Search

Displaying 32601 - 32625 of 37656 result(s)

Case 1047 - Sanction

Type of Content

University Tribunal Decision

Chair

Kuehl, Cynthia

Outcome/sanction

Grade Assignment of 0 for course

Notation on transcript ( 4 - 4+ years )

Suspension ( 2 - 2+ years )

Trial Division – s. B.i.l(b) of Code – unauthorized aid – Student knew or ought to have reasonably known that he possessed an unauthorized aid sheet in connection with a final examination – penalty hearing – unusual seven-month delay between the finding and the penalty hearing was due partly to Covid-19 pandemic - threshold to reject a joint submission had not been met given the very unusual circumstances of the global pandemic, the implications on the Student’s life and the presence of mitigating factors - the extraordinary circumstances of the pandemic resulted in acceptance of the JSP that results in a suspension, which, while intended to be three years, in practical effect was substantially less - Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) – Joint Submission on Penalty (“JSP”) - grade assignment of zero in the course - suspension from the University from the date the Panel made its order until August 30, 2022 - four-year notation on the transcript - report to Provost for publication with the Student’s name withheld.  

Case 1066

Type of Content

University Tribunal Decision

Chair

Thomas, Lori Anne

Outcome/sanction

Notation on transcript ( 4 - 4+ years )

Suspension ( 3 - 3+ years )

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(a) of Code  – forged documents – Student knowingly falsified statements about her purported work history in two applications for two work-study positions in labs for supervised study courses, or she knowingly uttered, circulated, or made use of those falsified statements – Student admitted charges – Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) – Joint Submission on Penalty (“JSP”) accepted – Joint Book of Authorities (“JBA”) - Discipline Appeals Board in The University of Toronto and M. A. (Case No. 837, December 22, 2016), which affirms R. v. Anthony-Cook, 2016 SCC 43 – finding of guilt – the Panel stressed the need for certainty when parties come to an agreement – three-year suspension – four-year notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript – report to Provost for publication of the decision and sanctions, with the name of the Student withheld .

Case 1063

Type of Content

University Tribunal Decision

Chair

Braden, Johanna

Outcome/sanction

Grade Assignment of 0 for course

Notation on transcript ( 3 - 3+ years )

Suspension ( 2 - 2+ years )

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(d) of the Code - three counts – plagiarism - Student knowingly represented as her own an idea, or expression of an idea, and/or the work of another in essays submitted in two courses - Student did not attend hearing – Rules 9, 16 and 17 of the Tribunal Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”) - ss. 6 and 7 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act (“SPPA”) – University’s Policy on Official Correspondence with Students – finding of guilt - University of Toronto and B.S. (Case No. 697, December 17, 2013) - harsher suspension is required - grade assignment of zero for both courses - suspension commencing the day the Panel made its Order and ending on December 31, 2022 - a notation of the sanction on the Student’s academic record and transcript commencing the day the Panel made its Order and ending on December 31, 2023.

Case 1033

Type of Content

University Tribunal Decision

Chair

Pinto, Andrew

Outcome/sanction

Notation on transcript ( 5+ years )

Suspension ( 4 - 4+ years )

Trial Division – s. B.i.3(a) of Code – forged documents – Student knowingly forged or in any other way altered or falsified an academic record, and/or uttered, circulated or made use of such forged, altered or falsified record, namely two documents that purported to be reference letters from two of his professors and a document that purported to be a transcript of consolidated academic record from the University - partial Agreed Statement of Facts - Joint Book of Documents - Joint Submission on Penalty accepted - Discipline Appeals Board decision in The University of Toronto and M. A. (Case No. 837, December 22, 2016) - up to four-year suspension, until December 31, 2023 - up to five-year notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript, until December 31, 2024 - report to the Provost for publication of the decision and the sanctions imposed, with the name of the Student withheld.

CRCC 2020 Report

Type of Content

File

Face Masks, Policy on

Type of Content

File

Report 409

Type of Content

Academic Appeal Committee Report

Chair

Stewart, Hamish

Outcomes

Appeal dismissed

UT – Faculty of Law – request to return to the program on a part-time basis with appropriate accommodations – duty to accommodate to the point of undue hardship – reasonable accommodation – jurisdiction – standard of review of correctness vs reasonableness – jurisdiction cannot be created by consent (Phillips and Phillips v. The Queen, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 161; Canada (Attorney General) v. Haberman, 2000 CanLII 15802 (Fed. C.A.) – the Committee’s function does not extend to invalidating the policies of a division, even if it is of the view that those policies are flawed or unfair – Terms of Reference Academic Appeals Committee (“Terms”) – although the Terms do not explicitly define the standard of review, the Policy on Academic Appeals within Divisions (2005) states that the “standard of review of an academic appeal is reasonableness.” – s. 17(1) and (2) of the Human Rights Code (“Code”) – Academic Accommodations Policy – academic accommodations contribute to academic integrity by attempting to ensure that the extraneous factor of disability does not affect a student’s reported results; they are not designed to guarantee that the student succeeds – it is not contrary to the Code to refuse an accommodation that would compromise academic integrity – Student had three unsuccessful, heavily supported, attempts at completing the first year of the program – no realistic basis in which the Student would be likely to succeed in the program regardless of accommodation – dissent – allowing the Student to continue part-time is a reasonable accommodation of his disability – the Student’s history has no bearing on whether part-time studies would now be an appropriate accommodation – the majority Committee agreed with the Academic Standing Committee – appeal dismissed.

Case 994 - Sanction

Type of Content

University Tribunal Decision

Chair