RYERSON UNIVERSITY POLICY OF SENATE ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

The University will apply the policy in a non-adversarial, investigative manner that is consistent with the principles of natural justice, including the right to know the case against you; to be heard and the right to a timely and fair decision based on the merits of each individual case. [...] The purpose of a discussion is to allow the decision maker to present to the student(s) the basis for their suspicion; for the student(s) to offer their perspective, to answer questions, and articulate their perspective on the facts; and for there to be a fair Pol 60: Academic Integrity 8 and transparent discussion. [...] The notification of a suspicion to the student must include a detailed summary of the basis for the suspicion to enable the student to prepare for the discussion; it is insufficient simply to specify the category of misconduct. [...] The decision maker is not to notify the student of the outcome or discuss the matter with the student while the student awaits the formal decision. [...] If the assigned penalty is a grade of “F” or “FLD” in the course, or if there is a recommendation for a penalty of DS, DA, DA-S, DW, Expulsion, or Revocation, a student may appeal the penalty alone (which means they accept the finding), or may appeal the penalty in conjunction with the finding.