Within Expedited Sanctioning the Honor Council is soliciting the input of faculty accusers and students who have admitted responsibility for an honor violation. As outlined in the Honor Constitution and Guidebook, once this process begins, the faculty accuser should use the table as a point of reference for recommending a set of sanctions. This recommendation includes two parts. First is a grade penalty, which is implemented by the faculty member. The Honor Council maintains no control over course grades, and the table suggests ways that faculty might use grading prerogatives as part of a holistic sanction. The second part of the sanction is implemented by the Honor Council and includes the possibility of Honor Education or Community Service. While these sanctions are administered by the Honor Council, the faculty accuser should include his or her recommendation as part of the holistic process.
The faculty accuser will recommend a grade penalty and a sanction by taking into account the recommendations in the table, mitigating or exacerbating circumstances, and the specifics of the case. This process is not bound by the recommendations in the table.
The responsible student shall maintain the right to request a Review and Sanction hearing throughout the process and the Honor Council retains the prerogative to hear the case in a Review and Sanction Hearing instead of accepting the faculty accuser’s recommendation.
This table is a set of suggested guidelines for sanctions within the Expedited Sanctioning Process. It also includes examples of accusations that would fall outside of Expedited Sanctioning. Remember that this process is optional for both faculty and students; the Honor System’s hearing process is available whenever either the accused or accuser would prefer it.