Texas A&M University.

What Student Rule 20 says about how cases proceed

Who may be present

“The accused student has the opportunity to be assisted by an advisor of their choice, at their own expense. […] The accused student is responsible for presenting their own information.” On recording: “There shall be a single verbatim record, such as a tape or digital recording, of all Honor Council proceedings. Deliberations shall not be recorded. The record shall be the property of the university.” — Student Rule 20, 20.2.4.1 Student Rights (page dated Aug 24, 2026; retrieved Aug 31, 2026) · Student Rule 20

What follows on the record

“A student who is assessed a grade of ‘F*’ shall have it documented on their transcript with the notation ‘FAILURE DUE TO ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT’ or other similar language approved by the Director for the Aggie Honor System Office.” The rule continues: “The student may have the grade of F* removed and permanently replaced with the grade of F […] contingent upon the successful completion of the Academic Integrity Development Program.” — Student Rule 20, 20.1.4.3 (page dated Aug 24, 2026; retrieved Aug 31, 2026) · Student Rule 20

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

From Student Rule 20, published by the Aggie Honor System Office (page dated Aug 24, 2026; retrieved Aug 31, 2026):

Source: Student Rule 20 — Aggie Honor System Office. The same rule states that suspension and expulsion may be assigned only by the Honor Council — "Instructors and AHSO administrators may not impose these sanctions" — that cases involving a previous violation on record must be referred to the Honor Council, and that an F* may later be replaced with an F only through a process that runs through the Academic Integrity Development Program and the AHSO Director. What any of this means for a particular case is for the institution and its process to determine.

Revision history of this page

2026-08-22 — Page created. All quotations retrieved this date from the tamu.edu pages linked beside them; source-page dates as recorded in each page's published metadata: Student Rule 20 modified Aug 21, 2026; AI Detection Tools modified Apr 2, 2026; the Gather Information page displayed no date, so its retrieval date is recorded. No campus-wide statement on Turnitin's AI-writing-detection feature was located, and none is asserted. The bracketed summary of the four limitations in section 01 condenses the page's own expandable headings (Inaccuracy, Bias, Ease of Circumvention, Rapid Evolution of AI) and is marked as editorial condensation, not quotation. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter. 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. All three sources were reachable and unchanged. The AI Detection Tools page at ai.tamu.edu still carries an article:modified_time of 2026-04-02 and still states, verbatim, "Although AI detection tools are available, the university strongly advises against sole reliance on these tools due to the following limitations" and "Rather than focusing on detection, Texas A&M University advocates for a human-centered approach to education"; its four expandable limitation headings are still Inaccuracy, Bias, Ease of Circumvention, and Rapid Evolution of AI. The sentence quoted in section 01 was confirmed to sit under the page's own heading "Challenges with AI Detection Tools," and that heading is now named in the text. Student Rule 20 still carries an article:modified_time of 2026-08-21, and all six quotations in section 02 plus the Generative AI definition quoted in section 01 and the "Instructors and AHSO administrators may not impose these sanctions" line were confirmed present verbatim. The Aggie Honor System Office's Gather Information page still lists "Turnitin.com reports" among the documentation that may support an allegation; the page displays no revision date, so its retrieval date was advanced. Retrieval dates throughout were advanced to this date. The detection-status check was re-run across Texas A&M's own AI, honor-system and teaching-center pages: the tension this page documents is unchanged — detection is advised against as a sole basis while Turnitin reports remain listed as supporting documentation — and no first-party statement enabling or disabling Turnitin's AI-writing-detection feature was located, so the stated absence in section 01 stands. 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 and captures were made for the Aggie Honor student pages, AI detection guidance, and the Teach With AI index. Student Rule 20 already held a recent capture dated 2026-06-19, which the archive returned instead of making a new one. The faculty "gather information" page hit the archive's rate limit and remains uncaptured. No source text was re-checked in this entry and no quotation changed.

2026-08-23 — Ombuds capture added this date: Texas A&M publishes an Undergraduate Ombuds in the Office of Undergraduate Studies, described by the university as confidential, impartial, informal, and independent, and reporting to the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs; the office states it keeps no personally identifiable records. Separate ombuds serve graduate and professional students and the Office of the Registrar. 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. Both answers were captured first-party from Student Rule 20 and are quoted in the block. 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. (Note: these tamu.edu hosts return an S3 403 to a short user-agent string and 200 to a full browser UA; this pass used a full desktop-Chrome UA, which is a fetch method, not a change at the source.) Student Rule 20 re-fetched: all six section-02 quotations, the Generative AI cheating definition, the "Instructors and AHSO administrators may not impose these sanctions" line, and both docket rows confirmed present verbatim; its article:modified_time advanced from 2026-08-21 (the date this page recorded as Aug 21, 2026) to 2026-08-24 with no change to any quoted text, so the source date shown on the page for Rule 20 was advanced to Aug 24, 2026 (a non-substantive revision). The AI Detection Tools page still carries article:modified_time 2026-04-02 and both quotations verbatim under the heading "Challenges with AI Detection Tools." MOVED SOURCE: the instructor documentation guidance formerly at /faculty/what-to-do/gather-information now returns 404; the Aggie Honor System Office restructured its faculty section, and the same content — including "Turnitin.com reports" among the documentation that may support an allegation — is now published first-party at /faculty/faculty-suspect.html ("I suspect a student cheated. Now what do I do?"). The link in section 01 and the source map are updated to the successor page; the quotation is unchanged and verbatim on it. Ombuds page (us.tamu.edu/ombuds) re-fetched: both quoted descriptions verbatim and the Rudder Tower 604 / 979-845-3210 / undergradombuds@tamu.edu contacts unchanged. Detection inventory re-run across TAMU's AI, honor-system and teaching pages: the documented tension is unchanged and no detector beyond Turnitin was located; the AI-writing-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.