DATE:
January 31, 2023
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. B.Z. and Y.C. ("the Students")
HEARING DATE:
September 8, 2022, via Zoom
PANEL MEMBERS:
Andrew Bernstein, Chair
Professor Ian Crandall, Faculty Panel Member
Yazan Zamel, Student Panel Member
APPEARANCES:
Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Chew Chang, Representative for B.Z., Chang Legal and Notary Public
Student # 1 B.Z.
Student # 2 Y.C.
HEARING SECRETARY:
Carmelle Salomon-Labbe, Associate Director, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
The University laid eight charges against Student 1 under the following sections of the Code in relation to a course: one count under section B.i.1(d), two counts under section B.i.1(b), two counts under section B.i.1(f), and three counts under section B.i.3(b). The University laid the following six charges against Student 2 with respect to the same course: one count under section B.i.1(b), one count under section B.i.1(d), two counts under section B.i.1(f), and two counts under section B.i.3(b).
Both students entered into an agreed statement of facts (“ASF”) and attended the hearing, but they did not accept liability in relation to their respective assignment. They were enrolled in the same course, which required them to submit an assignment. Student 1 submitted their paper first, and on the following day, Student 2 submitted their paper, which was nearly identical to Student 1’s paper. Student 1 subsequently submitted an assignment on behalf of Student 2. The students submitted a letter of explanation to express remorse. But that letter contained lies, which, according to the Panel, demonstrated a lack of honesty. Based on the evidence, the Panel concluded that the papers had been purchased online, and that the students had lied to avoid detection.
The Panel found Student 1 guilty of the following six charges: one count of plagiarism contrary to section B.i.1(d) and B.ii.1 of the Code, two counts of obtaining and/or providing unauthorized assistance contrary to sections B.i.1(b) and B.ii.1. of the Code, and three counts of academic dishonesty and misrepresentation contrary to sections B.i.3(b) and B.ii.1 of the Code. As for Student 2, the Panel found them guilty of the following four charges: one count of plagiarism contrary to section B.i.1(d) of the Code, one count of obtaining unauthorized assistance contrary to sections B.i.1(b) and B.ii.1 of the Code, and two counts of engaging in a form of cheating, academic dishonesty or misconduct, fraud or misrepresentation not otherwise described in order to obtain academic advantage of any kind contrary to sections B.i.3(b) and B.ii.1 of the Code.
In determining the sanction, the Panel agreed that there were not sufficient aggravating factors to warrant recommending expulsion. However, it observed that the students’ record of ongoing dishonesty – even while purporting to apologize – made it wonder whether they could be trusted in an academic environment again.
The Panel imposed the following sanctions on both students: a grade of zero in the course; a five-year suspension; a six-year notation on their transcripts; and a report to the Provost for publication.