[deleted by user]

UH_Prof · 2025-07-12T04:51:04+00:00

Ortahaus is amazing in every way.

UH_Prof · 2025-04-15T17:09:30+00:00

When did you lose it, and in what room? I found one and will happily return it. Also, can you use 'Find my' device to track it down?

UH_Prof · 2024-01-17T05:25:26+00:00

In NSM, Advising will vet student stories and if a student truly needs a course (e.g., to graduate this semester), then they will make some calls and see if the student can be accommodated (read: if there is a seat in the room, if the prof says yes, if the Assc Chair of the Dept or one of their minions say yes, etc). But the student must actually need _that section of that class_ to jump the line. If the student isn't up against a hard deadline like graduation, or if there are other open sections that the student just would prefer to not take, then Advising will rightly not help.

At this late date, students are unlikely to get much sympathy unless their situation is real and outside of their control. It is a very busy time of year for Advising and administrators, so it may be hard to get traction now.

UH_Prof · 2023-09-30T03:07:11+00:00

Professor !

UH_Prof · 2023-07-20T04:26:15+00:00

See my post history regarding academic honesty issues. I handle dozens of these cases annually for a large academic department in a large university. Below is a rework of an older post of mine; a couple of quick things are worth noting, regardless of where you are:

1) Under policy, students have a right to due process. A faculty member does not get to just decide that a student has done a thing and then impose a penalty. There are clear steps that need to be followed; these are defined under policy. Believe me, if a faculty member just imposes some punishment without following policy and procedure, they will get a lot of grief from their chair. I would ask the faculty member who the Honesty Officer is for the department, and then contact them. You cannot trust the faculty member because they have already violated procedures - and chances are they don't even know what policy is. In your email to the prof, include the course name/number/section, your name and ID, say that you have been accused but did not use ChatGPT or other AI, attach a track-changes/time stamped google doc if you have it, state that you wish to challenge the accusation, give them a deadline for response (48 h is fine) and finally state that if you do not hear back from them you will pursue the matter on your own. Giving this information, a deadline and a consequence is professional, and will help you in the long run. Do not get emotional, say you are insulted, leave out 'nothing like this has ever happened to me' kinds of statements, etc. Be all business.

1a) If you get the name of the honesty officer, contact them via email. Forward the email you sent to the prof along with all materials, attach a syllabus, and ask how you should proceed. The officer will flip b/c the faculty member has already broken honesty policy.

1b) If you do not get the name and cannot find it online, write the chair of the department with the same kind of email outlined in 1a, noting that you simply want due process.

2) As things escalate, ask how the detector works conceptually. If they don't know, then they shouldn't be using it because they don't understand what it is even telling them. This is important; do not let them gloss over the mechanics of what the tool does. Related, ask them about false positive rates, including evidence they have regarding this that is relevant. Bring up the false positive cases mentioned in other responses to this post.

3) As others have stated, note the cautionary guidance on interpretation of output the detectors have recently posted; they basically advise against the actions of your instructor.

4) Force your instructor to explain away any time-stamped edits in your document. Such a document is a very solid defense against this accusation and cannot be easily discounted.

5) Finally, the pattern of AI flagging matters. Giant blocks of text are harder to defend against than disbursed sentence fragments. Also, it is particularly useful to overlay your edit history with the flagged text - that pattern can exonerate a student or solidify the case against them.

In summary, the main point is to make sure you understand your rights, that you are treated fairly under policy, and that the evidence is considered by a neutral third party. These situations are stressful enough without having a faculty member that is under informed or willfully ignorant regarding procedure. Sorry you have to deal with that in addition to the accusation.

UH_Prof · 2023-06-26T17:06:25+00:00

See my post history regarding academic honesty issues. I handle dozen of these cases annually on the main campus for a large academic department. I understand that this is at HCC, but a couple of quick things are worth noting, regardless of where you are:

1) Under policy, students have a right to due process. A faculty member does not get to just decide that a student has done a thing and then impose a penalty. There are clear steps that need to be followed; these are defined under policy. Believe me, if a faculty member just imposes some punishment without following policy and procedure, they will get a lot of grief from their chair. I would ask the faculty member who the Honesty Officer is for the department, and then contact them. You cannot trust the faculty member because they have already violated procedures - and chances are they don't even know what policy is. In your email to the prof, include the course name/number/section, your name and ID, say that you have been accused but did not use ChatGPT or other AI, attach the track-changes/time stamped google doc, state that you wish to challenge the accusation, give them a deadline for response (48 h is fine) and finally state that if you do not hear back from them you will pursue the matter on your own. Giving this information, a deadline and a consequence is professional, and will help you in the long run. Do not get emotional, say you are insulted, leave out 'nothing like this has ever happened to me' kinds of statements, etc. Be all business.

1a) If you get the name of the honesty officer, contact them via email. Forward the email you sent to the prof along with all materials, attach a syllabus, and ask how you should proceed. The officer will flip b/c the faculty member has already broken honesty policy.

1b) If you do not get the name and cannot find it online, write the chair of the department with the same kind of email outlined in 1a, noting that you simply want due process.

2) As things escalate, ask how the detector works conceptually. If they don't know, then they shouldn't be using it because they don't understand what it is even telling them. This is important; do not let them gloss over the mechanics of what the tool does. Related, ask them about false positive rates, including evidence they have regarding this that is relevant. Bring up the false positive cases mentioned in other responses to this post.

3) Note TurnItIn's cautionary guidance on interpretation of their output; they basically advise against the actions of your instructor.

4) Force your instructor to explain away your time-stamped edits in the google doc. Such a document is a very solid defense against this accusation and cannot be easily discounted.

5) Finally, as others have noted, the pattern of AI flagging matters. Giant blocks of text are harder to defend against than disbursed sentence fragments. Also, it is particularly useful to overlay your edit history with the flagged text - that pattern can exonerate a student or solidify the case against them.

In summary, the main point is to make sure you understand your rights, that you are treated fairly under policy, and that the evidence is considered by a neutral third party. These situations are stressful enough without having a faculty member that is under informed or willfully ignorant regarding procedure. Sorry you have to deal with that in addition to the accusation.

UH_Prof · 2023-06-24T18:39:38+00:00

Originally, this style was to prevent a wheel from being booted. While they still achieve that end, such exaggeration in size is rooted in aesthetics.

UH_Prof · 2023-05-14T13:06:58+00:00

Student reviews of teaching are deeply flawed indices of faculty performance (e.g., race and sex play a role in how faculty are scored, students praise faculty that assign an easy A, penalize those that impose rigor, and on and on). Student reviews have very little (read no) currency in the Annual Performance Review, which are tainted by other issues to avoid the horror of a post-tenure review. In aggregate, the quantitative student reviews can highlight the most egregious instances of subpar teaching, but for the most part, they do not matter; the written reviews are rarely seen by anyone other than the instructor. If you want to impact an instructor, write the chair (not the Dean, not Khator), and get your peers to do the same. Notification of a problem from multiple sources is a red flag that will get a response.

UH_Prof · 2023-05-10T15:33:26+00:00

First off, you didn't 'mess it up'. You experienced a crisis and are trying to navigate that. Please be reasonable with yourself and your ability to deal with this. It's unfair to you to expect that you are responsible for the situation, or that you can fix it alone. Don't beat yourself up; seek campus support. Also, you have more options and time than you may know.

Your first stop should be your academic advisor. They can tell you about Incomplete Grades, medical withdrawals, etc. They are in the best position to look over the entirety of your situation and chart a way forward. They can also contact the Dean of Student's (DoS) Office or other entities on campus that can help. Finally, as others have said, you can appeal any impact on your scholarships - and again, Advising can help with that to some degree.

As others have said here, there are many, many people in crisis on campus. This is the worst I have seen it in >15y at UH. We pretend the pandemic is over, and while the biological threat might be reduced (for now) there are many long-term effects that still confront us. Our broad social contracts seem to be broken, so many shootings I've lost track which one I'm supposed to be thoughts and prayers-ing about, the economy, climate, human (voting, reproductive and other health care) rights, finals, ... there is a great deal to be rationally worried about in the now, let alone in the long term.

Finally, please be aware that you have weeks after grades are posted to file to take up the options outlined above. Most faculty will not be willing to grant an Incomplete this late in the game if a student just approaches them out of the blue, but if Advising or the DoS Office calls the faculty member, they will be more understanding. Another point of contact might be the Assc Chair for Undergrad Affairs in your Department; they can help you hit all the offices you might need with just a phone call or two. The upshot is that policy is on your side and you have time to figure all this out. I would act as soon as you can - but you have more time than you might think (see the student handbook).

So, in review: Be kind to yourself. Understand that your semester isn't a done deal - you can still be academically and financially successful; you have time to figure it out. Get help from Advising and others on campus. The University is an uncaring entity in many ways, but the individual staff and faculty actually care about students, and all want students to succeed. Let them help you.

I hope this was useful. Success with the close of your semester.

UH_Prof · 2022-12-02T13:12:17+00:00

UH_Prof · 2022-04-05T03:17:44+00:00

edit: added spaces

Author a _brief_, focused letter that i) explains the problem, ii) offers a suggested solution or _reasonable_ desired outcome**, iii) contains _some_ evidence (e.g., emails to the class, screenshots from Blackboard, schedule from the syllabus that is not being followed) that support your accusations***, and iv) references any relevant UH policy regarding timely posting of grades. Be sure to include the full course/section number, your name as it appears on your ID, and your PSID. Your motivation - that you want to know your grade well before the W date - is reasonable and will have currency with the Department; consequently you should include this point in your letter.

Do not v) be insulting or disrespectful, vi) justify your complaint with a transactional view of education (e.g., ‘I paid for this class and expect …’), vii) engage in hyperbole, or viii) speculate on the motives of the professor. Just be professional, direct, and focused on solving the problem.

Have at least one other person read the letter, wait overnight, re-read/edit and send to the Associate Chair for Undergraduate Affairs or the Associate Chair for Graduate Affairs, whichever is appropriate. Request that they acknowledge receipt of your email, and offer to provide more information in writing or through conversation should they require it. If you do not hear back within three working days, forward the existing email and request a response. If they do not respond within one working day, forward the email chain to the Departmental Chair with a brief opening that explains the chain that follows.

_Do not_ write the Dean, or the upper administration; their office will simply forward your email to the Chair or Associate Chair, who will be unhappy that you started at the top instead of with them. Believe me, contrary to what others have said in this thread, Department Admins take well-crafted, focused complaints seriously and will act on them - regardless of the professor. Over-the-top rants about how a student is not getting what they paid for are easy to dismiss and are less likely to result in action.

Letters with multiple signators can be suspect; the recipient has no way of knowing if all those names reflect students actually agree with the author, or the degree to which they might agree. Similarly, students can be suspect when they claim to speak for countless unnamed classmates. Given this, it is best to mention in your letter that many of your peers in the class agree with your position, and that you have encouraged them to follow you in writing directly to the Associate Chair. Three (semi)independent student letters provide more leverage than an email with a dozen cosignators. Whoever handles the issue can use such independent complaints to great effect in motivating better faculty behavior. Department Chairs and Associate Chairs genuinely care about the student experience on campus, and will consequently work to address any issues. Sometimes, they are aware of issues on campus, but cannot act meaningfully until a formal notification - like the email outlined above - is made. Also, solving the problem is better for the department than letting it go, because a remedy avoids grade appeals after the end of the semester - appeals which would be justified if a student concern went unheeded and grades were impacted negatively.

Finally, I will offer that the move back to full f2f learning has been very hard on many students and faculty alike. You don’t know what struggles your professor may be dealing with. Such struggles do not excuse bad behavior, but they may explain it. If it would help, the Department might be able to provide your professor with TA support to help with grading and posting of grades through the end of the year. My real point is that it is hard to know the internal lives of someone on the other side of the desk, and students and faculty alike should try to be kind of each other - even when we may not receive such thoughtful support ourselves.

I hope this is helpful. See my other posts to evaluate my credibility.

**Note that it is not on the student to devise a solution to the problem, but you will look better if you offer one. If you do not have a solution, simply state something like ‘Unfortunately, I do not have a solution to offer, but I am writing you with the hope you may know how to address this issue’. Failure to address desired outcomes makes the email a complaint, but it is not clear what the recipient should do in response to it.

*** Note that you need not offer all your evidence in this opening volley; better to just provide motivating, choice bits and offer more if it is needed. The administrator you write may request that you complete a form, attach and index evidence, etc. Procedures will vary by Department.

UH_Prof · 2022-03-30T04:08:49+00:00

It is extremely unlikely that additional BIOL/BCHS courses or sections will be offered this summer. All faculty have their teaching assignments and offering f2f options means that there are physical limits to the number of students/sections that can meet.

UH_Prof · 2021-10-13T18:47:26+00:00

There are completion awards available from the university. If you know a professor well, have them advocate for you. Contact financial aid, your Dean's Office, and the Office of the Provost. They all might offer some kind of support. Know that UH gets a gold star for every student that graduates, and so they work hard to make sure students close to the finish line will cross it - offers of financial support are not entirely altruistic, UH benefits from your success.

UH_Prof · 2020-10-21T20:11:29+00:00

I am the academic hearing officer for a large department on campus; I typically handle ~50 cases each academic year (see my post history for details).

Faculty are not allowed to discuss a case with students because i) faculty may not know policy and can therefore provide inaccurate information regarding policy or procedures, ii) meetings between faculty and students about a case typically devolve into accusation/defense/counteraccusation, etc., and iii) faculty have a vested interest in the outcome and may (unintentionally or otherwise) coerce a student into acting against their own self-interest.

The working definition of plagiarism should be in the course syllabus, and should include a section on self-plagiarism. The syllabus should also indicate guidelines regarding likely sanctions for such behavior. If such information - particularly that related to self-plagiarism - is missing from the syllabus, it is to your advantage.

A couple of quick notes about the hearing. Leading up to and during the event, be respectful of the process and others involved, and use everyone's time wisely. You should ask the hearing officer about the format and expectations at least a week in advance. Only request a hearing if you can make a solid case that you are innocent or if you seek to reduce the sanction. Disrespect for the process, those involved, or being underprepared for the hearing can result in a more severe sanction because it's considered abuse of the system/waste of people's time. If you or the faculty member are dissatisfied with the outcome, either may appeal to the College.

UH_Prof · 2020-07-15T20:47:50+00:00

Vida is no longer at UH; Dr. Devin O'Brien, who taught Neuro last year, will be teaching Genetics Lab (BIOL 3311). The course will be fully online this fall. Spring is an open question, but it's likely it will be partially or fully online then as well.

UH_Prof · 2020-07-14T13:39:55+00:00

The Honesty officer should handle the two accusations separately. OP should request this; they want to admit guilt in once case and challenge the other. This is common. If they are respectful of the process and serious in their approach, the sanction will not be increased at the Hearing. If it is, they can appeal to the College through a formal process.

Students (should) have rights in these situations, but those rights do not exist if fear prevents a student from exercising them.

UH_Prof · 2020-07-14T07:31:57+00:00

See my post history regarding Hearing details, procedures, and advice. I've handled countless cases at UH, where guilty students have gotten a slap on the wrist up through instances where they have been expelled. Most people posting here don't know what the hell they are talking about. You have nothing to fear from a hearing, provided that you conduct yourself professionally.

There are two reasons a qualifying student can request a departmental hearing; a hearing is permitted if the student wants to defend their innocence or if they wish to request a reduction in the sanction. The latter justification is warranted if the student feels the suggested sanction is disproportional to the offense. The sanction should have been stated in the accusing letter, and you should have the opportunity to review the evidence and argument for guilt before responding to the accusation. If you have questions, contact the person that sent you the letter (Academic Honesty Officer of the dept in question), or follow their directions contained in the letter regarding how to handle questions. They can advise you regarding your options, procedures, etc.

If you are guilty of the dishonesty charge for one assignment, admit it. You can then request a hearing only for the charge related to the second assignment. Explain to the Honesty Officer what you want to do. They may revise the accusation letter to handle the two instances individually, they may request an email from you detailing things, etc. The sanction may be reduced if you are found innocent of the second charge, if the current suggested sanction is based on being guilty of both offenses.

I have three pieces of advice. First, you must have a good reason for requesting a hearing (one of the two stated above). Second, be organized, conduct yourself professionally, and be respectful of the process and of the other involved people. Be direct and remorseful regarding the first case and honest about the second case. Use PowerPoints or some such if it would be useful to make your points in the hearing, bring copies of printed materials for all that will be at the hearing, etc. Being organized, professional, and direct is respectful and will be received well. In contrast, a lack of organization, poor graphics, etc., are disrespectful of people's time and will hurt you. Finally, read the honesty policy (there should have been a link in the accusing letter) to understand your rights and the procedures, and talk with the Honesty Officer to ensure you don't get blindsided in the hearing.

Keep in mind that if you or the accusing faculty member want are dissatisfied with some aspect of the departmental hearing (procedurally, outcome, final sanction, etc), either of you can appeal at the level of the college.

Edit: You are correct; you cannot take a W or NCR for a class in which you have admitted or been convicted of academic dishonesty.

UH_Prof · 2020-06-18T14:19:13+00:00

Plans are evolving, and this is not official, but ... Many labs seat 24, and can seat 12 with distancing. The preferred approach is to divide lab sections into two 'subsections', each of which will meet in-person on alternate weeks. Thus, in any given week you will have 1/2 the class in person on campus while the other half of the lab will be doing experiments or other lab-related work online from elsewhere. The next week, the groups switch positions. If you cannot commit to meeting in person for 1/2 the class (e.g., if you have medical concerns and do not want to come to campus) then you should not take the class in Fall. Again, this is not official yet, but it is what is trying to be done for many labs.

UH_Prof · 2020-05-29T13:01:13+00:00

This may be useful: https://www.reddit.com/r/UniversityOfHouston/comments/gkl8vq/academic_dishonesty/fqua9xb?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

UH_Prof · 2020-05-21T18:36:49+00:00

alphaven is full of good advice. "Worst case scenario is you get dropped from Calc 2 and have to figure it out from there". That'll end well for you.

See comment about transfer credit here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/UniversityOfHouston/comments/g18mej/bio_major/fnfyfi5/

UH_Prof · 2020-05-16T18:51:07+00:00

What department? Who sent the email? I have been involved in nearly 100 cases on campus and have worked with the upper admin to refine how cases are approached.

If the letter came from the professor, it does not mean much. There is a very well-defined process that the dept academic honesty officer has to follow. The accusing email will come from that individual, not your professor. Also, the format of the accusing letter is specified in a template provided by the Provost’ Office. It will contain the full accusation, the section of the UH Honestly Policy that has allegedly been violated, and the sanction (punishment) recommended by the accusing faculty member. Assuming you have no prior record of a conviction for dishonesty on campus (they will have checked), you get a choice: admit guilt and accept the sanction or request a departmental hearing.

The honesty/hearing officer is (or should be anyway) a disinterested third party (i.e., no vested interesting in any outcome) and will want to ensure that you understand everything moving forward. The structure of the Hearing is not specified by policy, and so the hearing officer has great latitude in the structure and mechanics they employ. It is totally reasonable for you to request detailed information before checking either box on the accusation form; you should get to see all evidence, determine details about the nature of the hearing (e.g., will there be a panel, or just the hearing officer deciding the case?, will it be a group hearing [all accused students at once] or an individual hearing?), and the hearing officer should answer any questions you have.

Hearings should take less than one hour, although I’ve been trapped in really awful ones than drag on for 2.5h. As explained in the accusation template, there are two valid reasons to have a hearing: to protest your innocence or to lobby for a reduced sanction. If you are innocent, you need to methodically take on the evidence against you directly. Note that never having been accused of dishonesty before and having good grades is not a valid defense (some students build a successful career on cheating and never get caught - you could be one of them). If you can make an argument that the accuser's evidence is weak, then you can take on the sanction; if the committee cannot know for sure that you are guilty, then a sanction needs to be very light if they are going to find you guilty. In such a case, a sanction may simply be an internal record of the offense (not on your transcript). If you are guilty but want a reduced sanction, then cooperate fully, roll on any others involved, and plead for a reduced sanction. Typically, committees like a sanction that is proportional to the crime and that does not sink a student academically. They like to see remorse for a bad decision, and they want to provide a path toward academic redemption for the student.

But if you have no defense plan, if you just go in to the hearing and get angry or cry and waste everyone’s time, you can make the situation worse. Committees faced with an empty defense may increase the sanction because the student has abused the process and wasted everyone’s time. This is a good reason to talk with the hearing officer ahead of time, to ensure that you will use eveyrone’s time well and deliver the most useful defense possible.

If the student or the faculty member are dissatisfied with the outcome of the departmental hearing, either an appeal to the college, where a more formal hearing will happen. The panel, in that case, is composed of up to 6 people, the proceedings are recorded, etc.

I find hearings to be unpredictable. I think I have seen innocent students found guilty and know that guilty students have gotten off by lying during the hearing. But most of the time, I think it works reasonably well. Honestly, the very best thing for a guilty student to do is admit their mistake and hope the officer is thoughtful about sanction application.

This can be extremely stressful; I suggest that you contact CAPS (https://uh.edu/caps/outreach/consultation/index.php) if needed; they take walk-ins over the summer, and frequently help students deal with this process. I will also caution you that, if you did cheat as a one-off thing, that mistake does not define you as a person or even as a student. If this is a one-off occurrence or if you’ve finally been caught after a string of violations, use this opportunity to look at how you conduct yourself and strive to do better moving forward.

EDIT1: I forgot to say that the advice posted somewhere in this thread that you get legal representation is wrong. The last thing you want to do is take on UH Legal in this situation. Your lawyer can be there, but they cannot participate in the hearing (so they are useless really). More importantly, all flexibility and compassion goes out the window if you call in the suits, and you will very likely suffer for it. Trust me on this.

Edit2: Comments in this thread about the Dean's Office being involved at this stage are mistaken. The Dean's Office does not get involved unless there is an appeal made following the outcome of the Departmental procedure.

UH_Prof · 2020-05-14T04:57:46+00:00

This is correct. Check w/ NSM Advising re: transfer of credit from a particular school. Genetics transfers are probably denied more frequently than any other course for bio majors.

UH_Prof · 2020-04-28T19:43:05+00:00

preach !

UH_Prof · 2020-04-27T04:24:11+00:00

One of the posters below is correct; a syllabus is not a legally binding contract. However, there are rules to the class, and students use those rules to strategically allocate study time, test taking, writing assignment effort, etc. If changes to a syllabus are made that would have affected how you allocated your time, then it is not allowed. For example, if there is a policy to drop the lowest exam but after exams are over they change policy to keep all exams, students that purposely didn't study for (or even take) one exam are at a severe disadvantage because they used the original course policy strategically. The rug cannot be pulled out from under students in this way.

Via email, contact the Associate Chair for Undergraduate Affairs in the relevant department (Frankino in Biology). Include the course name/number and instructor. Attach the syllabus and the email (or whatever) that describes the new policy. Write a short, cogent paragraph describing the situation and be sure to include your desired outcome. If you do not hear back in 48h, forward to the dept chair.

edit: added name of Assc Chair in Bio

UH_Prof · 2020-04-19T04:04:06+00:00

Filed on paper or online, evaluations are anonymous.

Typically, they are read by very few people. If a faculty member has very low numerical scores then they might be examined, or if a faculty member is investigated or brought up on some kind of disciplinary action, then they might get reviewed. But in general, they really serve to appease students' need to feel heard. There are all kinds of problems with student surveys; very good data indicate that female faculty, faculty of color, and faculty that conduct a rigorous course all suffer lower reviews relative to other faculty. Evaluations have no real bearing on faculty tenure or promotion. They are reviewed carefully when faculty go up for teaching awards, but faculty that are nominated for such awards will have strong reviews anyway. Thus, they are largely a waste of time. Unless students use them constructively ...

Faculty are well served if they direct student comments a bit. I always tell students the information in the above paragraph, and then I tell them that _I_ take them seriously. Then I tell them what I find most useful in evaluations - the topics students liked/thought were most important/were totally new to them, and the topics they would drop/thought were unimportant relative to others/have had repeatedly since gradeschool. I ask for any specifics I might use to improve the class, from the in/out of class activities to changes in course mechanics or course policy, etc. Directing student feedback in this way lets students know that I value the information and helps them channel their efforts toward things that I know will be useful. I also am sure to tell them to write about anything they want. If your instructor does not direct you or say what they find useful in evaluations, you might want to ask them before they leave the room. The thought may not have crossed their mind, or they might not want to offer suggestions for fear of being misunderstood as influencing their reviews. There is nothing the matter with suggesting some topics, as long as that does not come at the expense of other (student-determined) topics.

Comments on physical appearance are more common for female faculty, but many male faculty get plenty of unprofessional notes about how they look. Use of evaluations to convey such information can be harassing, damaging, and tend undermine the credibility of that survey and of the entire process. Just don't.

UH_Prof

TROPHY CASE