| Honor Council Rice University |
Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #11, Fall 1996
March 18, 1997
Members Present: John Doll, Stephen Friedfield, Jan Huber, Lauren Kern
(presiding) Noah Shapiro, Kasia Solon
Ombuds: Grace Li
Letter of Accusation
The Council received a letter of accusation from a professor in an upper
level humanities class. The letter stated that two very similar project
reports had been turned in by Student A and Student B. The letter went on
to state that, when questioned by the professor, Student A admitted to
having copied large portions of Student B's report.
Evidence Submitted
statement of the accused
A copy of Student A's report
A copy of Student B's report
A copy of the course syllabus
Student A's work from the course
Pleas
Student A pled In Violation.
Testimony:
Student A offered a summary of the events surrounding his violation. He
stated that he and Student B had been collaborating as part of a group
project in which each student was to submit their own report. He was
given a computer disk by Student B, and copied from the disk a file which
he thought to contain the group's data. In reality, however, the file was
a copy of Student B's report.
When Student A began to write his report he discovered that he did not
have a copy of the group's data. The report was due the next day, and,
because of the late hour, Student A felt that it was now impossible to
acquire a copy of the group's data. Rather than seeking an extension on
the report, Student A chose to copy Student B's report and submit it
(with minor changes) as his own work.
Student A emphasized the time pressure he was under when the violation
occurred, as well as the stress produced by a perceived need to
overachieve at Rice. He likewise cited stress created by complications in
a variety of extracurricular activities. Student A went on to note that
the professor in the class had originally wanted to penalize the
violation with a zero on the report in question, and had only taken the
case to the Honor Council after a complaint by Student B.
Deliberation
The Council recommended a penalty of an F in the course for the
violation. Because the report was worth 8.3% of the course grade, the
consensus penalty for the violation was an F in the course and a one
semester suspension from the University. The Council chose to mitigate
the penalty because of the accused's cooperation with the Council in the
form of a plea of In Violation. The Council felt that the stress cited by
the accused was academic in nature, and thus did not constitute a
mitigating circumstance. Likewise, the penalty originally considered by
the professor was irrelevant to the deliberation. One of the primary
roles of the Honor Council is to insure university-wide fairness and
equity in the assignment of penalties in cases of academic fraud. To
place penalty determination in the hands of individual professors would
destroy the case to case consistency the Council and its procedures
provide to the Rice community.
F in course 7
Abstentions 0
Thus, the Honor Council finds Student A In Violation of the Honor System,
and recommends a penalty of an F in the course. The council also
recommends a suspension clause be attached to his record.
Time of Trial and Deliberation: 45 mm.
Respectfully Submitted,
John Doll
External Vice Chair