Was anyone heard in Step 2? If so, how did it go? I`m not sure what to expect. EDIT: This is my first time, my teacher sent me step 1, but I refused. Your description was that I looked to the right for much of the test, even though I scanned the room and tracked everything else correctly. I came from ADHD medicine and couldn`t pay attention while I took the test, but I`m not sure they will always find me responsible. The role of the screening committee is exclusively to determine whether the student has provided sufficient evidence to warrant further verification. Within five days of this meeting, the screening committee will submit its decision in writing to the department head, the principal or delegate, the student and the teacher (indicating that they recommend or do not recommend a subsequent audit). A negative decision terminates the appeal. A positive decision triggers the next step in the process. If you`ve already gone to Step 1 with your teacher, you`re unlikely to get anything worse than what you`ve already had to do. But all of that`s going to go into your record, and if you get caught, you`re going to be in a much deeper. If your teacher sent you directly to step 2 (EDIT: or if you go to step 2 because you were offered a step 1 agreement and it was refused), you are already in the deep. The person who authorized you to send you directly to step 2 chooses one of the members of the faculty body, so that both faculty members are already strongly “guilty”. EDIT: This person is also the Tie-Breaking voice.

So if you think you`ve fucked badly enough to deserve to jump straight to a hearing, you probably already have an opinion on your case. If a student finds a violation of the Academic Honor Policy, he or she must report the incident to the course professor. If a teacher believes that a student in one of the teacher`s classes has violated the Academic Honor Policy, the teacher must first apply to the Office of Vice President for Faculty Development and Advancement to determine whether the student has previously found academic dishonesty to determine whether to proceed with a Stage 1 agreement (for teachers based in Panama City, the dean on the Panama City campus will also help). The professor must also inform the head of department or the dean. (Assistants must be advised by their counselor and extraordinary teachers must be advised by their department chair.) However, faculty members or others who do not have the authority to enforce the academic fee policy should not be informed of the charge unless they have identified a legitimate need for knowledge. If the continuation of a Stage 1 agreement is deemed possible, the teacher should discuss with the student evidence of academic dishonesty and consider the possibility of a Stage 1 agreement (see fda.fsu.edu/academic-resources/academic-integrity-and-grievances/academic-honor-policy). Four possible outcomes of this discussion can be achieved: the university mediator offers students in the university community a way to confidentially search for decisions relating to academic matters. . . .