| Honor Council Rice
University |
|
Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #30. Spring, 2002.
May 3, 2002.
Members Present:
Keith Henneke (presiding), Kathleen Milazzo, Andrew Lee, Jason Longoria, Landon Jennings, Elaine Thompson, Joshua Barron, Andrea Melton, Ravi Patel, Christopher Edwards (non-voting member).
Ombuds:
Robert Emmett.
Letter of Accusation:
The Honor Council received a letter of accusation from a professor in a graduate level business class. The letter stated Student A and Student B had both submitted an identical printout containing an answer to a single question in a non-collaborative assignment. This printout had Student B's name on it.
Evidence Submitted:
- Letter of Accusation
- Student A's Assignment
- Student B's Assignment
- Student A's Statement
- Student B's Statement
- Student Deposition
- Professor Deposition
- Syllabus (on a computer)
- Student A's original file (on a computer)
Plea:
Student A pleads Not In Violation. Student B pleads Not In Violation.
Opening Statement:
Student B stated that she printed to a print lab in another part of the building, and when she came to get the pages, one or two were missing and had to be reprinted. She had no knowledge that anyone had taken the pages, and could have done nothing to prevent it.
Student A stated that she did not check the pages of her document as they printed. She assumed that the next two pages after she printed were hers, and attached them to the rest of her assignment.
Discussion:
The council inquired into the nature of the printing system in the building, and learned that the specific narratives of Students A and B were plausible. The council determined that the original file of Student A contained two pages which were likely to have printed in two jobs. The student deposition demonstrated that Student A's original page was seen in the print lab around the time in question. Student A argued that the use of Student B's page was accidental.
Deliberation:
The council agreed that the submission of Student B's page in Student A's assignment was accidental. Given that Student B's name was on the page in question, the council debated whether a violation occurred. It was noted that the council does not accept unintentionality as a mitigating factor. Straw polls were taken.
Straw Poll #3 - Whether a Violation Occurred.
A violation occurred: 9 ( + 1 non-voting member)
A violation did not occur: 0
Abstention: 0
Straw Poll #4 - Whether Student B is In Violation of the Honor Code.
In Violation: 0
Not In Violation: 9 ( + 1 non-voting member)
Abstention: 0
Straw Poll #5 - Whether Student A is In Violation of the Honor Code
In Violation: 9 ( + 1 non-voting member)
Not In Violation: 0
Abstention: 0
Thus the Honor Council finds that Student A committed a violation of the Honor Code.
Penalty Phase:
Student A - Council members discussed the high levels of cooperation with the council and low levels of severity involved with this accused and this violation. Penalties were suggested. The consensus penalty of and F in the course and a Two semester suspension was automatically considered. In addition council members suggested penalties including a letter of reprimand, a zero on the section in question, a grading of Student A's original work, and a letter allowing the professor to decide between providing zero points on the section, or grading Student A's original Work. Straw polls were conducted. The consensus penalty was eliminated in early straw polls.
Straw Poll #7 - Penalty for Student A
Letter of reprimand, with the professor having discretion as to whether zero points will be awarded or Student A's original work be graded: 2 (+1 non-voting member)
Letter of reprimand and a zero on the section: 7
Letter of reprimand and a grading of Student A's original work: 0
A zero on the section: 0
Abstain: 0
Straw polls 3, 4, 5 and 7 were made binding.
Thus, the Honor Council finds Student B Not In Violation of the Honor Code.
The Honor Council finds Student A In Violation of the Honor Code, and she will be given a letter of reprimand and a zero on the section in question. Additionally, a suspension clause will be attached to her record.
Time of Trial and Deliberation: 1 hour 50 min.
Respectfully submitted,
Ravi V. Patel
Trial Clerk
Back to 2001-2002 Case Abstracts.
Back to Rice Honor Council main page.
Last modified Thursday, May 9, 2002. 10:30 AM
Reach the Honor Council at honor-council@rice.edu