Academic Integrity FAQs

Students who are suspected of an academic integrity violation will be notified by their professor in writing. It is recommended that this notification is sent via email for documentation purposes, and faculty members are expected to document the suspected violation in MUM (Waynesburg University’s referral system). This correspondence should include a proposed sanction, which could include but is not limited to failing an assignment or test, or failing a course.

Once the suspected violation is in MUM, it would only be shared with the Director of Records & Registration and the Provost, unless the student opts to appeal the accusation to the Academic Standards and Procedures Committee.

Students may accept the proposed sanction as outlined by their faculty member, or they may deny the allegation and choose to move forward with the appeal process.

Students are required to submit a written appeal to the Academic Standards and Procedures Committee within three (3) class days of their initial notice of the suspected violation. To submit the written appeal, students should email Brian Carr, Director of Records & Registration, at bcarr@waynesburg.edu.

A few things. First, a representative from Academic Affairs may reach out to get more information within a week of the written appeal being submitted. In most cases, this correspondence will come from Brian Carr, Director of Records & Registration.

The representative who reaches out is not a voting member on the Academic Standards and Procedures Committee, so they would not be responsible for voting on the appeal. Instead, this person will reach out to the student if additional information is needed, then they will share that information with the full committee.

Possibly. If more information is needed, Academic Affairs could contact faculty, staff, or students who were mentioned in the appeal process.

The full committee receives several documents to review as they consider the appeal:

1. The initial written referral that was shared by the faculty member
2. The written appeal submitted by the student
3. Any additional information shared by the Academic Affairs representative

If the committee determines that the allegation is founded, the decision will be shared in writing to the student, the faculty member, and Academic Affairs. The committee may determine:

1. That the allegation is founded and the sanction(s) are appropriate
2. That the allegation is founded and that the sanction(s) should be reconsidered
3. That the allegation is not founded because it cannot be substantiated

It is possible for students and faculty members to appeal the committee’s decision by sending a written appeal to the Provost. This written appeal must be sent within three (3) days of the initial notice.

The Provost will review the information provided and report their conclusion in writing to the student, the faculty member, and the Chair of the Academic Standards and Procedures Committee.

When in the judgement of the Provost, action other than or in addition to a failing grade in the course is warranted, such action, including suspension, dismissal, or expulsion, will be determined by the Provost and communicated in writing to the student.

No. The Provost’s review is the final level of appeal for academic integrity violations. Any decision made by the Provost would be final.

Artificial intelligence, or AI, involves using computers and software to perform tasks traditionally requiring human intelligence.

Machine learning (ML) is a subset of AI that focuses on enabling computers to extract insights from data. This is done by using algorithms to make informed decisions or predictions. ML differs from traditional programming, where computers perform tasks based on established instructions.

Generative AI is a term that encompasses a wide variety of artificial intelligence tools that can draft or substantively edit academic work for a user. Tools like ChatGPT use generative AI to produce human-like text, answer questions, and even write different kinds of creative content. 

Any tool that generates or edits content is considered generative AI. Such tools may include (but are not limited to) Grammarly, ChatGPT, Jasper, Anyword, etc.

Potentially. The University encourages the responsible use of generative AI for teaching and learning. In addition, the University hopes to foster open and exploratory investigation and research into generative AI.

The ultimate decision on whether students can use generative AI tools rests with the instructor. Instructors are cautioned to be clear to students about the expectations regarding the use of generative AI tools consistent with the guidelines set by the University.

When students are allowed to use generative AI tools, they may be required to cite the tools that are used and/or provide specific information about their use. Best practice is to keep detailed notes of what tools are used and how, including any transcripts of their use. This way, you can show how you followed all directions or requirements for the use of these tools.

Yes, the Waynesburg University Policy on Student Academic Integrity prohibits the unauthorized use of technological resources, such as generative AI.

​​​​​​If you use Grammarly to create or substantively edit work on your behalf, you may be violating Waynesburg University policy and you should ask your instructor if using Grammarly this way is permitted.

​​​​​​​It is important that your work honestly reflect your knowledge of a subject and ability to communicate your understanding. If you use a tool that replaces or substantially enhances your knowledge or ability, you should discuss its use with your instructor before submitting work created using the tool.