NOTE: This report has been presented to and received by the Arts and Sciences Senate Executive Committee (with praise).  However, it is still subject to further discussion by the Executive Committee and will ultimately have to be approved by the Arts and Sciences Senate.

Report of the AJC Review Committee

April 21, 2000


Following the retirement of Bill Weisner, the long-time Executive Officer of the Academic Judiciary Committee, the Executive Committee (EC) of the Arts and Sciences (A&S) Senate has established this committee to review the policies and procedures of the Academic Judiciary Committee (AJC).

The AJC is a standing committee of the Arts and Sciences Senate. The AJC "... shall adjudicate and take appropriate action in cases originating in areas in the Senate Constituencies and which involve charges of academic dishonesty by a student, or unfair treatment of a student by a faculty member1." Responsibilities of the AJC are not specified further.

The AJC works with the Executive Officer, an employee of the Dean of CAS, in hearing appeals of accusations of academic dishonesty. In addition, the hearing board rules are used in common with the College of Engineering. In this matter, there should be no conflict between the interests of faculty governance and the university administration: the fight against academic dishonesty is in everybody's self-interest.

Based on our review of the current operating procedures and policies of the AJC, this committee makes the following recommendation to the A&S Senate.

  1. Guidelines

    The A&S Senate shall direct the AJC to establish a set of Guidelines for the AJC. The recommendations included in this report may serve as a basis for those Guidelines. (click here for explanatory comments)

  2. Membership of the AJC

    The voting membership of the AJC shall consist of 9 members of the teaching faculty, two professional employees (including the Executive Officer), three undergraduate students, and one graduate student, as specified in the CAS Senate Constitution. In addition, there shall be a pool of at least 3 other undergraduate students and 2 other graduate students (9 students total) to serve on hearing boards. These students shall be selected as specified in the Constitution of the A&S Senate. (click here for explanatory comments)

  3. Duties of the AJC

    The responsibilities of the elected members of the AJC shall include the following:

    (click here for explanatory comments)

  4. Duties of the Chair of the AJC

    The duties of the chair of the AJC shall include the following:

    (click here for explanatory comments)

  5. Scheduling of AJC hearings

    This committee recommends the following:

    (click here for explanatory comments)

  6. Role of the Executive Officer

    The Executive Officer is appointed by the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, and so is not subject to the decisions of the A&S Senate. Nonetheless, in the interests of the clarifying the roles of all parties, this committee recommends that the responsibilities of the Executive Officer be formally established to include:

    (click here for explanatory comments)

  7. Role of the Hearing Officer
  8. Hearings The hearings shall proceed in accordance with the "Policies and Procedures Governing Undergraduate Academic Dishonesty" pamphlet, except where superceded by the Guidelines of the AJC.

    We recommend the following changes in the operating procedures of the Hearing Boards:

    (click here for explanatory comments)

  9. Conflicts of Interest

    This committee recommends the following:

To the top of the Report

To the Appendices

Respectfully submitted this 21st day of April, 2000, by the ad-hoc AJC review committee,
A. Fedi
P. Gratton
A. Lokshina
E. Waters
F. Walter (chair)