Transformation Assessment

Investigation Procedures Post-Transformation

Two Honor Counsel will be assigned to investigate each case. One Honor Advisor will be assigned to assist the Investigated Student and another Advisor will be assigned to assist the Community, including the Reporter.

At the beginning of an investigation, the Advisor for the Community will contact the reporter and explain the role of the Advisor and the investigation process and answer any questions from the reporter. The Advisor should also ask the reporter if any additional witnesses should be contacted by the investigators. This will allow all support officers to have a clearer idea of when to conduct the interview with the student. A face-to-face meeting with the reporter is only required if the reporter so desires. The Investigating Counsel will then meet with the reporter (and if requested by the reporter, the Advisor for the Community) to conduct a preliminary interview.

The Investigating Counsel will then conduct interviews with other relevant witnesses suggested by the reporter. When scheduling an interview, the Counsel should provide the witnesses with contact information for the Advisor for the Community, who should be available as a resource to these witnesses.

When interviews with all Community witnesses have been scheduled and are close to completion, the Advisor for the Investigated Student should contact the student to inform him of the investigation. This may be nearly immediately after the initial contact with the reporter or a few days later, depending on the number of additional witnesses to interview. The Advisor should answer any and all questions that the student has and explain the investigation process, including details about the interview, especially the rights of the Investigated Student at the interview.

Counsel will then schedule an interview with the student and his Advisor and compile all interviews into a packet that will be provided to the student for the response. The Counsel will conduct the initial interview, allowing the student to review it privately with his advisor, before printing it out and having the student sign and initial the statement.

After this, the student should be provided with the testimony of the other witnesses, and given the opportunity to review the evidence with his Advisor. When the student is ready, he should prepare a statement responding to any points of contention in the other witnesses’ statements. The format of this response should be a free-from essay written by the student. This will be included with the Investigative Log.

The Counsel will then interview any other witnesses suggested by the Investigated Student. These witnesses will not necessarily be given the opportunity to provide response statements, though the investigators may schedule follow-up interviews if required.

Counsel will then leave a copy of the I-Log with the Investigation Coordinator assigned to the case to review all the evidence and testimony. They should draw up a list of topics of further exploration that they need to review with other witnesses. The IC should review these topics and suggest any additional areas of inquiry that would be helpful to the Investigative Panel.

The Counsel will then provide the reporter and the Advisor for the Community with the investigated student’s statement. The reporter will be given the opportunity to provide a statement to the investigators responding to the student’s initial interview. The investigators may also pose additional questions to the reporter in light of the student’s testimony.

If, after discussion with the IC, Counsel need to conduct additional questioning with witnesses, they should conduct a follow up interview with any witnesses deemed necessary to resolving disputed factual contentions.

Counsel will then compile the I-Log and deliver it to the Vice Chair for Investigations.

Investigative Panel Procedures

The Investigating Counsel will complete their investigation in a timely manner. Investigative Panels will be schedule for 16 days from the beginning of the investigation. All materials should be compiled into a final I-Log 14 days from the beginning of the investigation, so the investigated student will have forty-eight hours to review the I-Log before the I-Panel. They should inform the Vice Chair for Investigations when their investigation will be complete and deliver 4 copies of the Investigative Log and all original evidence to the Vice Chair for Investigations or the Special Assistant as soon as the investigation is complete.

The Vice Chair for Investigations will have previously notified 3 rotating Committee members to conduct the Investigative Panel. The Committee members will review the investigative log and deliberate.

The panel should review all the evidence present in the investigative log and decide whether to issue one or more accusations. If the panel decides to issue multiple accusations against a student, each accusation should be voted upon separately and listed separately in the accusation letter.

If the panel feels that it does not have enough information to formulate a decision, it should draft a list of general topics and specific questions for the various parties that it would like answered so that it may formulate a decision. The investigators will collect this information and provide this information to the panel, which will be reconvened with the same Committee members.

After issuing a decision, the panel should promptly inform the Vice Chair for Investigations. If no accusation is issued, the Vice Chair for Investigations will notify the Honor Counsel and Advisors and ask the Advisors to inform their parties of the result. If an accusation is made, the Vice Chair for Investigations will inform the Honor Counsel and Advisors and inform the student of the result of the Investigative Panel via certified mail. Advisors should notify the reporter and the investigated students of the result of the I-Panel.

Per the by-laws, the student will have ten days from the date of the Investigative Panel to request a trial.

Transformation Resolution – Changes Made from Previous Investigation Procedures

Advisor for the Reporter changed to Advisor for the Community

The Advisor for the Community is available to provide procedural guidance and answer questions from any witness called by the Reporter, in addition to the Reporter.
The Advisor for the Community asks the Reporter in the first conversation if there are any additional witnesses, in order to speed up scheduling interviews. (Previously, Investigators would not as about additional witnesses until the Reporter’s interview.)

The Investigative Panel (I-panel) is scheduled on the first day of the investigation, and is scheduled for 16 days after the start of the investigation

Previously, the I-panel was not scheduled until the investigation was completed, and investigations did not previously have a strict time limit.
Extensions are allowed on investigations but must have good reason.

Only the three rotating Committee members are present at I-panel

Previously, the Investigated Student(s), Reporter(s), Investigators, Advisors, and any observers were all allowed to be in attendance.
The new change cuts down immensely on scheduling time for I-panel – only three individuals need to be accommodated, as opposed to at least 9 individuals.

Response interviews were added to the investigation procedures
- Since the Investigated Student and Reporter are no longer in attendance at the I-panel, response interviews provide a forum for each party to respond to the other’s testimony. This is a substitute for the statements made by the student and Reporter that used to occur during I-panel, during which each party responded to testimony.
- Response interviews also provide for the opportunity to conduct follow-up interviews with any witness that testified in the course of the investigation. The rebuttal statements in the response interviews will prompt the Investigators to conduct additional interviews to clarify facts of the case. This is a substitute for the question-answer period from the Committee members that used to occur during I-panel, as most questions that could be asked by Committee members will have already been resolved during the course of the investigation.
Investigation Coordinators (ICs) have an expanded role. Each investigation is assigned an IC.

Previously, the main responsibility of ICs was to answer questions about an investigation from the support officers on a case, and relay the progress of investigations to the Vice Chair for Investigations.
Now, in addition to the above, ICs schedule a meeting with the Investigators on Day 7 of an investigation regardless of the progress of the case. This meeting is to make sure the Investigators have drawn up a complete list of witnesses and evidence and to make sure the rest of the investigation runs smoothly.
Additionally, ICs meet with the Investigators on Day 14 (when the investigation should be completed) and review the Investigation Log (the compilation of all evidence and testimony). This meeting is to make sure the Investigators have interviewed all necessary witnesses and collected all relevant evidence to make the investigation as complete and thorough as possible.

Early Assessment of Transformation

Presented by Linda Liu, Vice Chair for Investigations

A statistical analysis was performed on Honor investigations from the previous five years (cases reported on or after 1/24/2002). Transformation went into effect on Dec. 6, 2006 and all investigations ongoing at that time (including cases reported prior to 12/6/2006) were switched over to the new procedures.

A summary of the results is presented below:

	Pre-Transformation	Post-Transformation
Average length of investigations (days)	50.68	32.57
Average time to schedule I-panel (days)	3.68	1.15

Transformation decreased the average investigation length by over 18 days, and cut the wait time from the completion of the investigation to the date of the I-panel by over 2.5 days. Since I-panels are now scheduled in advance, they can happen the day after the completion of the investigation, rather than trying to coordinate the schedules of nine or more individuals after the investigation is complete.

We postulate that the average length of investigations post-Transformation is greater than the time limit of 16 days because changing ongoing investigations to the new procedures took a lot of adjustment on the part of support officers and Committee members when the by-laws change was first made. Additionally, investigations that were not completed before Winter break of 2006 had to be continued in the Spring semester, adding about a month to the investigation time. This was the case for most of the ongoing investigations at the time Transformation was passed, as a large number of cases are usually reported around finals week. Investigation lengths have decreased over time since Transformation was first instituted. The average length of investigations for cases reported after 1/17/2007 is less than 25 days (see results below).

	Pre-Transformation	Post-1/17/2007
Average length of investigations (days)	50.68	24.89
Average time to schedule I-panel (days)	3.68	1

The changes that were part of the Transformation Resolution have resulted in investigations that are much more streamlined and conducted in a timely manner. The new procedures have shifted much of the burden placed on Investigated Students and Reporters to the Honor Committee. Reporters no longer have to feel like they have a personal stake in the outcome of an Honor case, as they no longer attend the I-panel to face the Investigated Student and the members of the Honor Committee. Enforcing a strict time limit on investigations (while allowing extensions for reasonable circumstances) allows the investigation to be completed in a timely manner, significantly reducing the stress placed on the Investigated Student during the course of the investigation.

Following the by-laws change, investigations have been conducted in a more thorough and conscientious manner. During training of Counsel as impartial Investigators, much more emphasis is being placed on uncovering all relevant facts during the course of the investigation instead of simply letting the I-panel ask any unanswered questions. As a result of adding response interviews to the investigation process, substantive facts are uncovered and responded to by each party during the investigative process instead of being debated in the I-panel, a forum in which emotions can often run high. We feel this will result in more informed and consistent decisions by Investigative panels when they are concentrating only on the facts of the case. Additionally, with the added oversight of the Investigation Coordinators, every investigation is subject to scrutiny and every Investigation Log is reviewed to make sure no piece of testimony or evidence is missing.

The Honor Committee is continuing to fine-tune its investigative procedures and will continue to evaluate the impacts of the Transformation Resolution in the coming years. We anticipate seeing ongoing improvement to all aspects of investigations as a result of the new procedures adopted as part of the Transformation Resolution.

If you have any questions, please contact Linda Liu, lindaliu@virginia.edu or Honor Chair Ben Cooper, bencooper@virginia.edu.