Academic Integrity Hearing Board (AIHB)

A college or school hearing board that reviews academic integrity cases, hears appeals, and may hear cases referred to it. The AIHB has authority to determine whether an action should be treated as a violation of the Code and may recommend penalties, including penalties beyond those available to an instructor.

Academic Misconduct

Misconduct in published or professional work, including manuscripts under review, related to integrity in scholarly or scientific research and communication. This is distinct from ordinary course-based academic integrity proceedings and is addressed under Cornell University Policy 1.2.

Accepting Responsibility

An alternative to the Primary Hearing and Appeals process. A student who accepts responsibility agrees to a limited penalty and completion of an academic integrity workshop, but the process does not result in a finding of violation of the Code. Participation is voluntary for both the instructor and the student.

Accepting Responsibility Workshop

The educational component of the Accepting Responsibility process. A student who accepts responsibility must complete the workshop, which may include in-person participation and additional work. Failure to complete the requirements can result in default and a return to the Primary Hearing and Appeals process.

Advisor

A person who accompanies and assists a student during an academic integrity proceeding. An advisor may help the student prepare, provide private advice during the hearing, and assist with presentation and questioning, but ordinarily does not speak for the student or conduct the student’s defense.

Appeal

A request for review after a finding or penalty. A student may appeal a primary hearing decision to the Academic Integrity Hearing Board on grounds including improper or unfair procedure, disagreement with the finding, or belief that the penalty is too strict. Appeals from Academic Integrity Hearing Board decisions may be directed to the dean under the procedures in the Code. Students who agree to the Accepting Responsibility process waive their right to appeal.

Artificial Intelligence Assistance

Aid provided by artificial intelligence tools or systems in completing academic work. Artificial intelligence assistance is treated like other forms of assistance: it is allowed only as permitted by the instructor. Students remain responsible for the accuracy and existence of sources they cite, including sources generated or suggested by artificial intelligence.

Central Academic Integrity Registry

The university-level registry for academic integrity records. The registry maintains records of findings of violation through the Primary Hearing and Appeals process and completed Accepting Responsibility processes, including information such as the course, charge, evidence summary, decision, penalties, and appeal outcome.

Charge

The allegation that a student violated the Code of Academic Integrity. In a primary hearing process, the charge should give the student enough information about the suspected violation to prepare a response, gather evidence, and arrange for witnesses if needed.

Classroom Misconduct

Behavior that disrupts or undermines the classroom or examination environment but is not itself treated as a violation of academic integrity. A faculty member may impose a grade penalty for classroom misconduct, and the student may seek review by the Academic Integrity Hearing Board on limited grounds, such as that the finding was arbitrary and capricious or that the penalty was excessive.

Clear and Convincing Evidence

The standard of proof used to evaluate academic integrity violations. It requires more than a mere preponderance of evidence but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and should produce a firm belief that the relevant facts have been established.

Code of Academic Integrity

Cornell’s university-wide statement of academic integrity expectations, examples of violations, and procedures for handling alleged violations. The Code explains student responsibilities, available processes, possible penalties, the role of instructors and hearing boards, and recordkeeping rules.

Finding of Violation

A decision that a student violated the Code of Academic Integrity. In a primary hearing, this finding is made by the instructor if the evidence is clear and convincing. In an Academic Integrity Hearing Board hearing, the board makes the finding. A finding may lead to a penalty and may be subject to appeal.

Independent Witness

A faculty member, staff member, or student appointed to observe a primary hearing impartially. The independent witness is not there to decide the case, question participants, or deliberate, but may later testify about the procedures followed if the student appeals.

Penalty

A consequence imposed or recommended after a finding of violation, or after a student completes the Accepting Responsibility process. Instructors may impose grade-related penalties. An Academic Integrity Hearing Board may recommend grade-related or non-grade-related penalties, such as suspension, expulsion, required counseling, community service, or a transcript notation.

Primary Hearing

The standard initial hearing process for many course-based academic integrity cases. At a primary hearing, the instructor presents evidence, the student responds, and an independent witness observes. The instructor decides whether the student violated the Code and, if so, what grade-related penalty to assign.

Record Keeper

A non-voting person responsible for maintaining clear and complete records of academic integrity proceedings. Record keepers may maintain records for Academic Integrity Hearing Board proceedings, communicate records to appropriate offices or registries, and, in the Accepting Responsibility process, help convey information and track eligibility or completion.

Respondents’ Codes Counselor (RCC)

A Cornell Law student counselor who can advise students about the Code of Academic Integrity, help them understand Cornell’s academic integrity process, and help them prepare for a hearing. An RCC may attend a hearing as an advisor but does not act as the student’s lawyer or answer the charges on the student’s behalf.

Transcript Notation

A notation placed on a student’s transcript in connection with an academic integrity matter. A notation may reflect pending action or, if recommended by the Academic Integrity Hearing Board and accepted by the dean, a violation-related penalty. The Academic Integrity Hearing Board may specify when and how a violation notation can later be removed.