AI Reviews FAQ

Once all of your materials have been submitted and/or the deadlines for submission have passed, your case will be decided by the AI Review Board as quickly as possible. We prioritize cases for students who are otherwise graduating seniors, and then we prioritize based on in which quarter the alleged violation occurred.

Keep in mind that the AI Review II takes a lot more coordination and scheduling than the AI Review I because we have to arrange for a date and time that can be attended by the Presiding Officer, Panel Members, the Instructor, and the Involved Student(s). So these Reviews do not occur as quickly as AIR Is.

After you've met with the Resolution Appropriate Administrative Authority (AAA) and contested the allegation, you'll receive a notification of what to do next, and that notice will indicate whether you are proceeding to an AI Review I or II.

You should contest the allegation if you didn't do what is alleged. You should not contest the allegation if your actions violated academic integrity but you're worried about the consequences. There is an appeal process to deal with the latter. You should also not contest if you didn't intend to violate or your actions don't reflect your character. The AI Review Board only looks at the evidence and whether a violation occurred, they are not there to judge you.

• Focus on being honest, fair, respectful, responsible and trustworthy in your statement and documentation, as well as in your interactions on the day of the Review (if going to an AI Review II)
• Work with your AS Advocate or an AIRB Advisor to write your statement, attach appropriate corresponding exhibits, as well as to prepare for the day of
• Carefully and diligently attend to your @ucsd.edu email and follow the AI Office instructions and timelines

At either an AI Review I or II, the AI Review Board considers all of the information presented to them "in writing" by the instructor and the involved student(s). This information includes written statements from the relevant parties as well as documentation to support the written statement.

In AI Review IIs, there is an added component - all of the relevant parties are invited to meet with the Review Board to discuss the case. Questions will be asked and answered during this Review.

In the end, both the AI Review I and II Panels will make decisions of responsibility based on a "preponderance of the evidence", that is "is it more likely than not that the student violated academic integrity?" If the answer is yes, the involved student is held responsible. If the answer is no, the involved student is not held responsible.

This depends on whether your case is headed to an AI Review I or II.

AI Review Is will most likely occur within 3 months of when an allegation was reported.

AI Review IIs are usually backlogged and take longer to resolved, so most likely within 6-9 months of when the allegation was reported.

According to the Academic Integrity Policy's Procedures, there are only three ways in which an academic integrity violation allegation can be resolved:

1. Acceptance of Responsibility. The involved student accepts responsibility for violating academic integrity standards and the procedures for applying administrative and academic sanctions are initiated (this is how approximately 70% of cases are resolved)
2. Proceed to an Academic Integrity Review. The involved student does not accept responsibility for violating academic integrity standards and the AI Review procedures are initiated (this is how approximately 15% of cases are resolved)
3. Withdrawal of Allegation. The Resolution AAA uncovers additional information that should be shared
   with the instructor regarding the allegation and the instructor decides to withdraw the allegation (this is how approximately 15% of cases are resolved).

In other words, if you aren't accepting responsibility and there appears no cause for an allegation withdrawal, the AI Review is the only resolution option.