Plagiarism PoliciesWhile not all of these strategies may succeed individually in eliminating plagiarism, a strategic combination may, in fact, reduce incidents of plagiarism. Focus groups have shown that students are less likely to plagiarize if the course policies specifically address the issue and state the penalties that will result from such actions. For further reading on the role of honor codes in combating plagiarism, see McCabe, Donald L. and Linda Klebe Trevino. "What we know about cheating in college." in Change, Jan-Feb 1996 v28 n1 p 28(6).
Statement on Irresponsible Academic Behavior
Code of Conduct Cover Sheet for Exams
Improper Collaboration Policy
Statement on Irresponsible Academic Behavior(appears courtesy of Barry Bean, Biology)
Statement from: BioS 42, Intro to Cell & Molecular Biology Laboratory [S’05]
There are many forms of irresponsible behavior that can ruin opportunities for you or for others in this course; there is no room and no excuse for bad behavior. Examples of irresponsible behavior cover a wide range, and include cheating, plagiarism, creating hazards or disruptions, slacking on responsibilities, unfairly exploiting the efforts of others, etc. Further explanation and guidelines on academic integrity at Lehigh can be found on the University Student Conduct System web page and on the Fostering Academic Integrity at Lehigh University web site.
It is firm policy in this course that cheating or plagiarism are unacceptable violations of academic integrity, and will earn an F as the semester grade in the course. Please meet requirements in good spirit, and do your part in advance of deadlines. For example, do not copy data or sections of lab reports from students currently or previously enrolled. While some exercises may be done in groups, and with healthy cooperation and collaboration among the members of the group, the writing of lab reports is an individual responsibility… do not ask for other student's work, and do not share yours with others.
Various forms of carelessness or disregard for safety considerations, abuse of others, compromising opportunities for others, failing to participate in good faith, etc., can also have serious consequences. Appropriate penalties should be expected. Offenders may loose points from their course totals, and serious offenders may be dropped from the course.
Code of Conduct Cover Sheet for Exams(appears courtesy of Steve Buell, Finance and Law, with input from Joan DeSalvatore, College of Business)
Code of Conduct
It is expected that all students will act with honesty and integrity in the completion of this, and every other assignment for classes at Lehigh University. Please remember that you may not give, receive or access any unauthorized assistance on this examination. I have abided by the Lehigh University Code of Conduct. You must sign below for your exam to be graded. ________________________________________________
Improper Collaboration Policy(online at http://www.lehigh.edu/~ejk0/cheating.html)
(appears courtesy of Edwin Kay, Computer Science and Engineering) Description of
In grappling with the course work, the sharing of ideas is educationally useful. The copying of ideas is destructive, fraudulent, and unacceptable. YOU ARE STRICTLY FORBIDDEN TO COPY SOMEONE ELSE'S HOMEWORK OR PROGRAMMING ASSIGNMENTS, WHOLE OR IN PART AND SUBMIT THOSE ASSIGNMENTS IN YOUR NAME. YOU ARE STRICTLY FORBIDDEN TO MAKE TRIVIAL OR MECHANICAL CHANGES TO SOMEONE ELSE'S ASSIGNMENT SOLUTION AND SUBMIT THE TRANSFORMED VERSION IN YOUR NAME.
It is difficult to know where to draw the line between educationally useful sharing of ideas and the educationally destructive copying of ideas. I will quote Roger D. Eastman of Loyola College (ironically this is copied), who draws the line rather well for programming assignments: ``I encourage you to help each other with programming assignments, but I also want you to understand where the help should stop. Don't take someone else's program to copy, or give yours for copying. If you want to show someone your program to ask about a syntax or run-time error, that's fine; if you want to brainstorm about what the assignment requires and how to approach it, that's fine; if you want to share your knowledge of [C++], that's fine; but letting someone copy your program line by line, in fact or spirit, is not fine.''
The line between sharing an copying may still seem fuzzy. To put it another way, when you start writing code, it is time to stop sharing ideas. But what about when you are stuck with a syntax error? In that case it is all right to ask someone about the syntax error, but that is as far as your sharing of information should go. To put it still another way, it is wrong to show someone else a copy of your program for ``reference.'' Conversely, it is equally wrong to look at someone else's program for ``reference.'' A completed program should have a single easily and uniquely identifiable author.
Debugging code presents an even greater challenge. Typically, students who have completed a programming assignment become obvious targets for programming help. While we applaud the desire of students to help one another in the educational process, don't go too far. Once you look at someone's else's code, you are in danger of improperly collaborating. It is okay to tell the other person what is wrong, but do not offer a correct coding sequence. In addition, do not incorporate any of the code you may have seen into your solution. Above all, do not assume that helping someone fix their code means making it look like yours!
The normal procedure in suspected cases of improper collaboration is to submit the incident and individuals to the University Committee on Discipline. These policies and procedures are clearly described in the Lehigh University Student Handbook. Often, when the discipline committee finds a student guilty of copying, the penalty is a grade of F in the course. Subsequent offenses can result in academic suspension and ultimately expulsion from the university. THERE MUST NOT BE ANY COPYING OF ASSIGNMENTS.
Some scenarios are presented below as examples. These are meant to be general examples, but may not be inclusive of all possible situations.
- A group of students sit down for an hour to discuss how they each plan to attack the programming assignment. As long as specific code sequences and/or flow charts are not exchanged, this is acceptable collaboration.
- Two (or more) students each complete a programming assignment. When it is done, they share their source files, and each student imports the best code and ideas from the other file. This results in essentially the same program being submitted by both the students. This is improper collaboration. Submit your own work.
- Your friend tells you that he or she is having problems getting a particular function to work and asks to see your version of just that function. Even though this one function may only a be a small fraction of the entire assignment, this is still improper collaboration since it is code sharing.
- You find a discarded printout, a floppy disk, or a file left on the hard drive or network in a computer lab and decide to use some of the code on it. This is improper collaboration. Even if the source of the code is anonymous, it is still tainted.
- The instructor provides sample code available to the class as part of the regular lectures or perhaps via a web page. Unless there were explicit instructions not to use the code, it is acceptable to include that as part of your solution. However, you should always give proper attribution to the original author. /* subroutine doit() Code supplied as a class example by Professor J. Knowitall in CSC 123, Fall 1999 */
More obvious examples of improper collaboration, i.e., blatant cheating, include submitting someone else's source code after modifying it by
- Adding, changing, and/or removing comments.
- Changing the names of variables, constants, subroutines, and/or functions.
- Rearranging the order of the declarations, subroutines, and/or functions.
- Applying any combination of the above and/or other simple transformations.
This document was generated using the LaTeX2HTML translator Version 98.1p1 release (March 2nd, 1998)
Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, Nikos Drakos, Computer Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds.
The command line arguments were:
latex2html -no_navigation -split 1 cheating.
The translation was initiated by Stephen Corbesero on 2000-08-29