Texas Tech University.

What TTU's own pages say about how cases proceed

Who may be present

"Be accompanied by an advisor to any meeting or hearing (may be an attorney)." The same document adds: "An advisor can be a member of the Texas Tech Community (faculty, staff, or student), a parent or legal guardian, a relative, or an attorney," but "may not speak on behalf of the student and does not have an active, participatory role." On recording, the Code as TTU now publishes it: "All Hearing proceedings, excluding the deliberations of the Hearing Panel and Sanction Panel, will be recorded by the University." — Rights and Responsibilities, Office of Student Conduct (titled for the 2018-2019 academic year; retrieved Aug 24, 2026; as of Sep 25, 2026 this PDF returns HTTP 404, although the Code still links it, so the three advisor passages drawn from it are shown as last verified and can no longer be checked first-party) and the 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct, web version, Section C (retrieved Sep 25, 2026; the 2025-2026 Student Code PDF this row first cited, whose recording sentence did not name the Sanction Panel, returns HTTP 404) · Rights and Responsibilities (depts.ttu.edu/studentconduct/PDF-WordFiles/RR20182019.pdf; no longer linked) · 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct

What follows on the record

"The status of Disciplinary Suspension will be shown on the student's academic record, including the transcript. Disciplinary Suspension is noted on the student's transcript by the phrase 'Disciplinary Suspension' […] In most instances, the notation of Disciplinary Suspension will remain on the transcript permanently." Disciplinary Expulsion is noted the same way, by the phrase "Expulsion." The Code's separate list of Academic Penalties — grade-based sanctions such as a reduced or failing grade — carries no transcript-notation provision of its own; on TTU's own pages, a transcript notation attaches only where a Disciplinary Suspension or Expulsion sanction is also imposed. — 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct, web version, Section C (retrieved Sep 25, 2026; the same passages stood in the 2025-2026 Student Code, Part I, Section C.12.c-d and C.12.g, as retrieved Aug 24, 2026) · 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct

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

From the 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct, web version, Sections B and C (retrieved Sep 25, 2026; the Dean of Students' page states that it "presents the 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct in a browsable format while preserving the policy language and outline structure of the official document"):

Source: 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct (web version; the 2025-2026 Student Code PDF these passages were first quoted from returns HTTP 404 as of Sep 25, 2026, and the appeal passage now names the Sanction Hearing and the DSC, where the 2025-2026 text quoted here on Aug 24, 2026 named only the Administrative Hearing and Panel Hearing and the ADOS/SD). Separately, OP 34.12 sets the referral timeline: "the instructor should refer the allegation along with supporting documentation or analysis no later than 30 days after learning of the alleged misconduct," and if a final grade is due before a matter is resolved, "[t]he involved student may be given a temporary grade of X by the Office of the Registrar, which does not affect the student's GPA, until the academic integrity adjudication process is complete." Source: OP 34.12: Grading Procedures, Including Academic Integrity (page dated Sept 6, 2024; retrieved Aug 24, 2026).

The Office of Student Conduct's own process materials for academic-integrity matters specifically state that an investigator "issues a formal allegation(s), only if the evidence demonstrates that an […] violation occurred and meets the Preponderance of the Evidence standard," and that the investigator "finds the student either Responsible or Not Responsible, and sends a Decision Letter to the student (the reporting faculty and the appropriate Associate Academic Dean will be carbon copied)." Sources: Academic Integrity Process and Academic Integrity: A Guide for Faculty (Guide revised 08/18/2021; both instructor-facing, quoted here because they describe the process a student experiences; retrieved Aug 24, 2026). As of Sep 25, 2026 both PDFs return HTTP 404 and neither is republished; the two passages are shown as last verified and can no longer be checked first-party. The Office of Student Conduct's restructured site now describes the academic-integrity process in its own terms on its Academic Integrity page, and its Student Conduct Process page, which replaces the former "Preponderance of the Evidence" graphic page (also HTTP 404), states the standard in text (retrieved Sep 25, 2026): "Student conduct cases use the preponderance of the evidence standard when determining responsibility. Under this standard, a student may be found responsible when the available information indicates that it is more likely than not that a violation occurred." What any of this means for a particular case is for the institution and its process to determine.

Revision history of this page

2026-08-24 — Page created. All quotations retrieved this date from the ttu.edu and depts.ttu.edu pages linked beside them. Source pages carried their own dates where displayed: the two TLPDC AI-caution white papers are both dated Summer 2024 and remain the resources linked from the TLPDC AI Teaching Resources hub (last edited on its own page Aug 19, 2026); OP 34.12 is dated Sept 6, 2024; the TTU Libraries AI Detection guide shows a Last Updated date of Aug 21, 2026; the Academic Integrity Faculty Guide is marked Revised 08/18/2021; the 2025-2026 Student Code and the Rights and Responsibilities PDF display no internal revision date beyond their titles (the latter is titled for the 2018-2019 academic year but is still the document currently linked from the Office of Student Conduct's Rights and Responsibilities page, whose own last CMS edit shows Jan 21, 2020 — flagged here rather than silently treated as current). DETECTION STATUS: not a step-2 disqualification. TTU's own TLPDC/Office of Student Conduct guidance advises "extreme caution" and states a detector report "cannot serve as the sole, definitive evidence," but the same guidance states a detector report "can serve as one piece of evidence when an academic integrity incident report form is filed" — the tool is not disabled and its use as evidence is not barred, so this page is built and flagged for reviewer judgment in the same family as Texas A&M, USF, Cincinnati, UGA, GSU, and CSULB. SimCheck (Turnitin) is named as the Canvas-integrated plagiarism tool providing an "AI Score" in the TLPDC white paper's own general description of learning-management-system detectors, not in a TTU-specific enablement statement; no campus-wide statement separately enabling or disabling the SimCheck AI-writing feature itself was located, and that absence is stated on the page. The TTU Libraries guide's detector caution concerns the third-party tools it lists (GPTZero, Copyleaks, etc.), not SimCheck specifically; the two are kept distinct on the page. SUBSTANTIVE FINDING: the Student Code's Academic Penalties provision (grade-based sanctions for academic misconduct) carries no transcript-notation clause of its own; transcript notation in the Code attaches only to the Disciplinary Suspension and Disciplinary Expulsion sanctions, which are separate from, and not automatic upon, a finding of academic misconduct. OMBUDS CHECK: two named offices were located and both excluded on their own terms — the Faculty Ombudsperson serves faculty only, and the Online Student Advocate program serves online students on enrollment and registration matters only; no general/on-campus student ombuds or independent advocacy office was located, and the docket states this plainly rather than listing either office as available. Student Legal Services (licensed attorneys, by appointment) was found and considered but not used for the ombuds row: it provides legal advice/representation to enrolled students generally, not an independent or confidential channel specific to academic-integrity matters, and TTU's own Rights and Responsibilities document already covers the right to bring an attorney as an advisor of choice. The Preponderance of the Evidence page's content is a PNG graphic and could not be captured as text; listed by title and link only, nothing quoted from it. Automated research pass. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-08-24). Internet Archive captures: to be added.

2026-08-27 — Sources re-fetched and compared this date; substantively unchanged. Both TLPDC detector white papers were re-fetched: "Why TTU Recommends Caution with AI Detectors" (still dated Summer 2024) carries verbatim the "extreme caution … no conclusive proof can be provided by an AI detection tool at this time" passage, the SimCheck/Turnitin Canvas "AI Score" description, the "AI detector results cannot serve as the sole, definitive evidence" line, and the "a report from an AI detector can serve as one piece of evidence when an academic integrity incident report form is filed" line; the companion "Academic Misconduct with AI" white paper was not re-opened this pass and is retained as last verified 2026-08-24. The TTU Libraries AI Detection guide's banner quotations ("TEXAS TECH DOES NOT ENDORSE ANY AI DETECTION TOOLS…" and "AI detectors are unreliable as indicators of AI misuse…") are verbatim, but the guide's own Last Updated date advanced from Aug 21 to Aug 24, 2026 (its curated third-party link list was refreshed; the quoted banner text did not change) — the in-text date reference has been updated to match. OP 34.12 (still dated Sept 6, 2024) was re-fetched and both quoted passages — the "no later than 30 days after learning of the alleged misconduct" referral rule and the temporary grade of "X" provision — remain verbatim. Detection-inventory sweep re-run: SimCheck (Turnitin) remains the only institutionally integrated detector; the Libraries guide's other products are listed for information only and TTU states it does not endorse them; no new institutional detector is documented first-party. Not separately re-fetched this pass and retained as last verified 2026-08-24: the 2025-2026 Student Code, the Rights and Responsibilities PDF, the Academic Integrity Process and Faculty Guide PDFs, and the teaching-with-ai hub page — flagged for the next pass. Office and ombuds findings unchanged. Archive capture: Save Page Now was unreachable from this environment this date (endpoint blocked); captures remain pending. Automated source re-verification; no human review implied.

2026-09-13 — Editorial review. Carrie Schluter read this page in full against its recorded first-party sources and found no change required. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-09-13).

2026-09-13 — One correction for faithfulness; no source changed and no fact changed. A quotation began "the involved student may be given a temporary grade of X..." where the source prints "The"; it now reads "[t]he", marking the case change. A second case difference on this page was left alone deliberately: the page prints "Preponderance of the Evidence" where the source prints the phrase in lower case throughout, which is a different question from a lifted first word and is recorded rather than silently restyled.

2026-09-25 — Dead-link repair and source re-verification, run by an automated agent in an attended session; Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-09-25). The Office of Student Conduct and Dean of Students sites were restructured, and seven sources this page linked returned HTTP 404 to a cloud crawler and to curl on the host. (1) The 2025-2026 Student Code PDF is replaced by a web version that states it presents the 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct (dos/student-code-of-conduct.php). The quotations were re-verified there: the academic-misconduct definition, the appeal-officer and grounds-for-appeal passages (the grounds now print without list numbers, and the quotation follows the current text), and the transcript-notation passages are unchanged. Two passages changed: the appeal sentence now names the Sanction Hearing and the DSC, and the recording sentence now covers the Sanction Panel. Both quotations were updated to the current wording, and the change is stated on the page. Section citations now name the web version's Sections B and C, because its section numbering could not be matched to the PDF's Part I, C.11 and C.12. (2) Rights and Responsibilities (RR20182019.pdf) has no successor, although the Code still links it; its three advisor passages are kept, labeled as last verified Aug 24, 2026 and no longer verifiable first-party. (3) The Academic Integrity Process and Faculty Guide PDFs have no successor documents; their two passages are kept, labeled the same way, and the office's new Academic Integrity page is linked. (4) The Preponderance of the Evidence graphic page is replaced by the Student Conduct Process page, which states the standard in text, now quoted. (5) Online Student Advocates moved to online/advocates-bachelors/. (6) The Dean of Students About page is now the About section of dos/, which lists Suite 203, Student Union Building, 806.742.2984 and deanofstudents@ttu.edu. The capture recipe now reads the replacement pages and drops the three documents that have no successor. Every source in this page's capture recipe was re-fetched this date by tools/capture.py on the host (review capture tools/packets/review/ttu-2026-09-25.txt); the checker reports 6 failures, down from 14: the five retained passages named above and the former graphic page's title, which the page mentions in passing. Detection status unchanged.

2026-10-06 — Internet Archive captures requested on 2026-09-26 by an automated capture pass and recorded this date; no human review is claimed for this entry. No quotation, date, finding or link above was changed by it. Each capture below was requested through Save Page Now and then confirmed to play back. Captures added: depts.ttu.edu/dos — About the Dean of Students → https://web.archive.org/web/20260926042421/https://www.depts.ttu.edu/dos/; 2026-2027 Code of Student Conduct → https://web.archive.org/web/20260926042455/https://www.depts.ttu.edu/dos/student-code-of-conduct.php; depts.ttu.edu/online/advocates-bachelors → https://web.archive.org/web/20260926042534/https://www.depts.ttu.edu/online/advocates-bachelors/; Academic Integrity → https://web.archive.org/web/20260926042619/https://www.depts.ttu.edu/studentconduct/academic-integrity.php; Student Conduct Process → https://web.archive.org/web/20260926042651/https://www.depts.ttu.edu/studentconduct/student-conduct-process.php.

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