Honor Council Rice University  
 

Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #4. Fall, 2001
November 8, 2001

Members Present:
Chris Conrad, Sally Anne Gutting, Jason Longoria, Ryan Bergauer, DJ Brasier, Kathleen Milazzo, Joshua Barron, Rebecca Daprato, Laura Derr (presiding).

Ombuds:
Shweta Shah.

Letter of Accusation:
The Honor Council received a letter of accusation from a professor of an undergraduate social science class that noted papers submitted by Student A and Student B were extremely similar. The professor noted that this assignment was worth approximately 5% of the course grade. The professor also stated that she was new and was not aware of the structure of the Honor Code and had not discussed it in class.

Evidence Submitted:

Plea:
Both Student A and Student B plead Not In Violation.

Opening Statements:
Student A - Stated that she wrote the paper before she and Student B could discuss the topic. Therefore, she did not want to discuss the paper with Student B, but did let Student B look at her notes and her outline for the paper.

Student B - This student felt she was not in violation of the honor code. She stated she did look at Student A's class notes and took her own notes from Student A's notes, then went to the library to write her own paper.

Discussion:
Both students were asked to describe what occurred when Student B copied Student A's notes. Student B said she came over to discuss the paper, but Student A had already written it. Student A would not let Student B take her notes from her room, so Student B stayed in Student A's room and made her own notes from Student A's notes. Student A left the room for approximately one hour and Student B was gone by the time Student A returned. A council member asked Student A where she put the paper after she printed it out and she stated she thought she put it in her backpack, but she was sure it was not in the folder that had the class notes. Student A could not remember if she had taken her backpack with her when she left the room while Student B looked at her notes.

Student B said she had no notes of her own because she signed up for the class 2 weeks late and had missed a substantial amount of class because of job interviews.

Both Students were asked about the sentences in the paper that were almost exactly the same. Student B said she went off of Student A's outline, so she must have gotten the ideas from there. Neither student could show in the notes exactly where the phrases and sentences came from. Student A said her outline was approximately 1/2 a page long and consisted of fragments of sentences.

Closing Statements:
Student A stated that she did not do anything wrong because she only allowed someone to look at her class notes. She said she never showed Student B her paper and was very surprised by the similarities between the two papers.

Student B stated that she did not do anything wrong because she just borrowed another student's notes and took her own notes off of them.

Deliberation:
The Council agreed that Student A had written her paper first and believed the written evidence demonstrated that Student B had copied portions of Student A's paper.

Straw Poll #1 - Did a violation occur?
Violation: 9
No Violation: 0
Abstentions: 0

Council members agreed that the sharing of notes was not a violation of the Honor Code, but were not sure if the sharing of an outline for a paper was a violation. The Council recalled testimony by the accused that the paper outline was short and only contained sentence fragments. Members discussed how much information could have been obtained from the outline. It was determined that only the sharing of the paper would have been a violation of the Honor Code.

Straw Poll #2 - Student A
In Violation: 0
Not in Violation: 8
Abstentions: 1

One Honor Council member was still unsure that sharing an outline for a paper was not a violation of the Honor Code. It was discusses that there was no Honor Code policy for the class, so the Council could not know whether sharing an outline for the paper was a violation. Student A's outline for her second paper was discussed; it was noted the outline was not labeled as an outline and that it was part of the student's notes for the class.

Straw Poll #3 - Student A
In Violation: 0
Not in Violation: 9
Abstentions: 0

Straw Poll #4 - Student B
In Violation: 9
Not in Violation: 0
Abstentions: 0

The consensus penalty for such a violation is an F in the course, since the assignment was worth less than 10% of the course grade. The council could find no mitigating circumstances, but the penalty of loss of credit in the course was discussed.

Straw Poll #5 - Student B
F in the course: 9
Loss of Credit in the course: 0
Abstentions: 0

Straw polls 1, 3, 4, and 5 were made binding.

Thus, the Honor Council finds Student A Not In Violation of the Honor Code and finds Student B In Violation of the Honor Code, and recommends that Student B be given an F in the course. Additionally, a suspension clause will be attached to her record.

Time of Trial and Deliberation: 1 hour and 20 minutes.

Respectfully Submitted,

Rebecca C. Daprato,
Trial Clerk

Back to 2001-2002 Case Abstracts.
Back to Rice Honor Council main page.
Last modified Friday, November 9, 2001. 11:30 AM
Reach the Honor Council at honor-council@rice.edu