Now that the semester is drawing to a close, it’s time for an update on the student I caught cheating on an exam earlier this semester. I don’t want to reveal anything about the student, even whether the student was male or female. But it’s clunky writing to keep saying “the student” and using gender-neutral language, so I’ll make it easy on all of us and just call the student Adam. I’ll spare you all the details on how I caught Adam cheating and all the drama that led up to it, but suffice it to say that two cheat sheets were seen on his desk while he was taking his exam and, when I approached him, the cheat sheets were crumpled up and stuffed into his front pocket. When I asked him to empty his pockets, out came the cheat sheets. I made it explicitly clear in class and in an e-mail before the exam, and it says on the exam itself and in my syllabus, that the only thing students were allowed on exams are a pen or pencil and sometimes a calculator. Again it seems a student used my suggested solutions for practice exam questions against me — shrinking them down to 4-point font and printing them out. Grrrr.

I took the exam from him and went back to my office, telling him I would contact him and let him know what I was going to do about this. I was a little hot at this point and I needed to cool down and think this through. I write in my syllabus that the punishment for cheating can be either a failing grade on the exam or a failing grade in the class, depending on the severity of the offense. I spoke with colleagues about the situation and everyone seemed to agree that I should throw the book at Adam. If there were ever a time to fail a student for cheating, it was for this, a clear case of premeditated cheating. It would be one thing if, during an exam, he were looking on the exam of the student next to him and continued to do so even after being warned. In that case, I might just give him a zero on the exam. But this was about as bad as it gets. At that point, I contacted the Office of Student Life and Development  (OSLD) and asked them what I should do next.

I was informed that I could mete out the punishment I deemed proper, and Adam would have the right to appeal the resulting grade if he so desired. I was told that I could also take it one step further and file a complaint against the student for violating the Student Code of Conduct (SCC).

(Note to professors: even if you decide to handle a cheating incident in-house and not pursue any violation of the SCC, you are still supposed to contact the OSLD and inform them of the situation; they will put something on the student’s record so that if it happens again, they can take this previous behavior into consideration. Despite what some may think, including myself before this incident, contacting OSLD does not automatically start an investigation or hearing; it’s entirely up to the professor.)

I wrote a detailed account of the events that occured and e-mailed it to the OSLD, along with scans of the cheat sheets. They contacted Adam and informed him that I was initiating an investigation. At that point, Adam came forwarded and admitted wrongdoing. He later sent me an e-mail apologizing for cheating. He said that given the situation, my giving him a failing grade in the course was an appropriate punishment. He felt embarrassed about everything — he hadn’t studied enough for the exam, had some family issues going on, and was afraid he would fail. I give him credit for the apology, and I appreciated it. This was an educational lesson for Adam and I wish him well in the future. No hard feelings.

Okay, now here’s the problem. I serve on the Judicial Board at SCSU, and we hear cases brought by the University against students that are accused of violating the SCC. The composition of board members changes with each proceeding, but it consists of one faculty representative, one staff representative, and three students. All the proceedings are confidential. We take notes throughout the hearing and everything is taken from us at the end and shredded. We are not to discuss anything that occurred during the hearing. We listen to the testimony, ask questions, take in evidence, and then the parties leave the room while we deliberate. We consider everything and first decide what the facts are. Then we decide if the accused party is “responsible” (the University’s word for “guilty” but since this is not a legal hearing, the language changes a bit) for violating part of the SCC. We then bring the parties back into the room. When someone is found responsible, we inform that party and any other relevant complaining party (for example, the victim in case of a sexual assault) that the person was found responsible. Then everyone else leaves the room and the Board members decide on appropriate punishment. The Board recommends a sanction, anywhere from a slap on the wrist to expulsion from the University. Ultimately it is up to the person in charge at OSLD to decide on what to do; I am told that he usually follows the Judicial Board’s recommendation.

When students are found responsible for violating the SCC at a Judicial Board hearing, they are told that they will be informed of the sanction within three business days, after the OSLD makes its decision. Everyone else involved in the process is told nothing. While the victim in a sexual assault case will learn at the hearing that the accused party was found responsible, the victim is never told what the ultimate punishment actually is. Judicial Board members are never told whether their recommended sanction is what was imposed, or whether OSLD decided to change it and substitute their judgment for the Board’s. In my case, I will never know what the punishment was for Adam. By coming forward and admitting responsibility for cheating on the exam, Adam bypassed the Judicial Board system, saving a lot of time and hassle. The OSLD decided on the punishment, with no recommendation by the Judicial Board. I have no idea how he was punished. I received an e-mail simply saying that he accepted responsibility for this violation and “was sanctioned appropriately.” I have no idea what “appropriately” means.

Some students at the university are considering changing our current SCC system, whereby the University provides an extra punishment on top of any criminal sanctions for things like sexual assault or drug use. I won’t get into whether I personally think that is appropriate or not, but if you’re going to have a system like the one we currently have (providing extra punishment for offenses which our legal system already finds worthy of punishment), shouldn’t the actual punishments meted out by the University be public information?

I am disappointed with the current system and its lack of transparency. I will never know whether the OSLD decided that Adam’s failing my class was already punishment enough, or whether they decided to suspend him or expel him. It would be nice to know where the University draws the line. How blatant does a violation of the most important part of the SCC have to be to warrant suspension or expulsion? I understand privacy issues, but without anybody knowing what the punishment for cheating is, how do we communicate to students just how wrong violations of academic integrity are?

I mentioned in a previous post that there should be a Student Cheating Report, much like there is a Sexual Assault Report every year. After writing that post, I sent an e-mail to the head of the OSLD letting him know my opinion about this and asking him why we don’t currently provide this information. He said that in the past the University has not put out a report because of the lack of a good information system, and this kind of report would require going through files by hand. (Personally, I think this should be a priority, regardless of how busy the OSLD is with other things, but at least I have an explanation.) He said they now have a simple system they can use for this, but it has a few glitches that need to be worked out. He said this is a summer project for him, and he agrees with me that faculty and students really need this kind of information. Every interaction I have had with him has confirmed to me that he is a great asset to this University and is very good at his job, so I trust that he will do what he says he will. I look forward to the results.

I’m not sure what the over/under is on the number of student violations of academic integrity in the last academic year. Feel free to state your guess for the record in a comment to this post. Closest to the actual number without going over gets $20 from me, via Paypal, when the report is released. (In the case of a tie, winners split it — I’m cheap, you know.)