Senators heard about a proposed Cybersecurity Program, thanked Tom Poetter for his service as chair-elect of the 2022-2023 Senate Executive Committee, and welcomed Tracy Haynes as the chair of the 2023-2024 Senate Executive Committee.

Minutes of the University Senate meeting for April 17, 2023, were approved.

The following items were received on the Consent Calendar:

1. Curriculum 

With the approval of the April 17, 2023 and abbreviated minutes from April 24, 2023, the following resolutions were approved:

SR 23-19 Changes to Tenure Track and Promotion and Tenure Policy 

April 17, 2023

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate approves changes to the Tenure Track and Promotion and Tenure Policy as outlined below:

Proposed changes (Clean Version)

Purpose of Tenure and Promotion

The best faculty members combine intense intellectual curiosity with a talent for high-quality teaching, active prosecution of research, scholarly and/or creative work, and a demonstrable commitment to productive professional service. The University seeks to reward through tenure and promotion those persons who exhibit the highest standards of teaching, research, and service.

Tenure is a means of assuring academic freedom: that is, the freedom to teach, to inquire, to create, to debate, to question, and to dissent (see policy “Principles of Academic Freedom”). Such activity is the essence of the search for truth and knowledge, and is primary to the University. This atmosphere is necessary as the University seeks to attract, maintain, and nurture a diverse and exceptional faculty. Promotion is a means of recognizing meritorious performance and professional accomplishment.

Each candidate for tenure and promotion is judged individually on the criteria, not relative to other candidates. Fulltime members of the faculty serving with a rank of Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, or Senior Instructor either are tenured or are serving a prescribed probationary period. The probationary period is intended to give the individual an opportunity for professional growth and to give the University an opportunity to assess the individual’s qualifications for a continuing appointment. If a candidate demonstrates the high quality of professional performance expected by Miami, tenure will be conferred, regardless of how many other candidates may be considered in a given year. However, it is not anticipated that all individuals will be able to demonstrate the high quality of professional performance required to achieve tenure.

Eligibility for Tenure

Tenure at Miami University is conferred by the Board of Trustees upon the positive recommendation of the President. Eligibility for tenure requires that a person:

1. Serve as a fulltime member of the faculty;
2. Be engaged at least fifty percent (50%) of his or her appointment in regular teaching assignments and research, except when in the judgment of the department, the department chair, the program director (when appropriate), the divisional dean, and the Provost, a faculty member’s responsibilities warrant the protection of tenure; and
3. Have an appointment with a tenure-eligible rank.

Eligibility for Promotion

Eligibility for promotion, unlike tenure, does not require that the person be engaged at least 50% of his or her appointment in regular teaching assignments or research.

A person with a fulltime tenure-eligible appointment who has not attained the rank of Associate Professor will be promoted to that rank upon the award of tenure. However, a person with a fulltime tenure-eligible appointment may apply for promotion to Associate Professor without making a simultaneous application for tenure. 

Anyone seeking promotion to Professor must meet the criteria as outlined by their departments, divisions, and the university. While there is no minimum time in rank required for Associate Professors, faculty members will typically need to spend enough time in rank to achieve a cumulative record of teaching, research/creative activity, and professional service as defined in Miami’s policy regarding requirements for Professor. All faculty members planning to apply for promotion to Professor are strongly encouraged to engage in a formative evaluation with their promotion committee prior to seeking promotion. 

If a candidate seeking promotion to Professor is denied, eligibility for promotion and re-submission will re-open after one academic year following receiving the denial.

SR 23-20 TCPL Policy Changes

April 17, 2023

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate approves changes to the TCPL Policy Changes as outlined below:

Revised Policy 

TCPL faculty includes lecturers and clinical lecturers with the ranks of assistant, associate and senior lecturer as well as teaching and clinical faculty with the ranks of assistant, associate and full professor. Collectively, these positions are referred to as TCPL faculty.

Limitation on Number of Lecturers and Teaching Faculty 

TCPLs may not exceed the following percentages of continuing faculty (full-time TCPL and Tenure/Tenure Track) within each division:

• CAS:  23.0%

• CCA:  29.0%

• EHS:  26.0%

• CEC:  20.0%

• FSB: 29.0%

• CLAAS: 29.0%

Divisions must work within the structure of governance processes to modify this limitation and to address faculty composition more broadly.  Divisions must adhere to their faculty composition policy and the dean of the college/school must annually communicate with faculty on current and historical trends in faculty mix. This communication should provide context including relevant budgetary resources and curricular needs. The provost will annually update the University Senate on changes to divisional policies and faculty mix. Any changes that incur a raising of the new caps in this resolution must be approved by Senate.

Appointment to a TCPL position requires a competitive search.

Professional Development Plan and Evaluation

To facilitate the professional development and position the TCPL faculty member for promotion to the associate level, the TCPL faculty member will develop, in concert with their department chair, a philosophy of teaching and service , and emanating from that philosophy an agenda or plan of activities. This plan should be tailored to the specific professional expertise of the faculty member and the needs of the curriculum, program/department, division, and students.  Plans must be approved by the dean and provided to Departmental and Divisional Promotion and Tenure committees as annual reports and dossiers are evaluated.

Plans must be flexible and open to revision, assuming faculty member, departmental, and divisional agreement on significant changes (indicated by dean approval). Department chairs or program directors will revisit the TCPL faculty member’s plan and goals as part of the annual review process.  

Beginning in their second year, TCPLs must submit to the chair or program director  a Cumulative Dossier that includes information on performance of teaching responsibilities,academic advising (if assigned) and service as defined by  the Professional Development Plan.

Beginning in their second year, departmental promotion committees and chairs must provide a cumulative annual assessment of the dossier, TCPL faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses, and specific recommendations for improvement. The second and third year assessments must be submitted to the dean for review.

Positions

Lecturers/Clinical Lecturers (Assistant, Associate or Senior Lecturer/Clinical Lecturer)

Qualifications

A Lecturer must:

1. hold a master’s (non-terminal) degree from an accredited college or university or the equivalent thereof; and

2. demonstrate effectiveness as a teacher or have documented extraordinary experience, talent, or abilities, which may include a professional license or professional certificate/degree, deemed critical to fulfilling the mission of the department or program; and

3. demonstrate effectiveness as an academic advisor (as assigned).

Assignment

1. A Lecturer’s primary assignment is to perform instructional duties with the expectation they will be assigned to teach Miami Plan and other undergraduate courses as assigned by the department chair/program director.

2. Lecturers may be assigned academic advising and/or university service responsibilities.

3. In extraordinary circumstances, with the written approval of the chair/program director, dean, and Provost, and President, a Lecturer may be assigned research or scholarship as part of workload expectations.

4. Lecturers, by virtue of the prospect that they may be associated with departments/programs for extended periods of time, should be as fully enfranchised as possible in the day-to-day life of the departments/programs in which they are appointed. Departmental Promotion and Tenure Committees are required to have TCPL representation on the Committee when considering the promotion of Lecturers. Any chair or faculty member serving on a promotion committee providing a recommendation of a TCPL candidate for promotion needs to be at the promotional rank or higher. If a TCPL of appropriate rank is not available within the department, a process for selecting additional faculty shall be established by the department or academic division.

Teaching Faculty (Assistant, Associate, Full Teaching Professor/Clinical Professor)

Qualifications

A Teaching Faculty member must:

1. hold a Ph.D. or other terminal degree from an accredited college or university or the equivalent thereof; and

2. demonstrate effectiveness as a teacher, or have appropriate educational background, and significant professional experience which may include a professional license or professional certificate/degree; and

3. demonstrate effectiveness as an academic advisor (if assigned).

Assignment

1. A Teaching/Clinical faculty member’s primary assignment is to perform instructional duties with the expectation they will be assigned to teach Miami Plan and other undergraduate courses as assigned by the department chair/program director.

2. Teaching/Clinical faculty member may be assigned academic advising and/or University service responsibilities

3. Teaching/Clinical faculty may teach graduate courses and supervise graduate students as approved by the chair, academic dean, Dean of the Graduate School and Provost.

4. In extraordinary circumstances, with the written approval of the chair/program director, dean, and Provost a teaching/clinical faculty member may be assigned research or scholarship as part of workload expectations.

5. Teaching/Clinical faculty, by virtue of the prospect that they may be associated with departments/programs for extended periods of time, should be as fully enfranchised as possible in the day-to-day life of the departments/programs in which they are appointed. The Departmental Promotion and Tenure Committees  are required to have TCPL representation on the Committee when considering the promotion of TCPL faculty. 

6. Any chair or faculty member serving on a promotion committee providing a recommendation of a TCPL candidate for promotion needs to be at the promotional rank or higher. If a TCPL of appropriate rank is not available within the department, a process for selecting additional faculty shall be established by the department or academic division.

7. A candidate is notified of the recommendations made at each level as soon as possible.

Appointments at the Rank of Assistant

Appointments to TCPL faculty positions at the rank of assistant are made on an academic year basis. If not renewed, the TCPL faculty member will be given notice of non-reappointment by February 15.  An assistant TCPL faculty member is eligible to receive, but not entitled to expect, annual renewal of the appointment. No person shall serve more than five (5) academic years as an assistant TCPL. 

Following a comprehensive evaluation and review in the fourth year, a TCPL faculty member may be promoted to the Associate level. If not promoted, the TCPL faculty member will be given one full academic year’s notice of non-reappointment before July 1. A faculty member who failed to achieve promotion may reapply for promotion during their terminal 5th year. In the event the faculty member does not achieve promotion during their terminal 5th year, their employment will cease at the end of their terminal year.

Promotion to the Rank of Associate

1. Faculty who wish to be considered for promotion to the associate rank are responsible for assembling and submitting a dossier of accomplishments and relevant supporting materials to their department or program . The dossier should be in accordance with the Dossier Guidelines for Teaching Professors, Clinical Professors, Lecturers and Clinical Lecturers and demonstrate the following criteria:

   1. High quality teaching;

   2. Academic advising (as assigned);

   3.  Service ;

   4. Professional collegiality

2. The candidate’s dossier is evaluated by the department or program (when appropriate), the chair and/or program director (when appropriate) and the academic dean. If there is a positive recommendation for promotion from the department or program (when appropriate), the chair and/or program director (when appropriate) or the academic dean, the dossier will advance to the Provost for consideration and decision.

Appointments at the rank of Associate are renewable in three year increments. Faculty members are entitled to one full academic year’s notice of non-reappointment by July 1.

Promotion to Rank of Senior Lecturer/Clinical Lecturer, Teaching Professor/Clinical Professor

Persons who have held the rank of associate for a minimum of three years may apply for promotion to the rank of full Teaching Professor/Clinical Professor or Senior Lecturer/Clinical Lecturer.

1. Faculty who wish to be considered for promotion to full are responsible for assembling and submitting a dossier of accomplishments and relevant supporting materials to their department or program (when appropriate). The dossier should be in accordance with the Dossier Guidelines for all Teaching Professors, Clinical Professors, Lecturers and Clinical Lecturers and must demonstrate the following criteria:

1. Cumulative record of high quality teaching;

2. Cumulative record of high quality academic advising (as assigned);

3. Continued Service;

4. Distinction or excellence in some area of pedagogy or service.

• The candidate’s dossier is evaluated by the department or program (when appropriate), the chair and/or program director (when appropriate) and the academic dean. If there is a positive recommendation for promotion from the department or program (when appropriate), the chair and/or program director (when appropriate) or the academic dean, the dossier will advance to the Provost for consideration and decision.

Appointments to the rank of Senior Lecturer/Clinical Lecturer and Teaching/Clinical Professor are renewable in five year increments. Faculty members are entitled to one full academic year’s notice of non-reappointment by July 1.

Extension of Time for Application to Rank of Associate

A  TCPL faculty member who:

1. has or shares primary responsibility for the care of an infant or a newly-adopted child under age five, and who must commit substantial portions of time to this care;

2. faces similar responsibilities associated with a serious health condition of another person; or

3. has a serious health condition may request an extension of one year before application for promotion to associate is required.

This extension may be granted whether or not sick leave, personal leave, or family and medical leave has been taken. Written requests for such extensions must be made within one year of the birth, adoption, or serious health condition and must be made before the beginning of the academic year in which the application for promotion to associate is required (i.e. the 4th year).

There may be other circumstances that require substantial amounts of time or produce excessive stress that would justify granting an extension of one year. In such cases, the TCPL faculty member may apply in writing to the Provost, who in consultation with the department chair, the program director (when appropriate), the Dean of the Regional Campuses (when appropriate), and the divisional dean, will determine whether such an extension should be granted. Any such request for an extension must be made within one year of the occurrence of the circumstance and must be made before the beginning of the academic year in which the application for promotion to associate is required (i.e. the 4th year).

There is a limit of one extension.

Non-Renewal of TCPL Faculty

TCPL faculty at the rank of Associate or higher may be non-renewed for failure to perform duties and associated responsibilities in a satisfactory manner. The faculty member will first be given written notice of the deficiencies in performance and a full academic year (2 full semesters) in which to demonstrate that the problem or deficiency has been overcome. In the event the faculty member does not overcome the deficiencies, the faculty member is entitled to a full-year’s notice of non-reappointment. The University may issue the notice of deficiencies and a contingent notice of non-reappointment concurrently (e.g., Give notice to the faculty member by July 1 that in the event these deficiencies are not overcome, the TCPL faculty member’s appointment will not be renewed beyond the upcoming academic year.)

Termination of TCPL Faculty

TCPL Faculty appointments may be terminated for cause at any time by the Provost. Chairs/program directors and deans may recommend termination by providing written notice specifying the reasons for the proposed termination, along with supporting documentation, to both the faculty member and the Provost.

The faculty member will receive an initial written notice specifying the reasons for the proposed termination from the Provost along with supporting documentation. The notice will be accompanied by an opportunity for the faculty member to be heard either in a meeting with the Provost or Provost’s designee or to respond in writing, at the faculty member’s election. Faculty members are entitled to be accompanied by an advisor of their choice (including legal counsel) to the meeting with the Provost.

If, following the meeting or receipt of the faculty member’s written response, the Provost determines that termination is not appropriate, the Provost may impose one or more disciplinary sanctions and/or specify the terms and conditions under which the faculty member may remain employed. If the Provost determines that termination is appropriate, the Provost shall provide a written notice stating the reasons for termination. The decision of the Provost is final.

Position Elimination

Upon the written recommendation of the chair/program director and/or with the written approval of the dean and Provost, TCPL faculty positions may be eliminated due to budget constraints (to include lack of funds and/or lack of work) or reorganization. TCPL faculty at the rank of associate or above are entitled to at least one full academic year’s advance written notice of position elimination.

If practicable, after considering the comprehensive instructional needs of the department, the chair should first seek to eliminate per credit hour, part-time and temporary faculty before eliminating Lecturers and Teaching Faculty.

If other employment has not been secured by the end of the notice period, the University will provide severance pay to a faculty member with at least five (5) academic years of continuous full-time Miami service. The severance pay program is intended to provide financial assistance during a period of employment transition. Eligible faculty members will receive one week of severance pay for each completed academic year of continuous Miami service beyond five (5) academic years. Should the eligible faculty member secure other employment prior to or within the severance pay period (not inclusive of summer or winter term), he or she shall receive one-fourth (1/4) of the unused severance pay in a lump sum.

Faculty who participate in a University Faculty Retirement Incentive Program are not eligible for severance pay. Faculty receiving severance pay are required to notify their chair and Academic Personnel Services as soon as other employment is obtained.

Grandfather Clause-

All Assistant TCPL faculty members who began teaching at Miami in their current position prior to July 1, 2019 could elect to opt out of this policy. Upon such written election, the Assistant TCPL was eligible to receive, but not entitled to expect, additional one-year appointments without limitation on the number of years of employment at the Assistant rank but will not be eligible for promotion. Eligible TCPLs had until December 20, 2019 to opt out and such decision is irrevocable.

Assistant TCPLs who began teaching at Miami in their current position  prior to July 1, 2019 who do not opt out of this policy have four academic years before they are required to apply for promotion to the rank of Associate ( i.e. until the 2022-2023 academic year.) With the approval of the department chair, program director (as appropriate), dean and Provost, a TCPL faculty member may credit up to three years of prior Miami service at the Assistant rank toward the four year promotion period.

SR 23-21 TCPL Guideline Changes

April 17, 2023

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate approves changes to the TCPL Guidelines as outlined below:

Introduction

The Teaching, Clinical Professors and Lecturers (TCPLs) Policy states that appointments to Teaching Professor, Clinical Professor, Lecturers and Clinical Lecturer (TCPL) faculty positions at the rank of assistant are made on an academic year basis. If not renewed, the TCPL faculty member will be given notice of non-reappointment by February 15. An assistant TCPL faculty member is eligible to receive, but not entitled to expect, annual renewal of the appointment. No person shall serve more than five (5) academic years as an assistant TCPL. Following an application for promotion and a comprehensive evaluation and review in the fourth year, a TCPL faculty member may be promoted to the associate level. If not promoted, the TCPL faculty member will be given one full year's notice of non-reappointment before July 1. A faculty member who fails to achieve promotion may reapply for promotion during their terminal 5th year. In the event the faculty member does not apply for, nor achieve promotion during their terminal 5th year, their employment will cease at the end of their terminal year.

The Teaching, Clinical Professors and Lecturers (TCPLs) Policy  states that faculty being considered for promotion to the associate rank are responsible for assembling and submitting a dossier, not to exceed 20 pages, of accomplishments and relevant supporting materials to their department or program (when appropriate). The dossier should be in accordance with these dossier guidelines for and demonstrate the following criteria:

1. High quality teaching;

2. Academic advising (if assigned);

3. Service;

4. Professional collegiality

The dossier is to be evaluated by the department or program , the chair and/or program director , and the academic dean. If there is a positive recommendation for promotion from the department or program , the chair and/or program director or the academic dean, the dossier will advance to the Provost for consideration and decision. Appointments at the rank of associate are renewable in three (3) year increments. Faculty members are entitled to one (1) full year academic year's notice of non-reappointment by July 1.

The The Teaching, Clinical Professors and Lecturers (TCPLs) Policy  states that faculty holding the rank of associate may apply for promotion to the rank of full Teaching Professor/Clinical Professor or senior Lecturer/Clinical Lecturer, as applicable after three (3) years from their first promotion. The dossier should be in accordance with these dossier guidelines for TCPL and demonstrate the following criteria:

1. Cumulative record of high quality teaching;

2. Cumulative record of high quality academic advising (if assigned);

3. Continued service;

4. Distinction or excellence in some area of pedagogy or service. 

The dossier is to be evaluated by the department, or program the chair and/or program director, and the academic dean. If there is a positive recommendation promotion from the department or program , the chair and/or program director or the academic dean, the dossier will advance to the Provost for consideration and approval. Appointments at the rank of full or senior are renewable in five (5) year increments. Faculty members are entitled to one (1) full year academic year's notice of non-reappointment by July 1. 

This document provides guidelines for assisting candidates in making the case for promotion and aiding those who must evaluate the candidates and make promotion recommendations and decisions. The guidelines are aids to, rather than substitutes for, the professional judgment of the candidate’s colleagues.

The dossier & evaluation guidelines for Teaching Professors, Clinical Professors, Lecturers, and Clinical Lecturers (TCPL) faculty are reviewed and approved each year by University Senate.

Preparatory Steps

To facilitate the professional development and position the TCPL faculty member for promotion to the associate level, the TCPL faculty member will develop, in concert with their department chair, a philosophy of teaching and service , and emanating from that philosophy an agenda or plan of activities. This plan should be tailored to the specific professional expertise of the faculty member and the needs of the curriculum, program/department, division, and students.   Plans must be approved by the dean and provided to Departmental and Divisional Promotion and Tenure committees as annual reports and dossiers are evaluated. Plans must be approved by the dean.

Plans will be flexible and open to revision, assuming faculty member, departmental, and divisional agreement. Department chairs or program directors will  revisit the faculty member’s plan and goals as part of the annual review process.

The PDP plan should articulate:

• A statement of teaching and service philosophy and its potential value

• The “academic fit” with the faculty member’s expertise (as a teacher and advisor and as participant in the institution)

• Realistic objectives aligned with the criteria for the next level of promotion.

The construction of a successful teaching/service agenda may be a multi-year effort and typically involves:

• Assessment of the challenges and needs within the served department, division, or University;

• Alignment of those needs with the faculty member’s skills, knowledge, and promotion criteria;

• Building of relationships and opportunities for teaching, service and collaboration.

Engage in Ongoing Documentation

TCPL faculty members should consider documentation as an ongoing process, rather than a summary of outcomes, making it a continuous process with regular feedback from colleagues. Throughout their career at Miami, they should focus on documenting their individual contributions while providing context to the teaching and service activity, balancing attention between process and impact, and clarifying the intellectual questions that guided their teaching and service responsibilities.

Assistant to Associate

Upon hire, each candidate should work with their chair to develop a long-term Professional Development Plan, to be approved by the Dean, that outlines expectations and goals for teaching and service to be achieved prior to promotion. Each spring semester, the candidate meets with their chair of record to evaluate progress in relation to that established  Professional Development Plan and make revisions when needed or applicable. In the spring of the second and third years, the candidate’s cumulative dossier is also submitted to the dean for formative review. Candidates are up for appointment annually with a non-reappointment notice by February 15 if not continuing.

Note: If the deadline date falls on a Saturday or Sunday, the deadline date will occur on the following Monday.

A candidate receiving a negative promotion letter in the fourth year may reapply for promotion during the fifth year, following the same timeline as above.

A candidate receiving a negative promotion letter in the fifth year may not reapply for promotion again and the contract is not renewed.

Associate to Full/Senior

Promotion to full or senior rank requires a minimum of three years in rank at the associate level.

Note: If the deadline date falls on a Saturday or Sunday, the deadline date will occur on the following Monday.

SR 23-22 CEC, TCPL Cap Change

April 17, 2023

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate approves changes to the CEC (TCPLs) Cap Change Policy as outlined below:

Limitation on Number of Lecturers and Teaching Faculty

TCPLs may not exceed the following percentages of continuing faculty (full-time TCPL and Tenure/Tenure Track) within each division:

• CAS:  23.0%
• CCA:  29.0%
• EHS:  26.0%
• CEC:  20.0 29%
• FSB: 29.0%
• CLAAS: 23.0%

SR 23-23 Academic Integrity Policy Revisions Proposal

April 17, 2023

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate approves changes to the Academic Integrity Policy Revisions Proposal as outlined below:

Introduction

Miami University is a scholarly community whose members believe that excellence in education is grounded in qualities of character as well as of intellect. We respect the dignity of other persons, the rights and property of others, and the right of others to hold and express disparate beliefs. We believe in honesty, integrity, and the importance of moral conduct. We defend the freedom of inquiry that is the heart of learning and combine that freedom with the exercise and the acceptance of personal responsibility.

Miami demands the highest standards of conduct from its students, faculty, and staff. As a community of scholars, our fundamental purpose is the pursuit of knowledge. Integrity in academic study is based on sound disciplinary practices and expectations as well as a commitment to the values of honesty and integrity.

As stated in the Statement of Essential Teaching Practices a responsibility of the faculty is to “[treat] students with courtesy and respect at all times. Courtesy and respect do not prohibit strong criticism directed at the student’s academic errors and scholarly responsibilities.”  Faculty also have the responsibility for “informing students of Miami’s Academic Integrity Policy and adhering to its principles.” 

All Miami students are expected to be of the highest character and to behave honestly in their learning and in their behavior outside the classroom. Academic and other forms of dishonesty violate the spirit of the values espoused by Miami University and undermine the value of a Miami education for everyone, especially for the person who is dishonest. Therefore, students are encouraged to hold one another accountable and report suspected academic dishonesty to their instructors. Additionally, when students err in their academic conduct, they are expected to accept responsibility for and learn from their actions. As such, the process outlined in this policy is intended to be educational in nature and provide learning opportunities for students in maintaining personal and academic integrity.

Students are responsible for knowing and understanding these standards; misunderstanding of the appropriate academic conduct will not be accepted as an excuse for academic dishonesty. If students are in doubt about appropriate academic conduct in a particular situation, they should consult with the instructor of the course, the department chair/program director, the academic dean in the appropriate division, or the academic integrity staff in order to maintain the highest standards of academic integrity.

Criteria

Academic Dishonesty

Academic dishonesty is defined as engaging or attempting to engage in any activity that compromises the academic integrity of the institution or subverts the educational process, including as a means to complete or assist in the completion of an academic assignment.

An academic assignment is defined as the submission or presentation of any student work for evaluation, grade, or academic credit. This includes, but is not limited to, assignments in courses, proficiency waiver exams, and portfolios of research submitted to earn academic credit. This definition applies to work submitted face-to-face or through on-line or electronic means and work submitted for face-to-face, hybrid, and on-line courses affiliated with any of Miami University’s campuses and divisions.

Academic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to, the following acts.

Acts of academic dishonesty

1. Cheating: using or attempting to use or possessing any unauthorized aid, information, resources, or means in the completion of an academic assignment or providing such assistance to another student. Examples of cheating include, but are not limited to:
   • Possessing, referring to, or using in any way unauthorized textbooks, notes, study aids, websites, crib/cheat sheets, AI tools, or other information during an academic assignment, in paper, electronic, or other format;
   • Possessing, referring to, or using in any way unauthorized electronic devices or other materials during an academic assignment;
   • Looking at or using information from another student’s work during an academic assignment;
   • Receiving unauthorized answers, information, or materials from another individual in any academic assignment;
   • Utilizing or soliciting another person to complete any portion of an academic assignment in place of oneself or submitting the work of another person as one’s own;
   • Submitting the identical or substantially the same assignment or portions thereof to fulfill the requirements for two or more courses without approval of the instructors involved, including when repeating a course; or submitting the identical or substantially the same assignment or portions thereof from a previously completed course to fulfill the requirements for another course without the approval of the instructor of the latter course; or submitting the identical or substantially the same assignment or portions thereof to fulfill the requirements for two or more academic assignments within a course without the approval of the instructor;
   • Completing or participating in the completion of any portion of an academic assignment for another student to submit as their own work, including taking a quiz or an examination for another student;
   • Providing answers, information, or materials to another student in a manner not authorized by the instructor, including one’s own completed coursework.
   • Submitting material, in whole or part, generated through an artificial intelligence output-generating program, software, or application without permission from the instructor.
2. Plagiarism: presenting as one’s own the work, the ideas, the representations, or the words of another person/source without proper attribution. Examples of plagiarism include, but are not limited to: 
   • Submitting material that in part or whole is not entirely one’s own work without accurate and appropriate citations and attribution (including appropriate use of quotation marks); 
   • Using the words, ideas, or structure/sequence of another person or source without accurate and appropriate citation and attribution (including the appropriate use of quotation marks);
   • Submitting material using translation software/devices without permission from the instructor;
3. Fabrication: falsification, invention, or manipulation of any information, citation, data, or method. Examples of fabrication include, but are not limited to: 
   • Changing material on a graded academic assignment and requesting re-grading for that assignment;
   • Presenting false or invented information in any academic assignment;
   • Presenting false claims regarding how information or data was collected or generated;
   • Providing an inaccurate account of how information or data was collected or generated;
   • Inventing, inaccurately presenting, or manipulating data and/or its outcomes;
   • Inventing or inaccurately presenting citations or sources;
   • Changing or manipulating any grade or evaluation.
4. Unauthorized collaboration: working with another individual or individuals in any phase of or in the completion of an individual academic assignment without explicit permission from the instructor to complete the work in such a manner. 
5. Misrepresentation: falsely representing oneself or another’s or one’s own or another’s efforts or abilities in an academic assignment or one’s own or another’s attendance in or ability to attend a class session or exam/quiz. Examples of misrepresentation include, but are not limited to: 
   • Utilizing another person to complete any portion of an academic assignment in place of one’s self; 
   • Having another individual sign-in for a course or use electronic or other means to falsely record one’s presence or participation in a class;
   • Signing another student’s name or use electronic or other means to falsely record another’s presence or participation in a class or on an academic assignment;
   • Including another student’s name on a group project for credit when that student did not contribute to the work;
   • Including one’s own name on a group project when one did not contribute significantly to the work or thereby claiming credit for work completed by another group member;
   • Including unacknowledged sources or citations in an academic assignment;
   • Presenting a false excuse or claim for not attending or not being able to attend a class session or exam/quiz or doing the same for another student.
6. Gaining/giving an unfair advantage: completing an academic assignment through use of information or means not available to other students or providing such means to others, completing an academic assignment in an unauthorized location, or engaging in any activity that interferes with another student’s ability to complete their academic work. Examples of gaining/giving an unfair advantage include, but are not limited to:
   • Retaining, possessing, using, distributing or making public previous or current academic assignment materials when the instructor has indicated that those materials are not to be retained or shared or are to be returned to the instructor at the conclusion of the academic assignment or course (including originals, copies, reproductions, pictures and electronic or hard copy formats, or uploading to websites or providing for sale);
   • Taking pictures of, making copies of, or reproducing any academic assignment materials when the instructor has indicated that those materials are not to be copied or reproduced in any form;
   • Completing an academic assignment in a location not authorized by the instructor;
   • Obstructing or interfering with another student’s academic work or ability to gain access to information to be used in the completion of an academic assignment;
   • Taking or using another student’s work without his or her knowledge;
   • Removing academic assignment materials from an instructor’s office, classroom, computer, or any other University space (physical or virtual/electronic);
   • Violating the procedures described to maintain the integrity of an academic assignment, including any procedures associated with online proctoring;
   • Aiding another student in committing or attempting to commit academic dishonesty. 

Attempts to engage in any of the above actions will be treated the same as completed acts.

Students may be held responsible for committing academic dishonesty while enrolled even if they withdraw from the course.

Procedures for Reporting and Adjudicating Cases of Academic Dishonesty

Academic dishonesty weakens the quality of education and the academic culture for all members of the Miami University community. All members of the Miami University community are expected to uphold the principles of academic integrity and to deter and report academic dishonesty.

Procedures for reporting alleged academic dishonesty

If academic dishonesty is suspected to have occurred within a course, the course instructor who suspects that a student has engaged in academic dishonesty shall report the alleged incident to the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity in a timely manner. If academic dishonesty is suspected to have occurred on an academic assignment that is not within a course (e.g., proficiency waiver examination, portfolio or research submitted for credit), the person in charge of the academic assignment shall report the alleged incident to the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity.

Other persons, including students, who believe they have knowledge of academic dishonesty, should report the alleged dishonesty to the instructor of the course or person in charge of the academic assignment in which the dishonesty is alleged to have occurred.  If, after reasonable inquiry, the course instructor or person in charge of the academic assignment finds the report credible, they will report the alleged incident to the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity.

In reporting the alleged incident to the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity, the course instructor or person in charge of the academic assignment (herein referred to as the instructor) shall provide a report of the incident and include the relevant documentation. The instructor is encouraged to communicate to the student suspected of committing academic dishonesty that they have been reported to the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity.

Once a report has been submitted to the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity, the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity may meet with the instructor to discuss the criteria for academic dishonesty, hearing procedures, the nature of the information, or to request more information.

Notice and Procedural Review

Upon receipt of a referral, an academic integrity staff member will notify the student of the report and schedule a procedural review with the student.

The notice will include a copy of the instructor’s report with all supporting documentation; the date, time, and location of the procedural review, which will be held no sooner than five university class days from the date of the notice; and the Student Guide to Academic Dishonesty.

The purpose of the procedural review is to review the report from the instructor, provide an explanation of the academic integrity process, discuss the reported student’s options, and advise the student regarding the proposed sanctions for the alleged violation(s).

If the student fails to appear at the procedural review, the case will be referred to the appropriate department chair/program director for a hearing. Procedural reviews may be rescheduled at the discretion of the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity.

Selection of a Hearing/Outcome Option

The student must, no later than two university class days from the date of the procedural review, select one of two resolution options and return the signed Academic Integrity Resolution Option form to the integrity staff member handing their case.

The options are:

1. Accept responsibility for committing academic dishonesty as alleged and the proposed sanction(s)* or
2. Request a hearing with the department chair/program director of the department/program in which the alleged violation arose.

If the student accepts responsibility, the academic integrity staff will notify the instructor and appropriate department chair/program director of the student’s decision. The academic integrity staff will impose the sanction(s) accepted by the student. If the student accepts responsibility, the finding is final, and the student may not appeal. If the reported student requests a hearing, the academic integrity staff will notify the student and the appropriate department chair/program director of the student’s decision. The department chair/program director has the right to require a single hearing for cases involving multiple students.

*If the case is not a first offense, see process below for petitioning to waive a period of suspension or hold a dismissal in abeyance.

Hearing Notice

If the student elects to have a hearing or fails to notify the academic integrity staff of the option selected within two university class days from the date of the procedural review, a hearing will be scheduled, and the student will be notified, of the date, time, and location of the hearing. The hearing will be scheduled no sooner than five university class days from the date of notification.

Hearing Procedures

The hearing will be conducted by the department chair/program director (herein referred to as the hearing officer). A student may request that a designee conduct the hearing. (Refer to Section 1.5.I)

Hearings will be held with all parties physically present. In the event not all parties are able to be physically present, hearings may be held via video, phone, teleconferencing or other means. Students may bring an advisor of their choice and up to two persons for support to the hearing. However, the advisor or support persons may not speak on behalf of the student. If an advisor or support person is determined to be unreasonably interfering with the hearing, they may be asked to leave.

At the hearing, the instructor will present the information supporting the allegation of academic dishonesty, including any supporting factual witnesses or information.  The student will be afforded the opportunity to respond verbally or by submitting a written statement or evidence, with any supporting factual witnesses, and to ask questions of the instructor and witnesses called by the instructor. The hearing officer may ask questions of all parties involved in order to understand the full nature of the situation and the evidence presented by both parties.

To the extent possible or necessary, the hearing should serve as an opportunity to have an educational conversation with the student about academic integrity.

If the student fails to attend the hearing, the hearing may be held in the student’s absence.

Hearing Outcome 

Following the hearing, the hearing officer shall review all of the documentation and testimony and determine whether the student has committed an act of academic dishonesty. The standard of review used to determine responsibility is a “preponderance” standard. This determination is based on the greater weight of the information and does not require a standard beyond a reasonable doubt. 

The hearing officer will submit the finding, rationale, and sanctions to be imposed for a responsible finding to the academic integrity staff. The academic integrity staff will send the hearing finding letter to the student, instructor, hearing officer, and any other relevant university personnel.

If a student is found Not Responsible, the finding letter will include the rationale for the finding. If the hearing officer determines that no violation of the Academic Integrity Policy has occurred, but that the student may benefit therefrom, the hearing officer may direct the student to successfully complete an educational seminar conducted by the academic integrity staff within a specified period of time. Such information will be outlined in the hearing finding letter sent to the student.

If the hearing officer concludes that the student is responsible for committing academic dishonesty, the hearing officer will contact the academic integrity staff to determine if the student has a previous dishonesty offense (either academic dishonesty or a dishonesty violation of the Code of Student Conduct). If the offense is a first offense of academic dishonesty, the hearing officer, after conferring with the instructor and academic integrity staff, will determine the appropriate sanctions to impose based on the sanctioning guidelines in this policy.

The hearing finding letter for a responsible finding for a first offense of academic dishonesty will include the rationale for the finding and the sanction(s) imposed. The hearing finding letter also will include a statement of the student’s right to appeal the decision of the hearing officer as outlined in this policy and include instructions for submitting an appeal and the deadline by which to do so. 

If the student has been responsible for a previous academic dishonesty offense, the minimum sanction imposed will be suspension for at least one semester. If the student has previously been suspended for academic dishonesty (including a period of suspension that has been waived) or had a dismissal held in abeyance, dismissal from the university will be the minimum sanction imposed.

The hearing finding letter for a student who has been responsible for a previous academic dishonesty offense will include the rationale for the finding, the grade-related and educational sanctions imposed, and the suspension/dismissal effective dates. The hearing finding letter will include a statement of the student’s right to appeal the decision of the hearing officer as outlined in this policy and include instructions for submitting an appeal and the deadline by which to do so. The student also will be provided with instructions for submitting a petition to waive a period of suspension or to hold a dismissal in abeyance and the deadline by which to submit the petition.

A student who is submitting an appeal based on procedural error or new evidence (see below), should submit the appeal before submitting a petition regarding suspension/dismissal imposition. If the appeal is denied, a petition regarding the suspension or dismissal can be submitted.

Once the appeal or petition deadline has passed and if no appeal or petition has been submitted, the academic integrity staff will, notify the instructor, the hearing officer, and any other relevant university personnel, if action by their office is required, that the case is fully resolved and the sanctions can be imposed.

Suspension/Dismissal Imposition Decision

A student found responsible for committing academic dishonesty who has a previous responsible finding for academic dishonesty, may submit a petition to waive a period of suspension or hold a dismissal in abeyance. The petition must be submitted within five University business days from the date the written decision was sent. If a petition is submitted, the hearing officer may submit a statement/recommendation with regard to the imposition of the suspension/dismissal sanction. The student’s petition, hearing finding letter and recommendation, and case materials from the student’s dishonesty cases with responsible outcomes will be sent to the Interdivisional (ID) Committee of Advisors for consideration. The ID Committee will review all of the materials and determine whether to grant a student’s petition. The ID Committee will consider the hearing officer’s recommendation, student petition, severity of the behavior, nature of the offenses, nature and worth of the academic assignment(s), and/or the presence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances in making a decision. 

The ID Committee will submit its decision and rationale to the academic integrity staff. The academic integrity staff will send the decision letter to the student. The letter will include the committee’s decision and rationale, restate the finding, rationale, and imposed sanctions from the hearing officer, provide suspension/dismissal effective dates if the student’s petition is denied. The decision of the ID Committee is final.

Sanctions

The purpose of sanctions is to hold students accountable for their academic integrity offenses in a manner that is appropriate to the nature of the offense as well as to provide education for students around the greater issues involved in their situations. Sanctions for academic integrity offenses take into consideration previous academic dishonesty offenses and may take into consideration previous Code of Student Conduct Dishonesty offenses.  

Miami University recognizes that each case of academic dishonesty is unique and sanctions should be appropriate to the offense; therefore, the severity of the offense, based on the nature of the offense and nature of the academic assignment, will be considered in determining the appropriate sanction(s) to impose.  

The sanctions imposed for a responsible finding in a hearing may differ from the proposed sanctions provided to a student during a Procedural Review meeting if different sanctions are deemed appropriate. 

No sanctions will be imposed until after the appeal deadline has passed or an appeal that has been submitted is fully resolved.

Sanctioning Guidelines for First Offenses

For a first violation of the Academic Integrity Policy considered to be low severity, when the student has no previous violation or Code of Student Conduct Dishonesty violation, a student typically will receive:

• A grade of zero (0) on the academic assignment(s) in question.
• An additional reduction in the final course grade (e.g., 10% reduction).
• Participation in an online academic integrity workshop. There will be a fee of $200 to the student for the workshop.

If the offense involves a major assignment or exam, in addition to the above, the sanctions also may include:

• A significant reduction of the course grade, including the possible specification of a course letter grade of F or NCR (no credit) for a course taken credit/no credit.

For a first violation of the Academic Integrity Policy considered to be high severity, when the student has no previous Code of Student Conduct Dishonesty violation, the student typically will receive:

• A grade of zero (0) on the academic assignment(s) in question.
• A significant reduction of the course grade (e.g., more than 10%), including the possible specification of a course letter grade of F or NCR (no credit) for a course taken credit/no credit.
• Participation in an online academic integrity workshop. There will be a fee of $200 to the student for the workshop. 

If the offense involves a major assignment or exam, in addition to the above, the sanctions also may include:

• A grade of F or Y or a grade of ADF or ADY in the course. A grade of ADF/ADY is a letter grade of F or Y (no credit) for the entire course with a transcript notation of “Academic Dishonesty (class) and the recording of a grade of either ADF for F or ADY for credit/no credit.

When a student accepts responsibility for or is found responsible for violating the academic integrity policy, the academic integrity staff and/or hearing officer will consider the type and severity of the behavior, nature of the offense, nature and worth of the academic assignment, and consult with the instructor in determining appropriate sanctions to propose and/or impose. 

A previous Code of Student Conduct Dishonesty violation may be taken into consideration as an aggravating circumstance in determining appropriate sanctions. More severe sanctions could be imposed due to a previous Code of Student Conduct Dishonesty offense.

First offenses may result in suspension or dismissal due to the severity of the behavior and/or presence of aggravating circumstances.

Sanctioning Guidelines for Students with Previous Academic Dishonesty Offenses

For a second violation of the Academic Integrity Policy, a student typically will receive:

• A grade of F or Y or a grade of ADF or ADY in the course. A grade of ADF/ADY is a letter grade of F or Y (no credit) for the entire course with a transcript notation of “Academic Dishonesty (class) and the recording of a grade of either ADF for F or ADY for credit/no credit.
• Participation in an educational workshop with the academic integrity staff

And a minimum of one semester suspension will be imposed. 

For a second violation of the Academic Integrity Policy, the academic integrity staff and/or hearing officer, in consultation with the instructor, may choose to propose or impose grade-related or educational sanctions other than those listed above, depending on the type and severity of the behavior, nature of the offense, nature and worth of the academic assignment, and/or the presence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances. A previous Code of Student Conduct Dishonesty violation may be taken into consideration as an aggravating circumstance. 

If a student previously has been suspended for academic dishonesty, the minimum sanction imposed will be dismissal from the university. 

Petition to Waive a Period of Suspension or Hold a Dismissal in Abeyance

The minimum sanction to be imposed for multiple offenses of academic dishonesty is either suspension or dismissal. 

A student may petition to waive the period of suspension or to hold the dismissal in abeyance, and to appeal the petition decision (see above).

ADF/ADY Sanction

If the sanction is the ADF/ADY, this denotes failure for the course with transcript notation of “Academic Dishonesty (class)” and the recording of a grade of either ADF for F or ADY for credit/no credit. The Office of the University Registrar will record the grade of ADF or ADY for the course with a transcript notation of “Academic Dishonesty (class).” If the student officially drops or withdraws from the course, and the sanction is an F/Y or ADF/ADY for the course, a grade of ADF or ADY will be imposed with a transcript notation of “Academic Dishonesty (class).” A student, who is sanctioned to an ADF/ADY, may not change their grading option after the date of the academic dishonesty occurrence. 

A course with a transcript notation of Academic Dishonesty is not eligible to be retaken using the Undergraduate Course Repeat Policy.

Suspension and Dismissal

If the sanction is suspension, the Office of the University Registrar will place the notice “Academic Integrity Suspension” on the student’s academic record. Similarly, dismissal for academic dishonesty will be noted on the student’s academic record as “Academic Integrity Dismissal.” If a petition to waive a period of suspension or hold a dismissal in abeyance is granted, this will be noted on the transcript.

1. Suspension may begin either immediately or at the close of the current academic semester or term as provided in the final decision. A sanction of dismissal will take effect immediately.
2. Suspension is a sanction that terminates the student’s enrollment for a specified period of time. The effective dates of the suspension will be provided to the student in the finding letter.
3. Suspensions will not be for less than the remainder of the current academic semester nor more than the remainder of the current academic semester plus up to two succeeding semesters. (Note that a student may not be suspended solely for either winter and/or summer term.) Suspended students may not attend any term or semester at Miami during a period of suspension (either in person or online). 
4. Dismissals permanently separate the student from the University without any opportunity to re-enroll in the future.
5. Academic credit earned elsewhere during a period of suspension will not be accepted in transfer. Incomplete grades may not be removed during periods of suspension or dismissal.

A student who has been dismissed or suspended from the University is denied all privileges afforded a student and must vacate campus. Students who are dismissed or suspended may not enter any Miami University campus/or other University property at any time for any reason in the absence of the express written consent of the Dean of Students or designee. To seek such permission, a suspended or dismissed student must file a written request with the academic integrity staff for entrance for a limited, specific purpose. During the period of suspension or dismissal, a student may not attend classes or participate in University-related activities, whether they occur on or off campus. All assigned educational sanctions must be completed prior to the conclusion of suspension, otherwise the suspension will remain in effect. Presence on campus in violation of sanctions could result in arrest. A student who has been suspended must apply for re-enrollment. 

Academic Integrity Education Sanctions

If the sanction includes an educational workshop or seminar, the student will be required to pay for the seminar. Failure to complete the seminar by the stated deadline will result in a hold being placed on a student’s ability to register for subsequent semesters, to change a class schedule, or eligibility to graduate.

Appeals

A student found responsible for an act of academic dishonesty may appeal the decision or sanction(s) in writing within five University business days of the date of the written decision by the academic integrity staff. Students who are studying abroad at the time of the notice may be given extended time to submit an appeal based on their ability to communicate via electronic means. The appeal submitted by the student should state the basis for the appeal, include all supporting documents, and be submitted by the student to the Assistant Director for Academic Integrity. The Assistant Director for Academic Integrity will forward the student’s appeal documents and all case materials to the dean of the division in which the matter arose. The Assistant Director for Academic Integrity also will notify the reporting instructor and hearing officer that an appeal has been submitted. The hearing officer may elect to write a response to the student’s appeal to be considered by the dean when deciding upon the appeal. 

1. Appeals may be filed for the following reasons:
   1. inappropriate sanction;
   2. a procedural error in the hearing of the case occurred that is found to be substantial enough to have changed the outcome of the hearing, including failure to objectively evaluate all relevant evidence or error(s) related to determination of relevance; or
   3. new evidence exists that was not reasonably available at the time the determination was made that is determined to be substantial enough to have changed the outcome of the hearing.
2. If the dean concludes that procedural error occurred or new evidence is available, either or both of which is sufficiently substantial to have affected the outcome of the hearing, the dean will order a new hearing. The dean shall appoint a new hearing officer.
3. If the dean concludes the sanction was inappropriate, the dean will impose the appropriate sanction.

The dean will notify the academic integrity staff of the appeal decision. The academic integrity staff will send copies of the final decision letter to the student, instructor, the hearing officer, and any other appropriate persons.

If an appeal based on procedural error or new evidence is denied, a petition regarding suspension or dismissal can be submitted, as outlined above.

The decision of the dean is final. The result of any new hearing ordered by the dean may be appealed only as detailed in this policy.

Withdrawal

Should a reported student be academically dismissed or withdraw from Miami University before an academic integrity case has been fully resolved or sanctions completed, the matter may proceed in the absence of the student, and/or a comment may be placed on the student's official transcript indicating “academic misconduct action is pending at the time of withdrawal.”

Academic Dishonesty Records

The Assistant Director for Academic Integrity, on behalf of the Office of the Provost, is responsible for maintaining records of any adjudication of academic dishonesty. Records of these hearings are kept confidential to the extent permitted by law.

1. Records of hearings regarding academic dishonesty resulting in a finding of not responsible will be maintained in the Office of the Provost until the end of the academic year in which the finding is made at which time they may be destroyed.
2. Records of actions resulting in an acceptance of or finding of responsible and sanctions other than suspensions or dismissals are maintained for seven academic years following the date the finding is made at which time they may be destroyed.
3. Records of actions resulting in an acceptance of or finding of responsible and a sanction of suspension or dismissal are maintained indefinitely. A notation of suspension or dismissal is reflected on the student’s official University academic record (transcript) maintained by the Office of the University Registrar, including if a period of suspension is waived or a dismissal is held in abeyance.
4. At any time after seven years from the date of the finding in which a sanction less than dismissal was imposed, a student or former student may petition the Provost or designee to have their records of academic dishonesty expunged. The decision to expunge will be based on the severity of the violation(s), the person’s disciplinary record as a whole (including violations of the Code of Student Conduct), and evidence of good behavior since the violation(s). If the records are expunged, any notation of academic dishonesty or suspension for academic dishonesty will be removed from the official academic record maintained by the Office of the University Registrar.
5. A student who has been dismissed from the University may not request to have their records expunged. However, the Provost has the authority to expunge the records and remove the notation in extraordinary circumstances any time after seven academic years from the date the finding was made.

Graduation

All Miami University academic dishonesty charges against a student must be resolved and sanctions completed before a student is eligible to graduate.

Interpretation of the Academic Integrity Policy

Any question of interpretation or application of the Academic Integrity Policy shall be referred to the Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs or designee for final determination.

Any reference to university class days in this policy does not include final exam week or winter or summer terms unless the matter arises during one of these terms.

Any reference to a particular office holder is to be read as including any person serving in an acting or interim capacity for the office and any person designated by the office holder to serve in place of the office holder. The designee must be a full-time tenured faculty member, or TCPL faculty with associate or full rank, or academic administrator but need not be from the department/program in which the matter originates.

SR 23-24 Registration Policy Proposal

April 17, 2023

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate approves changes to the Registration Policy Revision as outlined below:

Combined Bachelor’s/Master’s Degree 

Departments and programs offering a master’s degree have the option of offering a  combined bachelors and master’s degree program. See the specific  department/program of interest for program and admission details. 

• Admission Requirements: Miami students can express interest and apply in a combined degree program anytime during their undergraduate career. To matriculate in the combined program, the Miami undergraduates must have  earned a minimum of 64 undergraduate credit hours Junior or Senior standing and have a GPA of 3.00 or greater or meet the GPA requirement set by the  combined degree program…. 

….. 

Permission for Undergraduate Students to Enroll in Graduate  Courses 

Undergraduate students who have earned 64 or more credit hours Junior or Senior  standing and have a GPA of 3.00 or greater and having matriculated undergraduate  status, may request permission to enroll in 500 or 600 level graduate courses….

SR 23-25 Probation Policy Revision

April 17, 2023

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate approves changes to the Probation Policy Revision as outlined below:

Academic Probation 

A graduate student with 9 or more cumulative Miami graduate-level grade point  average earned hours is placed on academic probation at the end of any semester or summer  term in which his/her cumulative grade point average is less than 3.00. 

SR 23-26 Appointment to Standing and Advisory Committee of University Senate

April 17, 2023

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate confirm the 2023-2024 appointments to open seats of the standing and advisory committees of University Senate; and 

BE IT FURTHERMORE RESOLVED that Senate authorizes Senate Executive Committee to confirm remaining 2023-2024 appointments to the standing and advisory committees of University Senate