Skip to Content
man in blue long sleeve shirt holding woman in gray sweater
woman in white shirt using Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 in Platinum
black office rolling chairs on brown carpet
a stack of newspapers sitting on top of a window sill
a person writing on a piece of paper with a pencil
Purpose & OverviewCommittee CompositionEscalation TriggerCase File PreparationCommittee SummonsReview & Report SubmissionVerdict CompilationFinal Admin ReviewDecision Review RequestRecordkeeping & ArchivesSafeguards & Best Practices

Purpose & Overview

Upholding Fairness Through Review

The Integrity Committee exists to uphold fairness, academic excellence, and institutional trust. Its core mission is to provide an unbiased, multi-perspective review process for escalated AI/plagiarism cases and student appeals. This committee ensures that all outcomes are grounded in policy, equity, and the academic standards of the institution. 

Committee Composition

A Balanced and Diverse Panel

The committee is composed of five diverse members, each bringing a unique perspective:


  • Instructor (Subject Expert): Offers academic context and understands assessment criteria.
  • Parent/Guardian: Represents the student’s welfare and ensures fairness from a family lens.
  • Student Peer: Shares insight into peer norms and modern study pressures.
  • Academic Advisor or Counselor: Ensures ethical oversight and policy alignment.
  • Administrator/Compliance Officer (Non-Voting or Tiebreaker): Oversees the process and enforces final decisions when needed.
  • Members are rotated or randomly selected to preserve impartiality.

Escalation Trigger

When a Case Warrants Closer Review

A case is escalated when:


  • An instructor or administrator flags a student assignment for review.
  • A student formally files an appeal.
  • Once triggered, the case is routed to the committee dashboard for immediate assignment.

Case File Preparation

Building a Comprehensive Case File

Before review, the system compiles a complete case file including:


  • Assignment submission and metadata
  • AI or plagiarism detection reports
  • Instructor’s rubric and notes
  • Student’s appeal or written explanation
  • Communication logs relevant to the case
  • This ensures every reviewer has full context.


Committee Summons

Assigning Anonymous Reviewers

The system assigns the case to five committee members anonymously.


  • Members are unaware of who else is reviewing the case.
  • Each receives the full case file and has 72 hours to respond.
  • The anonymity preserves independent judgment and integrity.

Review & Report Submission

Independent Evaluation & Decisions

Each reviewer:


  • Examines the full case file
  • Submits a decision report using a structured template
  • Recommends an outcome (e.g., Cleared, Warning, Reduced Penalty, Upheld)
  • Provides a short rationale (2–3 sentences)
  • Once submitted, reports are timestamped and locked to prevent editing.

Verdict Compilation

Majority Rules, Unified Outcome

When all five reports are submitted:


  • The system tallies the majority decision (minimum 3 out of 5)
  • Identifies any split decisions
  • Combines all responses into a unified report for final review

Final Admin Review

Official Ruling and Communication

The Compliance Officer or assigned Administrator:


  • Reviews all submitted reports and rationales
  • Issues a final, binding decision based on the committee’s majority
  • Notifies the instructor and student through the system
  • Archives the case with a formal resolution status

Decision Review Request

Second Appeal Option


Appeal must be submitted within 7 days and include new evidence or justification.


The Compliance Officer:

  • Reviews the submission
  • Conducts a final review or assigns external review
  • Decides if further action is needed
  • Issues a binding decision and updates the case

Recordkeeping & Archives

Archiving for Transparency and Accountability

All case decisions are securely stored in the student’s Academic Integrity Record.


  • These records are accessible only to administrators
  • Reports are exportable for appeals, legal inquiries, or accreditation audits
  • This ensures transparency and institutional accountability

Safeguards & Best Practices

Safeguards That Protect Integrity

To maintain integrity and trust:


  • All committee members must sign a confidentiality and impartiality agreement
  • Conflicts of interest trigger immediate reassignment
  • Reviews are conducted anonymously to avoid groupthink or bias
  • Committee members are randomly assigned to each case