Honor Board Case Summaries, 2003-2004

To the Wesleyan Community:

Attached is a summary of the cases heard by the Honor Board during the 2003-2004 academic year. Each summary includes the allegation, the Board's findings and the sanction(s) assigned to the individual(s).

As stated in the Student Handbook, "The Honor System depends upon adherence of all members of the University to the standards of academic behavior articulated in the Honor Code. This community embraces a great variety of individuals whose diversity of thought and life-style are wellsprings of the intellectual and creative life of the University. In this diverse group there are, properly, a few basic tenets. These include a willingness to adhere to the Honor Code. Any student wishing to enroll at Wesleyan should understand and accept this responsibility as a condition of enrollment. The substantial responsibility is one aspect of the education offered at Wesleyan." (Wesleyan University 2002-2003 Student Handbook, p. 88)

This information is supplied by the Board to increase understanding of the Honor Code, and to promote an awareness of the Board's role in the Wesleyan Community.

If you have any questions about the Honor Code, please do not hesitate to contact any of the members of the Honor Board who are listed below:

Jonathan Psotka, '05 Senior Member, jpsotka@wesleyan.edu
Michael Sanfilippo, '05 Senior Member, msanfilippo@wesleyan.edu
Namrata Kotwani, '06 Junior Member, nkotwani@wesleyan.edu
Tacina Outram, '06 Junior Member, toutram@wesleyan.edu

Thank you,
The Honor Board

• The Board was asked to consider a possible violation of subsection 2, plagiarism. The professor alleged that the student copied parts of a website in his paper. The student admitted to the charges and was consequently found in violation. The Board recommended he receive no credit on the paper.

• The Board was asked to consider a possible violation of subsection 2, plagiarism. The professor alleged that the student improperly used an external source in writing his paper. The student admitted to the charges and was consequently found in violation. The Board recommended he receive no credit on the paper.

• The Board was asked to consider a possible violation of subsections 1 (giving and receiving assistance without due acknowledgement), 2 (plagiarism), and 5 (deception). The professor alleged that the student had copied portions of an assignment from a classmate. The student had also claimed to have done the work strictly on his own. During the hearing the student claimed that he received help from a classmate while doing the assignment. The student was found in violation of subsections 1 and 2 and cleared of subsection 5.

• The Board was asked to consider a possible violation of subsection 2, plagiarism. The professor alleged that the student improperly quoted large portions of a website in his paper. The student admitted to the charges and was consequently found in violation. The Board recommended he receive no credit on the paper. Due to other personal problems the Board also recommended that the student meet with the class dean.

• The Board was asked to consider a possible violation of subsection 2, plagiarism. The professor alleged that the student's paper was derived from various websites. The student admitted to the charges, claiming that he was suffering a serious emotional burden at the time. The student was consequently found in violation. The Board recommended he receive no credit for the assignment and perform 10 hours of community service.