The honor code observed in the Nicholas School of the Environment (the “Nicholas School”) follows the principles set out in the Duke Community Standard. Its procedures draw on those developed by the Duke undergraduate judicial system. You must sign to indicate your agreement to abide by the Duke Community Standard and its application in the Nicholas School before you may enroll.
Duke University is a community dedicated to scholarship, leadership, and service and to the principles of honesty, fairness, respect, and accountability. Citizens of this community commit to reflect upon and uphold these principles in all academic and nonacademic endeavors, and to protect and promote a culture of integrity.
To uphold the Duke Community
Standard:
- I will not lie, cheat, or steal in my academic endeavors;
- I will conduct myself responsibly in all my endeavors; and
- I will act if the Standard is compromised.
Application of the Standard
in the Nicholas School Definitions:
Lying. Lying includes, but is not limited to, communicating untruths in order to gain an unfair academic or employment advantage.
Cheating. Cheating is the act of wrongfully using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, study aids, or the ideas or work of another in order to gain an unfair advantage. It includes, but is not limited to:
- plagiarism (see below)
- giving unauthorized aid to another student or receiving unauthorized aid from another person on tests, quizzes, assignments or examinations;
- using or consulting unauthorized materials or using unauthorized equipment;
- altering or falsifying any information on tests, quizzes, assignments or examinations;
- using any material portion of a paper or project to fulfill the requirements of more than one course unless the student has received prior faculty permission to do so;
- working on any examination, test, quiz or assignment outside of the time constraints imposed;
- submitting an altered examination or assignment to an instructor for regrading;
- failing to adhere to an instructor’s specific directions with respect to the terms of academic integrity or academic honesty.
Plagiarism.
Occurs when a student, with intent to deceive or with reckless disregard for proper scholarly procedures, presents any information, ideas or phrasing of another as if they were his/her own and/or does not give appropriate credit to the original source. Proper scholarly procedures require that all quoted material be identified by quotation marks or indentation on the page, and the source of information and ideas, if from another, must be identified and be attributed to that source. Students are responsible for learning proper scholarly procedures.
The term “assignment” includes any work, required or volunteered, submitted for review and/or academic credit. All academic work undertaken by a student must be completed independently unless the faculty member or other responsible authority expressly authorizes collaboration with another.
Refer to the following Duke University Library site for more details on plagiarism and tips on how to avoid it in your work, including how to take notes accurately and how to cite sources, including electronic sources. A helpful tutorial on plagiarism and how to avoid it, with examples drawn from experiences of Duke students. Information on internet research and sometimes inadvertent plagiarism is discussed in here.
Stealing.
Stealing is the act of intentionally taking or appropriating the property of another, including academic work, without consent or permission and with the intent to keep or use the property without the permission of the owner or the rightful possessor.
The following sections provide additional information on the elements of the Duke Community Standard and its application in the Nicholas School. As a Nicholas School student, you are responsible for familiarizing yourself with this additional information and acting accordingly. For Nicholas School faculty, see a paragraph at the end.
Academic
Endeavors.
- Use of library, reading room, and other study materials. Use these materials so that they remain in good shape and equally accessible for others (e.g., don’t monopolize course materials on reserve; don’t remove reading room materials except briefly for copying).
- Use of computer labs and other university computer resources. Observe priorities or time restrictions on computer use. If a computer appears to be in use by others, don’t disrupt their work. Don’t display objectionable material on-screen. Protect your on-screen work from viewing by others if it involves assignments.
- Homework assignments and projects. Be sure you understand the allowable level of consultation or collaboration with others. Do not use the same or similar work for more than one assignment (e.g., for papers in two courses) without explicit, prior permission from both instructors.
- Self-scheduled exams. Do not discuss anything about self-scheduled exams (length, difficulty, etc.) with other students until after the end of exam week
- Mailboxes and Drop-boxes. Do not examine or remove materials in another person’s mailbox or drop-box.
- Studying from old exams, homework, lab exercises. Be sure you understand which previous course materials you may use. Such materials should be equally available to all.
- If the instructor has not already provided a place to do so, include this statement on any work you turn in and include your signature, “I have adhered to the Duke Community Standard in completing this assignment.”
Non-academic
Endeavors.
The second clause of the Duke Community Standard extends its reach to non-academic activities undertaken as a Nicholas School student. These include, but are not limited to, the following:
- General conduct: conduct yourselves in a manner that respects use of Duke facilities and events by others (e.g., clean up after yourself, protect the belongings and personal safety of others).
- Conduct on field trips; as a member of the Duke community, your conduct and behavior during field trips should reflect well on the university and its values. Obey all government ordinances and restrictions on drug, alcohol, tobacco or vehicle use.
- Alcohol policy
- Boat use at the Marine Laboratory
- Observe all local, state and federal laws.
- Safety: don’t prop doors open or admit unauthorized persons to Duke buildings; report suspicious activities.
Creating
a Community of Integrity.
Creating a climate characterized by integrity in academic and nonacademic activities is a joint responsibility of students, faculty, and staff. In addition to abiding by the terms of the Duke Community Standard yourself, you have a positive obligation to act, as described below, if you suspect the Standard has been compromised. Faculty and staff also share responsibility for integrity, especially (1) clarifying what is expected of students for academic assignments, (2) explicitly referring to the Duke Community Standard in classes, and (3) pursuing suspected cases of violation. In addition to signing the Duke Community Standard before enrollment, during orientation you must attend a student-led discussion of the Duke Community Standard as it applies to Nicholas School students.
Responding
to Suspected
Violations.
Your signature on the Duke Community Standard obliges you to take constructive action if you witness, or know about, behavior you perceive to be inconsistent with the Standard. Although there are no disciplinary sanctions associated with failure to act, you are, nonetheless, expected to take action—to do something—as a responsibility of membership in the Duke Community.
The university recognizes that it is not always easy to act on violations of the Duke Community Standard, but several alternatives are available:
Speaking directly with the individual exhibiting the behavior, both to gain clarity about the situation and to inform the individual about the concern.
Publicly calling attention to the behavior as it is occurring.
For incidents involving non-academic behaviors, alerting fellow students, Nicholas School staff, the Director of Professional Studies or other university staff. The information provided will give staff an opportunity to address the matter informally or through appropriate formal channels.
For cases involving academic integrity, alerting either a faculty member, particularly if the alleged violation involves coursework, or the Director of Professional Studies. Faculty who learn of or suspect a violation of academic integrity by a professional masters student must also contact the Director of Professional Studies.
Resolving
Violations
Procedures for resolving suspected Community Standard violations depend on the severity of the allegation and the student’s disciplinary history. Once a suspected violation has been brought to the attention of the Director of Professional Studies, s/he will evaluate the charge and determine the proper course of action. If further investigation is warranted, the Director of Professional Studies will notify the person suspected of the violation. The Director also will also review the disciplinary record of the person suspected to determine whether previous violations suggest a pattern of disciplinary infractions.
Violations of Academic Standards
One-Time
Student-Faculty Resolution.When the suspected violation of academic standards is viewed as minimal, such that it would not put the student at risk of probation, suspension or expulsion, and when the student has not committed any previous violations, it may be possible to resolve the allegation at the level of the faculty member and the student. The first, and essential, stage in this process is for the faculty member to discuss the situation with the Director of Professional Studies (DPS) to determine (1) that the suspected violation is in fact “minimal,” and (2) that the student has not previously been accused of any violations. The DPS serves as a “clearinghouse” for honor code violations, so that there is consistency in defining what violations are “minimal;” that the consequences for various types of violations are consistent, and that repeated violations by the same student are known. When these conditions are met, the instructor may impose consequences for the violation (and inform the DPS of those consequences). These could include receiving a failing grade on an assignment or exam, repeating one or more assignments, and/or completing a separate assignment.
If a faculty member does not wish to pursue the one-time student-faculty resolution option, s/he may refer the case to an administrative hearing (see below). Similarly, if the student does not accept the resolution proposed by the faculty member, s/he may appeal to the DPS to reconsider the case at an administrative hearing. In resolving a case at the level of an administrative hearing, if the allegation is found to be unwarranted, the faculty member may not penalize the student in terms of grades.
The DPS will keep a record of all one-time faculty-student resolutions, but that record will not become part of a student’s academic file unless there is a second violation.
Administrative
Hearing. If the suspected academic violation is not “minimal,” if there have been previous violations, if the faculty member chooses not to resolve the case, or if the student disagrees with the instructor’s proposed resolution, the case is then evaluated through an administrative hearing. (If the violation is severe enough to put the student at risk of suspension or dismissal, and if the accused student denies the accusation, s/he may ask to bypass the administrative hearing level and go directly to an ad hoc judicial panel, as explained below.) Alleged non-academic violations are handled by administrative hearing.
The DPS and the Director of Enrollment Services will hear from the student accused of the violation and the person making the allegation and review any relevant documents. Although these proceedings typically take place in person, it may sometimes be necessary to receive information by phone or email to resolve the case in a timely way. The DPS and Director of Enrollment Services will jointly decide whether there is clear and convincing evidence of the alleged violation. If so, they will jointly determine consequences proportional to the violation and consistent with the resolution of similar violations. Consequences may include probation, suspension, dismissal or expulsion, and/or assignments intended to educate the student about academic integrity. Consequences may include recommendations to a course instructor with respect to grades on assignments on the course as a whole, but final authority for these rests with the instructor.
If the student believes the administrative hearing failed to consider relevant information, violated fair procedures, or imposed consequences inappropriate to the offense, s/he may appeal the decision to an ad hoc judicial panel (see below).
The DPS will keep a record of the hearing and the resolution of the case, which will become part of the student’s file. If there has been a previous one-time resolution between the student and a faculty member, it will become part of the student’s file as well.
Ad
Hoc Judicial Panel. Appeals from the administrative hearing will be heard by an ad hoc judicial panel composed of at least four members, including at least two Nicholas School students and at least two Nicholas School faculty or staff members. The DPS will be present to help maintain continuity and consistency of procedures from one level to another and from one case to another, but is a voting member of the ad hoc judicial panel. The student members will be selected by the honor code representative(s) from the Nicholas School Student Council (NSSC). The faculty/staff members will be selected by the DPS. The student suspected of the violation may object in writing if s/he believes any member of the proposed panel has a conflict of interest that could jeopardize a fair judgment. All members of the panel and the accused student should be notified at least 48 hours in advance when and where the hearing will occur and what evidence will be presented. Any of the judicial panel members or the student may ask for evidence to be presented. The accused student may consult others for advice at his/her discretion and may bring a member of the Duke community (student, faculty or staff member) to the hearing as an advisor (but the advisor does not speak to the judicial panel or any witnesses). The panel will attempt to decide by consensus whether a violation occurred and what the consequences should be; where consensus is not possible, a vote will determine the outcome (thus, a 3-1 or 4-0 vote is necessary to reach a conclusion). A record of the judicial hearing will be kept by the DPS and made part of the student’s file.
Violations of Non-Academic Standards
Resolution of alleged violations of non-academic standards will follow procedures outlined above for resolution of alleged violations of academic standards. The Director of Professional Studies will evaluate the allegation and determine the proper course of action. If further investigation is warranted, the Director of Professional Studies will notify the person suspected of the violation. The allegation will be evaluated through an Administrative Hearing, and if appealed, through an Ad Hoc Judicial Panel, as described above.
Confidentiality.
Information shared in the course of resolving alleged violations is confidential; student records of disciplinary actions will be maintained in accordance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Information about honor code violations will be shared in these circumstances: (1) A student accused in writing of a violation that will be investigated further has a right to know that s/he has been accused. (2) Information about honor code violations, their disposition and consequences may be shared, with any identifying information removed, for the purposes of (a) educating students and faculty about honor code violations, (b) ensuring consistency in responding to honor code violations, and (c) reporting on honor code violations to the University or to facilitate research on academic integrity. When the student population is small, special care must be taken in describing honor code violations so that identity cannot be readily deduced from the details of the case.
For
Concurrent Degree Students:
The Nicholas School will share information about honor code violations involving concurrent degree students (both those that are resolved by one-time faculty/student interaction and those that result in school-level actions such as probation, suspension or dismissal) with the student’s other degree program. The Nicholas School will ask the other school to observe the same guidelines regarding confidentiality of information and student records as are observed here. The Nicholas School will ask other degree programs to reciprocate by sharing information on honor code violations by concurrent degree students with the Nicholas School. When sanctions imposed by one degree program could affect the concurrent degree student’s status in the other program (e.g., probation, suspension, dismissal), the Nicholas School will coordinate with the other degree program to ensure that the sanction has the intended effect.
For Nicholas School Teaching Assistants:
Please refer to the suggestions for faculty, given below. Remember to alert the course instructor of suspected violations, and don’t forget to respect student confidentiality.
For
Nicholas School Faculty:
Faculty
Responsibilities. Faculty help create a community of integrity by: (1) including the Duke Community Standard in course syllabi; (2) discussing academic integrity, responsible citation of sources, and related topics in class and when advising students; (3) clarifying, in writing, expectations about who or what students may consult in completing each assignment, (4) providing the statement “I have adhered to the Duke Community Standard in completing this assignment” and a signature line on all assignments, including exams; (5) creating conditions that minimize the temptation to cheat; (6) being alert to possible violations; and (7) following up on suspected and reported cases of academic integrity violations.
Proctoring of exams is not required, but is left to the discretion of the instructor. When deciding whether to proctor exams, consider the size of the class and the type of exam.
Respond to suspected violations that you observe or those that are reported to you by alerting the Director of Professional Studies.
If an alleged violation of academic integrity occurs in a course, the instructor has authority over how the violation affects grading for the course. When there is going to be an administrative hearing or a judicial panel hearing of the suspected violation (see above), an instructor may choose to wait for the resolution of the hearing(s) before deciding on the grade consequences of the violation. If the alleged violation is found to be without substance, the instructor may not impose a grade consequence.
updated 8-29-09
For more information, contact Lynn Maguire
