Academy Plagiarism Policy Examined

Recently, Harvard University’s Computer Science 50 (CS50): “Introduction to Computer Science I,” implemented a new “regret clause” to the course’s syllabus. The newly adopted clause prompted discussions among the Academy’s faculty members about the efficacy and leniency of Harvard’s policies as well as Exeter’s policies and responses towards academic dishonesty.

According to The Harvard Crimson, CS50’s new policy allows students who commit academically dishonest acts to avoid facing Harvard’s Administrative Board through a new “regret clause,” which states that students who violate the academic dishonesty standards may report the violation to their instructor within 72 hours and “will likely face only local course sanctions.”

Dean of Residential Life AJ Cosgrove said that, unlike CS50’s new, radical system, the Academy’s departments all approach plagiarism in an organized and uniform manner.

He noted that when an instructor suspects plagiarism in a student’s work, he or she must report it to the department head. After a discussion between the instructor and the department head, the case is reported to the dean of the Discipline Committee. Under the dean’s discretion, the case may reach the Discipline Committee.

Cosgrove added that a few years ago, the Administration created a separate committee in order to oversee the Discipline Committee’s management of plagiarism cases. He said that the added committee incorporated two new changes to the Discipline Committee’s procedures of dealing with academic dishonesty.

“The two primary changes were to require faculty to report cases of suspected academic dishonesty and to provide a systematic approach to reviewing academic honesty cases that provides us with the ability to respond with no disciplinary action, a case for regular consideration, or a case for special consideration,” Cosgrove said.

Various departments changed their academic dishonesty policies in past years as well. The history department, in particular, revised its policy last spring in order to address the department’s view of the usage of internet sources, and to bring clarity to how instructors distinguish mistakes from misconduct.

“We tried to be a little bit more nuanced in our definition,” Michael Golay, one of the history instructors who helped rewrite the policy, said. “I think the policy does recognize that mistakes will happen and that not every case of miscitation would necessarily be considered plagiarism but might be considered sloppy scholarship or something done out of ignorance.”

Lundy Smith, head of the English department, said that, unlike the history department, the English department last revised its policy a decade ago.

“We kept the old statement, and after we wrote the new one, we decided to give out both statements to the students,” Smith said. “One is called ‘The Statement on Academic Dishonesty’ and one is called ‘The Statement on Academic Honesty.’”

“I think our policy is pretty clear. It works for us, and it’s clear-cut,” Smith said.

However, many faculty members agreed that it would be interesting to see whether Harvard’s new policy turns out to be effective and helpful.

Bill Jordan, history department chair, said that incorporating such a policy like CS50’s could bring various benefits.

“It definitely will be worth thinking about and adopting a policy like that,” Jordan said. “Teachers don’t discover every time a student plagiarizes. There are students who get away with it. So I think such a policy, if implemented at Exeter, would bring light to more cases.”

History instructor Aykut Kilinc said that a policy that grants internal handling of plagiarism cases would be beneficial for students since all Exonians prioritize academic success over all of their other goals.

"For Exeter, [Harvard's policy] may be useful because what I noticed during my short period of time here is that stakes are very high,” Kilinc said. “Students are here to go to prestigious universities; they are building resumes; every paper, every exam counts."

Others faculty members disagreed and said that a policy that allows internal handling would be bring inconsistencies and ultimately contradict the Academy’s emphasis on academic integrity.

Smith said that internal handling could result in unintended, unwanted consequences. He said that during his second year at Exeter, one of his advisees had to withdraw from the Academy his senior year. When the student was caught cheating on a homework assignment during the last week of school, the Discipline Committee discovered that one of his past instructors had dealt with his violation without reporting it to the Discipline Committee.

“The board required him to withdraw the day of prom. The teacher hadn’t reported the case to anybody, and then when the student was caught the second time, the teacher just said, ‘Well, I talked to him about it,’ and it was over,” Smith said. “We don’t want these kind of cases to repeat.”

Cosgrove added that internal management of cases would only be destructive to the academic atmosphere on campus.

“All forms of honesty on our campus are critically important to the community we build,” Cosgrove said. “Internal handling of academic honesty or any major rule that the community values creates a system that is inconsistent. I don't think a policy like Harvard's CS50 would be helpful to students. I think it devalues integrity.”

Senior Will Li, a student member of the Discipline Committee, emphasized that the Committee reviews each case differently, and that the Academy reports all cases to the Committee in order to stress the seriousness of plagiarism as a violation.

“While it may seem severe, by putting each instance of plagiarism through the DC, we emphasize the severity of the infraction,” Li said. “The student is forced to evaluate the definition of academic integrity and reflect on his or her choices and what needs to be changed in the future. Although this is a time-consuming process, it establishes a culture that places originality of thought as one of Exeter's main tenets within the classroom and one that I fully support.”

Golay said that facing a plagiarism charge itself can be a damaging experience for students.

“Plagiarism, more than some other offenses here, I think, is very traumatic for students; it strikes at the core of what they are: scholars.” Golay said. “I think there is more chagrin attached to an accusation to plagiarism that there would be to some other major offenses. If it were me I would feel kind of sick about it just because of the value that everyone here places on academics, so I think in its most flagrant form, it’s a very serious offense.”