted a Joint Submission on Penalty (“JSP”). The Panel heard submissions on the appropriateness of the penalty and reviewed relevant prior decisions submitted by the University. The Panel considered the likelihood of repetition of the offence, the serious nature of the offence, and the detriment to the University. The Panel noted that this was not the Student’s first offence and that he had four prior offences but noted that the incidents had occurred around the same time. The University stressed the seriousness of the offence, especially during the height of the pandemic, and stressed the need for deterrence to communicate the seriousness of the offences. After considering the evidence and the similar cases provided by the University, the Panel accepted the JSP.
The Panel imposed the following sanctions: a final grade of zero in both courses; a suspension from the University for a period of five years; a corresponding notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript until graduation; and a report to Provost for publication.