1. K-State home
  2. »Honor System
  3. »System Basics
  4. »Honor Pledge Violations (AUGUST 2008-JULY 2009)

Honor and Integrity System

Honor Pledge Violations (AUGUST 2008-JULY 2009)

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

Reporting Stage: An instructor or student has notified the office of a pending report.
Notification Stage: The Director writes a letter of notification of allegations, sanctions, and the opportunity for student to review the case file.
Mediation Stage: Conversations about which OPTION is best for instructor/student.
Case Review Stage: The student comes into the Honor office to review the case file.
Investigation Stage: Honor Council members investigate the case.
Hearing Stage: Honor Council members hear the case.

 

This site was last updated on July 15, at 4:00 pm

 

 

 

July

 

Case #2008/2009-109-A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. The student submitted a paper which was reviewed using the Turnitin plagiarism detection software. A report was generated which identified multiple instances of copy and pasted sections from various websites. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with an official warning and the requirement to rewrite and resubmit the paper for partial credit. Case Closed.

 

June

 

May

 

Case #2008/2009-108-A Senior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. The student submitted a paper copy of a report that accompanied an oral report given in class. The paper was supposed to contain a summary of two sources used in the oral report. However, the student copied the information from a single online source without adequate attribution. No in text citations were used and the accompanying paper identifying the sources of the report contained two different sources not used during the speech. The online document which was copied was not mentioned in the accompanying documentation. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment, a grade cap of a "C" on the course grade, and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

 

Case #2008/2009-107-Two Sophomores are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration. The students were given an assignment to be completed independently. Upon reviewing the submitted assignments the instructor noted a response to a specific question that was odd. Continuing the grading process the instructor discovered the same response on another student's paper. At that time the instructor compared the two papers side by side and noted several similarities. When the students were confronted they admitted to collaborating on the assignment. They were sanctioned by receiving half of the originally earned points and required to prepare a paper related to academic integrity. The students were also asked if there were further instances of unauthorized collaboration, to which they responded no. The instructor informed both students that their previously submitted assignments would be reviewed and if similarities were found more severe sanctions would be imposed. While conducting this review the instructor discovered evidence of multiple instances of unauthorized collaboration. Therefore, the instructor has sanctioned the students with an XF in the course of violation and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.  Case Closed.

 

Case #2008/2009-106-A Senior is alleged to have engaged in falsification. The student was required to conduct an interview assignment with another faculty member in the college. The student sent the faculty member an email notifying him that he did not have time to conduct the interview and was planning to complete the interview form and submit it for grading. The faculty member informed the student that this was dishonest and would constitute an Honor System violation. The student disregarded this warning and submitted the interview. The faculty member reported the incident to the instructor for the course and an Honor System violation was reported. The Assistant Dean for the college sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-105-A Senior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. The instructor indicated the student used another student's assignment as a template to create the product, which was submitted for grading. While using the other student's assignment the student used exact wording and ideas throughout the document. The instructor sanctioned the student with a grade cap of a C in the course and the requirment to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-104-A Junior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and falsification while delivering a presentation in class. The instructor indicated the student presented a speech and written report that was clearly copied from an Internet source. The student also changed the data (dates and percentages) within the speech to support the argument being made by the student. According to the instructor, these changes indicate premiditation on the part of the student. The instructor also indicated the student knew the correct method to attribute sources as the student had done this correctly for the two previous reports. The Instructor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-103-A Junior is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on the final exam. The instructor utilized multiple versions of the final exam. The students responses (8/19 or 42%) match the version of the exam he was not given. Questions were written in a multiple choice format however, the answers on the two versions were not similar and accidentally deriving the answers from the other exam was highly unlikely. Additionally, the student failed to provide any calculations on the exam questions under suspicion. While some work was shown in some instances the work could not have led to the selection of the response recorded by the student. The instructor believes the students copied these answers from another student while unaware of the multiple versions of the exam. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course.  Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-102-A Junior and a Sophomore are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration during an in class final exam. The instructor reported creating and distributing multiple versions of the final exam. One student in question provided two solution sequences that were impossible to achieve given the problem as stated in the exam version possessed by the student. However, the sequence was correct for the alternate version of the exam. The other student recorded a solution that consisted of the exact solution sequence for the exam version recorded by the other student including the same errors made by the other student. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with an XF. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-101-A Senior  is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration during an in class final exam. The instructor reported creating and distributing multiple versions of the final exam. The student in question provided two solution sequences that were impossible to achieve given the problem as stated in the exam version possessed by the student. However, the sequence was correct for the alternate version of the exam. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with an XF. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-100-A Sophomore  is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration while taking the final examination in class. The instructor distributed two versions of the final exam. When grading the student's exam against the correct key for that particular version, the student had no correct responses on the last ten questions. However, when grading the student's exam with the key for the version not given to the student, the student answered eight of the last ten questions correctly. Overall the student's grade when compared to the correct key was a 32.5%, when compared to the key of the other version of the exam, the student earned a 60%. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-099-A Sophomore  is alleged to have engaged in  plagiarism on an assignment for class. The student submitted a paper for grading which contained direct quotes from cited sources but the student failed to use quotation marks. Additionally, the student included significant sections which were copied from two articles from the New York Times without any attempt at attribution. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a warning through the Honor & Integrity System, a reduced grade on the assignment, and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-098-A Junior  is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism on an assignment for class. The student submitted a paper for grading which contained only one citation. The information presented in the paper indicated the student could not have created the paper without using outside sources. Upon investigation the instructor located two websites from which information was copied and pasted into the student's paper. The student made no attempt at attribution for this information. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the paper and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-097-A Sophomore  is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and plagiarism on an assignment for class. The student submitted a paper for grading which did not meet the assignment requirements. When given the opportunity to rewrite the paper, the student submitted a paper which showed a much more sophisticated level of punctuation usage, sentence fluency, and organizational style than previously demonstrated by the student. The student explained this by stating that the student had received help from a tutor in the writing center. Upon investigation, it was discovered the student did make an appointment with a tutor but failed to show up for the appointment and did not reschedule.  Given this information and the advanced level of work demonstrated within the paper the instructor had no option but to alleged the student received unauthorized help and possibly plagiarized the contents of a paper prepared by another student for the same course. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with a grade cap of a C on the course grade and is further requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.  The student did not contest the allegation. However, this was the second violation for this student. A mandatory hearing was convened, the hearing panel considered both violations and recommended that upon completion of the Development and Integrity course, the violator present to Expository classes and perform community service in the form of a series of 7 speaking engagements.  The hearing panel also required the student to write a reflection paper about the experience with the Honor and Integrity System. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-096-Eight Graduate students are alleged to have engaged in plagiarism while completing a group project. The instructor noted specific "official" sounding language when grading the various projects. Upon further exploration using the websitehttp://www.duplichecker.com/search.asp  the instructor found several report documents that had been copied verbatim without any attempt at attribution. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the students with a reduced grade on the assignment, a cap on the course grade of a B, the requirement to attend a 4 hour Honor & Integrity workshop, and the requirement to complete the assignment individually to be resubmit for a maximum grade of 70% of the original possible points. Case Pending. 

Case #2008/2009-095-A Senor  is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration for the purpose of providing unauthorized aid on an exam. The instructor witnessed the student allowing another student to copying solutions from the student's exam  while waiting to submit the exam to the instructor. The Professor sanctioned the student with a 40/200 point deduction on the exam and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.  The student contests the allegations and the information was presented to a hearing panel.  The hearing panel did not find sufficient information for the student to be held responsible. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-094-A Sophomore is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration for the purpose of receiving unauthorized aid on an exam. The instructor witnessed the student copying solutions from another student while waiting to submit the exam to the instructor. The Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.  Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-093-A Senior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism on a term paper. The student submitted a paper which contained evidence of plagiarism from the Internet site www.latinobaseball.com. The student quoted some passages but the longer portion of the paper was copied directly from the site with a few changes in wording and not attempt at attribution. While the website was mentioned briefly in the paper it was not included in the works cited page. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the paper, an XF in the course, and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-092-A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. The student submitted a paper early in the semester which did not meet the assignment requirements. When given the opportunity to resubmit the paper the student submitted a much longer paper. However, upon grading the instructor noted the writing style was far more advanced than that which the student has previously submitted throughout the semester. The instructor search key phrases from the Internet and located a biography from an Internet site that was copied directly into the paper. No attempt was made to attribute the material to the original source. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-091-Two Freshman are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and/or plagiarism on an assignment. While grading assignments the instructor noted similarities between the two papers. Upon closer examination it was noted the assignments contained the same content in the same sequence. The text had been altered, font style, italics, and bold text had been inserted/removed to give the papers a different appearance. The Associate Professor sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. One student contested the allegations.  After the information was presented to a hearing panel, the student was found to be responsible. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-090-A Sophomore is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and unauthorized collaboration. The student submitted a paper which was not representative of his previous work. When confronted with the discrepancies identified by the instructor, the student admitted to receiving help on the assignment. When questioned further, the student admitted to receiving "lots of help" on the paper. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-089-A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and unauthorized collaboration. While grading the final two papers of the semester, the instructor noted the writing style of the papers differed significantly from previous papers submitted by this student. In addition, the content of the paper contained information consistent with previous semesters but different from the current semester. The instructor indicated no knowledge of the origin of the material but believes the student received unauthorized aid in the form of assistance while writing the papers and that the information from previous semesters was plagiarized. The instructor sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the final two papers, a requirement to rewrite the papers, an official warning through the Honor and Integrity office, and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Pending.

Case #2008/2009-088-A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in falsification. The student was observed placing ungraded, completed work, in a pile of papers that were yet to be graded. This action was done after the due date for the papers. The instructor alleges the students was attempting to receive credit for work that was not completed on time. The student was sanctioned with a 30 point deduction on the assignment, which could be earned back by redoing the original assignment. In addition, the student was required to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.Case Closed.

 

 

April

 

 

Case #2008/2009-087-A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. Specifically, the instructor stated that papers submitted to another class were not acceptable to be submitted for a grade in this class. The student submitted a paper containing references that were at least three years old. When confronted the student denied using a paper previously submitted for a grade. However, further information revealed the paper had been submitted. The student submitted a written email apologizing for using a paper which had been graded previously and for lying about it when confronted. The instructor sanctioned the student with the Development and Integrity course.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-086-A Freshman and a Sophomore are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and/or plagairism. The students submitted the exact same assignment for grading. The project was a design project that should have contained distinctly different outcomes. However, when grading the GTA noted the students had submitted the same assignment with no discernible differences. The instructor sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-084-085-A Junior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism, unauthorized collaboration, and falsification on three assignments. At one point during the semester the student was late to class and left class early. However, the student was able to complete the lab project even though all other students who were present for the entire period were not able to complete the task. The GTA believed  it was impossible for the student to have completed the work in the amount of time the student spent in class. The GTA administered a written warning in the lab book indicating the student was suspected of copying work from another source. During a subsequent lab period the GTA left the room so that instructor evaluations could be completed. The Junior had not arrived to the lab that day and was not present when the GTA left the room. Upon re-entering the room the GTA noted the student was present and the student had two copies of the lab book. The GTA confiscated both copies of the lab book. The second unauthorized lab book belonged to a student who had completed the course during the fall 2008 semester. Upon comparison of the lab work, the lead Professor and GTA identified 3 lab assignments that had been copied word for word from the unauthorized lab book, including spelling errors. The student who provided the lab book was given an official warning through the Honor & Integrity System. The Junior who copied the work was sanctioned by the Professor with an XF in the course.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-077-083-Several students are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on homework assignments. The instructor noted several of the electronic assignments contained exactly the same file names. These file names corresponded with the last names of the students in class. When submitted the last names did not match all of the individuals for which the assignments were submitted. Upon further examination the instructor determined the submitted assignments contained the same time stamps for completion, and the same network locations opened at the bottom of the screen. A total of seven students were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration. A Junior and a Senior were sanctioned with an XF and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course, A Senior was sanctioned with the requirement to enroll in the DI course, a grade of zero on seven homework assignments and a final grade deduction of 210 points, a Senior was sanctioned with the requirement to enroll in the DI course, a grade of zero on nine homework assignments and a overall final grade deduction of 270 points. Another Senior was sanctioned with the DI course, a 210 point overall grade reduction, and a grade of zero on seven homework assignments. The remaining two students, a Senior and a Sophomore, were sanctioned with an official warning from the Honor & Integrity System. The two students sanctioned with the warning are contesting the violation.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-076 - A Sophomore and a Junior are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on three assignments.  While grading a take-home quiz the instructor noted several similarities between the students paper. Most notably the students were asked to provide two responses to a particular question. However, both of these students provided four answers which were exactly the same. Given this information the instructor carefully compared the remaining portions of the quiz. The quiz responses were nearly identical regardless of the fact that multiple possible correct responses were possible. Finally, given the suspected nature of the collaboration on the quiz the instructor reviewed submitted on-line assignments for both of these students. The instructor found two on-line assignments containing exact responses across both students, including identical patterns of incorrect responses. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the students with a zero on the take-home quiz, a zero on the two on-line assignments, and is further requiring the students to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-074-075 - Two Sophomores are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on an assignment submitted for grading. The faculty member submitted all papers to the Turnitin.com website, a plagiarism detection system. The resulting report indicated the current students paper contained matches to a paper submitted previously by the other student during an earlier semester. As a result of this the current student is also alleged to have plagiarized the former students paper. The papers contained identical phrasing and incorrectly formated reference information. The current students was sanctioned with a warning and a zero on the paper. The former student was sanctioned with a warning. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-073 - A senior is alleged to have plagiarized while preparing and submitted an assigned paper for grading. The faculty member checked the paper for potential plagairism using turnitin.com software. The report indicated possible sources of plagairism. The faculty member located the potential sources and noted the student had in fact copied information from the sources and failed to accurately cite the sources. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a warning and a zero on the assignment.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-072 - A senior is alleged to have plagiarized while preparing and submitted an assigned paper for grading. Prior to grading the assignments the faculty member submitted the papers to the turnitin.com website to check for plagiarism. The students paper was returned with a report indicating a potential plagiarism incident from two particular websites. Following the review of the report the faculty member reviewed the sites and noted several instances of direct copying without adequate attribution to the original sources. In addition, the faculty member noted instances of falsified sources. These sources were discovered while reviewing the document following the report from the plagiarism detection software. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a warning and a zero on the assignment.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-071 - A graduate student is alleged to have plagiarized from several sources when submitting a paper for grading. The paper contained a section that had been copied from the wikapedia website. A quick search indicated this was the source of the information. Confirmation was secured by noting that while copying the text from the website the student inadvertantly copied three embedded hyperlinks found within the information on the site. Once the text had been copied into the paper the student modified the sentence by changing four words but did not realize the embedded links were still visible. When the paper was submitted electronically the links appeared as the instructor was reviewing the paper for grading. Additionally, the student copied texts from several other source. While the student did cite those source in the footnotes the student failed to use quotation marks to identify not only that the ideas communicated were from the source but also that the exact words were used from the source. This is an example, noted by the faculty member, of sloppy scholarship and resulted in unintentional plagiarism. The student was sanctioned with an XF in the course and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-070 - A student is alleged to have plagiarized another students work submitted during a prior semester. Upon grading a project submitted for class the instructor noted the product did not conform to the assignment guidelines. Upon closer examination it was discovered the project was identical the the assignment guidelines for a project from a textbook used in a previous semester. The instructor alleges the students acquired the product from a student who had previously submitted the work in a prior semester and subsequently submitted the work as original work. The instructor has sanctioned the student with a warning and a zero on the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-069 - A Freshman and a Sophomore are alleged to have falsified attendance documentation during class. A student reported to the instructor that on two occasions the student had witnessed another student sign the attendance sheet twice using two different names. Upon receiving this report, the instructor checked all attendance records and noted a discrepancy in the handwriting style for both students names on multiple occasions. The Assistant Professor sanctioned both students with a zero on the attendance portion of the grade, a one letter grade reduction in the final course grade, and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. The instructor did recommend a much more hash sanction should it be discovered that only one person was responsible for the falsification and signed the attendance sheet without the knowledge of the other individual. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-068 - A Sophomore is suspected of providing falsified attendance documentation. The instructor for this class uses an electronic response system to record quiz grades and attendance points. In addition, the instructor delivers an activity based course in which students work in teams to complete tasks. The group members are required to initial the tasks sheet prior to submission and the initials are cross referenced with the electronic response system to ensure accurate attendance records. The students signature and initials were missing from the task sheet given on April 3, 2009. However, qualitative comments at the bottom of the paper state the student arrived in class with the work completed. This note was not written in the students handwriting. Additionally, on the date in questions the students electronic response mechanism was used to record quiz responses for the student. Given the initials and signature were missing from the paper, deviating from the normal operating procedures for this class, the instructor is concerned the student may have fraudulently misrepresented attendance on the day in question. However, given the discrepancy in the anecdotal note at the bottom of the page, the instructor has requested the student receive a warning. Following a meeting to review the information related to the violation report the student was able to present information supporting that the student was indeed in attendance during the day in question. The reported elected to withdraw the allegation based upon the information supplied by the student. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-067 - A Freshman is alleged to have falsified attendance documentation. The instructor for this class uses an electronic response system to record quiz grades and attendance points. In addition, the instructor delivers an activity based course in which students work in teams to complete tasks. The group members are required to initial the tasks sheet prior to submission and the initials are cross referenced with the electronic response system to ensure accurate attendance records. The students signature and initials were missing from the task sheet given on April 3, 2009. On that day the instructor, while filtering around the room, noted the absence of one group member from this particular group. The instructor engaged the two remaining group members in conversation. The following class period the instructor commented to the group of three students that their group size had increased since the previous class period. Two separate conversations support the paperwork submitted by the group indicating the student was not present in class. However, the students electronic response system was utilized to record quiz answers on April 3, 2009. Given this information the instructor surmised the student falsified attendance documentation in order to receive credit for days that the student was not in class. As a result of this violation the instructor sanctioned the student with the revocation of any remaining unexcused absences and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Following the student case review information was presented indicating the student was actually in class and did not falsify the attendance information. The reporter of the violation elected to withdraw the allegation. Case Closed.

 

 

March

 

 

Case #2008/2009-066 - A Freshman is alleged to have submitted an assignment containing multiple instances of plagiarism. While reading the assignment the instructor became concerned about the language used within the paper. A comparison of the students submitted assignment and the paper under review demonstrated that most of the first page of the paper and one sentence on the second page had been directly copied form the paper being reviewed with no attempt at appropriate attribution. The instructor noted the student had multiple educational experiences related to plagiarism throughout the course and had demonstrated understanding of the concept through a quiz for which the student received full credit. The instructor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course of violation and the request that the X be a permanent part of the students record with no opportunity for it to be removed. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-065 - A Sophomore is alleged to have submitted an assignment that was identical to an assignment submitted by another student in the class. The student is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and unauthorized collaboration. Specifically the instructor noted  upon viewing the two exact completed assignments she contacted both students. The first student said when the assignment was completed it was given to the other student because the other students was struggling with how to respond to the assignment. The first student was verbally warned by the instructor. The second student admitted to copying the assignment from the other student and claiming it as original work. The Instructor sanctioned the second student with a zero on the assignment and an official warning through the office of the Honor & Integrity System. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-064 - Two Freshman are alleged to have falsified attendance documentation and supplied false quiz scores on in-class quizzes. The instructor for this class uses an electronic response system to record quiz grades and attendance points. In addition, the instructor delivers an activity based course in which students work in teams to complete tasks. The group members are required to initial the tasks sheet prior to submission and the initials are cross referenced with the electronic response system to ensure accurate attendance records. Following an earlier violation report (See Case 062) the instructor made an announcement in class indicated it was unacceptable for students to operate the electronic response devices for students who were not in class. Additionally, he stated that it was equally unacceptable for someone to allow their response mechanism to be used by another students when not attending class. Following this statement, one of the freshman was overheard complaining about having to operate two response mechanisms because the other freshman did not want to come to class. The other student was indeed absent from class based upon the absence of initials on the group activity for the date. However, electronic responses were registered from the students response mechanism for the day in question. Based upon this information the instructor has requested an Honor & Integrity System investigation into this incident. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-063 - A Junior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and falsification. While grading an assignment submitted via the KSOL delivery system, the instructor noted that two papers had been submitted that contained identical errors. The file properties were compared and demonstrated that both files had been created at the exact same moment. The instructor contact both students and confronted each of them with the information. Based upon the interviews with the students the instructor deduced that the Junior had acquired a copy of the other students file without the other students permission or knowledge. Upon acquiring the file the Junior submitted the assignment claiming credit as original work. The Adjunct Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment, a one letter grade reduction in the overall course grade, and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.  Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-062 - A Freshman is alleged to have falsified attendance documentation. The instructor for this class uses an electronic response system to record quiz grades and attendance points. In addition, the instructor delivers an activity based course in which students work in teams to complete tasks. The group members are required to initial the tasks sheet prior to submission and the initials are cross referenced with the electronic response system to ensure accurate attendance records. On two separate days, the freshman was not present to complete the team task for the day, however their electronic response mechanisms were used to record responses to quizzes given on those days. Based upon this information, the Assistant Teaching Scholar deduced the students submitted fraudulent information in an attempt to record attendance points and quiz scores for days they were not physically present for class. The student was sanctioned with a zero on the assignment, a revocation of any remaining unexcused absences, and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-061 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. Students were assigned the task of providing an in-class report including a handout to be disseminated to the audience. Following the report given by this student the instructor assessed the handout. During the assessment it was noted the student copied information directly from Amazon.com without attribution. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-060 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and the use of unauthorized aid. Upon receiving and grading the students assignment a GTA informed the instructor that the responses to the assignment were nearly identical to those disseminated in a previous semester. The instructor compared the responses to previous answer keys and confronted the student. The student admitted to acquiring work from a student who had the class during a previous semester. The student also admitted to consulting the key and using it to complete the assignment. Since the answers recorded on the student paper were nearly identical, in format and content, to the contents of the  consulted notes the instructor included the plagiarism charge along with the unauthorized aid allegation. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment.  Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-059 - A Sophomore is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. The student submitted a paper containing plagiarized statements taken from multiple websites. The student failed to make any attempt to attribute the information to the original source. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and integrity course.  Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-058 - A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration. The student submitted a paper for grading that was strikingly similar to another student's submitted paper. The two papers contained similar information in the exact order. In addition, both papers contained information that was not requested by the assignment. The instructor indicated that the physical makeup of the papers indicate that one student completed the assignement and the other students copied from the completed paper. An example of the information leading to this conclusion included one sentence which was virtually the same with the exception of four words that had been deleted from the middle of the sentence making the new sentence grammatically incorrect. When confronted with the information the student denied collaborating with anyone else although the other student had previously admitted to collaboration. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-057 - A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration. The student submitted a paper for grading that was strikingly similar to another student's submitted paper. The two papers contained similar information in the exact order. In addition, both papers contained information that was not requested by the assignment. The instructor indicated that the physical makeup of the papers indicate that one student completed the assignement and the other students copied from the completed paper. An example of the information leading to this conclusion included one sentence which was virtually the same with the exception of four words that had been deleted from the middle of the sentence making the new sentence grammatically incorrect. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with a warning and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-056 - A Senior and a Sophomore are alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and unauthorized collaboration. The two students submitted nearly identical (word for word) papers for an assignment.  The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. CaseClosed.

Case #2008/2009-055 - A Junior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism on a paper prepared for class. The student is alleged to have copied material from the Wikipedia website and submitted the paper without adequate attribution. The Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and a strong warning that future examples of this practice would result in failure in the course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-054 - A Junior is alleged to have provided unauthorized aid to another student during two in-class exams. A student was discovered to have copied answers from another student during two exams. Given the furniture arrangement in the room and the nature of the information that was copied the instructed deduced that the student could not have copied from the person in the seat in front had the person in front not been complicit in the act. Therefore, both students were reported for a violation. The instructor's syllabus also contained the following statement: Each student must work independently on his/her, tests or final exam. Remember that the idea is for each student to become independently knowledgeable. You should be aware that plagiarism and cheating are serious offenses and may be punished by failure on the exam, failure in the course, and/or expulsion from the university. Academic sanctions will be taken against ALL PARTIES involved in the act of cheating and/or plagiarism. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the final exam. The student contested the allegations and after the hearing panel reviewed the information, the student was found not responsible.  Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-053 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on two in-class exams. The students performance on the final two test was significantly different from prior tests. The professor began an investigation and found that the students responses, including calculations, were strikingly similar the the student who was sitting in front of the student. The faculty member confronted the student who admitted to copying from the person sitting immediately in front of the alleged violator. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the final exam. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-052 - A Junior is alleged to have engaged in the use of unauthorized aid in the preparation of an assignment for a class. Specifically, the student used easybib.com to generate a works cited page for an assignment. The assignment was to use the given information and practice appropriate citation formatting for the works cited page. The instructor became suspicious when grading the assignment. The reference contained information not given to the student and also included inaccurate information. Upon investigation the instructor was able to find the website which still contained the active page generated by the student. The student was sanctioned with a grade cap of a C in the course and is further required to redo the assignment with new information. Case Closed.

 

 

February

 

 

Case #2008/2009-051 - A Senior attempted to bribe two faculty members by offering money for a grade increase. The student sent email communication to the instructors offering $1,000 to each instructor if they would increase the final grade from an F to a D. The Department Chair filed an Honor System violation report and sanctioned the student with an XF in both courses. The student was also charged with a code of conduct violation.  The student was expelled from the university and received an XF in both courses. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-049-050 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in falsification in an effort to increase the chance of improving course grades. The student requested an Incomplete for two courses from the course instructor. The student claimed that an extended hospital stay prevented the completion of work for the courses. When a doctors note was requested the student faxed an unsigned note to the instructors. The origination of the fax was identified as belonging to a relative of the student. The student was asked to have the doctor fax a signed letter from his office as proof of the illness. A second fax was received that originated from the same location as the first faxed document. This second document contained a signature. In an effort to confirm the authenticity of the faxed document, the doctor was contacted directly. The doctor stated he did not prepare or sign the letter that had been faxed to the instructors. The student was sanctioned with an XF in both courses and is required to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-048 - A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and plagiarism. The student submitted an assignment outline that was drastically different than what had been developed througout the semester. The student stated in an email that due to difficulty with the previous topic the decision was made to change topics. Due to the atypical nature of this change and the lateness of the semester the instructor closely examined the outline. The outline consisted of headings that were not used in the class. Consultation with another faculty members resulted in the identification of a formal outlining process not used in the course of violation. Further investigation found multiple instances of plaigarism throughout the outline. A significant number of statements were taken directly from one of the websites listed in the references section without direct attribution. During a meeting with the student, the student said that a third party help put together the new outline. The course syllabus expressly forbids the consultation of anyone besides the teacher without express permission. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with a reduces grade on the paper and is further requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-047 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration with another student. Based upon a review of the work submitted by the alleged violator from Case 046, the instructor identified similarities between the eight projects submitted by both students. The student in this case was sanctioned with a grade cap of a C and required to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-046 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration with another student. The instructor noted discrepancies in grading between test scores and homework assignments throughout the semester. At the end of the semester the instructor compared the students homework with that of another student and discovered they were identical. Due to the nature of the projects the likelihood of identical work is non existent. When confronted the student acknowledge working together with the other student on the projects. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the Senior with an XF in the course and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-045 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in falsification of dated material for the purpose of receiving credit for work submitted after the due date for the assignments. Specifically, the student contacted the instructor to alert him that he had not received credit for work submitted during the semester. The instructor asked for evidence of the completion of the work prior to the due dates for each assignment. Upon examination of the projects, an embedded time-stamp within the submitted work identified the work as being begun and completed after the initial conversation with the instructor and after the due date for all of the assignments. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Failure to complete the course in the specified time will result in the student receiving an XF in the course of violation. Case Closed.

 

January

 

 

Case #2008/2009-044 - A Graduate student is alleged to have engaged in  plagiarism. The student submitted two papers for the course which, when graded, were strikingly similar in content to that submitted by another student during the Fall 2006 semester. The instructor alleges the students acquired the papers, modified them slightly, then submitted the work as original work. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on both papers. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-043 - A Junior is alleged to have engaged in  plagiarism. Upon grading the paper the Instructor noted several examples of text which had been copied and pasted from the Wikipedia website without the use of quotation marks. Additionally, the student copied several sections of text containing citations. While the student did include these citations in the reference page the original work from Wikipedia was not cited. Three additional paragraphs copied from various websites were included without any attempt at attribution. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the paper. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-042 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in  plagiarism. The student  submitted a final project containing extensive text copied directly from an Internet resource without adequate attribution. Upon searching, the Instructor located the website from which the information was copied into the final project.  The Instructor sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the project, a grade cap of C in the course, and the requirement to successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. In addition, upon completion of the DI course, the student is to rewrite the final project under the supervision of the instructor. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-041 - A Senior was alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and unauthorized collaboration. The instructor disseminated two versions of an in-class exam. The student in question was given version 1 of the exam. Upon grading the student correctly answered only 3 of the questions. When comparing the students exam with the version 2 key, the student correctly answered 35 of the questions on the exam. Given this information, the instructor has requested a Honor Council investigation. Upon completion of the adjudication phase, the student was found responsible for the violation and sanctioned with 1) a zero on the final exam 2) an XF in the course of violation 3) the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course and 4) preparing and delivering three letters of apology to various individuals across campus. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-040 - A Junior was alleged to have engaged in plagiarism and unauthorized collaboration. The instructor disseminated two versions of an in-class exam. The student in question was given version 1 of the exam. Upon grading the student correctly answered only 5 of the questions. When comparing the students exam with the version 2 key, the student correctly answered 37 of the questions on the exam. Given this information, the instructor has requested a Honor Council investigation. Upon completion of the adjudication phase, the student was found responsible for the violation and sanctioned with an XF in the course of violation, the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course and is responsible for joining the HIPE student group. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-039 - A Junior is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. Upon grading the student's paper, the instructor noted distinct differences in the writing style exhibited by the student. Specifically, the style was at a much more advanced level than previously demonstrated by the student. The Instructor also noted several critical comments about contents of the book that were not consistent with the focus of typical book reviews. The student had provided critical analysis of the historical maps provided in the book. This is not typical of book reviews in the course. Upon further investigation the instructor was able to locate an on-line review of the book which was closely aligned with that presented by the student. Upon further examination, the professor noted several similarities in word usage and structure that were too closely aligned to be considered coincidence. The Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-038 - A Junior is alleged to have presented falsified grading information to the instructor. The student presented five graded papers to the instructor that were not recorded in the on-line gradebook. Due to the unlikely nature of this situation the instructor compared the scoring marks on the students papers to other students graded papers. Several inconsistencies were noted. For example, on some of the student's papers partial points were given and deducted on papers that were supposed to have been graded as satisfactory or unsatisfactory. The student's paper was the only one containing partial grades. Additionally, on other assignments when points were given the total points for a given section were circled by the grader. The student's papers had partial points but no partial points were circled. Finally, the grader has a particular method of writing certain numerals. The manner in which these numerals was written on the students paper were inconsistent with the graders style. (eg. the grader crosses the numeral 7 and the students paper contained the numeral 7 with no cross) The Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on all five assignments. Following an investigation a hearing panel was convened to review the information available in this case. The hearing panel found that sufficient information did exist to find the student responsible for the violation. The sanctions have been upheld by the hearing panel. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-037 - A Graduate student is alleged to have engaged in  plagiarism. The student submitted a paper based upon a semester long project. Upon grading the paper the instructor noted several distinctly different writing styles through out the paper. The instructor selected portions of the text and used the "Google" search engine to search for identical text. Two websites were found containing the content of the paper with the exception of the final page of the document. The instructor determined the student copied or paraphrased both websites without appropriate citation. While the authors of the websites were cited the specific websites were not cited and the content of the website appeared identically throughout the paper. The instructor has asked for an Honor Council investigation. The investigation will be intiated durig the spring 2009 semester the case was presented to an Honor Council Hearing Panel for adjudication. The panel found the student was responsible for plagiarism and sanctioned the student with an XF in the course of violation and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed. 

Case #2008/2009-036 - A Graduate student is alleged to have engaged in  plagiarism. The student is alleged to have submitted the same work as that which was submitted by another student. The other student was mentoring the student through the course and share completed papers as a model for how to respond to the assignments. After changing the name on the responses the student chose to submit the assignments for grading. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a warning and is requiring the student to redo the assignments. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-033,034,035 - Two Sophomores and a Junior are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and plagiarism. Upon receiving a set of assignments the instructor noted that several of the computerized graphics looked similar and in fact were identical when compared. The instructor became suspicion about other assignments. Upon reviewing all collected assignments the instructor noted three students who had identical drawings composing the majority of four assignments. The instructor believes the students split the assignments and upon completion shared the drawings among themselves. Working on the assignments collaboratively was unauthorized and submitting another students drawing as your own constitutes plagiarism. The GTA sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignments and between 90-120 additional point deductions from their final homework grade depending on the number of identical submissions by the students. The students were also given an official warning through the Honor & Integrity System. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-032 - A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in  plagiarism. The instructor, while grading a final paper, noted a paragraph and sentences which were copied verbatim from Wikipedia.com. without any attempt at attribution to the source. The Visiting Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the paper. Case Closed

Case #2008/2009-031 - A Freshman and a Junior are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and plagiarism. The two students admitted to the instructor that they had worked together on an individual project. The students stated they swamped at least one page of the 3 page assignment and submitted identical work. Thus, engaging in unauthorized collaboration on the individual project and plagiarizing each others work when submitting the work for grading. The GTA sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment and a further reduction of 30 points from the final homework grade. Additionally, the GTA requested an official warning be filed with the Honor System office. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-030 - A Sophomore is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism. While grading the papers the instructor found verbatim unacknowledged reproduction of material found on the web site "Free Essays".  The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the paper and is further requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.  Case Closed.

 

December

 

 

Case #2008/2009-029 - A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and plagiarism. A GTA in another section of the same course in which the student was enrolled discovered that a student in that class submitted the same paper submitted by the Freshman. The student admitted to working together on the project and emailing an electronic copy of the paper to the student but denied that the purpose was for the student to submit the paper to a separate section of the course. In addition to the unauthorized collaboration it was determined that a portion of the paper contained plagiarized statements from a pamphlet used for information gathering. The student failed to provide any attribution to the written material within the paper. The GTA sanctioned the student with the requirement to successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.  Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-028 - A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and plagiarism. The student submitted a paper previously submitted by another student in another section of the same course. The paper submitted was a report prepared on an outside of class assignment. The student was given an electronic copy of the paper by another student and then submitted the paper as original work. The paper contained statements that were copied from a pamphlet without any attempt at attribution. The student admitted to these acts. The GTA sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and is further requiring the student to successfully complete the Development and Integrity course.  Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-027 - A Sophomore is alleged to have used unauthorized aid during an in-class exam. The student was taking a test using a clear clipboard and note cards upon which to record observations. The GTA proctoring the exam noticed the student had notecards containing writing rather than the blank cards given at the beginning of the exam. Upon requesting the notecards from the student the GTA saw that the notecards contained notes from class which included the answers to all of the observations. The student claimed no knowledge of how the notes became mixed up with the blank cards the students were given. Additionally, the student claims not to have used the information during the test. The Instructor of the class sanctioned the student with a zero on the exam and is further requiring the student enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-026 - A Junior is alleged to have plagiarized a paper from the Internet. The student submitted a document through K-State Online which was an exact duplicate of a document found on the Northern Illinois University website. The Associate Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and is requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-025 - A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and falsification. The student submitted a an examination for which the responses did not match the version of the exam that was distributed to the student at the beginning of the exam period. The student was alleged to have changed the version number on the exam and copied answers from another student during the exam. The student originally denied the allegations but eventually admitted to cheating on the exam. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the exam and is further requiring the student complete the Develop and Integrity course through the Honor & Integrity System. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-024 - A Senior is alleged to have plagiarized while preparing and submitting a take-home exam. The student submitted the response exam via email. When the instructor was grading the paper it was discovered that the student had copied a paragraph from an Internet source directly into the final response paper without attempting to attribute the source. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a one letter grade reduction on the final exam score. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-023 - A Freshman is alleged to have plagiarized while preparing and submitting a paper for grading. Students were required to prepare a reflection paper based upon what they had learned from four previously submitted papers. The instructor noted the student made several references to a paper which the student did not write. Specifically, the student references a paper about the women's movement but the paper that was prepared by the student was about drug use at K-State. The instructor also noted several inconsistencies in style, grammar usage, and spelling throughout the paragraphs of the paper. For example, the introductory paragraph was well developed, however, the following two paragraphs, which were obviously written by the student, were filled with grammar and spelling errors. The following three paragraphs had limited errors and were much better developed than the previous two paragraphs. These paragraphs also contained reference to a paper which was not submitted by the student. Given this information, the instructor believes the student lifted this material from another students paper. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the student with an XF in the course and is further requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-022 - A Freshman is alleged to have plagiarized from an Internet site when preparing a paper for class. The Instructor assigned specific websites to be reviewed for a project. The freshman utilized one of the approved website for the review but also included information from an unapproved website. The Instructor was able to demonstrate that information was plagiarized from both websites. The instructor assigned the student with a zero on the assignment and is further requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-021 - A Junior is alleged to have copied another students assignment prior to submitting it for grading. The instructor noted similarities between the two assignments. Upon investigation the instructor discovered the assignments were nearly identical copies. The Junior admitted to acquiring the other students assignment and making minor modifications prior to submitting the paper for grading. The instructor determined that the other student had no knowledge of the theft of the paper. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course offered through the Honor System. Case Closed .

Case #2008/2009-020 - Two freshman are alleged to have submitted the same paper to be graded in two separate sections of a course. While grading the paper, the instructor noted a different instructors name on the paper and a different beginning time for the class session. The instructor contacted the instructor in charge of the other section and it was determined that the same paper had been submitted by two different students. While investigating the incident the first student admitted coping the other students paper because of a time issue. The first student stated the paper was requested from the second student and it was freely given. However, the second student claims to have no knowledge that the paper was submitted by the first student. The Reporters have requested an investigation by the Honor Council but recommended sanctioning both students with an XF if both are found to have willingly contributed to the incident. Following a case investigation the CIs were able to determine that the student who submitted the assignment the second time did so without the knowledge of the other student. The student freely admitted to submitting the assignment after finding it on the students laptop computer. The first student was released from responsibility and was withdrawn from the investigation. The violation report was amended to an Option 1 and the instructor assigned an XF as a sanction for the student who admitted responsibility. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-019 - A Graduate Student is alleged to have submitted a project containing plagiarized information obtained from the Internet. Assignment guidelines given to student clearly indicated that copying and pasting of electronic information was not permissible on the assignment. In addition, the Instructor provided numerous opportunities to discuss and avoid plagiarism. The instructor graded a powerpoint project and found the document to contain multiple text entries copied from Internet sources with no attribution. The Professor sanctioned the student with an XF in the course. Case Closed.

 

November

 

Case #2008/2009-018 - A Senior is alleged to have submitted a paper that was plagiarized from an Internet source. The Instructor required students to prepare a technical paper that provided guidelines for completing a task related to the students discipline. The student submitted a paper that was copied directly from a set of instructions available on the Internet. The material included large quantities of text and graphical representations associated with the task. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and is further requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed .

Case #2008/2009-017 - A Freshman is alleged to have submitted a paper that was plagiarized from several Internet sources. The instructor handed out an assignment containing several questions that were to be researched and responded to in the students own words. The student in questions copied several statements from websites and submitted these statements as answers to the questions. The instructor did note that some of the sources were cited in the footnotes included with the paper. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment.Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-016 - A Sophomore is alleged to have submitted a paper that contained plagiarized statements from several sources. Specifically, the instructor indicated most of the first page had been copied directly from the website Wikipedia and that several course readings were used without attempts to acknowledge the original source material. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment. The Case was withdrawn at the request of the Reporter. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-015 - A Senior is alleged to have engaged in falsification. During a testing situation a student approached the GTA to submit an exam. The GTA looked at the name on the paper and then looked at the students face. The name on the paper did not match the face. When confronted the student stated that was the correct name and ran out of the room. Toward the end of the testing time the correct student entered the room and asked to take the test. The student was informed that a test with the student's name had already been submitted. The student claimed no knowledge of why somebody would have taken the test and placed the student's name on the exam. The GTA sanctioned the student with a zero on the exam and an XF in the course.Case Closed.

 

October

 

Case #2008/2009-014 - A Freshman is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration. The student submitted two assignments which were nearly identical (50% first assignment, 100% second assignment) to that submitted by the alleged violator from Case 013. The instructor sanctioned the student with a grade reduction on the first assignment (50%) and a zero on the second assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-013 - A Junior was alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration. When grading papers the instructor noted similarities in student responses. Upon further examination of the papers the instructor found about half of the same answers on the first assignment and 100% identical responses on the second assignment. The instructor sanctioned the student with a grade reduction on the first assignment (50%) and a zero on the second assignment. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-012 - Two Juniors are alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration and plagiarism. The two students submitted nearly identical papers for a class. The assignment was given on K-State on-line and the students submitted their papers within 1 hour of each other. When the instructor was reviewing the papers distinct similarities were noted. Specifically, out of the two page paper the student had only two sentences that were different on their papers. The instructor sanctioned the students with a zero on the assignment, a zero on the writing portion of the class (approximately 20% of the total grade) and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed. *note* One student was dropped from the case and the other chose not to contest the allegations.

Case #2008/2009-011 - A Senior is alleged to have provided an electronic copy of a paper previously submitted in a class to a student who is currently enrolled in the course. The current student submitted the paper for grading with only minor changes to the paper. The Senior is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration with the current student. The Assistant Professor sanctioned the student with a warning. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-010 - A Junior is alleged to have plagiarized a paper written by another student and submitted during a previous semester. The instructor reported receiving a draft version of a paper that was extraordinarily polished. Additionally the paper contained numerous scientific language and references that are not common for papers submitted in the course. Upon examining the references provided the instructor noted numerous electronic retrieval dates from the previous semester. the instructor retrieved an electronic copy of a paper submitted during the previous semester on the same topic. Upon comparing the papers the instructor discovered they were nearly identical and that only a few minor changes had been made by the student prior to submitting the paper.  The instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the paper and the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-009 - A Junior is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration on an in-class exam. The instructor reported that two versions of the test were distributed to students. The student in question returned a completed response sheet that was inconsistent with the responses to the version of the test the student was given at the beginning of the testing period. However, upon examination of the second version of the test the student responses were consistent with the correct answers. The instructor sanctioned the student with the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. The student contested the allegation. Following an investigation and an Honor Council Hearing the student was found not responsible for engaging in unauthorized collaboration. The students name has been removed from the Honor System database and the original earned grade was recorded for the in-class test. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-008 - A Sophomore is alleged to have submitted an assignment completed by another student. Upon receiving the assignment the instructor noted errors that were consistent with those found in another assignment she had graded previously. She confronted the two students. The first knew nothing about the incident. The second student admitted to taking the assignment from a jump drive found in the other students apartment. The Instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the assignment and is further requiring the completion of the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-007 - A Freshman is alleged to have submitted a paper which was typed and partially written by another student. In addition, the instructor later learned the paper was a rendition of another students published work prepared in a previous semester. The instructor sanctioned the student with a reduced grade on the assignment and is further requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-006 - A Sophomore was alleged to have submitted a paper in which approximately 75% of the content had been copied word-for-word from the assigned readings. The student did utilize quotation marks in a few instances and inserted one footnote however, this was not adequate to the amount of information copied from the sources. The instructor acknowledge after meeting with the student that the student did not have an understanding of the citation expectations or format required in academia in the United States. The instructor sanctioned the student with a warning and is further requiring the student to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. Case Closed .

Case #2008/2009-005 - A  Graduate Student submitted responses to four preliminary exams which contained instances of plagiarism, and when examined together presented a pattern of plagiarism. The student used improper citation for source material, copied directly from source material and failed to provide appropriate attribution, identified secondary source material as primary source material, and failed to attribute information directly to the author whose ideas accounted for the organization and content of the response to the exam questions. The Chair of the doctoral committed has sanctioned the student with the requirement to submit a revision of the exam containing examples of plagiarism. The revision must have all incidences of plagiarism removed and must adhere to APA style and source material must be supplied to each committee member upon submission of the exam. Additionally, these requirements must be met within a time frame as identified by the committee. Case Closed.

September

Case #2008/2009-004 - A  Junior was alleged to have provided false documentation in order to be given the opportunity to take a make-up exam after missing the original administration of the exam.  The student approached the instructor prior to the exam stating the student had an interview scheduled out of town on the day of the exam and asked permission to miss the exam but have the opportunity to take a make-up exam. The instructor agreed providing the student supplied documentation from the company as to the date and time of the interview. Following the missed class period, the student submitted a document containing the company logo. Upon viewing the document the instructor became suspicious due to the fuzziness of the company logo and the fact that the letter contained no signature. The instructor asked for further documentation and contact information for the company. The student agreed to supply this information. However, prior to supplying the instructor with the additional material, the student sent a message through electronic mail indicating the student had lied about the interview and that the letter submitted by the student was a fake. The instructor sanctioned the student with a zero on the exam. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-003 - A Sophomore and a Junior were alleged to have engaged in unauthorized collaboration. The instructor of the class stated the students submitted identical homework assignments. The Graduate Teaching Assistant sanctioned the students  with a reduction in the total value of homework for the semester (60 points reduced to 30 points) and is further requiring the students to enroll in and successfully complete the Development and Integrity course. The students contested the violation and were found responsible by an Honor Council Hearing Panel. The Hearing Panel upheld the sanctions identified by the Reporter. Case Closed.

Case #2008/2009-002 - A Freshman is alleged to have submitted a forged document to his academic adviser for the purpose of accessing the registration process. The Freshman is alleged to have forged the advisers signature on a document that would allow the student to continue through the enrollment process. The student was confronted about the forgery and lied about it to the reporter. The student then met with the Department Chair and the Academic Adviser where he admitted to forging the document and lying about it. The student was assigned the Development and Integrity course as a sanction.  Case Closed .

Case #2008/2009-001 - A Sophomore is alleged to have submitted fraudulent attendance documentation for two Juniors during a class which the Juniors did not attend. The Sophomore is alleged to have contacted the other two students via cell phone toward the end of class for the purpose of obtaining their WID numbers. Upon receiving the WID numbers for the two Juniors the Sophomore completed and submitted scantron forms for each of the students so they would receive credit for the class attendance. The Instructor has sanctioned all three students with an XF in the course. Case Closed.