Student Affairs - Kellogg School of Management

The Kellogg Honor Code

All students enrolled in a course offered by the Kellogg School of Management agree to abide by the Kellogg Honor Code.

The Kellogg Honor Code governs student conduct pertaining to all academic, placement, and extracurricular activities associated with the Kellogg School of Management. Each student agrees:

1. Not to seek an unfair advantage over other students, including but not limited to giving or receiving unauthorized aid during completion of academic requirements;
2. To truthfully represent fact and self at all times;
3 To respect the property and personal rights of all members of the Kellogg community; and
4. To uphold the Kellogg Honor Code by reporting all material violations, and by fully cooperating with and protecting confidentiality of any Honor Code proceedings.
All Kellogg students are also expected to adhere to all policies and requirements of Northwestern University and to abide by all applicable laws and regulations.

The Honor Code Philosophy Statement
The students of the Kellogg School of Management regard honesty and integrity as qualities essential to the practice and profession of management. The purpose of the Kellogg Honor Code is to promote these qualities so that each student can fully develop his or her individual potential. Upon admission, each student makes an agreement with his or her fellow students to abide by the Kellogg Honor Code. Students who violate the Kellogg Honor Code violate this agreement and must accept the sanction(s) imposed by the Kellogg community.

The Kellogg Honor Code is administered by students and is based on the concept of self-government. The efficacy of such a student-administered honor code is dependent upon a high degree of dedication to the ideals of honesty, integrity and equal opportunity reflected by the code. The Kellogg Honor Code requires that each student act with integrity in all Kellogg activities and that each student hold his or her peers to the same standard. In agreeing to abide by the code, the Kellogg students also agree to report suspected violations. By not tolerating lapses in honesty and integrity, the Kellogg community affirms the importance of these values.

The intent of the Kellogg Honor Code is to express the ethical standards of the Kellogg community. It does not attempt to be a list of rules and sanctions.

I. Organization
A. The Honor Code Committee
i. Role: The Honor Code Committee is responsible for:

a) Interpreting the Honor Code;
b) Promoting the values of the Honor Code through communication with Kellogg students, faculty, and administrators;
c) Serving as representatives of the student body on all issues pertaining to the Honor Code;
d) Assisting in investigations of suspected Honor Code violations (see Section II,E); and
e) Interpreting possible violations of the Honor Code.

ii. Composition: The Honor Code Committee will include two co-chairs, five student representatives, and a faculty representative. The student representatives will consist of two full0-time students from the first-year class, two full-time students from the second-year class and one 1Y student. The selection procedure for the co-chairs is outlined in Section I.B.ii. The student representatives will be appointed by the co-chairs. The faculty representative will be identified by the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs. The faculty representative is a non-voting member of the Honor Code Committee and is also responsible for providing advice to the Committee and feedback to the faculty about the Honor Code.

iii. Replacement: If the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs or the co-chairs determine that a member of the Honor Code Committee is unfit to perform his or her duties, the co-chairs will excuse that member from all further involvement in the Honor Code Committee. His or her responsibilities will be assumed by (a) another student appointed jointly by the co-chairs and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs, or (b) in the case of faculty, another faculty member appointed by the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs.

B. The Honor Code Co-Chairs

i. Role: The Honor Code Co-Chairs are responsible for:

a) Promoting the values of the Honor Code;
b) Selecting members of the Honor Code Committee;
c) Setting the annual agenda for the Honor Code Committee;
d) Overseeing the activities of the Honor Code Committee;
e) Administering Honor Code proceedings;
f) Coordinating with the administration and faculty on matters relating to the Honor Code;
g) Publishing an annual overview of Committee actions to the Kellogg community; and
h) Ensuring that the Honor Code remains an important aspect of the Kellogg environment.

ii. Succession: The offices of the Honor Code Co-Chairs will be filled by the current 1st Year Representatives upon the completion of the current academic year. This elevation is subject to the approval of a majority of the non-1st Year Representative members of the outgoing Committee and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs. In the event that either of the 1st Year Representatives opts out or is deemed unsatisfactory for the co-chair position, the Committee, in consultation with the KSA Executive Committee and the administration, will select an appropriate replacement.

iii. Conflict of Interest: The co-chairs may not run for KSA office or hold KSA office while serving as co-chairs.

iv. Replacement: If the assistant dean or a majority of the remaining members of the Committee determines that a co-chair is unfit to perform his or her duties, the assistant dean will excuse the co-chair from all further involvement in the Committee. All responsibilities of the removed co-chair will be assumed by the remaining co-chair and/or another member of the Honor Code Committee selected by the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs.

C. The Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs
The role of the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs on the Honor Code Committee is to provide impartial procedural advice to the Committee and the co-chairs. S/he will also serve as the historian of the Honor Code, maintaining records of past actions and cases and advising the Committee of past precedents

II. Suspected Violations
A. Reporting Suspected Violations
Students and faculty members are obligated to report suspected violations of the Honor Code promptly to a member of the Honor Code Committee, the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs, or any faculty member. Should the case proceed to a hearing, the person(s) reporting the suspected violation will become the charging witness(es). There must be at least one charging witness for an investigation to commence.

B. Notification
The person to whom the suspected violation is initially reported (Section II, A) will notify the co-chairs of the suspected violation as soon as possible. The co-chairs will notify the KSA VP of Academics, the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs, and the members of the Committee. The co-chairs will choose a member of the Committee to assist the KSA VP of Academics with the investigation.

C. Confidentiality
Charges and all subsequent steps pertaining thereto will be kept confidential by all parties involved. Only the co-chairs, the KSA VP of Academics, Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs, and the Committee member assisting with the investigation will know the identities of the accused and the accuser(s) unless/until the case goes before a student panel. Any breach of confidentiality is an Honor Code violation. The charged person may choose to waive his or her right to confidentiality at any time during the investigation or hearing by giving written notice to the co-chairs.

D. Investigation
i. Investigators: The KSA VP of Academics will conduct the investigation of the suspected violation. If the KSA VP of Academics recuses him/herself or is unavailable to conduct the investigation in a timely manner, a previously designated substitute from the KSA Executive Committee will conduct the investigation. The substitute investigator shall be chosen annually once the new KSA Executive Committee takes office. A member of the Honor Code Committee, chosen by the co-chairs on a case-by-case basis, will accompany the KSA investigator on all interviews and offer assistance on all aspects of the investigation.

ii. Investigation: The investigation may include interviews with any and all persons, regardless of affiliation with Kellogg, believed to have information relevant to the incident. The investigation will be conducted under the supervision of the co-chairs and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs. All interviews will be conducted in the presence of one member of the Honor Code Committee. Upon completion of the investigation, the KSA investigator will report the investigation's findings to the Honor Code Committee.

iii. Determination: Upon the presentation of the investigation report, the Committee and the KSA investigator will discuss the elements of the case and address any ambiguities. At the conclusion of the discussion, three of the four student representatives of the Honor Code Committee not involved with the investigation will be randomly selected to determine by majority vote whether a hearing is warranted. The Committee's decision will be based on the results of the investigation, the letter and spirit of the Honor Code, and the materiality of the suspected violation. The Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs will serve in an advisory capacity to the Committee, if requested. The Honor Code co-chairs and the KSA investigator are not to cast votes as members of the Honor Code Committee. The three voting members of the Honor Code Committee will then be excused from all further involvement in the case.

Interpretations are the opinions of the Committee only and will not prejudice the investigation or the hearing of suspected violations of the Honor Code. Final determination of violations may be made only by a hearing panel, with one exception noted below (Sections II,E). If the Committee determines there are not sufficient grounds to warrant a hearing, the co-chairs will so notify the charged person and the person who filed the charge in writing, at which point the case will be closed.

iv. Minutes: The KSA investigator or the HCC investigator for the case shall promptly prepare minutes of the findings. The minutes shall not reveal the identities of any parties. The minutes shall be held by the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs and shall be available for all future Honor Code Committees to review.

E. Acceptance of Charge for Suspected Violation
At any point in the hearing process, and at his/her sole discretion, the charged person may confess to the suspected violation and thus waive his/her right to a hearing. The charged person must inform the co-chairs of his/her decision as soon as possible, and subsequently provide a written and signed statement to the co-chairs detailing what violation is being confessed to and why the person is choosing to confess. This statement of confession will be kept confidential by the co-chairs and Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs.

In such situations, the Committee, with the advice of the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs, KSA investigator, and other relevant parties, will determine the sanctions for the violation. Possible sanctions are listed below in Section III, H. The recommended sanctions must be approved by a majority of the Committee.

The charged person retains the rights to subsequently request a student panel or to appeal these sanctions to the Dean of Kellogg using the procedures outlined in Section III, J below.

III. Hearings
A. Notification
Upon determining that the case will move to a hearing, the co-chairs should immediately inform the accused of this fact via e-mail. Once the date, time and location for the hearing have been determined, which must be done with due haste, the co-chairs will provide written notification by registered mail to the local address of the charged person. The notification will include:

i. The date of the notice;
ii. The name of the charged person;
iii. The name of the charging person (If the charging person is a student, that student’s written consent to be identified must be provided);
iv. A description of the suspected violation;
v. The date, time and place of the hearing; and
vi. The names of persons appearing as witnesses against the charged person (provided again that any student witnesses must provide written consent to be identified).

B. Advisers/Spokespersons
The charged person and the KSA investigator each may enlist an adviser to assist them in preparing for the hearing. In addition, the charged person may empower the same person or a different person to act as spokesperson, assisting in the presentation of the charged person’s arguments at the hearing. The adviser/spokesperson may only be a Kellogg student or a member of the Kellogg regular faculty, although it may not be a co-chair or the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs. The adviser would attend the pre-hearing conference and the hearing and would provide advice to the party in question.

C. Pre-Hearing Conference
The accused and the KSA investigator will be encouraged to attend a pre-hearing conference conducted by the co-chairs. The purpose of this conference is to clarify procedural issues concerning the hearing and preparations for the hearing. The pre-hearing conference should be held at least one week prior to the hearing.

D. Preparation
All information to be presented at the hearing will be made available to the charged person by the KSA investigator at least one week prior to the hearing. The chairs will not convene the hearing until the charged person has had a reasonable amount of time to complete his or her own investigation.

The charged person will be allowed to:

i. Conduct his or her own investigation of the circumstances surrounding the reported violation; and
ii. Request interviews from any persons believed to have information relevant to the incident
All interviews involving persons expected to provide evidence against the charged person during the hearing must be conducted in the presence of at least one member of the Honor Code Committee.

E. Hearing Panel
For each hearing, the co-chairs and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs will create a hearing panel.

i. Role: The purpose of the panel is to provide the Dean of Kellogg with a determination of fact and a recommended sanction, if any.
ii. Composition: The panel will include one or both of the co-chairs, eight student members, and at least one tenured faculty member. One of the student members will be chosen by the co-chair(s) to serve as secretary of the panel. The secretary will take minutes of the panel's meeting.
iii. Appointing panel members: The Office of the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs will prepare a random listing of all students enrolled in the program in which the charged person is enrolled. The first eight students able and available to serve will be selected in the order that their names appear on the list. Students will serve for only one hearing. All students have a duty to serve on a panel when selected, but the co-chairs and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs will excuse a student if he or she has cause for not serving or if that student is deemed to have a conflict of interest. The same random selection process will be used to appoint the faculty members for each hearing, with the understanding that faculty members associated with the course(s) at issue or faculty members otherwise involved in the incident may not be appointed to the panel.

The names of the panel's members shall be provided to the charged person, who may challenge the inclusion of any panel members for cause. Challenges must be made in writing and delivered promptly to the co-chairs. Those challenged may be removed by decision of the co-chairs and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs. Challenged panel members will be replaced. The charged person has a right to challenge replacements for cause using the procedure identified in this paragraph

F. The Hearing
i. Location and time: The hearing will be held at a place and time that will protect the confidentiality of the matter and be convenient to all parties involved. The hearing will not be held in the Jacobs Center or the McManus Living-Learning Center. The hearing proceedings and the panel discussions taken in aggregate shall not exceed eight hours.

ii. Observers: Unless otherwise requested in writing by the charged person, hearings will be closed. Witnesses are not permitted to remain in the hearing room either before or after giving evidence. The charged person's adviser and/or spokesperson and the KSA investigator’s advisor will be permitted to attend the hearing, if applicable. The parents and/or spouse of the charged person will also be permitted to attend the hearing as observers only.

iii. Roles: The Honor Code co-chairs will direct the hearing. The KSA investigator will present to the panel the findings of the investigation and may ask persons to give testimony in the case. In conducting this role, the KSA investigator is not and should not be a prosecutor, but should always seek to present all relevant facts pertaining to a particular case.

The charged person will be given the opportunity to respond to the charges with:

a. Information,
b. Physical evidence,
c. Testimony or witnesses, and/or
d. Questions of the witnesses called by the KSA investigator.
Panel members may question evidence and testimony presented by both the KSA investigator and the charged person. The faculty members of the panel are to assist the panel in their deliberations and should help the panel members prepare written opinions. Faculty members do not vote on either the determination of fact or the recommendation of sanctions.

iv. Rules of evidence: The hearing will not be conducted according to strict rules of evidence or the procedures used in a court of law. The co-chairs will make determinations on the admissibility of evidence.

v. Decisions: At the conclusion of the hearing, the panel members and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs will meet privately to discuss the hearing. Thereafter, the eight student panel members will convene in private, without faculty or administration advisors, and vote to determine whether the charged person is or is not guilty of violating the Honor Code. The co-chairs, the faculty panel members, and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs will act as advisers to the panel as necessary. In providing advice to the panel members, faculty members should participate in discussions to ensure that all relevant information has been considered. However, it is inappropriate for faculty members to state their personal opinion regarding the guilt or innocence of the charged person.

G. Burden of Proof
For a finding of guilt to be rendered, at least seven of the eight voting panel members must conclude that the material presented during the hearing supports such a decision with sufficient evidence.

If the student is found guilty, both the majority and dissenting panel members must issue a written opinion to the Dean of Kellogg within five days. The majority opinion should set forth enumerated findings of fact which constituted the basis for its finding of guilt. The opinion should also explain how it resolved any ambiguities in the Kellogg Honor Code if any such ambiguities were at issue. The dissenting opinion, if any, should detail the basis for the belief that a reasonable doubt existed or that the Honor Code was not violated. The opinions will not reveal the names of any parties. All panel members will be required to sign a statement indicating that they agree with their respective opinion as written. The statement will not identify panel members with an opinion. The faculty panel members may be consulted in the course of the preparation of the written opinion.

If the student is not found guilty, both the majority and dissenting panel members must issue similar written opinions to the Dean of Kellogg within five days.

The written opinions shall be held by the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs and shall be available for all future Honor Code Committees and panels to review.

H. Sanctions
If the student is found guilty, the panel will also recommend a sanction or slate of sanctions. The recommended sanction(s) must be agreed to by at least seven of the eight voting panel members. Sanctions may include, but are not limited to, the following:

i. Loss of student rights and privileges for a specified period;
ii. Required service;
iii. Reduced or failing grade;
iv. Probation;
v. Suspension for a definite or indefinite period;
vi. Exclusion (i.e. expulsion) from Kellogg; and/or
vii. A combination of the above

Any sanction involving a reduced or failing grade will only serve as a recommendation to the appropriate faculty member. The panel will also recommend to the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs whether a record of the charges and sanction(s) should be made a part of the student's permanent file.

I. Notification of Determination and Sanction
Upon receipt of approval of the recommended sanction(s) from the Kellogg deans and the Northwestern University Office of General Counsel, the co-chairs will provide the charged person written notice of the panel's determination of fact and recommended sanction(s), if any. Within five business days thereafter, the written opinion will be given to the Dean of Kellogg, along with a file containing all documents and physical evidence needed to evaluate the case.

J. Appeals to the Dean of Kellogg
Within five business days of receiving written notice of the panel's determination of fact and recommended sanction(s), the charged person may appeal the decision of guilt and/or the recommended sanction(s) to the Dean of Kellogg. Appeals may be considered on the basis of an unduly harsh sanction(s), new information not available or reasonably known at the time of the hearing, violation of procedure, or harmful bias. All appeals must be in writing and include the following information:

i. The date the appeal is filed;
ii. The name, address and telephone number of the person making the appeal; and
iii. The basis for the appeal.

The appeal must also be forwarded to the Honor Code co-chairs and the KSA investigator. Both the co-chairs and the KSA investigator will be permitted to reply to the dean in writing to address the issues raised by the appeal.

K. Results of Appeals
i. Determination of sanctions: In connection with any appeal, the Dean of Kellogg may accept the recommendation of sanctions of the hearing panel or the Committee in whole or in part, or fashion a decision he or she feels is more appropriate.

ii. Appeals based on information unavailable or not reasonably known prior to the determination of the hearing panel: If the dean determines that new information presented in the appeal is material, the dean will instruct the panel to hear such additional information. The dean may also instruct the panel to reconsider the original information. After considering the information specified by the dean, the panel will make a determination of fact as provided for in Part III,F,v and Part III,G and a recommendation of sanctions as provided for in Part III,H to be presented to the dean.

iii. Appeals based on the dean's determination of harmful bias or violation of procedure: If the Dean of Kellogg determines that a harmful bias or a violation of procedure occurred during the process, then the dean will call a meeting of the Honor Code co-chairs, the KSA investigator, and the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs. This group of four, excluding the dean, will make a determination by majority vote whether to:

a. Uphold the panel's determination of fact and make a recommendation of sanctions to the dean based on the panel's recommendation of sanctions or fashion a recommendation of sanctions they feel is more appropriate,
b. Overturn the panel's determination of fact and render a finding of innocence, or
c. Take any other action deemed appropriate.

In the event of a tie, the dean will cast the deciding vote. In addition, the dean will retain veto power at all times.

iv. Notification: The dean will notify the charged party of his or her decision in writing within 10 business days after the appeal is filed.

L. Records
Minutes of meetings of the panel and all documents associated with the investigation and hearing deemed relevant by the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs will be maintained by the Office of the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs.

If the charge is upheld, the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs may retain such records in the charged person's permanent file (if so recommended by the hearing panel under Section III,H), but no record of the Honor Code violation will be placed on the transcript of the charged person, except in cases that result in the exclusion of the student from Northwestern University. In such cases, in accordance with Northwestern University policy, the exclusion is indicated on the student's transcript with the phrase: Excluded for Academic Dishonesty.

IV. Honor Code Co-Chairs' Reports
A. Public Statement on Violations
The co-chairs may consider submitting a public statement to the Kellogg community about the proceedings. This public statement will not reveal any personally identifiable information regarding the parties involved, including the members of the hearing panel. This public statement may only reveal:

i. A description of the conduct that gave rise to the charge, and
ii. The final decision regarding the range of sanctions considered and the basis for any changes resulting from appeals and the basis for such appeal.
In the event a charged person is found not guilty either by the student panel or on appeal, the co-chairs shall give the charged person the option of whether a public statement is made.

B. Annual Report
The co-chairs will be responsible for submitting an annual overview of Honor Code Committee proceedings for the past calendar year to the Kellogg community. These proceedings should include a summary of violations that occurred over the past calendar year as well as non-case related activities undertaken by the Committee. No student names or other personally identifiable information should be included in the report. It is recommended that the annual report be issued at or near the beginning of Winter Quarter.

V. Amendments
It is envisioned that from time to time amendments to the Kellogg Honor Code may be necessary to clarify or amend provisions. The Honor Code Co-Chairs and Committee will determine, by majority vote, whether any proposed change requires a clarification of provisions or an amended provision.

A. Clarification of Provisions
If there is any provision in the Honor Code that requires clarification, but does not materially change the procedures or the spirit of the Honor Code, then such clarification may be made by a majority vote of the Honor Code Co-Chairs and Committee members with the advice of the Assistant Dean for Student Affairs. All clarifications must be approved by Northwestern University’s Office of General Counsel and subsequently submitted in writing to the Dean of Kellogg, who will have veto power over any and all clarifications.

B. Amended Provisions
If any proposed change to the Honor Code materially alters a procedure or the spirit of the Honor Code, then the amendment can be effected only with the support of a majority of students enrolled in Kellogg and subject to the Honor Code and, to the extent that the proposed material change would affect faculty’s role in implementing the Honor Code, a majority of all faculty members. Prior to voting, all proposed changes must be approved by Northwestern University’s Office of General Counsel and subsequently submitted in writing to the Dean of Kellogg, who will have the authority to veto any and all proposed changes to the Honor Code.