Academic Integrity Regulations
The UNC Policy Manual
700.6.1[R]
Adopted 04/25/13
Academic Integrity Regulations
The following set of required procedures will enhance the ability of each UNC campus to monitor and protect the integrity of its curriculum, student evaluation, and academic records. In addition, the appropriate review, evaluation, and supervision of University staff, including academic department chairs and other faculty administrators, will promote an enhanced culture of academic integrity. These procedures are to be implemented in addition to and in concert with the recommendations included in the 2011 Report of the Task Force on Athletics and Academics, the implementation of which President Ross has already required. These supplemental procedures stem from extensive discussions among campus stakeholders and incorporate concepts discussed in the UNC-Chapel Hill Report of the Independent Study Task Force, the Report of the Special Subcommittee of the Faculty Council, and specific campus policies addressing monitoring of academics and student-athletes, as well as the report of the Board of Governors Academic Review Panel.
The procedures below are grouped by functional area, and each has a corresponding implementation date.
I. Registrar and Student Records Best Practices
A. All campuses will have clear rules designating individuals (by position occupied) authorized to submit a course grade or grade change, and the circumstances under which such changes may be made. (September 2013)
B. All campuses will have audit procedures for verifying that only an authorized person submitted grades or grade changes to the student information system. (September 2013)
C. All campuses will maintain an electronic record of grade-related approvals and changes to the student information system. (December 2014)
D. All campuses will have course numbering and reporting conventions that utilize separate section numbers to identify independent study courses taught by individual faculty members. (May 2014)
II. Evaluating the Academic Performance of Student-Athletes and Other Student Subgroups
A. Using results from the 2013 Board of Governors’ Intercollegiate Athletics Report, General Administration will work with campuses to develop a common threshold or definition of clustering by student-athletes or other student subgroups that will trigger an automatic review of flagged courses to determine whether there were any irregularities in the reasons clustering occurred. (December 2013)
B. On an annual basis, all campuses will review the course grade-point averages calculated for student-athletes and other student subgroups versus nonstudent-athletes and other identified subgroups. A summary of student-athlete comparisons will be included in the required Board of Governors’ Intercollegiate Athletics Report, beginning in 2014.
C. All campuses will have procedures for notifying academic advisors and Academic Support Program staff of any changes made to the course grades of student-athletes and/or to their course schedules after the designated two-week drop/add period. (December 2013)
III. Review and Approval of Nonstandard Courses and Course Sections
All campuses will have processes and policies to ensure that all forms of individualized instruction conform to the basic guidelines pertaining to other undergraduate courses, including but not limited to a syllabus or learning contract specifying expected student learning outcomes, number of hours of expected work, grading information, and scheduled meeting times with the faculty member. (September 2013)
IV. Supervision and Evaluation of Faculty and Faculty Administrators
A. All campuses will have guidelines on the number of undergraduate independent studies a faculty member may teach per term. If campuses choose to enumerate a limited number of circumstances under which exceptions to these limits may be approved, guidelines must enumerate the required individuals (by position) who must grant approval. (September 2013)
B. All campuses will have criteria and processes to ensure the regular review and evaluation of all aspects of performance of department chairs. (September 2013)