Fall 2025 Community Notices

During the fall semester of 2025, fourteen (14) allegations of violations involving fifteen (15) students were reported to the Honor Court. One (1) of those cases were brought to a full Honor Court hearing. In summary, twelve (12) students were found responsible for a violation and three (3) students were not charged.

Of the twelve (12) students who were charged and either took responsibility or were found to be responsible through the hearing process, eight (8) received only the educational tutorial. One (1) student was suspended for one semester with the ability to transfer credit, alongside the educational tutorial. One (1) student was withdrawn from the course with an “XF*” on their transcript, appealable to an “F” after two years, alongside the educational tutorial. Two (2) students were withdrawn from the course with an “XW” on their transcript, appealable to a “W” after two years, alongside the educational tutorial.

The aforementioned cases are reported in more detail below:

A student was alleged to have submitted a falsified transcript in conjunction with a request for transfer credit. The student was found responsible for violating section II.3 at an Honor Court hearing and was suspended for one semester with the ability to transfer credit. In addition, the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have used a native-speaker to assist them with a written assignment in a non-English language course. The student was found responsible for violating section II.5 at an administrative hearing and the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have used uncited sources and a generative AI tool to complete a lab report. The student was found responsible for violating sections II.1 and II.5 at an administrative hearing and the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have submitted her lab partner’s figure for a lab report for which collaborative work was not permitted. The student was found responsible for violating section II.7 at an administrative hearing and the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have used uncited sources and generative AI tools without acknowledgement or explicit permission to complete an essay. The student was found responsible for violating sections II.1 and II.5 at an administrative hearing and the educational tutorial was assigned.

Two students were alleged to have collaborated during an in-class exam. One of the students admitted to looking at the other student’s test during an in-class exam without their knowledge. This student was found responsible for violating section II.6 at an administrative hearing and the educational tutorial was assigned while the case against the other student was dismissed.

A student was alleged to have accessed their phone during a test where outside materials were not allowed. The student was found responsible for violating section II.6 at an administrative hearing and received an XW in the course with the X removable after two years. Additionally, the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have used uncited sources and an outside tutor without acknowledgement to complete a lab report. The student was found responsible for violating sections II.1 and II.5 at an administrative hearing and the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have referenced physical notes during a closed-note exam The student was found responsible for violating section II.6 at an administrative hearing and received an XW in the course with the X removable after two years. Additionally, the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have used another student to assist them on several assignments throughout a course, including assignments after the faculty member had warned them of the class’s collaboration policy. The student was found responsible for violating section II.5 at an administrative hearing and received an XF* in the course with the X removable after two years. Additionally, the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have used an online language tool without acknowledgement or explicit permission of the instructor. The student was found responsible for violating section II.5 at an administrative hearing and the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have accessed their phone during a test where outside materials were not allowed. The student was found responsible for violating section II.6 at an administrative hearing and the educational tutorial was assigned.

A student was alleged to have used generative AI tools without acknowledgement or explicit permission to complete an essay. The case was dismissed without a charge being brought against the student.

A student was alleged to have used text from outside sources without appropriate citation. The case was dismissed without a charge being brought against the student.