CS/ECE 374 (Spring 2024): Academic Integrity

This policy statement is unfortunately necessary, thanks to the actions of a tiny minority of students. If you have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to ask in lecture, in lab, during office hours, on Ed, or by email.

tl;dr: Be honest. Cite your sources. We mean it. If you need help, please ask. Don't be stupid!

• Our Expectations
  • Cite Your Sources
  • Use Your Own Words
  • Don't Be Stupid
• Penalties
• Group Work
• Warning Signs

Our Expectations

Each student (or homework group) must write their own solutions, in their own words, and must properly credit all sources.

These are the same ethical standards that researchers are expected to follow in their formal publications. For comparison, see the guidelines published by the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), the American Mathematical Society (AMS), the American Physical Society (APS), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM).

For more information and examples, see any of the following:

• The CS department's policies and recommendations
• The Provost Office's Students’ Quick Reference Guide to Academic Integrity
• Article 1, Part 4 of the Student Code.

Cite Your Sources

• If you use an idea from a book, cite the book.
• If you use an idea from a paper, cite the paper.
• If you use an idea from Wikipedia, cite Wikipedia.
• If you use an idea from CS StackExchange, cite CS StackExchange.
• If you use an idea from last semester's homework solutions, cite last semester's homework solutions.
• If you use an idea from one of the labs, cite the lab.
• If you use an idea from Discord, cite Discord.
• If you use an idea from ChatGPT, cite ChatGPT.
• If you use an idea from another student, cite that student.
• If you use an idea from the bathroom grafitti at Kam's, cite the bathroom grafitti at Kam's.
• If you use an idea from your mom, cite your mom.

• Official course materials (lectures, lecture notes, homework and exam solutions from this semester)
• Sources for prerequisite material (which we assume you already know by heart)

Use Your Own Words

• Copying verbatim from the lecture notes is plagiarism.
• Copying verbatim from a textbook solution manual is plagiarism.
• Copying verbatim from old CS 374 or 473 homework or exam solutions is plagiarism.
• Copying verbatim from ChatGPT is plagiarism.
• Submitting work done entirely by another student is plagiarism, even if that student is part of your homework group.
• Allowing another student to copy your work verbatim is also an academic integrity violation, even if that student is part of your homework group.
• Making simple lexical changes, such as Rogeting or changing word order or changing variable names, still counts as ”copying verbatim“ for purposes of this policy.

Classes in some other departments allow and even encourage verbatim copying in small doses. For example, if you want to claim that an expert holds an important or controversial opinion, it is usually better (more honest, more accurate) to quote them verbatim, instead of rewriting their opinion in your words.

Immortality. I notice that as soon as writers broach this question they begin to quote. I hate quotation. Tell me what you know.

— Ralph Waldo Emerson, Journals (May 1849)

Students frequently overuse direct quotation in taking notes, and as a result they overuse quotations in the final paper. Probably only about 10% of your final manuscript should appear as directly quoted matter. Therefore, you should strive to limit the amount of exact transcribing of source materials while taking notes.

— James D. Lester, Writing Research Papers (1976)

But computer science classes are different. We won't ask you to defend a hypothesis or opinion using evidence or rhetoric. What we will ask for are formal, logical, mathematical arguments. Expert opinion is irrelevant here; the math must speak for itself. In particular, we are asking you to demonstrate your expertise in formal, logical, mathematical reasoning. You can only demonstrate expertise in something by actually doing it. (The same argument goes for programming classes. Your MPs are not just asking you for working code; they are asking you for evidence of your ability to independently produce working code.)

That said, if you want to use an algorithm from Jeff's notes in your solution, just use it (and cite it) and carefully describe any necessary changes.

Don't Be Stupid

Penalties

• The default penalty for cheating on a homework problem is a grade of zero on the entire homework set, which we will not drop when we compute your final course grade. (In practice, the effect of this penalty is about half of a letter grade.)
• The default penalty for cheating on an exam is a grade of zero on the entire exam, which we will not drop when we compute your final course grade. (In practice, the effect of this penalty is roughly two full letter grades.)
• The penalty for a second offense of any kind, or a particularly egregious first offense, is an F in the course.

In accordance with department and university policy, we report all academic integrity cases to the Computer Science department, to the student's college, and to the Senate Committee on Student Discipline. We also report offenses by computer science graduate students to their advisors. Multiple offenses, even in different classes, can result in suspension or expulsion.

Our high expectations for graduate students extend to issues of academic integrity. A notice of any cheating offense by a graduate student will be entered into their file, where it will be seen by the student's advisor, as well as their qual, prelim, and thesis committees. Many professors refuse to advise MS or PhD students who have committed even a single cheating offense; the risk to our professional careers if a student acts unethically in research is simply too high. If you cheat, you may be signing your own academic death warrant.

Regardless of whether it constitutes plagiarism, or whether you get caught, getting too much help on your homework will hurt your final grade. If you don't learn how to solve algorithmic problems on your own, you will perform poorly on the (closed-book, closed-notes) exams, which make up 70% of your final course grade. Several students with ≥90% homework averages have failed this course.

Group Work

Groups of up to three people are allowed to submit a single solution for each homework. Every member of the group receives the same grade and the same credit for the entire assignment. That means every member of the group is responsible for the entire assignment.

Group solutions must represent an honest collaborative effort by all members of the group. In particular, groups must not delegate one problem to each group member; only the students who actively worked on a problem may add their names to the solution. At a minimum, you must read, understand, and approve anything submitted with your name on it. Allowing someone else to add your name to a solution to which you made no contribution is plagiarism. This does not mean that every student in a group must contribute good ideas or must help in the actual writing of every group solution. Asking "stupid" questions, proposing bad ideas, shooting down bad ideas, working out examples (even if they don't appear in the solution), uncovering bugs, and even just acting as a sounding board for other group members are all legitimate contributions.

If a submitted homework contains plagiarized material, we will separately determine each student's culpability (if any) and penalty (if any), in accordance with Student Code. By default, every member of the homework group will be given the same penalty. (Again, this is the same standard that is applied to coauthors of research papers.) If you cheat, you are not only endangering your grade, and possibly your academic career, but your colleagues’ as well.

As illustrations, consider the following scenarios. All scenarios involve a group of three students (A, B, and C) collaborating on a three-problem homework set, who argee in advance that each student will write up and submit the solution for one problem — A will handle problem 1, B will handle problem 2, and C will handle problem 3 — with all three names at the top. Variants of all these scenarios have actually happened. Yes, even the last two.

• Each student writes up a complete solution for their problem, in their own words and properly citing of all sources, but with no involvement from the other group members. The students then email their solutions to each other; after some discussion, everyone agrees to submit all three solutions exactly as written. Each student submits the solution they wrote, with all three names at the top.

  Everything's cool.

• All three group members first discuss and jointly work out sketches of solutions for all three problems. Then each student writes a detailed solution to their individual problem, in their own words and properly citing all sources. With no further discussion, each student submits the solution they wrote, with all three names at the top.

  Everything's cool.

• Each student writes up a complete solution for their problem, in their own words and properly citing of all sources, but with no involvement from the other group members. With no further discussion, each student submits the solution they wrote, with all three names at the top.

  All three students are guilty of plagiarism and would receive an undroppable zero on the entire homework set.

• All three group members first discuss and jointly work out sketches of solutions for all three problems. Student A later finds a solution to problem 1 on the web and submits it without proper citation, with all three names, with no further discussion with B and C. Students B and C independently write up solutions to their problems, properly citing all sources, and submit them with all three names, with no further discussion.

  Student A is guilty of plagiarism and would receive an undroppable zero on the entire homework set. Students B and C followed the rules; their problem 1 would be forgiven.

• Student B finds a solution to problem 2 on the web and submits it verbatim with all three names at the top of the first page, as the group agreed. A and C had no knowledge of student B's plagiarism, and no other involvement in solving problem 2. Students A and C collaborate on problems 1 and 3, with no involvement from student B, and submit a properly written solution with all three names, as they had agreed.

  All three students are guilty of plagiarism, although for different reasons. All three students would receive an undroppable zero on the entire homework set.

• The solution for problem 3 is a verbatim copy of another source. Immediately after submitting the homework, but before the plagiarism is discovered, all three students drop the course. None of the students responds to the initial charge of plagiarism or to repeated emails from the instructor asking to discuss the situation.

  All three students are guilty of plagiarism. An academic integrity infraction is added to their permanent records even though they dropped the course.

• All three group members discuss and jointly work out sketches of solutions for all three problems. Student A later finds a solution to problem 3 on the web and emails the text (copied verbatim) to student C, with a clear citation to the original source. Student C copies the text of student A's email verbatim into his solution, without consulting or citing the original source, under the mistaken belief that the text is student A's own work. All three students submit their respective solutions with all three names at the top, with no other involvement by the other group members.

  Student C is technically guilty of plagiarism, but they would probably receive only a warning. Problem 3 would be forgiven for all three students.

• Each student writes up a complete solution for their problem, with no involvement from the other group members. A and C write their solutions in their own words, properly citing all sources, but B copies their solution verbatim from another source. B and C email their solutions to the entire group. A does not respond to B and C's email or send their own solution. After some discussion (without A), B and C agree to submit their solutions exactly as written, with only B and C named on the first page. B never reveals that their solution to problem 2 was plagiarized. A also submits their solution to problem 1, with all three names on the first page, without B and C's knowledge or agreement.

  Let's go through this one carefully.

  • Student A is technically guilty of facilitating plagiarism, but would probably receive only a warning, along with (droppable) zeros on problems 2 and 3.
  • Student B is guilty of plagiarism and would receive an undroppable zero on the entire homework set.
  • Student C followed the rules. They would receive a (droppable) zero on problem 1; their problem 2 would be forgiven; and they would be strongly encouraged to find new homework partners.
  • The instructor has a headache. Instructor mad.

Warning Signs

Almost every instance of plagiarism I have seen was motivated by a combination of two factors.

• Desperation: The student feels overwhelming pressure to improve their performance, despite gaps in their understanding. The student might be overwhelmed by work in other classes, or financial pressure to graduate, or parental/cultural expectations. This might be the hardest course the student has ever taken, and their merely good performance is a blow to their aspirations or self-image. The student may be suffering from Impostor Syndrome, the feeling that they really aren't good enough to be here (despite evidence to the contrary), and that their fraud will be uncovered if they admit that they can't do something. The student might have trouble with English, and therefore worries that rewriting someone else's text would distort the meaning. Perhaps the student is dealing with depression, serious illness, divorce, or a death in the family. Or maybe the student simply sees no way to satisfy the instructor's unreasonable or unclear expectations without cheating.

  If you find yourself in this situation, ask for help! If you need help understanding the material, come to office hours, ask questions in class, ask questions on the newsgroup, talk to your fellow students. The instructional staff will even make extra appointments to help guide you through the material or give you feedback on tentative solutions, but only if you ask. (But please remember that our goal is to help you master the material, not just to help you get a better grade.)

  If you think a homework problem is unclear, please ask for clarification. Your confusion might indicate a gap in your understanding of the course material, but it might also indicate that the question is poorly stated, unfairly hard, or even impossible. Our job is to help you learn the material; please let us know if we aren't doing our job.

  We do expect solutions to be written in clear, coherent English. If you are thinking of copying someone else's words because you are uncomfortable with English, you are probably better off taking a class to improve your English instead of this course.

  Asking for help does not make you "look stupid". Quite the opposite—it means you are smart enough to recognize your own limitations and work to overcome them. Asking for clarification is not an insult to the instructor or the TAs. Quite the opposite—questions are valuable feedback that we can use to teach more effectively. Everyone suffers from Impostor Syndrome occasionally, including your professors. Most importantly, please remember that your grade is not a statement about your intelligence, your potential for success, or your worth as a human being; it's only feedback about your mastery of the course material.

  If your situation is very serious, or not directly related to this class, you may prefer to discuss your situation with your department or college advisor, a family member, a trusted friend, or the counseling center, but please talk to someone.

• Different expectations: The student is used to an academic culture where plagiarism is tolerated or even encouraged. Maybe they come from a high school with litigious parents who discourage teachers from punishing cheaters. Maybe they come from a country where students are expected to parrot back their instructors' exact words to demonstrate understanding. Maybe cheating was inconsistently or ineffectively enforced in their past classes; they've seen cheating students succeed (getting higher grades, or even better jobs) where honest students have suffered.

  Please be aware that our standards for academic integrity may be different than what you're used to. This point is especially important for international students. The standards we apply in this class are a proper subset of the standards applied to Illinois faculty and most other professional scientific researchers. (Fortunately, we don't have to worry about authorship and author ordering policies, accurate recording and reporting of experimental results, or ethical issues with human or animal test subjects.)

  Our job as instructors is to help you master the course material. We ask that you write everything yourself so that we can make an honest assessment of your facility with the course material, and therefore give you useful feedback. We allow wide latitude in choosing the resources you need to learn, because we believe that freedom will help you learn more effectively. We trust that you will use those resources responsibly and ethically. Plagiarizing other people's work to improve your grade is an abuse of that trust. It is unfair to us and to your fellow students.

  We are painfully aware of differences in cheating policies and their enforcement in different classes, both within and outside the computer science department. Within the guidelines of the Student Code, the university gives faculty broad discretion (under the rubric of academic freedom) in defining what constitutes "cheating" and how stringently cheating policies are enforced. Sometimes these differences lead students to believe that cheating policies are overly restrictive or inconsistent, and so can be justifiably ignored.

  We believe that our policies are fair, but even with the best of intentions, people make mistakes. If you believe that any policies in this course are unclear, unfair, or inconsistently applied, we strongly encourage you to voice your concerns to Timothy, Ruta, or any of the teaching assistants.

• Apathy: Very rarely, students cheat simply because they want a good grade (or a degree) at all costs, with no thought whatsoever for learning or fairness. We have absolutely no sympathy for these students. You have every right to rob yourself of the educational opportunity you (or your advisor, or your parents) have paid for, but don't expect us to help you.