First| Prev| Next| Last

Academic Policies

Evaluation of Student Progress

CCL doctoral students will be given regular critiques of their work, both in writing and orally. Coursework is graded, with a "pass" or "no credit" being recorded on each student's academic record. An "incomplete" grade would be awarded if the student did not submit the assignments required, or if the revisions to these assignments were not yet up to the level deemed appropriate to doctoral study.

Audit

There is no audit for courses in the Community College Leadership doctoral program.

Incomplete grade

A student can be allowed only one incomplete at any point in the program, on the understanding that this incomplete must be removed by the end of the term following the one in which the incomplete was originally awarded. In all cases, courses must be taken in the sequence provided in the catalogue. Each course carries as prerequisite completion of the courses proceeding. However, this requirement is considered to have been met when a student is obliged to complete additional work for a course in the subsequent term -- as in the case of an incomplete. If an incomplete for a course is not removed by the end of the subsequent term, the student will be asked to withdraw from the program. When the work for this incomplete is completed satisfactorily in the faculty's judgment, the student can apply for reentry into the program at the point at which she or he left. The one exception to these provisions is the course CCL 615 Dissertation Research Concept Paper. No student can enter the second year's coursework without satisfactorily completing a dissertation concept proposal.

Reentry into the CCL Program

Students dropped from the program for academic reasons will not be considered for readmission. If for any reason an admitted student is unable to continue in the program with their cohort, that student must reapply for admission to join a subsequent cohort.

Readmission does not require resubmission of credentials or letters of reference if it takes place within three (3) years.

A narrative providing the rationale for readmission is required. An interview is part of this reapplication process as well.

In every case the admissions committee will make the final determination concerning the readmission of the candidate

Student Withdrawal

General information can be obtained from the Registrar’s office.

Grades

Grades (Pass/No credit) for all courses are posted on the NLU banner system. Students can access banner by using their NLU password.

Transcripts

Transcript requests for course work completed at National-Louis University must be submitted in writing via mail or fax (847.465.4746) with appropriate fee to:

National-Louis University
Wheeling Campus
Transcript Department
1000 Capitol Drive
Wheeling, Illinois 60090
Also see Transcript Requests

Attendance

Attendance is important to the accomplishment of CCL curriculum objectives. The university has a no-cut attendance policy; therefore, students are expected to be present for all scheduled class dates.

If a student has a major unexpected crisis, they may miss two of the five class dates and will need to make up the work as deemed necessary for the course faculty. If a student anticipates missing a class, they are expected to notify the faculty to see if any additional work is required for the course. If a student, for whatever reason, misses three of the five class dates, they must repeat the course, meaning that they must temporarily withdraw from the program and reapply for reentry with another cohort.

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act

In compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, National-Louis University protects the rights of students with relation to the accuracy and privacy of their educational records. In accordance with the provisions of this act, National-Louis University has established basic policies to prevent the release of any personally identifiable information regarding any of its students, without first having received the consent of the student. The student may request the opportunity to examine the student's records, may challenge portions of the record, may request the university to have any inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise inappropriate data deleted or corrected, or may have inserted into the record a written explanation regarding the content of the record.

Academic Honesty

Like other colleges and universities, National-Louis University has expectations regarding academic honesty (see Definitions and Guidelines) on the part of students enrolled for course work, faculty and staff, and, indeed, of professional people at all levels of academic activity.

With respect to the academic honesty of students, it is expected that all material submitted as part of any class exercise, in or out of class, is the actual work of the student whose name appears on the material or is properly documented otherwise. The concept of academic honesty includes plagiarism as well as receiving and/or giving improper assistance and other forms of cheating on coursework. Students found to have engaged in academic dishonesty are subject to disciplinary action and may be dismissed from the University.

Faculty has the right to analyze and evaluate students' course work. Students may be asked to submit their papers electronically to a third-party plagiarism detection service. Students who are asked to submit their papers, and refuse, must provide proof for every cited work comprising the cover page and first cited page for each source listed in the bibliography. When evidence of academic dishonesty is discovered, an established procedure of resolution will be activated to bring the matter to closure.

The Policy on Academic Honesty is in the University Catalog as a hard copy and online at http://www.nl.edu/registrar/catalogs.cfm and in the Student Guidebook as a hard copy and online at http://www.nl.edu/StudentServices/studentaffairs/StudentHandbook/ .

For resources on how to cite properly and avoid plagiarism, go to NLU's Center for Academic Development at http://www.nl.edu/centers/cad/resources/index.cfm and the NLU Library at http://www.nl.edu/library/ . For an interactive tutorial on how to avoid plagiarism, go to http://faculty.nl.edu/cad/presentations/Student%20Plagiarism%20tutorial.htm .

When evidence of academic dishonesty is discovered, an established procedure of resolution will be activated to bring the matter to closure.

Handling of Academic Dishonesty

• A faculty member (or other university employee) who has reason to believe that a student has violated the university's policy on academic honesty has an unequivocal obligation to confront the student for an explanation and resolution.
• The faculty member (or the university employee) shall arrange a private meeting with the student within 7 days of the occurrence of the alleged incident of academic dishonesty or within 7 days of the date he/she learned of the incident to (1) explain the allegation(s) of violation of the Policy on Academic Honesty, (2) present the reasons or evidence to support such allegations, and (3) provide a copy of the university's Policy on Academic Honesty. The desired outcome of this meeting shall be the identification of a mutually satisfactory remedy (see following page) by which to correct the breach of the Policy on Academic Honesty. The outcome of this meeting becomes a part of the official record only at such time as Step 3, below, is activated.
• If the faculty member (or other university employee) and the student are unable to agree mutually on an available remedy, either party may petition for a formal hearing procedure to resolve the matter.
• The petitioning party shall file a Petition for Hearing on Academic Dishonesty (hereinafter Petition) within 20 days of the private meeting described at Step 2, above. Said Petition shall be filed with the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs of the university. The 20-day period may be extended by the mutual consent of the parties, but in no event shall any such extension exceed the 20-day period by more than 40 days.
• The Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs, within 10 days of receiving the Petition, or such other time as may be mutually agreed among the parties, shall convene the university Council on Academic Standards (hereinafter Council) which shall hear and decide the matter. The petitioner's presence is required. An accused student shall have a right to appear at the hearing with or without an advocate. However, the absence of an advocate shall not abrogate the Council's responsibility to proceed and reach resolution.
• The Council shall evaluate all available evidence and materials, including the direct personal statements of the parties in attendance, including others who have direct knowledge of the matters under review. The Council shall then, in private session, decide upon the remedy to be applied. That decision shall be reported within three days to the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs who shall inform both parties, in writing, of the decision and place a copy of said notification in the student's file maintained by the Registrar.
• Either party shall have the right to file a written appeal of the Council's decision. Said appeal shall be received in the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs office within 14 days of the Council's decision.
• The Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs shall act on said appeal within 21 days of receipt, using whatever means of fact-finding that may be available. All parties shall be notified of the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs' decision. This action shall be the final administrative remedy available to resolve matters concerning academic dishonesty. Any remedy requiring further action by the President or Board of Trustees shall be carried out within a reasonable period of time.

Remedies

• No further action.
• Further investigation.
• Mediation by a third party.
• Extra or repeated assignments.
• Re-examination.
• Lowered grade or no credit for assignment, examination, thesis, course or
• internship.
• Suspension from the university (Can only be imposed only by the President).
• Dismissal from the university.
• Recommendation to the Board of Trustees to rescind an awarded degree (Can only be imposed only by the President).

Timelines

All days are calendar days; not working days.

• Day 1: Date of alleged incident of academic dishonesty or the date the accusing party learned of said incident.
• Day 8: Deadline for private meeting between accusing party and student.
• Day 29: Deadline to petition Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs for a Hearing on Academic Dishonesty.
• Day 40: Deadline for Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs to convene the Council on Academic Standards.
• Day 43: Deadline to report Council's decision(s).
• Day 58: Deadline to file written appeal of Council's decision.
• Day 80: Deadline for Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs to act on appeal.

Academic Appeal

Fairness of academic decisions shall be insured by permitting a student to appeal an academic decision for any of the following reasons:

• The criteria and procedures for the decision were not published.
• The published criteria and procedures were not consistent with college, school, division, department or program policy and procedures, or violate a student's rights.
• The published criteria and procedures were not followed in making the decision. This includes factual and calculation errors or major errors in judgment. Reasonable and customary academic judgments are specifically excluded from this review process.
• The decision was substantially influenced by factors other than published criteria, i.e., the decision was discriminatory.

A variety of academic decisions and judgments are essential to the orderly operation of an educational institution. Awarding transfer credit, course grades, admission to a specific program and certification for graduation are examples of academic decisions that affect an individual student enrolled in the College. Students have a right to expect that these important decisions will be made fairly by application of published policies and procedures. Individual students are entitled to a reasonable and timely review of academic decisions. At the same time, the collective good of the academic community requires the establishment and consistent application of policies, procedures, and standards. College faculty and staff also have a right to expect reasonable freedom to exercise collective and individual professional judgment within their recognized areas of expertise. This policy has been developed to insure fairness to all parties involved in such academic decisions.

This policy is limited to the review of academic decisions which are based on the application of established policies, procedures, or standards. It does not establish any individual right to review established policies, procedures or standards, or limit any existing rights to individually or collectively petition individuals or groups responsible for university policy.

Policy Definitions

Faculty and academic administrators are said to be exercising "reasonable and customary judgment" when they are faithfully following published criteria and procedures. Reasonable and customary judgments also include those academic decisions made within a faculty member's recognized areas of expertise.

When an academic administrator decides at Step II of this policy that a faculty member's decision was "reasonable and customary," and thus not qualifying for appeal, the student will be so advised. A student may appeal the administrator's decision by complying with Step III of this policy. The faculty governance unit at that level may sustain the Step II decision or ask the administrator to review the initial appeal.

General Academic Policies and Procedures

The institutional catalogs are the primary source of published academic and admissions standards. Additionally, institutional and college generated student guides and handbooks, program/course guides (which students have access to) and faculty generated course syllabi are also sources of documented academic standards. Verifiable, in-class verbal instructions relative to grading criteria/assignments may be considered in an appeals process. However, primary consideration will be given to documented instructions and that decisions influenced by other than published criteria are subject to review in accordance with this policy.

A policy or procedure may not be appealed; only appeals based on academic decision under a policy and procedure may be heard. This does not prevent students from petitioning for reform of academic policies and procedures outside of the academic appeals process. In such cases, the student should be directed to the individual or academic unit responsible for developing the decision in question.

Academic Unit

For this policy, an academic unit is defined as a division, department, program or other subdivision of a college.

Academic Administrators

Academic administrators include the Chief Academic Officers (Provost, Vice President for Academic Affairs), the college deans and the individual college department heads, program director or administrator designated by the college deans, all of whom are responsible for academic decision makers (other administrators [registrar, admissions, etc.], faculty and staff) who administer the faculty generated admissions standards and academic standards. At the college department/program level, the administrator must have responsibility for the curriculum/program in which the student (appellant) was enrolled at the time of the academic decision under appeal; this academic administrator will attempt to resolve contested academic decisions at Step II of the appeals process.

Academic Decisions

An academic decision is a decision made by a faculty member; a faculty admissions team; a faculty governance unit; an academic administrator (as defined above); or by an academic staff agency staff member (registrar, admissions, assessment center, etc.) acting in accordance with academic policies and procedures.

Discriminatory Practices

In order for an academic decision to be appealed on discriminatory grounds, the student must contend in writing that the decision was influenced by factor(s) that relate to any of the parties involved being a member of a protected class. Protected classes are defined in federal and state laws and regulations or in university policies.

 

Policy on Disruptive Classroom Behavior

National-Louis University shall not tolerate disruptive behavior in a learning environment convened by a faculty member.

Disruptive behavior by a university student is defined as any act which denies others the freedom to speak, to be heard, to study, to teach or pursue research. Such behavior is antithetical to academic freedom and to the rights of all members of the academic community.

Initial situations of mildly disruptive behavior shall be managed informally by a faculty member based upon that faculty member's personal judgment at the time. However, if disruptive behavior progresses or is of serious nature in its initial form, the formal procedure shall be as follows:

1. An instance of disruptive behavior shall result in an immediate oral and public warning by the faculty member.
2. A subsequent instance may result in the expulsion of the student for the remainder of the class period by the faculty member.
3. Continued disruptive behavior may result in the expulsion of the student from the course by the faculty member and the awarding of the grade of WU or WN. Such grade shall result regardless of the date on which the expulsion takes place. A statement of the reason for permanent expulsion shall be given in writing by the faculty member to the student, the chairperson of his/her major department, the chairperson of the department in which the course is offered, and the Registrar.
4. The disciplinary actions listed in Paragraph 3, hereinabove, may be appealed by the student in accordance with the provisions of the Policy on Academic Appeal.

In addition, disruptive behavior which constitutes a threat to persons and/or property will be immediately referred to the vice president for student affairs for adjudication and disciplinary sanction in accordance with the Student Hearing and Appeal System. Any sanctions imposed may be appealed only through the appeals process contained in that policy. Cases of imminent danger to life and property shall be referred to appropriate law enforcement authorities.

The above provisions notwithstanding, parties are encouraged to resolve matters relating to disruptive behavior amicably whenever possible. In addition, all parties are urged to document for their own records all matters relative to the purview of this policy.