Professional and Continuing Education
Pawley Hall, Room 440G
456 Pioneer Drive
Rochester, MI 48309-4482
(map)
(248) 370-3177
oupace@oakland.edu

policies-procedures

Plagiarism Policy

All members of the academic community at Oakland are expected to practice and uphold standards of academic integrity and honesty. An instructor is expected to inform and instruct students about the procedures and standards of research and documentation required of students in fulfilling course work. A student is expected to follow such instructions and be sure the rules and procedures are understood in order to avoid inadvertent misrepresentation of his work. Students must assume that individual (unaided) work on exams and lab reports and documentation of sources is expected unless the instructor specifically says that is not necessary.

* Academic integrity means representing oneself and one's work honestly. Misrepresentation of one's work is cheating and takes two forms. The first of these is claiming credit for ideas and work which are actually not one's own and thereby trying to get a grade one has not actually earned. The second is submitting work for a course one is presently taking which one has actually completed for a course taken in the past or is, in fact, also completing for another present course. Under some circumstances, an instructor might permit a student to submit for a present course work completed for a past course or another present course, but the instructor's permission must be received before a student does this. The following definitions are examples of academic dishonesty:

1. Cheating on examinations by 

    a. using materials such as books and/or notes when not authorized by the instructor,
    b. by taking advantage of prior information not authorized by the instructor regarding questions to be asked on the exam,
    c. copying from someone else's paper,
    d. helping someone else copy work or
    e. other forms of misrepresentation.

Students would be well advised to be careful to avoid the appearance of cheating.

The following definitions are examples of academic dishonesty:

2. Plagiarizing from work of others. Plagiarism is using someone else's work or ideas without giving the other person credit; by doing this, a student is, in effect, claiming credit for someone else's thinking. Whether the student has read or heard the information he uses, the student must document the source of information. When dealing with written sources, a clear distinction would be made between quotations (which reproduce information from the source word-for-word within quotation marks) and paraphrases (which digest the source information and produce it in the student's own words). Both direct quotations and paraphrases must be documented. Just because a student rephrases, condenses or selects from another person's work, the ideas are still the other person's, and failure to give credit constitutes misrepresentation of the student's actual work and plagiarism of another's ideas. Naturally, buying a paper and handing it in as one's own work is plagiarism.

3. Cheating on lab reports by

    a. falsifying data or
    b. submitting data not based on student's own work.

4. Falsifying records or providing misinformation regarding one's credentials.

If a student feels that practices by the instructor are conducive to cheating, he may convey this information either directly to the instructor or to the PACE Director. Instructors are expected to bring evidence of plagiarism, cheating on exams or lab reports, falsification of records or other forms of academic misconduct before the Academic Conduct Committee of the University Senate for determination of the facts in the case and if warranted, assessment of penalty. If academic misconduct is determined the Committee assesses penalties ranging from academic disciplinary reprimand (which is part of the student's confidential University file), to academic probation to suspension or dismissal from the University.

GUIDELINES FOR INSTRUCTORS

Instructors have at least three roles to play in maintaining proper standards of academic conduct:

  1. To assist their students in recognizing the way in which general standards apply in context of a particular course or discipline.
  2. To take practical steps to prevent cheating and to detect it when it occurs.
  3. To report classroom misconduct please complete the Allegation of Misconduct Form.
Process once the form is completed:
  • Provide the form to the Program Director and as backup to PACE Director (440J Pawley Hall).
  • Program Director will independently meet with the student and instructor to review the complaint within three weeks of receiving the complaint.
  • After the independent meetings, Program Director will determine the corrective action and provide it in writing to the student and instructor within 30 days .  Determination is final.
Attendance Policy

The attendance policy may vary, but as a general rule, attendance is required to administer and award CEU’s for coursework. Students are allowed a maximum of two absences from 20 to 30 hour courses with instructor permission and without penalty to their grade.

Grading Policy
Grade Submission

Faculty members are responsible for entering grades into SAIL within 72 hours of course end. It is the responsibility of the unit or department to monitor grade entry. PACE is responsible for auditing overall grade entry for compliance with OU policy and reporting non-compliance to the unit for remediation.

Grading Policy

The (I) grade is temporary and may be given only by student request and instructor consent and is only available for courses longer than two weeks in duration. It may be used by students/participants experiencing severe hardship beyond their control that prevents completion of course requirements. Student work to remove an (I) grade for PACE courses and faculty submission of the grade must be completed within 90 days from the faculty grade submission deadline for the course. (I) grades after the 90-day deadline shall be changed to a grade of either 0.0 or Unsatisfactory.

Request for (I) Grade Process:
  1. Student will discuss the possibility of receiving an (I) grade with the instructor.
  2. The instructor will determine whether an (I) grade is a possibility for the class.
  3. If the instructor determines that the student/participant may receive an (I) grade, the student/participant will complete and sign their portion of the PACE Request for Incomplete (I) Grade form found on the PACE website on the Student Forms page.
  4. Instructor will complete and sign their portion of the PACE Request for Incomplete (I) Grade form.
  5. The original form will be provided to the program director with copies for the student/participant, instructor and PACE director.
  6. When work is appropriately completed and accepted by the instructor, the instructor will complete and submit the Grade Change form found at oakland.edu/registrar/resources.
Grade Appeal
Policy

Grade Appeal Process (Numeric Grades Only)

Mission:  The mission of a grade appeals process is to give the appealing student a fair and impartial hearing before a panel of impartial instructors with program specific knowledge. 

Panel:  Panel members will be made up of an odd number of instructors and unbiased University Administrators (possibly 3) that do not have the appealing student in class.

Decision:  The issue will be decided by panel majority vote.

The procedure for processing a final grade appeal is as follows:

  1. Any student who feels a grade may be incorrect or unfair should contact the Professor/Instructor within 7 days after the grade has been posted.
  2. After discussing the matter with the course instructor, if the student still feels the grade is inappropriate, he or she should contact the Program Administrator within 7 days to provide evidence that they have met with the faculty/instructor and provide the Program Administrator with a Grade Appeal Request or position paper to the Program Administrator.
  3. The Administrator will then ascertain the faculty/instructor’s position in writing and any pertinent documents.
  4. The Program Administrator will meet with the Appealing Student in an attempt to resolve the conflict.
  5. If still unresolved, the Program Administrator will convene a panel of instructors (called the Grade Appeals Panel) within 7 days of meeting with the Program Administrator.
  6. The Program Administrator will schedule an agreed upon meeting date (called the Grade Appeals Hearing) for the student, faculty/instructor and panel. The instructor will have the option to attend.
  7. The Program Administrator will provide the submitted information from the faculty/instructor and student to the Grade Appeals Panel for review.
  8. At the Grade Appeals Hearing, if desired, the Appealing Student and the Instructor will be provided the opportunity to present their positions and answers questions from the panel. No other witnesses will be called.  A final statement is at the option of the Appealing Student.  The burden of proof is on the Appealing Student.
  9. The parties will be temporarily excused while the panel deliberates.
  10. The Grade Appeals Panel may choose to render a decision at the time of the hearing or within a reasonable time.
  11. A written summary including the decision will be provided to the student via mail.
  12. A grade change form will be completed by the Program Administrator for approval.
  13. The decision will be binding and the matter deemed resolved. Process should be finalized within a 3-week period of grade posting.