MBA Code of Conduct Annual Report

Last year, the faculty approved an updated NYU Stern Student Code of Conduct that replaced the MBA Honor Code and previous Code of Conduct. It also replaced the Code of Conduct used by the NYU Stern Undergraduate College. This new Code of Conduct will be used going forward for all NYU Stern graduate and undergraduate programs.

Recommendations and new procedures were created to support this new Code of Conduct. This included more exposure and education for faculty and students, streamlined approaches in handling certain cases, and communication of violations in an annual summary or report. This article will serve as the annual report of judicial activity for the graduate programs of NYU Stern.

There were three cases that were investigated and judged appropriate for a hearing by the Judicial Hearing Panel. In order to maintain confidentiality, the names of the students that were involved will be omitted.

The first case involved two students who were alleged to have cheated on an exam. The exam was made available through Blackboard. Since there were different times that the exam could be opened by students, two students were accused of conspiring to take the test at different times so that one student could provide the questions and answers to the other. Based on the evidence and the students admitting guilt, the committee found both students guilty and recommended failure of the course. In addition, the student who "received" the answers was also recommended to have a delay of one semester before re-taking the course. Dean Henry approved the recommendations of the Judicial Hearing Panel and communicated this to the students.

The second case involved a student accused of plagiarizing a paper in a course. The investigation included a review of a Turnitin report submitted by the professor and a student interview. The Judicial Hearing Panel recommended failure of the course. Additionally, the committee required that the student take Indiana University's test "How to Recognize Plagiarism" located at https://www.indiana.edu/~istd/plagiarism_test.html and submit the confirmation certificate showing that all ten test questions were answered correctly. Dean Henry approved the recommendations of the Judicial Hearing Panel and communicated this to the student.

The third case was a continuation of a plagiarism case from the previous year. The judicial Hearing Panel at the time recommended course failure with a semester delay for retaking the course. In addition, the panel required a letter addressed to the Judicial Committee expressing remorse and an explanation for the actions taken. These recommendations were all approved by Dean Henry. After these sanctions and required actions were communicated to the student, the student attempted to register for the course during the sanctioned period. In addition, the student's letter did not show adequate remorse and included inaccurate statements which were interpreted by the Judicial Committee as being false. Based on not fulfilling the required sanctions, the committee recommended having the student dismissed from the school. Dean Henry approved this recommendation and communicated this to the student.

In addition to these cases, there were two student cases of plagiarism that were reported to the Dean of Students by faculty members. One case involved a group assignment where one member was alleged to have plagiarized their section; the other was an individual student assignment that was also believed to be plagiarized based on a Turnitin report. Both students admitted guilt and grade adjustments ranging up to failure for the assignment was issued by the professors.

These cases represent the activity that was reported to the Dean of Student's Office in the 2010-2011 academic year. While these may seem like only a few cases involving fewer than ten students, one case is too many. Academic integrity is a cornerstone of any credible institution and it is my hope that there are no cases next year. I would like to thank Jeff Schwartz, this year's outgoing chair of the Judicial Committee for his leadership in managing all of the judicial activity this year and I'd like to welcome next year's chair, Josh Simpson. If you have any questions about the judicial process, or would just like to discuss it, please feel free to reach out to me or Josh.