Riley, Brian, and Amanda are all part of the same coding class. The professor had assigned a coding project where students had two weeks to come up with their own code. No collaboration was allowed. When grading, the professor noticed the similarities when he ran the Moss analysis. Amanda and Brian’s code were a 94% match and both matched 72% of Riley’s code. The professor said there were no other close analysis in the class. Amanda and Brian decided to meet together in the library so they could hang out while working on their codes separately. Riley texted Amanda because she was having problems stating her code. Amanda sent a screenshot of her code to Riley to use as a reference. What honor code violation is Amanda responsible for?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

This item presents a scenario involving academic integrity in a coding class, with Amanda's actions forming the core of the issue.

First, consider the setup: students were instructed to develop their own code without collaboration. The Moss analysis showing high similarity between Amanda and Brian, and some overlap with Riley, indicates not all work was independently created.

Next, focus on Amanda's specific behavior. She and Riley were in contact because Riley was having problems with her code. Amanda sent Riley a screenshot of her own code to use as a reference. This action provides direct assistance to another student in completing an assignment and enables the other student to imitate or copy the work rather than producing original code themselves.

From a definitions standpoint, complicity (or being complicit) involves knowingly helping or enabling another person to commit wrongdoing. In this case, Amanda knowingly supplied a reference (the screenshot) that could facilitate Riley’s ability to submit work that is not independently produced, which aligns with complicity in academic dishonesty.

Now, what is not being claimed here for the purposes of this analysis? There is no option provided in the prompt to compare against, so I cannot assess alternate labels without seeing them. However, in general, other potential violations in similar scenarios might include collaboration or unauthorized collaboration, and plagiarism. The core distinction is that complicity centers on knowingly assisting someone else to cheat, which fits Amanda’s action of sharing her code as a reference.

From a reasoning perspective, one might question whether simply sharing a screenshot constitutes collaboration or encouragement to plagiarize. Still, the explicit intent to help Riley reproduce or imitate the work points toward a deliberate assistive action, which is the hallmark of complicity.

Additionally, the social arrangement—Amanda and Brian meeting to work on their codes together while separately developing their own work—could suggest a broader culture of informal collaboration, but the critical factor for Amanda’s liability here remains the explicit act of sending the code screenshot to Riley.

In summary, Amanda’s act of providing a reference by sending a screenshot to Riley is best characterized as complicity because she knowingly aided another student in the process of completing an assignment that was explicitly prohibited from collaboration, thereby facilitating academic dishonesty.

Similar Questions

Module: Getting help from non-student friends Question: Select all correct answers:

Copying and pasting or sharing computer code is OK when:

You are allowed to use "homework helper" websites when working on homework and programming projects for this course.

The professor will write all your code for you.

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler