Each member of the Henry B. Tippie College of Business community accepts personal responsibility to uphold and defend high ethical standards in all academic endeavors and to promote an atmosphere of integrity in which all individuals may flourish.
- As a Tippie College of Business student, you formally declare a commitment to scholastic honesty and integrity, maintaining the spirit of this Honor Code throughout the undergraduate and graduate experience.
- As a Tippie College of Business student, you understand that your social responsibility requires treating all individuals with the utmost respect and dignity.
- As a Tippie College of Business student, you must strive to set a standard of honest and ethical behavior that will be an asset to yourself, the college, and the business world at large.
Any violation of this Honor Code will not be tolerated. Furthermore, a person who stands by and does nothing when confronted with unethical behavior not only threatens the spirit of the code, but also is in violation of the code.
B. The Judicial Process
I. The Judicial Board
The mission of the Judicial Board is to secure justice for any student charged with a violation of the Honor Code as well as to uphold the integrity of the business school. Board members shall also serve as advisors and consultants in resolving Honor Code violations informally.
The Judicial Board shall consist of seven peers from the student's academic program and two faculty members appointed by the senior associate dean of the Tippie College of Business for a one-year term. The members of the Judicial Board will be required to sign a confidentiality agreement before serving on the board.
Student committee members are elected to the Judicial Board through an application and interview process for a term of one year.
II. Violations of Honor Code
A. Academic Dishonesty
Academically dishonest behavior includes, but is not limited to the following:
- Cheating—Cheating includes the unauthorized use of notes, texts, or other aids during a test or quiz. Cheating also includes copying the work of others, allowing others to view your answers or copy your work during a test, quiz, or on homework.
- Plagiarism—Plagiarism includes presenting the work of others without proper acknowledgment or claiming the words and ideas of another as one's own. This includes the failure to properly cite and specifically credit the source of both text and web materials. Plagiarism also includes the copying of source codes, graphs, programs, and spreadsheets, or copying answer keys and solution manuals without the authorization of the course instructor.
- Unauthorized Collaboration—Unauthorized collaboration includes working with other students on projects or assignments without authorization from the course instructor. Instructors are expected to clearly specify the amount of collaboration that is allowed on assignments and projects. This should be done in writing either on the assignment itself or in course syllabi. When an instructor has specified that collaboration is not allowed on a project or assignment, students must refrain from discussing the assignment or project with their classmates.
B. Social Misconduct
The Tippie College of Business will not tolerate any acts of harassment, theft, or any other form of social misconduct that would reflect poorly on the college.
A. Reporting of Alleged Violations
It is the responsibility of all members of the University of Iowa community to report violations of the Tippie College of Business Honor Code. Reports of Honor Code violations should be made to the instructor or teaching assistant responsible for the class or directly to the associate dean of the appropriate program.
B. Proceeding with Alleged Violations
Once an Honor Code violation has been discovered or reported, faculty members may first choose to resolve the violation informally with the accused student(s). In this case, the incident will not be reported to the appropriate program or the Judicial Board. Student(s) who are subject to informal disciplinary action have the right to appeal any faculty member's decision to the
associate dean. Appeals must be made in writing to the Judicial Board within 10 school days of the faculty member's final decision. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to document all correspondence with the student(s), including dates.
Faculty members who are unable or do not wish to resolve alleged Honor Code violations informally can elect to bring the matter before the Judicial Board. Students may also bring alleged Honor Code violations to the Judicial Board if a faculty member opts to do nothing about an alleged cheating incident. This will initiate the Judicial Board process, which includes Investigation, Notification, Full Hearing, Decision, Sanctions, Appeal, and Recording.
C. Investigation of Alleged Violations
A member of the university faculty or staff will notify the accused student(s) as soon as an investigation commences. A student appealing a professor's decision must write a statement to the board outlining the basis of his or her appeal. Two representatives of the Judicial Board will conduct the investigation. The team will gather relevant evidence to determine whether there is a reasonable basis for believing that the Honor Code was violated.
The investigative process will consist of, but is not limited to, the following:
- Inform the accused student(s), in writing, of the complaint.
- Consult and question any and all people deemed necessary.
- In the event that the investigative team believes a violation may have occurred, a formal hearing will follow.
- Investigators must provide a list of evidence and relevant information (i.e. statements made during the interviews) to both the members hearing the case and to the students appealing to the board. This information should not be given to the professor.
- A syllabus and any relevant assignments must be obtained from the student(s) and the professor prior to the full hearing.
The accused student(s) may consult with the University of Iowa Ombudsperson or other advisors during the investigation and after the full hearing. If there are no grounds for a full hearing, the matter will be considered closed, and no record will be kept of the allegation.
The results of the investigation will be presented at the hearing by one of the investigators. Also, the investigators should prepare a brief summary of their findings without a statement of guilt or nonguilt and furnish this to the board and to the student(s) at least two days prior to the hearing. The investigators will not sit as judges in the case.
Upon completion of the investigation, The Undergraduate Program Office assistant director for programming shall promptly notify the accused student(s) of the results of the investigation and if a hearing will be held. The notification shall convey all relevant details relating to the charge and shall contain an explanation of the student's rights concerning the charge. Simultaneous notification shall be provided to all members of the Judicial Board. If a hearing will be held, the student and other affected parties will be notified of the date of the full hearing. Written notification shall be made 10 school days prior to the hearing. A student may waive the 10-day period and request that the Judicial Board proceed immediately. However, it is at the discretion of the Judicial Board to use the entire 10 days if needed.
E. Full Hearing
The purpose of the full hearing is to reach a final decision in a case that cannot be resolved informally. The full hearing will be a private and confidential meeting conducted by a panel of the Judicial Board. The panel shall include two students and one faculty advisor. Conflicts of interest should be avoided (e.g., a student member of the hearing panel should not be in the same course as the accused). Whenever possible, the faculty advisor should not be in the same department as the faculty member bringing the charge of academic misconduct.
The accused student(s) shall be entitled to an advisor at the hearing and to call witnesses.
The steps of the hearing are as follows:
- A board member opens hearing
- State the time, place, and purpose of hearing
- Explain the sequence of events that will occur during the hearing
- Investigative Team
- Explain process of investigation
- Provide list of evidence, including any witnesses who were interviewed and relevant information
- Timeline of events
- Professor and/or TA
- Presents his/her case
- Student offers brief statement about why the appeal was brought to the board
- Presents his/her case
- Investigative Team
- Investigation team highlights inconsistencies and/or consistencies of statements.
- All participants except three panel members are dismissed
- Three panel members come to a conclusion
After the hearing, the panel members will inform the associate dean of the appropriate program of their recommendation. The associate dean will then determine if the recommendation is acceptable or if modifications will be made. Lastly, the associate dean will notify the student(s) and the professor of the decision. Such notification will be in writing and mailed to the student(s).
A determination of guilt shall require a majority vote of the hearing panel. In the event that sanctions are imposed, the sanction shall again be decided by a majority vote. If no guilt is found, disposition of the case will be final.
When recommending sanctions, the board shall consider: sanctions imposed in prior cases, any mitigating circumstances, and repeat offences. The board will notify the associate dean of the appropriate program of the recommended sanction. The respective program will review the sanction for consistency and, barring unusual circumstances, implement the same sanction. The Judicial Board may recommend any reasonable sanction. These may include but are not limited to:
- Letter of apology
- Restitution (e.g., for theft of an item from the library)
- Community service
- Mandatory ethics course
- Required paper on ethics
- Failure of assignment or test
- Failure of course
- Loss of privileges (e.g., interviewing on campus)
- Grade reduction
- The sanction imposed by the instructor prior to the appeal
Students who violate the Tippie College of Business Honor Code may also be subject to discipline under the University of Iowa Code of Student Life.
If a student is found to have violated the Honor Code, the student may appeal the board's decision to the associate dean of the appropriate program. Further appeals may be taken to the dean of the Tippie College of Business and then to the provost of the University of Iowa (see the University of Iowa Code of Student Life).
All proceedings and decisions of the Judicial Board shall be recorded to serve as precedents for future decisions. All possible verbal communication shall be tape recorded. Records shall be kept in the Undergraduate Program Office and will remain on file until the student(s) involved have graduated from the undergraduate or graduate program.
IV. Ratification and Revision of Code
The Honor Code will be a living document. The Judicial Board will supervise changes to the document. Changes should be submitted to the Judicial Board in writing. All proposed revisions will be published for review in the Bottom Line, on the web, and by email to faculty and students before a vote. The Leadership Council, the MBA Association, the Undergraduate Program Office, and the Department of Accounting will approve any changes to the Honor Code. Changes will require a majority vote from the Leadership Council for implementation.