Honor Board Case Summaries 2022-2023
Regulation 1 [Assistance without acknowledgment] the attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise without due acknowledgement. This includes, but is not limited to: cheating during an exam; helping another student to cheat or to plagiarize; completing a project for someone and/or asking someone to complete a project for you.
In an interim hearing, the board considered both written evidence and student and faculty testimony. The student was alleged to have violated Regulation 1 (assistance without acknowledgment) and Regulation 2 (plagiarism) of the Honor Code. The student turned in a written assignment that was flagged with a 100% AI-generated score by Turn-it-in. Based on the evidence provided by the faculty and the Turn-it-in AI report, the board believes that it is more likely than not that the writing of the assignment was AI-assisted. The student was found responsible for violating both Regulations 1 and 2. The Student received a zero grade for the assignment and was placed on probation.
In an Honor Board hearing, the board considered student, faculty, and written testimony that Student A and Student B had violation Regulation 1 of the Honor Code: The attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise without due acknowledgment. As this is their second violation in the same class, the board recommends that the students be sanctioned with a failure for the course and both be suspended for the 2023 fall semester.
In an Honor Board hearing, the board considered written documentation and student testimony. The student was alleged to have violated regulation 1. Assistance without acknowledgement, and 5. Deception for two homework assignments. The student was found responsible for regulations 1 and 5 as the student admitted to deceiving the Professor and using an answer key on both homework assignments in question. Given this finding, the student will receive probation and receive a zero for both assignments.
In an Honor Board hearing, the Board considered student and professor testimony and written documentation. The student was alleged to have violated Regulation 1 Assistance without Acknowledgement. The student did not correctly cite sources in a final examination, resulting in an alarmingly high Turnitin score. The student only cited the books, without specific page numbers, and missed citations for his outside sources. Although the plagiarism may not have been intentional, the student still violated the Honor Code and is found responsible for violating the Regulation. The student will receive a zero on the final exam and is being placed on probation.
In an honor code hearing, the Board considered written evidence as well as student testimony. The students were alleged to have violated section 1 of the honor code: assistance without acknowledgement. The students admitted responsibility, it was clear that their collaboration violated the policy in the syllabus, as the students' homeworks were identical. The students were found responsible, will receive a zero grade on homeworks 3 and 4, and be placed on probation. The Board also recommends a peer tutor for this course.
In an honor board hearing, the Board considered written documentation as well as student testimony. The student was alleged to have violated regulation 1 of the honor code: assistance without acknowledgement. The student was found responsible for this regulation, as he admitted to accessing files on Moodle while still taking the final exam. The student will receive a 50% for the final exam. The student also mentioned test anxiety, and the Board recommends CAPS as a resource should the student be interested in receiving help for this anxiety.
In an honor code hearing, the Board considered written documentation as well as student testimony. The students were alleged to have violated regulation 1 of the honor code: assistance without acknowledgement. The students were found responsible for this regulation. Student A admitted to showing his finished code to a classmate, which is not permitted, as specified in the course syllabus. The student will receive a single letter grade demotion for both homework 7 and homework 8 and be placed on probation. The student B was found responsible for this regulation as he admitted to receiving assistance from a classmate in a way that is not permitted through the syllabus as well as copying his code almost word-for-word. The student will receive a zero for both homework 7 and homework 8 and be placed on probation.
In a simplified/ honor board hearing, the board considered student testimony, written documentation, as well as faculty testimony alleging that the student had violated Regulation 1 of the honor code - assistance without acknowledgment. The board found the student responsible for the violation. We are recommending that the student get a zero on the exam. We are also recommending that the student visit with CAPS as well as International Student Affairs, and Khai Tran.
In a simplified Honor Code Hearing, the Board considered student testimony as well as written documentation. The Students A and B are alleged to have violated regulation 1 Assistance without Acknowledgment. Because both students admitted to the violation, the Board finds both student A and B responsible. The Board decided both students should receive a 0 on quiz 8 and Student B to get a 50% on quiz 7 and student A to get a 0% on quiz 7. Both should be put on probation.
In an Honor Board hearing, the board considered student, faculty, and written testimony that Student A and Student B had violation Regulation 1 of the Honor Code: The attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise without due acknowledgment. Student B admitted to having photographed the answers from Student A and used that photo to copy their work. The board found Student A non-responsible and Student B responsible for violating Regulation 1. The Board recommends that Students B be sanctioned with a 0 on the assignment and a disciplinary warning.
In an Honor Board hearing, the Board considered student testimony and written documentation. The students were both alleged to have violated regulation 1 of the Honor Code (assistance without acknowledgment). Both students admitted to collaborating on the entire exam, a clear violation of the Professor's guidelines. Because of this, the Board finds both students responsible for violating 1. Assistance without Acknowledgment of the Honor Code. The Board recommends both students receive a 0 on the exam and the students be put on probation. The Board requires a meeting with the class dean, a follow up with a peer tutor, and a CAPS referral.
Regulation 2 [Plagiarism] The presentation of another person’s words, ideas, images, data, or research as one’s own. Plagiarism is more than lifting a text word-for-word, even from sources in the public domain. Paraphrasing or using any content or terms coined by others without proper acknowledgment also constitutes plagiarism.
In an honor board hearing, the Board considered written evidence as well as student testimony. The student was alleged to have violated regulation 2 of the honor code: plagiarism. The student was found responsible for violating this regulation, as he admitted to using online sources in his papers without citations. Because the first paper was not brought to the Board, the student will receive the original grade for this. The student will receive a 50% for the second paper in question and be placed on probation.
The board considered student testimony as well as written documentation. The student was alleged to have violated regulation 2 of the Honor code, Plagiarism- the presentation of another person’s words, ideas, images, data, or research as one’s own. The student was found responsible for committing plagiarism as the student submitted papers 1 and 3 without using direct quotation marks which made his citations in line with plagiarism. On his second paper he not only did not use direct quotation marks when necessary he also used direct quotes in his writing without any citations at all. In conjunction with faculty recommendation he will receive a 10 point penalty on papers 1 and 3 and half credit on paper 2. The board recommends a follow up training on plagiarism with the writing center.
In an Honor Code hearing, the Board considered written documentation and faculty testimony. The student received and opened his charge letter and failed to appear before the Board for the hearing. The respondent is alleged to have violated regulation 2 Plagiarism of the Honor Code. Based on numerous moments of egregious mis-citing and fabrication of research, the Board found the student responsible. Because this is the student's second Honor Code violation, the Board recommends that the student be dismissed from the university.
