Honor Code

Why does Oglethorpe have an Honor Code?

The purpose of the Oglethorpe Honor Code is to promote and support academic integrity by building a culture of trust between faculty and students. This is a community-wide commitment, as everyone (faculty, staff, and students) is part of the network that supports and affirms the goal of academic honesty. It is also aspirational, as it calls us all to aim higher but also acknowledges that individuals will occasionally fall short of the lofty goals in our Code. The Honor Code procedures are there to ensure that incidences of academic misconduct are addressed fairly, consistently, and empathetically, with a focus on making amends and reintegrating the student into the academic community. After all, we are an institution of higher learning, so our policies and procedures should be focused on learning outcomes and not just punitive measures.

Do Honor Codes work?

There is no fool-proof way to prevent all academic dishonesty. However, research shows that universities with a robust Honor Code have a lower rate of academic dishonesty than those that don’t have a robust Honor Code. The key word above is “robust”. Simply signing an Honor Code Affirmation at orientation won’t by itself do much to support ethical decision making in moments of stress. A robust Honor Code promotes and emphasizes a culture of trust (which supports the development of academic integrity) rather than focusing the students’ attention on punishment (which can paradoxically lead to more cheating, not less). In short, the Honor Code functions best when students are reminded of positive behaviors (honesty, fairness, responsibility and the like) rather than negative outcomes (the penalties for cheating). The Honor Code also functions best when the community incorporates regular reminders of the expectations of ethical academic behavior that are part of Code.

Why do I have to sign the Honor Code pledge on every graded assignment?

Students are asked to include an affirmation at least once in every course that they take at Oglethorpe:

I affirm that I am acting with academic integrity. (followed by the student’s signature)

Indeed, many professors will require you to sign this affirmation with each major graded assignment. By signing this affirmation repeatedly and frequently, students are regularly reminded of the standards of academic integrity that we have all agreed to uphold. It is not a legal contract, but rather a declaration in support of the kind of authentic learning environment we want to create at Oglethorpe.

What can I do to reduce the chances of engaging in academically dishonest behavior?

The Oglethorpe Honor Code states that instructional staff “assume that students are conducting themselves with academic integrity and act toward them in ways consistent with that assumption.” In short, we’re not assuming that everyone is trying to cheat. Nevertheless, academic dishonesty does occur. How do students that we assume to be acting with academic integrity (and who sign an affirmation supporting that assumption) end up making unethical decisions? Additionally, how do you as a student who has affirmed their support for academic integrity avoid scenarios that are likely to test that integrity?

Get organized. Panic can cloud one’s judgment, and panic is more likely to occur in situations where a student feels like the workload has gotten out of control. You will have periods of time where little graded work is due, and then you’ll have two papers and a test all in one week. You should know about these major assignments well in advance, which means that you can spread out the work over a longer period of time rather than leaving it all to the last minute. Keep an assignment calendar, and include short-term goals (“I will write the outline for my paper due in two weeks”) along with due dates and electronic reminders for major assignments.

Ask for help. If you are confused about a topic, it can be easy to assume that everyone else gets it and you don’t. This kind of thinking, however, also makes it easier to rationalize bad decisions. Instead, you should ask questions in class. You should go to office hours. You should send your professor a draft for feedback. Every one of these actions communicates to the professor that you are interested in learning, and authentic learning is the essence of academic integrity.

Ask for more time. Let’s say that you’ve done your best to keep an organized assignment calendar, but you underestimated how much time an assignment would take. The clock is ticking on the submission deadline, and panic is starting to set in. Rather than letting that panic cloud your judgment, ask the professor for an extension. Check the syllabus first, as it may include this information about how to ask for extra time and if there is any kind of grade “cost” for taking that extra time. If you don’t see that information on the syllabus, reach out to the professor anyway. You’ll be surprised how often they will say “yes”, especially if you’ve been actively involved in the course up to that point.

Read the assignment guidelines carefully and ask clarifying questions. The syllabus for your course says that you shouldn’t plagiarize, but do you really understand what plagiarism is? Is including a reference list enough? Do you still need to cite the source if you are paraphrasing? Can you use paraphrasing software? What about generative AI tools like ChatGPT? Are those allowed, and how do you properly cite them if they are? Is using the same paper in two different courses considered plagiarism? Some of these questions may not have clear-cut answers, so it’s important that you ask rather than just assume. Asking questions about what falls in the bounds of the Honor Code doesn’t make you appear suspect–it makes you appear as if you care deeply about maintaining the bond of trust.

What kind of actions would be considered a violation of the Oglethorpe Honor Code?

In the Oglethorpe Honor Code, academic dishonesty largely falls under five categories:

Plagiarism

Plagiarism at its core is the failure to give credit for the use of another’s legitimate work, and/or to have the work perceived as your own.

Examples of plagiarism include:

• Direct plagiarism, or copying word-for-word from a source without using quotations and proper attribution.
• Paraphrasing plagiarism, or the act of paraphrasing someone’s work without acknowledging that the ideas are not your own.
• Self-plagiarism, or using work that you previously submitted for another course without acknowledgement or permission.

Misrepresentation

Academic misrepresentation is an attempt to fulfill the requirements of a course with work other than one’s own work. Misrepresentation is distinguished from plagiarism by the fact that one could not reasonably give credit to a source in a case of misrepresentation.

Examples of misrepresentation include:

• Contracting with a person, website, or tool (either for free or via payment) to write an assignment for you (either in whole or in part) and submitting the paper as if it was your own.
• Contracting with a person, website, or tool (either for free or via payment) to solve problems for you (either in whole or in part) and submitting the solutions as if they were your own.
• Falsifying data, figures or sources in a laboratory report.
• Providing a report of attending an event, visiting a site, participating in an extra-credit activity and the like when you were not actually present at the event/site/activity.

Unauthorized Aid

This category refers to any possession or use of unauthorized materials or assistance in an effort to fulfill course requirements. It is the student’s responsibility to ask the professor for specific guidance on what materials or assistance are in fact authorized and to communicate that information to any tutors or other providers of authorized aid.

Examples of unauthorized aid include:

• Possession or use of unauthorized notes during an assessment.
• Possession or use of unauthorized electronic devices during an assessment.
• Unauthorized use of external source material.
• Unauthorized use of “homework helper” sites.
• Unauthorized use of generative artificial intelligence.
• Unauthorized collaboration with other students.

Facilitation

In this category, a student is facilitating another student’s ability to commit academic misconduct.
While we do work and study in a collaborative space, it is the student’s responsibility to ensure that other students do not misuse their work.

Examples of facilitation include:

• Knowingly permitting another student to copy your work.
• Uploading assignments and/or solutions to a shared test bank, “homework helper” site, or group chat.
• Signing in for a student at an event where attendance is a required part of a course.
• Claiming that another student completed work for a group project that they did not do.

Interpersonal Academic Misconduct

In this category, we consider the unfair academic advantage that may result student-faculty and student-student interactions.

Examples of interpersonal academic misconduct include:

• Lying (to a professor or to another student) for academic advantage. This could include lying to earn a particular grade or lying to avoid an academic penalty.
• Colluding with other students in a collective effort to engage in academic misconduct.
• Claiming credit for a group project to which one did not contribute.
• Obtaining someone else’s work (with or without their knowledge) and submitting as one’s own.
• Pressuring or coercing another student to aid in one’s engagement in academic misconduct.
• Falsely accusing another student of academic misconduct.
• Deliberately damaging the work of another student or otherwise putting another student in a position of academic disadvantage.
• Lying to the Honor Council regarding one’s role or someone else’s role in suspected academic misconduct.

Did any of those examples surprise you?  It seems likely. Research shows that students are often confused about what constitutes academic dishonesty. Remember that the goal of the Honor Code is to promote academic integrity, and the goal of academic integrity is to support authentic learning. If the action in question is circumventing the learning goals of the course or aimed at gaining unfair academic advantage, then the action would likely be out of bounds in terms of academic honesty. The list of examples above is also not a complete list. Every course is different, and every professor will have specific expectations of what academic honesty looks like in their course. If you are at all confused about what is allowed in the course or on a specific assignment, ask your professor.

I just got a letter saying that I need to appear at a hearing because I’ve been suspected of violating the Honor Code! What do I do now?

Don’t panic.

There is no assumption that you have violated the Honor Code just because you receive a letter. However, the professor who initially filed the case did see something concerning in one of your assignments and would like to have it reviewed by an objective, external group. The letter includes reference to both the course and the assignment in question.

Another important piece of information in this first letter is the email address of a peer member of the Honor Council who is there to answer your questions and concerns. This person won’t be at any of your meetings (either as an advisor or an Honor Council member), but they can help put your mind at ease about some of the procedures and potential consequences of an Honor Council appearance. They are here to help you, and I highly recommend that you contact them.

The letter also includes the date and time of your initial consultation with the Honor Council Director. You’ll also get an Outlook calendar invitation. You should RSVP to that invitation as soon as possible, and set a reminder on your calendar so you don’t accidentally miss your meeting. (Note: Parents aren’t allowed to attend the initial consultation. How much you share with them about the meeting is up to you, but the initial consultation is only for the student and the Director.)

After your initial consultation, you have up to three days to communicate whether or not to accept responsibility for the suspected violation. You can communicate that decision to the reporting professor, your peer advisor, or the Director.

I asked my professor why they suspected me of violating the Honor Code, but they haven’t replied. Why not?

As mentioned above, the Honor Council serves as an external, objective body. We are there to ensure that students who are suspected of an Honor Code violation are treated in a fair and consistent manner. This is not to say that your individual professor wouldn’t be fair or consistent, but there is a personal relationship between you and the professor. When there has been a suspected breach of trust in that relationship, feelings and conversations can get complicated. Your professor may be comfortable talking with you during the initial stages of the process, but they might instead decide to wait on that conversation until after the initial consultation. In either situation, you can always reach out to your peer advisor (communicated in your letter) or the Honor Council Director.

I admitted to my professor that I was dishonest about an assignment. Why do I still need to have a hearing?

Accepting responsibility takes courage, and courage is one of the fundamental values of academic integrity. We’re glad to know that you are taking that first important step in rebuilding the bond of trust between you and your professor. That said, academic integrity is an issue for the entire community, not just for that one course. Including members of Honor Council in that process serves multiple purposes:

1. It is a reminder of the community standards that we all share.
2. It is an opportunity to receive feedback and support from faculty and peers not in the specific course.
3. It guarantees that all students who accept responsibility receive fair and consistent academic consequences.

What is a Resolution Conference?

If a student accepts responsibility for the suspected Honor Code violation following their initial consultation, then the case proceeds to a resolution conference. A resolution conference is deliberately small in scale. There are very few attendees. Only you, the reporting professor, two members of the Honor Council and the Director are there. We have found over the years that students are more likely to approach the process openly and honestly in a more intimate setting. The small number of attendees also helps us to maintain confidentiality. (Again, parents aren’t allowed to attend the resolution conference.)

A key element in a successful resolution conference is that the student openly accepts responsibility and wants to make amends. By the end of the conference, all attendees (including the student!) must unanimously agree to an action plan. That action plan may include a grade reduction on the assignment, but the primary goal of the action plan is to rebuild trust within the academic community. In short, a resolution conference is restorative, not just punitive.

While there is no set time limit to a conference, most conferences last about 30 minutes. This may be longer if more than one person is involved in the case.

You’ll receive a letter within three business days summarizing the elements of your action plan, including any relevant deadlines.

What is an Academic Conduct Board?

If a student does not accept responsibility for the suspected Honor Code violation following their initial consultation, then the case proceeds to an academic conduct board. An academic conduct board is slightly larger in scale, including five members of the Honor Council as well as the Director. (Again, parents are not allowed to attend an academic conduct board.)

The Academic Conduct Board process involves an opening statement from the suspected student, a verbal or written statement from the reporting Community Member, questions/discussion of the evidence, witness statements and questions, and a closing statement from the suspected student. Following the closing statement, the suspected student is excused, and the Honor Council deliberates and votes on whether or not the student responsible or not responsible for the suspected violation. If found responsible, the Honor Council also votes on a sanction. Both decisions carry by simple majority.

You’ll receive a letter within three business days letting you know the Honor Council’s decision.

What happens if I don’t show up to my hearing?

If you don’t show up to your initial consultation and don’t communicate your decision regarding responsibility within three days of your scheduled consultation, then the assumption is that you do not accept responsibility for the suspected violation. This sends your case automatically to an Academic Conduct Board.

If you have already accepted responsibility but do not show up to your Resolution Conference, then the case will likely be sent to an Academic Conduct Board. (This is not automatic, as you have already engaged in the resolution process by accepting responsibility.)

If you do not show up to your Academic Conduct Board, then we hold the hearing in your absence. This means that you will not be able to share evidence that supports your claim that the work was your own.

NOTE: Students will sometimes claim that they didn’t come to a meeting or hearing because they didn’t know about it. This isn’t an acceptable argument. All communication regarding initial consultations and resolution conferences and academic conduct boards comes through an attachment to an Oglethorpe email. The calendar invitation also arrives via Oglethorpe email. You’ll get at least three business days’ notice between the letter/invitation and your meeting. Therefore, as long as you check your Oglethorpe email on a regular basis (at least once a day is recommended), then you’ll receive the notification in ample time.

Can I appeal the Honor Council’s decision?

Yes, but only under certain circumstances.

If you accepted responsibility and participated in a resolution conference, then you cannot appeal the outcome of a resolution conference. After all, you accepted responsibility, and you were part of the group that unanimously decide on a sanction and an action plan.

If, however, you said that you were not responsible for a violation but you were found responsible by an academic conduct board, then you may be eligible to appeal that decision—but only for cause. More details can be found in Section 11.2.5 of the Oglethorpe Honor Code.

Am I going to lose my scholarship?

The Honor Council can’t assign any sanctions directly related to your financial aid. We cannot and would not, therefore, ever say that you must lose your scholarship. Indeed, the Financial Aid office isn’t part of the small group of people who even know about your case.

That said, the sanctions in a case sometimes involve a grade reduction in the course. If that grade reduction causes your GPA to fall below the line required for your scholarship, then your scholarship might be affected. However, there would be no indication that this was due to an Honor Code case.

Will an Honor Code violation show up on my transcript?

No.

The only records of Honor Code cases are maintained through the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities. The registrar isn’t involved.

Am I going to get kicked out of Oglethorpe?

We are an institution of higher learning. Therefore, everything that we do (including applying sanctions for Honor Code violations) should be focused on learning. Removing a student from the community is antithetical to that core goal of learning and growth. Asking a student not to return is an exceptionally rare occurrence, and it would only be applied as a last resort after a student has repeated non-responsive appearances before the Honor Council.

In short, our goal isn’t to punish you. Our goal is to promote academic integrity by helping you learn and grow from the experience. The best way to do that is to maintain your connection with the academic community.

Why does Oglethorpe have an Honor Code?

The purpose of the Oglethorpe Honor Code is to promote and support academic integrity by building a culture of trust between faculty and students. This is a community-wide commitment, as everyone (faculty, staff, and students) is part of the network that supports and affirms the goal of academic honesty. It is also aspirational, as it calls us all to aim higher but also acknowledges that individuals will occasionally fall short of the lofty goals in our Code. The Honor Code procedures are there to ensure that incidences of academic misconduct are addressed fairly, consistently, and empathetically, with a focus on making amends and reintegrating the student into the academic community. After all, we are an institution of higher learning, so our policies and procedures should be focused on learning outcomes rather than punitive measures.

What can I do to promote and support academic integrity in my courses?

Talk about academic integrity early and often. Every faculty member is asked to include a statement regarding academic integrity in their syllabus, but this statement alone is rarely sufficient. Schedule time throughout the semester to revisit the academic integrity issues that are relevant to your course. This emphasizes to the students that academic integrity is a foundational part of campus culture. Returning to the conversation also presents academic integrity as something that can be learned, improved and developed (a growth mindset) rather than something that one has or doesn’t have (a deficit mindset).

Clarify expectations. Each course (and even each assignment) has specific challenges when it comes to academic integrity. Students benefit from knowing what kind of specific behaviors are out of bounds (a list of “Don’t”s), but it is critical that students also know about specific behaviors that will help them to approach an assignment from an academic integrity perspective (a list of “Do”s).

Emphasize the utility and relevance of assignments. Students are going to be more tempted to engage in academic dishonesty if they don’t see the assignments as relevant to their educational goals. This does not mean that every one of your assignments must be personally meaningful to every single student, but providing clear utility and relevance in your assignment descriptions can increase student engagement and therefore decrease the likelihood that a student will convince themselves that academic misconduct is acceptable “just this once”.

Provide low-stakes (or even no-stakes) opportunities for feedback and revision. One rationale that students often give for academic misconduct is poor time management of large assignments. Breaking large assignments into smaller chunks addresses this issue in a few important ways. First, it gives the instructor opportunities to catch mistakes and to provide non-punitive formative feedback. Second, it gives an opportunity for students to reflect on their own learning, increasing their self efficacy when it comes to the task. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, low-stakes assignments reduce stress for the student, decreasing the likelihood that a student will convince themselves that cheating is less costly than failure.

Approach academic integrity from an equity perspective. We must strive to meet students where they are. Our students bring with them a variety of experiences, backgrounds, and understandings that impact their beliefs and knowledge about academic integrity. It is problematic to assume that students inherently understand what constitutes academic dishonesty in higher education, particularly if they have little or no experience in U.S. higher education culture.

What are my responsibilities as a Faculty member regarding the Honor Code?

The most important responsibility is also one of the most challenging ones. We as Faculty are called to assume that our students are honest and to “act towards them in a way that is consistent with that assumption.” (Oglethorpe Honor Code, section 11.1.3.3) After all, we know that academic dishonesty occurs in higher education, so it can be difficult to assume the contrary. However, assuming that students will be dishonest can create an adversarial relationship between faculty and students. Alternatively, assuming student honesty gives us the opportunity to focus on the learning we want our students to experience while they are at Oglethorpe. According to Donald McCabe, “Academic integrity is not the absence of cheating. It is something much bigger than that. It pervades the culture of an institution. What it is at the end of the day is authentic learning.”

Because this is a community-wide aspiration, Faculty are also asked to approach possible instances of academic dishonesty from a community perspective. You shouldn’t have to deal with this on your own, and the procedures in the Honor Code are there to support you in your goal of promoting and supporting academic integrity in your courses. Additionally, students benefit if they hear that academic integrity is critical to the entire community and isn’t limited to a single course. To that end, we ask that you report incidences of academic misconduct to the Honor Council rather than informally adjudicating these cases on your own.

What should I do if I suspect that a student has violated the Oglethorpe Honor Code?

Gather all relevant evidence. Keep in mind that the Honor Council only has access to the evidence that you provide. The Honor Council Director may contact you to request additional evidence, but the Honor Council can’t gather much evidence independently.

Consult with the Honor Council Director. This step may not be necessary, as you may have clear and irrefutable evidence that a violation has occurred. However, if you have any questions about whether or how to submit a suspected Honor Code violation, you are welcome and encouraged to ask questions.

Submit a suspected Honor Code violation. Be sure to include as much specific detail as you can in your description of the incident. This report is your “voice” in when the Director has an initial consultation with the student–the more we can hear your perspective, the better. Be aware, however, that the student will also have access to this narrative as part of the full report.

I use Turnitin for paper submissions. Is there a specific percentage in the report above which a paper is considered plagiarized?

No. Turnitin is a useful technological tool, but it is just a tool. In order for Turnitin (or any other plagiarism-detecting software or website) to be used effectively, you still need to apply your disciplinary expertise. Is that four-word phrase highlighted by Turnitin a standard phrase in your field, or is it idiosyncratic enough to require a citation? Turnitin can’t make that decision for you. Turnitin can also be very sensitive, flagging direct quotations or paraphrased passages in the text that are properly cited. In short, if you see something flagged in Turnitin, you’ll still need to spend some time determining for yourself whether that flagged section is evidence of plagiarism. As always, feel free to contact the Honor Council Director if you have any questions.

The Turnitin Similarity report also includes a AI detection percentage. How should I interpret this in regards to the Honor Code?

Turnitin’s AI detection software only analyzes long-form prose text (i.e., sentences that are part of paragraphs that are part of larger essays, and so on). This excludes poetry, code, bullet lists, annotated bibliographies and reference lists. Also, unlike the plagiarism detection software built into Turnitin, the AI detection software in Turnitin can’t reference back to an original source. It can only claim a likelihood that some or all of the eligible text was not written by a human. False positives can occur, and new research out of Stanford has indicated that the false positive rates are higher for non-native English writers. Given this lack of certainty, what can you do with this information in regards to a suspected violation of the Oglethorpe Honor Code?

First, just as with plagiarism detection, don’t underestimate the value of your disciplinary and pedagogical expertise. Are the sources verifiable? Are the claims consistent with the scope of the course? Are there abrupt changes in tone and/or style within the document? Is there an unexplainable jump in the level of skill demonstrated in previous writing from this student?

Second, if your disciplinary and pedagogical expertise (or the original Turnitin AI detection software) indicates a likelihood of AI use, then run the paper through another AI detector. Current recommended software includes GPTZero, Copyleaks, and WinstonAI, although new software will no doubt enter the market. If you are getting consistent reports from more than one piece of detection software, then the chance of a false positive is significantly reduced.

I submitted a suspected case to the Honor Council Secretary. What happens next?

The Honor Council Director may reach out to you with additional questions or request additional evidence, but not always. Indeed, if you included lots of detail in your initial report, then the Director should be able to proceed directly to an initial consultation with the student without any further input from you.

After the initial consultation, the student has three days to communicate whether they accept responsibility or do not accept responsibility for the suspected violation. The student may communicate their choice to the Director, or they may communicate directly with you. If they communicate with you, please contact the Director so that they can follow up with the student to confirm.

If the student accepts responsibility, then you’ll be asked to participate in a resolution conference with the student, the Director, and two members of the Honor Council. One of the outcomes of the resolution conference is a mutually agreed upon decision about any academic sanction, but an additional purpose of the resolution conference is for the student to openly accept responsibility and agree to make amends. To that end, the reporting professor must be willing to accept the student’s claim of responsibility and discuss what the student can do to rebuild trust in the community. In short, a resolution conference is restorative, not just punitive. If you are unable to participate in the resolution conference, then you can send answers to a short series of questions, and the Director can read your answers at the conference on your behalf.

If the student doesn’t accept responsibility, then the case moves to an Academic Conduct Board hearing. You may be called as a witness in the hearing to answer questions about what brought the suspected violation to your attention. However, Faculty do not always need to appear as witnesses, as you may have provided sufficient detail in your initial submission report.

Regardless of whether you participate in a resolution conference or are called as a witness in an academic conduct board hearing, you will receive a resolution letter with instructions about any next steps.

How long does it take to resolve a suspected Honor Code case?

Most cases are resolved in approximately 2 weeks. However, there are factors out of our control that could delay the process. Is there a case backlog? Did the student need to reschedule their initial consultation? Did the academic conduct board hearing run over time and needs to be concluded at a later date? If it has been more than 3 weeks and you still haven’t heard anything, please feel free to reach out to the Honor Council Director.

Keep in mind, however, that the Honor Council doesn’t hold regularly scheduled conferences or hearings during (a) exam weeks, (b) January term, or (c) Summer session. We are occasionally able to hold ad hoc meetings during these times, but that’s not guaranteed. That said, if you file a case during the last week of classes in the Fall or Spring semester, the case might roll over into the beginning of the next regular semester. In that situation, you’ll get information from the Registrar on how to submit a grade of “I” (Incomplete) for the student. You’ll also be asked to assign a final course grade once the case is resolved.

Can I talk to a student about a case while it is in process?

Absolutely! Recall that the Honor Code process and any subsequent consequences should be focused on student learning. As an instructor, you can play a critical role in shaping the student’s learning experience throughout an Honor Code case. Recall also, however, that the Honor Code is a community-wide aspiration. That said, any conversation that you have with a student (even one where the student accepts responsibility) is not a replacement for having a student meet with the Honor Council.

The degree to which you communicate with a student after you filed a case is up to you. At the very least, however, it is considerate to let a student know that you’ve filed a suspected Honor Code case and why. We have found over the years that students are more likely to engage openly with the Honor Council if they aren’t taken by surprise when they receive their hearing notification.

Do I have any role in determining the consequences for a student who is responsible for violating the Honor Code in my course?

That depends.

If the student accepts responsibility, then you and the student and two Honor Council members will decide on a sanction together during the resolution conference. That decision must be agreed upon unanimously by everyone at the conference. If you cannot attend the resolution conference and instead submit a written statement, one of the questions you need to answer in your statement is what you consider to be an appropriate academic sanction. However, the other attendees at the conference may modify your request, and you are bound by their unanimous decision.

If the case goes to an Academic Conduct Board hearing, then the Honor Council panelists at the hearing determine whether or not the student is responsible for the suspected violation and what the academic sanction would be in the case of a responsible finding. Again, you are bound by the panelists’ decision.

Regardless of the resolution path, the Honor Code involves an escalating sanction structure. In other words, a second responsible claim/finding will result in a more significant sanction, even if the suspected violation is less severe. This is why it is so important to report suspected violations to the Honor Council Director rather than making a “side deal” with the student, as you may not know the student’s history with the Honor Council.