Academic Misconduct at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley

The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley is an educational institution that takes academic integrity very seriously. The school expects students to abide by the Vaquero Honor Code, a guide based on the virtues of honesty and integrity. Students are expected to apply this code to every aspect of student life, including academics. They're expected to work hard and do the work necessary to obtain their degrees without engaging in any sort of academic dishonesty. If academic dishonesty does arise, the school deals with it swiftly and firmly.

What Are Some Examples of What the School Considers Academic Dishonesty?

There are four levels of academic integrity violations at the school ranging from Level One to Level Four, with Level Four being the most serious. Level One violations include things like incorrectly citing a source on a paper, while Level Four violations include behavior like taking an exam for someone else. Other examples of academic dishonesty at the school include the following.

  • The student uses fake or false references or findings during research, tests, or other types of academic exercises.
  • The student fakes lab data in order to “prove” an experiment.
  • The student hires another student or uses a service to write a paper for them and then submits it as their own.
  • A student takes a test and then gives information from the test to another student or students who will be taking the exam later.
  • The student receives an unsatisfactory grade on a paper, changes the content of the paper without permission, and then resubmits the paper, asking for reconsideration.
  • The student goes out of their way to destroy academic materials like library books and other items that other students may need for a course, leading them to gain an unfair academic advantage.
  • Gaslighting the instructor by telling them that they handed in the assignment and the instructor must have lost it.
  • The student is able to get a copy of the exam or the answer key in advance of the exam.
  • Signing in another student as “present” even if they're not there.
  • Writing answers on desks or on the floor prior to an exam.

Once a student is accused of academic misconduct, the response from the school is firm and swift.

What Happens When a Student Is Suspected of Academic Misconduct?

There are two approaches that an instructor can take at the school if they suspect that a student has engaged in academic misconduct.

One option is for the instructor to reach out to the student directly. They'll determine whether a violation has occurred and figure out if the issue can be resolved. If the student admits fault, they'll receive a sanction determined by faculty called a Faculty Disposition. The student and the instructor will sign the Faculty Disposition form and send it to SRR (Student Rights and Responsibilities) for review. SRR will then determine if the sanction is sufficient or if additional sanctions are warranted.

If the student chooses not to admit fault, the second option comes into play. With this option, the instructor refers the student directly to SRR. SRR will look into the situation, meet with both parties, and determine if there's enough evidence to support a violation. If SRR determines that a violation did take place, the student can either accept responsibility and receive an Administrative Disposition, or they can refuse to accept one and move to the formal hearing/appeal stage.

What Happens If a Student Denies the Allegations?

Students who deny allegations of academic misconduct that have been levied against them are allowed to file an appeal. During the appeal process, the student disputes the charges in front of a hearing officer. The student will be given a minimum of ten days' notice of the exact time, date, and location of the hearing. They'll also be given the name of the Hearing Officer who will be overhearing their case. After the hearing, the case is either dismissed or the student is found guilty, and a sanction is imposed.

What if the Student Thinks the Hearing Won't Be Fair?

There may be a situation where the student doesn't believe that the Hearing Officer assigned to their case will be fair and impartial. If that's the case, the student is allowed to challenge the assignment. They'll need to challenge it in writing and explain why they feel that they won't get a fair trial with the assigned Hearing Officer. That letter is then sent to the Hearing Officer via the Office of the Dean up to three days before the hearing date.

Students should be aware that the Hearing Officer themselves will determine whether or not they will be able to be impartial. This can make it really uncomfortable for a student who truly believes they won't be given a fair shot.

Can the Student Have an Attorney?

Students accused of academic integrity at UTRGV and who are going through the hearing process are allowed to be assisted by an advisor of their choosing, and that advisor can be an attorney. Having an attorney-advisor like Joseph D. Lento by your side can help put your mind at ease. He knows the ins and outs of all types of academic misconduct cases, giving you the info you need to address your specific situation.

Reach Out for Legal Help

Preparing a strong defense is one of the most important things you should do when dealing with academic misconduct allegations.

Students who've committed academic misconduct have that information stored on their academic records. Depending on the severity of the charge or charges, that information can make it difficult for them to obtain certain jobs or transfer to other schools. You need to put up as strong a fight as possible to minimize the chance of future and lifelong negative consequences. Reach out to the Lento Law Firm at 888-535-3686 for help.

Contact Us Today!

footer-2.jpg

If you, or your student, are facing any kind of disciplinary action, or other negative academic sanction, and are having feelings of uncertainty and anxiety for what the future may hold, contact the Lento Law Firm today, and let us help secure your academic career.

This website was created only for general information purposes. It is not intended to be construed as legal advice for any situation. Only a direct consultation with a licensed Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York attorney can provide you with formal legal counsel based on the unique details surrounding your situation. The pages on this website may contain links and contact information for third party organizations - the Lento Law Firm does not necessarily endorse these organizations nor the materials contained on their website. In Pennsylvania, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout Pennsylvania's 67 counties, including, but not limited to Philadelphia, Allegheny, Berks, Bucks, Carbon, Chester, Dauphin, Delaware, Lancaster, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Schuylkill, and York County. In New Jersey, attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New Jersey's 21 counties: Atlantic, Bergen, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Hudson, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Ocean, Passaic, Salem, Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren County, In New York, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New York's 62 counties. Outside of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, unless attorney Joseph D. Lento is admitted pro hac vice if needed, his assistance may not constitute legal advice or the practice of law. The decision to hire an attorney in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania counties, New Jersey, New York, or nationwide should not be made solely on the strength of an advertisement. We invite you to contact the Lento Law Firm directly to inquire about our specific qualifications and experience. Communicating with the Lento Law Firm by email, phone, or fax does not create an attorney-client relationship. The Lento Law Firm will serve as your official legal counsel upon a formal agreement from both parties. Any information sent to the Lento Law Firm before an attorney-client relationship is made is done on a non-confidential basis.

Menu