UC Davis.

What UC Davis's own pages say about how cases proceed

Who may be present

“Students may have an advisor (or support person) of their choice as long as the individual they choose is not otherwise connected to the case.” The same page states: “Advisors provide guidance but do not take an active role in the process, and students are expected to speak for themselves.” — Advisors for Student Conduct Process, Student Conduct and Integrity (page modified May 29, 2026; retrieved Aug 23, 2026) · Advisors for Student Conduct Process

What follows on the record

“When, because of violations of the Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline, a student is suspended or dismissed, a notation that the discipline was imposed must be posted on the academic transcript for the duration of the suspension or dismissal.” The same section states: “No other disciplinary actions are recorded on transcripts.” — Interim UC Davis Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline, Section 106.00 (last update Mar 10, 2026; retrieved Aug 23, 2026) · Interim Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline

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

From Student Conduct and Integrity's description of the referral process (page modified Mar 10, 2026; retrieved Aug 23, 2026) — instructor-facing, quoted because it describes the process a student experiences:

The same page describes the sequence: report submitted through studentconduct.ucdavis.edu; the student is directed to schedule a meeting, hears the report explained, and responds; a temporary "Y" grade holds the course grade open if the quarter ends first; and after a hearing, the Director's decision letter "describes any appeal rights." Source: What happens when I refer a student — Student Conduct and Integrity.

A separate page covers advisors, and states these rights and limits directly (page modified May 29, 2026; retrieved Aug 23, 2026):

Source: Advisors for Student Conduct Process — Student Conduct and Integrity. That page also states the grounds on which a decision may be appealed — "new information, procedural error or disproportionate sanctions" — citing sections F.3.b.i and F.4.d of Appendix H, and describes the appeal decision as final. It does not state a number of days for filing an appeal, and no filing window is asserted here; the Appendix H and Interim Policy pages linked in the source map are where UC Davis publishes the complete procedures. The same page describes the governing text as the Interim UC Davis Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline, while the referral-process page describes a hearing panel deciding "whether the student violated the Code of Academic Conduct"; which text governs a given case is not something these pages settle. What any of this means for a particular case is for the institution and its process to determine.

Revision history of this page

2026-08-21 — Page created. Captured first-party this date: the Student Conduct and Integrity referral-process page (modified Mar 10, 2026), the IET AI guidance (modified Jul 20, 2026), and the Canvas Help Turnitin page (last updated Mar 10, 2021 — dated; re-check on next pass). Not established: any campus-wide statement on Turnitin's AI-writing indicator; the section above says so rather than asserting either way. The advisor description and any filing-window details are paraphrase pending verification against the linked pages. 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. Every source was reachable and unchanged. The Student Conduct and Integrity referral-process page still carries an article:modified_time of 2026-03-10, and all five quotations in section 02 were confirmed present verbatim, including the 98%/2% resolution figures and the panel composition. The IET AI guidance was re-checked and its two quoted lines are unchanged. The Canvas Help Turnitin page still shows "Last update: March 10, 2021" — no newer version has replaced it — and still describes originality checking and a similarity report with no mention of an AI-writing indicator; the note flagging that page's age stands. Pending paraphrase resolved. The advisor description flagged as paraphrase-pending at publication was replaced with quotations from the Advisors for Student Conduct Process page (article:modified_time 2026-05-29), which states the advisor role, the limits on it, and a six-item list of student rights. The same page names the grounds for appeal — new information, procedural error, disproportionate sanctions, citing Appendix H sections F.3.b.i and F.4.d. No filing window in days is stated on any page captured in this review, so none is asserted; the earlier note about a pending filing-window paraphrase is resolved as "not stated on these pages" rather than filled in. Two governing texts were also surfaced and added to the source map: the Interim UC Davis Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline and Interim PACAOS Appendix H, which the advisors page describes as the complete procedures, alongside the Code of Academic Conduct that the referral page names as the standard a hearing panel applies. Section 02 now notes that divergence without resolving it. Detection status. The first-party check was re-run across UC Davis's Canvas Help, IET, Student Conduct and Integrity and policy pages. No campus-wide statement enabling or disabling Turnitin's AI-writing indicator was located, so section 01's statement of that absence stands, and the third-party characterization of AI detection as available at instructor discretion remains unverified and is still labeled as such. 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 was reached this date from a browser, but the archive's concurrent-session limit was hit before any UC Davis source was submitted, and every request for a studentconduct.ucdavis.edu page returned "You have already reached the limit of active Save Page Now sessions." Captures for this page therefore remain pending, alone among the six pages reviewed this date. No source text was re-checked in this entry and no quotation changed.

2026-08-23 — Ombuds capture added this date: UC Davis publishes an Office of the Ombuds with Davis and Sacramento numbers, stating that discussions do not create a record and do not begin a formal process, and that email is used for scheduling only. 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. Already quoted in this page’s prose from the advisors page and hoisted into the block rather than re-fetched. What follows on the record. Searched and captured this date. The disciplinary-process, academic-misconduct and policies pages carry nothing on notation or records; Section 106.00 of the interim policy does, and is what the block cites. Two further first-party statements were located and are recorded here rather than hoisted, since the block carries one answer: Appendix A of the same policy publishes a retention schedule of fifty years for dismissal, seven years for suspension or Clery cases, and five years otherwise; and Student Conduct and Integrity’s FAQ states that “AMCAS now requires that applicants report student disciplinary matters, and many law schools and Bar Associations require that students authorize Student Conduct and Integrity to report whether the student has a disciplinary record.” The same FAQ also says “Usually, no permanent records are retained,” which sits awkwardly beside Appendix A’s schedule; both are noted as published, and which governs is not determined here. Automated pass; no human review is claimed for this entry.

2026-08-30 — Sources re-fetched and compared this date; automated pass, not a human review. Unchanged, quotations verbatim: the Student Conduct and Integrity referral-process page (still article:modified_time 2026-03-10; all five section-02 quotations verbatim, including the 98%/2% resolution figures, the panel composition, and the presumption-of-innocence and silence provisions), the Advisors for Student Conduct Process page (still article:modified_time 2026-05-29; the advisor-role quotations, the six-item student-rights list, and the appeal grounds citing Appendix H F.3.b.i and F.4.d all verbatim), the Interim UC Davis Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline (still article:modified_time 2026-03-10; both Section 106.00 transcript-notation quotations verbatim), and the IET AI Guidance page (still modified Jul 20, 2026; both quoted lines verbatim). Detection status re-checked: the Canvas Help Turnitin page still shows "Last update: March 10, 2021" and still describes only originality/similarity checking with no AI-writing indicator; the detection-inventory sweep across the Canvas Help, IET, and Student Conduct and Integrity pages again located no campus-wide statement enabling or disabling Turnitin's AI indicator, so section 01's stated absence stands and the third-party "instructor discretion" characterization remains unverified. Not re-fetched this pass: the Office of the Ombuds contact page, which retains its Aug 23, 2026 verification. Internet Archive captures still could not be requested — the Save Page Now endpoint is unreachable from this run environment (URL on the environment's fetch blocklist); UC Davis remains the one page in this cohort with no captures yet, and they remain to be added.

2026-08-30 — Internet Archive captures were attempted this date by an automated capture pass; no human review is claimed for this entry. No quotation, date, finding or link above was changed by it. No captures could be obtained. Save Page Now was reached successfully this date with an authenticated session, and every one of the ten first-party sources was submitted individually. Nine returned error:no-request, meaning the UC Davis edge gave the Internet Archive's crawler no response at all; the Canvas Help Turnitin page returned HTTP 403 to the crawler, which would have recorded a refusal page rather than the article, so it is not recorded as a capture. This is a site-side block on the archiver, not a failure of the request environment, and it supersedes the 2026-08-23 note attributing the gap to a blocklist in the run environment. UC Davis remains the one page in this cohort with no captures. Retrying will not help unless the block lifts; an alternative capture route is an open question for the owner.

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).

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