DATE:
January 28, 2025
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. J.F.
Hearing Date:
November 13, 2024, via Zoom
Panel Members :
Christopher Wirth, Chair
Dr. Lynda Mainwaring, Faculty Panel Member
Maria Dzevitski, Student Panel
Appearances:
Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Jesse Wright, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Jimin Lee, Representative for the Student, Downtown Legal Services Sukhpreet Sangha, Supervising Lawyer, Downtown Legal Services
Hearing Secretary:
Carmelle Salomon-Labbé, Associate Director, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
In Attendance:
The Student
The Student was charged with knowingly representing as their own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another in connection with an assignment in CSC108H5 (the “Course”), contrary to section B.i.1(d) of the Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters, 2019 (the “Code”). In the alternative, the Student was charged with knowingly obtaining and/or providing unauthorized assistance. In the further alternative, the Student was charged with knowingly engaging in a form of cheating, academic dishonesty or misconduct, fraud or misrepresentation.
The hearing proceeded on the basis of an Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) tendered jointly by the Student and the University. Th ASF detailed that the Student was enrolled in the Course in Fall 2022 and was required to complete a programming assignment, worth 10% of the Course mark. The Student submitted the assignment, which was subsequently run through MOSS, a computer software that compares programs. MOSS flagged the Student’s code as being highly similar to code submitted by other students in the Course, including virtually identical answers for some of the assignment questions. The Course instructor informed the Student and advised them to sign an Admission of Guilt Form, which the Student promptly signed. At a meeting with the Dean’s Designate, the Student admitted that they had purchased all the code submitted for the assignment from an individual on WeChat. The Student plead guilty to all of the charges. On the basis of the evidence and the admissions of the Student contained in the ASF, the Panel concluded that the Student was guilty of one count of representing as their own the work of another contrary to section B.i.1(d) of the Code.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the Panel considered an Agreed Statement of Facts for Sanction and Joint Submission on Penalty (the “ASFS/JSP”) entered into by the parties. The ASFS/JSP detailed that the Student had committed one prior offence, involving the use of an unauthorized aid in a different course. The ASFS/JSP also contained statements of the Student regarding their personal circumstances and mental health. The University also provided a Book of Documents outlining a number of prior relevant decisions of the Tribunal. The Panel concluded that it was appropriate to accept the proposed sanction contained in the ASFS/JSP, as it was within the reasonable range of penalty for similar conduct established by prior decisions of the Tribunal.
The Panel imposed the following sanction on the Student: a final grade of zero in the Course; a five-year suspension from the University; and a six-year notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript.