Submit an Academic Petition or Appeal

Petition Letter: Dear Dr. Stephenson,


a. Request:

My name is Natalie DiMaio. I am a third-year student in the Kinesiology program, within the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. This letter is for the intended purpose of appealing a Level One Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity. Within this letter, I will discuss my basis of my decision.

You may notice that the nature of this appeal letter will in fact be similar (or in some instances the same) to another appeal letter that will be filed by my twin sister, Julia DiMaio. It will be understood that this situation involves both Julia and I, in addition to the same course (HLTH 332). Therefore, there will be elements in this letter; most notably in the basis of this appeal, as well as the explanation in which we prepared for this test, that will be the same. Additionally, both Julia and I attempted to follow the suggested online format ¿¿How Do I Write an Appeal Letter¿

b. Explanation of Extenuating Circumstances:

i. Background:

I am a very passionate, and serious student. I am also very honoured to be a member of the Queen¿¿s community. I understand the rules and regulations outlined by The International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) that is mandated by Queen¿¿s University. The ICAI defines academic integrity as a ¿¿commitment, even in the face of adversity, to six fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. From these values flow principles of behaviour that enable academic communities to translate ideals into actions.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) As stated in Academic Regulation 1.1.1, ¿¿Definition,¿ within the Academic Regulations document of the University, I understand that Queen¿¿s University strives to create a learning environment through upholding the pillars of academic integrity, namely honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. Upon the consultation of ¿¿The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity, Second Edition,¿ I understand and appreciate the ¿¿crucial role that integrity and its¿¿ component values play in education.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) Specifically, as stated by Princeton University, ¿¿the ability of the university to achieve its purposes depends upon the quality and integrity of the academic work that its faculty, staff, and students perform.¿ (Princeton University, 1995) As a well-rounded member of the Queen¿¿s community, I always pride myself in the ways in which I contribute to the development of the highest standards of academic integrity and am always dedicated to upholding these values in all aspects of my life. I understand that dishonest behaviours within the academic community, in addition to all areas of my life, are simply unacceptable, and that honesty builds a ¿¿foundation of necessary prerequisites for full realization¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) of the subsequent pillars of academic integrity previously outlined. It is also acknowledged that honesty describes that both students and faculty must practice honesty for the development of making ¿¿ethical choices, and for the production of a foundation of lifelong integrity.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) I acknowledge that trust allows for successful collaboration and the sharing of information, and the free circulation of new ideas, ¿¿without fear that our work will be stolen, or our reputations diminished.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) I have received numerous accolades, including an entrance scholarship, the Dean¿¿s List, and academic awards through Ontario University Athletics. I pride myself on being honest and truthful, both prior to my time as a university student, as well as being a Queen¿¿s student, I have always and continually produce individual and unique pieces of academic work, for the facilitation of my own learning to the best of my ability. I appreciate the element of fairness, specifically that fairness is exemplified when students effectively do their own work honestly. (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) Additionally, it is the responsibility of administrators for the provision of ¿¿clear, useful, and just policies that help establish and nurture communities of integrity.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) I also understand respect, in that students are encouraged to ¿¿taking an active role in their own education, contributing to discussions as well as listening to others¿¿ points of view, and performing to the best of their ability.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) In addition, respect is observed when faculty and administrators take the ideas of students seriously, through the recognition of each student as their own individual, aiding them and providing ¿¿full and honest feedback on their work, and valuing their perspectives and goals.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) As a varsity athlete, and having been exposed to sports my entire life, I have learned that it is not possible to be successful at a sport without respect. For successful progression and to become more proficient at the sport, an athlete must take ownership of their actions and learn from them, thus showing respect to teammates, coaches, and all other members associated with the team. Finally, the last fundamental value that I acknowledge and understand is responsibility. Responsibility, as outlined in Academic Regulation 1.1.2 ¿¿ ¿¿Integrity in Action,¿ of the Academic Regulations of the University, is ¿¿both personal and collective, and draws students, faculty, administrators, and staff into creating and maintaining a learning environment supported by and supporting academic integrity¿ (https://www.queensu.ca/artsci/sites/default/files/academic_regulations_19_final.pdf). I understand that creating a responsible environment requires learning to be done in such a way that ¿¿recognizes and resists the impulse to engage in unscrupulous behavior.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) In addition, it is imperative that all individuals within the community hold themselves accountable for their actions. Through my academic standing and through many extracurricular activities that I have involved myself in at Queen¿¿s; namely through beginning an Honours Thesis through the Kinesiology program, being an active member of Queen¿¿s Health Outreach, and through my time as a varsity athlete, I have learned to understand the responsibilities outlined for me. This understanding and acceptance has enabled me to contribute to each activity to the best of my ability not only for myself, but for the betterment of each endeavor I partake in. Courage is an additional value to the pillars of academic integrity, which I also acknowledge and understand. The ICAI defines courage as a significant element of one¿¿s character, in which the individual holds themselves at the ¿¿highest standards of academic integrity, even when doing so involves risk of negative consequences or reprisal.¿ (https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf) It is through the act of appealing this Level One Finding, that I demonstrate courage. Additionally, I have experienced a Level One Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity in my first year at Queen¿¿s. In an essay written for a Sport Sociology course (KNPE 167), the finding was based on a Turnitin score of 16, when the maximum requirement for the paper was 15. I had forgotten to put quotation marks around a direct quote placed in my paper. However, I immediately met with my professor, explained the situation and expressed that it was a genuine and honest mistake. The instructor gave me the opportunity to resubmit the paper with the quotation marks. Since this incident, I pride myself on becoming even more diligent with academic integrity and the associated documentations and regulations. I have been very proactive in upholding my academic standing since this incident, in order to negate any potential jeopardization of my character. I have attached the documentation of this Level One Finding as part of my appeal.

ii. Basis of This Appeal:

As mentioned previously, there has been a Level One Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity, on the basis of plagiarism. Based on the Academic Regulations and University Policies, Academic Regulation 1.2.1 ¿¿ ¿¿Types of Departures,¿ plagiarism is defined as ¿¿presenting another¿¿s ideas or phrasings as one¿¿s own without proper acknowledgement.¿ Based on the examples provided, this Level One Finding does not equate to:
(i) copying and pasting from the internet, a printed source, or other resource without proper acknowledgement;
(ii) copying from another student;
(iii) using direct quotations or large sections of paraphrased material in an assignment without appropriate acknowledgement;
(iv) submitting the same piece of work in more than one course without the permission of the instructor(s).

My position in this Finding is that I did not commit plagiarism, and am therefore appealing this Level One Finding of plagiarism. Based on Academic Regulation 1.4 ¿¿ ¿¿Processes for Investigation of Departures from Academic Integrity¿ from the Academic Regulations and University Policies document, subsection 1.4.1.3 ¿¿ ¿¿Notification of Investigation,¿ it is stated that instructor ¿¿should include all documents relevant to the investigation (information gathered under Academic Regulation 1.4.1.2) along with the Notice of Investigation form.¿ The information referred to from Academic Regulation 1.4.1.2 ¿¿ ¿¿Collection of Initial Information¿ may include:
(i) the work submitted by the student for academic credit;
(ii) the source(s) from which the work submitted by the student is apparently derived;
(iii) the instructions describing the nature of the work to be done.

However, based on the Notice of Investigation provided for this scenario, the document states that the evidence would only be provided in person, given the work in question was a term test. However, this is not outlined within the Academic Regulations and University Policies document. Rather, in accordance to Academic Regulation 1.4.1.4.3 ¿¿ ¿¿Student¿¿s Right to Review Documentation,¿ it states that ¿¿at least 10 calendar days prior to the meeting, the student has the right to see any relevant material considered by the instructor in addition to the documents sent with the Notice of Investigation¿ (https://www.queensu.ca/artsci/sites/default/files/academic_regulations_19_final.pdf) In addition, in accordance to the Appeal of Academic Decisions document, section 1.2.2 ¿¿ ¿¿Procedural Fairness,¿ this regulation states that ¿¿procedural fairness or natural justice holds that:
(i) Students must have access to any evidence and information relevant to the academic matter in question;
(https://www.queensu.ca/artsci/sites/default/files/appeal_regulations_19_final_v2.pdf) Therefore, process was inadequately abided by.

I appreciate that under the Faculty¿¿s Appeal of Academic Decisions policy, section 1.1, generally ¿¿appeals are only granted where there are significantly extenuating circumstances, beyond the student¿¿s control, which would merit the waiving of a particular Faculty regulation or decision.¿ (https://www.queensu.ca/artsci/sites/default/files/appeal_regulations_19_final_v2.pdf) The significant circumstances that Dr. Tomasone may not have taken into account in reaching her Finding is the fact that I am a fraternal twin, and the other student referenced in this Investigation, is my twin, Julia DiMaio. Twin research strongly supports the notion that both genetic behavior and shared experiences and upbringing can result in similar answers on exams. For reference, please see Dr. Nancy L. Segal¿¿s article at https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/twofold/201107/twins-in-the-classroom, and pages 155-156 of her book Twin Mythconceptions: False Beliefs, Fables, and Facts about Twins, as well as Dara Lovitz book, Twinsight: A Guide to Raising Emotionally Healthy Twins with Advice from the Experts (Academics) and the REAL Experts (Twins).

iii. Specifics of the Online Test in HLTH 332:

Additionally, this case should not be considered an act of plagiarism. The work presented in this situation is an online term test, worth 15 of the final grade. The online term test, further outlined in the syllabus that has been provided, is 50 multiple choice questions, followed by four short answer questions, with one short answer being a bonus question. The bonus question specifically is based upon any information that was not tested in the multiple-choice section. The online test was to be written during class time, but outside of class. In this Finding, two of the four questions being examined are short answer questions, with one being the bonus question. Question 51 (the first short answer question) is related to quality participation, and Question 52 (the second short answer question) is the bonus. A lecture capture was posted onto OnQ on November 25th, 2019 regarding the information for the online test being examined, specifically by Dr. Jennifer Tomasone, (Professor for HLTH 332). The instructor speaks at length in this capture regarding how Question 51 should be completed by the students. From 04:31, the transcript from the capture is as follows:

¿¿So, with that, let¿¿s brainstorm for a second. Does quality participation apply to all domains Okay yes, so participation can happen in education and in employment. It could happen in leisure, right That we talked about three different sort of domains of participation. So, quality participation is possible in each of those domains. How might you create a quality participation experience in education How might you create a quality participation experience in employment And you kind of know how to create it in leisure because that was sort of the context around which the lecture was developed. So, what you¿¿ll want to know¿oh man this is such a huge hint¿what you want to know are the six elements of quality. And you¿¿ll want to know how or what each of those elements look like in education, in employment, and in leisure. So, get together with a classmate or a housemate, and make a little table for yourself of what does autonomy look like in school ¿ And do it for each of the six elements of quality participation. And also, be able to define the elements. Everyone should now get perfect on that question.¿

Specifically, it was stated at 05:49 and therefore encouraged by the instructor to ¿¿get together with a classmate or a housemate, and make a table. Therefore, as presented in the in-person meeting with Dr. Tomasone and the Associate Dean of Kinesiology, Anna Van der Meulen, another student and I got together and equally contributed to creating a study document together with the six elements of quality, with their subsequent definition provided in lecture and an example created by myself and the other student for each element based on quality participation. Therefore, this cannot be viewed plagiarism as I did not take another individual¿¿s ideas as my own. The answer to my question is written specifically to reflect the structure of the question. The question appeared as follows:

a) Name the elements of quality participation
b) Define the elements of quality participation
c) Provide an example of each

Therefore, in my answer and based on the notes that I had studied from for this question (which had been referenced specifically as a likely question by the instructor ¿¿ as noted above), I formatted my answer as follows:

a) Autonomy, Belongingness, Challenge, Engagement, Mastery, and Meaning

b) Autonomy: having independence, choice, or control
Belongingness: sense of belonging to a group; acceptance/respect from others; feeling included
Challenge: feeling appropriately challenged
Engagement: engaged in the activity, motivated, focused, involved; experiencing flow
Mastery: experiencing achievement/competence/sense of accomplishment; self-efficacy
Meaning: contributing towards a personal or socially meaningful goal; felling a sense of responsibility to others

c) Autonomy: choosing whether or not they would like to perform a specific exercise
Belongingness: socializing at Revved Up events
Challenge: being reassessed every 6 months to ensure that there is an appropriate level of difficulty
Engagement: having a volunteer work alongside them, to encourage and support them
Mastery: noticing improvements (do more reps)
Meaning: learning about the benefits of exercise

The finding states that ¿¿Both students had the same formatting for their responses to Question 51, which suggests that they were collaborating during the test.¿ Additionally, it was stated in the in-person meeting that the other student and I were the only two students out of the entire class that formatted the question this way, however, I was never provided any evidence with this statistic. Nonetheless, the answer to this question was not formatted in accordance to another student, rather solely formatted based upon how the question was outlined on the test. My answer clearly exemplifies that the formatting of the question was followed, and I was solely following the instructions provided by the professor. Therefore, my answer to Question 51, Quality Participation is not a form of plagiarism as it does not comply with the definition and or examples outlined in the Academic Regulations and University Policies document.

Question 52 is the bonus question on this test. Based on the lecture capture transcript for Online Test 2 posted on November 25th, 2019, Dr. Tomasone states at 03:22 that the answer for this question must be ¿¿something you studied for test two and it has to be something that wasn¿¿t tested. ¿¿ At 03:40, she continues to state, ¿¿this is your chance for you to be like sweet, I studied this and I know this so well and she didn¿¿t test me and I want the mark for this, so this is a true bonus.¿

Throughout my life, I have had exposure to, and continue to be surrounded by services animals. When I was very young, my family had a German Shepherd dog named Sydney, whose father, Bear, was a service dog in a senior citizen¿¿s home in Boston, Massachusetts. When Sydney passed away, my family got another German Shepherd dog named Mazzie. Her breeder, who is also our family friend, provides service dogs to the Massachusetts police department. Additionally, my father works in management for the NHL St. Louis Blues Hockey Club. Over the past two years, this NHL organization has adopted and trained a service dog, named Barclay, which will then be donated to a person in need. I have been exposed to service animals throughout my entire life.

Subsequently, when I realized that the topic of service animals was not tested in the multiple choice, and given the short amount of time remaining in the test, I chose to write about something very important and significant to me and my family that I knew about, namely service animals for the bonus question because of my knowledge and personal life experiences that I could obtain an extra mark.

A specific element of my answer in question is the error regarding the price range of service animals. In lecture, it was taught that the cost of a service animal can vary from 3,000-50,000. Additionally, within the study document that was created with another student that has been previously mentioned, the price range is written correctly. However, while studying for this test, I studied the information incorrectly, and seemingly made the mistake of writing 3,000-5,000, instead of 50,000. Therefore, this was an oversight on my part, as I simply studied the material provided in lecture, and my study document, incorrectly. This information was explained to Dr. Tomasone and Anna Van der Meulen in my in-person meeting.

The other student, my twin sister, also wrote about service animals for her bonus question, and made the same mistake as me. While studying for this test, we studied together, and studied the information incorrectly. However, we did not write this test together. We both have very similar life experiences, and therefore service animals are something that we both understand and hold close.

A final fact to note is that as we prepared for the test, we had no idea what our multiple-choice questions might be. This is purely coincidence as, based on the lecture capture for Online Test 1, posted on October 7th, 2019, which outlines the logistics of these tests, Dr. Tomasome states at 02:54, that ¿¿within each lecture, let¿¿s say there¿¿s going to be four questions of a type, which are actually randomized from a larger bank of questions. So I¿¿ve written probably like 12 questions for each lecture and they¿¿re all matched in terms of how difficult they are.¿ Additionally, at 03:27, Dr. Tomasone continues to state that ¿¿the questions will be different and then, within the question that you get, the response options are also randomized so even if you happen to be sitting with your friend and you both get question one exactly the same, A to D will be a different order from your friend¿¿s A to D.¿ Therefore, and in accordance with Dr. Tomasone, as the multiple choice was completely randomized between each student taking the test, it would be impossible for me to know what was on the other student¿¿s 49 multiple choice questions. While it is stated in the Finding that ¿¿both students select the same topic to write about (service animal) when many other topics could have been selected,¿ this may be due to the fact that we share very similar life experiences. Additionally, it is stated that the wording is nearly identical, which is due to the fact that a study document was created equally and studied from for this test.

Dr. Nancy Segal¿¿s comment on page 156 of Twin Mythconceptions rings true in this matter: ¿¿It is, therefore, not surprising that identical twins sometimes obtain exactly the same test score, make the same unusual mistake, or reach the same unexpected conclusion when writing a paper or completing a thought. Some fraternal twins do as well, but less often¿.to attribute twins¿¿ identical scores to cheating just because they are twins and perform alike is unjustifiable.¿

c. Future Plan:

As I have addressed above, I am a committed, dedicated and active student, and keenly aware and appreciative of the requirements of and reasons for academic integrity. Having experienced a Level One Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity in my first year at Queen¿¿s, I have become even more diligent and proactive in this regard in that matter, in an essay written for a Sport Sociology course (KNPE 167), the finding was based on a Turnitin score of 16, when the maximum requirement for the paper was 15. I had forgotten to put quotation marks around a direct quote placed in my paper. However, I immediately met with my professor, explained the situation and expressed that it was a genuine and honest mistake. The instructor gave me the opportunity to resubmit the paper with the quotation marks.

Based on the above as outlined, including taking into account the extenuating realities of twins, I request the December 17th Finding of plagiarism against me to be reversed. In the alternative, if the Finding is maintained, I would ask that the above considerations be considered by the Associate Dean (Studies) when determining any sanction.

As a future plan, and to ensure this situation does not arise again, I am proposing that (where possible), I will not enroll in courses that my sister is taking and, if we are required to take the same course offering, to make extra efforts to not study or prepare together with her.

Thank you for taking the time to consider my appeal letter and attached documentation:
(i) Notice of Investigation (HLTH 332)
(ii) Finding of Investigation (HLTH 332)
(iii) Personal HLTH 332 Study Note
(iv) HLTH 332 Course Syllabus
(v)
(vi) Finding of Investigation (KNPE 167)
(vii) Associate Dean (Studies) Appeal Form
(viii) Appeal Fee
(ix) Appeal Letter
I look forward to the opportunity to meet with you and discuss this further. If you have any questions prior to our meeting, please contact me at 16nd18@queensu.ca.

PLEASE NOTE: In accordance to the Appeal of Academic Decisions document, section 2.2.1 ¿¿ ¿¿Submission of the Appeal,¿ this regulation states that: ¿¿all documents used by the instructor and student in the initial decision must be included as part of the submission.¿ However, my test results (used as evidence by Dr. Tomasone) cannot be provided by me, as I was never given access to this information. It was not included with the Notice of Investigation, nor was it included with the Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity.

Regards,
Natalie DiMaio