University of Wyoming

Conditions & exceptions

Captured regulation; no independent detector validation.

G. Plagiarism: Presenting the work (i.e., ideas, data, creations) of another, wholly or in part, as one’s own work without customary and proper acknowledgement of sources and extent of use, unless authorized by the Instructor. Submissions generated, in whole or in part, by an Artificial Intelligence-based application without attribution to the application will be treated as plagiarism; instructors, at all times, reserve the right to apply software to detect writing produced by Artificial Intelligence-based applications.

Collected: 2026-10-09 · 76–82
SHA-256: 823cdec910e32f1ba7db6e34585d4f319e551e87f1ed11400ec8aaad2a23b98f

Academic Integrity Limitations Misinformation and Hallucinations Prompt Engineering Practical TIps Academic Integrity Use Generative AI chatbots as a supplementary tool rather than a primary source. Avoid copy-pasting chatbot responses into your work. Not only might the response be factually incorrect, but copying without attribution can potentially be considered plagiarism. Always check with your instructor before using an AI chatbot to assist in your assignments, as instructor attitudes regarding its use can vary.

Collected: 2026-10-09 · 26–33
SHA-256: b7a10b4d74e81f7cb66858012a628898b376e33ee0b0edeafd9faf0323af4a6a

B. Establishing a Charge of Academic Dishonesty Within five (5) school days of discovering the alleged academic dishonesty, but no more than thirty (30) calendar days after the submission due date, the Instructor will consult with the academic Department Head or designee and shall prepare a Charge of Academic Dishonesty and recommended sanction if the Department Head concurs with the instructor that sufficient evidence of academic dishonesty exists. C. Initial Process

Collected: 2026-10-09 · 168–179
SHA-256: 823cdec910e32f1ba7db6e34585d4f319e551e87f1ed11400ec8aaad2a23b98f

F. Appeal An appeal of the final decision of the College Hearing Officer must be submitted to the University Appeals Coordinator within thirty (30) calendar days after the college decision is rendered. The appeal must be in writing and must set forth facts substantiating the claim based on grounds outlined below. 1. An appeal of the finding of Academic Dishonesty may be submitted solely upon the following grounds: a. The student was not given written notice of a hearing or an opportunity for a hearing. b. The report of the college level hearing fails to describe any act of the student’s which could be construed as Academic Dishonesty. c. The findings from the hearing were not supported by substantial evidence, were the result of prejudice toward the student, capricious evaluation, or capricious treatment, and such allegations must include specific examples of the capricious actions or substantive factual errors.

Collected: 2026-10-09 · 381–400
SHA-256: 823cdec910e32f1ba7db6e34585d4f319e551e87f1ed11400ec8aaad2a23b98f

E. Notification of Findings The Dean or College Coordinator/s shall notify the student and the Instructor of the findings from the hearing. Notification shall be in writing or otherwise recorded Student Academic Dishonesty Page 7 of 11 means and occurs when delivered to the student either in person with signed acknowledgment by the student or by tracked delivery of physical or electronic notification to the student’s local address on file with the University or to the student’s University email account. If no local address is on file, notification will be sent to the student’s permanent address. 1. If the charge was not upheld by the hearing, the Dean or designee will dismiss the Charge of Academic Dishonesty and shall have the record expunged and notify the student in writing. 2. If the charge was upheld, the student has thirty (30) calendar days from the date of the notification to file an appeal.

Collected: 2026-10-09 · 326–344
SHA-256: 823cdec910e32f1ba7db6e34585d4f319e551e87f1ed11400ec8aaad2a23b98f

presenting evidence of bias or conflict of interest. In the event that the College Coordinator/s find evidence of bias or conflict of interest, the College Coordinator/s will choose another Hearing Officer. e. If the student wishes to be accompanied at the hearing by an advisor of the student’s choice, the student must notify the Hearing Officer at least five (5) working days prior to the hearing. The role of advisor shall only be to consult with the student, not to represent the student. f. If the instructor wishes to be accompanied at the hearing by an advisor of the instructor’s choice, the instructor must notify the Hearing Officer at least five (5) working days prior to the hearing. The role of advisor shall only be to consult with the instructor, not to represent the instructor. If the student chooses an advisor who is an attorney, the Instructor may be accompanied by an advisor who is a University attorney.

Collected: 2026-10-09 · 258–274
SHA-256: 823cdec910e32f1ba7db6e34585d4f319e551e87f1ed11400ec8aaad2a23b98f

III. SCIENTIFIC OR RESEARCH MISCONDUCT Allegations of student academic misconduct involving federal grants, scientific misconduct or research misconduct shall be referred to the Vice President for Research and Economic Development to be handled pursuant to University policy. Further action under this Regulation is dependent on the outcome of that process. Sanctions under this Regulation may be imposed when an allegation of scientific misconduct has been substantiated. Only the sanction is appealable under this Regulation. A student may not appeal the finding of scientific misconduct. If scientific misconduct has not been substantiated, but issues of academic dishonesty remain, this Regulation applies.

Collected: 2026-10-09 · 25–34
SHA-256: 823cdec910e32f1ba7db6e34585d4f319e551e87f1ed11400ec8aaad2a23b98f