Breach of Academic Integrity
General
According to University Senate rules, all violations of academic integrity relating to cheating, plagiarism, and unauthorized use of generative AI models, must be reported to the Executive Director of Residential Living and Student Conduct, together with a statement of the penalty imposed by the faculty member. If, in the opinion of the Executive Director of Residential Living and Student Conduct, other problems of a personal or an emotional nature are present, the Executive Director may make a referral or conduct sanction in addition to an academic penalty.
Cheating is officially defined as giving, obtaining, or attempting to give or obtain information relative to an examination or other work that an individual student is expected to do alone, or the use or attempted use of material or information restricted by the instructor. Collaborative work on which students are expected to work together is also subject to this policy. Each instructor will indicate beforehand which work may be done in collaboration with other students
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is no lesser an offense than cheating. Examples of plagiarism as adapted from the American Sociological Association’s ASA Code of Ethics, seventh edition, section 1.1.2 might/may include but are not limited to:
• Taking data or material from their own or another person’s written or creative work, without explicitly identifying, crediting, or referencing the work
• Paraphrasing the work of others without acknowledging or referencing said work
• Claiming credit for the ideas of others, published or unpublished. Whether established concepts or theories require citation should be discussed with your instructor)
• Presenting collaborative work as exclusively your own
• Re-using or re-submitting your own material or assignments from other courses without indicating that you are doing so or without instructor permission.
In the application of consequences for cheating, plagiarism, or the unauthorized use of AI, instructors should be aware of and exercise sensitivity to the ways in which these definitions and assumptions differ across cultures.
A “zero,” or the equivalent of the lowest failing grade possible, shall be assigned for that piece of work to any students cheating, plagiarizing, or using AI in an unauthorized manner on a final examination, non-final examination, or other piece of work.
An “F” shall also be assigned as the course grade to any student cheating, plagiarizing, or using AI in an unauthorized manner on a comprehensive final examination. In the case of a student plagiarizing on a final research paper or project, an “F” shall also be assigned as the course grade.
Statement on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Student Work
Bradley University embraces the generation, application, and interpretation of knowledge and prioritizes academic excellence by nurturing critical inquiry, research, creativity, and technical skills development. To these ends, the University recognizes the need to instruct its students in the ethical use of generative AI as a valuable tool, and acknowledges the need for both definition and regulation of its acceptable use. The University recognizes that different disciplines may incorporate artificial intelligence differently.
The University prohibits student use of AI to generate work that will be submitted as the original work of the student without appropriate attribution. Students should consult their instructor or the appropriate style and citation manual (eg. MLA, APA, etc.) for guidance and are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of any AI-generated work.
Non-permissible uses of generative AI in student work are considered to be violations of academic integrity and will be assigned the same consequences as those for plagiarism or cheating. Non-permissible uses of generative AI for academic work will be communicated by individual instructors for their courses on the course syllabus and in specific assignments. Individual instructors may choose to be more restrictive than the University regarding the use of AI in their courses. In the event that an instructor does not include an explicit statement on the use of AI on their course syllabus, this policy shall be the default.
(Approved by the University Senate, November 2025)
Grievance Procedure
If the student objects to the instructor’s conclusion that a breach of academic integrity has occurred, the student may consult the University Ombudsman and/or appeal the instructor’s conclusion through the instructor’s department chair to the Dean or to the Dean’s designee(s) of the college in which the course is offered, within 20 days of the time that the student receives written notification of the instructor’s conclusion. A copy of the notification will be filed with the Director of Residential Living and Leadership. Due process requirements for a fair hearing shall be provided to all parties. The record of the hearing before the Dean or the Dean’s designee(s) shall consist of written statements of the instructor and student in support of their positions provided prior to the hearing and a tape recording or transcript of the hearing itself. An appeal of the decision of the Dean’s or the Dean’s designee(s) may be made within 10 days of the decision by written appeal to the University Student Grievance Committee. In the event of an appeal, the Dean shall transmit the decision to the University Student Grievance Committee, and if the Dean’s designee(s) rendered the decision, the Dean shall indicate whether or not he or she agrees with the decision.