Honor Board Case Summaries 2007-2008

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 1 (The attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise without due acknowledgement) of the Honor Code. The professor informed the Honor Board that an in-class exam a student turned in may have contained answers copied from another student’s exam. Although there were similarities between the two exams as well as inconsistencies in the evidence presented, after reviewing the situation the Honor Board did not feel that there were sufficient grounds to find either student in violation.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 2 (Plagiarism) of the Honor Code in relation to the draft of the final research essay that a student turned in for a senior research seminar. Two-thirds of the essay draft was copied and pasted from an article found on the internet. The Board found the student in violation. Since the essay was designed as a culminating experience for a student’s academic career, and since such a large proportion of the essay was not original, the Board felt that this violation was particularly severe. As a sanction, the student received no credit for the course, and the student was also suspended for one semester. The student sent an appeal to the president about the Honor Board’s decision, but their appeal was denied.

• The Honor Board was asked to review three separate cases containing identical circumstances - possible violation of Subsection 4 (Willful falsification of data, information or citations in any formal academic exercise) and Subsection 5 (Deception concerning adherence to the conditions set by the instructor for the formal academic exercise) of the Honor Code. The professors charged that answers on the tests that three separate students asked to be considered for re-grading were modified from the answers the students turned in on their original test papers. After further inquiry, the Board found each separate student in violation. As a sanction, each student received no credit for their exam. Each student was also required to write a five-page essay about the importance of Honor Codes in academic communities and to meet with their class deans to discuss their understanding of the Honor Code. Each of these three students appealed the Board’s decisions to the president, but their appeals were denied.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 1 (The attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise without due acknowledgement), Subsection 2 (Plagiarism), Subsection 4 (Willful falsification of data, information or citations in any formal academic exercise) and Subsection 5 (Deception concerning adherence to the conditions set by the instructor for the formal academic exercise) of the Honor Code. The professor reported that the research paper a student turned in contained references whose citations were inconsistent with the actual sources themselves. In addition, the paper was virtually identical to a paper submitted by another student three years earlier. After reviewing the situation, the student was found in violation of Subsections 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the Honor Code. As a sanction the student received an “F” for the course. The student was also required to write a five-page essay with full citations about the importance of Honor Codes in academic communities and to meet with their class dean to discuss their understanding of the Honor Code.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 2 (Plagiarism), Subsection 4 (Willful falsification of data, information or citations in any formal academic exercise) and Subsection 5 (Deception concerning adherence to the conditions set by the instructor for the formal academic exercise) of the Honor Code. The professor reported that the paper a student turned in contained references whose citations were inconsistent with the actual sources themselves and may have been altered. After further inquiry, the Board found the student in violation of Subsection 2 and Subsection 4. As a sanction, the student received no credit for the paper, and was required to write a five-page essay with full citations about the importance of the Honor Code in academic communities. The student was also required to meet with their class dean to discuss their understanding of the Honor Code, and to write a letter of apology to the professor.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 2 (Plagiarism) of the Honor Code in relation to the final research paper that a student turned in. The professor reported that the majority of the student’s paper appeared to have been copied word-for-word from various internet sources. The student admitted that they plagiarized the majority of their paper. After reviewing the situation, the Board found the student in violation of the Honor Code. As a sanction, the student received no credit for the course. The student was also suspended for one semester. The student appealed the Honor Board’s decision, but their appeal was denied by the president.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 2 (Plagiarism) of the Honor Code in relation to a final research project that two students collaborated on. The professor’s report indicated that the draft of the final project contained portions that were taken word-for-word from Wikipedia. When the Honor Board reviewed the situation, one of the students admitted that they were the one who copied the passages from Wikipedia. As a sanction, the student who admitted plagiarizing the information received a failing grade for the final project. The other student was not found in violation of the Honor Code.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 2 (Plagiarism) of the Honor Code in relation to the research paper that a student turned in. The professor reported that there were over a dozen sentences which were identical to an internet resource. After reviewing the situation, The Board determined that the student was in violation of the Honor Code. As a sanction the student received an “F” for the course. The student was also required to write a letter of apology to the professor, and to complete a five-page essay with full citations about the importance of the Honor Code. It was also suggested that the student make arrangements to meet with a writing tutor from the Writing Workshop. The student submitted an appeal to the president concerning the sanction of an “F” for the course. After reviewing the situation, and meeting with the student, the president determined that the explanation that the student gave and their taking responsibility for not citing the sources in the sections of the paper in question were satisfactory. As a result, the student’s sanction was changed from an “F” for the course to an “F” for the paper. The student was still required to fulfill all other sanctions.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 2 (Plagiarism) of the Honor Code in relation to a paper that a student turned in. The professor’s report indicated that the student’s paper contained significant amounts of material taken directly from various sources without the proper acknowledgement or citation. After reviewing the situation, and after the student admitted to plagiarizing sections of their paper, and apologized to the professor, the Honor Board determined that the student was in violation of the Honor Code. As a sanction the student received no credit for the paper.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 1 (The attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise without due acknowledgement), and Subsection 2 (Plagiarism) of the Honor Code. The professor informed the Board that almost half of the paper submitted by a student appeared to have been heavily drawn from a paper submitted by another student for another course in the same area of study the semester before. After reviewing the situation and after the student admitted that they plagiarized sections of their paper from the other student’s work, it was determined that the student was in violation of the Honor Code. As a sanction, the student received a zero for the assignment, and as a consequence due to the grading structure of the course, no credit for the course. The student was also required to write a letter of apology to the professor, and a five-page essay, containing full citations, about the importance of the Honor Code. The student was required to submit this essay to their class dean for discussion. The student appealed to the president to overturn the sanctions, but their appeal was denied.

• The Honor Board was asked to review a possible violation of Subsection 2 (Plagiarism) of the Honor Code in relation to a paper that a student turned in. The professor indicated that there were substantial portions of the student’s paper that were copied word-for-word, without the proper acknowledgement or citation, from internet sources. After reviewing the situation, and after the student admitted plagiarizing sections of their paper, the Honor Board determined that the student was in violation. As a sanction, the student received a zero for the paper. They were also required to write a letter of apology to the professor and a five-page essay containing full citations, about the importance of the Honor Code. The student was required to submit this essay to their class dean for discussion.