3. Vote to reduce each of the three students’ penalties. Instead of a zero, each student will receive only half of the possible total points for the project, which would be an F. You’re still holding students responsible for the group project, but not imposing catastrophic punishment. This compromise both undercuts the professor’s policy and punishes

“innocent” team members to some extent, but not as severely. Melinda Asbel watched as three of her classmates filed out of the conference room. Ten she turned back to the large wooden table and faced her fellow members (a student and three faculty members) of the university’s judiciary committee.

The three students—Joe Eastridge, Brad Hamil, and Lisa Baghetti—had just concluded their appeal against a plagiarism conviction stemming from a group project for an international marketing course. Melinda, who happened to be in the class with the students on trial, remembered the day the professor, Hank Zierden, had asked Joe, Brad, and Lisa, along with the group’s leader, Paul Colgan, to stay after class. She happened to walk by the classroom a half hour later to see four glum students emerge. Even though Paul had a chagrined expression on his face, Joe was the one who looked completely shattered. It didn’t take long for word to spread along the ever active grapevine that Paul had admitted to plagiarizing his part of the group paper.