Honor Code Case Summaries 2024-2025
REGULATION 2 - Plagiarism
In a Full Honor Board hearing, the board considered allegations that Student A violated Regulation 2 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The board found the student responsible for violating Regulation 2 and recommended Student A to be sanctioned with a suspension from Wesleyan.
In a Simplified honor board hearing, the board considered allegations that Student A violated Regulation 2, Plagiarism of the Honor Code. The board found the student not responsible for violating the Honor Code.
In an Honor Board Hearing, the board considered allegations that Student A violated Honor Code Regulation 2 Plagiarism. The student was found responsible. The student will be placed on academic probation and will receive a 0 for the assignment.
In a full Honor board hearing, the board heard testimony and reviewed documentation in regards to an alleged violation of regulation 2 of the Honor Code, for plagiarism. The student admitted to committing plagiarism in lifting the title without acknowledgement and not citing any sources. Even without the accusation of AI use, this is enough for a finding of responsible for the alleged violation. Including the use of AI, which the student admitted to, though downplaying it, the Board believes that it is more likely than not that the student used AI to improve the submitted work. The board did not find it credible that the student completed A-Levels and did not know how to cite sources. The board recommends a zero on all assignments 1 and 2, a failure for the course, as well as being placed on Probation. Student A was charged with violation 1 of the academic honor code. The board found them responsible. They will receive a 0 on the assignment and be placed on probation.
In an Honor Board Hearing, the board considered allegations that Student A violated Honor Code Regulation 2 Plagiarism. The student was found responsible. The student will be placed on probation and will receive a 0 on the exam.
In a full hearing, the board heard testimony and reviewed evidence in regards to an alleged violation of honor code regulation 2, plagiarism. The student pled not responsible to the alleged violation. After deliberation, the board determined that the student was responsible for the violation and in conjunction with another case for this same student, the board recommends dismissal for the student in question.
In a full hearing, the board heard testimony and reviewed evidence in regards to an alleged violation of honor code regulation 2, plagiarism. The student pled not responsible to the alleged violation. After deliberation, the board determined that the student was responsible for the violation and in conjunction with another case for this same student, the board recommends dismissal for the student in question.
After considering student and written testimony, the board found the student responsible for regulation two, plagiarism. The student admitted to using AI software in order to complete the assignment. The board finds that the student should receive a warning. The board would like to defer to the professor's AI policy and allow the student to rewrite the paper but receive a 20% deduction on the final grade of the paper.
REGULATION 1 – The attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise without due acknowledgement
In a simplified hearing, the board heard testimony from student A and B as well as their professor, and reviewed documentation regarding an alleged violation of regulation 1, assistance without acknowledgement. After deliberation, the board found students A and B responsible for the violation. The board requires a 0 on the assignment in question and a half letter grade demotion on their final grade, as well as the students being placed on academic probation.