Posted: April 6, 2026

Sponsors: University Faculty Committee

Proposers:
Michael Clarkson, Senator, Computer Science
Liz Karns, Director of Academic Integrity Initiatives, OVPUE

One-page summary

Redline Edits

Responses to feedback on proposed edits

Abstract: This resolution proposes updates to the Cornell Code of Academic Integrity in four areas: the introduction of an educationally grounded response to certain violations, improvements to institutional recordkeeping related to academic integrity, clarifications to policies related to graduate students as well as artificial intelligence, and modernization of language to be inclusive. Together, these changes are intended to strengthen academic integrity at Cornell while preserving faculty authority and supporting student learning.

Whereas the Cornell Code of Academic Integrity (henceforth, “the Code”) is a foundational statement of the university’s commitment to honesty, trust, and responsibility in academic work, and is established and maintained through faculty governance;

Whereas the Code affirms that absolute integrity is expected of every Cornell student and that all academic work submitted for credit must represent the student’s own intellectual efforts, with all assistance properly acknowledged;

Whereas faculty retain primary responsibility for defining academic expectations within their courses, including the authority to specify permissible forms of collaboration and assistance and to communicate course-specific variances from the Code;

Whereas academic integrity is not only a matter of enforcing rules but also a central component of students’ ethical development, including the formation of values, habits, and decision-making practices that extend beyond the classroom;

Whereas the current structure of the Code does not provide a formal mechanism for addressing first-time or lower-level academic integrity violations through educational interventions, resulting in a system that can be disproportionately punitive and may discourage consistent reporting by faculty;

Whereas peer institutions have increasingly adopted mechanisms to address first-time or lower-level academic integrity violations through proportionate and educationally focused responses, highlighting the importance of providing such options within Cornell’s academic integrity framework;

Whereas the university cannot control the disclosure requirements imposed on students by external entities such as professional schools, but it retains responsibility for defining how academic integrity matters are classified, addressed, and reported within Cornell;

Whereas the Accepting Responsibility pilot, implemented at Cornell across multiple semesters and involving hundreds of students across multiple colleges, has demonstrated that a structured educational intervention model can promote student learning, improve student–faculty interactions, increase engagement with academic integrity processes, and reduce faculty burden;

Whereas effective implementation of an educationally grounded academic integrity process requires consistent and reliable institutional infrastructure, including centralized systems for recordkeeping, communication, and reporting;

Whereas clarifications regarding the scope of academic integrity policies as they relate to graduate and professional work are necessary to ensure alignment with existing university policies and consistent application across student populations;

Whereas evolving practices and technologies, especially artificial intelligence, require updates to the Code to ensure that examples and classifications of violations remain clear to all stakeholders;

Whereas the Code should reflect contemporary standards of clarity, inclusivity, and accessibility, including the use of gender-neutral language;

Be it therefore resolved that the Faculty Senate approves amendments to the Code that formally incorporate the Accepting Responsibility process as an established component of the university’s academic integrity framework;

Be it further resolved that the Faculty Senate affirms that these amendments preserve and support faculty authority to define academic expectations, to communicate course-specific policies, and to determine appropriate responses to violations within their courses;

Be it further resolved that the Faculty Senate calls upon the administration to establish and support a centrally administered program for Accepting Responsibility, including appropriate staffing and resources, in order to ensure consistent, effective, and sustainable implementation across the university;

Be it further resolved that the Faculty Senate supports the development of centralized information systems for reporting, recordkeeping, and communication related to academic integrity, in order to promote consistency, efficiency, and equity across colleges and schools;

Be it further resolved that the Faculty Senate approves clarifications to the Code regarding its scope and application to graduate students and to scholarly and professional work, including representation of graduate faculty and students on Academic Integrity Hearing Board panels, in alignment with the Code of Legislation of the Graduate Faculty;

Be it further resolved that the Faculty Senate approves updates to the Code that modernize and clarify examples and definitions of academic integrity violations, including those involving artificial intelligence, and that reclassify use of unauthorized assistance and materials as violations of the Code rather than as matters of classroom misconduct;

Be it further resolved that the Faculty Senate approves edits to the Code to adopt clear and inclusive gender-neutral language throughout;

Be it further resolved that the specific amendments to the Code shall be made in accordance with the accompanying redline document;

Be it finally resolved that these updates to the Code shall be completed by and take effect at the start of the Fall 2026 semester.