DATE:
June 5, 2025
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. Z.C. ("the Student")
HEARING DATE:
February 18, 2025 via Zoom
PANEL MEMBERS:
Shaun Laubman, Chair
Professor Peter Coyte, Faculty Panel Member
Ozanay Bozkaya, Student Panel Member
APPEARANCES:
William Webb, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
IN ATTENDANCE:
The Student
HEARING SECRETARY:
Karen Bellinger, Associate Director, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
The Student was charged with one count of knowingly using or possessing an unauthorized aid in a final exam in ECO101 (the “Course”), contrary to section B.I.1(b) of the Code of Behaviour and Academic Matters, 2019 (the “Code”).
The hearing proceeded on the basis of an Agreed Statement of Facts (the “ASF”) and Joint Submission of Penalty (“JSP”). The ASF detailed that the Student was required to write a final exam in the Course. During the exam, the Student was observed holding her exam booklet in front of her chest at an unusual angle and making a motion with one hand in her pocket that seemed like she was pressing a button. The Chief Presiding Officer investigated and saw the Student had a miniature earpiece in one ear and a black button on her shirt that the Student later admitted in the ASF was a button camera. The Student admitted that she used and possessed unauthorized aids during the final exam to obtain unauthorized assistance from a third party.
Based on the ASF and the admissions within, the Panel found the Student guilty of use of an unauthorized aid, contrary to section B.I.1(b) of the Code.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the Panel considered the JSP submitted by the parties, case law, and an apology made by the Student. The panel noted that sanctions for this type of conduct range from expulsion to a five-year suspension. The Student engaged in an extremely serious breach of academic integrity that is deserving of a harsh sanction. They further found that the Student’s actions were completely premeditated and deliberate. On the other hand, the Panel found that the Student’s apology was meaningful and insightful and demonstrated a genuine commitment to learning from their mistake and not repeating it in the future. Further, the Student entered into an undertaking to complete academic success workshops.
The Panel concluded that the sanctions proposed in the JSP would not be contrary to the public interest nor would they bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
The Panel imposed the following sanction: a final grade of zero in the Course; a five-year suspension, and a notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript until they graduate.