North Carolina Central University.

What NCCU's Academic Honor Code says, and what it says does not apply to it

Who may be present

Not stated for the Academic Honor Code process. NCCU's Student Code of Conduct states the Honor Code "must be resolved in accordance with this Academic Honor Code and under the direct authority of a NCCU faculty member" — expressly separate from the general Code's Advisor and hearing-panel provisions. — POL – 40.13.1 Student Code of Conduct, § 6.1.2.2

What follows on the record

Reproduced without resolution: the Academic Honor Code states a non-response charge "will be recorded on a student's academic transcript," while the Academic Transcripts policy states "[n]otations of academic misconduct… shall not be recorded on transcripts or retained by the Office of the Registrar except for notice of expulsion." — Undergraduate Catalog, Academic Regulations

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

From the Undergraduate Catalog's Academic Regulations (retrieved Oct 20, 2026; no on-page revision date beyond the 2026–2027 catalog edition), the Academic Honor Code defines academic dishonesty — cheating, fabrication, plagiarism, and complicity, each quoted with its own examples — and sets the penalty by the instructor responsible for the course, tiered to the share of the final grade the exercise carries:

No page located describes the Academic Integrity Board's own composition, hearing format, or appeal path. NCCU's general Student Code of Conduct (POL – 40.13.1) defines a detailed Advisor right, a "Preponderance" evidentiary standard, and recording of hearings — but the Code itself places academic-dishonesty matters outside that structure: "The Academic Honor Code governs student conduct directly related to the academic life of the University… All alleged violations of the Academic Honor Code must be resolved in accordance with this Academic Honor Code and under the direct authority of a NCCU faculty member." Those general-Code provisions are reproduced in the source map for completeness but are not presented here as governing an Academic Honor Code case. On the record, the Catalog's own Academic Transcripts section states the opposite of the Honor Code's non-response-penalty language quoted above: "Notations of academic misconduct and non-academic misconduct shall not be recorded on transcripts or retained by the Office of the Registrar except for notice of expulsion," and, separately, "[n]otations regarding academic misconduct and non-academic misconduct, except for expulsion, shall be removed from all academic transcripts." NCCU's own pages do not reconcile the two statements; both are reproduced. Source: Undergraduate Catalog, Academic Regulations and POL – 40.13.1 Student Code of Conduct. What these quotations mean for any particular case is for the institution and its process to determine; they are reproduced so you can read the originals in context.

Revision history of this page

2026-10-20 — Page created. Priority A tranche 4, entry 283. Cold build (scheduled, unattended); no prior CANDIDATES.md/procedure-facts.json research to reuse. Second entry in this pass's batch. All quotations retrieved this date. Named-vendor sweep (Turnitin and its AI writing indicator specifically, SimCheck, Originality, Copyleaks, iThenticate, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Winston AI, Crossplag, ZeroGPT, Packback, Grammarly Authorship, Honorlock, Proctorio, Respondus, Examity) found Turnitin and Respondus named only on NCCU Online's partnerships page ("Thank You To Our Partners"), with no page confirming a feature, an LMS integration, or an AI-writing capability; the official Canvas Support page names no detection tool at all. A library plagiarism guide links the public turnitin.com site as a student self-check resource, read as awareness rather than deployment evidence and not used to assert a feature. CATEGORY SWEEP: two "Understanding AI" library guides discuss AI's academic-integrity risks generically and name no detector. DISQUALIFICATION CHECK: not disqualified. PROCESS-BASED VERIFICATION SWEEP: none-published at the scope searched. EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT: not applicable, no specific detector feature confirmed. PROCESS, FROM THE UNDERGRADUATE CATALOG'S ACADEMIC REGULATIONS: the Academic Honor Code (Undergraduate Student Code of Academic Integrity) defines cheating/fabrication/plagiarism/complicity and sets instructor-assessed penalty tiers by percentage of the final grade; non-response within 48 hours is an automatic F/Zero and "the charge… will stand and will be recorded on a student's academic transcript"; a second offense is referred to the Academic Integrity Board and may draw suspension or expulsion. SCOPE FINDING: NCCU's Student Code of Conduct (POL-40.13.1, "Last Revised: May 2025") states at §6.1.2.2 that Academic Honor Code violations are resolved "under the direct authority of a NCCU faculty member," separately from the general Code's own Advisor right (§7.1.7), "Preponderance" evidentiary standard (§5.18), and hearing-recording provisions (§5.20, §7.1.19) — so those general-Code rights are reproduced in the source map for completeness but not presented as governing an Honor Code case; no page located describes the Academic Integrity Board's own hearing format, accompaniment rule, or appeal path. DIVERGENCE FOUND AND REPRODUCED, NOT RESOLVED: the Honor Code's non-response clause states a charge "will be recorded on a student's academic transcript," while the same catalog's separate Academic Transcripts section states "[n]otations of academic misconduct… shall not be recorded on transcripts or retained by the Office of the Registrar except for notice of expulsion" and that such notations "shall be removed from all academic transcripts" — NCCU's own pages do not reconcile the two statements. OFFICE: the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards (919-530-6311, studentconduct@nccu.edu) is the general Code's own published contact; it administers non-academic conduct matters under the Code, and no separate phone or email is published for academic-dishonesty cases specifically (handled by the instructor, the dean of the student's school, and the Academic Integrity Board). OMBUDS: no office titled ombuds was located. The Dean of Students Office (Student Services Building, Suite 208, 919-530-7466) is described as having "a focus on advocacy, case management, conflict resolution, wellness and crisis management for all students," without naming academic-integrity cases or claiming independence/confidentiality; a separate Student Advocacy Coordinator (919-530-7492, studentadvocacy@nccu.edu) is explicitly scoped by NCCU's own page to "unexpected life events that impact their academic progression (e.g., homelessness, food insecurity, and personal hardship)," not integrity casework — both recorded as published rather than presented as a case-advocacy fit. TRANSPORT NOTE: ecatalog.nccu.edu returns HTTP 202 with an empty body to curl (confirmed with curl -v, 15s timeout) while a browser fetch reaches it in under a second with HTTP 200 — read and supplied as plain text from a browser session; all other sources captured normally over curl. Nothing paraphrase-pending. Traces to tools/packets/nccu-packet.txt; gated in tools/fidelity-gate.txt. Archive captures pending — not requested this pass (unattended scheduled run). Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-10-20).

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