Academic Integrity Policy

Policy Statement

Academic integrity is a foundational principle of higher education and is expected of all students, staff, and faculty. This policy:

• defines academic integrity and emphasizes its importance,
• describes activities that may breach academic integrity in the context of credit-bearing undergraduate or graduate courses,
• outlines procedures for addressing allegations of breaches of academic integrity, and
• specifies sanctions that the instructors, programs, departments, and university may impose when breaches of academic integrity are confirmed.

Purpose/Scope

SUNY Brockport is an inclusive learning community that inspires excellence through growth, engagement, and transformation. Developing, sharing, and assessing ideas, knowledge, and creative works are among its core functions, and academic integrity provides the framework for these core functions.

Academic integrity is a foundational principle because:

• Academic credentials represent a student’s knowledge and skills as evaluated by their instructors. Academic integrity ensures that these credentials are earned honestly through genuine effort.
• Academic integrity supports genuine learning, which instructors help foster by providing feedback. However, if a student’s work is not theirs, the instructor’s feedback does not lead to genuine learning.
• Genuine university-level learning promotes lifelong learning, which benefits the individual and the society, and academic integrity is critical to genuine university-level learning.
• Respecting and acknowledging others’ contributions promotes creativity and knowledge creation, and academic integrity supports both.

A student seeking a SUNY Brockport credential that leads to a certificate or license is required to abide by the stipulations of the certification body and/or licensing authority. For such a student, academic integrity requires abiding by stipulations, which may exceed the expectations identified within this policy.

Applicability

This policy applies to all SUNY Brockport students.

Definitions

Academic Integrity — The expectation that students, faculty, and staff act with honesty, trust, fairness, and respect when developing and sharing ideas, knowledge, and creative works (as stated by the International Center for Academic Integrity). Because professionals in fields requiring certification or licensure must follow the ethical standards and expectations the issuing authority sets, upholding the ethical guidelines of the relevant certifying or licensing body is also part of the academic integrity of students preparing for such professions.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) — A technology that uses math, logic, and large amounts of data that enable computers to perform tasks such as reasoning, problem-solving, and inferring that typically require human intelligence.

Breaches of Academic Integrity — Any transgression of the requirement that students act with honesty, trust, fairness, and respect when they present or submit work for evaluation at the University. Not adhering to the ethical standards of the certifying body or licensing authority of the profession a student intends to enter is also a breach. Common forms of breaches are:

Cheating: Any fraudulent or deceptive academic act that has the potential to impact a course credit. Examples include but are not limited to falsification of data, possessing, providing, or using unapproved materials, sources, or tools for a project, exam, laboratory report, thesis, or creative work.

Duplicate submission: Submitting for credit the same or similar work in more than one course in a single semester or multiple semesters without prior approval of the instructors of the courses.

Plagiarism: Presenting without proper attribution the work or ideas of others or other entities, including those created by GenAI (such as ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot), for credit. Using the exact words of another person or entity without quotation marks and attribution, paraphrasing text without giving appropriate credit, and presenting the creative product of another person or entity without adequate and proper attribution are common examples of plagiarism.

Using unauthorized materials: Accessing or using unauthorized materials, information, tools, technologies, or study aids in an exam, laboratory/studio, project, or paper. Unless the instructor authorizes explicitly the use of text, images, or other products created by GenAI (such as ChatGPT), using any one of them may constitute a breach of academic integrity.

Unethical or unprofessional behavior: Not adhering to the ethical standards of a certifying body or licensing authority.

Deception and maliciousness — Intentional and pre-meditated actions taken to gain an unfair advantage or undermine the academic process. Submitting another person’s work as one’s own, using unauthorized materials during exams, and falsifying research data are typical examples of deception, whereas destroying another student’s work, removing academic resources to prevent others from using them, and changing other students’ data, papers, or assignments are examples of maliciousness.

Generative AI (GenAI) — A subset of AI that focuses on creating new content based on learned patterns from existing data.

Premeditation — In the context of academic integrity, this refers to the deliberate planning or intent to engage in dishonest academic behavior. It implies that the violation was not spontaneous or due to a momentary lapse in judgment but rather a calculated decision to be malicious or deceptive.

Sanctions — Penalties imposed by the instructor, department chair (or program director), or university for misconduct that breaches academic integrity.

Note 1: Breaches of academic integrity vary in scope and severity. Some breaches may be the result of inexperience or lack of understanding. Others may involve premeditation and maliciousness. Accordingly, the sanctions imposed by the instructor and/or the department chair need to be appropriate. Here is a framework that faculty and department chairs/ directors may use to inform their decisions:

Level 1 Breaches: Transgressions that do not show premeditation by the student and may be the result of inexperience or lack of adequate understanding, especially when it is the first such occurrence. They are also minor in scope, involving a small portion of an assignment or a minor part of the overall course grade. Two examples of Level 1 violations are:

1. 1. First occurrence of plagiarism by an undergraduate student on a very limited portion of an assignment.
   2. Unpremeditated access and use of unauthorized or prohibited materials, tools, technologies (such as ChatGPT), or study aids in a quiz, lab report, minor project report, etc.

For Level 1 Breaches, a faculty member may:

• • Provide a warning
  • Require the student to redo the assessment.
  • Reduce the points awarded for the assessment (including a zero).
  • Implement all the above actions

Level 2 Breaches: These transgressions are characterized by premeditation to cheat or plan to deceive and involve a more significant portion of the course grade compared to Level 1 violations. Examples of such breaches may include:

1. 1. First occurrence of plagiarism by a student in multiple places.
   2. A second breach after receiving a warning from an instructor.
   3. Selectively omitting evidence or including previously submitted work from another course without attribution.

For Level 2 Breaches, a faculty member may:

• • Assign zero points for the assessment.
  • Reduce the course grade, including assigning a failing grade.

Level 3 Breaches: These are egregious transgressions denoted by maliciousness and/or deception. A serious professional code of conduct violation is also a Level 3 breach. Here are two examples:

1. 1. Cheating and/or plagiarism on a capstone project, thesis, dissertation, or major project/report/assessment instrument.
   2. Falsifying data, submitting products created by GenAI (such as ChatGPT) as one’s creation, or submitting an assignment the student acquired or purchased.

For Level 3 Breaches, a faculty member may:

• • Assign a failing grade for the course.
  • Recommend the department chair to dismiss the student from the major or program.

Note 2: Informed by the norms of the discipline, an academic department, individual program, and/or instructor may stipulate additional criteria regarding academic integrity, so long as they are not in conflict with this policy. Department- or program-level criteria must be published on the respective website, whereas instructor-specific criteria must be included in the syllabus of each applicable course.

Note 3: If the department-level sanctions include dismissing a student from a major or program, the decision must first be discussed with the school dean and the provost before being finalized.

Note 4: Faculty may require students to use plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin) to spot textual similarities to existing documents. However, such detection may lead to charges of plagiarism if the matched text in the student’s written work has not been properly cited to identify the source.

Policy Procedures

Procedures for Alleging and Dealing with Breaches of Academic Integrity

The process described herein is multi-step. A resolution could be reached at any stage. When that happens, the office that facilitated the resolution will submit documentation of the breach and its resolution to the Provost’s Office, which will be the repository of this information.

This process is entirely conducted through SUNY Brockport email. Specifically, all parties will send and receive emails to and from their brockport.edu email address.

A. An instructor who observes, discovers, or concludes based on reliable information that a student has breached academic integrity will notify the student within five (5) business days (of discovery) to discuss the matter with the student.

Any student or university employee who witnessed or has knowledge of a breach of academic integrity should notify the course instructor in writing. In such cases, in addition to the witness statement, evidence is required to conclude that a breach of academic integrity has occurred.

The student will have five (5) business days to respond and discuss the issue with the instructor.

If the matter is unresolved by day six (6), the instructor will complete the applicable reporting form, provide documentation, and indicate the sanction(s)to be imposed. The student and the department chair (or program director) will receive a copy of the form and evidence.

B. The department chair (or program director) will review the case to:

1. 1. ensure that the allegation of the breach aligns with the policies of the university,
   2. ascertain that the course-level sanction proposed by the instructor is appropriate, and
   3. determine whether to impose a department-level sanction(s), which may include the dismissal of the student from a departmental program.

C. Within five (5) business days (of the instructor’s report), the department chair will inform the student, the instructor, and the dean/ dean’s designee, the determination and any specific sanction(s) to be imposed.

The student will be advised that they have the right to appeal the allegation and/or proposed sanctions to the dean or designee, and of the university policy which specifies that any other confirmed breach in any course in any subsequent semester could result in dismissal from the university.

D. Within ten (10) business days of the department chair’s (program director’s) determination, the student may file an appeal to the dean (or designee) of the school or college in which the alleged breach occurred by:

1. 1. providing evidence to disprove the instructor’s allegation and/or
   2. contending that the sanction imposed by the instructor and/or the chair (if any) is unfair and incommensurate with the alleged breach.

The instructor and department chair (or program director) will also be informed of the appeal and will receive the evidence submitted with the appeal.

E. If the student does not appeal, the instructor imposes the sanction(s) on or after the 11th business day (from when the department chair informed the student of the sanctions). The matter is deemed closed at this point.

F. Within ten (10) business days of receiving the appeal, the dean or designee will review and render a decision to:

1. 1. Support the appeal: If the dean or designee concurs fully with the student, no sanction will be imposed, and the student will be held harmless.
   2. Partially support the appeal: If the determination is that the student breached academic integrity, but the sanction imposed by the instructor and/or the chair is severe, the dean or designee will decide the appropriate sanction.
   3. Reject the appeal: If the determination is that the student breached academic integrity and the sanctions were appropriate, the sanctions will be imposed.

In all cases, the dean or designee will inform the student, instructor, department chair, and provost of the decision and any sanctions. If the student breached academic integrity, the student will be advised of the university policy that any other confirmed breach in any course in any subsequent semester could result in dismissal from the university.

The decision of the dean or designee is final.

G. To support students in reducing the likelihood of violating the academic integrity policy, the following recommendations will be shared with the students:

1. 1. Consult with the course instructor as needed for clarification on assignment parameters.
   2. Save draft versions of their work to demonstrate authentic progress.
   3. Appropriately cite all sources used.
   4. Adhere to artificial intelligence policies outlined in the course syllabus.
   5. Meet with a professional writing tutor.
   6. Meet with a liaison librarian.
   7. Complete a refresher workshop on academic integrity.
   8. Review University and Departmental student policies
   9. International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI)

Links to Related Procedures and Information

International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI)

Contact Information

Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs

History (in descending order)

Item	Date	Explanation
Next Review Date	2031-06-18	Five-year review
Revision Date	2026-06-18 (Senate Resolution 2025-2026 #51)	Policy revised throughout
Revision Date	2025-06-06 (Senate Resolution 2024-2025 #34)	Policy revised throughout
Revision Date	2024-07-30 (Senate Resolution 2023-2024 #67)	Addendum added at end of Policy Procedures regarding Artificial Intelligence
Revision Date	2015-08 (Senate Resolution 2015-2016 #N/A)	Policy Revised
Revision Date	2010-05-07 (Senate Resolution 2009-2010 #32)	Policy Revised
Adoption Date	1981-01-28 (Senate Resolution 1980-1981 #9)	Policy Adopted

Approval

This policy was approved by Brockport University Senate and SUNY Brockport President on 2026-06-18 (Senate Resolution 2025-2026 #51)