There’s still time to submit your enrollment deposit!

Academic Integrity

Policy

Academic Integrity Standards

At Pratt, students, faculty, and staff do creative and original work. For Pratt to be a space where everyone can freely create, our community must adhere to the highest standards of academic integrity.

Academic integrity at Pratt means using your own and original ideas in creating academic work. When you make your own work, engaging responsibly with the ideas of others means you must acknowledge them.

At Pratt,

  • We do our own work,
  • We are creative, and 
  • We give credit where it is due.

Academic Integrity Standing Committee (AISC)

Based on our value of academic integrity, Pratt has an Academic Integrity Standing Committee (AISC) that is charged with educating faculty, staff, and students about academic integrity practices. The committee is concerned that:

  • All students entering degree programs at Pratt are enrolled in a zero-credit academic integrity tutorial course during their first semester, which must be passed as a degree requirement.
  • The Academic Integrity Code is followed and in (a) the case of a first infraction the student is engaged in an educational process, and (b) in the case of a subsequent or severe infraction, an Academic Hearing Board is convened.
  • The Adjudication Procedures are followed and, if required, an Appeal Board is convened. 
  • Guidance is offered to faculty and department administrators on the process for reporting infractions.
  • The process is conducted with care and confidentiality.

AIC 100 Academic Integrity Course (undergraduates) and AIC 600 Academic Integrity Course (graduate students) 

The goals of this course are to teach students about academic integrity in higher education and to review Pratt’s Academic Integrity Policy and its application in both studio and liberal arts courses, while also providing instruction in citation requirements and formatting, an overview of  how to best evaluate sources, what might constitute fair use, and other matters related to academic integrity. The outcome for this course is to foster the development of ethical reasoning and practical judgment for students, who are expected to uphold Pratt’s Academic Integrity Policy across studio, liberal arts, and research contexts. This course is designed to assist students navigating real pressures, collaborative ambiguity, cross-cultural difference, and evolving technology.

  • Assessment: Due to the high value Pratt places on academic integrity, a passing grade of 80% is required of both undergraduate and graduate students.
  • Like any required course, failure to pass the course will result in reenrollment the following semester.
  • For academic support, students are encouraged to seek assistance from the course professor, the Writing and Tutorial Center, Pratt Libraries, and/or the Learning/Access Student Success Center, or to consult with an academic advisor about other support resources.

Academic Integrity Code 

When students submit any work for academic recognition or other honors, including admissions applications, they make an implicit claim that the work is wholly their own, completed without  unauthorized assistance. These works include, but are not limited to exams, quizzes, presentations, papers, projects, studio work, code, contest entries, and other assignments and assessments. In addition, no student shall prevent another student from completing their work. Students may study, collaborate, and work together on assignments at the discretion of the instructor. 

Examples of infractions include but are not limited to: 

  • Plagiarism, defined as using the exact language or a close paraphrase of someone else’s ideas, whether visual or textual, without citation. 
  • Violations of fair use, including the unauthorized or uncited use of another’s artworks, images, designs, etc. 
  • The supplying or receiving of completed work, including written assignments, projects, outlines, artworks, designs, prototypes, models, or research for submission by any person other than the author. 
  • The unauthorized submission of the same or essentially the same piece of work for credit in two different classes, or the submission of a work created while not enrolled in the relevant class, for credit.
  • The unauthorized supplying or receiving of information about the form or content of an examination. 
  • The supplying or receiving of partial or complete answers, or suggestions for answers; or the supplying or receiving of assistance in interpretation of questions on any examination from any source not explicitly authorized. (This includes copying or reading of another student’s work or consultation of notes or other sources during an examination.) 
  • Taking sole credit for work created in partnership or a group, or falsely claiming participation in partnered- or group-created work.
  • Removing materials from others’ access or damaging others’ submissions to hinder or devalue their work.
  • The unpermitted use of AI or any other unpermitted technology in the creation or enhancement of work. (It would not be a violation of the policy when use of generative AI is called for in an assignment, or where use of generative AI is acknowledged transparently and is used – with the instructor’s advance approval – as one tool among others as part of an extended creative process.)
  • Infractions specific to majors or departments, as added by faculty to their syllabi.

Academic Integrity Code Adjudication Procedures

One aspect of Pratt’s student conduct adjudication process is to resolve alleged violations of Pratt’s Academic Integrity Code, and if a violation is demonstrated, to render an appropriate sanction. The conduct adjudication process is not intended to be a formal legal process although fundamental fairness applies. This process, educational in nature, has as its goal to protect the rights of individuals while at the same time providing an experience from which they can learn.

Central to Pratt’s Academic Integrity Code procedures is the Academic Integrity Standing Committee (AISC). The AISC is an Institute-wide committee that reports to the Provost and is composed of members from each department or program through elections facilitated by the Academic Senate, with each member serving no more than three years without renewal. In addition to serving on Academic Integrity Hearing Boards, the committee provides education and support on issues of academic integrity for faculty and students, including counsel to students who commit first-time minor infractions. 

I. Jurisdiction 

All incidents of alleged academic integrity violations must be reported.

Faculty or departments alert the AISC of academic dishonesty through the Starfish system and, when contacted by the AISC Chair, follow instructions to complete the required Academic Integrity Infraction Report. 

The only individuals at Pratt with access to academic integrity records in Starfish are: 1) the lead administrator of Starfish ; 2) the Registrar; and 3) the Chair and Assistant Chair of the Academic Integrity Steering Committee. Should a student have a concern about another student’s alleged academic integrity violation, they should reach out to the relevant faculty member or department chair for their review and forwarding to the AISC.

In most cases of a first infraction the AISC will arrange an educational response, where students will retake the online Academic Integrity Tutorial Course (on a confidential and non-transcript basis) and meet with an AISC representative to review the course, discuss the reported incident, and become familiarized with Pratt’s many resources to support students and their ethical work.

Cases will be referred to an Academic Integrity Hearing Board under the following circumstances:

  • In the case of a second allegation in the same or another course. (In a case of very similar first infractions within the same time-frame, the AISC will have discretion, in consultation with the Associate/Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, to treat these infractions as one combined report for an educational response.)
  • When the infraction is judged to be so serious that the maximum penalty available to the faculty member (failure of the course) is deemed to be insufficient, and the faculty or Chair of the Department requests a hearing.  The AISC Chair will have discretion to discuss such requests with the Associate/Vice Provost (without disclosing the name of the student) before agreeing to schedule a hearing for a first offense. 

Cases will be referred to an Appeals Board if any party involved in the initial hearing contests the outcome. 

Cases will be referred to the Provost for a final determination if any party involved in the Hearing Board or the Appeals Board processes contest the outcome. The Provost may request a hearing, at their discretion, and their decision is final. 

II. Composition

A. Academic Integrity Hearing Board

An Academic Integrity Hearing Board is convened to hear and make decisions about students’ alleged academic integrity infractions. Most prominent among these are cases of alleged academic dishonesty, including plagiarism and cheating. The Academic Integrity Hearing Board does not hear grade disputes; students may appeal these through a separate process (see Final Grades, Grade Disputes, and Grade Appeal Policies).

1.Selection

The Academic Integrity Hearing Board for each student hearing will consist of three members from the Academic Integrity Standing Committee (AISC). The Chair of the Academic Integrity Standing Committee (or their delegate) assembles the Hearing Board by emailing the members of the AISC to ascertain who might or might not be available at times that would not conflict with the student’s course schedule, while keeping the identify of the student strictly confidential and, in choosing that hearing’s board members, eliminating representatives from the student’s major department and the department in which the alleged infraction occurred, if different. The student may supply their own list of support persons, including fellow students, to be invited as non-voting participants in the hearing, who may also serve as character or other witnesses or may ask questions under the same questioning guidelines as other hearing participants.

The AISC Chair facilitates the hearing. The AISC Chair may not vote on the determination of responsibility or sanctions to be imposed, if any, but  may ask relevant questions of the student and witnesses, and testify about the student’s prior encounters with the AISC should the hearing reach sanctions-consideration stage. It is the AISC Chair’s responsibility to ensure that proper procedures are followed and to ensure that the determination letter fully and properly summarizes the hearing and its outcome.

2. General Guidelines
  • A member may not serve on a Hearing or (below) an Appeal Board if they have a conflict of interest concerning the case being heard. If a member of a Board perceives themselves to have a conflict with respect to the case at hand, that member must withdraw and an alternate will be selected.
  • If by majority vote, the Board decides that a member may be prejudicial with respect to the case at hand, an alternate will be selected. 
  • If the student or faculty objects to a member for good cause, and the Board so decides, an alternate will be selected.

B. Appeal Board

If the involved faculty member(s), student(s), or chair of the department object to the Hearing Board’s decision, an Appeal Board may be convened. All parties have twelve days, excluding weekends and holidays, from the Hearing Board’s decision to request an Appeal Board be convened. The Appeal Board is composed of three members of the AISC who did not serve on the original Hearing Board.The AISC Chair  (or their delegate) assembles the Appeal Board and facilitates the hearing, but may not vote, It is the AISC Chair’s responsibility to ensure that proper procedures are followed and to ensure that the determination letter fully and properly summarizes the appeal process and its outcome.

C. Appeal to the Provost

If, after both a hearing and an appeal, any parties are not satisfied with the outcome, they may petition the Provost for a hearing. The parties will have 72 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, to notify via email the AISC Chair and the Provost’s Office of an intent to appeal; additional time to prepare their formal letter of appeal will be provided in consultation with the AISC Chair. The decision of the Provost (or the Provost’s designee) will be final.

III. Procedural Steps

A. Faculty

Faculty must report any alleged academic integrity infraction through the Starfish system, and follow instructions to file an Academic Integrity Infraction Report, unless in conversation with the AISC Chair it is determined that such a report is not warranted.

For a first offense for which the offending student accepts responsibility, course level consequences of the infraction are at the discretion of the faculty member.The faculty member may choose from one or more of the following sanctions:

  1. Require the student to repeat the assignment or submit a comparable alternate assignment, 
  2. Impose a lower or failing grade for the particular assignment,
  3. Assign a lower or failing grade for the course.

When the faculty member reports the infraction and the sanction, the student will be required to meet with an AISC member as an educational intervention.

This meeting is an educational opportunity intended to help students understand academic integrity and how to avoid infractions in the future. Additionally, the student will also be required to retake the AIC Academic Integrity Tutorial course on a confidential and non-transcript basis. Given the importance of this educational intervention, students who do not comply with these requirements will receive a grade of INC in the course where the infraction was reported, as detailed below.

If the faculty member believes that a first infraction warrants a more severe sanction than those available at the course level, they should impose one of the above sanctions and refer the matter to the AISC for further review and determination.

If the student believes the actions in question are not grounds for the  filing of an academic integrity report, the incident must be referred to the AISC for review. The AISC Chair will review the case to determine whether faculty had a reasonable concern that justified the filing of a report. If the AISC Chair believes the report is justified, the report will stand and the procedures described above for a first offence, or below for or second offense, will apply. Should the AISC Chair determine that the report should not have been filed, the report will be withdrawn.  If  not satisfied with the AISC Chair’s decision to allow a first report to stand, the student has the right to request a hearing. Procedures for a hearing will be the same as those described below, and the student must be advised of the range of possible sanctions (see IV below). If the student objects to a faculty’s grading decision, the student must follow Pratt’s Grade Dispute Policy.

When obligations are assigned to a student for a first offense, the Registrar will assign a provisional INC grade to the student for the course in which the infraction occurred. If the intervention is successfully completed prior to the end of the class, the AISC Chair will notify the Registrar and the INC grade will be cleared so that the faculty member can assign a final grade. If the obligations are completed after the end of the semester, a completed change of grade form will need to be submitted to the Registrar, countersigned by both the chairperson of the department in which the course was offered and the AISC Chair. Completion of any outstanding infraction-related obligations is a requirement for graduation.

For a student’s second or subsequent reported offense, the Academic Integrity Hearing Board must hear the case.

B. Academic Integrity Hearing 

Whenever a case is referred, the Hearing Board will be convened and conducted as follows:

1. Submission of Written Complaint

The AISC Chair, upon notice that this is a student’s second infraction or upon receipt of a faculty member’s request for a hearing, will convene a Hearing Board within nine business days and forward all relevant and available information regarding the case to the Hearing Board, including a list of witnesses. The Hearing Board will conduct a hearing as soon as possible, but no later than twelve business days from the receipt of relevant information. Care will be taken to hold the hearing at a time and day least likely to conflict with class schedules. 

2. Notice of Hearing

The following parties will be notified via email of the hearing date and time:

  • The student respondent (herein referred to as the student)
  • The Chair of the Department in which the course is being offered 
  • The Chair of the student’s major department (if different) 
  • The relevant Dean or Deans 
  • Pratt’s Director of Student Support & Advocacy and, if the student is an international student, the Director of International Affairs as well, so that they may offer appropriate support to the student.

Students who wish to request a temporary postponement for medical or other extenuating circumstances must do so by emailing the AISC Chair within 72 hours of notice of the meeting being sent. Temporary postponements will be made at the discretion of the AISC Chair.

Note: The Institute is committed to a timely process. If a full Hearing Board cannot be convened in person, the reporting faculty member is not available in person, or if the student is not present during break periods, video conferencing may be used to ensure a timely hearing. If no alternative arrangements can be made during break periods, the hearing will be held within ten business days of the end of the break period.

3. Quorum

All three members of the Academic Integrity Hearing Board must be present to constitute a quorum. 

4. Failure to attend

If the student  refuses or fails to attend a hearing, does not attempt to schedule a videoconference, or file a request for temporary postponement within 72 hours as described above, the Hearing Board will, at the AISC Chair’s discretion, still hear the case. If the case is heard and responsibility for the infraction is determined, the student  will be appropriately disciplined as though they had been present.

5. Representation

Another person, including a family member or a friend, or the Director of Student Support or Advocacy (or delegate) may attend the entire hearing for moral support or character testimony only.  (Additional character witnesses may also testify or offer written statements, on the same basis as other witnesses.)

Attorneys cannot be present except in cases where the student is also facing court action. In this case, the attorney may not question witnesses or Hearing Board members, but may only advise their client.

6. Scope of Inquiry

The Hearing Board must consider only matters contained in the relevant Academic Integrity Infraction Report when considering whether an infraction has occurred. A student’s academic and social standing, previous conduct record, if any, or other mitigating or compounding circumstances may not be considered when determining responsibility for the infraction, but may be taken into account when deciding upon a sanction.

7. Examination of Witnesses and Documents

The Hearing Board chair will summon witnesses at the request of the parties involved. In addition, the Hearing Board will have the power to summon witnesses on its own initiative. All parties will have access to all submitted evidence and the list of witnesses in advance of the hearing. If a witness cannot appear in person or via videoconference for good cause, the Hearing Board may, at its discretion, accept a signed statement from the witness. The Hearing Board will consider whatever documents it deems relevant to the case and will make such documents part of its record.

8. Questioning

The student has the right to be present at all meetings at which witnesses testify and may ask witnesses questions if they wish to do so. The Hearing Board reserves the right to rule on the relevance of the questions.

9. Access to Documents

Both the faculty and the student will have access to all documents submitted to the Hearing Board from any source and advance access will be given whenever possible. Whenever a party submits new evidence at the hearing, the Hearing Board may, at its discretion, grant an adjournment to give the other party an opportunity to review the material and prepare a rebuttal.

10. Findings

When possible and where applicable, after the Hearing Board has arrived at its decision, the findings will be given verbally to the student and faculty by the AISC Chair. Within ten business days of the hearing, the Chair will issue to the involved parties written findings of fact, the decisions and/or recommendations of the Hearing Board, and information about the appeal process. This will be sent via email.

These findings will, in all cases, be sent to the faculty member who reported the infraction, the members of the Hearing Board, the Chair of the department for which the student did the work in question, along with the Chair of the student’s major department (if different), and the relevant Dean or Deans. Pratt’s Director of Student Support & Advocacy will be notified, and if the student is an international student, the Director of International Affairs will also be notified, so that they may offer appropriate support to the student.

Possible recommendations and penalties are listed in Section IV of this document. Some recommendations or penalties will demand additional notifications, as specified there.

In the case that a penalty is the restriction of the use of facilities, or of privileges, these findings will also be sent to the offices that control those facilities or privileges. 

In the case that a penalty requires the student to make restitution for their actions, the offices responsible for collecting that restitution will be notified, along with the Registrar’s office.

In the case that the penalty is suspension from the Institute, these findings will also be sent to the Registrar’s office, the Office of Undergraduate Advising (if the student is an undergraduate), and the Office of Student Affairs.

In the case that the recommended penalty is dismissal from the Institute, these findings will also be sent to the Provost. If the Provost chooses to impose this penalty, the Provost’s decision will at that time also be communicated to the Registrar, the Office of Undergraduate Advisement, and the Office of Student Affairs, with the caveat that this decision is subject to appeal.

Should the student appeal and the decision be upheld, no further notifications will be necessary. Should the decision be changed on appeal, the Registrar, the Office of Undergraduate Advisement, and the Office of Student Affairs will again be notified.

11. Adjudication

After hearing the case, the Hearing Board is empowered to impose such disciplinary penalties as it deems appropriate. The range of sanctions that may be given by the Academic Integrity Hearing Board includes as listed in IV below. 

The decision of the Hearing Board may be appealed by the student or the faculty. The penalty imposed will remain in effect pending the appeal outcome, unless the Provost (or designate) or the AISC Chair – in consultation with the Associate/Vice Provost for Academic Affairs – suspends imposition of the sanction until the appeal is resolved. This determination will be made upon receipt of the appeal.

C. Appeal Board

An Appeal Board hears appeals of decisions rendered by the Academic Integrity Hearing Board.

1. Scope of Review

On appeal, neither party will be entitled to a rehearing of the entire case. Rather, the Appeal Board will limit its review of the Academic Integrity Hearing Board’s determination to the following three issues: 

  1. Did the Hearing Board or the faculty conduct themselves in such a way that both parties had an adequate opportunity to prepare their case?
  2. Was the evidence presented at the hearing convincing enough to justify a decision?
  3. Is there evidence that the Hearing Board or the faculty member acted in a capricious or prejudicial manner?
2. Written Appeal

The appeal must be in writing and must touch upon at least one of the three issues listed above. It must be submitted by email to the Provost at provost@pratt.edu and to the AISC Chair at kcullend@pratt.edu or any future AISC Chair’s email address.

3. Time of Appeal and Review

Notice of intent to appeal must be submitted by email within 72 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) of the receipt of the Academic Integrity Hearing Board’s written decision. The AISC Chair will convene an Appeal Board to review the appeal as soon as possible, but no later than ten business days after receipt of the written appeal. The Appeal Board will limit its inquiry to the issue(s) put forward in the appeal and may ask either or both sides to make an oral presentation.

4. Record on Appeal

The record on appeal will be composed of the written appeal and all other relevant documents, including the written decision of the Appeal Board.

5. Determination

The Appeal Board may uphold the decision of the Academic Integrity Hearing Board, return the case to the Hearing Board or to the faculty for further review in keeping with suggestions that the Appeal Board may make, or reverse the Hearing Board’s decision and dismiss the case. In cases where the Appeal Board decides to reverse the decision, the faculty member will be advised of the reversal. If a grade is involved the faculty member will be asked to review the grade in light of the Appeal Board’s conclusions.

Additional notifications of the Appeal Board’s decision will follow the notification guidelines listed above, in Section B.10.

D. Appeal to the Provost

The student or the faculty may appeal the decision of the Appeal Board to the Provost (or designate). The Provost may uphold the decision of the Appeal Board, impose an alternative sanction, or reverse the Appeal Board’s decision and dismiss the case. The Provost’s decision is final. 

Notifications of the Provost’s decision will follow the notification guidelines listed above, in Section B.10.

IV.Penalties

For academic violations, most notably plagiarism and cheating, the penalties range from written warning or failure in the course (rendered by the faculty member) to dismissal from the Institute (recommended by the Academic Integrity Hearing Board to the Provost). Penalties may also include other sanctions, such as those listed below:

A. Counseling from AISC Member

Any student found to have committed a first offense must meet with an AISC member for counseling and education about academic integrity. Additionally, students will be required to retake the Academic Integrity Tutorial course (on a confidential and non-transcript basis).  Students will also be made aware that additional violations will result in more severe sanction, including a hearing before the Academic Integrity Hearing Board. 

B. Repeat the Assignment

Faculty members may require the student to repeat the assignment for grading. 

C. Course or assignment grade of F

Faculty may issue a grade of F for the assignment in question, or a grade of F in the course, depending on the seriousness of the infraction.

D. Grade of WD or WF

The Hearing Board may give a grade of WD or WF, which removes a student from a course retroactively. For international students, this penalty can only be applied in consultation with the Office of International Affairs; in such cases, a failing grade of F may be recommended by the AISC Chair to the Associate/Vice Provost for Academic Affairs to avoid jeopardizing a student’s visa status.

E. Restriction 

Denial of the use of certain facilities or the right to participate in certain activities or privileges for a specified period of time, such as participation in athletics or holding a leadership position at the Institute. 

F. Suspension

Suspension from the Institute for a stated period of time. Suspension from the Institute requires a petition for reinstatement. 

G. Dismissal

Dismissal from the Institute.

H. Restitution

A student may be required to make restitution for damage or loss to either Institute or individual property. This may include forfeiture of part or all of the student’s security deposit (in the case of a resident student) and imposition of additional charges if warranted. Failure to make restitution will result in withholding the student’s transcript and/or denial of either graduation or continued enrollment at the Institute.

I. Service

A student may be required to fulfill an educational project or program.

Note: One or more sanctions may be imposed when and if appropriate.

V.   Confidentiality

All disciplinary matters related to academic integrity remain confidential, do not appear on a student’s transcript, but remain a part of the student’s permanent record. Such records may be referred to when a student is involved in another disciplinary action, and then only at the time of determination of sanction (not at the time of the determination of responsibility for the infraction). If a student is under the age of 18 when a serious sanction is imposed, parents or legal guardians will be notified. Serious sanction is defined as suspension or dismissal from either a residence hall or the Institute. 

VI. Alternative Resolution Process

The Office of the Provost may pilot an alternative resolution process to the hearing and appeals steps described above. The details of this process must be described in writing and made available as an option to faculty and students. Any pilot must be evaluated and may run for no more than three full academic years before it must either be retired or considered for inclusion as part of this policy.

Updated May 18, 2026