DATE:
February 24, 2025
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. M.F.A
HEARING DATE:
November 27, 2024, via Zoom
APPEARANCES:
Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel
HEARING SECRETARY:
Christopher Lang, Director, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
IN ATTENDANCE:
The Student
The Student was charged with two counts of knowingly using and/or possessing an unauthorized aid or aids and/or obtaining unauthorized assistance in connection with the final exam in BIO203H5F (the “First Course”) and the final exam of BIO208H5F (the “Second Course”), contrary to section B.i.1(b) of the Code.
The hearing proceeded on the basis of an Agreed Statement of Facts (the “ASF”) executed by the Student and the University. The ASF detailed that the Student was enrolled in the First and Second Courses during Fall 2023 and was required to write an in-person final exam in each course. During the final exam in the First Course, the Student was found to have concealed two cell phones (a smart phone and a flip phone) in their pocket by an exam invigilator. The smart phone was powered on and displaying notes which appeared to be generated by ChatGPT and directly related to the exam. During the final exam in the Second Course, the Student was again caught with two phones in their possession – a Smart phone and a flip phone – and had been using the Smart Phone to access notes related to the course. The Student subsequently admitted, in a meeting with the Dean’s Designate and in the ASF, that they had accessed and used a smart phone during each of the exams, and attempted to hide the smart phone (in particular, by first presenting the flip phone to the exam invigilators), and was aware that possession of the devices was not permitted. On the basis of the facts and admissions contained in the ASF, the Panel found the Student guilty of two counts of knowingly using and/or possessing an unauthorized aid or aids and/or obtaining unauthorized assistance, contrary to section B.i.1(b) of the Code.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the Panel considered an Agreed Statement of Facts on Penalty (the “ASFP”), and a joint submission on penalty (the “JSP”). The ASFP detailed that the Student was previously charged and found guilty by the Tribunal to have committed four prior academic offences of plagiarism and had been suspended from the University for four years. In determining the appropriateness of the JSP, the Panel considered the sanctioning factors set out in University of Toronto v Mr. C. (Case No. 1976/1977-3, November 5, 1976, “Mr. C”). With respect to the Student’s character, the Panel found that while the Student had cooperated with the process, the number of offences was a negative factor. The Panel also observed that there were no extenuating circumstances. The Panel further noted that there was nothing to suggest – in view of the Student’s prior offences – that the Student would not repeat their conduct if not sanctioned significantly. The Panel also observed that the detriment to the University was significant, and a serious sanction was required to deter others from committing similar types of misconduct. With respect to the proposed sanction in the JSP, the Panel concluded that it was consistent with relevant prior cases decided by the Tribunal and accepted the JSP on that basis.
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 and a corresponding notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript; and a final grade of zero in the First and Second Course.