University of Northern Iowa.

What the Student Academic Ethics Policy and Academic Grievance Policy say about how cases proceed

Who may be present

The Academic Ethics Policy itself does not mention an advisor or hearing; a student who grieves a sanction moves to Policy 12.01 (Student Academic Grievance), where "either party may elect to be accompanied to meetings or hearings by an advisor," and at the Board stage "[t]he student may be accompanied to the appeals hearing by an advisor, who may be an attorney" — but "[t]he advisor cannot address the review panel, examine witnesses." A staff member makes "an audio recording of the proceedings" at the Board hearing stage; the recording "is a confidential record and will not be disclosed except as required by law," retained "for a period of seven years." — Policy 12.01, Student Academic Grievance · Student Academic Grievance Policy

What follows on the record

Notice-level, Level One, and Level Two violations "will not be made public or attached to transcripts or other records," though the Office of the Provost keeps documentation of all violations and notices "may be shared with the Office of the Dean of Students." A Level Three violation carries permanent expulsion with an "academic disciplinary separation" notation placed on the transcript. — Policy 3.01, Student Academic Ethics · Student Academic Ethics Policy

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

From the Student Academic Ethics Policy (3.01; effective date 8/24/2026, last reviewed/updated 8/2026; retrieved Oct 11, 2026), on how a case begins and escalates:

The policy sets four escalating outcomes rather than a single evidentiary hearing: a Notice of Academic Ethics Concern (possible grade reduction, no credit for the assignment, an alternate assignment, or a citation exercise); Level One (no credit for the assignment and a further course-grade reduction); Level Two (recommended F in the course, with possible disciplinary probation); and Level Three (recommended permanent expulsion). No evidentiary standard, such as a preponderance, is named in the policy itself. A student "may appeal the decision using the Academic Grievance process" under Policy 12.01, which sets fixed deadlines at each step: an informal grievance must be filed "within ten class days of the first day of the semester following the semester or summer session," a formal appeal "must be initiated within five class days following the completion of the informal appeal process," and a Board hearing, once reached, "will be held within twenty class days after the appeal has been filed with the Office." At the Board stage, "[b]oard members will be persuaded by clear and convincing evidence," defined as the facts being "highly probably or reasonably certain." Violations involving research are separately "reported to the Research Misconduct Officer." Source: Student Academic Ethics Policy and Student Academic Grievance Policy. 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

2026-10-11 — Page created. All quotations retrieved this date from the policies.uni.edu and ai.uni.edu pages linked beside them; the Student Academic Ethics Policy carries its own "effective date of 8/24/2026" and shows it was "last reviewed and/or updated in 8/2026" (earlier reviews listed as 2/2024 and 4/2023), while the Student Academic Grievance Policy shows no effective or review date beyond its 2012 Faculty Senate and President's Cabinet approval dates, and the AI in Teaching & Learning site shows only a 2026 footer copyright. 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 only Turnitin, and the one UNI page describing it (it.uni.edu, article node 41) is gated behind a campus login — confirmed by a direct browser read this pass, which returned a CatID sign-in prompt in place of article text, the same AUTHENTICATION-GATED pattern documented on other ServiceNow/Drupal-authenticated campus IT sites in this collection. It is listed by title only, not linked; nothing is quoted from it. A second, previously indexed page (elearning.uni.edu/node/2371) that once described an April 2023 rollout of Turnitin's AI-writing feature to instructors is now a dead link — confirmed not found by a direct browser read this pass — so that 2023 description is not relied on as current. Category sweep covered the Center for Excellence in Teaching & Learning's site (cetl.uni.edu), the full "AI in Teaching & Learning" site (ai.uni.edu, including its "Framing Thoughts on AI" and "AI Technologies Guidelines & Procedures" pages), and the Student Academic Ethics Policy itself; none named a detector in either direction beyond the material quoted in section 01. Ombuds/advocacy search ("ombuds," "ombudsperson," "student advocate," "student advocacy") found nothing on uni.edu, including a direct read of the Dean of Students' own leadership page, which lists no such office. Office contact: the Academic Ethics Policy names the Office of the Provost and Executive Vice President as the office that documents and notifies on violations; its own page publishes a phone and a building address but no office email, so none is stated. Deliberately not used: a Faculty Senate docket item describing a pending revision to Policy 3.01 (adding a post-graduation sanctions clause, §V.E) that is not yet reflected in the live policy text; nothing on this page relies on it. Nothing paraphrase-pending. Archive captures pending. Reviewer: Carrie Schluter (review confirmed 2026-10-11).

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