Honor Code Case Summaries 2023-2024
REGULATION 1 – The attempt to give or obtain assistance in a formal academic exercise without due acknowledgement.
In a Simplified Hearing, the Board considered allegations that a Student had violated Regulation 1 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The Board found the student responsible, as the language used in the submitted homework strongly resembled an online source and was different from the language emphasized in class lectures. The Student was placed on probation and received no credit for the submitted paper.
In a simplified hearing, the Board considered allegations that a student had violated Regulations 1 and 2 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. Based on the student’s own testimony and documentation, the board found the student to be responsible for both violations. The Student was placed on probation and received a full letter grade demotion on the final.
In a simplified hearing, the board considered allegations that Students A and B violated regulation 1 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. Student A was alleged to have submitted work from student B in violation of collaboration policy. The board found student B not responsible since his intention was not to send work to be copied from. Student A was found responsible since the student directly copied work from student B without doing own work and submitted student A's work. Student A received a zero for the assignment and is unable to make it up. Student A is also encouraged to seek help in office hours or with TA’s.
In a Simplified Honor Board hearing, the board considered allegations that Student A violated Regulation 1 and 2 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The board found the student not responsible for Regulation 1 and Regulation 2. The case was closed.
In a simplified honor board hearing, the board considered allegations that a student violated regulation 1 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The student was found responsible as the Professor submitted the homework and final in question marked where the cheating occurred as well as the student pleading responsible to using outside sources to complete these assignments, and was forthright with the cheating. The student will be placed on probation.
In a virtual hearing, the Honor Board considered allegations that Student A had violated Regulation 1 and 2 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The board considered faculty testimony and documentation, however, the student failed to appear. After deliberation, the board found the student not responsible for violating regulation 1 and responsible for regulation 2. The Student was placed on probation and received a “0” on the assignment.
REGULATION 2 – Plagiarism-the presentation of words, ideas, images, data, or research that are not your original work without citation.
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 dismissed from the university. Because this is a second violation of the Honor Code, the board determined that a dismissal from the university was appropriate.
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 Student A to be responsible for violating Regulation 2, and the board recommends that the student be suspended.
In an Honor Board hearing, the board considered allegations that Student A violated Regulation 2. of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The Board found the student not responsible for violating Regulation 2. The case was closed.
In a Simplified Honor Board hearing, the board considered allegations that a Student had violated Regulation 2 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The board recommends that the student be placed on probation. It also recommends that the student receive a 0 for the three Moodle Post Assignments which were plagiarized and in addition, have his final grade for this course deducted by a half-letter grade.
In an honor hearing in which the respondent party was invited, but did not attend, the board considered allegations that this Student violated regulation 2 and 1 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The student was found responsible for both violations given the evidence from multiple AI checkers which provided assurance that this was not the student's work. The student will be placed on probation for this offense and will receive a zero for this assignment which will result in the failure of the class.
During a simplified honor code violation hearing, the board considered allegations that a student violated Regulation 2 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. Based on the student’s own admission that they received assistance with their final paper from their roommate while studying abroad, the board determined that the help the student received was significant and the board agreed with the faculty that the paper consisted of words and ideas that were not the student’s own. Given this determination, the board finds the student responsible for violating Regulation 2 of the Honor Code — the student was placed on probation and received a “0” on the assignment.
In a Simplified Honor Board hearing, the board considered allegations that Student A violated Regulation 2- of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. The board found the student not responsible for Regulation 1 but found the student responsible for Regulation 2. The board recommends that the student receive a 0 on the assignment and be put on probation.
REGULATION 5 – Deception – Deception concerning adherence to the conditions set by the instructor for a formal academic exercise.
In a simplified hearing, the Board considered allegations that a Student had violated Regulation 2 and 5 of the Wesleyan University Honor Code. After deliberating, the board found the student responsible for violating Regulation 2 but not responsible for Regulation 5. The board sanctioned the student to receive a 0 on the assignment.