Academic Honesty and Integrity Policy

Statement of Purpose: Academic Honesty and Integrity [+]

The New School views academic honesty and integrity as the duty of every member of an academic community to claim authorship for his or her own work and only for that work, and to recognize the contributions of others accurately and completely. This obligation is fundamental to the integrity of intellectual debate, and creative and academic pursuits. Academic honesty and integrity includes accurate use of quotations, as well as appropriate and explicit citation of sources in instances of paraphrasing and describing ideas, or reporting on research findings or any aspect of the work of others (including that of faculty members and other students). Academic dishonesty results from infractions of accurate use. The standards of academic honesty and integrity, and citation of sources, apply to all forms of academic work, including submissions of drafts of final papers or projects. All members of the university community are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the standards of academic honesty and integrity.

Students are responsible for understanding the university’s policy on academic honesty and integrity and must make use of proper citations of sources for writing papers, creating, presenting, and performing their work, taking examinations, and doing research. Through syllabi, or in assignments, faculty members are responsible for informing students of policies with respect to the limits within which they may collaborate with, or seek help from, others. Individual schools/programs may require their students to sign an Academic Integrity Statement declaring that they understand and agree to comply with this policy.

The New School recognizes that the different nature of work across the schools of the university may require different procedures for citing sources and referring to the work of others. Particular academic procedures, however, are based in universal principles valid in all schools of The New School and institutions of higher education in general. This policy is not intended to interfere with the exercise of academic freedom and artistic expression.

Definitions and Examples of Academic Dishonesty [+]

Academic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to:

  • cheating on examinations, either by copying another student’s work or by utilizing unauthorized materials
  • using work of others as one’s own original work and submitting such work to the university or to scholarly journals, magazines, or similar publications
  • submission of another student's work obtained by theft or purchase as one’s own original work
  • submission of work downloaded from paid or unpaid sources on the internet as one’s own original work, or including the information in a submitted work without proper citation
  • submitting the same work for more than one course without the knowledge and explicit approval of all of the faculty members involved
  • destruction or defacement of the work of others
  • aiding or abetting any act of academic dishonesty
  • any attempt to gain academic advantage by presenting misleading information, making deceptive statements or falsifying documents, including documents related to internships
  • engaging in other forms of academic misconduct that violate principles of integrity.

Adjudication Procedures [+]  

An administrator or faculty member at each of the schools/programs of the university is the Dean’s designee with responsibility for administering the university’s Academic Honesty and Integrity Policy (hereinafter “School Designee”). The name of each School Designee is listed at the end of this policy.

The steps below are to be followed in order. If the two parties come to agreement at any of the steps, they do not need to proceed further.

Throughout this policy where correspondence is indicated, but the method is not specified, New School email accounts and/or hard copy, sent through regular mail or hand delivery, may be used and is considered a good faith effort of notification on the part of the university. Each school will follow internal procedures for tracking correspondences with students related to this policy.

All time frames indicated by days refer to business days that do not include periods when the university’s administrative offices are closed, including weekends and holidays.

Grades awarded under the university’s Academic Integrity and Honesty Policy are not subject to review under this Grade Appeal Policy.

Step 1: Notification to Student

A faculty member who suspects that a student has engaged in academic dishonesty will meet with the student. It is expected that the faculty member will contact the student within ten (10) days after the last day of classes for that semester in which the alleged incident occurs. If academic dishonesty is alleged on an examination, paper, or creative work due within the last two weeks of classes, the faculty member should submit an incomplete grade until the student can be properly notified and the matter resolved. If grading a major culminating work (for example, a Senior Exhibit, final course paper, Master's Thesis, or Doctoral Dissertation) which may take longer to evaluate, faculty may request an exception to this deadline through the Dean’s office.

The student must contact the faculty member within ten (10) days of the notification to schedule a meeting with the faculty member. The faculty member is responsible for setting the meeting. This meeting can be in person or via telephone. A student who fails to respond in the time required will be deemed to have waived his/her rights under this policy. If the student does not respond, and the faculty member determines that the infraction is an actionable offense, s/he will inform in writing the School’s Designee of his/her determination and include copies of the following: correspondence with the student, syllabi, and course assignments.

In cases where the student is taking a course with a faculty member of a different school, the faculty member’s school designee will inform the student’s School Designee who will then oversee the adjudication process.

Step 2: Faculty Meeting with Student

During the meeting with the student, the faculty member will review the allegations with the student and allow the student the opportunity to respond. The student and/or the faculty member may, on a voluntary basis, request the presence of a designated third party from the student’s school or the university’s student ombudsman. A Third Party is appointed within each school for this purpose and can assist in clarifying questions about this policy and its processes, and facilitate communication between the faculty member and the student. The name of each Third Party is listed at the end of this policy and the School Designee can never also serve as a Third Party. If the faculty member and/or the student elect to have a third party present, the requestor is responsible for notifying the other of his/her decision in advance of the meeting.

During this meeting, the student may either accept responsibility for the allegations or dispute them. Regardless, the faculty member will consult with the School Designee and then make one or more of the following determinations:

  1. Indicate that the student has not committed an infraction of this policy.
  2. Indicate that the student has committed an infraction and impose one of the following sanctions: a. require the student to resubmit the assignment; or b. give the student a failing grade for that particular assignment; or c. give the student a failing grade for the course.
  3. Indicate that the student has committed an egregious infraction supporting the recommendation to the Dean that the student be suspended or expelled. Examples of egregious infractions include, but are not limited to: (1) multiple instances of academic dishonesty in a single course, (2) repeated instances of academic dishonesty by a student in different courses, and (3) academic dishonesty related to a major culminating work such as a Senior Exhibit, Master's Thesis or Doctoral Dissertation.

The faculty member will send correspondence as well as syllabi and course assignments to the School Designee with his/her determination.

In the rare and exceptional circumstance where the Step 2 process cannot occur, the instructor or the School’s Designee shall notify the student of the instructor’s concern that the student has engaged in academic dishonesty and that the matter has been referred to the Dean for resolution. In such cases, the student may proceed as set forth in the Appeals Procedures.

Step 3: Review of Faculty Determination and Possible Imposition of Sanctions by School Designee

The School Designee will review the faculty member’s determination and consult, as needed, with appropriate academic personnel. Based on the faculty member’s determination, the nature of the most recent violation as it relates to past violations, consistency within the division and across the university, and on any other relevant information pertaining to the student’s record at the university, the School Designee may determine that modified sanctions should be imposed on the student that can include, but are not limited to, suspension or expulsion.

Recognizing the importance of the decision for the student, the faculty member and the School Designee will notify the student in writing of the sanction(s) as soon as possible, but not more than twenty (20) days after receipt of the faculty member’s written recommendation. In addition, the School Designee will notify the appropriate offices in the school, the faculty member, the faculty member’s School Designee (if the course at issue is offered through another school), as well as the Office of the Assistant Vice President for Student and Campus Life.

Appeal Procedures [+]  

If the student is dissatisfied with the outcome of the adjudication procedures, s/he has the right to appeal.

Student’s Right to Appeal

The student may appeal the School Designee’s decision to the Dean/Director of the School or his/her designee (hereinafter “Dean”). The appeal must be in writing and sent within ten (10) days of the decision letter received by the student. The student may request that the Dean convene a meeting of the existing committee that is responsible for academic standards and standing, or convene such a committee should one not already exist, to review the appeal. No member of this committee will have been part of the appeals process to date. The committee’s recommendation will be made to the Dean, whose decision is final except in cases where the student has been suspended or expelled. Alternately, the student may waive review by a committee and request that the appeal be reviewed exclusively by the Dean or his/her designee, who will not be the School’s Designee.

The student’s appeal must be reviewed within fifteen (15) days of receipt. Note that an appeal to the Dean may result in a stricter penalty than that applied by the School Designee. The student must be notified in writing of the appeal decision within five (5) days of the decision. A copy of the decision must be sent to the faculty member who brought the initial allegations, the Office of the Assistant Vice President for Student and Campus Life, and other offices as appropriate. The Dean’s decision is final, and not subject to further appeal, except in cases where the decision is either to suspend or expel.

Appeal to the Provost

A student who has been ordered suspended or expelled from the university because of a violation of this policy may appeal to the Provost or his/her designee (hereinafter “Provost”). The appeal must be made in writing within five (5) days of receipt of the Dean’s decision.

If the Provost decides to consider the appeal, such a review will be limited to: (a) whether the adjudication procedures outlined in this policy were properly followed; and (b) whether the sanction imposed is appropriate given the nature of the violation, and is consistent with sanctions imposed across the university in the past for similar violations. Note that an appeal to the Provost may result in a stricter penalty than that applied by the Dean; i.e., an appeal of a Dean’s decision of suspension could result in the Provost’s decision of expulsion. The Provost will, within ten (10) days of receipt of the request, make a determination. The Provost’s decision is final.

School Designee and Third-Party Point Person by School[+]  

As part of the policy, below is the list of School Designee and Third-Party point people for each school.

School School Designee Third Party
Eugene Lang College The New School
for Liberal Arts
Riva Kadar, Associate Dean of Academic Planning 212.229.5100 x2236
Jon White, Associate Dean of Student Affairs
212.229.5100 x2282
Mannes College The New School for
Bill Gustafson, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs
212.580.0210 x4837
Audrey Axinn, Assistant Dean
212.580.0210 x4836
Parsons The New School for Design Juli Parker, Assistant Dean of Advising
212.229.5855 x4037
Nikki Cherry, Director of Advising, Training, and Development
212.229.8970 x4212
The New School for Drama Carrie Neal, Associate Director
212.229.5859 x2622
Keisha Davenport, University Ombuds
The New School for Jazz and
Contemporary Music
Martin Hundley, Director of Academic Affairs
212.229.5896 x4577
Richard Harper, Faculty
The New School for Public
Kathleen Breidenbach, Vice Dean
212.229.5100 x2225
Chrissy Roden, Director of Student Affairs
212.229.5615 x2150
The New School for Social Research Tsuya Yee, Assistant Dean, Director of Academic Affairs
212.229.5712 x3005
Ellen Freeberg, Associate Dean, Faculty and Curriculum
212.229.5712 x3000
Connect with the New School