Academic Integrity Working Group

The AIWG was tasked with its mission by the same university entities responsible for the Committee of 12. These include the Board on Conduct Affairs, the Undergraduate Senate, the Graduate Student Council, the Senate of the Academic Council, and the Office of the President. Explore the Charge to the Academic Integrity Working Group Here

In June, 2023, the Office of the President granted final approval to the recommendations of the Committee of 12, including revisions to the Honor Code and a mandate for the creation of the Academic Integrity Working Group (AIWG).

• Important Links
  • Website: OCS Honor Code
  • PDF: Final Honor Code & AIWG Proposal
  • PDF: Synopsis of C-12 Work 2022-2023

Composition Guidance from the AIWG Charge

“The AIWG will consist of four students (two graduate and two undergraduate, from diverse backgrounds including first-gen/low-income representation) and four faculty/lecturers (especially from departments with the most frequent instances of in-person exam cheating concerns), along with one person each from the Office of Community Standards (OCS) and Office of General Counsel (OGC). Student appointments will be for one academic year with the option to apply for renewal. Membership in the AIWG is to be determined respectively by the ASSU Nominations Commission, the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees, and the VPSA (for OCS and OGC). It will meet with stakeholders (student groups, departmental representatives, Academic Advising, etc.) to inform its proposals. Non-voting members may include representatives from the Center for Teaching and Learning, the Office of Accessible Education and others as identified by the Working Group. VPSA will provide resources for project management.”

The AIWG is comprised of diverse members from across the Stanford community.

Voting Members

• Co-Chairs
  • Faculty
    • Jennifer Schwartz Poehlmann, Senior Lecturer, Chemistry
  • Student
    • Xavier Arturo Millan, Undergraduate, Computer Science
• Faculty & Instructors
  • Brian Conrad, Professor, Mathematics
  • Chris Gregg, Associate Professor-Teaching, Computer Science
  • Julian Nyarko, Professor of Law and Senior Fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI
• Office of Community Standards (OCS)
  • Vy Hoang, Assistant Dean of Students
• Students
  • Graduate
    • John Sandoval, Graduate, Master of Liberal Arts
    • Ryan Loo, Graduate, Masters in Computer Science
  • Undergraduate
    • Emily Chan, Undergraduate, Art & Art History

Non-Voting Members

• Center for Learning and Teaching (CTL)
  • Cassandra Volpe Horii, Associate Vice Provost for Education and Director of CTL
• Office of Accessible Education (OAE)
  • Crystal Hill, Assistant Vice Provost
  • Retnika Devasher, Accommodations & CTC Manager
  • Antonia De Michi, Disability Advising Manager
• Office of the General Counsel (OGC)
  • Karis Chi, Senior University Counsel, Student and Academic Affairs
• VPSA Project Manager
  • Deanna Graesser Ledoux, Project Manager, Dean of Students Operations

The AIWG began the multi-year pilot of equitable in-person proctoring practices at Stanford, Spring Quarter 2024. Review the Pilot Guidelines, Courses Participating, and More

• AIWG Chairs & Deans Presentation, 10.20.25
• Foundational Logistics to Consider Transitioning Running In-Person exams
• AIWG Best Practices for In-Person Exams
• The AIMES website, launched by the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL), provides guidance and examples of how AI can be integrated into coursework in ways that support student learning and career preparation. CTL encourages departments to reach out for individual consultations and department level workshops.

Student Affairs does not unilaterally direct or control the Academic Integrity Working Group (AIWG) or its processes. Instead, Student Affairs' role is to offer resources for project management and to facilitate the procurement of an unbiased external consulting group to support the proctoring pilot. Student Affairs maintains a neutral & objective position and does not attempt to influence AIWG operations.

The Academic Integrity Working Group (AIWG) continues to collect faculty interest for the continuing proctoring pilot in Academic Year 2025–2026. Instructor interest for the Summer quarter is currently closed. The deadline to submit the interest form for Summer 2026 was May 29, at 8 pm. Submissions are reviewed on a rolling basis before each quarter. 

Access Faculty Interest Form

One of the primary goals of the AIWG and the proctoring pilot is to gather essential data, and a critical aspect of our data collection process is campus feedback. We will be gathering input from students, faculty, and instructors throughout the course of our work. Your input is invaluable to our efforts. Do you have thoughts, concerns, or questions? Please feel free to share them with the AIWG using this anonymous form.

The Honor Code was updated to permit the proctoring of in-person assessments beginning Fall 2026. The Student Conduct Charter was updated to clarify the Board on Conduct Affairs' authority to provide interpretive guidance and formulate proctoring bylaws. Additional information is available on the linked policy pages.

Faculty and instructors who choose to proctor assessments are strongly encouraged to include the following statement in their syllabus: "To foster a climate of academic honesty, effective learning, and fair assessment, examinations in this course may be proctored in accordance with the Stanford Honor Code."

No. The Proctoring Bylaw applies only to in-person assessments. Remote proctoring, whether by software or through a human proctor connecting via the internet, is not permitted. Some courses may choose to use lockdown browsers during an in-person proctored exam if they wish to run exams online or provide students access to specific software during exams. As of Spring 2026, lockdown browser tools are in pilot testing at Stanford; for more information, instructors are encouraged to reach out to the Canvas team by email at canvashelp@stanford.edu .

Instructors should communicate expectations and available options to students in advance. Guidance for common situations, including student travel, can be found in the Traveling Students and Alternate Testing Arrangements resource. The following link provides Tips and Resources for Off-Campus Proctoring Situations.

Break procedures are determined by the instructor and should be communicated clearly to students before the assessment. Instructors may require students to sign out and sign back in when leaving the exam room and leave their exam materials with course staff during the break. See the Exam Break Sign Out Sheet and implementation guidance for an example approach.

Yes. Instructors may select the format that best fits their classroom and assessment needs.Seating chart templates and instructions are available to support exam administration and documentation, shared resources can be found in the Exam Assigned Seating and Exam Break Sign-Out Sheet folder. The AIWG is actively working to develop and collect more seating charts and exam room reference documents for faculty and instructors.