<p>This time of year can get hectic, and some students start to cut corners. Here’s a letter describing various offenses and the disciplinary actions. </p>
<p>*Cases of Plagiarism</p>
<li><p>A student submitted a final paper in which a significant portion of
text was quoted verbatim from a website without quotation marks or proper
citation. After a formal investigation, the student accepted responsibility
for academic misconduct before a hearing panel of the Undergraduate Judicial
Board. Though the student claimed responsibility, the panel was
particularly cognizant of her conscious rephrasing of particular sentences
throughout the paper and interpreted her actions as a clear intent to
deceive by claiming another?s work as her own. Due to the substantial amount
of plagiarism and the student?s apparent lack of ethical concern regarding
her actions, the panel issued a two-semester suspension. The student was
also required to rewrite the final paper and submit a written reflection on
her behavior. As the student was eligible for graduation following her
readmission after suspension, the usual additional sanction of disciplinary
probation until graduation was not applicable in this case.</p></li>
<li><p>A student submitted a term paper in which she had adopted
word-for-word phrasing from her sources, but did not put the material in
quotes. In addition, the paper contained citations of certain articles as
primary sources, when in fact the student had relied solely on descriptions
of these sources found in other primary sources. The student acknowledged
responsibility for plagiarism and had no prior history of academic
dishonesty. Given the limited extent of the misconduct in question, the case
was resolved via a Faculty-Student Resolution. The student agreed to a
sanction in which she received half of the grade points that the paper would
have otherwise earned.</p></li>
<li><p>A student submitted an assignment for a course in which there were
direct quotes taken from sources that were inappropriately cited, had no
citation, or were attributed to the wrong source. The student?s subsequent
presentation of his paper in class was of significantly lower quality than
the paper itself, prompting the instructors to suspect academic dishonesty.
The case was forwarded to the Office of Judicial Affairs for a formal
investigation. The student specifically requested that the case be resolved
through an administrative hearing rather than a panel of the Undergraduate
Judicial Board. He pled responsible to the charge of academic dishonesty,
acknowledging that the final form of the paper contained instances of
plagiarism. He insisted, however, that the presence of the passages in the
final version of the paper was the result of an unintentional oversight.
The hearing officer issued a one-semester suspension. The student was
further sanctioned with a written assignment, and upon his reenrollment, he
must submit his first academic paper to the Writing Studio for review. Upon
the completion of this process, the student must submit a reflection paper
to the Office of the Judicial Affairs and will remain on disciplinary
probation for the remainder of his academic career.</p></li>
<li><p>A student submitted two assignments for a class, both with direct
quotes from sources that were not properly cited. The student accepted
responsibility for plagiarizing the second paper, but maintained that the
lack of appropriate attribution in the first paper was a harmless oversight.
Upon the student?s acceptance of responsibility, the matter was forwarded to
a panel of the Undergraduate Judicial Board to determine a sanction. The
panel was pleased by the student?s ready acknowledgement that his actions
were wrong, but was concerned he consistently focused on the avoidance of
suspension, rather than the serious nature of academic dishonesty. The
panel decided to issue a one-semester suspension and assign a reflective
research assignment. Upon his return, the student will be placed on
disciplinary probation for the remainder of his time at Duke.</p></li>
<li><p>An instructor became aware of inconsistencies in the writing style
within a student?s final paper in addition to errors in referencing. Upon
checking the references, the professor found that the student?s paper
contained large sections of verbatim text from online sources. The case was
referred to a panel of the Undergraduate Judicial Board. The student
pleaded responsible-in-part to the charge of academic dishonesty, admitting
that the final paper contained improperly cited material but denying any
intent to plagiarize. Though the panel was sympathetic to extenuating
circumstances in the student?s life and agreed that the student had not
willfully chosen to cut and paste from online sources, they nevertheless
believed that the student was responsible for a violation of university
policy due to the large amount of unattributed material. The Board issued a
two-semester suspension, and the student will remain on disciplinary
probation for the remainder of her Duke career. In order to address the
non-academic difficulties affecting the student?s life throughout the
judicial process, the panel mandated that the student seek an assessment
with Counseling and Psychological Services during the suspension period.
Upon her return, the student will also be required to meet with the Writing
Studio for additional instruction in proper research methodology.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Incidents of Misconduct Involving Examinations</p>
<li><p>An instructor noted that an examination submitted by a student for
re-grading seemed to have been significantly altered from its original form.
A formal investigation was launched, and the student was informed of the
instructor?s concerns. The student stridently denied the allegations, and
the Office of Judicial Affairs began the process of forward the case to a
panel of the Undergraduate Judicial Board. As the investigation continued,
the changes to the student?s exam became increasingly clear, and the student
opted to accept responsibility for the charge. She requested that the matter
be resolved in an administrative hearing. The hearing officer considered
the student?s apparent remorse and difficult personal circumstances and
issued a one-semester suspension. Upon her return, the student will also be
placed on disciplinary probation for the remainder of her academic career.</p></li>
<li><p>An instructor noted discrepancies between an exam submitted for
re-grading and a photocopy of the student?s original exam. The matter was
forwarded to the Office of Judicial Affairs, and upon notification of the
charges, the student accepted partial responsibility. He insisted that
while he had altered his answers before re-submitting the exam, he had
committed an innocent mistake in light of confusing and unclear course
requirements. A panel of the Undergraduate Judicial Board was convened to
resolve the situation. Upon review of the course?s syllabus, the panel
concluded that the student?s claim of misunderstanding the requirements for
resubmission was implausible. Citing discrepancies between several aspects
of the student?s hearing testimony, the panel found the student responsible
for the charge of Cheating and issued a one-semester suspension,
disciplinary probation for the remainder of the student?s undergraduate
career at Duke, and a written reflection paper.</p></li>
<li><p>During an exam, an instructor went to the restroom where he
encountered a student in his class in the single stall. After the student?s
departure, the instructor discovered the student?s textbook and notes in a
binder on the floor of the stall he had occupied. After a formal
investigation, a hearing was held before a panel of the Undergraduate
Judicial Board to determine if the student was responsible for academic
dishonesty. The student pleaded not responsible to the instructor?s
allegations, arguing that he had been extremely ill on the day of the exam.
He claimed to have left his materials on the bathroom floor prior to the
beginning of the exam out of forgetfulness, and said that he had felt sick
during the exam and rushed to the bathroom in a state of near delirium that
resulted in him again forgetting the materials. The instructor offered
conflicting testimony, however, arguing that the bathroom had been
completely silent when he had entered, and that he saw no materials on the
floor in the stall until after the student had exited. The panel, noting
frequent inconsistencies in the student?s account, suspected that the
materials in question had been in the student?s hand when the instructor
entered the bathroom. Thus, the student was held responsible for the
violation and sanctioned with a two-semester suspension and disciplinary
probation for the remainder of his academic career. The student must also
submit a reflection paper to the Office of Judicial Affairs and consult with
the Academic Skills Resource Center upon his return to Duke.</p></li>
<li><p>An instructor believed that he noticed a student glancing at
information on a fellow student?s test during an examination. Comparing the
two completed exams, he discovered a high degree of similarity between the
papers, and the matter was forward to the Undergraduate Judicial Board. The
student pleaded not responsible to the charge of Cheating, citing confusion
regarding the terms ?open note? and ?open book? due to previous educational
experiences in international contexts. She insisted that similarities
between the two papers stemmed from the fact that she and the other student
had worked together on study materials prior to the exam. These study
materials had been on the other student?s desk, and the student admitted to
consulting them in addition to her own notes during the exam. Though the
instructor acknowledged some ambiguity regarding the exam?s open note
policy, identical notations on the students? actual test papers led the
panel to conclude that one student had deliberately consulted the exam paper
of another. That student was held responsible for Cheating and sanctioned
with a two-semester suspension and disciplinary probation for the remainder
of her academic career.</p></li>
<li><p>An instructor noticed a student looking ?very hard? at another
student?s desk during an in-class quiz. Upon comparing the two quizzes, the
instructor discovered identical responses, both correct and incorrect, on
the entire quiz. The matter was forwarded to a hearing of the Undergraduate
Judicial Board. The student pleaded responsible in part to the charge of
Cheating, admitting that she had attempted to consult another student?s quiz
on a single question but maintaining that she had been unsuccessful and that
her submitted quiz featured only her own work. However, due to overwhelming
similarities between the two documents, the panel concluded that the student
was responsible for the charge of Cheating. As they considered an
appropriate sanction, the panelists learned that the student had previously
been held responsible for the charge of plagiarism. Thus, they voted to
issue a four-semester suspension.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Consequences of Misconduct</p>
<p>In addition to the sanctions reported above, other potential consequences of
misconduct as noted in the Bulletin of Information and Regulations are:</p>
<p>Expulsion
Dismissal and permanent removal from the university without
possibility of readmission or reinstatement is not typically a sanction
applied in individual cases of academic misconduct. Nevertheless, it may be
considered in cases involving repeated incidents throughout a student?s
academic career.</p>
<p>Degree Revocation
If clear and convincing evidence of serious academic misconduct
surfaces after a student has already graduated from Duke, the university
reserves the right to revoke any previously conferred degree.</p>
<p>Suspension
A suspension is an involuntary dismissal from the university for
a specified period of time which may include the current semester and such
additional semesters as deemed appropriate in a formal hearing. No academic
courses taken at another institution during a student?s period of suspension
can receive degree credit at Duke. A student who is suspended must apply
for readmission following the period of separation from the university.</p>
<p>Disciplinary Probation
Disciplinary probation is a status imposed on students for a
specific amount of time during which another violation of university policy
or violation of any of the conditions of the probation shall result in an
augmented disciplinary action, including the possibility of suspension.
Students who are suspended for academic misconduct typically remain on
disciplinary probation for the remainder of their time at Duke.</p>
<p>Formal Warning
This formal written reprimand included on a student?s
disciplinary record may be applied in cases involving minor misconduct.</p>
<p>Educational Projects/Initiatives
Students may be required to complete a project or a written
assignment, attend an educational program, or seek assistance for the
Academic Skills Instructional Program, the Writing Studio or other
university resources. *</p>