DATE:
December 7, 2022
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. Z.L. ("the Student")
HEARING DATE:
September 23, 2022, via Zoom
PANEL MEMBERS:
Simon Clements, Chair
Professor Joseph Clarke, Faculty Panel Member
Jessica Johnson, Student Panel Member
APPEARANCES:
Tina Lie, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Joseph Berger, Co-Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
The Student
HEARING SECRETARY:
Krista Kennedy, Administrative Clerk and Hearing Secretary, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
The Student was charged with one count of knowingly obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection with a term test, contrary to section B.i.1(b) of the Code. In the alternative, they were also charged with one count of knowingly engaging in a form of cheating, academic dishonesty or misconduct, fraud or misrepresentation not otherwise described in the Code in order to obtain academic credit or other academic advantage of any kind in connection with the test, contrary to section B.i.3(b) of the Code.
The parties submitted an Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) containing, among other things, the Student’s admission of guilt made at the Dean’s meeting. The Student admitted in the ASF that (i) they had knowingly obtained unauthorized assistance from online sources and an online calculator while writing the term test, and in doing so: (ii) they had searched for and copied answers for that test from an online source; (iii) they knew they were not permitted to consult with online sources or an online calculator during the test; (iv) they had knowingly submitted the test with the intention that the University rely on it as containing their own ideas or work in considering the appropriate academic credit be assigned to their work; and (iv) they are guilty of obtaining unauthorized assistance on the test. The ASF also contained evidence that in marking students’ tests, the instructor and teaching assistants had found substantial similarities between the Student’s answer and the answers submitted to the same question by several other students. The Panel found the Student guilty of knowingly obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection with the test, contrary to section B.i.1(b) of the Code. The University withdrew the other charge.
The parties provided an Agreed Statement of Facts on Penalty establishing that the Student had two prior academic offences, which were both resolved at the divisional level. These prior offences also involved the obtention of unauthorized assistance. Additionally, the parties submitted their Joint Submission on Penalty (“JSP”). While recognizing the Student’s expression of remorse, the Panel stated that their pattern of behaviour provided the Panel with no comfort that they had learned a lesson or that they were unlikely to repeat this behaviour given the opportunity. The Panel also noted the seriousness of the offence and the need for deterrence. Citing the decisions University of Toronto and M.H. (Case No. 1141, July 16, 2021) and University of Toronto and Y.Y. (Case No. 851, March 1, 2017 (Sanction), the Panel highlighted that cheating on a test is profoundly unfair to other students and that the integrity of examinations is a cornerstone of academic life. According to the Panel, the JSP was reasonable, it did not bring the administration of justice into disrepute, and it was not otherwise contrary to the public interest.
The Panel imposed the following sanctions: a grade of zero in the course; a suspension for three years and eight months; a notation on the Student's transcript until their graduation; and a report to the Provost for publication.