Case #687

DATE: July 16, 2013
PARTIES: University of Toronto v. Y.Z.

Hearing Date(s): September 24, 2012

Panel Members:

Andrew Pinto, Chair
Karen Dion, Faculty Member
Yingxiang Li, Student Member

Robert Centa, Assistant Discipline Counsel for the University
John Koziar, Student Representative, DLS

In Attendance:
Kristi Gourlay, Manager, Office of Academic Integrity
Natalie Ramtahal, Coordinator, Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances

Trial Division – s. B.i.3(a) of the Code – forged academic record – submitted forged academic record to employer – Student did not attend hearing – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – Joint Submission on Penalty – Student admitted guilt and cooperated with the University – Student expressed contrition – misconduct undermined integrity of the recruitment process – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted – five-year suspension; seven-year notation on transcript; report to Provost for publication

Student charged with one offence under s. B.i.3(a) of the Code. The charge related to an allegation that the Student submitted an altered academic record to a potential employer. The Student did not attend the hearing. The Student admitted to receiving reasonable notice of the hearing in the Agreed Statement of Facts. The Student pleaded guilty and the matter proceeded by way of an Agreed Statement of Facts. The employer informed the Student in an interview that a successful candidate would have a grade point average of 3.5 or higher. The Student did not inform the employer that his grade point average was below 3.5. The Student was offered a position by the employer. The employer requested a copy of the Student’s transcript to complete his file. The Student admitted to forging and falsifying his academic record in at least twenty-three ways before submitted it to the employer. The Panel accepted the Student’s guilty plea. The parties presented a Joint Submission on Penalty. Transcript forgery is among the most serious offences. The Student cooperated from the outset of the discipline process and the misconduct in question transpired very quickly. The Student had expressed contrition. The Panel noted that employers and other third parties must be able to rely on academic transcripts and that the Student’s misconduct undermines the integrity of the recruitment process. The Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and imposed a five-year suspension, a seven-year notation on the Student’s transcript, and ordered that the case be reported to the Provost for publication.