Difference between revisions of "Lit Hum exam leak (2007)"
| (13 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Image:Wen_Jin.jpg|thumb|160px|Wen Jin, section leader who leaked exam information]] | [[Image:Wen_Jin.jpg|thumb|160px|Wen Jin, section leader who leaked exam information]] | ||
| − | The '''Lit Hum exam leak''' took place in Spring [[2007]]. Prior to the exam, [[Wen Jin]], a [[Lit Hum]] section leader leaked information that helped some students study for the [[passage identification]]s.<ref>[http://media.www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2007/05/02/News/Students.Must.Drop.Or.Retake.Lit.Hum.Exam-2898104.shtml Students Must Drop or Retake Exam]</ref> These notes identified which quotations would appear on the final exam, and sketched out the essay questions. Students who received this study guide passed it on to other students in the Class of 2010, and it eventually spread to a significant proportion of the class. | + | The '''2007 Lit Hum exam leak''' (not to be confused with [[Lit Hum exam leak|other Lit Hum exam leaks]]) took place in Spring [[2007]]. Prior to the exam, [[Wen Jin]], a [[Lit Hum]] section leader leaked information that helped some students study for the [[passage identification]]s.<ref>[http://media.www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2007/05/02/News/Students.Must.Drop.Or.Retake.Lit.Hum.Exam-2898104.shtml "Students Must Drop or Retake Exam"], Columbia Spectator, 5/9/07 (spec lists article post date incorrectly as 5/2/07)</ref> These notes identified which quotations would appear on the final exam, and sketched out the essay questions. Students who received this study guide passed it on to other students in the [[Class of 2010]], and it eventually spread to a significant proportion of the class. By [[May 4|May 4th]], when the exam was given, hundreds of Lit Hum students had seen the study guide. Jin is now an Assistant Professor in the English Department. <ref> [http://www.columbia.edu/cu/english/fac_profiles.htm#wj "Faculty Profiles"], Department of English and Comparative Literature </ref> |
== Aftermath == | == Aftermath == | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
=== Email to students === | === Email to students === | ||
| − | In an email to students on Monday, May 7th, 2007, the [[Core Office]] sent an email to students confirming "that there was a significant misjudgment on the part of one Lit Hum instructor, which has resulted in a complicated situation". The office announced that they were "looking into [the] matter". The email was sent from [[Patricia Grieve]], Chair of [[Literature Humanities]], and [[Deborah Martinsen]], Associate Dean of the [[Core Curriculum]]. | + | In an email to students on Monday, [[May 7|May 7th]], 2007, the [[Core Office]] sent an email to students confirming "that there was a significant misjudgment on the part of one Lit Hum instructor, which has resulted in a complicated situation". The office announced that they were "looking into [the] matter". The email was sent from [[Patricia Grieve]], Chair of [[Literature Humanities]], and [[Deborah Martinsen]], Associate Dean of the [[Core Curriculum]]. |
=== Email to instructors === | === Email to instructors === | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=== Decision to offer second exam === | === Decision to offer second exam === | ||
| − | On Tuesday, May 8th, 2007, a faculty ad hoc committee including Dean [[Austin Quigley]] and Core Curriculum administrators concluded that exam security had been severely compromised, and that freshmen would be offered the choice of taking a second Lit Hum exam or having their grade on the previous Lit Hum final not count for their final semester grade. | + | On Tuesday, [[May 8|May 8th]], 2007, a faculty ad hoc committee including Dean [[Austin Quigley]] and Core Curriculum administrators concluded that exam security had been severely compromised, and that freshmen would be offered the choice of taking a second Lit Hum exam or having their grade on the previous Lit Hum final not count for their final semester grade. |
== The study guide == | == The study guide == | ||
| − | + | <blockquote> | |
| − | |||
'''Part I- Possible Identifications''' | '''Part I- Possible Identifications''' | ||
| Line 53: | Line 52: | ||
:-material objects | :-material objects | ||
:-Books in Cervantes | :-Books in Cervantes | ||
| − | + | </blockquote> | |
== The passage identifications == | == The passage identifications == | ||
| + | The ''Crime and Punishment'' passage identification exposed many students who had used the study guide, as the guide had predicted the excerpt from ''Crime and Punishment'' would be from the epilogue. | ||
| − | + | <blockquote> | |
| + | We keep imaging eternity as an idea that cannot be grasped, something vast, vast! But why must it be vast? Instead of all of that, imagine suddenly that there will be one little room there, something like a village bathhouse, covered with soot, with spiders in all the corners, and that's the whole of eternity. I sometimes fancy something of the sort. | ||
| + | -''Crime and Punishment'', Part Four, Chapter 1 ('''not''' the Conclusion) | ||
| + | </blockquote> | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==See also== | ||
| + | *[[Lit Hum exam leak]] | ||
== External links == | == External links == | ||
| + | * [http://bwog.com/tag/lithum-cheating-scandal-2007/ Complete coverage of the scandal] on [[Bwog]] | ||
| + | * [http://bwog.com/2007/05/06/confessions-pt-3-lit-hum-exam-leaked/ Confessions, pt. 3: Lit Hum Exam Leaked] on [[Bwog]] | ||
| + | * [http://bwog.com/2007/05/07/breaking-freshmen-you-may-not-be-getting-your-grades-for-a-while/ Dean Martinsen's emails on the Core Office investigation] from [[Bwog]] | ||
| + | * [http://media.www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2007/05/02/News/Lit-Hum.Exam.Contents.Leaked-2896754.shtml Lit Hum Exam Contents leaked] from ''[[Spec]]'' | ||
| + | * [http://media.www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2007/05/02/News/College.To.Offer.Second.Lit.Hum.Exam-2897492.shtml College to Offer Second Lit Hum Exam] from ''[[Spec]]'' | ||
| + | * [http://bwog.com/2007/05/08/who-says-there-are-no-second-chances/ Commentary on the second exam offering] from [[Bwog]] | ||
| + | * [http://bwog.com/2007/05/09/post-readers-must-really-hate-us/ Roundup of New York media coverage of the scandal] on [[Bwog]] | ||
| + | * [http://www.myfoxny.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=3161557&version=3&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1 Fox News coverage] | ||
| − | + | [[Category:Academic scandals]] | |
| − | + | [[Category:Core Curriculum]] | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | [[Category: | ||
Latest revision as of 17:52, 8 December 2013
The 2007 Lit Hum exam leak (not to be confused with other Lit Hum exam leaks) took place in Spring 2007. Prior to the exam, Wen Jin, a Lit Hum section leader leaked information that helped some students study for the passage identifications.[1] These notes identified which quotations would appear on the final exam, and sketched out the essay questions. Students who received this study guide passed it on to other students in the Class of 2010, and it eventually spread to a significant proportion of the class. By May 4th, when the exam was given, hundreds of Lit Hum students had seen the study guide. Jin is now an Assistant Professor in the English Department. [2]
Contents
Aftermath
Email to students
In an email to students on Monday, May 7th, 2007, the Core Office sent an email to students confirming "that there was a significant misjudgment on the part of one Lit Hum instructor, which has resulted in a complicated situation". The office announced that they were "looking into [the] matter". The email was sent from Patricia Grieve, Chair of Literature Humanities, and Deborah Martinsen, Associate Dean of the Core Curriculum.
Email to instructors
Earlier on Monday, May 7th, 2007, Deborah Martinsen had sent an email to all Lit Hum instructors that also confirmed "an unfortunate breach in Lit Hum final exam security". She explained that the Core Office had a copy of the notes. Furthermore, Martinsen told instructors that one quotation had been substituted at the last minute. Thus, while the leaked info identified the quote from Crime and Punishment as coming from the Epilogue, it in fact came from another part of the novel. Martinsen said that students identifying the quote as coming from the Epilogue likely had access to the study notes. Also, instructors were told to suspect students who "correctly identified all of the other passages" and/or "the exact Canto in Dante".
Martinsen told instructors that the Core Office is still "trying to determine how widely these answer sheets circulated". She asked instructors to "refrain from submitting your final grades" until she gets back to them with grading recommendations "later in the day". All of this year's Lit Hum blue books will be submitted to the Core Office.
Decision to offer second exam
On Tuesday, May 8th, 2007, a faculty ad hoc committee including Dean Austin Quigley and Core Curriculum administrators concluded that exam security had been severely compromised, and that freshmen would be offered the choice of taking a second Lit Hum exam or having their grade on the previous Lit Hum final not count for their final semester grade.
The study guide
Part I- Possible Identifications
- Too[sic] the lighthouse- Will be a difficult passage, know the candles reference -p. 97 cyclical, she hinted it may be this passage but would not say.
- Crime and Punishment- will be from the epilogue
- Pride and Prejudice- will be a Mr. Bennet quote, there are only a few in the book
- Don Quixote (Cervantes)- will be from the last chapter
- St. Augustine- easy
- Virgil- Book 11
- - Battle scene (female)
- Divine Comedy- Ulysses
- - Book 26
- Montaigne- Easy, probably from one of the first two essays we read
- Boccaccio (Decameron)- will be from the prologue
- Shakespeare- slightly difficult
Part II- Passage Analysis
- A passage from each of these books Virgil, Shakespeare, Woolf
- - spatially versus temporally
- - contradictions and/ or paradoxes
Part III- Essay possible topics she hinted at
- 1. death, mourning, burial practices (corpses, tombs, graveyards, funerals); intimacy, love relationships
- 2. daily practices and material objects (gardens, flowers, food, clothes, books, décor, and art)
- 3. ending to narratives (intense drama, character information)
- 4. reality as a fictional construct
- -eating
- -material objects
- -Books in Cervantes
The passage identifications
The Crime and Punishment passage identification exposed many students who had used the study guide, as the guide had predicted the excerpt from Crime and Punishment would be from the epilogue.
We keep imaging eternity as an idea that cannot be grasped, something vast, vast! But why must it be vast? Instead of all of that, imagine suddenly that there will be one little room there, something like a village bathhouse, covered with soot, with spiders in all the corners, and that's the whole of eternity. I sometimes fancy something of the sort. -Crime and Punishment, Part Four, Chapter 1 (not the Conclusion)
References
- ↑ "Students Must Drop or Retake Exam", Columbia Spectator, 5/9/07 (spec lists article post date incorrectly as 5/2/07)
- ↑ "Faculty Profiles", Department of English and Comparative Literature
See also
External links
- Complete coverage of the scandal on Bwog
- Confessions, pt. 3: Lit Hum Exam Leaked on Bwog
- Dean Martinsen's emails on the Core Office investigation from Bwog
- Lit Hum Exam Contents leaked from Spec
- College to Offer Second Lit Hum Exam from Spec
- Commentary on the second exam offering from Bwog
- Roundup of New York media coverage of the scandal on Bwog
- Fox News coverage
