Need Help - Important Case

[Bruiners]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Background Info Of What's Going On:​

I am a senior at a T5 public university preparing to apply to medical school. I am currently facing an academic integrity case under Section 102.01 (Academic Dishonesty) related to a fully asynchronous course taken in Summer 2025

The allegation is that my exam submission included an equation not found in lecture slides or the textbook and was “most likely provided by AI,” which was prohibited during the exam. The professor also alleged possible collusion through a GroupMe chat, although there is no direct evidence of AI use during the exam and no exam-related discussion in the GroupMe.

For context:

• I did not use AI during the exam.
• I used ChatGPT during exam preparation to explore lecture slide material and help with understanding.
• ChatGPT generated an alternative formulation, which I wrote in my notes.
  • I provided pictures of my notes + ChatGPT logs showing the conversation between me and ChatGPT.
• During the exam, under time pressure, I applied that formulation incorrectly.
  • One of the documents in the hearing packet shows me emailing the TA after the exam mentioning the exam was difficult.
• The answer was wrong and did not improve my score.
• I have never had any academic misconduct issues in 16 years of schooling.
• I can provide way more details if we speak on PM.

The Dean applied the “preponderance of evidence” standard and referred the case to the Student Conduct Committee.

The current sanction on the table (if found responsible) is:

• Deferred suspension
• 5-year disciplinary record at UCLA (not transcript notation)

Ina UCLA legal services meeting I had today, an attorney told me that appeals are very limited and that there may be little difference between acknowledging responsibility and appealing versus going to hearing and appealing. They indicated sanction reductions typically occur only in VERY extreme procedural cases.


I understand that AMCAS asks whether you have ever been the subject of institutional action, even if it is not on the transcript.
I am very concerned that a 5-year notation, even if internal, would significantly harm my medical school chances.

Questions​

1. Has anyone here applied to medical school with a deferred suspension or internal institutional action that was not on the transcript? How did schools respond?
2. Does a 5-year internal record (non-transcript) typically carry the same weight as a transcript notation when disclosed on AMCAS?
3. Is there any meaningful difference, from a medical admissions standpoint, between:
   • Accepting responsibility and appealing the sanction
   • Going to a hearing and then appealing
4. Would reaching out directly to the professor at this stage (to explain my situation and future career implications) be inappropriate or potentially harmful?
5. Are there any other procedural steps I should consider before the hearing that could meaningfully reduce risk?
6. For those familiar with med admissions committees: how damaging is a first-time, non-transcript academic integrity action when the applicant takes responsibility and explains the situation clearly?
7. Would delaying my application cycle be wiser if a sanction is imposed?
   1. I am already taking two gap years.

I understand that I made a mistake in how I handled exam preparation relative to course policy, but I did not gain any academic advantage and did not use AI during the exam itself. I am trying to assess realistically how this may affect my future, my dream career, and what strategic decisions make the most sense at this point.


Thank you all so much in advance for any guidance. I'm extremely worried.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I'm sorry to hear, but can I ask if you hired the attorney, or is this an attorney on behalf of the university?

 

[Bruiners]

I'm sorry to hear, but can I ask if you hired the attorney, or is this an attorney on behalf of the university?

This is an attorney on the behalf of the university.

 

[Bruiners]

This is an attorney on the behalf of the university.

I would appreciate clarification on why that is relevant. I have some thoughts, but I am currently feeling overwhelmed and not thinking as clearly as I normally would.

 

[SilentCavalier]

Any university proceeding with regards to discipline is not like your normal court proceeding. There is no due process, the standard of proof they use to assess responsibility is 50% and a feather which affords plenty of grey area, and the decisions they make are in the interest of mitigating risk to the university. They do not care what happens to you and the university-appointed attorneys may know how the process works, but they are not concerned with the outcome. If you care about keeping your record clean, and/or applying to and attending medical school, I would retain an outside lawyer specializing in this kind of thing. It won’t be cheap but it’s worth your future.

You likely also won’t get a final decision in anything close to a timely fashion. If you planned on applying this coming cycle, I would reconsider, and have a helluva gap year lined up to make your application stellar if this does end up going on your record in a way that med schools would be made aware of.

Best of luck.

 

[Bruiners]

Any university proceeding with regards to discipline is not like your normal court proceeding. There is no due process, the standard of proof they use to assess responsibility is 50% and a feather which affords plenty of grey area, and the decisions they make are in the interest of mitigating risk to the university. They do not care what happens to you and the university-appointed attorneys may know how the process works, but they are not concerned with the outcome. If you care about keeping your record clean, and/or applying to and attending medical school, I would retain an outside lawyer specializing in this kind of thing. It won’t be cheap but it’s worth your future.

You likely also won’t get a final decision in anything close to a timely fashion. If you planned on applying this coming cycle, I would reconsider, and have a helluva gap year lined up to make your application stellar if this does end up going on your record in a way that med schools would be made aware of.

Best of luck.

Thank you for your response. I am not very capable financially in locating legal counsel, but I am willing to take whatever steps are necessary. I am feeling discouraged because the process seems to be advancing on procedural grounds rather than being guided by ethical considerations. I sincerely appreciate any guidance or assistance anyone can provide.

 

[Med Ed]

I understand that I made a mistake in how I handled exam preparation relative to course policy,

I am unclear what mistake you actually made, and therefore what you could potentially accept responsibility for. Does course policy prohibit how you used AI to study?

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I am not endorsing this service, and inclusion should not imply endorsement.



I don't have a direct contact to this group.

 

[polymerization]

Ina UCLA legal services meeting I had today, an attorney told me that appeals are very limited and that there may be little difference between acknowledging responsibility and appealing versus going to hearing and appealing. They indicated sanction reductions typically occur only in VERY extreme procedural cases.

Huh? This would only be true if they had clear evidence that you cheated. According to you, you did not, so there is a massive difference. One requires you to admit to something you say you did not do, a coerced false confession (which would then logically be impossible to appeal credibly). The other requires evidence to be disseminated, interpreted, and an adverse judgment adjudicated for you to appeal—which is a judgment they're taking for granted if you truly did not cheat, because there would be no substantive evidence driving the decision.

I know this may be part of a good cop/bad cop coercion strategy, but it's unusually direct for a situation with so much ambiguity (from what you have offered us here). Either they know more than you think they do, or they have shown you compelling enough evidence that you are approaching this knowing you are likely to lose. Or something else? You tell us. At face value, the group chat, e-mail, and ChatGPT transcripts don't prove anything directly. It's just weird that you would mention it if it was immaterial to the case, which leads me to believe it doesn't "look" good, even if you are being honest about the situation.

I agree with @SilentCavalier that, generally, schools have a tendency to just take the professor's word for it in 99% of cases... but considering what is on the line for you personally, I find it hard to believe that you could reach this point in your education and not go full-on scorched earth to protect your integrity and future.

An IA before graduating is a kiss of death, and the professor knows that—I would avoid communicating outside of the formal process, lest they perceive it as harassment. Once institutional gears start turning, there's no going back. I don't think the professor could reverse the referral even if they wanted.

 

[AJ25]

All these people on SDN with IA's trying to become docs LMAO!

 

[Goro]

One of the documents in the hearing packet shows me emailing the TA after the exam mentioning the exam was difficult.
This is irrelevant


The answer was wrong and did not improve my score.
Irrelevant. Also more evidence that one should never use ChatGPT. BTW, was this an open book exam????

I have never had any academic misconduct issues in 16 years of schooling.
One could counter that by saying you simply hadn't been caught yet.


I am very concerned that a 5-year notation, even if internal, would significantly harm my medical school chances.
This depends upon whether your school tells this to med schools that inquire about such things.

Does a 5-year internal record (non-transcript) typically carry the same weight as a transcript notation when disclosed on AMCAS?
Hmmm, if a school finds out that you didn't disclose what you were supposed to, that would likely be an auto-reject.


Accepting responsibility and appealing the sanction
We don't get to hear about this; it's an internal school matter.


Going to a hearing and then appealing

See above
Would reaching out directly to the professor at this stage (to explain my situation and future career implications) be inappropriate or potentially harmful?

Nothing screams entitlement to a professor more than saying "This will prevent me from going to medical school!"

For those familiar with med admissions committees: how damaging is a first-time, non-transcript academic integrity action when the applicant takes responsibility and explains the situation clearly?

It depends upon the IA. They're not all alike. A ******* freshman can be cut a lot more slack a senior, who should know better.


Would delaying my application cycle be wiser if a sanction is imposed?
I am already taking two gap years.

I can't sugar coat this, if your med school path isn't DOA, it's in deep stasis.

I understand that I made a mistake in how I handled exam preparation relative to course policy, but I did not gain any academic advantage
Again, the bolded is irrelevant. How would you interpret a student who claims "I cheated, but I cheated wrong, and it didn't help me"?

 

[chilly_md]

Did you use AI during your online exams or did you just learn the equivalent of very wrong quadratic formulas because you had Chatgpt summarize things for you instead of actually reading the textbook/powerpoint slides?

 

[IlDestriero]

This, if true as written, is a great example of what’s going on in universities today. I have kids in college. At one of their schools a CS professor failed 2/3 of the class because AI said they all used AI generated code for the final exam project.
So let’s pause here and think about this for a second. Should the professor really think 2/3 of the CS major students in his class at an elite university are using AI on their final project? 2/3? That doesn’t pass the sniff test, not remotely. But he pressed on and failed them anll and lodged honor code violations. It was in the newspapers, scandal, collusion, the kids were away for the summer, at their internships, and wham- failed, cheating, honor code, etc.
Well, as you can imagine in those 2/3 of the class at this well known school are some well heeled parents who aren’t just going to sit idly by and hope for the best for their babies. It turns out, after independent investigation of compelled evidence, that the portion of code that the AI detector determined to be generated by AI was in fact directly copied directly from the professors own course notes available online. Yes, the ace professor seems to have, pathetically, used AI to generate the code for his class notes, and then didn’t even recognize that fact when he was reviewing the exams. What a joke. I’d be so embarrassed I’d resign in disgrace immediately. If I was a student I’d incessantly refer to him in any conversation until the end of time as “the professor that uses AI to write his lectures”.

Good advice above. You’re focusing on some irrelevant things.
-Can you use AI or other online platforms to study? I wouldn’t see how they can prohibit that, or why. Many professors are terrible, or weak in certain areas. It’s normal and smart to look at other outside resources for help. What if you went to the math resource center and they gave you this formula there? No different. You weren’t using ai to do your exam, you were using AI to study and prepare.
-Can you use your notes for the test? Sounds like it.
-Can you prove that you used AI or whatever outside resources to study prior to the exam, and not during the exam? Yes.

This seems open and shut. You didn’t use AI for the exam. You had an open note test and used your own notes and assignments, study guides, etc.
DIE ON THAT HILL.
The only legal advice you should even listen to is that of your own attorney. A university attorney has one client and it’s not you. The advice they gave you is comically bad, UNLESS it was part of some kind of plea agreement that gave you a lesser sentence. Like if you lose we will expel you or suspend you for a year, but if you plead no contest now we will just give you an AI note and a zero on the exam.
If you plead guilty there will be nothing to appeal. If you are found guilty you can appeal that based on the above evidence they should have accepted your logs and study guides as proof you don’t use ai for the exam and they are trying to after the fact say you can’t use AI for anything ever, which is ridiculous btw. Especially now where universities are giving degrees in AI and training people to find ways to use it for everything.

And as an aside, be careful what you put in group chats, etc.