Code of Student Academic Integrity

• Chapter 1. Principles and Purpose
• Chapter 2. Definitions
• Chapter 3. Standards of Due Process, Standard of Proof, and Jurisdiction
• Chapter 4. Responsibilities
• Chapter 5. Rights of the Parties
• Chapter 6. Prohibited Behaviors
• Chapter 7. Academic Misconduct Process Structure
• Chapter 8. Outcomes
• Chapter 9. Appeals
• Chapter 10. Case Files and Disciplinary Records
• Chaper 11. Graduate Students
• Related Resources

• Procedures for Adjudication of Academic Misconduct Cases 

• ---

  As amended and effective for violations occurring on or after July 7, 2025.
• Click here for .pdf version

Chapter 1. Principles and Purpose

The University of North Carolina at Charlotte is an academic community dedicated to teaching, research, service, and the holistic development of Students. Academic integrity is a cornerstone value of the University’s intellectual community. It is important to nurture an atmosphere of honesty, fairness, trust, respect, and mutual responsibility. Integrity is essential because it ensures that Students fairly benefit from their educational experiences and pursuits of knowledge. Violating the principles of academic integrity hinders a Student’s academic progress, damages the reputation of the University and undermines the University's educational mission and goals.

The University recognizes that Academic Misconduct detracts from the value of a UNC Charlotte degree and has influence beyond the University community, including relationships with employers, other educational institutions, the business community, the UNC System, and the community at large.

The purpose of the Code of Student Academic Integrity (the Code) is to:

1. support and promote an ethical learning environment;
2. create consistent standards for all members of the academic community;
3. assist Students in taking responsibility for one’s own academic work;
4. protect the integrity of the academic environment of the University community; and
5. clarify Student values and how they relate to appropriate academic conduct.

Chapter 2. Definitions

When used in the Code, certain terms are defined as follows:

1. Academic Misconduct means behavior and/or action by a Student that interferes with education or fair evaluation of a Student’s performance or work, including any of the behavior prohibited in Chapter 6 of the Code and is synonymous with the term “academic dishonesty” in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 116-40.11.
2. Academic Misconduct Procedures means procedures outlined in the Code and the Procedures for Adjudication of Academic Misconduct (“Supplemental Procedures”) addressing alleged Academic Misconduct by a Student through which a Faculty Member, designated University official, or Hearing Panel considers information and/or documentation in order to address whether a Student has violated the Code.
3. Academic Integrity Board (AIB) means a body of full-time faculty members, composed as set forth in Chapter 7, Section III, the members of which serve on Hearing Panels to adjudicate charges of Academic Misconduct.
4. Advisor means an individual invited by the Student, Faculty, or Referring Party to attend a Hearing and to confer with the Student, Faculty, or Referring Party during the Hearing. An Advisor may not address a University official or the Hearing Panel, other parties, or witnesses, and may not unreasonably delay, disrupt, or otherwise interfere with the proceedings. An Advisor may not argue, make statements, or question witnesses; however, an Advisor may respond to questions if asked to do so by the Convenor of the Hearing Panel. An Advisor may not be called as a witness.
5. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is technology that allows machines to do tasks that normally require human thinking, such as learning, solving problems, understanding language, content creation, and/or decision making
6. Authorization means approval of an action, conduct, or activity provided by the Faculty Member responsible for the evaluation of the Student's academic work or as otherwise required in the Code.
7. Chair means the Chair of the Academic Integrity Board.
8. Code means University Policy 407, Code of Student Academic Integrity.
9. Convener means the member of the Hearing Panel who exercises control over the Hearing proceedings to maintain a fair, impartial, and efficient Hearing.
10. Day (unless otherwise specified) means a business day on which the University is open.
11. Director means the Associate Dean of Students and Director of Student Accountability & Conflict Resolution or designee.
12. Disciplinary Standing is a designation of a Student’s disciplinary status with the University.
    a. “Good” disciplinary standing means the Student is not on a probationary or higher disciplinary status and does not have any outstanding Academic Misconduct outcomes. 
    b. “Not in Good” disciplinary standing means the Student has an active probationary or higher disciplinary status and/or has outstanding Academic Misconduct outcomes.  
13. Facilitator means an individual appointed by the Director to conduct a Facilitated Resolution.
14. Faculty Member means a person who is responsible for assigning, grading, reviewing, and/or assessing an academic exercise that is alleged to have been affected by Academic Misconduct, including full-time faculty members, part-time faculty members, adjunct faculty members, instructors, and teaching assistants or a designee.
15. Hearing means the resolution method adjudicated by a Hearing Panel.
16. Hearing Panel means a body of two members of the Academic Integrity Board (AIB) and a trained undergraduate or graduate student appointed by the Chair or designee that adjudicate a charge of Academic Misconduct against a Student.
17. Procedural Advisor means a representative from the Student Accountability Board (AIB) or a staff member appointed by the Director or designee.
18. Provost means the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
19. Referring Party means an individual, other than the Faculty Member on record, who suspects that Academic Misconduct has occurred or is appointed by the chair of their department, who determines that the information is sufficient to warrant an adjudication and participates in the Academic Misconduct process as a representative of the University.
20. Resolution Types include, but are not limited to: 
    a. In Absentia Resolution means the resolution method in which a case is resolved in the Student’s absence.
    b. Informal Resolution means the resolution method in which, if offered, a Student voluntarily accepts the determinations on responsibility and outcome(s) proposed by the Faculty Member or Referring Party.
    c. Facilitated Resolution means the resolution method in which, if offered, a Student and Faculty Member or Referring Party voluntarily accept the determinations on responsibility and outcome(s) as proposed by the Director or designee.
    d. Hearing means a formal resolution option involving a Hearing Panel.
    1. Hearing Panel means a body of two members of the Academic Integrity Board (AIB) and a trained undergraduate or graduate Student appointed by the Director or designee that adjudicates a charge of Academic Misconduct against a Student
    2. Outcome-Only Hearing means a hearing in which the Student takes responsibility for the Academic Misconduct Charge(s) and the Hearing Panel makes a decision only on an appropriate outcome(s).
21. Responsible means determined by the Academic Misconduct Procedures to have committed a violation(s) of the Code.
22. Staff Advisor means an individual appointed by the Director to advise a Hearing Panel on the Hearing process.
23. Student means an individual who has accepted an offer of admission to the University; is currently enrolled in coursework or has registered for coursework at the University; has a continuing relationship with the University; is an auditing Student; or is participating in an educational program sponsored by or affiliated with the University. The continuing relationship ends upon graduation, termination of the relationship, or a break in enrollment of twelve (12) consecutive months after the last semester attended at the University.
24. Student Panel Member means an undergraduate or graduate student who is selected, appointed, and trained by the Director or designee to serve on Hearing Panels to adjudicate cases of Academic Misconduct.

Chapter 3. Standards of Due Process, Standard of Proof, and Jurisdiction

Section I. Standards of Due Process

1. Any Student is entitled to a Hearing before a Hearing Panel, except when the case is resolved through an In Absentia resolution, an Informal Resolution, or a Facilitated Resolution, as provided in Chapter 7 of the Code.
2. The focus of inquiry in the Academic Misconduct Procedures is to determine whether the Student is or is not responsible for engaging in Academic Misconduct prohibited under Chapter 6 of the Code, and, if found responsible, to determine the outcome to be imposed.
3. Formal rules of evidence do not apply, nor does deviation from prescribed procedures necessarily invalidate a decision or proceeding, unless significant prejudice to the Student or Faculty Member results.

Section II. Standard of Proof

For a Student to be found responsible for Academic Misconduct under the Code, the Faculty Member or Referring Party must establish that the Student is responsible for Academic Misconduct by a preponderance of the evidence—that it is more likely than not that the Student engaged in Academic Misconduct as charged. This determination must be based solely on the information presented during the Academic Misconduct Procedures. Information presented may include, but is not limited to, pertinent records (e.g., assignment, syllabi), exhibits (e.g., photographs, audio/video information, social media information), and written/oral statements.

A Student is presumed not responsible until determined otherwise through the Academic Misconduct Procedures.

Section III. Authority and Jurisdiction

1. All procedural and interpretive questions concerning the Code will be resolved by the Director, in consultation with the Chair. This includes, but is not limited to, whether a case is continued to be pursued under the Code.
2. When necessary, and in consultation with the Chair, the Director may alter academic misconduct procedures to protect the University community, property, or resources.
3. Jurisdiction under the Code may be exercised with respect to all academic work, whether in the classroom, online, through distance education, or in-person. Academic work subject to the Code may be either inside or outside the context of an academic course, including in the preparation of materials submitted as a program or degree requirement or in other non-course-related academic contexts, except as provided in Chapter 3, Section III.4 below.
4. Academic work that is submitted in a grant application or for publication, or in the case of a thesis or dissertation, submitted to ProQuest (or the University's then current dissertation database), falls under the jurisdiction of the Research Misconduct process. Prior to initiating an Academic Misconduct case in which research integrity might be implicated, the Research Integrity Officer and the Chair should discuss the case and make a mutual determination about the appropriate process to be applied. See University Policy 309, Responding to Allegations of Misconduct in Research and Scholarship.

Chapter 4. Responsibilities

The responsibility for maintaining the academic standards of honesty and integrity is shared by all members of the academic community. Students and Faculty Members are expected to be familiar with, and abide by, the provisions of the Code.

Section I. Faculty Member Responsibilities

Faculty Members are responsible for the academic instruction and evaluation methods for all academic exercises. As such, Faculty Members should ensure, to the best of their ability, that all work submitted by Students is consistent with academic standards, including being free from the adverse impacts of Academic Misconduct. To that end, Faculty Members are obligated to:

1. Publish, review, and enforce their expectations for academic conduct in course work, including written syllabus policy notices and/or written notices on exams and assignments.
2. If the Faculty Member suspects that Academic Misconduct has occurred and determines that the information is sufficient to warrant an adjudication, report all such cases of suspected Academic Misconduct using the appropriate method outlined in the Code of Student Academic Integrity so a central record may be kept.
3. Faculty are expected to participate as needed in the adjudication of the suspected Academic Misconduct.
4. Engage mechanisms that discourage Academic Misconduct, such as exam monitoring, online submission of materials, etc. (See examples.)

Section II. Student Responsibilities

Students are integral members of the academic community and are responsible for their academic work, abiding by the Code, and will be held responsible for their Academic Misconduct. As responsible members of the University community, Students are expected to

1. Review and abide by expectations set forth by the Faculty Member for academic conduct in course work, including syllabus policy notices and/or notices on exams and assignments;
2. Seek clarification from a Faculty Member regarding expectations related to academic work; and
3. Take an active role in encouraging other members of the academic community to respect the standards set forth in the Code. Should a Student suspect Academic Misconduct, they should make the suspicion known to the Faculty Member or Director.

Section III. Referring Party (other than Faculty Member) Responsibilities

Members of the University community are also expected to take an active role in encouraging Students to respect academic integrity. If a Referring Party suspects that Academic Misconduct has occurred and determines that the information is sufficient to warrant an Academic Misconduct adjudication, they should:

1. Make the suspicion known to the Faculty Member or Director.
2. As requested by the Director, attend and participate in any Academic Misconduct Procedures that may be conducted to adjudicate a charge of Academic Misconduct.

Chapter 5. Rights of the Parties

Section I. Rights of the Student

The Student has the following rights:

1. to be provided a fair, impartial, and efficient process;
2. to be presumed not responsible for a violation of the Code until determined otherwise;
3. to be given written notice of any allegation(s) of Academic Misconduct;
4. to review the information that will be presented in any case resolution, provided that the information may be given to the Student in a redacted format;
5. to present relevant information on their behalf;
6. to obtain support, advice, or assistance pursuant to relevant sections in Chapter 7 of the Code;
7. if found responsible, to have an outcome(s) imposed on the basis of the guidelines set forth in the Code;
8. to be informed of the final decision and results of a proceeding in writing;
9. to request reasonable accommodations in the adjudication of the case under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act through the Office of Disability Services;
10. to confront, in some manner, the allegations and information presented relevant to the formal charge(s) against them, which in all cases will be brought forward by the University;
11. to request that a member of a Hearing Panel be excluded from the Hearing on the basis of a conflict of interest, bias about, or interest in the case;
12. to pose reasonable questions, verbally or in writing, to any witness appearing at a Hearing through the Hearing Convenor;
13. to have prior Academic Misconduct excluded from information presented during a Hearing Panel’s deliberation of findings for any charge(s);
14. to appeal any decision of a Hearing Panel, pursuant to Chapter 9 of the Code; and
15. to have supervised access to a recording of the Hearing proceedings.

Section II. Rights of the Faculty Member or Referring Party

The Faculty Member or Referring Party has the following rights:

1. to be provided a fair, impartial, and efficient process;
2. to review the information that will be presented in any case resolution, provided that the information may be given to the Faculty Member or Referring Party in a redacted format;
3. to present relevant information on their behalf;
4. to obtain support, advice, or assistance pursuant to relevant sections in Chapter 7 of the Code;
5. to be informed of the final decision and results of a proceeding;
6. to request reasonable accommodations in the adjudication of the case under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act through the Office of Disability Services;
7. to be provided the same opportunities as the Student to address any University official involved with the resolution of the complaint, including being present during the findings stage of the Hearing;
8. to request that a member of a Hearing Panel be excluded from the Hearing on the basis of a conflict of interest, bias about, or interest in the case; and
9. to have supervised access to a recording of the Hearing proceedings only in which the Faculty Member or Referring Party has an opportunity to participate.

Chapter 6. Prohibited Behaviors

Except in cases of Research Misconduct, as set forth in Chapter 3, Section III.2 of the Code, the following behavior, or complicity in the following behavior (see examples in Supplemental Procedures), is considered Academic Misconduct under the Code:

1. Cheating means using or attempting to use materials, or giving assistance or materials without Authorization to another in any academic exercise that could result in gaining or helping another to gain academic advantage. Cheating includes, but is not limited, to the following actions:
   1. Copying - copying from another’s assignment, examination, or other academic exercise;
   2. Use of Unauthorized Materials - using materials or equipment in connection with an assignment, examination, or other academic exercise which have not been authorized by the faculty member, including but not limited to, notes, calculator, websites, Artificial Intelligence and/or other technology;
   3. Misrepresentation - permitting another to substitute for one’s self in an academic exercise, or submitting of an academic exercise that has been prepared by another;
   4. Unauthorized Collaboration - communicating about and/or sharing the work or effort in an academic exercise with another individual or individuals without Authorization. 
2. Fabrication means providing fabricated information, including inventing or counterfeiting information, in any form in an academic exercise. 
3. Failure to Comply means failing to comply with a specific instruction related to  a condition of protecting academic integrity that has been clearly communicated in a particular course, syllabus, test, assessment, assignment, or other academic exercise.
4. Falsification means altering without Authorization any data or information, regardless of communication method (e.g., e-mail or other electronic communication), in an academic exercise. 
5. Misuse of Academic Materials means sharing, distributing, altering, acquiring, damaging, or making inaccessible academic materials without Authorization, that could result in gaining or helping another to gain an academic advantage. 
6. Multiple Submission means submitting academic work or substantial portions of the same academic work (including oral reports) in more than one academic exercise or publication without Authorization. 
7. Plagiarism means presenting the words or ideas of another as one’s own words or ideas, including failing to properly acknowledge a source, unless the ideas or information are common knowledge. Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:
   1. Verbatim Plagiarism - copying word-for-word a section of someone else’s work, without attribution and without quotation marks.
   2. Inadequate/Uncited Paraphrasing - Failure to cite the rewording of another person’s original text, and/or presenting another person’s concepts or ideas as one’s own without proper attribution. This can include, but is not limited to, changing only a few words or altering the sentence structure from the original source and/or using Artificial Intelligence without citation.
   3. Failing to properly acknowledge a source - Giving incorrect and/or not including information about a source in accordance with the citation style. This may include, but is not limited to, missing in-text citations, missing or omitted sources, and/or using text generated by Artificial Intelligence without attribution.
   4. Self-plagiarism - the use of one's own previous work in another context without indicating that it was used previously.

   5. Mosaic Plagiarism - Patchwriting, and/or reusing a mix of words, phrases, and ideas from one or more source(s) (a) without indicating which words and ideas have been borrowed, and/or (b) without properly citing the source(s).

Chapter 7. Academic Misconduct Process Structure

This Chapter outlines the general process for handling suspected cases of Academic Misconduct. Specific procedures for adjudicating cases of Academic Misconduct are detailed in the Procedures for Adjudication of Academic Misconduct Cases supplemental to the Code (“Supplemental Procedures”).

Section I. Case Referrals

Timely resolution of suspected Academic Misconduct cases is highly desirable for both the University and the accused Student. To this end, Faculty Members and Referring Parties are responsible for timely communication with the appropriate University officials involved in the Academic Misconduct process. Specific procedures for case referrals are set forth in the Supplemental Procedures.

Once a Student has received notice of an alleged Academic Misconduct violation, if the Student withdraws from the course, the Academic Misconduct adjudication process may continue.

Failure to submit a timely referral to the Academic Misconduct Procedures may limit the University’s ability to appropriately respond to the referral and may result in a case no longer being pursued.

Section II. Resolution Types

The Procedures for Adjudication of Academic Misconduct Cases provide details and guidance on each resolution type summarized below.

A. Informal Resolution

Some first offenses are properly handled and remedied by an Informal Resolution for the course or program in which the Academic Misconduct occurred. In the event the Faculty Member is unavailable, or the academic exercise was evaluated by more than one person, the chair of the department may appoint a designee to participate in the Academic Misconduct process as a representative of the University.

B. Facilitated Resolution

The Director, in consultation with the Chair, may determine that a Facilitated Resolution is appropriate and offer a Facilitated Resolution:

1. If a Student is eligible for an Informal Resolution (it is the Student’s first charge of Academic Misconduct), but the Faculty Member or Referring Party and the Student are unable to reach an Informal Resolution; or
2. If a Student is not eligible for an Informal Resolution (it is not the Student’s first charge of Academic Misconduct) or the Faculty Member /Referring Party chooses not to offer an Informal Resolution, but the Director determines that it is appropriate to attempt resolution through a Facilitated Resolution.

C. In Absentia Resolution

If a case has not been resolved through Informal Resolution or Facilitated Resolution, and the Student has not responded to meeting requests from the Director or designee, the case may be resolved in the Student’s absence through an In Absentia Resolution, in the discretion of the Director or designee.

D. Resolution through Hearing

1. Resolution before a Hearing Panel may be appropriate in any of the following circumstances:
   1. the Student has been charged and found responsible for a prior Academic Misconduct offense;
   2. the Faculty Member or Referring Party believes that a more severe outcome is warranted for an alleged first Academic Misconduct charge than is permitted under an Informal Resolution and the Director has determined that a Facilitated Resolution is not appropriate;
   3. the Student is eligible for an Informal Resolution, but no such resolution is reached pursuant to the procedures in Chapter 7;
   4. the Director or designee has determined that a Facilitated Resolution is appropriate and has offered a Facilitated Resolution, but either the Student or Faculty Member/Referring Party declines the offer or no such resolution is reached pursuant to the procedures in Chapter 7; or
   5. an outcome that includes expulsion or degree revocation is being pursued.
       
2. Outcome-Only Hearing

If a Student takes responsibility for the charged violation(s) but does not accept the outcome(s) offered in an Informal or Facilitated Resolution, they can request an Outcome-Only Hearing. Upon such a request, the Director or designee, in their discretion, may grant an Outcome-Only Hearing. In an Outcome-Only Hearing, the Hearing Panel accepts the Student taking responsibility for the violation(s) and will make a decision only on an appropriate outcome(s).

E.  Scheduling Delays

In consultation with the Chair, and at the discretion of the Director, the scheduling of a Hearing may be delayed:

1. during times of heavy caseloads;
2. if the Formal Charge(s) occurs close to the end of an academic semester or term;
3. in the event of the reasonable need of the Student or the University for additional time to gather information for the Hearing;
4. upon request of the Student or Faculty Member/Referring Party due to extenuating circumstances;  or
5. due to decreased availability of student and faculty panelists during summer terms, academic breaks, and/or for extenuating circumstances.

F.  Failure to Appear

If a Student who is charged with Academic Misconduct fails to appear at a Hearing after being notified pursuant to the Code, the Hearing will continue in the absence of the Student. If a Faculty Member or Referring Party who has referred an Academic Misconduct case fails to appear at a Hearing after being notified pursuant to the Code, the Hearing will continue in the absence of the Faculty Member or Referring Party.

Section III. Academic Integrity Board and Hearing Panels

1. AIB Composition
   1. The AIB is composed of full-time faculty members, including the AIB Chair.
   2. At least two faculty members shall be appointed to the AIB from each college, and the number of faculty members appointed from each college shall be in proportion to the number of full-time faculty members in each college.
   3. The Provost or designee shall determine the minimum number of members of the AIB and shall appoint the Chair. The Provost or Provost’s designee shall appoint all other faculty members to the AIB.
   4. The faculty members and the Chair shall be appointed for two-year staggered terms. All members of the AIB may be reappointed.
2. Hearing Panels
   1. The Director or designee shall appoint a Hearing Panel of two members of the AIB and one Student Panel Member to adjudicate a charge of Academic Misconduct.
   2. One of the members of the Hearing Panel will be designated by the Director or designee as the Convener to conduct the Hearing.
   3. When the accused Student is a graduate Student, the Hearing Panel must include graduate faculty and a graduate Student Panel Member.
   4. The Director or designee shall assign Hearing Panel members on the basis of availability and impartiality in a particular case. Neither faculty member may be from the same academic department in which the alleged offense occurred or the department in which the accused Student is seeking a degree.
   5. When the appointed faculty members of the AIB are unable to serve on a particular case, the Director is authorized to appoint a faculty member from an appropriate department on an interim basis.
   6. The Chair may not sit on a Hearing Panel.
3. Conflicts of Interest or Bias
   1. The Student, Faculty Member, or Referring Party may challenge any member of the Hearing Panel on grounds of a conflict, bias or relationship that might affect impartial consideration of the case by that Panel member. The Student, Faculty Member, or Referring Party must submit the challenge in writing to the Director or designee at least two (2) Days prior to the scheduled Hearing. The Director must decide the challenge prior to the Hearing. If the Director, in consultation with the Chair, determines possible bias, they will excuse the Hearing Panel member and appoint a replacement. The Hearing may be rescheduled at the discretion of the Director or designee in order to appoint an available replacement.
   2. Additionally, Hearing Panel members may recuse themselves if they believe there is a conflict with, bias about, or interest in the case.
   3. The Director, in consultation with the Chair, shall make the final decision whether to exclude any Hearing Panel member; this decision cannot be appealed. If a Hearing Panel member is excluded, the Director will select a new Panel member as a substitute.

Chapter 8. Outcomes

Outcomes for Academic Misconduct are intended to educate Students on the effects of their Academic Misconduct, encourage appropriate behavior in future academic exercises, and uphold the standards essential to maintaining the integrity of the academic community.

In all cases, a course grade received based on outcomes imposed in an In Absentia Resolution, Informal Resolution, Facilitated Resolution, or Hearing will not be replaced if the course is repeated. This provision is not subject to appeal or academic petition. Students are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the applicable academic policies, including course progression expectations and the undergraduate grading policy and graduate grading policy. 

Section I. Compelling Factors

Compelling factors may be considered when determining outcomes and may include, but are not limited to:

1. Student’s demonstration of insight about their behavior;
2. Nature and seriousness of the offense;
3. Injury or damage resulting from the Academic Misconduct;
4. Student's motivation, intent, and state of mind at the time of the incident;
5. Student's prior Academic Misconduct record; and
6. Student's attitude and demeanor subsequent to the violation.

Section II. Outcome Options for Faculty Members (Informal Resolution)

Possible outcomes that may be imposed under an Informal Resolution are:

1. Disciplinary Warning. Official documentation conveying to the Student that their behavior was unacceptable and that any future violation of the Code may result in more severe action, including Suspension, or Expulsion;
2. Resubmission of Academic Exercise with or without grade penalty;
3. Reduced Academic Exercise Grade including an "F" or zero points on the academic exercise (assignment, exam, etc.);
4. Reduced Course Grade including "F" for an undergraduate course  and "U" for graduate course; and/or
5. Educational Outcomes to help Students learn from their decisions and reflect on what they want to get out of the University experience. See examples.
6. Remediation. With the recognition that students can learn and grow from their mistakes, remediation may be offered for some first offenses. For undergraduate courses, remediation is designed as an educational intervention to prevent repeat offenses. Upon successful completion of the Remediation Workshop and associated assignment(s), the Student is eligible to have the record converted to an internal record that is not disclosed as part of a disciplinary record, unless otherwise required. Common exceptions to disclosure include, but is not limited to, if a student grants someone a full release of their records (e.g., if they are applying to work for government or law enforcement) or if an entity has a legal right to see the complete record (e.g., for a legal proceeding).

Failure to complete the requirements of remediation within the designated timeline will render the case ineligible for conversion to an internal record. The nature of some violations, especially those that are significant and/or severe, cases involving graduate courses, and second and subsequent violations in an undergraduate course are not eligible for remediation.

Successful completion of remediation will not affect or change a grade penalty imposed.

The maximum outcome that a Faculty Member or Referring Party may assign using the Informal Resolution form is an “F” for an undergraduate course and a “U” for a graduate course. The outcomes under B-F above may not apply in a case in which an Academic Misconduct violation is not within the context of an academic course.

Section III. Outcome Options for a Facilitator and/or a Hearing Panel

Possible outcomes that may be imposed under an In Absentia Resolution, Facilitated Resolution, or Hearing Panel are the same as for an Informal Resolution, in addition to one or more of the following, taking into consideration the Faculty Member/Referring Party’s recommendation(s):

A. Academic Integrity Probation. A status in which the Student is deemed not to be in good disciplinary standing with the University for a definite period of time not less than the remainder of the semester in which the Academic Integrity Probation is imposed. Academic Integrity Probation does not affect the Student’s academic standing and is not notated on the Student’s academic transcript. In the event the Student is subsequently found responsible for a violation(s) of the Code while on Academic Integrity Probation, more severe outcomes, including but not limited to a Grade Reduction/Transcript Notation, Suspension, or Expulsion, may result. Conditions restricting the Student's participation in University activities may also be imposed.

B. Grade Reduction/Transcript Notation. The grade of "F" for an undergraduate course or "U" for a graduate course with a notation of "X" on the academic transcript indicating that the notation is a result of Academic Misconduct.

1. When imposed, this outcome will stipulate the exact minimum length of time the "X" notation shall remain on the academic transcript. When that time has elapsed, the "X" notation will be removed automatically by a request from Student Accountability & Conflict Resolution to the University Registrar.
2. After the “X” notation is removed, the failing course grade will remain on the transcript, and will appear as an "F" for an undergraduate course or "U" for a graduate course.
3. Students may not exclude a grade from GPA calculations for any course in which they have received a grade with an "X" notation.

C. Disciplinary Suspension. Separation from the University for a definite period of time not less than the remainder of the semester in which the Disciplinary Suspension is imposed. During the Disciplinary Suspension period, the Student may not attend or participate in classes; access various University electronic systems, including, but not limited to, email services; or participate in Student Organizations or any University-sponsored program, activity, or related event. The Student will be automatically withdrawn from registered courses based upon the effective date of the Disciplinary Suspension. The Student will be responsible for any financial obligations to the University but may be eligible for a reduction of tuition and fees based upon the effective date of the Disciplinary Suspension and the University’s Reduction of Tuition and Fees Schedule. Notification of the Disciplinary Suspension will appear on the Student's academic transcript and will remain until the end of the Disciplinary Suspension period. However, even when the notation is removed from the transcript, Student Accountability & Conflict Resolution will maintain a disciplinary file in accordance with the Records Retention and Disposition Schedule. The Student’s name will also be included in the UNC System Suspension and Expulsion Database. In order to re-enroll at the University at the conclusion of the Disciplinary Suspension period, the Student must reapply for admission to the University, but may not re-enroll at the University until after the Disciplinary Suspension period has ended.

D. Expulsion. Permanent separation of the Student from the University. The Student may not attend or participate in classes; access various University electronic systems, including, but not limited to, email services; or participate in Student Organizations or any University-sponsored program, activity, or related event. The Student will be automatically withdrawn from registered courses based upon the effective date of the Expulsion. The Student will be responsible for any financial obligations to the University but may be eligible for a reduction of tuition and fees based upon the effective date of the Expulsion and the University’s Reduction of Tuition and Fees Schedule. A Student who has been expelled from one constituent institution of The University of North Carolina system may not be admitted to another UNC System institution until the Expulsion has been rescinded by the institution that imposed the outcome. Notification of the Expulsion will appear on the Student's academic transcript until the date the Expulsion is rescinded, if it is rescinded. Student Accountability & Conflict Resolution will maintain a disciplinary file in accordance with the Records Retention and Disposition Schedule. The Student’s name will also be included in the UNC System Suspension and Expulsion Database. The Student may petition the Chancellor in writing for the Expulsion to be rescinded, but not earlier than two (2) calendar years from the effective date of the Expulsion.

E. Post-Enrollment and Post-Graduation Outcomes

A Student who has violated the Code, but who graduates from the University or ceases enrollment before imposition of an outcome may be subject to:

1. Revocation of any degree awarded;
2. Temporary or permanent withholding of the diploma or transcript for any degree, regardless of whether the degree has been awarded; and/or
3. Having an outcome(s) imposed as a condition of re-enrollment at the University.

Chapter 9. Appeals

A. Eligibility for Appeal

1. An accepted Informal Resolution or Facilitated Resolution may not be appealed.
2. A Student may appeal the Hearing Panel’s determinations on responsibility and/or outcome(s).
3. If a Student engages in an Outcome-Only Hearing, they may appeal only the Hearing Panel’s determinations on outcome(s) but not their responsibility.

The Faculty Member or Referring Party bringing the charge of Academic Misconduct against a Student is bound by the Hearing Panel's determinations on responsibility and outcome(s) and is not permitted an appeal.

 B. Grounds for Appeal

Grounds for appeal at any level of review are limited to:

1. Violation of due process;
2. Material procedural error;
3. Outcome(s) inconsistent with charge.

Appeals not meeting the grounds described in this Section will not be considered. It is not the purpose of the appeal process to provide for a new hearing at a higher administrative level.

C. Submission of Appeal

A Student who wishes to appeal the outcome of a Hearing must submit an appeal form in support of the appeal to the Director within five (5) Days after the Notice of Outcome.

1. The appeal shall separately state each ground upon which the Student claims that the Hearing Panel committed an error in reaching its conclusions and shall set forth the Student's information and arguments in support of such claims.
2. Failure to submit a written appeal by the deadline stated in the Notice of Outcome or failure to meet the grounds described in Chapter 9, Section B will render the decision of the Hearing Panel final and conclusive.
3. Upon request, the University shall provide access to the case file to the accused Student for the purpose of preparing an appeal. The University shall redact any such copy to exclude confidential records regarding other Student(s), as appropriate.
4. If the written appeal has been timely filed and meets the grounds described in Chapter 9, Section B, the Director shall deliver it with the Record on Appeal to the Provost.

D. Provost’s Review

The Provost or their designee will decide appeals based upon the information provided in the appeal form and the Record of Appeal and will issue a written decision on the appeal. If the Provost designates another person to make the determination on appeal, that person's review and decisions shall be treated in all respects as if made by the Provost. The decision may:

1. Affirm the determination on responsibility and outcome(s) (if applicable) imposed by the Hearing Panel;
2. Affirm the determination on responsibility and reduce but not eliminate the outcome(s) imposed by the Hearing Panel; or
3. Remand the case for a new Hearing before a Hearing Panel composed of members of the AIB who have not previously participated in the case.

The Student will be notified within a reasonable time in writing of the decision on appeal. The Provost or designee shall send copies of the decision on the appeal to the Student, Faculty Member or Referring Party, Director, and Chair.

The decision of the Provost affirming the determination on responsibility will be final and conclusive, and the outcome(s) will be imposed as directed.

If the case is remanded to a new Hearing, the appropriate procedures described in the Code will apply.

E. Chancellor’s Review

If the decision of the Provost or designee, or the Hearing Panel’s decision upon remand,  imposes an outcome of expulsion or revocation of degree, the Student may file a written letter of appeal to the Chancellor through the Director.

1. The written appeal must be received by the Chancellor within five (5) Days after the Student receives notice of the Provost’s decision or the Hearing Panel’s decision on remand.
2. The appeal shall separately state each ground upon which the Student claims that the Hearing Panel committed error in reaching its conclusions and shall set forth the Student's information and arguments in support of such claims.
3. Failure to submit a written appeal will render the Provost’s decision on appeal or the Hearing Panel’s decision on remand final and conclusive.
4. Upon request, the University shall provide access to the case file to the accused Student for the purpose of preparing an appeal. The University shall redact any such copy to exclude confidential records regarding other Student(s), as appropriate.

The decision of the Chancellor shall be final and conclusive, and the outcome(s) will be imposed as directed.

Chapter 10. Case Files and Accountability Records

1. Resolutions outlined in the Code are considered part of a Student’s disciplinary record.
2. Disciplinary records related to an individual Student are confidential and will be maintained pursuant to University Policy 402, Student Education Records (FERPA), including limited exceptions that permit disclosure without a Student’s consent.
3. Students may inspect and review their Academic Misconduct records in accordance with University Policy 402, Student Education Records (FERPA).
4. The case file, including audio or audiovisual recordings and/or transcripts of the Hearing, will be retained as part of the Student’s record for a minimum of eight (8) years from the date of resolution. Disciplinary records including the outcome of Expulsion or Registration Revocation will be retained for a minimum of 75 years. Disciplinary records may be retained for longer periods of time or permanently, as specified in the outcome(s) or if the outcome(s) is considered incomplete.

Academic transcripts shall reflect outcomes, as outlined in Chapter 8 of the Code.  A notation of a Grade with X designation, Disciplinary Suspension, or Expulsion will appear on academic transcripts for the period of time designated in the Notice of Outcome.

Chapter 11. Graduate Students

Distinct from undergraduate education, graduate education is intended to develop independent, specialized skills and knowledge in a particular academic discipline. Graduate Students completing a master’s or doctoral degree are expected to maintain a fierce commitment to ethical practices, both personally and professionally. Because Graduate Students have already earned an undergraduate degree, they are held to a higher academic standard than undergraduate students. All forms of academic work including, but not limited to, course work, lab work, thesis or dissertation work, research, teaching, and extension performed by any graduate Student enrolled on a part-time or full-time basis, are expected to be completed in compliance with the Code.

Outcomes imposed under the Code may have an impact on a Graduate Student’s continuation in the graduate program. Graduate Students are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the Graduate School policies, including but not limited to the grading policy and the procedures for academic suspension and termination.

In addition to the expectations outlined in the Code, graduate Students’ ethical practices include accepted professional standards of conduct, such as codes of ethics used by professional societies in the United States to regulate the manner in which their professions are practiced. The knowledge and practice of ethical behavior shall be the full responsibility of the Student; however, graduate Students are encouraged to consult with their Graduate Faculty, Graduate Program Director, and/or the Graduate School for further information on what is expected of them.

Academic work that is submitted in a grant application or for publication, or in the case of a thesis or dissertation, submitted to ProQuest (or the University's then current dissertation database), falls under the jurisdiction of the Research Misconduct process. (See University Policy 309, Responding to Allegations of Misconduct in Research and Scholarship.) Allegations of research misconduct may also be investigated by the Research Integrity Officer.

Students accepted into an early entry program will be subject to the same policies that pertain to other matriculated Graduate Students. Early entry students who are found responsible for engaging in Academic Misconduct may be dismissed from their graduate program.