Honor Code

CHAPTER ONE: ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

1.1 — Definitions:

  1. Accused Student: A student suspected of an Honor Code Violation. The term includes a student who has made a Conscientious Admission but who has not reached agreement with the Honor Code Administrator.
  2. Accuser: A member of the law school community who reports the alleged Honor Code Violation.
  3. Community of Trust: Students of Dickinson Law expect that all members of the student body will conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the highest standard of honesty and integrity expected of those who enjoy the privilege of practicing law. This level of integrity accompanies the student in all dealings within the law school community.
  4. Confidentiality: Information regarding an investigation of an alleged Honor Code Violation or Honor Proceeding shall not be made public, except as detailed in Chapter 8.
  5. Conscientious Admission: A student’s oral or written admission, presented to the Honor Code Administrator, of a possible Honor Code violation committed by that student.
  6. Hearing Board: A panel, composed of three students and two faculty members drawn from the Honor Committee, convened to determine the validity of one or more alleged Honor Code Violations brought against an Accused Student and, when appropriate, to impose sanctions.
  7. Honor Committee: The standing committee composed of six students and five faculty members, responsible for upholding and enforcing the Honor Code.
  8. Honor Committee Chairperson: A student elected by a majority vote of the Student Bar Association to assist with the administration of the Honor Code.
  9. Honor Proceeding: The formal adjudication of an alleged Honor Code Violation.
  10. Law School Community: Includes all students, faculty, administrators and staff of Dickinson Law.
  11. Party: Either the Honor Code Administrator, the Presenter, or the Accused Student in an Honor Proceeding.
  12. Plagiarism: Should be given its usual dictionary meanings: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own; to use (a created production) without crediting the source or to commit literary theft, presenting as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source. Plagiarism includes the copying or paraphrasing without acknowledgment of any material written or expressed by another person, entity, generative artificial intelligence or service, and the submission of work written in whole or in substantial part by someone or something other than the student who submits the work as the student’s own work. Plagiarism also includes the re-submission of work originally completed for another course and the giving or receiving of excessive assistance or making excessive use of the work of someone or something else in preparing an assignment, without faculty approval.
  13. Excessive Assistance. What constitutes “excessive assistance” or “making excessive use of the work of someone else” is a matter for the course professor or dissertation supervisor to decide and communicate in a timely manner to the students. Unless the professor gives different instructions, “excessive assistance” should be construed with reference to the academic purpose of the assignment — to develop the student’s research and writing skills and to evaluate the student’s skills. A student may receive some counsel and suggestions from other people, e.g., another student, the course professor, so long as the paper is, in both pedagogical and literary senses, the work of the student. Excessive assistance includes the use of generative artificial intelligence except where permitted. Notwithstanding the definition of excessive assistance, a professor may permit the use of generative artificial intelligence or service in their course or dissertation supervision. The professor’s permission to use generative artificial intelligence or service must be made explicitly by the professor in writing. The professor’s permission of the use of generative artificial intelligence or service in their course or dissertation supervision should be construed narrowly to cover only the specific assignments; designated by the professor unless the professor explicitly in writing provides full, blanket, or open permission regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence or service.
  14. President of the Hearing Board: A faculty member appointed by the Honor Code Administrator from among the two faculty members chosen to serve on the Hearing Board. The President presides over the hearing and prepares the Hearing Report.

1.2 — Purpose and Scope:

  1. The goal of the Honor Code is to safeguard and promote the ideals of honor and integrity by prohibiting lying, cheating, stealing, and other dishonorable conduct of an academic nature.
  2. The Honor Code does not relieve law students of the obligation to comply with other Penn State policies generally applicable to Dickinson Law student conduct, nor does it relieve law students of the obligation to comply with federal, state, and local regulations and with the jurisdiction of law enforcement authorities.*
  3. Misconduct that may be subject to sanctions under the Honor Code, along with other misconduct, remains subject to the authority of the Dean and Faculty to maintain the educational process, the public reputation and institutional integrity of the law school, and the safety of the Law School Community. Such authority includes, without limitation, (1) the exclusion of a student from law school premises, (2) the imposition of grading sanctions, (3) the reporting of misconduct to law enforcement, bar admission authorities, and others, (4) the imposition of sanctions for misconduct in the law school admissions process, and (5) the imposition of sanctions upon former students who are no longer enrolled at the law school. In addition, the Honor Code does not preclude other remedies by authorities outside the law school, such as civil or criminal measures or bar-related sanctions, or by other units of The Pennsylvania State University or other educational institutions in which students subject to the Honor Code may be enrolled.
  4. The procedures of this Code apply to all allegations of misconduct described herein.
  5. An Honor Proceeding may be initiated until the law student’s enrollment ends.

 

*The Honor Code procedures described herein shall be used to adjudicate alleged substantive violations of generally applicable Penn State academic rules.

 

Table of Contents

Revision, Effective April 23, 2024