HONOR SYSTEM POLICY FOR STUDENTS ENROLLED IN ADVANCED DENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS The new policies apply to students enrolled in the following Advanced Dental Education Programs as of July 2008:
Advanced Education in General Dentistry
Advanced Education in Pediatric Dentistry
Advanced Education in Restorative Dentistry
Advanced Education in Orthodontics
Advanced Education in Periodontics
Advanced Education in Endodontics
Advanced Education in Prosthodontics
Each student, upon entering an advanced dental education program at the University of Michigan School of Dentistry, is expected to have established the highest concepts of honor and personal integrity, and to maintain these concepts during matriculation in the School and, following graduation. The Honor System of the School of Dentistry is one expression of the high degree of personal and professional integrity that is essential for members of the dental profession.
The purpose of the Honor System is to promote personal and professional integrity by proscribing unacceptable conduct, through the School of Dentistry’s Code of Academic Integrity and Professional Conduct. In addition, the Honor System establishes a fair system to formally address violations of this policy.
This policy applies to all students enrolled in advanced dental education programs at the School of Dentistry, and includes off campus activities.
The profession is responsible for monitoring its own ethical standards and this practice must begin in dental school and continue through advanced education/graduate education. The faculty and students share the responsibility for maintaining these standards. The faculty is responsible for maintaining conditions that assure an environment that promotes ethical conduct. The responsibility of the individual student in abiding by these standards and reporting acts of dishonesty in the classroom, laboratory or clinical situations, or reporting any acts that are not professional, parallels the responsibility of the individual dentist for eliminating unethical practices. Failure to act condones unethical or dishonest conduct and makes the observer an accomplice.
The Honor System Policy will be distributed annually to entering students by the program director at each program’s new student orientation session. At this session each advanced dental education student must signify in writing that he/she agrees to abide by the principles and procedures of the Honor System while a member of the dental school community.
I. CODE OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY AND PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
The School of Dentistry’s Code of Academic Integrity and Professional Conduct (“the Code”) has two basic premises. First, it assumes that individuals uphold values of honesty, ethics and professional behavior and support others in maintaining these same values. Second, it implies that the same personal integrity that prevents people from acting dishonestly or unprofessionally compels them to do something about unethical behavior that they observe. The members of the faculty of this School believe in these principles and responsibilities.
The Code incorporates the American Dental Association’s Principles of Ethics and Code of Professional Conduct. In addition, all advanced education and graduate students enrolled at the School of Dentistry students are also required to comply with the Horace H. Rackham’s Policy Statement on Academic and Professional Integrity (Appendix B)iv and the University’s Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities. Responsible, professional behavior is an expectation of students both on and away from the University campus.
Nothing in this policy prevents a faculty member from assigning grades or course work that he/she determines to be appropriate as a result of an evaluation of a student’s performance. When a faculty member determines that a student has engaged in academic misconduct, such as cheating or plagiarism, the faculty member may either file a charge under the Honor System Policy for Students Enrolled in Advanced Dental Education Programs or exercise his/her authority with regard to assessing the student’s performance in that course, such as assigning a failing grade, issuing an incomplete, or assigning additional course work for evaluation. Any student who feels that his/her performance was evaluated unfairly may follow the procedures outlined in the Academic Grievance Procedures for Students Enrolled in Advanced Dental Education Programs at the School of Dentistry. Faculty members are responsible for informing the Director of Graduate Programs of all cases of academic misconduct that they resolve independently.
In broad terms, academic misconduct relates to actions or behaviors that are
contrary to maintaining the highest standards of conduct in course work, faculty–
interactions, research or any other elements of the School’s curriculum and
programs. Professional misconduct is defined as behavior that calls into question a student’s ability or fitness to participate in an advanced dental education program. Elements of academic and professional misconduct are further defined in the above-referenced codes and policies of the School of Dentistry’s Code of Academic Integrity and Professional Conduct.
The following actions are examples of violations of the Code of Academic Integrity and Professional Conduct. Such violations would include, although would not be limited to, the following major offenses:
Falsification of Information or Data: Making false or incomplete entries in preclinical and clinical records, evaluation records, laboratory prescriptions, data falsification, and falsification of official University records.
Plagiarism: Taking credit for someone else's work and ideas, taking other's
papers or methods, copying the writing of others, including the extraction of
information from electronic media, without appropriate credit.
Violation of Dental School or Clinic Regulations: Examples of such violations include dishonesty on examinations, quizzes, operating outside of defined clinic and pre-clinic laboratory hours, operating without proper faculty supervision, or failure to comply with clinic protocols.
Suspicious Behavior: During instructional and testing periods, when students are performing independently, they are obligated to conduct themselves in a manner that does not arouse suspicions or cause a question of integrity.
Failure to Maintain Standards of Care: Students must demonstrate that patient care is a primary consideration during treatment and learning exercises. Inattention to patient care responsibilities, failure to prepare adequately for patient care procedures, and failure to observe standards of infection control procedures are examples of failure to maintain standards of care.
Unprofessional Conduct: Examples include discrimination, harassment and breach of confidentiality.
Misrepresentation: Falsely representing one’s professional credentials or academic standing.
Impairment: Any participation in academic or professional life while impaired
from alcohol, chemical or substance dependency or abuse or prescribed medications that impact judgment or compromise patient safety.
Retaliation: For example, against administrative, faculty or student colleagues; or, against those who participate in the Honor System process.
Making false accusations.
Failing to participate in the Honor System process or to comply with requests from the Advanced Education Review Committee, Hearing Panel, Executive Committee, or Dean.
Intentionally violating the confidentiality of the Honor System process or student record and retention policies.
The School of Dentistry and University community view academic or professional misconduct as extremely serious, and as constituting grounds for penalties including suspension or dismissal under appropriate procedures. Students who are found responsible for violating academic integrity are subject to the following disciplinary action: failing grade for the exam, failing grade for the course, restitution, educational project, remediation or service project, suspension, dismissal, revocation of degree, withholding a degree or other disciplinary action deemed appropriate.
Unprofessional behavior in violation of standards outlined in the professional conduct policies and University conduct policies referenced and incorporated in the Honor System Policy can result in disciplinary action up to and including dismissal from the School of Dentistry, revocation of degree, or any other sanction deemed appropriate to address the violation.
The Executive Committee will forward to the faculty and students enrolled in advanced dental education programs an anonymous summary, by categories only, of reviewed violations and imposed sanctions, as often as practicable without violating the privacy rights of the students involved. II. HONOR SYSTEM PROCEDURES A. Definitions
1. Advanced Dental Education Review Committee: The Advanced Dental Education Review Committee (ADERC) consists of one advanced education student from each
advanced education program and one faculty member from each advanced education program (faculty will serve 2 year terms, staggered, limited to 2 consecutive terms). The committee will be elected in April.
At the first meeting following election of the Review Committee, the members will elect the following officers: Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, and Secretary. The Chairperson of the Review Committee must be a faculty member. The Review Committee is responsible for: (1) establishing its standard operating procedures that will be made available to all advanced education students, faculty, and staff; and (2) hearing all written complaints regarding violations of the Honor System Policy for Students Enrolled in Advanced Dental Education Programs. The Review Committee must convene at least twice per year.
2. Executive Committee: The Executive Committee is the Executive Committee
of the School of Dentistry and is comprised of six members of the governing
faculty appointed by the Board of Regents. Eligible faculty include tenured
professorial staff or associate and full professors of the clinical instructional
staff. The Executive Committee assists the dean in formulating educational,
instructional, and research policies for consideration of the faculty.
3. Dean: The Dean is the Dean of the School of Dentistry and serves as the chief
executive officer of the School. With the Executive Committee, the Dean is
responsible for the ultimate disposition of all student issues related to
academic performance and professional behavior.
4. Hearing Panel: A Hearing Panel will consist of at least three members of the
ADERC and include at least one student representative. The Chair of the Review Committee will appoint the members of the Hearing Panel and the Chair of each Hearing Panel.
5. Investigators: The Investigators are members of the ADERC who
are responsible for gathering evidence, identifying and interviewing witnesses and accused parties and presenting the allegations of misconduct before the Hearing Panel for a particular case. The Chair of the Review Committee will appoint the investigators.
6. Respondent: The Respondent is the student who is charged with violating the Code of Academic Integrity and Professional Conduct. The respondent has the following rights:
a. The right to request that the ADERC Hearing be waived and
that the matter be heard by the Executive Committee. When the matter is originally heard by the Executive Committee, the Dean will serve as the final appeal.
b. The right to have a different investigator assigned to the case.
c. The right to review all evidence considered by the Review Committee.
d. The right to appear before and present evidence and witnesses to the Hearing Panel.
e. Compliance by all participants in the Honor System Policy with the established policies regarding the confidentiality and retention of student records.
B. Hearing Procedures
1. Filing a request for investigation: Any member of the School of Dentistry
faculty, staff or student body may submit a written statement to the ADERC, with a copy to the Director of Graduate Programs, providing details of suspected academic or professional misconduct by a student enrolled in an advanced education program. The request for investigation must be signed and dated by the person making the allegation.
2. Notification of an investigation: Within 5 business days of the ADERC’s receipt of a request for investigation, the Review Committee must notify the accused student or students, in writing, that a request for investigation has been received.
The notice of investigation must include the specific allegations of misconduct and the names of the investigators.
3. Investigators: The Chair will appoint two members of the ADERC to serve as the Investigators. The Investigators cannot serve on the Hearing Panel reviewing the matter that they have investigated.
4. Review of the Investigator’s report: The Investigators will present to the ADERC all information gathered during their investigation. The ADERC will then determine if a charge should be referred to a hearing or not. If the ADERC determines that no hearing is necessary, it must notify the respondent and the person requesting the misconduct investigation, in writing, that the matter has been resolved with no action. If a hearing is necessary, the ADERC must notify the respondent, in writing, that a charge has been referred to a hearing panel for action. The hearing notice must include:
c. a copy of the rights of the respondent under the Honor System process.
5. Timing of the Hearing: A review hearing should be held within 10 business
days after the respondent has been notified of the charge. In such cases
where this is not possible, the review hearing will take place as soon as
practical. A hearing may proceed in the absence of the respondent when the
respondent declines to participate or fails to cooperate in the scheduling of a
6. Hearing Process:
a. No later than five business days before the hearing, the respondent and
the investigators must submit to the ADERC, in writing, all documents that they would like the Hearing Panel to consider, a list of all witnesses that they would like to submit testimony before the Hearing Panel, and the name of an advisor and whether that advisor is an attorney, who may accompany the respondent. The investigator will include a copy of the written statement that led to the investigation and the Investigator’s report to the ADERC.
b. The respondent will have an opportunity to appear before a Hearing Panel to present his/her case. The respondent may review all documents considered by the Hearing Panel and may question witnesses who appear before the Hearing Panel. The respondent may also present his/her own evidence and witnesses.
c. The Hearing Panel may limit any testimony based on redundancy or lack of relevance.
d. The respondent may be accompanied at the hearing by a personal advisor, who may be an attorney. The advisor may not participate directly in the proceedings, but may only advise the respondent.
e. The hearing will be closed to the public and will be recorded. A party to the proceeding may request a copy of the recording. The Hearing Panel will deliberate in private.
f. All recordings of the proceedings will be controlled by the School of Dentistry. No court reporters, stenographers, videographers or similar professionals are permitted without the prior consent of the Dental School.
g. The Hearing Panel will prepare a written report containing factual findings and recommended sanctions. The vote of the majority of the members of the Hearing Panel will determine whether the respondent is found responsible or not responsible for the alleged violation and will determine the panel’s recommended sanctions. The chair of the Hearing Panel is permitted to vote. A finding that the respondent is responsible for an alleged violation will be in the sound discretion of the Hearing Panel based on the totality of evidence presented.
h. Within 10 business days after the hearing, the Hearing Panel will submit its written report to the ADERC for action. The ADERC must issue its determination to the respondent no later than 5 business days after receiving the Hearing Panel report. The respondent, the Director of Graduate Programs, and the Executive Committee will receive a copy of the report.
7. Executive Committee: The Executive Committee, or its designated subcommittee, is responsible for reviewing appeals to ADERC Determinations.
C. Appeal Procedures
1. The respondent may appeal the ADERC Determination. Within 10 business days after receiving the Determination, the respondent may submit an appeal to the Executive Committee. The following are the only grounds for an appeal:
a. Violations of established policies and procedures resulting in an
b. The sanctions are excessive in relation to the violation;
c. There is new evidence that was not reasonably available at the time of the hearing that should be considered.
The Executive Committee may decline to consider any appeal that does not fall within one these categories of error.
2. The respondent may file an appeal of the ADERC’s Determinations to the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee may schedule a hearing on an appeal within 10 working days after receiving the appeal or may rule on the appeal from a review of the ADERC record.
a. The Executive Committee may request that the charging party, the Investigators, the Chair of the Hearing Panel or others be present at the appeal hearing to present information relevant to the appeal.
b. The student may be accompanied at the appeal hearing by a personal advisor, who may be an attorney. The advisor may not participate directly in the proceedings, but may only advise the student.
c. The appeal hearing will be closed to the public and will be recorded. The
Executive Committee will deliberate in private.
d. The Executive Committee will issue its written determination of the
appeal to the respondent, the Chair of the ADERC and the Director of Graduate Programs, within 10 business days. The decision of the Executive Committee is final.
e. When an appeal is filed, the Dean will determine if the sanctions imposed
by the ADERC’s Determination will stay in effect during the appeal process. The decision of the Dean is final.
3. The appeals process is not designed to provide for another hearing. The
appeals process is designed to provide a review of possible errors as outlined
in Section C1. If the appeal does not fall within one of those categories of
errors, the Executive Committee may decline to review the appeal and the
Determination of the ADERC will be final.
D. Confidentiality and File Retention Policy
Records created during the Honor System Process are governed by the same
confidentiality and file retention policies applicable to other student records.
E. Waiver of Deadlines
All deadlines may be waived, at the discretion of either the Chair of the ADERC, the Executive Committee, or the Dean as provided in this policy. Requests for extensions or waiver of deadlines should be submitted to the appropriate person, depending on the stage in the process. The Chair of the ADERC, the Executive Committee, or the Dean may on their own initiative alter deadlines when it is in the best interest of all parties to do so.
This policy is effective September 30, 2008
Approved and adopted by the governing faculty on September 30, 2008