Case Study: Cheating on a Test: resolution by the Academic Integrity Review Board
It was time for the mid-term in Political Science 305. Dr. Pierce provided the class with ten essay questions to complete on their own and use as a study guide. On the day of the test, each student was required to use a blue book provided by the professor to answer four of the ten questions during an in-class test. They were not allowed to bring their study guides with them to class that day. They had two hours and ten minutes to complete the test, and they were not allowed to use any additional materials.
One student, Tom, came in twenty-five minutes late. He picked up a blue book and sat in the back of the room. After approximately one hour, he closed his blue book and turned it in. The professor assumed he was not able to complete the test because he only had it for one hour. The rest of the class took the entire time to finish.
When Dr. Pierce started grading the test he noticed several unusual things about Tom's test:
- Tom answered five questions instead of four.
- In Tom's blue book, questions one and three were not questions asked on the test but they were asked in the study guide.
- Questions two, four, and five were from the test but they were not in the same order as the question on the test.
- He did not make an attempt to answer question four on the test.
- His answers for the first four were perfect. They were very comprehensive and well organized. There were no misspellings and no scratch outs.
- Question five was poorly done. The first two paragraphs seemed to be the answers to anther question. Tom scratched them out and wrote a short, incomplete answer with many spelling errors and scratch outs.
Dr. Pierce did not want to believe that Tom cheated but decided to contact him via e-mail to set up a meeting. When Dr. Pierce and Tom met, Tom vehemently denied cheating. He was angry and seemed offended by the questions he was asked by the professor. He kept saying that he did not cheat and did not appreciate being called a "cheater."
Dr. Pierce called the Office of Student Conduct for advice as to how to proceed.
Issues to Consider:
1. Approach: What is the best approach to discussing the situation with the student? It is best not to make any announcements regarding individuals cheating in class. Students' judicial files are protected by federal law and it is important not to share any identifying information with the class (this includes sharing information with parents or anyone who calls on the student's behalf without a release of information signed by the student). It is best to contact the student after class, at home, or through e-mail. If you are interested in more information regarding how to conduct the meeting, please see "How to Confront."
2. Now what? What do we want students to learn from these incidents?
The next step is to fill out the paperwork. It can be located at Report of an Academic Integrity Violation. If a student denies cheating and you believe that they did in fact cheat, please contact the Office of Student Conduct for consultation. The staff can help you determine if there is sufficient evidence to warrant a hearing. You can also go to the procedures link on our web site. There you will find the Report of an Academic Integrity Violation (RAIV) form.
If the student denies cheating, you should check the box under step five (indicating that a hearing is needed) and the student should not sign the form. Send the form and all supporting materials to the Office of Student Conduct. We do not want to send a message to students that we only address this issue when it is convenient for us. It is important to let students know that if we believe a violation may have occurred, we will use the existing University procedures to determine what actually occurred. The student should remain in the class until the Board resolves the situation.
In cases were the student admits cheating, the faculty member determines the appropriate sanction and the student signs off on the form. The form provides several alternatives as well as a place for the faculty to write in a sanction. An F on an assignment and an F for a class are common sanctions. Faculty members usually consider a number of elements when determining a sanction. They consider the extent to which the student cheated (copied one answer verses an entire paper), the weight of the assignment (5% verses 50%), the student's response to the situation, and other relevant information. The staff in the Office of Student Conduct can provide case precedent upon request.
The student's file is kept confidential and the violation is only indicated on their transcript if they are suspended or expelled. The record is kept for five years from the date of resolution. If they have no prior violations and do not violate the academic integrity policies in the future, then the situation will likely end with the faculty's sanctions. Please see the Academic Integrity Procedures or Common Questions for Faculty for more information or contact the Office of Student Conduct at 515-2963.
3. Other Advice: Avoid bargaining. It is a common strategy for students to offer alternatives to the faculty member's initial response. While some students fully accept responsibility for their behavior and the appropriate consequences, others may not. At times students become extremely emotional and either intentionally or unintentionally manipulate the faculty member into believing they should not hold them accountable in a specific instance. If a student becomes very emotional or tries to bargain with you and you begin to question whether or not you should pursue the charge, we suggest that you stop the meeting and call us for a consultation.
Reporting the violation has two major benefits. The first is accountability. If this is not the first incident in which the student has cheated, then the records will show a pattern. Judicial files are confidential so if it is a one-time mistake, it will be kept in the Office of Student Conduct and is not usually noted on their transcript. The second benefit is that reporting the violation helps to protect the faculty member. As long as University procedures are utilized, faculty members are acting within the scope of thier job.
4. Hearings: All hearings are schedules for Monday or Thursdays at 4:00pm. The average length of a hearing is approximately two hours depending on the circumstances. A student assistant will meet with any faculty member that has a case coming before the Board to answer questions and to explain the proceedings. The faculty member's role is to simply explain the materials to the Board and answer any additional questions. It is not a difficult process and in most cases the paperwork submitted with the form is sufficient evidence for the Board. Ask the student assistant or staff in the Office of Student Conduct if you need to provide any additional information. If there are other materials that might be helpful for the Board, the student assistant must have those at least three days prior to the hearing.
In addition to the materials sent with the form such as copies of the tests or papers in question, other information may be helpful. Information that, depending on the nature of the case, is sometimes helpful for the Board:
- A copy of the syllabus
- Information regarding attendance or other grades
- Other student's answers to a specific question or responses to an assignment
Student Conduct Home / Links / Student Conduct Mission Statement / Student Conduct Staff / NCSU Home
