Section 1: LGS Honor Code
Click on a topic below for more information.
- Article 1: Jurisdiction
- Article 2: Academic misconduct
- Article 3: Reporting cases
- Article 4: Hearing procedure
- Article 5: Sanctions
- Article 6: Post-hearing procedure
- Article 7: Appeal procedure
- Article 8: Miscellaneous
- Article 9: The use of sources in writing research papers, theses, and dissertations
This code is presented in order to acquaint students with:
- The rights and responsibilities of members of the academic community; and
- Some of the policies that apply to them as members of the academic community at Emory University.
All students and members of the faculty in the Laney Graduate School are expected to cooperate in maintaining academic integrity. Given below in this Honor Code are definitions of academic dishonesty and the procedure for hearings in cases where academic misconduct is suspected.
The Honor Code shall apply to cases of academic misconduct by students enrolled in the Laney Graduate School.
Academic misconduct is an offense generally defined as any action that is offensive to the integrity and honesty of members of the academic community. These actions include but are not limited to the following: cheating or obtaining unauthorized assistance in any academic assignment or examination; acquiring, receiving, or passing on information about the content of an examination prior to its authorized release; plagiarizing, passing off the work of another (content or expression) as one’s own; falsifying data or results when conducting research; and attempting to do any of the foregoing. It is the obligation of every student to know the regulations regarding academic misconduct. Ignorance of these regulations will not be considered a defense. Article IX of this code and incorporated herein is the document entitled “The Use of Sources in Writing Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations in the Laney Graduate School.”
(A) Any individual, when he or she suspects that an offense of academic misconduct has occurred, shall report this suspected breach to the appropriate director of graduate studies, program director or to the Dean of the Laney Graduate School. (Wherever “Dean” appears in this code, it shall include any person designated by the Dean of the Laney Graduate School to act in his/her stead.)
(B) When a case comes to a director of graduate studies or program director, s/he should then notify the Dean of the Laney Graduate School. The Dean shall conduct a preliminary investigation to determine that sufficient evidence exists for the case to go forward. If not, the charge shall be dismissed. In cases that require a hearing, the Dean shall notify the Vice President for honor and conduct of the Graduate Student Council (hereafter GSC).
(C) Following the compilation of relevant information, the accused student shall meet with the Dean of the Laney Graduate School at a time that is mutually convenient. The student shall have outlined the circumstances surrounding the alleged instance of violation of the code. At this meeting the student will be advised of his/her rights and informed of the procedures of the Laney Graduate School in such matters.
(D) At the end of this meeting, or shortly following this meeting, a written statement of charges will be made available to the student, informing the student of the alleged academic misconduct and the student’s right to a hearing. This letter shall include the date, time, and place of the hearing and shall inform the student of the names of known persons who might appear as witnesses. This letter shall also inform the student of the right to select an adviser.
(A) Upon GSC notification, a Hearing Committee will be formed consisting of:
- The Vice President of the GSC, or Vice President’s delegate who will act as Chair of the committee
- A member of the GSC, not from the student’s program or the program of the Vice President (or his/her delegate), appointed by the Vice President of the GSC
- Two members of the graduate faculty, one of whom is from the student’s program division (sciences, social sciences, or humanities)
(B) The student shall have the right to have an adviser at the hearing that may, but need not, be a faculty member. The adviser shall be any member of the Laney Graduate School – student, faculty, or staff. In cases where this restriction poses a hardship in the view of the Dean, the student may, upon the approval of the Dean, select any non-attorney from within the University community as adviser. The student shall have the right to testify and the right to be present at the hearing. The student or the adviser shall have the right to question witnesses, to call a reasonable number of witnesses on the student’s behalf, to present documentary and physical evidence, and to make a closing statement. Members of the committee may question witnesses as well. The Chair of the committee may exclude any question that he or she finds inappropriate.
(C) Should the accused, after proper notification, not appear at the time and place specified, the hearing might be conducted with the accused in absentia. In this event, the committee shall render its decision based upon such evidence as it has before it.
(D) Hearings shall be fair and impartial. The rules of evidence of courts of law shall not apply. Evidence that, in the opinion of the Chair, is relevant and appropriate may be presented. Witnesses shall testify without oath, and signed statements may be submitted from witnesses who do not attend the hearing. Other than the witness while testifying, only the members of the Hearing Committee, the adviser, a member of the decanal staff of the Laney Graduate School designated by the Dean, and the accused may be present during the hearing. A tape recording will be made of the hearing, except for the final deliberations of the committee. The Hearing Committee shall determine the weight and pertinence of the evidence.
(E) At the conclusion of the presentation of evidence, the Hearing Committee shall retire to deliberate in secret. A three-fourths vote shall be required for a finding of an Honor Code violation.
(F) If the committee determines that there was a violation on the part of the accused student, the committee shall secure from the Dean the record of any previous University proceedings where the student was found to have engaged in academic misconduct or violation of any Honor Code. On the basis of its findings in the case and the student’s previous record, the committee shall render to the Dean a recommendation by plurality vote as to the proper sanction or sanctions. The Dean, may, however, impose a different sanction than that recommended by the Hearing Committee.
When a student is judged guilty of an Honor Code violation, one or more of the following sanctions may be imposed:
(A) Warning. The student shall be notified by letter, or by both letter and appointment with the Dean, that his/her academic conduct has violated Laney Graduate School standards.
(B) Probation for a specific period of time. The student shall be notified by letter, or by both letter and appointment with the Dean, that his/her academic conduct has violated Laney Graduate School standards and that conviction for another serious Honor Code violation will most likely bring harsher disciplinary action.
(C) A grade of F in the course or on the work in question. The student shall be notified by letter, or by both letter and appointment with the Dean, that his/her academic conduct has violated Laney Graduate School standards and that conviction for another serious Honor Code violation will most likely bring harsher disciplinary action.
(D) Dismissal. The student shall be notified by letter, or by both letter and appointment with the Dean, that the student’s academic conduct has violated Laney Graduate School standards and that s/he should vacate the campus, and all buildings and property owned by the University by a certain date. Dismissal generally will be for a specified time, after which the student may go through the standard application procedure for readmission. This sanction automatically invokes sanction E below.
(E) Revocation of financial support. Conviction for an Honor Code violation may result in the revocation of financial support received from the University. This sanction may also be used in conjunction with other sanctions. Revocation of financial support is automatically applied with the recording of sanction
(F) A recommendation different from those listed above, appropriate for the particular academic misconduct issues involved.
In the case of a finding of an Honor Code violation, the Hearing Committee shall promptly prepare a concise, but thorough, written summary of pertinent evidence and facts that shall be transmitted to the Dean with the accompanying recommendation for sanction. After receipt of the summary, the Dean shall promptly transmit to the accused, in writing, his/her decision on the charge. The Dean may increase or decrease the severity of the recommended sanction. The student shall be notified by the Dean, in writing, of the decision and the sanction imposed.
(A) The judgment of the Dean shall be final unless, within seven (7) days of that notification to the student, the Dean receives a written appeal from the student. The appeal shall state specifically the grounds. Mere dissatisfaction with the decision of the Hearing Committee is not a ground for appeal.
(B) On receipt of the appeal, the Dean shall form an Appeal Committee to advise her/him concerning the case. The Appeal Committee shall consist of:
- Two members of the Executive Council of the Laney Graduate School appointed by the Dean, one of whom shall be appointed Chair of the Appeal Committee; and
- Two members of the GSC, not from the student’s program, appointed by the GSC President.
No member shall be appointed who has served on the Hearing Committee in that case or who was a participant in the proceedings before that committee.
(C) The Appeal Committee may review the records in the case, may consult with members of the original Hearing Committee, may confer with the Dean, or may decide to rehear the case.
(D) In the case of a new hearing, the Appeal Committee shall notify the student in writing of the date, time, and location of the appeals hearing. The student and adviser shall have the rights specified in IV.B above and the hearing shall be conducted in accordance with IV.D and IV.E above.
(E) Having completed its investigation, the Appeal Committee shall promptly transmit to the Dean a written summary of its findings and its recommendations on whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the previous decision.
(F) The Dean shall promptly notify the student in writing of his/her final decision on the appeal.
(A) Confidentiality: Because alleged instances of academic dishonesty can have serious impact on a student’s professional career and relations, all proceedings of the Hearing Committee and reviews of the Appeal Committee shall be carried out with due regard for privacy. It shall be the responsibility of the Chairs of the Hearing Committee and the Appeal Committee to take reasonable steps to see that this privacy is maintained and that the student is afforded all rights and privileges. All evidence shall be considered confidential prior to, during, and after the proceedings here described.
(B) This Honor Code is effective August 1, 1992, and supersedes the Laney Graduate School Honor Code that was revised in February 1984. The 1984 Laney Graduate School Honor Code is hereby repealed.
Article 9: The Use of Sources in Writing Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations in the Laney Graduate School of Emory University
Because of the seriousness of the act of plagiarism when conducting scholarly research, the Laney Graduate School Executive Council has adopted the following statement on plagiarism. Each student is responsible for understanding this statement and for conducting his/her research and writing in accordance with the highest standards of integrity.
A writer’s data, facts, ideas, and phraseology should be regarded as his/her property. Any person who uses a writer’s data, facts, ideas, or phraseology without giving due credit is guilty of plagiarism. Information may be put into a research paper, thesis, or dissertation without a footnote or other documentation only if it meets all of the following conditions: (1) it may be found in several books on the subject; (2) it is written entirely in the words of the student; and (3) it is not paraphrased from any particular source and is generally regarded as common knowledge. Whenever any idea is taken from a specific work, even when the student writes the idea entirely in his/her own words, there must be a citation giving credit to the author responsible for the idea. Methods of citation vary. The student must give appropriate credit.
The student is entirely responsible for knowing and following the principles of paraphrasing:
In paraphrasing you are expressing the ideas of another writer in your own words. A good paraphrase preserves the sense of the original, but not the form. It does not retain the sentence patterns and merely substitute synonyms for the original words, nor does it retain the original words and merely alter the sentence patterns. It is a genuine restatement. Invariably it should be briefer than the source. (Floyd C. Watkins, William B. Dillingham, and Edward T. Martin, Practical English Handbook, 3rd ed., Boston, 1970, p. 245.)
Any direct quotation must be documented in an acceptable fashion. Even when a student uses only one unusual or key word from a passage, that word should be quoted. If a brief phrase that is common is used as it occurs in a source, the words should be in quotation marks. Any questions should be referred to the director of graduate studies or program director in the student’s program.