DATE:
December 9, 2024
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. Z.H.
HEARING DATE:
November 1, 2024 via Zoom
PANEL MEMBERS:
F. Paul Morrison, Chair
Professor Manfred Schneider, Faculty Panel Member
James Wang, Student Panel Member
APPEARANCES:
William Webb, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Chew Chang, Representative for the Student, Chang Legal & Notary Public
HEARING SECRETARY:
Karen Bellinger, Associate Director, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
IN ATTENDANCE:
The Student
The Student was charged with knowingly using or possessing an unauthorized aid and/or obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection with the final exam in STA573H3F (“Final Exam”), or attempted to do so, contrary to sections B.i.1(b) and B.ii.2 of the Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters, 2019 (the “Code”). In the alternative, the Student was charged with knowingly representing as their own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another in connection with the Final Exam. Also 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.
The hearing proceeded by way of an Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”), submitted jointly by the Student and the University. The Student was enrolled in the Course and was required to complete a Final Exam worth 40% or 70% of their final grade depending on whether or not they wrote the midterm exam. The Final Exam was administered in-person and students were prohibited from possessing or using aids, except a calculator, or obtaining assistance. During the Final Exam, an invigilator noticed that some of the buttons on the Student’s shirt looked unusual and asked the Student whether they had any unauthorized aids. The invigilator noticed that the Student was wearing an earpiece, which the Student claimed was a hearing aid, and had a cellphone and another earpiece in their pocket. The Student subsequently admitted that they were wearing a miniature earpiece for the purpose of obtaining assistance and had purchased an exam assistant service from an individual on WeChat. At a Dean’s Designate Meeting, the Student admitted to possessing an unauthorized aid with the intention of receiving unauthorized assistance, but did not actually receive assistance from any third part during the Final Exam. The Student denied, however, that they wore a button camera during the Final Exam.
In support of the University’s position that the Student was wearing a button camera, the University provided additional affidavit evidence of an Academic Integrity Specialist containing evidence that the Student’s clothing included a button camera. The affidavit described the appearance and mode of functioning of button cameras. The Panel found such evidence to be clear and compelling evidence that the Student’s clothing included a button camera.
Based on the ASF and the submissions made by both parties, the Panel found the Student guilty of knowingly possessing an unauthorized aid and/or obtaining unauthorized assistance, contrary to sections B.i.1(b) and/or B.ii.2 of the Code.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the Panel considered an Agreed Statement of Facts on Penalty (the “ASFP”). The ASFP detailed that the Student had committed a prior academic offence of using authorized assistance for the completion of an assignment in a different course. The Panel also considered precedent cases of the Tribunal related to the use of miniature cameras and earpieces in the course of an examination or academic test. The Panel also heard submissions from the University that a penalty including expulsion was called for in cases involving miniature cameras and earpieces, except in cases in which there were extenuating circumstances.
On the basis of the ASFP, the precedent cases, and the submissions by the University, the Panel imposed the following sanction: a recommendation to the President of the University that the President recommend to the Governing Council that the Student be expelled from the University; a five-year suspension from the University; a five-year notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript; a final grade of zero in the Course; and a report to the Provost for publication.