Honor Council Rice University  
 

Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #31, Spring, 2002
May 10, 2002

Members Present:
Robert Cardnell, Chris Conrad, Candice Hance (presiding), Landon Jennings, Jason Longoria, Andrea Melton, Andy Perez, Geneva Rhee, Elaine Thompson.

Ombuds:
Anshu Duggal

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 paper. The professor stated that the student copied portions of essays for a midterm exam directly from several sources without quoting or citing properly.

Evidence Submitted:

Plea:
The accused plead In Violation.

Opening Statement:
The accused made no opening statement. When questioned, the student admitted that he had plagiarized on both essays using web sources he had found on his own. The accused also explained that he plagiarized on the essays because he was under a time constraint to finish the midterm by its due date. In closing, the accused expressed his regret for committing the violation.

Deliberation:
The Council agreed that the student did commit a violation. Then the Council determined whether Student A committed a violation on each essay.
Straw Poll #1: Did Student A Commit a Violation?
In Violation: 9
Not in Violation: 0
Abstentions: 0

Straw Poll #2: Did Student A Commit a Violation on Essay #1?
In Violation: 9
Not in Violation: 0
Abstentions: 0

Straw Poll #3: Did Student A Commit a Violation on Essay #2?
In Violation: 9
Not in Violation: 0
Abstentions: 0

Since the essays counted 9% each towards the total course grade (for a total of 18% of the course grade), the consensus penalty was an F in the class plus a two-semester suspension. The possible penalties discussed were loss of credit in the course, an F in the course, an F+1-semester suspension, and an F+2-semester suspension. The Council debated the impact of cooperation as a mitigating circumstance. Some felt that cooperation would not mitigate the consensus penalty down enough, since the accused blatantly plagiarized on both essays, while others felt that cooperation was enough of a mitigating circumstance to decrease the penalty. After some more discussion, the Council thus decided:

Straw Poll #6: Penalty Deliberation
F+1-semester suspension: 3
F+2-semester suspension: 6
Abstentions: 0

Straw polls #1, #2, #3, and #6 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 two-semester suspension. Additionally, a suspension clause will be attached to his record.

Time of Trial and Deliberation: 1 hour, 5 minutes.

Respectfully Submitted,
Geneva Rhee,
Trial Clerk

Last modified Sunday, August 4, 2002 4:36 PM
Reach the Honor Council at honor-council@rice.edu