Respondents found responsible for violating any of the policies in the Code of Conduct reserve the right to appeal. Appeals must be based on one of the four criteria described below, include an appropriate rationale, and be submitted by the deadline set in the Outcome Letter to be considered.
Appeals are reviewed by an Appellate Board. The Appeal Board will consist of five (5) trained members of the University Conduct Board – including three (3) students and two (2) faculty or staff members. A quorum of three (3), including two (2) students and one (1) faculty or staff member, must be present to hold an appeal.
Any member of the University Conduct Board who participated in the University Hearing that found a Respondent responsible cannot be on the Appeal Board for the same case.
- Unduly Harsh Sanction: The sanction given is unduly harsh and inconsistent with sanctioning practices.
- New Information: Information that was not available at the time of the Hearing is now available, and could reasonably be expected to have altered the outcome of the case.
- Improper Procedure: The Hearing did not follow the proper protocol outlined in the Code of Conduct.
- Insufficient Information: Whether the facts in the case were sufficient to establish that it is "more likely than not" that a violation of the Code of Conduct Policies occurred and that the Respondent was responsible for the violation.
For instructions on appealing academic sanctions, please refer to the Academic Integrity Conduct Process.