Proposed changes to the Code of Academic Integrity could be made within the next couple of months that would change the way students appeal instructors' disciplinary decisions for infractions such as cheating or plagiarism.
Alexis Hernandez, associate dean of students, proposed changes in the appeal process for students that would allow the deans of colleges to be make authoritative decisions if an instructor's decision should be overturned.
Hernandez presented the proposed change during Wednesday night's Associated Students of the University of Arizona Senate meeting to get senators' suggestions and feedback.
Currently, the college deans' role in the appeal process is only to advise and give suggestions to students. The dean usually explains the appeal process to students and determines if a student has enough evidence to present it to the University Hearing Board, the next step in the appeal process.
But Hernandez said the current system leads to an overload of cases for the UHB. About 20 disciplinary cases a year get to the UHB level, and he said about 12 of those don't even have enough evidence for an appeal, creating a heavy load for UHB.
"It's a labor-intensive process," Hernandez said.
He suggested amending the Code of Academic Integrity to allow the deans to filter some of the sanction appeals so the UHB can concentrate on cases with substantial evidence.
The dean of the college that offers the class would handle appeals.
Deans want to have more input on disciplinary actions on the students in their colleges, Hernandez said.
Under the new proposed changes, the dean of the college would be the final authority on disciplinary sanctions.
In cases involving suspension, expulsion or permanent notation on transcripts, the proposed appeal procedure would still have to go through the UHB and deans wouldn't have the final say.
"This process is more in line of our sister institutions," Hernandez said.
In the last step of the appeal process, a student has the right to appeal UHB's decision to a provost.
Some senators expressed concern that students won't have as many chances to appeal if the changes are passed.
Stephanie Hartz, an ASUA senator, said if a student puts in the effort to appeal a sanction, she thinks that student should have the right to have their case heard by UHB, not just the dean.
Suggestions from senator during the meeting included implementing a jury of peers to decide if a student's sanction should be overturned.
"Rest assured, you don't want students on the board," Hernandez replied to the suggestion. "Students are tough on each other."
Hernandez said the most typical violation is plagiarism.
The Code of Academic Integrity applies to all students except students in the College of Law and Medicine.
ASUA senators will further discuss the proposed changes within the next couple of months.