| Honor Council Rice University |
Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #9. Spring, 2001
April 9, 2001
Members Present:
Aaron Martz (presiding), Jeff Charbeneau, Andrew Lee, Kristin Johnson, Elaine Thompson, Ricardo Vargas, Candice Hance, Joshua Barron (observing), Jason Longoria (observing)
Ombuds:
Shweta Shah, Joan Shreffler (observing), Maeve Quigley (observing)
Letter of Accusation:
The Honor Council received a letter of accusation from a professor in an upper level science class. The letter stated that Students A and B had identical answers on a homework assignment.
Evidence Submitted:
Copies of the homework from Student A and B
Student A and B written statements
The course syllabus
The homework assignment
Student A's homework assignment
Student B's homework assignment
The professor's solutions to the homework assignment
Deposition of Student A
Deposition of Student B
Deposition of the professor
Deposition of the TA for the class
Textbook for the class
Homework assignments from other students in the class
Other homework assignments from Students A and B
Plea:
Students A and B plead In Violation
Testimony:
The students stated in their opening statements that they had violated the honor code for the class in collaborating on the homework, but that their violation was in no way intentional. The students testified that they completed the homework together, working on problems and solutions together, but that neither student copied from the other, and that any similarity in their work was purely unintentional and a factor of working closely together on the assignment. Student A testified that the answers to some of the problems came from a web page given to them by the professor as an alternative textbook for the class, and that the answers had a limited number of ways to be expressed.
Both students stated that their collaboration in the development of the solutions to the problems was perhaps excessive within the scope of the honor code for the course, and that this was the reason for their plea of In Violation.
Deliberation:
The council agreed that a violation had indeed occurred, and that Student A and Student B could be considered together in this decision.
Straw Poll #1 (Students A and B)
In violation: 7 (+ 2 observing)
Not in Violation: 0
Abstentions: 0
Thus Students A and B were found In Violation of the Honor Code.
The council then debated the penalty for the violation. The consensus penalty for the violation is an F in the course. Other penalties suggested were loss of credit on the assignment. The council felt that full cooperation with the council and unintentionality were mitigating circumstances in considering the penalty.
There was also some debate as to whether the honor code for the class is too ambiguous. Some members felt that the honor code for the class provides too much leeway and that it should be made more specific in order to prevent further violations of this nature from occurring.
Students A and B were considered separately for penalty.
Straw Poll #2 (Student A penalty)
F in course: 0
Loss of credit on assignment: 7 (+ 2 observing)
Abstentions: 0
Straw Poll #3 (Student B penalty)
F in course: 0
Loss of credit on assignment: 7 (+ 2 observing)
Abstentions: 0
Thus, the Honor Council finds Students A and B In Violation of the Honor Code and recommends to the Dean of Students that they be given a loss of credit on the assignment. A suspension clause is also attached to their records.
Time of Trial and Deliberation: 35 minutes
Respectfully Submitted,
Andrew Lee
Trial Clerk