The Knox College Honor System

The Honor System has been an integral part of the life of Knox College since 1951, when the student body initiated a system of academic integrity. All students and faculty at Knox College must understand the Honor System and follow its provisions. This text is available online to all students and faculty and provides a general description of the Honor System, including the Honor Code and the Constitution of the Honor Board.

Honor Board Members (AY2026–27)

The Knox College Honor Code

Intellectual integrity is the underpinning for all educational, scholarly, and creative work at Knox College. The College community expects its members to demonstrate a high degree of ethical integrity in all their actions, including and especially academic work. At Knox, each individual is held responsible for ensuring that their academic work meets the institutional standards of honesty.

The College has a vested interest in protecting the integrity of the many operations essential to an educational and scholarly institution, including the granting of degrees, the conferring of honors and privileges, and the certification of credits to other institutions. Academic dishonesty undermines the intellectual endeavor on which education is based; any misrepresentation of scholarly work is contrary to the purpose of the academic community. Consequently, academic dishonesty in any form will not be tolerated.

Dishonesty in Academic Work

Knox College defines academic dishonesty as actions giving or receiving an unfair advantage in academic work by cheating, lying, misrepresenting one’s work, plagiarizing the work of others, or willfully impeding the academic progress of another student. Examples of academic dishonesty include, but are not limited to:

1. Giving or receiving unauthorized help (human or otherwise) in any course. Where courses require or allow collaborative work, students must take particular care to collaborate up to, but never beyond, the limits set by the instructor. Instructors are expected to define those limits clearly.
2. Plagiarism. To plagiarize is to present the work of another (human or otherwise) as if it were one’s own. As such, it is possible to plagiarize without meaning to, simply by using a choice of phrase, evidence, example, argument, thesis, and so on that one found in another’s work without acknowledging the author of that work. It is possible to plagiarize material directly quoted as well as material paraphrased or summarized, even when there is substantial rewording or rearrangement. To avoid plagiarism, the sources cited must include, but are not limited to, books, articles, pamphlets, pictures, graphs, poems, plays, and any information found on the Internet.
    Particular care should be taken when using ideas or language from online sources. These should be cited in the text in the same manner as ideas or language from print sources. Moreover, it is not sufficient to list sources in an introduction or bibliography; specific references must be in the footnotes or the text.
    Finally, to explain similarities between one’s “own” work and that of others on the basis that a source was read some time ago or phrases and ideas of that author have been confused with one’s own does not constitute a defense against a charge of plagiarism. It is the student’s responsibility to take sufficient notes to give credit where credit is due. Where the specific language of another is used, the material so used must be enclosed in quotation marks and a citation included. The basic rule is simple: if in doubt, cite the source(s).
    When a group submits an assignment, all members are responsible for ensuring the work is not plagiarized.
    Common knowledge includes generally known facts such as the names of leaders of prominent nations, basic scientific laws, etc., and basic historical information (e.g., George Washington was the first President of the United States). Common knowledge does not require citation. For further clarification of the appropriate citation in a particular case, consult the instructor.
3. Using in an examination, quiz, test, etc., any source of information not explicitly authorized by the instructor. Students should assume that all examinations are closed-book — with no notes or other aids allowed — unless the instructor specifically states otherwise.
4. Using or procuring any examination, quiz, test, etc., without authorization, including obtaining an examination before its administration.
5. Having possession of an examination, quiz, test, etc., or an electronic device in an unauthorized location.
6. Voluntarily assisting another party in committing academic dishonesty.
7. Fabricating data or lab results.
8. Altering, destroying, or stealing the academic work (e.g., deleting electronic files, sabotaging an experiment, etc.) of another student.
9. Lying or making misrepresentations to a faculty member or administrator to obtain an extension, incomplete, or excused absence.
10. Deliberately denying another student access to necessary study materials by altering, destroying, or stealing these materials.
11. Submitting work done in a previous or concurrent course without prior understanding and approval of the course instructor(s).
12. Falsifying evaluation forms or other documents concerning experiential, internship, or other course components.
13. Misleading or dishonest citations or bibliographical entries.
14. Using artificial intelligence in contradistinction to what is stated in the course materials (syllabus, assignment, verbal instructions, etc.).

Responsibilities of Students

The primary responsibility for academic honesty rests with the individual student. Every student is responsible for the integrity of their work and should conduct their academic activities in a manner above suspicion at all times.

One cornerstone privilege of the Honor System is the unproctored examination.

• Students are expected to leave books, notes, study aids, and any other materials or sources elsewhere during an examination, and to take examinations in public places, such as classrooms or open lounge areas, in the buildings. Washrooms, storage areas, and maintenance areas in the basement and elsewhere are not public places. Neither are carrels or other closed areas, nor anywhere upstairs in Seymour Library. Students should not bring examinations into these non-public places.
• Students should keep examinations covered as they work on them, and should remove themselves and their work from temptation and suspicion.
• Faculty may require that students not bring books, notes, electronic devices, study aids, or any other materials or sources into the building in which an examination is administered. Alternatively, they may permit students to bring these resources into the building but may require that these books, notes, electronic devices, study aids, and other materials or sources be left in a central area or the classroom throughout the examination or other academic obligations. Students should adhere to the guidelines set forth by their faculty members.

Students are also responsible
for discouraging violations of the Honor System.

While a student’s failure to report a violation is not itself a violation of the Honor Code, students are strongly encouraged to take some action if they know or reasonably suspect that a violation of the Honor Code has been committed.

Students may:

• Inform the suspected violator of their awareness and disapproval.
• Discuss the suspected violation with the course instructor.
• Discuss the nature of a suspected violation with an Honor Board member before deciding whether a formal report should be made.
• Formally report the suspected violation to the Honor Board.

Responsibilities of Faculty

Faculty members are expected to clearly state their policies regarding matters such as studying together, the use of notes, books, electronic devices, study aids, and any other materials or sources for assignments and exams, proper citation, and related matters. Instructors should take special care to make clear the limits of collaboration for any course assignment or project. Faculty members are not to proctor their tests. If they choose to leave the room, they should inform the students of their whereabouts. However, whether in the classroom or elsewhere in the building, they should follow their normal routines and should not monitor their students while examinations are in progress. Faculty members may, for good reason, set special conditions for the taking of a particular exam. In such cases, the faculty member must announce and explain the conditions under which the examination is given and should do so only after consulting with the Associate Dean of the College.

Definition of Proctoring

For the purposes of this constitution, proctoring is strictly defined as the active monitoring of students during an examination (or such), conducted either by the professor or an authorized delegate (such as a Teaching Assistant).

• What proctoring is not: Passive actions — such as leaving the room entirely, staying in the classroom working on other work, staring out the window, etc. — does not constitute proctoring under this definition. Professors are permitted to be in the classroom.

A faculty member is responsible, as described in the Faculty Handbook, Section II.B.4, to call the facts of a potential violation of the Honor Code to the attention of the Honor Board. Unless the Board has expressly approved an “informal resolution,” disciplinary action is to be taken only by the Honor Board, not by the faculty member. A faculty member may discuss any doubts concerning the integrity of a student’s work with the student in question if unanswered doubts remain.

Structure of the Board

The Honor System is overseen by the Honor Board. Alleged cases of dishonesty in academic matters are referred to the Honor Board. The Honor Board must investigate all reports of suspected violations of the Honor Code to determine responsibility and to specify sanctions. Sanctions may range from a warning to expulsion from the College.

The rules and procedures of the Honor Board are set out in detail in its Constitution below.

Constitution of the Honor Board

Article I: Name and Definitions

The judicial body charged with administering the Honor System of Knox College and increasing community awareness of the Honor System shall be known as the Honor Board of Knox College (“Honor Board,” “the Board”).

Any alleged violation of the Honor Code presented to the Honor Board shall be known as a complaint. The complaint, once received and processed by the Board, shall be known as a case.

The person or persons bringing a complaint before the Honor Board shall be known as the complainant. The person or persons against whom a complaint is brought shall be known as the respondent(s).

Article II: Membership

Section 1. Membership

The membership of the Honor Board shall consist of

1. at least nine students (three seniors, three juniors, and three sophomores, as determined by expected graduation date);
2. three members of the faculty; and
3. the Advisor to the Honor Board.

Additional student members from any class year may be appointed, ideally no more than 15 Honor Board student members in total. These additional members may be appointed to lessen the burden on the membership generally and/or to achieve diversity of representation.

The Honor Board Selection Committee (see below) is charged with developing a system for balancing Board membership so that it is as diverse as possible.

Section 2. Appointments and Terms

1. By the end of each academic year, the Honor Board shall ideally have appointed at least three current first-year students for the coming academic year. The Faculty Affairs Subcommittee (FASCom) shall appoint one or more faculty members to replace the outgoing member(s). The Advisor to the Honor Board will be appointed by the Provost.
2. Appointments shall last for three academic years. Each academic year, the Selection Committee will also invite students from all classes to apply for Board membership in the coming academic year.
3. Any student in the appropriate class with good academic and conduct standing may apply for a position on the Honor Board. Students with any prior Honor Board convictions may apply, but must address in the application how they regard those convictions in light of a possible appointment to the Board. The Selection Committee shall review the applications, invite each candidate to interview, and make its final selections from among the students interviewed.
4. If a member of the Honor Board is absent from campus for more than a term, they may be required to resign from the Board. The Honor Board shall enforce this requirement by majority vote. The replacement may be temporary or permanent at the Board’s discretion.
5. The Honor Board shall have the right to temporarily replace a member who is absent from the campus for one term if their absence will jeopardize the Board’s ability to achieve a quorum at hearings.
6. The Honor Board shall have the right to replace members who do not perform their duties with an affirmative vote of at least 60% of voting members.
7. In situations, such as after the end of a term, where the Board must consider a case or conduct a rehearing and a quorum cannot be assembled from the regular or alternate members, the Advisor to the Honor Board, in consultation with at least two members of the Honor Board, may appoint interim student and/or faculty members to serve for a period not exceeding one term. No more than three interim members may serve at any time.

Section 3. Standing Committees

1. The Co-chairs, Secretary, and Advisor to the Honor Board constitute the Executive Committee.
2. The Honor Board Selection Committee shall convene for all appointment proceedings as described in Section 2. The Committee shall consist of the Honor Board Secretary and at least four other Honor Board members. Both the Academic Standing Committee (ASC) and the Student Senate are encouraged to participate in the selection process and shall be notified of the time. The Academic Standing Committee may be represented by one member, and the Student Senate by up to two members. No person may satisfy more than one membership requirement.
3. Select members of the Board shall function as an Education Committee charged with the task of increasing community awareness of the Honor System’s purpose, policies, and procedures.

Article III: Officers

Section 1. Selection

The officers of the Honor Board shall be the Co-chairs and the Secretary. The Co-chairs and the Secretary are to be determined at least one term in advance of their service by the outgoing Executive Committee. Should the Co-chairs and Advisor to the Honor Board unanimously determine that an extraordinary need exists, they may select a third Co-chair for one academic term, renewable until the Executive Committee no longer perceives a need.

Section 2. Responsibilities of the Co-Chairs

1. A Co-chair shall preside at all meetings of the Honor Board. They shall call all regular and special meetings of the Honor Board. The Co-chair who presides at a hearing shall do so without vote.
2. A Co-chair shall receive and process all reports of alleged violations of the Honor Code.
3. In consultation with the Advisor to the Honor Board, a Co-chair shall determine whether the allegations fall within the Board’s jurisdiction and warrant a hearing.
4. A Co-chair shall inform the respondent of the charges against them and direct the respondent to the Code itself to read about their rights under the Honor System.
5. A Co-chair shall assemble and prepare all relevant evidence and statements for a hearing, shall contact witnesses as appropriate, and shall schedule hearings.
6. A Co-chair shall notify the respondent in writing of the Honor Board’s decision within twenty-four hours.
7. A Co-chair shall oversee the fulfillment of all record-keeping and reporting requirements as described in Article VII.

Section 3. Responsibilities of the Secretary

1. The Secretary shall assist the Co-chairs in preparing case files and evidence for hearings.
2. The Secretary shall maintain a file of important precedent cases to assist the Board in deliberations.
3. The Secretary shall assist the Co-chairs in fulfilling all record-keeping reporting requirements as described in Article VII.
4. The Secretary shall chair the Education Committee.

Section 4. Responsibilities of the Advisor to the Honor Board

1. The Advisor to the Honor Board shall help to ensure the smooth functioning of the Honor Board.
2. When a Faculty Member of the Honor Board is unable to attend a formal hearing, the Advisor to the Honor Board may substitute for that faculty member (with vote) to achieve quorum.

Article IV: Authority

Section 1. Jurisdiction

The Honor Board shall have the authority to adjudicate all alleged violations of the Honor System. A violation of the Honor System is any instance of academic dishonesty as described in the Honor Code.

Section 2. First Offenses

1. In consultation with the Advisor to the Honor Board, the Honor Board Co-chair, in receipt of a complaint, shall have the authority to decide whether an offense is to be resolved formally (full Board hearing) or informally, between faculty members and students (see below).
2. Certain offenses must be heard by the full Honor Board (formal resolution). These include allegations of:
   • Submission of purchased papers;
   • Taking exams in prohibited areas;
   • Other egregious violations of the Code.
3. Other offenses may be handled by informal resolution, provided the following criteria are met:
   • The presiding Honor Board Co-chair agrees that the case need not be heard by the full Board;
   • The student and the professor wish to engage in informal resolution; and
   • The student takes responsibility for the offense.
4. Second offenses may also be handled by informal resolutions, provided that the following criteria are met:
   • The Honor Board Co-chairs and the Advisor to the Honor Board unanimously agree that the case need not be heard by the full Board;
   • The student and the professor wish to engage in informal resolution; and
   • The student takes responsibility for the offense.
5. In cases of informal resolution, the faculty member and student will meet to discuss the situation and steps for moving forward, including the sanction, which may include any combination of the following:
   • Warning.
   • Resubmit the assignment for full or partial credit.
   • Educational projects. Such projects include, but are not limited to, writing assignments, research assignments, or other educational requirements directly related to the violation. The project(s) will be clearly defined by the faculty member and must include a due date and a penalty for failing to complete the project on time.
   • “F” (zero credit) on the work.
   • “F” (zero credit) in the category to which the assignment belongs (e.g., all quizzes, all lab reports).

A faculty member entering into an informal resolution may not assign a sanction of “failure in the course” (although it may still be possible for the student to fail the course for other reasons). The respondent and the Honor Board Co-chair must be in agreement with the faculty member’s assigned sanction.

Section 3. Sanctions

In the case of a formal resolution, the Honor Board shall have the authority to assign sanctions for the violations of the Honor System. Such sanctions shall include one or combination of the following:

1. Warning.
2. Educational projects. Such projects include, but are not limited to, writing assignments, research assignments, or other educational requirements directly related to the violation. The project(s) will be clearly defined, including a due date and the consequences for not completing the project on time.
3. “F” (zero credit) on the work.
4. “F” (zero credit) in the category to which the assignment belongs (e.g., all quizzes, all lab reports).
5. Mandatory withdrawal from the course with a “W” grade.
6. “F” in the course.
7. Suspension. Separation from the college for a specified minimum period of time, after which the student is eligible to return. Eligibility may be contingent upon satisfaction of specific conditions noted at the time of suspension. The student must vacate the campus within 24 hours of notification of the action, though this deadline may be extended upon application to, and at the discretion of, the Dean of Students. Suspension may be deferred to the next term at the discretion of the Honor Board. During the suspension period, the student is banned from college property, functions, events, and activities without prior written approval from the Dean of Students. The sanction may be enforced with a trespass action if necessary.
8. Expulsion. Permanent separation from the college. The student is banned from college property, and the student’s presence at any college-sponsored activity or event is prohibited. This action may be enforced by a trespass action if necessary. If expelled, a student receives an “F” in the course involved and a grade of “W” in any courses in progress other than that course.

The listing below provides general sanctioning recommendations by violation level. This listing is meant to serve as a guideline only and is not intended to be construed as limiting the Honor Board’s discretion and its right to impose any particular sanction or sanctions as it deems appropriate based upon the facts and circumstances present in a particular matter. There will be times when a violation may fall under a different level than the one listed below. Similarly, there may be times when an alternative sanction is most appropriate. Each sanctioning determination will be made based on the individualized facts and circumstances involved in a particular matter.

In the case of repeat offenses, each new sanction should increase in severity from the previous sanction.

Violations by Honor Board Members

Violations committed by Honor Board members are especially heinous, as these individuals represent and embody academic integrity at Knox College. They are entrusted with upholding and protecting the academic integrity of the entire institution. Sanctions imposed in such cases shall reflect this responsibility.

Any violation by a current Honor Board member will have them automatically removed from the Board. Any violation will be treated as egregious, increasing the usual sanction levied. Any violation at Level 2 or above has (at a minimum) suspension as the sanction.

Withdrawals

Students who have been found responsible for an Honor Code violation in a course forfeit the right to withdraw from that course unless the Board assigns a mandatory withdrawal sanction. The Board assigns this sanction in consultation with the Advisor to the Honor Board, exclusively in cases with significant extenuating circumstances.

Article V: Procedure

Section 1. Complaint Submission

Any member of the Knox community wishing to bring a case before the Honor Board must complete the Honor Code Violation Allegation Form. If a faculty member wishes to pursue an informal resolution, the request still must be made via the Allegation Form.

The Co-chairs will determine which Co-chair will preside over the case; to the maximum extent practicable, a single Co-chair will manage all aspects of a single case. In consultation with the Advisor to the Honor Board, a Co-chair shall determine whether

1. the allegations are under the jurisdiction of the Board, and
2. if the case meets the criteria to be resolved informally.

If the case is to proceed to a hearing, the presiding Co-chair will meet confidentially with the complainant to review the details of the complaint and any relevant evidence.

If the case is to be resolved informally, the Co-chair will meet with the complainant and the respondent to determine an appropriate sanction.

Section 2. Notification to Respondent

If a case is to proceed to a hearing, the presiding Co-chair will notify the respondent in writing of the case against them following the initial meeting with the complainant. The presiding Co-chair will explain the allegation and review the Honor Board process. The presiding Co-chair may ask the respondent for a preliminary plea at this time, but the respondent will not be bound by this plea at the hearing. The Co-chair will notify the respondent that they are not permitted to withdraw from the course in question until they are found not responsible for the alleged infraction. The presiding Co-chair will treat information provided in the preliminary meetings by the complainant or respondent as evidence that may be used during the hearing or deliberation unless an exception is made in consultation with the Advisor to the Honor Board. The respondent will be advised of this.

Section 3. Scheduling

The Co-chair shall schedule the hearing to take place within a reasonable time after the date of the complaint submission, taking into account the facts of the situation, scheduling conflicts, the academic calendar, and other relevant considerations. In situations, such as after the end of a term, where the Board must consider a case or conduct a rehearing and a quorum cannot be assembled from the regular or alternate members, the Advisor to the Honor Board, in consultation with a Co-chair, may appoint interim student and faculty members to serve for a period not exceeding one term. If a hearing cannot take place when the College is not in session, it shall be scheduled after the start of the next term.

If the grade for a course is due before a hearing can be held, the course instructor shall list the grade as “HB.” This includes both end-of-term grades, as well as midterm grades.

Honor Board members will recuse themselves from cases in which they have a potential or actual conflict of interest with a party involved in the case or where their ability or perceived ability to make an unbiased decision may be in question. Honor Board members should confer with the Co-chairs and the Advisor to the Honor Board if they have any doubts about a perceived conflict of interest. Other members of the Board are within their right to ask (though not demand) that a member of the Board recuse themselves in the interest of preserving the Board’s integrity, both real and perceived. The Advisor to the Honor Board may require a member to recuse themselves when deemed necessary.

The complainant and the respondent will be presented with a list of Honor Board members who will be hearing their case and will have the opportunity to request that a member recuse themselves if a conflict of interest exists. Final determinations regarding recusal are made by the Associate Dean of the College.

Section 4. Hearings

A quorum must be present for a hearing to take place. A quorum shall consist of five (5) voting members, including at least one (and at most two) of the faculty members.

A Co-chair shall preside over all hearings but shall do so without a vote. It will be the Co-chair’s sole responsibility to direct the procedure of the hearing using the procedures outlined in this Constitution.

Hearings will be conducted in accordance with the terms of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). In cases involving more than one student respondent, each hearing will be conducted separately unless otherwise agreed upon by all involved parties. At the hearing, the Co-chair shall inform the respondent of the charges brought against them. The respondent shall have the opportunity to present a plea of “responsible” or “not responsible” at any point in the hearing, but no plea will be required of the respondent. The respondent will be questioned, allowed to ask questions of the Honor Board, and shall have the right to see and question the complainant unless the presiding Co-chair and the Advisor to the Honor Board agree to make an exception to this rule. (This exception is most often granted when the complainant is a Knox College student, in which case the course instructor may appear at the hearing, and the respondent may question the instructor.) The respondent may submit and read a statement of defense if desired.

The Co-chair shall determine the appropriate order of statements and the presentation of evidence. Except as noted above, the complainant, respondent, and Honor Board members are permitted to ask questions of any party at any time during the hearing; however, the presiding Co-chair may reserve the right to rule questions irrelevant or inappropriate. Witnesses may ask questions at the discretion of the presiding Co-chair.

A respondent will forfeit the right to present a defense if they fail to appear at the scheduled hearing.

Interference with Honor Board proceedings, including but not limited to intimidating actions directed toward a member of the Board or any other person involved in a case, may constitute Abuse of the College Conduct Process as defined in the Student Code of Conduct and may be referred to the Dean of Students for action.

Section 5. Advisors

For any case coming before the Honor Board, the respondent and the complainant will each be allowed to consult an advisor of their choosing. Advisors may provide support to the student before and/or during the hearing, but may not participate directly in the hearing.

The advisor may not have been involved in the case itself and may not act as a witness in the hearing.

At the student’s request, the Advisor to the Honor Board will assist in identifying a College employee who may serve as an advisor.

The advisor is expected to treat the hearing and all related conversations as confidential.

Section 6. Accommodations for Students with Disabilities

If a student with a documented disability would benefit from a reasonable accommodation at any point during the process, they should — and are encouraged to — request an accommodation by contacting the Office of Disability Support Services (DSS). DSS and/or the Title IX Coordinator will work with the student to determine any appropriate accommodations and communicate them to the Associate Dean of the College.

Section 7. Witnesses and Evidence

Admission of any individual into a hearing, including witnesses, is at the discretion of the presiding Co-chair.

If the complainant and/or the respondent wishes to present witnesses, they must submit a list of proposed witnesses and the justification for their submission to the Co-chair at least 72 hours before the scheduled hearing. Witnesses must have information directly relevant to the alleged violation. Character witnesses are not permitted.

If the complainant and/or respondent wishes to present evidence, they must do so at least 72 hours before the scheduled hearing. This should include, but is not necessarily limited to:

• An original copy of the assignment or document in question, if available. Correspondence between the complainant and respondent concerning the assignment or document.
• A copy of any course syllabus or related information that may contain information written by the complainant regarding the Honor Code, artificial intelligence, and its application to coursework conducted within the course.
• If the complainant is not an instructor or advisor for a course or other activity in which the alleged academic dishonesty occurred, then the Co-chair may also meet with the course instructor or activity advisor to collect evidence. The Co-chair will also collect any related evidence provided by the respondent.

The Co-chair shall have discretion to determine what evidence is admissible at the hearing and shall notify all parties of such decisions before the hearing. The Co-chair shall ensure that all admissible evidence is available to the complainant and respondent at least 48 hours before the hearing. Similarly, whenever possible, all evidence presented in a case will be made available to the Board at least 48 hours before the hearing so that Board members have ample opportunity to familiarize themselves with it and to formulate appropriate questions.

Section 8. Deliberations

The Honor Board shall meet in closed session for deliberation.

The Honor Board shall first decide on whether the student is “responsible” or “not responsible.” The standard of proof used in an Honor Board hearing is “clear and convincing,” meaning it is highly and substantially more probable than not that the student violated the Honor Code.

A simple majority (more than 50%) of voting members present at the hearing will be used to determine if the respondent is responsible. If the respondent has entered a plea of “responsible,” the Board does not vote on the issue of responsibility and moves directly to a consideration of the sanction.

If the Honor Board decides “responsible,” the Board must then decide on a sanction, also by a simple majority.

All decisions must be reached within twenty-four hours of the time the hearing began, except for reasonable and unavoidable delays, with the agreement of the Advisor to the Honor Board.

Section 9. Notification of Outcomes

The Co-chair will notify the respondent, the complainant, and the Advisor to the Honor Board of the Board’s decision within twenty-four hours via their College email addresses. The Advisor of the Honor Board will inform the registrar that a decision has been made if a decision comes after the end of the term.

The course instructor is responsible for calculating the student’s final course grade in accordance with any sanctions imposed. The faculty member will notify the Registrar of any final grade changes resulting from Honor Board decisions within a week of the decision.

Students found responsible for an Honor Code violation in a course forfeit the option to withdraw from that course, unless the Board’s sanction is “mandatory withdrawal from the course.”

Instances of course failure or withdrawal resulting from an Honor Board decision are not recorded specifically as failures due to academic dishonesty on transcripts; any notations of course failure or withdrawal for academic dishonesty are identical to those for failures due to non-attendance or other circumstances.

The Secretary or the presiding Co-chair will present the case, with identifying information redacted, to the Academic Standing Committee for informational purposes, when requested. The Academic Standing Committee may not alter the decision of the Honor Board.

Article VI: Appeal

Section 1. Submission of Appeal

1. The respondent may appeal the Board’s finding and/or sanction by submitting a written request (may be via email) for a rehearing to the Provost within seven calendar days of the notice of the outcome being sent.
2. Appeals must fall into one of the following categories:
   1. The respondent has new evidence that was not available before the hearing.
   2. The applicable procedures were not adhered to during the hearing, and the deviation from the process was substantial enough to likely have affected the outcome.
   3. The sanctions imposed are disproportionate to the infraction (see Article IV, Section 3 “Sanctions” above).

Section 2. Initial Review

1. The Provost shall conduct an initial review of the appeal to determine if the grounds are sufficient to warrant an appellate review. The Provost shall render this decision within seven calendar days of receiving the appeal. If the Provost considers the stated grounds for appeal to be insufficient for further appellate review, the Provost may summarily dismiss the appeal. If the appeal is summarily dismissed, the respondent and the Honor Board will be notified.
2. If an appellate review is granted, the Provost shall notify the Honor Board of the grounds for appeal before the appellate review.

Section 3. Appellate Review

1. The appellate review consists of a meeting between the Provost, the appellant, and one Honor Board member designated by the Board. The appellate review shall take place within fourteen calendar days of the review being granted. The complainant may attend the appellate review at the discretion of the Provost. The Provost may meet with the appellant before the review meeting as necessary.
2. Within seven calendar days of the appellate review meeting, the Provost shall determine whether the grounds for appeal are sufficient for rehearing. If a rehearing is granted, the Provost shall direct it to the appropriate body (as specified in section 4 below). The Provost shall provide a written explanation of their decision and the rationale for the appellant, the complainant, the Academic Standing Committee, and the Honor Board.

Section 4. Rehearing

1. If the Provost determines that there are sufficient grounds, a rehearing of the case shall be conducted within fourteen (14) calendar days of the decision by one of the following bodies:
   1. The Honor Board, if the basis for the rehearing is new evidence.
   2. A body consisting of the voting members of the Academic Standing Committee and one Honor Board member who did not attend the original hearing, if the basis for the rehearing is substantial procedural error or sanctions that are substantially disproportionate. A quorum shall consist of the Honor Board member and four voting members of the Academic Standing Committee. The Associate Dean of the College may appoint alternate members to achieve the quorum required, in the manner described in Article II, Section 2G. No person may satisfy more than one membership requirement. A faculty member on the Academic Standing Committee shall chair the rehearing body. The agreement of five voting members is required to overturn the original decision due to procedural error or sanction.
2. Except as noted in Section 4, all rehearings shall follow the procedures mandated for original hearings under the Honor Board Constitution and Procedural Guidelines. A reassembly of all witnesses and evidence shall be required, with reasonable accommodation.
3. All sanctions imposed by the Honor Board are stayed during the appeal process, unless the Provost decides otherwise, in which case the respondent will be informed in writing of the Provost’s decision.
4. All appeal decisions are final.

Article VII: Records

1. A detailed case summary of each case shall be composed, including accounts of evidence, testimony, and the Board’s decision. All documents related to each case, including evidence, witness statements, and written decisions from all hearings and appeals, shall be filed with the case summary in the Office of Academic Affairs. These records shall be maintained for ten years, or longer if required by law.
2. A summary of each case without names or other identifying information shall be released for publication in the student newspaper (or other appropriate publication as determined by the Board) upon the newspaper’s request twice per term. The information contained in the summary shall be limited to the case reference number, the number of students involved in the case, charges brought, pleas entered, the Board’s decisions of responsibility or non-responsibility, the sanction assigned, and the result of any appeals proceedings.

The Academic Standing Committee shall be informed of all Honor Board actions, but shall not have the power to alter the decisions or sanctions assigned by the Board, except as specified in Article VI.

At the conclusion of the hearing and deliberations, the Co-chair will collect any additional copies of the information provided at the hearing and submit it to the Office of Academic Affairs to be destroyed.

Article VIII: Adoption

This Constitution originally became effective with approval by a majority vote of the Student Senate, the approval of the Academic Standing Committee, and the written approval of the President of the College.

Any member of the Honor Board, the faculty, the Student Senate, or the College administration may propose amendments to the Honor Board Constitution. For ratification, a proposed amendment must receive the approval of two-thirds of the members of the Honor Board, two-thirds of the members of the Academic Standing Committee, and two-thirds of the members of the Student Senate executive board.

The Honor Board, in consultation with the Office of Academic Affairs, shall notify the Knox community of all changes to the governing documents of the Honor System.