TAMIU Student Handbook 2019-2020

Page 58 of 86 Section 10.18 Appeal to Honor Council of Academic Charge A student who is found responsible for an Honor Code violation, assessed a sanction, and has yet to appeal, has 10 University business days from the date of notification of outcome to file an appeal of the findings. The appeal must be stated in writing. The chair will determine if the appeal merits a hearing. Section 10.19 Appeals of Faculty Findings Faculty alone are responsible for assigning grade penalties in their courses for violations of the Honor Code. A student’s appeal of a faculty member’s charge of academic dishonesty must be based on one of the following reasons: 1. Insufficient or misinterpreted evidence that led to the initial finding of the violation of the Honor Code. 2. Substantial new evidence not available at the time of the original faculty decision. In this case, the Honor Council will consider new information that is sufficient to alter a decision or other relevant facts not known to the person appealing at the time of the original hearing. Section 10.20 Honor Council Findings The Honor Council will hear the appeal and assess a finding of “responsible” or “not responsible” of academic misconduct. The Honor Council will notify the student, the faculty member, the chair of the department, the dean and the Provost of its findings. If the Honor Council assesses a finding of “responsible,” the student may appeal following the appeal process defined below. The Honor Council will disclose its determination of the academic appeal to school officials who have an educational interest in the finding or sanction. Section 10.21 Appeal to Provost of Honor Council Decisions Where Honor Council upholds the facultymember’s original charge, a request for appeal may be made in writing to the Provost. The request must be submitted within 10 University business days after notification of the Honor Council’s decision. There are three grounds for an appeal: 1. Substantial new evidence: The Provost will consider new information that is sufficient to alter a decision or other relevant facts not known to the person appealing at the time of the original hearing. 2. Procedural irregularities : The Provost will determine whether the original hearing was conducted fairly in light of the charges and evidence presented, and in conformity