| Honor Council Rice University |
Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #5. Fall, 2000
January 29, 2001
Members Present:
Sean Kunnengieser, D.J. Braiser, Aaron Martz, V. Elaine Thompson, Andrew Lee, Muneeza Aumir, Kelly Bolen (presiding)
Ombuds:
Keith Henneke
Letter of Accusation:
The Honor Council received a formal letter of accusation from a professor of an upper level science class that accused students A and B of collaborating on the pledged final exam.
Evidence Submitted:
Letter of Accusation
Student A's previous homework
Copy of final exam
Student A's final exam
Student B's final exam
Copies of final exams of five different students in the class
Student B's written statement
Course syllabus
E-mail from the professor stating how much the exam was worth
Plea:
Student B pled in In Violation. Student A was dropped from the case after the preliminary investigation.
Testimony:
Student B started the testimony by stating that he accessed Student A's exam without his knowledge and copied from it and that Student A was completely innocent of any wrongdoing. He stated that after finishing his exam he realized that he done badly and copied the answers of two of the questions in the exam. He described the severe emotional stress he was facing at the time. He acknowledged the severity of the violation and expressed remorse for his actions.
In his closing statement he reiterated his regret. He further pointed out that he had only copied two questions which together were worth only half of the exam.
Deliberation:
The Council discussed both the severity of the violation and the severe mitigating circumstances as well as the co-operation of the accused.
Considering the clear evidence and the testimony of the accused, the Council determined that a violation had occured.
Straw Poll #1
In Violation: 7
Not in Violation: 0
The consensus penalty for such a violation is an F in the course and a 2 semester suspension since the final was worth more than 20% of the course grade. Other penalties proposed included F in the course, loss of credit in the course and loss of credit on the exam.
More debate occured over whether to consider the value of the whole exam or just the value of the two questions that Student B copied. The Council also discussed the co-operation of the accused and how crucial such co-operation had been in the case.
Straw poll #2
F in the course and 2 semester suspension: 0
F in the course: 0
Loss of credit in the course: 4
Loss of credit on the exam: 0
Abstentions: 3
The Council felt that given the mitigating circumstances, an F in the course and a 2 semester suspension was too severe. Considering the severity of the violation however, an F in the course and a 1 semester suspension was proposed. The abstaining members stated that they had not reached a decision regarding the extent to which they felt the mitigating circumstances should be considered. The Council then debated the rehabilitative nature of the penalties and debated the importance of Student B taking the course again. The Council also discussed previous cases and penalties handed out under similar circumstances.
Straw Poll #3
F in the course and 1 semester suspension: 0
F in the course: 0
Loss of credit in the course: 3
Loss of credit on the exam: 2
Abstentions: 2
The Council further debated the severity of the violation. They also discussed whether, considering that the exam was worth a substantial part of the grade, the penalty of loss of credit on the assignment would be a harsher penalty than loss of credit in the course.
Straw Poll #4
F in the course and 1 semester suspension: 0
F in the course: 1
Loss of credit in the course: 6
Loss of credit on the exam: 0
Straw Poll #1 and #4 were made binding.
Thus the Honor Council finds Student B In Violation of the Honor System and recommends that he receive a loss of credit in the course, and that a suspension clause be attached to his record.
Time of Trial and Deliberation: 1 hour, 30 minutes
Respectfully Submitted,
Muneeza Aumir
Trial Clerk