��ˮ����Ƶ

Student Academic Misconduct means plagiarism, cheating or other academic misconduct as defined in the ��ˮ����Ƶ calendar or in any ��ˮ����Ƶ policy that defines student academic misconduct. [See the definition section (Section 3.1) of the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy]

For information about appeal terminology and for FAQs, please see��here.�� For information on the appeal process and timelines, please see��here.

��

First Level of Appeal

If you want to appeal a faculty decision that you are responsible for Student Academic Misconduct, please review the��Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy and the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee Procedure.�� You may submit an appeal to the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee if you:

• have relevant new information that could not have been presented to your faculty, and that may have affected the faculty’s decision if it had been presented,
• are alleging that the faculty’s decision was made in a procedurally unfair way [refer to the definition of “procedural fairness” in the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy],
• are alleging there was a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of a person who made the faculty decision,
• are alleging the faculty did not have the authority to make the decision or to impose sanctions,
• are alleging that the decision, or the severity of the sanction, or both, is unreasonable, or
• are alleging any other ground of appeal [See Section 5.6 of the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy].

You are responsible to satisfy the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee that your evidence or position is more likely than not to have occurred or to��be accurate.�� This is referred to as the balance of probabilities standard of proof [See Section 4.11 of the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee Procedure]. Note that feeling dissatisfied with a decision is not a ground of appeal.

��

Second Level of Appeal

If you want to appeal a ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee decision that has confirmed that you are responsible for Student Academic Misconduct, please review the��Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy and the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Tribunal Procedure.�� You may submit an appeal to the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Tribunal if you:

• have relevant new information that could not have been presented to the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee and that may have affected the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee’s decision if it had been presented,
• are alleging that the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee’s decision was made in a procedurally unfair way [refer to the definition of “procedural fairness” in the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy],
• are alleging there was a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of a person who made the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee decision,
• are alleging the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Committee did not have the authority to make the decision or to impose sanctions,
• are alleging that the decision, or the severity of the sanction, or both, is unreasonable, or
• are alleging any other ground of appeal [See Section 5.6 of the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy].

You are responsible to satisfy the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Tribunal that your evidence or position is more likely than not to have occurred or to��be accurate.�� This is referred to as the balance of probabilities standard of proof [See Section 4.11 of the ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Tribunal Procedure]. Note that feeling dissatisfied with a decision is not a ground of appeal.

The ��ˮ����Ƶ Appeals Tribunal is the final level of appeal at the ��ˮ����Ƶ for appeals involving Student Academic Misconduct.