Honor Council Rice University  
 

Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #17. Fall, 2001
March 28, 2002

Members Present:
Joshua Barron, DJ Brasier, Laura Derr, Jason Longoria, Aaron Martz (presiding), Paul Murphy, Geneva Rhee, Joan Shreffler, Ricardo Vargas.

Ombuds:
Muneeza Aumir.

Letter of Accusation:
The Honor Council received a letter of accusation from a professor of an upper-level social science class that accused a student of plagiarism on a final paper. The professor stated that the student did not cite or properly quote the primary source used in the paper and improperly cited another source as well. The professor also noted that those parts of the paper that were cited were minimally paraphrased.

Evidence Submitted:

Plea:
The accused plead In Violation.

Testimony:
The accused admitted to violating the Honor Code but was not intentionally plagiarizing from other sources. The student mentioned that he wrote the paper in such a manner that in his haste, he forgot to cite the primary source and to properly cite another source used in the paper. He also stated that he did not know how to properly cite some of the sources. However, contrary to what was stated in the letter of accusation, the student also mentioned that the professors of the class did not mention which proper writing format to use, nor did they show examples of proper citation.

Deliberation:
The Council agreed that the student did commit a violation but was fully cooperative throughout his testimony and committed the violation without intending to.

Straw Poll #1: Did Student A Commit a Violation?
In Violation: 9
Not in Violation: 0
Abstentions: 0

Since the paper constituted 30% of the course grade, the consensus penalty was an F in the class plus a two-semester suspension. The Council considered full cooperation and severity as mitigating circumstances. Since the accused was not attempting to deceive the Council about the violation, the consensus penalty was mitigated down. Some members of the Council discussed the relevance of severity in this case, since the parts of the paper the student did cite were very minimally paraphrased. Also, the instructions of the assignment made it clear that the professor wanted the primary source to be cited in the paper. After much discussion, the majority of the Council decided on an F in the class with a one-semester suspension.

Straw Poll #5: Penalty Deliberation
F+1-semester suspension: 5
F in the course: 4
Abstentions: 0

Straw polls #1 and #5 were made binding.

Thus, the Honor Council finds Student A In Violation of the Honor Code and recommends that he be given an F in the course plus a one-semester suspension. Additionally, a suspension clause will be attached to his record.

Time of Trial and Deliberation: 1 hour, 27 minutes.

Respectfully Submitted,

Geneva Rhee,
Trial Clerk

Back to 2001-2002 Case Abstracts.
Back to Rice Honor Council main page.
Last modified Friday, March 29, 2002. 9:30 AM
Reach the Honor Council at honor-council@rice.edu