Chat with AI
Ethical Obligations and Decision-Making in Accounting: Text and Cases 4th Edition by Steven Mintz,Roselyn Morris
Edition 4ISBN: 978-1259543470Ethical Obligations and Decision-Making in Accounting: Text and Cases 4th Edition by Steven Mintz,Roselyn Morris
Edition 4ISBN: 978-1259543470 Exercise 1
Harvard Cheating Scandal
Yes. Cheating occurs at the prestigious Harvard University. In 2012, Harvard forced dozens of students to leave in its largest cheating scandal in memory, but the institution would not address assertions that the blame rested partly with a professor and his teaching assistants. The issue is whether cheating is truly cheating when students collaborate with each other to find the right answer-in a take-home final exam.
Harvard released the results of its investigation into the controversy, in which 125 undergraduates were alleged to have cheated on an exam in May 2012. I The university said that more than half of the students were forced to withdraw, a penalty that typically lasts from two to four semesters. Many returned by 2015 . Of the remaining cases, about half were put on disciplinary probation-a strong warning that becomes part of a student's official record. The rest of the students avoided punishment.
In previous years, students thought of Government 1310 as an easy class with optional attendance and frequent collaboration. But students who took it in spring 2012 said that it had suddenly become quite difficult, with tests that were hard to comprehend, so they sought help from the graduate teaching assistants who ran the class discussion groups, graded assignments, and advised them on interpreting exam questions.
Administrators said that on final-exam questions, some students supplied identical answers (right down to typographical errors in some cases), indicating that they had written them together or plagiarized them. But some students claimed that the similarities in their answers were due to sharing notes or sitting in on sessions with the same teaching assistants. The instructions on the take-home exam explicitly prohibited collaboration, but many students said they did not think that included talking with teaching assistants.
The first page of the exam contained these instructions: "The exam is completely open book, open note, open Internet, etc. However, in all other regards, this should fall under similar guidelines that apply to in-class exams. More specifically, students may not discuss the exam with others-this includes resident tutors, writing centers, etc."
Students complained about confusing questions on the final exam. Due to "some good questions" from students, the instructor clarified three exam questions by e-mail before the due date of the exams.
Students claim to have believed that collaboration was allowed in the course. The course's instructor and the teaching assistants sometimes encouraged collaboration, in fact. The teaching assistants-graduate students who graded the exams and ran weekly discussion sessions_varied widely in how they prepared students for the exams, so it was common for students in different sections to share lecture notes and reading materials. During the final exam, some teaching assistants even worked with students to define unfamiliar terms and help them figure out exactly what certain test questions were asking.
Some have questioned whether it is the test's design, rather than the students' conduct, that should be criticized. Others place the blame on the teaching assistants who opened the door to collaboration outside of class by their own behavior in helping students to understand the questions better.
An interesting part of the scandal is that, in March 2013, administrators searched e-mail accounts of some junior faculty members, looking for the source of leaks to the news media about the cheating investigation, prompting much of the faculty to protest what it called a breach of trust.
Harvard adopted an honor code on May 6, 2014. The goal is to establish a culture of academic integrity at the university.
Answer the following questions about the Harvard cheating scandal.
1.Using Josephson's Six Pillars of Character, which of the character traits (virtues) apply to the Harvard
cheating scandal and how do they apply with respect to the actions of each of the stakeholders in this case?
2.Who is at fault for the cheating scandal? Is it the students, the teaching assistants, the professor, or the institution? Use ethical reasoning to support your answer.
3.Do you think Harvard had a right to search the e-mail accounts of junior faculty, looking for the source of leaks to the news media? Explain.
4.What is meant by the culture of an organization? Can an honor code establish a culture of academic integrity in an institution such as Harvard University?
Yes. Cheating occurs at the prestigious Harvard University. In 2012, Harvard forced dozens of students to leave in its largest cheating scandal in memory, but the institution would not address assertions that the blame rested partly with a professor and his teaching assistants. The issue is whether cheating is truly cheating when students collaborate with each other to find the right answer-in a take-home final exam.
Harvard released the results of its investigation into the controversy, in which 125 undergraduates were alleged to have cheated on an exam in May 2012. I The university said that more than half of the students were forced to withdraw, a penalty that typically lasts from two to four semesters. Many returned by 2015 . Of the remaining cases, about half were put on disciplinary probation-a strong warning that becomes part of a student's official record. The rest of the students avoided punishment.
In previous years, students thought of Government 1310 as an easy class with optional attendance and frequent collaboration. But students who took it in spring 2012 said that it had suddenly become quite difficult, with tests that were hard to comprehend, so they sought help from the graduate teaching assistants who ran the class discussion groups, graded assignments, and advised them on interpreting exam questions.
Administrators said that on final-exam questions, some students supplied identical answers (right down to typographical errors in some cases), indicating that they had written them together or plagiarized them. But some students claimed that the similarities in their answers were due to sharing notes or sitting in on sessions with the same teaching assistants. The instructions on the take-home exam explicitly prohibited collaboration, but many students said they did not think that included talking with teaching assistants.
The first page of the exam contained these instructions: "The exam is completely open book, open note, open Internet, etc. However, in all other regards, this should fall under similar guidelines that apply to in-class exams. More specifically, students may not discuss the exam with others-this includes resident tutors, writing centers, etc."
Students complained about confusing questions on the final exam. Due to "some good questions" from students, the instructor clarified three exam questions by e-mail before the due date of the exams.
Students claim to have believed that collaboration was allowed in the course. The course's instructor and the teaching assistants sometimes encouraged collaboration, in fact. The teaching assistants-graduate students who graded the exams and ran weekly discussion sessions_varied widely in how they prepared students for the exams, so it was common for students in different sections to share lecture notes and reading materials. During the final exam, some teaching assistants even worked with students to define unfamiliar terms and help them figure out exactly what certain test questions were asking.
Some have questioned whether it is the test's design, rather than the students' conduct, that should be criticized. Others place the blame on the teaching assistants who opened the door to collaboration outside of class by their own behavior in helping students to understand the questions better.
An interesting part of the scandal is that, in March 2013, administrators searched e-mail accounts of some junior faculty members, looking for the source of leaks to the news media about the cheating investigation, prompting much of the faculty to protest what it called a breach of trust.
Harvard adopted an honor code on May 6, 2014. The goal is to establish a culture of academic integrity at the university.
Answer the following questions about the Harvard cheating scandal.
1.Using Josephson's Six Pillars of Character, which of the character traits (virtues) apply to the Harvard
cheating scandal and how do they apply with respect to the actions of each of the stakeholders in this case?
2.Who is at fault for the cheating scandal? Is it the students, the teaching assistants, the professor, or the institution? Use ethical reasoning to support your answer.
3.Do you think Harvard had a right to search the e-mail accounts of junior faculty, looking for the source of leaks to the news media? Explain.
4.What is meant by the culture of an organization? Can an honor code establish a culture of academic integrity in an institution such as Harvard University?
Explanation
Verified
Verified
Cheating means using unfair means to achieve the desired results. Academic cheating is done by students in their exams, homework assignments, college entrance exams etc. Cheating is an unethical practice which is harmful to our society and the future of our young generation. As per the reports, around 50% of the students in the college are engaged in Academic Dishonesty.
Cheating, apart from copying from other student's notes or bringing written or printed material in the exam, also includes Plagiarizing.
1.
'J' six pillars of characters provide the foundation for judging the ethical behavior in decision making. It is the duty of the student to behave in an ethical and socially responsible manner. J's six pillars of characteristics focus on six ethical aspects namely Trustworthiness, Responsibility, Fairness, Caring, Citizenship, Respect.
We can use the following character traits to evaluate the 'H' university's cheating scandal:
Trustworthiness:
Trustworthiness includes honesty, reliability, integrity, and loyalty. A Trustworthy person has the ability to win another person's trust.
Responsibility:
Under responsibility, we are accountable for what we do. Responsibility can be ethical or moral or legal. Every human has a responsibility as a member of society. So, it is our responsibility to perform ethically.
Fairness:
Fairness means being unbiased in making a decision and not discriminating on the basis of caste, color, creed, religion,
Students, Teaching Assistant and Administration were the stakeholders in the cheating case of 'H' university. J's six pillars of character can be applied in the case of each stakeholders:
Students
Trustworthiness:
The students of 'H' university were expected to give their take-home final exam honestly. They were not allowed to discuss the exam with each other but they discussed with each other.
Responsibility:
Reasonability states that we are responsible for our own action hence we should perform our work ethically. In case of 'H' university cheating scandal, it was the responsibility of each student involved in that scam that if one student was using an unfair means to complete the test than other should have not have followed him/her.
Teaching assistant
Responsibility:
It was the mistake of the teaching assistants that they gave the students the opportunity to consult them for the test for understanding the test questions clearly. It was clear in the rules of the university that no collaborations were allowed but some teaching assistant and course's instructors encouraged collaborations which became a matter of issue.
Administration:
Trustworthiness :
It was an unethical action done by the administration to the check the email accounts of junior faculty members to track the main source for releasing the news of scandal to media. This act of administration can be classified under integrity of trustworthiness
Fairness:
The policies set by the administration were contradicting. They mentioned that it was an open book test in which the student can use books, notes or even google the information but they cannot discuss it with each other.
Also, the collaboration with the teaching assistant and course's instructor was encouraged as of result of which the answers of some students turn out to be similar. Due to which they were accused of cheating and discussing the test paper.
2.
In the cheating scandal of 'H' university, there was not a single person responsible for this situation. Students, as well as the teaching assistant, were both responsible for this scandal.
Students were given strict guidelines that they can use books, notes, internet etc. for completing the test but they cannot take any help from resident tutors, writing centers etc. But students ignoring these rules took the help of teaching assistant to discuss their exam papers due to which the matter they wrote in test papers were almost similar.
Teaching assistants were also responsible for this scandal as they were not allowed to help students because it was strictly mentioned in the exams instructions that any kind of
collaboration is not allowed. These teaching assistant should have resisted students when they were approached for help in the test.
3.
The administration of 'H' university was not allowed to search the emails of the junior faculty members to find the main person responsible for disclosing the news of scandal to media. This action was not ethical because it was not mentioned in the university policy. Such kind of action taken by the university is a breach of privacy and trust.
4.
Having a mutual set of beliefs, values, and assumptions in an organization which regulates the behavior of the employees in the organization is called organizational culture. The organizational cultures of companies differ from one company to another.
Honor Codes are set by the administration of an academic institution to discourage the unethical behavior of people constituting that organization.
Yes, an Honor Code in 'H' university can help in establishing the culture of academic integrity among the people within that organization. Such codes will help the students, teachers, and administration of the university to keep a check on their activities and determine on their own whether such a step is ethical or unethical.
These codes will reduce the chances of such cheating scandals in near future and can be taken as a warning that ignoring these rules will lead to serious consequences.
Cheating, apart from copying from other student's notes or bringing written or printed material in the exam, also includes Plagiarizing.
1.
'J' six pillars of characters provide the foundation for judging the ethical behavior in decision making. It is the duty of the student to behave in an ethical and socially responsible manner. J's six pillars of characteristics focus on six ethical aspects namely Trustworthiness, Responsibility, Fairness, Caring, Citizenship, Respect.
We can use the following character traits to evaluate the 'H' university's cheating scandal:
Trustworthiness:
Trustworthiness includes honesty, reliability, integrity, and loyalty. A Trustworthy person has the ability to win another person's trust.
Responsibility:
Under responsibility, we are accountable for what we do. Responsibility can be ethical or moral or legal. Every human has a responsibility as a member of society. So, it is our responsibility to perform ethically.
Fairness:
Fairness means being unbiased in making a decision and not discriminating on the basis of caste, color, creed, religion,
Students, Teaching Assistant and Administration were the stakeholders in the cheating case of 'H' university. J's six pillars of character can be applied in the case of each stakeholders:
Students
Trustworthiness:
The students of 'H' university were expected to give their take-home final exam honestly. They were not allowed to discuss the exam with each other but they discussed with each other.
Responsibility:
Reasonability states that we are responsible for our own action hence we should perform our work ethically. In case of 'H' university cheating scandal, it was the responsibility of each student involved in that scam that if one student was using an unfair means to complete the test than other should have not have followed him/her.
Teaching assistant
Responsibility:
It was the mistake of the teaching assistants that they gave the students the opportunity to consult them for the test for understanding the test questions clearly. It was clear in the rules of the university that no collaborations were allowed but some teaching assistant and course's instructors encouraged collaborations which became a matter of issue.
Administration:
Trustworthiness :
It was an unethical action done by the administration to the check the email accounts of junior faculty members to track the main source for releasing the news of scandal to media. This act of administration can be classified under integrity of trustworthiness
Fairness:
The policies set by the administration were contradicting. They mentioned that it was an open book test in which the student can use books, notes or even google the information but they cannot discuss it with each other.
Also, the collaboration with the teaching assistant and course's instructor was encouraged as of result of which the answers of some students turn out to be similar. Due to which they were accused of cheating and discussing the test paper.
2.
In the cheating scandal of 'H' university, there was not a single person responsible for this situation. Students, as well as the teaching assistant, were both responsible for this scandal.
Students were given strict guidelines that they can use books, notes, internet etc. for completing the test but they cannot take any help from resident tutors, writing centers etc. But students ignoring these rules took the help of teaching assistant to discuss their exam papers due to which the matter they wrote in test papers were almost similar.
Teaching assistants were also responsible for this scandal as they were not allowed to help students because it was strictly mentioned in the exams instructions that any kind of
collaboration is not allowed. These teaching assistant should have resisted students when they were approached for help in the test.
3.
The administration of 'H' university was not allowed to search the emails of the junior faculty members to find the main person responsible for disclosing the news of scandal to media. This action was not ethical because it was not mentioned in the university policy. Such kind of action taken by the university is a breach of privacy and trust.
4.
Having a mutual set of beliefs, values, and assumptions in an organization which regulates the behavior of the employees in the organization is called organizational culture. The organizational cultures of companies differ from one company to another.
Honor Codes are set by the administration of an academic institution to discourage the unethical behavior of people constituting that organization.
Yes, an Honor Code in 'H' university can help in establishing the culture of academic integrity among the people within that organization. Such codes will help the students, teachers, and administration of the university to keep a check on their activities and determine on their own whether such a step is ethical or unethical.
These codes will reduce the chances of such cheating scandals in near future and can be taken as a warning that ignoring these rules will lead to serious consequences.
Ethical Obligations and Decision-Making in Accounting: Text and Cases 4th Edition by Steven Mintz,Roselyn Morris
Why don’t you like this exercise?
Other Minimum 8 character and maximum 255 character
Character 255
