Search

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(b) of Code – unauthorized assistance in a midterm test – admission at the hearing – student admitted to collaborating with other students – finding of guilt – joint submission on penalty – student undermined the grades-based system of evaluation and broke the honour code that is essential to modern learning – joint submission on penalty did not bring the administration of justice into disrepute – grade of zero in the course; three-year suspension; notation on transcript until graduation; and report to Provost.

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(b) of Code – unauthorized assistance – Student knowingly used or possessed an unauthorized aid, or aids, or obtained unauthorized assistance in connection with two assignments – Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) – admission of guilt – the Student admitted to accessing Chegg.com – finding of guilt – Agreed Statement of Fact on Sanction – four prior academic offences – Joint Submission on Penalty (“JSP”) – the Panel did not recommend expulsion in this case as there was no proof that the Student paid for access to Chegg.com and the Student did eventually cooperate with the University in this matter – the proposed penalty is serious and lengthy – the Panel accepted that the JSP was reasonable and within the range of appropriate sanctions for the offences the Student committed – a grade of zero in the course; a suspension of just under five years; a six-year notation or until graduation on the transcript, whichever comes first; and a report to the Provost for publication.

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(d) of Code – student did not attend the hearing – student was given reasonable notice of the hearing – student knowingly represented as their own an idea or expression of an idea or work of another in an assignment – student’s assignment was similar to another student’s assignment – chances of two students independently developing such similar solutions were virtually zero – finding of guilt – plagiarism and the use of third-party sources are considered serious offences that strike at the heart of academic integrity – University and the Tribunal must send a strong message to other students – grade of zero in the course; two-year suspension; three-year notation on transcript; and report to Provost.