Mary Stephens
Reporter
Due to academic dishonesty, the sophomore humanities exam was cancelled last Thursday and re-administered Monday. One student confessed that he stole information from the office of Tim Dillon, associate professor of history and humanities, and told one other person.
In the two hours before the 9:30 a.m. exam, at least 11 students informed sophomore humanities faculty that questions from the test were being circulated. Some students made phone calls individually to faculty. Others came to their offices in groups.
After the sophomore humanities students had taken their seats in Lower Seeger and Hyder Auditorium for the test Thursday, faculty informed them that the integrity of the test had been compromised. The test was moved to the following Monday.
“If we tried to make a new test (Thursday),” said Ted Thomas, professor of humanities, history and German, “it would not have been thoughtfully done—we considered that.”
Several students expressed hurt and anger that a student compromised the test. Many said they felt unprepared for Monday’s test format.
Dillon said he had left the final test draft sitting folded on his computer table late Wednesday afternoon. His door was opened as he moved throughout the Faculty Office Building, answering student questions about the next day’s exam.
Various sources confirmed to Dillon that they saw two students in his office while he was moving about the Faculty Office Building.
One student confessed to Dillon that he committed some test questions to memory. He said that he told an upperclassman and no one else; asking him what should be done with the information.
“No student so far as I know now copied any questions, or removed a draft of the test physically from my office,” Dillon said.
Dillon said he is not sure how the test questions got distributed after that point.
According to the Milligan student handbook, the faculty usually decides appropriate punishment for academic dishonesty. If dishonesty is considered “flagrant,” the case goes to the College Disciplinary Committee.
Dillon said it was not flagrant; the student was not intending to steal, and had no pattern of past dishonesty. Keeping with the procedure outlined in the student handbook, the student will receive a failing grade for either the test or course unless he makes an appeal to through the Academic Grievance Committee and proves his innocence.
Dillon would not reveal the name or punishment of the student who confessed, saying he would rather the student learn from his mistake privately than be injured by public disapproval.
Though all of Monday’s tests covered the same material, Thomas said it was the first time in at least five years that the humanities faculty used various drafts.
Cook’s humanities student Megan Allen, a sophomore business major, said Monday’s test was harder, but that the situation was handled fairly.
Ruth Cook, professor of English and humanities, said she was “tremendously disillusioned” by a portion of students who complained about the test being re-administered. She said that some did not seem to understand that the faculty was also inconvenienced and that re-administering the test was the only way it could have integrity.
Cook said the testing environment will be more strict in the future. The faculty will probably do away with “lead” essay questions—those given before the test for students to do research. Written information is not to be brought in to the test, but Cook has heard from students that “lead” answers have been pre-written this semester and brought in on “blue books”—the lined pamphlets used for testing.