Honor Council Rice University  
 

Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #23. Spring, 2002
April 12, 2002

Members Present:
Elspeth Simpson, Jason Longoria, Aaron Martz, Landon Jennings, Andrea Melton, Jay Bodas, Anna Ahrens, Jennifer Hamilton, Joan Shreffler (Presiding).

Ombuds:
DJ Brasier, Robert Emmett (Observing), Kate Gurba (Observing).

Letter of Accusation:
The Honor Council received a formal letter of accusation from a professor of a graduate level language class that accused a student of multiple submission on a final paper. When questioned by the professor about the work in general, the student had admitted to submitting the same paper to two different classes, but stated he had not realized it was a violation.

Evidence Submitted:

Plea:
The accused plead In Violation.

Testimony:
The accused admitted to using the same paper for both classes. He stated that he had attended the International Student Orientation at the beginning of the semester, where an Honor Council briefing took place. However, he did not receive a copy of the Academic Fraud book until after he had been accused. Although he did use the same paper for both classes, he did not know it was an honor code violation.

Deliberation:
The Council agreed that a violation did occur. Ignorance could not be taken into consideration, but the Council agreed that the accused had been extremely cooperative.

Straw Poll #1
In Violation: 9
Not In Violation: 0
Abstentions: 0

The Council considered cooperation as a mitigating circumstance. Since the paper constituted 10 percent of the course grade, the consensus penalty was an F and two-semester suspension. The extreme cooperation of the accused led the council to agree that the penalty should be mitigated down a great deal.

Straw Poll #2
F and 2 Semester Suspension: 0
F in the course: 0
Loss of Credit on Assignment: 8
Abstentions: 1

The council member abstaining said that he felt loss of credit on the assignment was too harsh and suggested lowering the grade on the paper 2 letter grades.

Straw Poll #3:
Loss of Credit on Assignment: 6
Lowering Assignment Grade by 2 Letter Grades: 3
Abstentions: 0

The council members continued to deliberate. Those favoring a reduction of two letter grades felt that a zero on the assignment was harsh given the mitigating circumstance of extreme cooperation. One council member also pointed out that the work the accused had done for the class fit with the work they did for the paper.

Those favoring loss of credit on the assignment felt that since he had not done an original paper for the class, giving him anything but a zero would be giving him credit for work he had not done. Although his cooperation warranted mitigation, a zero on the paper was as far as the Council should mitigate down.

Straw Poll #4:
Loss of Credit on Assignment: 8
Lowering of Assignment Grade by 2 Letter Grades: 1
Abstentions: 0

Straw polls 1 and 4 were made binding.

Thus, the Honor Council finds the accused In Violation of the Honor System and recommends that he receive loss of credit on the assignment, and that a suspension clause be attached to his record.

Time of Trial and Deliberation: 22 minutes.

Respectfully Submitted,

Elspeth Simpson,
Trial Clerk

Back to 2001-2002 Case Abstracts.
Back to Rice Honor Council main page.
Last modified Tuesday, April 16, 2002. 2:00 PM
Reach the Honor Council at honor-council@rice.edu