2012 Harvard cheating scandal

The 2012 Harvard cheating scandal involved approximately 125 Harvard University students who were investigated for cheating on the take-home final examination of the spring 2012 edition of Government 1310: "Introduction to Congress". Harvard announced the investigation publicly on August 30, 2012.[1] Dean of Undergraduate Education Jay M. Harris described the case as "unprecedented in its scope and magnitude".[2][3][4] The Harvard Crimson ranked the scandal as the news story most important to Harvard in 2012.[5]

Harvard University's Massachusetts Hall

A teaching fellow noticed similarities between a small number of exams during grading in May 2012.[1][4][6] The course's professor brought the case to the Harvard College Administrative Board, which reviewed all final exams, leading to individual cases against nearly half of the 279 students enrolled in the class, almost two percent of the undergraduate student body.[1][4][6] The administrative board completed its investigation in December 2012.[7] On February 1, 2013 Harvard revealed that "somewhat more than half" of the investigated students, estimated at 70%, were forced to withdraw.[8][9]

Government 1310: "Introduction to Congress" was led by assistant professor Matthew B. Platt in Spring 2010, 2011, and 2012.[10] The course was offered to students of Harvard College and Harvard Extension School.[11][12][13] It developed a reputation as an easy course, receiving a high proportion of "easy" or "very easy" ratings in the Q Guide, Harvard's collection of course evaluations.[10][14] According to some Spring 2012 students, Platt immediately confirmed this reputation by promising 120 A's and stating that attendance was optional.[3][15][16][17] Students who attended could share their notes.[17]

Grades were determined by four take-home exams.[4][10] In 2010 and 2011, the take-home exams were essays, but in 2012 they were changed to a short answer format.[10] The change corresponded with a spike in difficulty and a drop in overall score, according to the Q Guide.[10] Students said the short answer format facilitated collaboration.[4][10] Some guessed that the changes were forced from above.[9]

Spring 2012 final exam

The spring 2012 final exam was assigned April 26 and due May 3 at 5:00 p.m.[18] Its first page contained the 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."[4][18] The use of etc. has been questioned.[19][20]

Students complained about confusing questions on the final exam.[3][4][10] Due to "some good questions" from students, Platt clarified three exam questions by email on April 30.[10] Platt cancelled his office hours on the May 3 due date on short notice.[4] Many students received assistance from the teaching fellows.[3][9][17]

Spring 2013 – present

Government 1310 had its spring 2013 Harvard College course listing removed as of October 7, 2012.[21] Platt taught the course through the Harvard Extension School only for spring 2013 and spring 2014.[22][23] Grading was based on two essay exams, ten quizzes and the final.[24] The collaboration policy forbade any collaboration.[24]

Investigation

A teaching fellow noticed similarities between a small number of exams during grading in May 2012.[1][4][6] Platt reported the suspected plagiarism in a letter to administrative board secretary John "Jay" L. Ellison on May 14.[25] The similarities were first noticed in answers for the bonus short answer question "Describe two developments in the history of Congress that ostensibly gave individual MCs [members of Congress] in the House greater freedom and/or control but ultimately centralized power in the hands of party leadership."[25] Some students picked the "somewhat obscure" pair of the Cannon Revolt of 1910 and Henry Clay and "all the answers use the same (incorrect) reading of the course material in arguments that are identically structured."[25] Additional comparisons revealed possible collaboration on the other questions.[25]

The administrative board reviewed all exams over the summer and flagged roughly 125 for suspected collaboration.[1][4] The suspects constitute nearly half of the 279 students enrolled in the class and almost two percent of Harvard College's undergraduate student body.[4][6] Harris said the similarities include "answers that look quite alike to answers that appear to have been lifted in their entirety."[26] Harvard enlisted "supplemental fact finders" to deal with the load.[27] Peter F. Lake, a Stetson University College of Law professor approximated fifty hours per student totaling "essentially one administrator’s entire year of energy."[27]

Harvard announced the investigation publicly on August 30, 2012.[1] Dean of undergraduate education Jay M. Harris justified the announcement as a springboard to raise awareness and a teachable moment.[4][28] A senior under investigation dismissed this explanation, writing, "Harvard chose to go public with this story to first and foremost save their own asses."[15]

On the same day as the announcement, Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences dean Michael D. Smith sent an email to all faculty members informing them of the investigation and suggesting that they clarify their collaboration policies.[4][26][29][30]

Each student was given copies of their exams and similar ones, then had to submit a written explanation.[31] The student met with an administrative board subcommittee and was shown the other students' statements.[31] Some students named the classmates they collaborated with.[31] The subcommittee recommended an action to the full board.[31]

Cases were finalized in September and December 2012.[31] Students forced to withdraw vanished from campus as verdicts were issued every Tuesday.[17] The administrative board completed its investigation in December 2012.[7]

Discipline

Potential discipline for academic dishonesty includes a year's forced withdrawal.[1][4][32] In May 2010 the administrative board gained the ability to "exclude" students and fail them.[32] IvyGate published rumors that the administrative board developed a "tiered punishment scheme" based on general classes of collaboration but Faculty of Arts and Sciences spokesperson Jeff Neal stated that each case would be evaluated individually.[33][34]

Students could withdraw voluntarily before their cases were closed, according to an email sent by Ellison to resident deans.[28][35] If convicted and sentenced to a required withdrawal, the leave of absence would be credited as time served.[28] A forced withdrawal includes a permanent notation on the student's transcript.[36] Harvard biology professor Richard Losick calls the note "a severe punishment" and one suspected student describes it as "almost the kiss of death in the academic realm."[36] During their absence, students must "hold a full-time, paid, non-academic job in a non-family situation, for at least six consecutive months" before becoming eligible for readmittance.[37][38]

On February 1, 2013, Smith revealed that "somewhat more than half" of the students were forced to withdraw "for a period of time" and "roughly half" of the remainder were put on disciplinary probation.[8][39] Smith's e-mail covers all administrative board cases for the past term without mentioning Government 1310 or the scandal, but a Harvard official said they were from one course.[8] For the majority of cases, the "period of time" is two semesters according to students.[40]

Athletes

Harvard Crimson varsity team athletes will lose a year of Ivy League eligibility if they play any games and are forced to withdraw.[28][41] If they register and attend classes before withdrawing, the Harvard Department of Athletics Student-Athlete Handbook says "In nearly all circumstances, [they] will be ineligible to compete in the first year [they] return to Harvard."[41] According to estimates by students, over half the class and up to half of those suspected are athletes.[41][42] The Harvard Crimson football team was expected to lose players, but it won its season opener.[43][44][45] None of the starters left the team.[46] Sports Illustrated reported that Kyle Casey, current co-captain and leading scorer of last year's 2011–12 Harvard Crimson men's basketball team withdrew from Harvard ahead of the registration deadline.[47][48][49] The Boston Herald reported that co-captain Brandyn Curry was expected to withdraw also.[50] On October 9, 2012 a team spokesperson confirmed that they "are not playing this season."[51][52] Platt highlighted a group of baseball players in his letter to the Ad Board.[25] One athlete told The Boston Globe that his teammates combined notes while travelling on their team bus.[42] Four ice hockey players left the team.[53][54][55]

In a telephone interview with the Associated Press, Harvard president Drew Faust said that athletes should not be set apart or given special treatment.[56] Faust said "It is not about one student group. It’s not confined to any one student group."[56][57] Athletes and non-athletes withdrew voluntarily.[57]

Reaction

Students

Students claimed that collaboration like note-sharing and consulting teaching fellows was widespread.[3][16] One student produced shared lecture notes and argued successfully that they were the source.[58] Students under investigation complained about uncertainty stemming from the length of the investigation and the Administrative Board's hiatus over the summer.[28] One 2012 graduate now working on Wall Street told Bloomberg Businessweek "Dragging us into this investigation now, when we have financial obligations and jobs, seems very unfair."[16] Current students expressed concerns about pro-rated tuition costs where students forced to withdraw later would pay more.[59] Some students did not receive their verdicts until shortly before finals.[17] In the interest of "financial equity," Harvard calculated tuition refunds for all required withdrawals based on September 30, 2012.[8] Harvard Extension School students wrote to The Boston Globe and GovLoop to debunk claims that Platt encouraged collaborating on exams.[60][61]

A number of students responded to Harvard's announcement by going to the media themselves and "trying to present the other side" of the story.[16] A senior reached out to The New York Observer and Salon.[15][62] He told Salon "we’re being scapegoated" and that many students are ready to file lawsuits.[15] One student who had contacted a lawyer told The Harvard Crimson "Harvard has created this war between the students and the fricking school, and this is a war that I am willing and very eager to fight."[63] Experts said that Harvard can be sued for procedural errors, lost employment opportunities or intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress.[63] After the final announcement, lawyers said that lawsuits would be difficult and unlikely.[64] Harvey A. Silverglate said "Schaer vs. Brandeis makes Harvard very close to invulnerable."[64] One lawyer said students may be waiting to graduate and avoid retribution.[64] The statute of limitations for breach of contract is six years in Massachusetts.[64]

Implicated students and parents were disappointed by Smith's e-mail and blamed Platt.[40][65] Other students thought the punishment was fair.[37][40] Robert Peabody, an attorney for two students said the process was too slow and calling it "death by a thousand nicks", "living torture", "basically hell" and "twisting in the wind."[31][66] He said his clients "emotionally deteriorated over the course of the semester."[58]

Harvard Crimson's survey of graduating seniors of the class of 2013 estimated that 32.0% of students cheated on "papers or take-home tests" but 7.0% self-reported cheating.[67]

Harvard

An honor code was drafted by Harvard's Committee on Academic Integrity and adopted on May 6, 2014 by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences by "overwhelmingly" positive vote.[68] Colin Diver, former president of Reed College writes that an "Honor Principle" must be the basis of a culture of academic integrity.[69] Some professors defended the take-home exam format.[70]

Erika Christakis and Nicholas A. Christakis write that there is a "national crisis of academic dishonesty."[71] Harry R. Lewis entreats Harvard to "Know thyself."[72] Howard Gardner writes that the case exposes "ethical rot" at Harvard.[73] Gardner contemplates the scandal "as a play in four acts."[74]

Faust, Smith and Harris made statements regarding the investigation at the first Faculty of Arts and Sciences meeting of Fall 2012 on October 2.[75] Faust also granted an interview with The Harvard Crimson.[76] She refused comment on student athletes saying the investigation "includes a wide spectrum of students."[76]

The instructors of Harvard's Expository Writing Program are using the scandal to accentuate the anti-plagiarism principles they have already been teaching.[77]

Thomas G. Stemberg

Thomas G. Stemberg, prominent Harvard alumnus and Staples Inc. founder, wrote a heavily critical letter addressed to Faust dated January 6, 2013.[78][79] Stemberg was co-chair of the Friends of Harvard Basketball fundraising group.[78][80] The 2012–13 Harvard Crimson men's basketball team lost two stars to the scandal.[78] Stemberg criticized Harvard for punishing students who used collaborative notes alongside those who copied answers.[78][79] He alleged that students had escaped punishment by lying in their testimony.[79] He called Platt and other undergraduate instructors "clearly not qualified."[78][79] Stemberg said to Bloomberg News "Those students who cut and pasted exam answers deserved to get kicked out. The rest of them should have been vindicated, and the faculty member fired."[31] The other co-chair Thomas W. Mannix disapproved of how the media focused on the basketball team and individual players.[81]

Commentary

Editorials by The Harvard Crimson call out widespread confusion over the acceptability of collaboration as the scandal's root cause[82] and focus on extracurricular activity.[83] An editorial by The Cavalier Daily blames the "poorly worded exam instructions" and the phrase "open Internet".[84] According to an editorial by The Boston Globe, the cheating exposes a lack of quality in Government 1310.[85] An editorial by The Christian Science Monitor examines the challenges of teaching integrity.[86] Naomi Schaefer Riley writes in Bloomberg View that the scandal highlights problems in the college admissions process.[87] Farhad Manjoo, writing for Slate, believes "The students should be celebrated for collaborating" as they would in the real world.[88] Sarah Green writes in Harvard Business Review that a developed love of learning would prevent cheating.[89] Forbes contributor Richard Levick blames Harvard for drawing out the investigation and failing to maintain confidentiality.[90] Alexandra Petri writes in The Washington Post that cheating is caused by an aversion to failure.[91] In The Boston Globe, Lauren Stiller Rikleen blames the Millennial Generation's inexperience on a lack of structure.[92] A number of student newspapers published opinion pieces on cheating inspired by the event.[93][94][95][96] Jonathan Zimmerman of the Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development at New York University writes in The Christian Science Monitor that "poor teaching" encourages cheating.[97]

On February 11, 2013 The Daily Show did a segment on the scandal.[98]

Yale

The Yale Freshman Class Council designed a shirt for the Harvard–Yale football game replacing "Veritas" in the Harvard logo with "Cheaters" or "Cheatas" but the Yale Licensing Office rejected the design.[99][100][101] The approved shirt has "Try cheating your way out of this one" on its back.[101] Harvard won the game.[102]

Yale College Dean Mary Miller discouraged instructors from using take-home finals in direct response to the scandal.[103][104]

Administrative Board

On October 23–26, 2012 The Harvard Crimson published a four-part series about the Administrative Board and the changes made in 2009–2010.[105][106][107][108] The Harvard Crimson followed up with a critical editorial.[109] One criticism is resident deans are normally trusted advisors but communications with them are not protected by privilege.[17][106][109]

Collaboration policies

On August 30, 2012, the same day as the announcement, Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences Dean Michael D. Smith sent an email to all faculty members informing them of the investigation and suggesting that they clarify their collaboration policies.[4][26][29][30]

Harris reminded instructors that course syllabi must contain explicit collaboration policies before the Spring 2013 semester.[110][111] Some classes also went over their policies in their first lecture.[110]

Search of deans' email accounts

On March 9, 2013 The Boston Globe reported that Harvard searched 16 resident deans' email accounts seeking the source of a leaked email shortly after the scandal broke.[112] On March 11 Smith and Evelynn Hammonds confirmed the search in an official statement.[113][114] One dean had forwarded the email to two students in their role as an advisor and it was redistributed, reaching The Harvard Crimson.[112][113][114] In light of a second leak of an Administrative Board meeting and with no explanations forthcoming, administrators approved the email search.[113][114] Information technology staff searched the subject lines of the deans' staff email accounts.[112][114] Only the dean responsible was notified about the search.[112] The statement said Senior Resident Dean Sharon Howell was also informed but she and an anonymous Harvard official said she was not.[113] The Faculty of Arts and Sciences privacy policy requires members to be "notified at the earliest possible opportunity."[112] The policy was partially due to suspected snooping by Harvard President Lawrence Summers.[112] It was not clear if resident deans are faculty or merely staff.[115] The search breaks the faculty policy but not the staff policy.[116] Faculty members reacted negatively to the search.[117][118][119][120]

Resident deans have separate administrative and personal email accounts.[112] The first search examined only the administrative account.[112][114]

On April 2, 2013 Hammonds disclosed that additional searches were run on the deans' two email accounts seeking communication with reporters for The Harvard Crimson.[121][122] In April, Hammonds announced that her earlier statement had not been complete as she had failed to recollect a second email search, this time of the accounts of Allston Burr Resident Deans, academics who live in Harvard's undergraduate housing and advise students. Hammonds did not inform Smith of this second search, violating the Faculty of Arts and Sciences' email privacy policy.[123]

The Harvard Crimson called on Hammonds to resign, stating: "Since Hammonds provided misinformation regarding the highly sensitive issue of email searches, and since she violated clear policy regarding those searches, her presence at the helm of the College stands as a roadblock to rebuilding trust between students, faculty, and the administration."[124]

On May 28, Hammonds announced that she would resign to lead a new Harvard research program on race and gender in science. Hammonds said that her decision to resign was unrelated to the email search incident.[125][126]

An outside investigation run by Michael B. Keating of Foley Hoag found that the searches were done in good faith.[127]

References
  1. "College announces investigation". Harvard Gazette. 30 August 2012. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2012-09-04.
  2. Pérez-Peña, Richard; Bidgood, Jess (2012-08-30). "Harvard Says 125 Students May Have Cheated on Exam". The New York Times. Cambridge (Mass). Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  3. Pérez-Peña, Richard (2012-08-31). "Students of Harvard Cheating Scandal Say Group Work Was Accepted". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2012-09-19. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  4. Robbins, Rebecca D. (2012-08-30). "Harvard Investigates 'Unprecedented' Academic Dishonesty Case". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2012-09-04.
  5. "TOP 12 NEWS STORIES OF 2012". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-12-31. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-01-08.
  6. "Harvard investigates 125 students for cheating on final exam". The Boston Globe. 2012-08-30. Archived from the original on September 6, 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-05.
  7. "With Investigation Complete, Harvard Plans a Cheating Scandal Announcement". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-01-22.
  8. Landergan, Katherine (2012-09-30). "Half of students in Harvard cheating scandal required to withdraw from the college". The Boston Globe. Retrieved 2013-02-01.
  9. Pérez-Peña, Richard (2013-09-16). "Students Accused of Cheating Return Awkwardly to a Changed Harvard". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2017-02-26.
  10. "Cheating Scandal Erupts After Short-Answer Questions Added To Congress Exams". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-09-07. Retrieved 2012-09-04.
  11. "GOVT E-1310 Home § Government E-1310 (Spring 2009-2010)". Harvard University. 2013-06-19. Archived from the original on 2013-06-19. Retrieved 2014-05-26.
  12. "GOVT E-1310 Home § Government E-1310 (Spring 2011)". Harvard University. 2013-06-19. Archived from the original on 2013-06-19. Retrieved 2014-05-26.
  13. "GOVT E-1310 Home § Introduction to Congress (Spring 2012)". Isites.harvard.edu. Archived from the original on 2016-02-03. Retrieved 2014-05-26.
  14. "Harvard Q | Home". Q.fas.harvard.edu. Archived from the original on 2012-09-06. Retrieved 2012-09-04.
  15. Halperin, Alex (2012-08-30). "Accused student: Harvard "out for blood"". Salon. Archived from the original on 2012-09-05. Retrieved 2012-09-05.
  16. "Harvard Students Fighting Allegations of Cheating on Exam". Bloomberg BusinessWeek. Archived from the original on September 7, 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-04.
  17. "Concerns raised over Harvard's handling of cheating scandal - Metro". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2013-01-29. Retrieved 2013-01-29.
  18. "Final exam for Government 1310: Introduction to Congress". The Boston Globe. Retrieved 2012-09-21.
  19. Carmichael, Mary. "Harvard students bridle over test cheating investigation". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2012-09-21.
  20. Pesek, William (2012-09-04). "How to Stop Cheating at Harvard (and Yale)". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 2012-09-08. Retrieved 2012-09-21.
  21. "Gov 1310 No Longer Listed for Next Semester". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-10-09. Retrieved 2012-10-08.
  22. "GOVT E-1310 Home § Introduction to Congress (Spring 2013)". Isites.harvard.edu. Archived from the original on 2016-02-03. Retrieved 2013-04-10.
  23. "Introduction to Congress". Extension.harvard.edu. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2014-05-26.
  24. "Government 1310 - Introduction to Congress" (PDF). Harvard. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-02-03. Retrieved 2014-05-26.
  25. "Typo at Root of Cheating Scandal, Letter Reveals". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  26. "Harvard undergraduate academic misconduct investigated". Harvard Magazine. Archived from the original on 2012-09-08. Retrieved 2012-09-10.
  27. "Administration Makes Changes To Cope with Cheating Scandal". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-09-13. Archived from the original on 2012-09-20. Retrieved 2012-09-17.
  28. Cook, Mercer R. "Students Accused in Cheating Scandal Frustrated by Uncertain Process". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2012-09-04.
  29. Hackett, Gina K. "Professors Emphasize Collaboration Policies on First Day of Shopping Week". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-10-05. Retrieved 2012-09-05.
  30. Levitz, Jennifer (2012-08-31). "Harvard Probes Allegations of Cheating on Exam". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on 2015-04-04. Retrieved 2012-09-06.
  31. Lauerman, John (2013-02-01). "Harvard Students Forced to Withdraw in Cheating Scandal". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 2013-02-05. Retrieved 2013-02-05.
  32. Robbins, Rebecca D. (September 6, 2012). "Ad Board Reform of 2010 Led to More Options, More Dishonesty Cases". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on October 5, 2012. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  33. Robbins, Rebecca D. (September 11, 2012). "Cheating Scandal To Be Reviewed Case-by-Case". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on March 30, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  34. Trotter, J.K. (September 9, 2012). "Harvard to be Harsh on 'Intro to Congress' Cheaters: New Details". IvyGate. Archived from the original on March 3, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  35. "Text of Leaked Email Originally Sent by Ad Board Secretary to Colleagues". The Harvard Crimson. 2013-05-01. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-05-14.
  36. Cook, Mercer R.; Robbins, Rebecca D. (October 23, 2012). "Ad Board's Educational Mission Under Scrutiny". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on September 23, 2023. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  37. Johnson, O'Ryan (2011-11-22). "Harvard cheating punishment seen as fair". Boston Herald. Archived from the original on 2013-02-04. Retrieved 2013-02-04.
  38. "Disciplinary Matters The Administrative Board of Harvard College". Adboard.fas.harvard.edu. Retrieved 2013-02-07.
  39. "Harvard College disciplines students in cheating inquiry". Harvard Magazine. 2013-02-01. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-02-19.
  40. "Harvard details suspensions in massive cheating scandal - Metro". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-02-04.
  41. Feldman, Jacob D. H. (September 6, 2012). "For Accused Jocks, Athletic Regulations Complicate Decisions". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on September 23, 2023. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  42. "Cheating case entangles athletes at Harvard". The Boston Globe. 2012-07-13. Archived from the original on September 13, 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
  43. Koenig, Alexander; Samuels, Robert S. (September 10, 2012). "Football Bracing for Lineup Changes Following Government 1310 Incident". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on September 23, 2023. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  44. Lauerman, John. "Harvard Football Said to Risk Losing Players in Cheating Probe". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 2012-09-12. Retrieved 2012-09-11.
  45. Feldman, Jacob D. H. (September 17, 2012). "Football Team Responds to Cheating Allegations". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on February 2, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  46. Gasper, Christopher L. (October 9, 2012). "Harvard football is schooling competition". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on December 22, 2012. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  47. Winn, Luke (September 12, 2012). "Harvard to be without Kyle Casey, Brandyn Curry in wake of cheating scandal". Sports Illustrated. Archived from the original on May 15, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  48. Samuels, Robert S.; Sherman, Scott A. (September 11, 2012). "Men's Basketball Co-Captain Kyle Casey To Withdraw, Miss 2012–13 Season; Curry Also Implicated". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on April 19, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  49. Pérez-Peña, Richard (2012-09-11). "Harvard Cheating Suspects Go on Leave". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2012-09-27. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  50. Duggan, Dan. "Sources: Harvard basketball captains to miss year in wake of scandal". Boston Herald. Retrieved 2012-09-12.
  51. May, Peter (2012-10-09). "As Season Approaches, Harvard Adjusts Roster". Thequad.blogs.nytimes.com. Archived from the original on 2012-10-12. Retrieved 2012-10-10.
  52. Connolly, John. "Crimson forge on after losses". Boston Herald. Retrieved 2012-10-10.
  53. Botchford, Jason. "Canucks prospect linked to scandal". The Province. Archived from the original on 2013-02-04. Retrieved 2012-12-13.
  54. "Riders' Michalek one of many involved in Harvard academic cheating scandal". TheGazette. 2011-03-31. Archived from the original on 2013-01-01. Retrieved 2012-12-14.
  55. "NOTEBOOK: Men's Hockey Perfect on Penalty Kill". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-12-10. Archived from the original on 2012-12-24. Retrieved 2012-12-18.
  56. "University prez Faust: Cheating at Harvard not a sports problem". Boston Herald. 2012-09-13. Retrieved 2012-09-20.
  57. Pennington, Bill (2012-09-18). "Harvard Cheating Scandal Revives Debate Over Athletics". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2012-10-04. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  58. Pérez-Peña, Richard (2013-02-01). "Harvard Forced Dozens to Leave in Cheating Scandal". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2013-08-09. Retrieved 2017-02-26.
  59. "Tuition Concerns Raised in Cheating Scandal". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-09-13. Archived from the original on 2012-09-17. Retrieved 2012-09-17.
  60. "Regarding act of taking an exam, Harvard students seemed unclear on concept". The Boston Globe. 2012-09-06. Archived from the original on 2013-12-31. Retrieved 2012-09-10.
  61. Clinch, Guy W (2013-01-19). "Gov 1310: an Adult Learner's Experience with the Harvard Cheating Scandal - GovLoop - Knowledge Network for Government". GovLoop. Archived from the original on 2013-01-27. Retrieved 2013-06-27.
  62. Clark, Patrick (2012-08-30). "A Harvard Student Writes In on Cheating Scandal". Observer. Archived from the original on 2012-09-05. Retrieved 2012-09-10.
  63. "Harvard Could Face Student Lawsuits in Fallout of Cheating Scandal". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-09-13. Retrieved 2012-09-10.
  64. Denise, Michelle. "Government 1310 Verdicts Leave Door Open for Lawsuits". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2013-02-17. Retrieved 2013-02-14.
  65. Denise, Michelle. "Concerns Linger After 'Final' Cheating Scandal Announcement". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2013-02-08. Retrieved 2013-02-08.
  66. Levitz, Jennifer (2013-02-01). "Harvard Disciplines Dozens of Students in Cheating Scandal". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on 2015-03-27. Retrieved 2013-02-07.
  67. Freyer, Jake. "Class of 2013 Senior Survey". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2013-06-09. Retrieved 2013-06-20.
  68. "Harvard College's Honor Code". Harvard Magazine. Archived from the original on 17 December 2014. Retrieved 9 December 2014.
  69. Diver, Colin S. (2012-08-31). "Students will show academic integrity — if colleges support it". Opinion. The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2012-09-06. Retrieved 2012-09-05.
  70. "Faculty Members Defend Take-Home Exams Despite Scandal". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-10-05. Retrieved 2012-09-05.
  71. Christakis, Erika (2012-09-04). "Harvard Cheating Scandal: How to Respond to Academic Dishonesty". Time. Archived from the original on 2012-09-08. Retrieved 2012-09-10.
  72. "Harry R. Lewis: Harvard, Know Thyself". HuffPost. 2012-09-17. Archived from the original on 2012-09-18. Retrieved 2012-09-19.
  73. "Harvard scandal reveals ethical rot". Philadelphia Daily News. 2012-09-12. Archived from the original on 2016-03-03. Retrieved 2012-09-21.
  74. "Harvard's Cheating Scandal As A Play In Four Acts". Cognoscenti. WBUR. 2012-09-28. Archived from the original on 2012-10-07. Retrieved 2012-10-02.
  75. "Harvard academic leaders address College cheating investigation". Harvard Magazine. 2012-10-03. Archived from the original on 2012-11-10. Retrieved 2012-10-04.
  76. "Faust Addresses Cheating Scandal". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-09-30. Archived from the original on 2012-10-05. Retrieved 2012-10-04.
  77. Lee, Michelle S. (2012-11-08). "Expos Stresses Honesty". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2012-11-16.
  78. Auritt, Elizabeth S. "Alumnus Slams Harvard's Handling of the Cheating Scandal". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2013-01-28. Retrieved 2013-01-28.
  79. "Text of Stemberg's Letter Addressing the Cheating Scandal". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-01-28.
  80. "Harvard : Harvard Friends Groups". Gocrimson.com. Archived from the original on 2013-05-10. Retrieved 2013-01-28.
  81. Denise, Michelle. "'More Than Half' of Ad Board Cases Last Fall Led to Withdrawals, Harvard Says". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2013-02-05. Retrieved 2013-02-06.
  82. "Delineating Dishonesty". Opinion. The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-10-05. Retrieved 2012-09-04.
  83. "Conducive to Cheating". Opinion. The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-09-19. Retrieved 2012-09-17.
  84. "The Cavalier Daily: Crimson Handed". HuffPost. 2012-09-04. Archived from the original on 2013-07-03. Retrieved 2012-09-05.
  85. "Harvard cheating scandal reveals gaps in costly education". The Boston Globe. September 6, 2012. Archived from the original on 2013-12-31. Retrieved 2012-09-07.
  86. "Integrity and the Harvard cheating scandal". The Christian Science Monitor. Archived from the original on 2012-09-19. Retrieved 2012-09-20.
  87. Barro, Josh. "Cheating at Harvard Exposes an Admissions Game". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 2012-09-07. Retrieved 2012-09-05.
  88. Manjoo, Farhad (4 September 2012). "Harvard cheating scandal: Everyone has it wrong—the students should be celebrated for collaborating on an unfair test". Slate. Archived from the original on 2012-09-04. Retrieved 2012-09-05.
  89. Green, Sarah (5 September 2012). "Cheating at Harvard, and in the 'Real World'". Harvard Business Review. Archived from the original on 2012-09-07. Retrieved 2012-09-06.
  90. Levick, Richard (2012-04-18). "Why Harvard Mishandled Its Cheating Scandal". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2012-09-09. Retrieved 2012-09-06.
  91. Petri, Alexandra (2012-09-07). "The Harvard cheating scandal and the end of failure". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 2012-09-16. Retrieved 2012-09-21.
  92. Rikleen, Lauren (2012-09-14). "Cheating and the Millennial generation". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2013-12-31. Retrieved 2012-09-21.
  93. "Arizona Daily Wildcat :: Harvard scandal casts spotlight on how colleges fight cheating". Wildcat.arizona.edu. Archived from the original on 2012-10-23. Retrieved 2012-09-07.
  94. "Quite Thought Full". Opinions. The Duquesne Duke. Archived from the original on 2013-12-31. Retrieved 2012-09-07.
  95. "Honor codes put in spotlight". The Daily Tar Heel. Archived from the original on 2014-01-01. Retrieved 2012-09-07.
  96. "Editorial: Succumbing to academic pressure". The Brown Daily Herald. 2012-09-12. Retrieved 2012-09-19.
  97. Zimmerman, Jonathan. "Harvard cheating scandal? It could be bad teaching". The Christian Science Monitor. Archived from the original on 2012-09-23. Retrieved 2012-09-24.
  98. "Crimson Lied - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 02/11/13 - Video Clip". Comedy Central. Archived from the original on 2013-02-13. Retrieved 2013-02-12.
  99. Schwarz, Hannah (November 2, 2012). "Officials reject FCC's "Cheaters" shirt for The Game". Yale Daily News. Archived from the original on April 6, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  100. Lee, Michelle S. (November 5, 2012). "Yale's Harvard-Yale Game Shirt Design Rejected". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-11-09. Retrieved 2012-11-06.
  101. Schwarz, Hannah (November 12, 2012). "Licensing office approves FCC shirt design". Yale Daily News. Archived from the original on April 11, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  102. Sherman, Scott A. (November 17, 2012). "Harvard Rallies To Top Yale, 34-24, in 129th Game". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on April 20, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  103. Menton, Jane Darby (November 28, 2012). "Miller discourages take-home finals". Yale Daily News. Archived from the original on April 7, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  104. Ferreol, Michelle Denise L. (November 30, 2012). "Yale Dean Discourages Take-Home Exams After Harvard Cheating Scandal". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on February 7, 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
  105. "Ad Board's Educational Mission Under Scrutiny". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-10-23. Archived from the original on 2012-11-01. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  106. "Ad Board's Advising System Faces Criticism". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-10-24. Archived from the original on 2012-11-06. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  107. "For Ad Board, Burdened Proof?". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-10-25. Archived from the original on 2012-11-01. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  108. "Critics Call for Student Role on Ad Board". The Harvard Crimson. 2012-10-26. Archived from the original on 2012-10-30. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  109. "A Penal System". Opinion. The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2012-11-05. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  110. Conway, Madeline R. "Classes Address Collaboration Policies". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2013-01-31. Retrieved 2013-01-31.
  111. Landergan, Katherine (2013-01-29). "Harvard professors write clear collaboration policies for new semester after cheating scandal". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2013-02-03. Retrieved 2013-01-31.
  112. Carmichael, Mary (2012-09-19). "Harvard University administrators secretly searched deans' email accounts, hunting for media leak". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2013-03-11. Retrieved 2013-03-11.
  113. "Harvard defends e-mail searches, offers limited apology". The Boston Globe. 2013-03-11. Archived from the original on March 16, 2013. Retrieved 2013-03-21.
  114. "Dean's Communications". Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Archived from the original on 2013-03-13. Retrieved 2013-03-22.
  115. Kansra, Nikita (2013-03-09). "Administrators Secretly Searched Resident Deans' Email for Cheating Scandal Leak". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2013-04-19. Retrieved 2013-04-18.
  116. Fandos, Nicholas P. (2013-03-11). "Administrators' Statement on Secret Email Searches Leaves Questions Unanswered". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-04-18.
  117. Fandos, Nicholas P. (2013-03-11). "Professors Call Ethics of Email Search Into Question". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-04-18.
  118. Lewis, Harry (2013-03-09). "Bits and Pieces: Email Privacy at Harvard". Harry-lewis.blogspot.com. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-04-18.
  119. "Harvard Spies on E-mails". My Biased Coin. 10 March 2013. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2014-05-26.
  120. "At Harvard, Secrets and Lies | Shots in the Dark". Richardbradley.net. Archived from the original on 2013-03-14. Retrieved 2013-04-18.
  121. "Secret e-mail searches on Harvard cheating scandal broader than initially described - Metro". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-04-03.
  122. Fandos, Nicholas P. "Revelation of Second Email Search Contradicts Administrators' Previous Statement". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2013-04-08.
  123. Fandos, Nicholas (2 April 2013). "Revelation of Second Email Search Contradicts Administrators' Previous Statement". The Harvard Crimson. Archived from the original on 23 September 2023. Retrieved 19 May 2013.
  124. "To Rebuild Trust, Hammonds Must Resign". The Harvard Crimson. 4 April 2013. Archived from the original on 6 June 2013. Retrieved 28 May 2013.
  125. Perez-Pena, Richard (28 May 2013). "Harvard Dean Who Handled E-Mail Searches to Step Down". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 23 September 2023. Retrieved 28 May 2013.
  126. "Evelynn Hammonds to step down as Harvard College dean". Boston Globe. 28 May 2013. Retrieved 28 May 2013.
  127. Pérez-Peña, Richard (2013-07-22). "No Evidence Harvard Officials Read Faculty E-Mails, Report Says". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2023-09-23. Retrieved 2017-02-26.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.