Academic Honesty

Authorizing Body:  Student Performance Review Committee
Author:  Angela Nuzzarello, M.D., MHPE
Date Issued:  August 1, 2011
Last Update:  December 17, 2018


Academic honesty is vital to the success and integrity of all educational programs. OUWB seeks to ensure academic honesty and personal integrity among the OUWB community. Academic honesty is defined as the proper performance of all professional assignments without cheating, lying, stealing, receiving unauthorized assistance from any other person or using any source of information without proper authorization or citation.

Examples of academically dishonest behavior include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Plagiarism - Submission of the words, ideas, opinions or theories of another that are not common knowledge, without appropriate attribution to that other person. Plagiarism includes, directly quoting, paraphrasing, presenting or submitting another person’s written or spoken words, ideas, theories or formulas without proper attribution.

2. Unauthorized assistance - Giving or receiving assistance, in connection with any academic work that has not been specifically authorized by the supervising instructor. During examinations, quizzes, lab work, and similar activity, students are to assume that any assistance (such as books, notes, calculators, and conversations with others) is unauthorized unless otherwise clearly specified by the supervising instructor. Examples of prohibited behavior include, but are not limited to, the following:
  • Copying, or allowing another to copy, answers to an examination;
  • Transmitting or receiving information, during an examination
  • Giving or receiving answers to a quiz or examination
  • Completing for another, or allowing another to complete for the student, all or part of an assignment
  • Submitting a group assignment, when less than all of the group members assisted significantly in its preparation; and
  • Unauthorized use of a programmable calculator or other electronic device.
  • Violating exam protocols. The supervising instructor or designated proctor has the sole discretion to codify the circumstances under which examinations will be conducted
3. Lying/Tampering - Giving any false information in connection with the performance of any academic or clinical work or in connection with any proceeding under this policy. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
  • Giving false reasons (in advance or after the fact) for failure to complete academic work.
  • Falsifying the results of any laboratory or experimental work or fabricating any data or information;
  • Altering any academic work after it has been submitted, or time has expired for completing it, unless such alterations are part of the assignment or expressed permission has been granted by an authorized faculty member or preceptor, altering grade, lab, or attendance records.
  • Modifying computer (including removable media such as disks, CDs, flash drives, etc.) or laboratory equipment in order to alter or prevent the evaluation of academic work, unauthorized use of another's computer password, disrupting the content or accessibility of an Internet site, or impersonating another to obtain computer resources;
  • Giving or encouraging false information or testimony in connection with academic work or any proceeding under this policy.
  • Submitting for academic advancement an item of academic work that has been submitted for credit in another course, unless done pursuant to authorization from the instructor supervising the work.
  • Falsifying attendance records, such as swiping or signing in as present at an instructional session and leaving or swiping or signing in for another student.
4. Theft - Stealing, taking or procuring in any other unauthorized manner (such as by physical removal from a professor's office or unauthorized inspection of computerized material) information related to any academic work (such as exams, grade records, forms used in grading, books, papers, computer equipment and data, and laboratory materials and data).

Any behavior that constitutes academic dishonesty is prohibited even if it is not specifically listed in the above list of examples. The SPRC has the authority to determine if there has been a violation of this policy.

Instructors will take reasonable steps to inform students of the academic honesty rules that apply to particular academic work and the specific types of academic assistance that are permissible in connection with that academic work. Additionally, each instructor shall take reasonable steps to foster a climate of academic honesty. However, the failure of an instructor to meet these responsibilities is an unacceptable defense to an accusation of academic dishonesty.

Every student is obligated to be familiar with these guidelines. Lack of knowledge of the provisions of these guidelines is another unacceptable response to an allegation of academic dishonesty.

Scope and Applicability: 
All students enrolled in Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine

Standard Practice Guideline:


Reporting Incidents of Alleged Academic Dishonesty
Any member of Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, including faculty, staff, or students, who has personal knowledge of facts relating to an alleged violation of this policy, is required to report the alleged violation to the Associate or Assistant Dean for Student Affairs, Associate Dean for Medical Education, or Associate Dean for Undergraduate Clinical Education within fifteen (15) business days of discovering the possible violation. OUWB reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to investigate and act on complaints involving incidents that have occurred beyond the 15-day filing reporting period. Such acceptance is not intended to, nor shall it; waive timeliness defenses the School of Medicine may otherwise have available to it in any judicial or administrative proceedings. The Associate Dean for Student Affairs, Associate Dean for Preclinical Education, or the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Clinical Education will report the incident and any related findings to the SPRC leadership for possible inclusion on the SPRC meeting agenda. An instructor may take any action reasonably necessary to collect and preserve evidence of the alleged violation and to maintain or restore the integrity of exam or laboratory conditions.

Resolving Matters of Alleged Academic Dishonesty

The matters of alleged academic dishonesty are subject to the Student Performance Review Committee (SPRC) process. The SPRC will determine the outcome of the allegation. A student found in violation by the SPRC, or who admits a violation as part of any meetings or consultations with faculty or staff members will be subject to SPRC actions as detailed in the Student Performance Review Committee guidelines. All students will be required to annually attest to having read and understanding this guideline.