Discipline Process
The University of Alberta is dedicated to the principles outlined on this site. Because we demand honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility from our students, we are called upon to model those values. In addition, we are required to ensure a fair process when addressing academic dishonesty. The Code stipulates procedures from reporting an offence through to the final appeal. These procedures are designed to ensure that all students are treated fairly as they go through the discipline process. They also protect instructors from uncertainty and, when followed properly, they may protect the University from litigation.
The Code begins with rights afforded to the students, including the right to an advisor, the right to know the case against oneself and to respond to the allegations, the right to an unbiased decision-maker, and the right to be presumed innocent until a finding has been made on balance of probabilities. Instructors are advised to become familiar with these rights to ensure that these principles are followed.
When in doubt, it's best to consult on the process. Both Student Conduct and Accountability and the Office of the Student Ombuds are available to provide information on the discipline process. Because they are an impartial service, the Office of the Student Ombuds can provide information and advice on procedures to instructors as well as to students.
The Process
The discipline process is defined by the type of allegation: academic misconduct or non-academic misconduct.
The Code is amended periodically to reflect new policies. Always check the Code online for the most up-to-date information. The following documents are a summary only.
VIEW THE ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE PROCESS CHART
VIEW THE NON-ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE PROCESS CHART
Who Can Sanction Students
The following is a summary of the players involved and their roles in a case of academic misconduct:
- May discover academic misconduct while grading assignments, papers or exams or while proctoring an exam.
- Is required to bring suspicions to the attention of the Instructor.
- Collects information and evidence related to suspicions or allegations of academic misconduct.
- Meets with the student involved.
- Is required to report all academic misconduct to the Dean.
- Is not authorized to impose sanctions for academic misconduct.
- Receives all complaints related to student academic misconduct in the Faculty.
- Meets with the student involved.
- Makes a finding on whether the student violated the Code.
- Is authorized to impose "Intermediate Sanctions", that is, sanctions related to grades in that course (either on the relevant assignment or in the course itself), as well as notations on the student's transcript.
- Functions to ensure that decisions throughout the Faculty (regardless of department) are consistent.
- May recommend "Severe Sanctions", that is, sanctions that interrupt a student's program (i.e., suspension or expulsion) to the Discipline Officer.
- Decisions can be appealed to the University Appeal Board.
- Receives a recommendation from a Dean for Severe Sanctions.
- Meets with the student involved.
- Makes decision on whether to impose a Severe Sanction.
- Functions to ensure that decisions involving Severe Sanctions are consistent across the University.
- Decisions can be appealed by the student or the Dean to the University Appeal Board.
Note: the more severe the consequences to a student, the more processes are involved.
The structure in place is designed to provide a fair process for the accused student, as required by law, as well as consistent decisions (without resorting to a precedent-based system) across Faculties and the University. It also functions to allow instructors to focus on their teaching and preserving a positive relationship with their students rather than becoming disciplinarians.