A revised version of the University’s academic integrity policy will be submitted to both the academic senate and council on conduct governance this semester by the task force that reviewed the academic integrity policies in the student code.

The changes are aimed at clearing up ambiguities in the current code and lowering the standard of proof in holding a student guilty of cheating. The new policies could be added to the student code for the 2013-14 school year if it passes through the senate and the chancellor signs off on it by the end of spring semester, said Charles Tucker, task force member and associate dean for undergraduate programs for Engineering.

“One of the major goals was to have a policy that was clear and understandable for students, for faculty (and) for staff so that we could actually use it and so that it could be used across campus,” Tucker said.

The task force set a more explicit basis for an instructor to decide whether a student has cheated: looking at whether it’s more likely than not that the student cheated, according to Section 1-403 of the revised policy. The current code says that the faculty member “should feel certain” that the student cheated before imposing a penalty.

Michael LeRoy, chair of the task force and a professor in the School of Labor and Employment Relations and College of Law, said that if the standard of proof were too high, the policy would be impossible to enforce. If it were too low, students would be at risk.

After the original draft of the new policy was written, it was posted online for comment by the campus community.

He also said the basic structure of how the University handles academic integrity has not changed, but the task force did make some changes to parts of the appeals process to make it more explicit, such as adding a standard for department hearings that previously was up to departments themselves to create.

“The revised code has a single unified description of both the college and department level appeal hearing processes and in both cases there is at least one student on the hearing panel for the appeal,” Tucker said.

LeRoy said he wanted the task force to create a new policy that covers a more comprehensive scope than the current policy.

“The current policy is out of date and essentially predates many of the technology extensions that student commonly use — social media, iPads, iPhones,” he said. “Things that are normal and can be put to good use but things that can also be used to cheat.”

LeRoy said the task force gave thought to not only changing the policy but to changing the student culture, emphasizing being proactive rather than reactive.

“Up until now, our thinking is that 98 percent of all students don’t know about the code unless and until they are accused by a faculty member of cheating or fraud,” LeRoy said. “We want 100 percent of students aware of the code when they embark on every class and we also want faculty members to be very clear about following the rules they set up and also adhering to the code itself.”

He said the largest change to the policy is in its philosophy.

“It is meant to be thought about when a course begins and not when a test is given,” he said.

Tyler can be reached at [email protected].