| Honor Council Rice University |
Case #21, Sping 1994
Abstract of the Honor Council
April 19, 1994
Members present: Alex Cestero, Sam Cole, Dan Grossman, Steve
Hackney, Lauren Kern, Abigail Martin, Kevin Reed, Caline Mouawad
(observing), and Michael Munson (observing).
Ombudsman: Lan Huynh
Letter of Accusation
The Honor Council received a letter of accusation from the
professor of a lower-level science class, accusing a student,
Student A, of copying parts of three homeworks from solution sets.
Evidence Submitted
¥3 of Student A's homework assignments
¥Solutions
Plea
Student A entered a plea of In Violation.
Opening Statement
Student A explained that after doing poorly on a test, he went
to talk with his professor who offered to give him a make-up test.
The professor, after seeing that many students did poorly on this
test, decided that a make-up test for Student A would be unfair.
Student A decided to drop the course, but due to classes and work, he
was unable to drop the course by the drop deadline, and was not able
to subsequently drop the course. Thinking that he would be allowed
to drop the course after the deadline, Student A fell behind. The
professor gave Student A the opportunity to take the next test late
and to turn in late the homework assignments that he had missed.
Student A explained that he copied these homeworks from the
solutions. In Student A's own words, he felt he had nothing to lose
and therefore took a gamble that backfired.
Questioning
Student A was asked if these were the only homework
assignments that he had copied. He replied that they were. Student
A was asked if he had received an Honor System orientation, and he
indicated that he had. Student A was asked why he chose these
problems to copy. He replied that he copied the harder ones and
those that were not in the study guide. Student A was asked why he
didn't ask anyone for help. He agreed that he could have asked other
students for help, but explained that he was accustomed to working
alone and the solutions were simply quicker.
Witness 1 - professor of the course
The professor was asked about the Honor Code policy for the
course in question. He explained that after a student made initial
attempts to solve a problem, his advice was to then discuss it with
classmates, teaching assistants, or himself. He stated that each
student must write up the homework on his own. The professor
related the course of events leading up to and following the drop
deadline much as Student A did, with the only significant additions
being that the material Student A missed was very difficult.
Further Questioning
Student A was asked about his attitude toward the Honor Code.
He replied that he copied from the solutions out of desperation,
knowing that it was wrong.
Closing Statement
Student A gave no closing statement.
Penalty Deliberation
Because the homeworks in question (combined) were worth
less than 10% of the total course grade, and because some
collaboration was allowed, the consensus penalty for this violation
is an F in the course. The Council saw no mitigating circumstances,
and thus only the consensus penalty was proposed. One straw poll
was taken:
Straw Poll #1
F in course 7 (+2 observing)
Abstentions 0
The results of Straw Poll #1 were unanimously made binding. The
Honor Council thus finds Student A In Violation of the Honor Code,
and recommends to the Dean of Students that Student A receive an F
in the course in question. The council also recommends that a
suspension clause be attached to Student A's record.
Time of hearing and deliberation: 45 minutes.
Respectfully submitted,
Lauren T. Kern
Trial Clerk