| Honor Council Rice University |
Abstract of the Honor Council
Case #11, Fall 1998
February 18, 1999
Members Present: Jan Huber (presiding), Julie Bachir, Daniel Chelius,
Jessie Dirks, Steve Friedfeld, Jeff Gavornik, Paul Hess, Bill Moore, Kasia Solon
Ombuds: Elizabeth Oehler
Letter of Accusation: The council received a letter of accusation from
the professors of a lower level humanities course stating that the final exams
of Students A and B were substantially similar.
Evidence Submitted: Letter of accusation
Written statements of Students A and B
Course syllabus
Student A's exam
Student B's exam
Copy of professors lecture notes
Course textbook
Student A's class notes
Other students' final exams
Plea: Student A plead Not In Violation
Student B plead Not In Violation
Testimony: The professors alleged that the essay portions of the final
exam for Students A and B were almost identical in wording and thematic
structure. Students A and B stated that, because this portion of the exam was
open book/notes, it was inevitable that their essays would contain similar
wording and structure, as taken from the textbook. Further, the students
testified that Student A finished his exam, slept for several hours, turned in
the exam, and then left Houston, while Student B had been away for a portion of
the time when Student A took his exam. Student B and two witnesses testified
that he (Student B) was under the influence of alcohol and thus could not have
taken Student A's exam while Student A was sleeping.
Deliberation: The council studied the essay portions and the closed-book
short answer sections of the exams in question. Identical wording was discovered
in both sections of both exams. The council examined these two sections on the
exams of a majority of the other students in the class, as well as sections from
the textbook, to determine if similar structure or phrases could be found.
Because no other essays, short answer sections, or text contained identical or
even similar phrasing, entire sentences, or structure; and, because identical
phrasing occurred throughout the closed book portion of the two exams in
question, the council decided unanimously in a straw poll that a violation had
occurred.
The council felt that the essays in Student B's exam appeared to be a shortened
version of Student A's essays, since the structure and often wording were
identical, though either abridged or restructured, but not paraphrased. In
addition, the council felt that it was possible for Student B to have taken
Student A's exam at some point and copied it, since it was not in a sealed
envelope upon completion. The council discussed several possible scenarios in
which collusion could have occurred, and decided that based on the evidence and
timeline, it was possible for Student B to copy Student A's exam. The council
also discussed at length the possibility that Student A discussed the exam with
Student B, but found no clear and convincing evidence to prove this.
Straw Poll #4:
Student B In Violation 9
Student B Not In Violation 0
Abstentions 0
Straw Poll #5:
Student A In Violation 0
Student A Not in Violation 9
Abstentions 0
After deliberations, one member of the Honor Council (Jessie Dirks) was
dismissed because of illness, and another member (Julie Bachir) was dismissed
such that 7 members were present for the penalty phase hearing of Student B.
The council discussed possible mitigating circumstances, and decided that only
severity could be considered, as the short answer and essay sections of the
final were only a portion of the exam. It was decided, however, that because the
essays were nearly identical, and because these two sections comprised the
majority of the final exams worth, severity would not be considered a mitigating
circumstance. The final was worth 30% of the course grade, and thus the
consensus penalty is an F in the course and a 2 semester suspension.
Straw Poll #6:
Student B, F in course and 2 semester suspension 7
Abstentions 0
Thus, the Honor Council finds Student A Not In Violation of the Honor Code.
Thus, the Honor Council finds Student B In Violation of the Honor Code and
recommends that he receive an F in the course and a 2 semester suspension and
that a suspension clause be attached to his record.
Time of Trial and Deliberation: 5.5 hours
Respectfully Submitted,
Steve Friedfeld
Trial Clerk