The Ohio State University.

What Ohio State's own pages say about how cases proceed

Who may be present

“The respondent may choose to bring an advisor for support throughout the disciplinary process. The advisor (i.e., support person) may be any person other than a witness.” The rule continues: “The advisor may only counsel the student and may not actively participate in the disciplinary process, unless the hearing body determines that clarification is needed.” — Code of Student Conduct, rule 3335-23-12, Hearing procedures, subsection (C) Advisor (board approval dates listed through Nov 16, 2023; retrieved Aug 31, 2026) · Rule 3335-23-12 — Hearing procedures

What follows on the record

“If a student is suspended or dismissed from the University, the Office of the University Registrar is informed and an appropriate notation (‘disciplinary suspension’ or ‘disciplinary dismissal’) is added to the student’s transcript.” On retention, the same page states that the Office of Student Conduct “retains notations of records of students found in violation of academic misconduct for a minimum of ten years (fifty years for dismissals).” — COAM Procedures and Rules, Records of the Committee on Academic Misconduct (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Aug 31, 2026) · COAM Procedures and Rules

The two questions an adviser raises first, answered from this institution’s own published documents — or recorded as not stated in them.

From the Committee on Academic Misconduct page, Office of Academic Affairs (page carries a "Notification Update — October 2025" heading; retrieved Aug 31, 2026):

Source: Committee on Academic Misconduct — Office of Academic Affairs. That page also notes that incident reports are submitted through a Maxient portal.

On records, transcripts and regional-campus hearings, the office's separate COAM Procedures and Rules page — which presents itself as excerpted from the Code of Student Conduct, "version as of May 31, 2019" — states (no on-page date displayed; retrieved Aug 31, 2026):

The same page links the code sections for initiation and investigation, filing of complaint, notice of charges, hearing bodies and procedures, sanctions guidelines, and the appellate process (rules 3335-23-05 through 3335-23-19). Ohio State's campus syllabus statements state that an instructor who suspects misconduct is "obligated by University Rules to report suspicions to COAM." What any of this means for a particular case is for the institution and its process to determine. Sources: COAM Procedures and Rules; Syllabus Statements — Ohio State Mansfield (both retrieved Aug 31, 2026).

Revision history of this page

2026-08-22 — Page created. All quotations retrieved this date from the osu.edu pages linked beside them; source-page dates where displayed: Oct 23, 2024 (OTDI Turnitin announcement) and an on-page "Notification Update — October 2025" heading (COAM page); other pages displayed no revision date, so retrieval dates are recorded instead. Turnitin Feedback Studio (Similarity Report) is confirmed first-party; no campus-wide statement on Turnitin's separate AI-writing-detection feature was located, and none is asserted. COAM's generative-AI statement is quoted from Ohio State instructional pages that reproduce it, because the OAA address they cite redirected to COAM's main page at retrieval — noted rather than treated as the statement's original location. The instructor reporting-obligation line is from a campus syllabus-statements page and is labeled as such. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-08-22). Internet Archive captures: to be added.

2026-08-23 — Sources re-fetched and compared this date by an automated source re-verification; no human review is claimed for this entry. Every source was reachable, and every quotation was found present verbatim: the OTDI Turnitin article (still bylined October 23, 2024, both sentences unchanged); the Teaching and Learning Resource Center's Turnitin guide ("there is no Similarity Report outcome that unequivocally indicates plagiarism"); the COAM page (formal-hearing sentence and the Notification Update — October 2025 paragraph, both unchanged); COAM Procedures and Rules (records, transcript-notation and regional-campus sentences); and COAM's generative-AI statement as reproduced on the ASC Office of Distance Education and Ohio State Mansfield pages, along with the Mansfield line that instructors are "obligated by University Rules to report suspicions to COAM." Correction to attribution. Three quotations in section 02 — on sanction-letter distribution and record retention, the registrar's transcript notation, and regional-campus hearings — were attributed at publication to the COAM page. They are not on that page; they appear on the Office of Academic Affairs' separate COAM Procedures and Rules page, which was already linked in the source map. Section 02 now separates the two sources and attributes each quotation to the page that carries it. Nothing was quoted that is not first-party, and no quotation text changed. Additions. COAM Procedures and Rules states that it excerpts the Code of Student Conduct "version as of May 31, 2019"; that date is now shown. The COAM page's own quotation of the Code's definition of academic misconduct was added to section 02. The note about the OAA address for the generative-AI statement was made specific: the two addresses the instructional pages cite for it, oaa.osu.edu/artificial-intelligence-and-academic-integrity and oaa.osu.edu/academic-integrity-and-misconduct, both redirect to COAM's main page, which does not carry the statement, so the statement is still quoted from the pages that reproduce it. Detection status. The first-party check was re-run across Ohio State's OTDI, Teaching and Learning Resource Center, OAA and college instructional pages. Turnitin Feedback Studio remains documented as the enterprise anti-plagiarism tool producing Similarity Reports; no first-party statement enabling or disabling Turnitin's separate AI-writing-detection feature was located, so the stated absence in section 01 stands unchanged. Internet Archive Save Page Now could not be reached from the environment this review ran in; captures remain pending for all sources on this page.

2026-08-23 (second entry) — Internet Archive Save Page Now, unreachable when the entry above was written, was reached this date from a browser. Captures were made for every source on this page: the COAM page and the separate COAM Procedures and Rules page — the two whose attribution the entry above corrected, now fixed in the archive as separate documents — plus the enterprise Turnitin announcement, the CarmenCanvas Turnitin guide, the ASC AI-policy guidance, the Board of Trustees code, and the Mansfield syllabus statements. No source text was re-checked in this entry and no quotation changed.

2026-08-23 — Ombuds capture added this date: Ohio State's Office of Ombuds Services is staffed for faculty and for graduate and professional students, so undergraduates are directed to the Student Advocacy Center, which publishes its own academic-misconduct page. The Advocacy Center's site gives conflicting addresses — a banner stating the office has moved to the Younkin Success Center alongside a footer listing Drackett Tower — so no address is reproduced here; phone and email are given instead. Sources re-fetched and compared this date; automated pass, not a human review.

2026-08-23 — Section 02 now opens with the two questions an adviser raises first. Who may be present. Searched and captured this date. The COAM Procedures and Rules page does not answer it; it links the Code of Student Conduct rules, and the answer is in rule 3335-23-12(C), which was fetched directly and is now cited in the block and listed in the source map. That rule states nothing about recording a hearing; rule 3335-23-14, Record of proceedings, was not captured in this pass and remains open for a future review. What follows on the record. Already quoted in this page’s prose from COAM Procedures and Rules and hoisted into the block rather than re-fetched. Automated pass; no human review is claimed for this entry.

2026-08-31 — Sources re-fetched and compared this date; automated pass, not a human review. Every source reachable and every quotation present verbatim: the OTDI Turnitin article (still dated Oct 23, 2024, both sentences), the Teaching and Learning Resource Center's Turnitin guide ("no Similarity Report outcome that unequivocally indicates plagiarism"), COAM's generative-AI statement on the ASC and Mansfield pages, the COAM page (formal-hearing, incident-summary and Code-definition sentences, with its "Notification Update — October 2025" heading unchanged), COAM Procedures and Rules (records/ten-year, transcript-notation and regional-campus sentences, "version as of May 31, 2019"), rule 3335-23-12(C) (both advisor sentences), and the Mansfield "obligated by University Rules to report suspicions to COAM" line. Retrieval dates in sections 01–02 and the source map advanced to Aug 31. Student Advocacy Center contact (614-292-1111, advocacy@osu.edu) re-confirmed. Detection inventory re-run: Turnitin Feedback Studio remains the enterprise anti-plagiarism tool; the TLRC guide additionally names iThenticate, but only as a self-check tool for faculty and graduate students to check their own work (Turnitin being classroom-use-only), not as an AI-writing detector run on student submissions — so no detector is added and the section-01 AI-indicator absence stands. No captures requested this pass.

Spot an error or an outdated quotation? hello@gatheredwork.com — corrections are made on the record, in this log.