Contesting an Instructor's Finding and/or Sanction to the AIC

If the student accepts responsibility for the instructor’s charge, and the instructor-imposed sanction, then the matter is immediately resolved.  If the allegation or founded violation represents a second violation of the Academic Integrity Policy, the AIC will review the case regardless of whether the student decides to contest the instructor’s finding.

1. If the student disagrees with the finding and/or the sanction of the instructor, the student can contest the instructor’s findings to the AIC within 10 business days from the date of the sanction letter.  If the student decides to contest the instructor’s finding and/or sanction, he/she must prepare a written document that includes evidence in support of his/her argument and that is thoughtful, well-reasoned, and substantive.  The document must demonstrate effectively the grounds for contesting the instructor finding and/or sanction.  The option to contest an instructor’s findings and be heard by the AIC is not granted automatically; each request is considered by the AIC chair, who will evaluate whether any of the following circumstances exists:
• Additional evidence which may have affected the instructor’s decision and came to light after the sanction was imposed;
• Clear evidence that the instructor violated the procedure for charging a student with academic dishonesty; specifically, basing the finding on incomplete or inappropriate evidence, and/or imposing a sanction that is substantially incommensurate with the violation.
2. Any student who has received an AIC sanction letter is encouraged to schedule a meeting with the Dean of Students or designee to discuss the situation prior to contesting the case.
3. In exceptional circumstances, a student may request additional time to contest the instructor’s finding and/or sanction by contacting aic@chapman.edu or by sending a letter to the Office of the Chancellor, addressed to the AIC Chair.  Requests for extensions must be made within 10 business days of the date of the sanction letter.
4. The AIC chair will notify the student in writing whether or not a hearing will be held at least five business days in advance of the scheduled hearing date if a hearing is to be held.
5. If the AIC hears the student’s case, the following individuals will participate:
• The AIC Chair and the AIC members;
• The student;
• Any other persons called by the AIC Chair.  These may include material witnesses (such as the faculty member) that the student or AIC members deem pertinent to the case.
• The student may also invite one person to provide support (e.g., friend or family member). This support person may not speak for the student, and this individual may not be an attorney(practicing or non-practicing). The presence of attorneys at hearings is not permitted as the proceedings are not meant to function as a court of law.
6. Should the student fail to appear before the AIC, the AIC shall have full authority to proceed in the student’s absence.  Any student that misses his/her scheduled hearing with the AIC forfeits the right to appeal the AIC’s decision to the Office of the Chancellor.
7. At the start of the hearing, the student is invited to present his/her view of events. The student has the right to present relevant evidence supporting his/her claims.  The student should be brief, concise, and organized in presenting his/her case. The AIC Chair may conclude the hearing at any time should the committee feel that the student is straying from the relevant facts of the case or reasons for the instructor’s finding and/or sanction to be vacated.   Although the committee may ask the student to review briefly the events of the case, student comments should focus primarily on specific reasons the instructor’s finding and/or sanction were inappropriate.  Grounds for contesting an instructor’s finding and/or sanction are listed in #1 of this section of the Academic Integrity Policy. 
8. Committee members may ask the student questions about his/her case for clarification.  The student is expected to maintain proper decorum during the proceeding or risk being excused.  If a student is excused, the hearing will continue in his/her absence.
9. After the student has presented his/her case and all questions have been addressed, the student will be excused and the AIC will deliberate. Deliberation may result in the following:
• A decision to uphold or overturn the initial sanction. The AIC reserves the right to modify the instructor’s sanction.
• A determination that additional information is needed. In this case, the decision is suspended until all necessary information has been obtained. In this case, the student will be notified within about one week.
10. After the AIC makes its decision, the Chair will notify the student.  Decisions of the AIC are based on the standard of proof whether it is more likely than not that the student violated the Academic Integrity Policy of Chapman University.
11. A quorum is necessary for all AIC business.  A quorum is defined as two voting members of the Academic Integrity Committee.

Appeal of AIC Decision

If unsatisfied with the outcome of the AIC hearing to contest the instructor’s finding and/or sanction, the student may appeal the decision of the Academic Integrity Committee to the Office of the Chancellor within 5 business days of the date the AIC decision letter was sent. This period is known as “the appeal period.”  In exceptional circumstances, a student may file a request for an extension to the appeal period by contacting aic@chapman.edu or by sending a letter to the Office of the Chancellor.  Requests for extensions must be made within the appeal period.

Appeals are not granted automatically as they must be thoughtful, well-reasoned, and substantive, and must demonstrate that at least one of the following criteria exists:

• That there was a substantive procedural error that may have prohibited the contest hearing from being conducted fairly in light of the findings and/or sanctions.
• New evidence not available at the time of the hearing has become available, and is potentially sufficient to alter a decision.

The Office of the Chancellor has the final authority on all Academic Integrity Policy violation cases.