Case #573

DATE: April 15, 2010
PARTIES: University of Toronto v. I.J.


Hearing Date(s): October 6, 2009

Panel Members:
Janet Minor, Chair
Professor Graham Trope, Faculty Member
Elena Kuzmin, Student Member

Appearances:
Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel for the University
Betty-Ann Campbell, Law Clerk
Professor Ryan Balot, Course Instructor
Larissa Atkinson, Teaching Assistant
Dr. Tamara Jones, Academic Integrity Officer

In Attendance:
Professor Sam Solecki, Dean’s Designate, Office of Academic Integrity

Trial Division – s. B.I.1(d) and s. B.I.3(b) of Code – plagiarism – significant portions of an essay plagiarised – hearing not attended – reasonable notice of hearing - finding on evidence of guilt – sentencing principle – see University of Toronto v. M.H.H. – see University of Toronto v. S.B. – see University of Toronto and A.K. – see University of Toronto v. V.W.S.L. – University submission on penalty accepted – grade assignment of zero for course; four-year suspension; five-year notation on transcript; and report to Provost

Student charged with two offences under s. B.I.1(d) and s. B.I.3(b) of the Code. Charges relate to the allegations that the Student plagiarised an essay from a purchased essay and online sources. The Panel found evidence presented by the Professor and the Teaching Assistant for the course supported this charge. The Student did not attend the hearing. The Panel was satisfied that the University had demonstrated that the charge had been made out and found the Student had committed plagiarism. The University withdrew the second charge under s. B.I.3(b). The Panel did not hear any character evidence, explanation of potential extenuating circumstances, or remorse from the Student. The Panel referred to University of Toronto v. M.H.H and University of Toronto v. S.B. in characterizing the seriousness of the offence of plagiarism. The Panel further referred to University of Toronto and A.K. and noted that in recent years plagiarism had been a particular problem for the University and the Tribunal. The Panel further noted the case of University of Toronto v. V.W.S.L. and commented the enterprise of purchasing work for submission was emblematic of the highest and greatest detriment to the University community. The Panel accepted the submission of the University that the bulk of the paper was likely purchased and the remainder was plagiarized. The Panel imposed a grade assignment of zero for the course, a four-year suspension, a five-year notation on the Student’s transcript and that a report to the Provost be issued.