1. K-State home
  2. »Honor System
  3. »System Basics
  4. »Honor Pledge Violations (AUGUST 2006-JULY 2007)

Honor and Integrity System

K-State Honor & Integrity System

1800 Claflin, Suite 001
Manhattan, KS 66502

 

785-532-2595
honor@k-state.edu

 

Dr. Steve Starrett - Director
steveks@k-state.edu

 

Dr. Camilla Roberts - Associate Director
cjroberts@k-state.edu

Honor Pledge Violations (AUGUST 2006-JULY 2007)

The following violations of the Honor Pledge occurred at Kansas State University. Most recent occurrences are listed first. For definitions to some Honor & Integrity System terms used below, please access this web site link: TERM

This site was last updated on Sunday, October 14th 7:40 p.m.

July

Case #2006/2007-118-Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized by submitting previously submitted work for credit in a course the student was repeating. The instructor, upon discovering the student was repeating the course, communicated the expectation that all work submitted must be original to the current course. Upon reviewing the submitted work the instructor discovered that two of the assignments were the same, without alteration, as those previously submitted by the student. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with an XF and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-117- Instructor decided not to file a report.

Case #2006/2007-116-A Graduate student submitted an assignment solution received from another student. The Graduate student received the solution from another student who thought the submission deadline had passed. The student initially denied the allegation but upon consideration approached the Professor two hours later and acknowledged the unethical actions. The professor sanctioned the student with a warning and the successful completion of the D&I class. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-115-A Sophomore was alleged to have received unauthorized aid on a paper presented for grading. Specifically, a computer was analyzed which indicated the paper was created on this computer by another student and was sent via electronic mail to the student in question. The student was informed in the email message to revise the rough draft for the paper to insure that the paper matched the rough draft. The student acknowledged the transaction with the tutor, however explained that after being ill, and not being able to meet with the tutor physically, the email system was used. After consulting with the instructor, the Director and instructor together decided an Honor Pledge violation had not occurred. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-114-A Junior was alleged to have plagiarized on a paper submitted for class. Upon reviewing the paper to be graded the instructor noted that about 70% of the paper had been taken verbatim from four separate Internet sites. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a rewrite of the assignment and an official warning from the Honor & Integrity System. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-113-A Sophomore was alleged to have falsified proctoring information submitted for a course through the Division of Continuing Education. In addition, the student was alleged to have used an unauthorized email account to correspond with the instructor and staff. The Instructor attempted to resolve the case independently. However, upon further investigation the complicated nature of the case dictated that it be filed with the Honor & Integrity Office for further investigation and adjudication. After a thorough investigation, the Honor Case Investigators recommended the case be adjudicated by an Honor hearing panel. The Honor hearing panel found the student, who chose not to attend the hearing, responsible for an Honor Pledge violation and sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and successfully completing the D&I course. Case Closed.

June

Case #2006/2007-112-Case dropped by Reporter.

Case #2006/2007-111--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized information contained within a paper submitted for grading. As a result the Assistant Instructor sanctioned the student with a cap on the assignment grade and a modified assignment related to those given in the D&I course. The reason for giving the modified assignment was that the student no longer resides in Manhattan, Kansas. The student failed to complete the assignment in the allowed time and upon submission the final assignment was incomplete. Therefore the instructor modified the sanction to include taking the D&I course on campus. The student did not contest the violation. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-110--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized on two papers submitted for grading. Upon receiving the two papers the instructor was able to locate sources of plagiarized passages on the Internet. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignments and a requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. In addition, the student was required to redo both papers in order to successfully complete the course. Upon completion of both papers the final course grade will be reduced by one letter grade since the papers were not satisfactorily completed in the appropriate time frame. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-106-107-108-109--Four students (2 Seniors & 2 Juniors) were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration while taking the final examination. Prior to administering the final exam the instructor created three different versions of the test. Upon completion of the final exam the instructor conducted comparisons of examination responses. Four students were found to have multiple responses matching their neighbors' tests. Specifically, two students match their neighbors' responses on 12 out of 22 answers, one student matched a neighbor's paper on 16 out of 22 responses, and another student matched a neighbor's paper on 15 out of 22 responses. The chances of randomly matching 12 responses is : [22!/(12! x 10!)] x (1/5)12 x (4/5)10 = 0.00028 or 0.028% or 1 in 3,514. The chances of matching 16 out of 22 responses randomly was calculated as [22!/(16! x 6!)] x (1/5)16 x (4/5)6 = 0.000000013 or 0.0000013% or 1 in 77million, and the chances of matching 15 responses is [22!/(15! x 7!)] x (1/5)15 x (4/5)7 = 0.00000012 or 0.000012% or 1 in 8.3 million. Given the highly unlikelihood of random events occurring in this course of 106 students, the instructor filed an Honor Pledge Violation. All students were sanctioned with the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Three of the students were assigned a one letter grade reduction in their final grade for the course. Cases Closed.

Case #2006/2007-105--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized several Internet sources while preparing a paper which was submitted for grading. Upon reviewing the paper the instructor noted several inconsistencies in writing style. As a result the Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment. The student did not contest the violation. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-104--A Junior was alleged to have advertised on facebook.com to sell a used laboratory manuel containing completed labs with answers. The instructor for the course noted the advertisement and reported the situation to the Director of the Honor Council. Upon review of the available information the Director determined that a violation had not occurred since the manuel had yet to be purchased and has not been used by another student for class. The Director notified the student of the allegation and recommended that in the future the student use caution with respect to selling textbooks containing student generated responses. Case Closed.

May

Case #2006/2007-103--A Graduate Student was alleged to have plagiarized a scholarly article when the student submitted a paper for grading. The instructor became suspicious of a paper submitted as a required book review. Upon searching the internet, the instructor was able to identify several word-for-word statements found in articles that had been used but not cited in the paper. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a grade cap of C in the course and will inform the student's committee chair of the violation. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-102--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized a website when the student submitted a paper for grading. When grading the paper the instructor noted that the paper contained seven paragraphs which were copied almost word-for-word from a website. In addition, the instructor stated that the paper contained quotes and paraphrases from a source which was not cited and that the student provided false citation information for the passage in question. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and an XF for the course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-101--A Senior and a Junior were alleged to have collaborated on an outside class assignment. The students submitted two assignments electronically. The assignments contained identical formatting and spelling errors. In addition, an examination of the file properties indicated that the second assignment for both students were created at the exact same time on the exact same computer. The only difference between the two submitted assignments was the use of the students' names in the appropriate places. The Instructor sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment and a one-letter reduction in the overall course grade. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-100--A Sophomore was alleged to have received unauthorized aid on a paper presented for grading. Specifically, a computer was analyzed which indicated the paper was created on this computer by another student and was sent via electronic mail to the student in question. When interviewed the student acknowledged receiving more aid than was allowed in the course. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a one letter grade reduction in the final grade for the course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-99--Reported. Awaiting case review. Case Pending.

Case #2006/2007-98--Notified. Proceeding toward Honor panel hearing. Case Pending.

Case #2006/2007-97--A Graduate Student was alleged to have plagiarized on a paper submitted for grading. The Instructor noticed several grammatical errors contained within the abstract of the paper yet the body of the paper was virtually free from errors. This inconsistency prompted the instructor to conduct a search for specific key phrases from the paper. The instructor located a paper with an identical name on the Internet site Research Papers On-line. The paper was offered for sale for $49.50 and selected representative paragraphs were provided as examples of material contained within the paper. All of these paragraphs matched paragraphs contained within the students paper. The Assistant Professor turned the case over to the Honor & Integrity System for investigation. An investigation ensued. The case went forward to adjudication. An Honor hearing panel found the graduate student in violation and responsible. The sanctions included an XF for the course, a recommendation for a 3-year suspension, and the requirement to take the Development & Integrity course upon return to KSU. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-96--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized on a paper submitted for grading. The instructor noticed that an argument made in the first two pages of the paper was not supported with in-text citation. Upon searching the Internet the instructor was able to locate the passages used by the student in the paper. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-95--A Junior was alleged to have improperly used information from an Internet site resulting in plagiarism. The instructor found that the student did not cite the source of his information or use quotation marks to indicate the work was not the student's work. Due to the relatively small portion of the paper that contained the instances of plagiarism the Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-94--A Senior was alleged to have submitted a paper which contained plagiarism and false citation information. Upon receiving the paper the instructor, while grading, found instances of attribution for material that did not exist within the cited material. In addition, the paper contained quotes and paraphrases from a source that was not cited. As a result, the instructor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-93--A Sophomore was alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on an in-class exam. The student was observed looking at other student's papers during the exam. A GTA reported the incident to the instructor during the exam. The instructor alerted all 6 proctors to watch the student closely. At the end of the testing period all proctors indicated they had observed the student looking at other student's papers. The Associate Professor has sanctioned the student with a warning and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-92--A Junior was alleged to have submitted a paper for grading containing plagiarized portions from an Internet source. The instructor, while grading the paper, discovered that sentences had been "lifted" from an Internet source without adequate attribution. The Association Professor sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-91--A Senior was alleged to have submitted a paper for grading containing plagiarized portions from an Internet source. The instructor discovered a missing paper while grading. The instructor requested the paper from the student. Upon grading the paper the instructor discovered the plagiarized portions of the paper and filed a report. The Association Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-90--A Junior was alleged to have falsified responses on a grade exam. Upon receiving a graded exam back from the instructor, the student changed incorrect answers to the correct responses and asked the instructor to give her additional points on the exam. The Professor sanctioned the student with a grade reduction and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I class. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-89--Two Seniors were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on an assignment. The assignments were submitted through K-State On-line. When the instructor checked the properties of the submitted files the instructors discovered that both files contained the same origination dates and times. In addition, there existed similarities in non-default fonts and similar mistakes in formatting. The Instructor sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment and a one letter grade reduction in the course. This was the second violation for one student. A hearing panel determined no additional sanctions. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-88--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized while completing a paper for class. Specifically, the instructor noticed that five paragraphs of the paper matched five paragraphs of a paper submitted by another student in the class. When the students were interviewed separately the Freshman indicated the other student brought the paper to the student's residence to print the paper. The second student did not remove the paper from the desktop prior to leaving. The Freshman copied the paper adding one or two paragraphs to the paper and submitted the paper for grading. The Instructor has sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the assignment, the requirement to complete an additional assignment and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-87--Two Seniors were alleged to have completed assignments which were nearly identical. The students were alleged to have completed projects that had four very specific similarities in design that were unique to the individual projects. In addition, some the unique components of the project were done incorrectly. The similar nature of the incorrectly completed projects alerted the instructor to unauthorized collaboration by the students. The students admitted collaborating on the project to different degrees. The instructor was able to identify who was more responsible for the collaboration and assigned separate sanctions for the students. The Instructor assigned the student who was most culpable an XF in the course with the option to take the D&I course to remove the X portion from the student's transcript. The student who was seen to be less culpable was required to re-do the assignment and participate in an oral examination related to the content of the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-86--A Sophomore and a Junior were alleged to have submitted separate papers containing 14 pages of identical text. They were alleged to have plagiarized each other's work prior to submission. One student had been warned by the instructor about plagiarism and had a minor deduction on a previous paper submitted to the instructor. As a result the Graduate Teaching Assistant has sanctioned the students with a zero on the extra credit assignment, a zero on all extra credit assignments for the whole semester, and required that both students enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-85--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized while completing a paper for class. Specifically, the instructor stated that early in the semester the student was found to have plagiarized a paper. At that time the student was confronted with the allegation and signed an agreement to accept the penalty for the paper. In addition, the agreement contained a clause indicating further evidence of plagiarism on subsequent papers would be reported to the Honor & Integrity System. Later in the semester a paper was submitted that contained numerous instances of plagiarism. Since this was an Option 2 (sent directly to the Honor System for investigation and adjudication), a hearing panel decided the student had tried to correct the necessary citing, but failed to use direct quotes, even with proper attribution to the source. The hearing panel sanctioned an XF, successful completion of the DI course, a research paper on the importance of correct citation, and visits to the Writing Center for additional help in citing works. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-84--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized on a paper submitted for a class assignment. The instructor stated the student copied the entire report from an internet source and falsified the citations to make them appear to have come from the bibliography page. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the paper and to successfully complete the D&I course during the Summer 2007 session before receiving a degree. Case Closed.

April

Case #2006/2007-83--An Assistant Professor filed a report on a Freshman who plagiarized parts of a paper. The instructor withdrew the report within an appropriate time, indicating there had been a miscommunication. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-82--A Junior was alleged to have plagiarized while completing a paper for class. Specifically, the instructor stated that material that should have been cited was not. In addition, the text appears to have been cut and pasted from another source. The instructor indicated that the text beginning on page four has a grayed background causing the instructor to doubt the validity of the paper as the student's original work. As a result the Assistant Professor has sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the assignment and required that the student enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-81--A Junior was alleged to have plagiarized the majority of a paper submitted for grading. The instructor indicated that more than 60% of the paper was copied from an identified source with no attempt to attribute the original work to the author. As a result the Assistant Professor has sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-80--A Senior was alleged to have looked at another students paper during an exam. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the exam. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-79--A Junior was alleged to have looked at another students paper during an exam. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the exam and required that the student enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-78--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized another students paper submitted during a previous semester. Specifically, the instructor indicated that the paper contained verbatim text from the previously submitted paper without adequate attribution. The Professor sanctioned the student with a grade reduction of 85 points and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-77--A Freshman was alleged to have changed the grade on a lab assignment prior to turning the grade in for credit. The Instructor was informed by a TA that a grade had been given on the paper during the first ten minutes of class. While helping the student the TA noticed that the student had written a perfect score down on the portion of the paper where the TA was to record the final grade. The Instructor has sanctioned the student with the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

March

Case #2006/2007-73--through Case #2006/2007-76--A distance education student was alleged to have falsified proctor policy information and taken tests without an approved proctor. Instructors of the student's four classes assigned an XF in each of the four classes. Since this student had four Honor Pledge violations, an automatic hearing was held. The hearing panel decided this case was egregious enough to warrant expulsion. The hearing panel also added that the student could not re-apply to KSU for one year and that before enrolling in ANY classes, the student had to take the Development & Integrity course. Cases Closed.

Case #2006/2007-71&72-Two Freshman were alleged to have collaborated on a paper for class which resulted in plagiarism. Upon grading the instructors noted similarities between two paragraphs contained in both papers. Specially, the introductory paragraph and one other paragraph were essentially identical. The Graduate Teaching Assistants for both classes have sanctioned the students with an XF in the course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-70--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized on a paper submitted for a class assignment. Upon reviewing the paper the instructor noted that substantial portions of the paper were plagiarized from "gradesaver.com". The instructor provided copies of both papers with consistencies highlighted. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and required enrollment in and successful completion of the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-69--A Junior was alleged to have plagiarized on a paper submitted for a class assignment. Upon reviewing the paper the instructor noted that a large portion of the paper was in fact a plagiarized copy of one of the textbooks used for the class. The instructor confronted the alleged violator about the paper and the AV admitted that a lack of time to prepare a number of assignments had caused the student to plagiarize the assignment. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and required enrollment in and successful completion of the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-68--A Sophomore was alleged to have plagiarized on a paper submitted for a class assignment. Specifically, the paper was an unaltered copy of a paper available from an Internet source. The instructor became suspicious while grading the paper since the paper did not respond to the question asked and did not utilize the required sources. Upon further investigation the original paper was located on the Internet. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and required enrollment in and successful completion of the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-67--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized on a paper submitted for a class assignment. Specifically, the paper contained several instances of plagiarism from the textbook and from various websites. The student admitted having surfed the Internet for information but denied using the textbook. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and required enrollment in and successful completion of the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-66--A Junior was alleged to have submitted a fraudulent copy of a lab report that was plagiarized from student work created for the same class 2 years earlier. Upon receiving the electronic copy of the lab report the instructor opened the report and noticed the name on the report was that of a student who had taken the class during a previous semester. In addition, the lab partners section listed the names of students who had also been in the class during a previous semester. Upon examining earlier lab submissions by this student, the instructor discovered two of the previously submitted lab reports identified the former student as the creator of the electronic file. A hearing panel found the Junior responsible for unauthorized aid and sanctioned the student with an official warning, a paper on the importance of reading class syllabi, and community service. Case Closed.

February

Case #2006/2007-65--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized on a short paper submitted for a class assignment. Specifically, the paper contained information that was not general knowledge with no attribution for the source. The student did acknowledge the omission of the citation material and wrote an apology on the paper prior to submitting the assignment. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a warning, a reduced grade on the assignment, and required that the student resubmit the paper for partial credit. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-64-- A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized on a short paper submitted for a class assignment. Specifically, the paper contained information that was not common knowledge with no attribution for the source. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a warning, a reduced grade on the assignment, and required that the student resubmit the paper for partial credit. Since this was the student's second Honor Pledge violation, an automatic hearing was conducted. The student was currently enrolled in the D&I class and the hearing panel felt there was no need for additional sanctions. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-63--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized on a short paper submitted for a class assignment. Specifically, the paper contained necessary and explicit data without appropriate attribution to the source material. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a warning, a reduced grade on the assignment, and required that the student resubmit the paper for partial credit. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-62-- A Senior was alleged to have submitted reading response journal that contained plagiarized statements taken from an internal source. The Assistant Professor was able to locate three of the journal responses that were taken directly from the Internet source. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and required that the student enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-61--A Sophomore was alleged to have submitted an assignment in which three sections were copied verbatim from three different Internet sites. The Assistant Professor, after discussing the situation with the student, sanctioned the student with a warning and a zero on the assignment. The student did not contest the allegations. Case Closed.

January

Case #2006/2007-60--A Junior was alleged to have copied answers to an in-class exam from another student. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the exam and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. The student contested and the case investigators, after interviews, advised the Director that there was insufficient information to conclude responsibility for an Honor Pledge violation. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-59-- A Senior was alleged to have copied answers to an in-class exam from another student. The Instructor indicated that responses given on the student's exam did not match the version of the exam given to the students. Specifically, a number of the responses on the student's paper matched the second version of the exam. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the exam and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

December

Case #2006/2007-58--A Junior and two Sophomores were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and plagiarism on a take home final paper completed in partial fulfillment of coursework. The papers contained remarkably similar content and structure. In some cases, glaring errors were made which were consistent in at least two of the papers. The Graduate Teaching Assistant reported the incident to the Office of Honor & Integrity for investigation and adjudication. After an investigation, a hearing panel determined responsibility on the part of the two Sophomores for both plagiarism and unauthorized collaboration. The panel found the Junior responsible for unauthorized collaboration, but not plagiarism. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-57--A Junior was alleged to have submitted a paper in which portions were lifted directly from previously published text without appropriate citation. According to the Instructor, the student was notified during the grading of the draft version that several occurrences of plagiarism existed within the paper. Upon grading the final draft the Instructor noted at least two instances of failure to cite directly quoted material. The Associate Professor chose OPTION 2, sending the student to the Honor & Integrity System to be investigated, adjudicated, and sanctioned if found in violation. The Honor hearing panel decided the student violated the Honor Pledge by plagiarizing the Internet source without proper citation. They sanctioned the student with the Development & Integrity course and a rewrite of the paper for a final grade, as recommended by the instructor. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-56--This case involved a Senior whole submitted a paper in which portions were lifted directly from previously published text' without appropriate citation. According to the Instructor, the student was notified during the grading of the draft version that several occurrences of plagiarism existed within the paper. The student failed to provide proper citation upon re-submission of the paper. The student also had a previous violation (Case #2003/2004-90) and admitted to violating the Honor Pledge this time as well, which triggers an automatic hearing. The Honor hearing panel decided to suspend the student until Spring semester 2008. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-53-55-- 53-Ten students (9 Seniors & 1 Junior) were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration when completing an assignment. The instructor examined the assignments upon submission and found complete likeness in the assignment. Upon further investigation, the instructor found multiple instances of similarities across assignments for these 10 students. Three of these students have contested and a hearing panel found the students in violation and upheld the instructor's sanctions.Case Closed. Case 54--Three students (1 Senior & 2 Juniors) were found to have strikingly similar assignments but there was no outright copying. The students contested and Case Investigators recommended this case be withdrawn due to insufficient information for a hearing. Case Closed.Case 55--Five additional students (5 Seniors) were found to have incidental likenesses in the work but this was most likely due to misunderstanding than collaboration. These students were sanctioned with an informal warning letter but no inclusion in the database. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-52--A Junior was alleged to have submitted a paper in which several portions were copied directly from an Internet source without appropriate citation. The instructor located the plagiarized portions of the paper by using an Internet search engine. The portions of copied text were taken from the Wisped web sites. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and required the successful completion of the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-51--A Senior falsified information when submitting a written reflection based upon an event the student was to have attended. The instructor became suspicious of the content of the students paper when it was submitted. The instructor questioned the student who admitted to retrieving much of the information from an Internet web sites. The student originally claimed to have attended the event and fallen asleep. Further questioning revealed the student did not attend the event. The instructor has sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment, an XF in the course, and the requirement to successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-50--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized an Internet source while submitting a paper for class. The instructor was able to locate information used in the paper on the Internet. The Instructor indicated that 90-95% of the paper was cut and pasted directly from various Internet sites. The student failed to use quotation marks and did not cite the original work. As a result the Assistant Professor has sanctioned the student with zero on the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-49--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized an Internet source while submitting a paper for class. The instructor was able to locate a paper on the Internet which contained large quantities of text used in the paper. The student failed to use quotation marks and did not cite the original work. As a result the Assistant Professor has sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the assignment, an official warning, and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-48--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized an Internet source while submitting a paper for class. The instructor was able to locate a paper on the Internet which contained large quantities of text used in the paper. The student failed to use quotation marks and did not cite the original work. As a result the Assistant Professor has sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment, an official warning, and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-47--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized portions of text while completing a paper for class. The student submitted a paper based on the novel in which information from the Internet was used without citation. The Reporter indicated that the student did not properly cite the source of the information and did not use quotation marks when appropriate. As a result the Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the paper and an official warning in the office of Honor & Integrity. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-46--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized significant portions of text while completing a paper for class. The instructor noted several passages in the paper that appeared to be quoted from an article. Upon closer examination of the reference page, the instructor found several plagiarized portions of text from multiple articles. The Assistant Professor required the student to rewrite the paper with a 75% cap on the grade. The student did not contest the allegations. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-45-A Junior was alleged to have consulted his notes multiple times during a closed book examination. After case investigators spoke with the instructor, the witness, and the student, it was decided that not enough information was obtained and therefore the case was stopped. The student's name has been removed from the Honor & Integrity System database of Honor Pledge violators. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-44--Case withdrawn by Professor.

Case #2006/2007-43--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized on a submitted paper. According to the reporter the student submitted a paper that included numerous passages taken from various Internet sites. Although the student included a "Works Cited" page, no effort was made to cite sources within the text. In addition, the reporter indicated the student did not include all of the sources actually used throughout the paper. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the assignment and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-42--Unauthorized collaboration during a final reported by TWO students in independent reports. One student immediately reported to the instructor and the Honor & Integrity System office. The other student reporter e-mailed the instructor the day after the final. After a case review, all three students decided not to contest the allegation. All three were given information about ways to monitor one's exam-taking behavior. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-41--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized on a report. Specifically, the student submitted a review of a report in which significant sections were directly copied from the article without quotation marks or adequate citation. Although citations were used following large blocks of text, the citations were inappropriate to cite the material copied from the original article. The Assistant Instructor sanctioned the student with a required rewrite of the paper and capped the grade on the rewrite at 75%. In addition, the student is required to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-40--A Senior was alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration while taking a test in class. Specifically, the student was alleged to have looked at another student's paper during the examination. Following the test the instructor compared the two test papers and noted that 48 of the 50 responses were identical. These 48 similar responses included both correct and incorrect answers. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with an official warning filed in the Honor & Integrity office. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-39-Two Graduate Students were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on a take home exam. Due to scheduling conflicts and problematic room assignments, the instructor sent a test to students through email at a specified time. The students were instructed not to collaborate on the exam although they were allowed to consult their textbooks. The students were given two and a half hours to complete the exam and then were to submit responses via email. Two students submitted exams within 12 minutes of each other. Upon grading each of these students missed ten questions. Of the ten questions answered incorrectly by these two students nine were the same and in fact the students had recorded the same incorrect responses. Several of these questions were answered incorrectly by only these two students. In addition, the other students who missed some of the same questions did not choose the incorrect response selected by these two students. Given the statistical comparison of responses and the close proximity of the submission times, the instructor suspected unauthorized collaboration. At the hearing the graduate students were able to show the rationale behind like answers using their textbooks and test-taking strategies. They also submitted phone records showing they had not contacted each other. One student took the test in Manhattan, the other in a city 150 miles away. The students were found not responsible. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-38--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized while completing a written assignment. The reporter indicated that while grading papers, the reporter became aware that two papers that had been submitted were nearly identical. Similarities were found in content, formatting of tables, font usage, and italicization of certain text. The student acknowledged preparing hand written copies of tables and summaries but denied making an electronic copy and altering in slightly prior to submission. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and if requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-37--A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized while completing a written assignment. The Instructor indicated the student submitted a paper largely comprised of directly plagiarized material from a US Department of Transportation site and created false in-text citations to ensure that it looked as though information was correctly sited. The Instructor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-36--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized while completing a library assignment. When the student submitted the assignment the instructor noticed that the font on one of the references looked odd. Using an Internet search engine the instructor located a site which contained the exact wording and phrasing used in the submitted paper. Upon finding this the copied section the instructor decided to check the other sources. The instructor discover three other instances of plagiarism contained within the assignment. The student decided to contest the allegation on the grounds that sources were provided, although a portion of the paper did not include proper quotation mark notation. An Honor hearing panel decided that the student had tried to complete the assignment without deceiving the instructor and found the student not responsible for an Honor Pledge violation. Case Closed.

Cases #2006/2007-34 and 35--An Instructor alleged that four Freshmen (in two groups of two) engaged in unauthorized aid on assignments. All students were were sanctioned with a 0 on the assignment and the additional requirement to successfully complete the Development & Integrity course. All four Freshmen heard a HIPE presentation at the beginning of their class. In Case 35, both students did not contest the allegation. Case Closed. In Case 34, one AV contested the allegation and the case was heard by an Honor hearing panel. The panel decided that one student was in violation and the other student was not. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-30-33-- Four Graduate Students were alleged to have engaged in the plagiarizing of another student's work. One student found a copy of a file from a previous semester's assignment on a laptop. The student copied figures from the laptop and submitted the figures with slight modification and no attribution to the original author. The student then allowed three other graduate students to use the same computer. Each of these students also copied and modified the figures and subsequently presented the figures as original work. All students acknowledged their responsibility in this case and were not contesting the allegations. All students will be enrolled in the Development & Integrity class in the spring semester. All Cases Closed.

Case #2006/2007-29-- A Junior was alleged to have falsified assignments in an attempt to gain credit for completing the assignments. The student contacted the Graduate Teaching Assistant for the course and indicated a problem with missing grades on K-State Online. The GTA asked the student to produce the graded assignments. Upon examination the graded assignments appeared to be different from previously graded assignments both in style and markings. The Professor submitted an Option 2 report requesting the Honor & Integrity System investigate the situation. After investigation, a hearing was held. The alleged violator decided not to attend the hearing. The hearing panel found the student in violation and sanctioned the student an XF, as well as taking the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-28--A Sophomore was alleged to have plagiarized a set of answers posted on K-State Online. Following the return of a submitted exam the student requested a regrade on three portions of the test. Upon examination it was discovered that the three answers in question had been copied from the posted correct answers on K-State Online. The Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

November

Case #2006/2007-27--A freshman was alleged to have plagiarized an Internet site while presenting a speech in class. The instructor noted that the most recent speech presented by the student was different in quality from what the student normally presented. The instructor research phrases from the speech and was able to ascertain that the majority of the speech was copied from and Internet web site. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with an XF in the class and required that the student enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-26--A senior was alleged to have falsified material submitted for an assignment calling for a collection. The Professor has sanctioned the student by requiring that the student enroll in and successfully complete the D&I class. This places the senior, who has a position lined up after mid-year graduation, in an awkward and frustrating position--to have to come back to take the 1-credit hour class. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-25--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized while completing a paper for class. The assignment called for the student to write a two page review of a film. The review was found to contain approximately one page of plagiarized ideas from a web sites. that provided a review of the film. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment, a requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I class, and capping the grade in the class at a B. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-24--Two Freshman were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on an assignment. While grading the assignment, the instructor realized that the papers contained nearly identical answers. The Instructor sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-23--A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized another student's paper. The student submitted a paper that was identical to a paper that was submitted by another student in a different class. The collaboration was discovered when two instructors were talking about the papers that were submitted to their classes. The instructor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-22-- A Freshman was alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration which led to plagiarism. The student submitted a paper that was identical to a paper that was submitted by another student in a different class. The collaboration was discovered when two instructors were talking about the papers that were submitted to their classes. The instructor later discovered, through the student's meticulous record keeping, the Freshman was truly the author of the paper that was lifted by the other student. The instructor withdrew the case. Case Withdrawn.

Case #2006/2007-21--A Sophomore was alleged to have submitted doctors notes from Lafene Health Center indicating the students was ill and had visited the center during days in which the instructor had recorded five absences. The instructor noted similarities in the notes with the exception of the dates. The instructor contacted Lafene Health Center and verified that the student had in fact not visited the center on any of the days the student was absent from class. When the student was questioned in relation to the notes the student indicated that the notes had in fact been falsified. As a result of this action the Assistant Professor has sanctioned the student with an XF in the class and required the student to enroll in and successfully complete the D&I class. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-20-- A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized while submitting an assignment for class. The student submitted a paper that did not reflect the writing style of previous submissions. When the instructor used the "google" search engine to check portions of the paper, the search indicated that approximately two and a half pages of the paper were nearly identical to the content contained by the web site. As a result of this action the Assistant Professor has sanctioned the student with an XF in the class. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-19-- A Senior was alleged to have plagiarized while submitting two assignments for class. Given specific instructions related to acceptable submission requirements, the student intentionally used various ideas, comments, and phrases from a web site while preparing a paper. The student acknowledged the act and said that it was a one time occurrence. However, the Reporter decided to check this on the next submitted paper. The Professor found several more instances of plagiarism on the submitted assignment. As a result of this action the Professor has sanctioned the student with an XF in the class. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-18-- Two Sophomores were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on an assignment. The students were directed to work on the assignment individually. While grading, the GTA noticed similarities in incorrect answers. The GTA informed the faculty member who confronted the students. The students acknowledged comparing answers and adjusting their answers prior to submitting the assignment for grading. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-14,15,16,17-- Two Freshman, a Sophomore, and a Senior were alleged to have plagiarized an Internet site while completing papers for class. The students did not work collaboratively on the papers but the instructor indicated that in all instances ideas and concepts were taken from web based sites without adequate attribution. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the students with a warning, and a reduced grade on the assignment. Cases Are Closed.

Case #2006/2007-13-- A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized an Internet site while completing a paper for class. The instructor stated that the student's paper contained "sections that were identical to the web sites. and other sections that, though in [the student's] own words, clearly used the information and ideas that appear on the site." The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a warning, a zero on the assignment, and required the student to enroll in the D&I course.  Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-12-- A Sophomore was alleged to have plagiarized an Internet site while completing a paper for class. The instructor stated that the student's paper contained "sections that were identical to the web sites. and other sections that, though in [the student's] own words, clearly used the information and ideas that appear on the site." The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a warning, a zero on the assignment, and required the student to enroll in the D&I course.  Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-11-- A Freshman was alleged to have plagiarized an Internet site while completing a paper for class. The instructor was able to "google" sections of the student's paper and found numerous "borrow" ideas and statements. The student failed to provide adequate attribution to the original authors. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a warning, a zero on the assignment, and required the student to enroll in the D&I course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-10-- A Sophomore was alleged to have submitted an assignment and an exam in which multiple portions were plagiarized from Internet sources. The Reporter indicated that the student submitted the papers through K-State online. Upon examining the papers the instructor noted that the wording did not sound like the students previous work. When the instructor "googled" sections of the paper, it was discovered that the sections were taken verbatim from various web sites. The Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-09-- Two Seniors were alleged to have collaborated on an individual assignment for class. The instructor specifically indicated that the assignment was to be done alone. Upon grading, the instructor noted similarities in the students' work. Upon talking with the students both indicated responsibility for some degree of collaboration. The Adjunct Faculty member sanctioned both students with a warning and required that they enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. Case Closed.

October

Case #2006/2007-08-- Two Graduate Students were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on an in class exam. Following the unproctored exam the instructor was contacted by another student in the class. In the email contact the student indicated that the two Graduate students talked continuously during the exam. Upon examination of the test papers the instructor noticed several similarities in exam responses. The Instructors later received email confirmation from two other students that witnessed the communication during the class. The Associate Professor sanctioned the students with a reduced grade on the exam. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-07-- A Junior was alleged to have plagiarized while completing two assignments for class. The instructor was notified by a GTA that portions of the student's homework assignment resembled posted solutions from a prior semester. The instructor conferenced with the Junior about the allegations. The student acknowledged acquiring posted solutions from a previous semester and using those answers to complete the assignments for class. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on both assignments.Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-06-- A Senior was alleged by an Instructor to have plagiarized a web site design for a presentation. This was the student's second uncontested Honor Pledge violation. When a student violates the Honor Pledge twice, an automatic Honor Panel hearing is convened where the decision is whether to assign additional sanctions. Since the student had barely begun the Development & Integrity course assigned for the first violation (plagiarism), the hearing panel upheld the recommendation of the second instructor for an XF, being barred from taking the class again, and community service in the form of giving HIPE presentations to the campus community, specifically in the student's major department. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-05-- A Senior was alleged to have copied answers from another classmate during and in-class exam and again during an in class quiz. The Instructor noted that the student appeared to be examining a classmates paper during the exam period. The other student completed the test well before the Alleged Violator. Upon comparing the exams the Alleged Violators missed considerably more answers on the last part of the exam than on the first. On the quiz the student scored the exact same grade as the other student, the similarities included selecting the same wrong 2 answers on the quiz. Only 10% of the students selected the same wrong answers on these questions. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a warning. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-04-- Two Freshmen were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on an assignment completed in class. The completed product was identical in content and format including identical spelling errors. The Instructor sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment and a 25% grade reduction on the overall project grade.

Case #2006/2007-03-- A Sophomore was alleged to have plagiarized upon submitting a written report for class. The report was reviewed by the instructor and found to contain information not presented in class. A google search of the specific paragraph identified an internet web site that contained the exact information. The paragraph included by the student contained the same information, but the sentences had been reordered. The similarities between the paragraph and the web site were determined to be to close for this to be coincidence. The Instructor showed the student how to cite correctly and sanctioned the student with a warning.Case Closed.

September

Case #2006/2007-02-- A Sophomore and a Freshman were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on a lab assignment. While standing 10 feet away the lab instructor observed the Sophomore copying answers directly from the Freshman's lab report. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the Sophomore with a zero on the assignment, a capped grade of a B for the class, and required that the Sophomore enroll in and successfully complete the D&I course. The Freshman was sanctioned with a zero on the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2006/2007-01- A Sophomore and a Freshman were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on a homework assignment. Upon examining the submitted assignment the Instructor noted similarities in phrasing. The phrases used in the two papers were unique to these particular students. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment and the requirement to enroll in and successfully pass the D&I course. Both students chose to contest the allegations. A Hearing Panel found both students responsible for the allegations and upheld the sanctions.Case Closed.