Code change clarifies USU academic procedures
into action.
While most of the changes are an attempt to make it easier to read and understand, the process of appeals for academic dishonesty will see the biggest change said Spencer Watts, the Academic Senate president.
The code will be brought before the Academic Standards Committee next week and with its approval, he said ASUSU will also approve it. Watts said the policy will be all but finalized, which will take place when the Education Policy Committee meets again next year. After that approval, he said it will be official.
After numerous cases last year involving academic dishonestly and no consistent way for them to be dealt with, Watts said this issue was brought to his attention when he was running for office last year.
After being elected, Watts looked into the issue and decided a code needed to be put in place to allow uniform procedures for all cases.
Upon looking into the code, it was discovered that although a policy in place, it was never used and many didn’t even know what the policy consisted of.
Watts, along with Dallin Phillips and the Campus Judicial Office has been working on the changes to the code since June, he said.
They have also worked closely with ASUSU and arrival committees while the provost office is constantly drafting, reviewing and making necessary changes.
He said previously, teachers weren’t required to tell students if they had been accused of cheating and penalized, thus allowing students with nothing to do to fix the problem.
“[The new code] created a time limit of seven days for teachers to let the students know, and for student appeals to begin within 10 days,” said Watts.
The new policy also sets the order for students to appeal to if they feel there is a problem. Phillips said the new approach states that the honor board reviews committee will take people out of the hearing board pool, which was already a part of the code.
Watts said the change is one that is fair to all involved because everyone will know the procedure to follow for incidences of academic dishonesty.
“It’s a uniform way to approach the problem that is fair to students and faculty,” Phillips said.
Besides revising the academic dishonesty policy, Watts and Phillips said they also relocated sections so they were in an order that made it easy to follow all procedures.
In this process, no other codes were changed, just order and wording to make it easier to use.
After having worked at Utah State University since 1998, Phillips says changes to the code are an evolving process.
He said he hopes to eventually be able to hand students and faculty the section of the code they need for their problem that will easily help them to understand and follow the necessary steps they need to take.
-albaugh@cc.usu.edu