In the months since the Computer Science 4 cheating scandal has subsided from the campus's consciousness, allegations of a different sort have emerged, this time against Dean of the College James Larimore.
In a highly critical letter written to executive directors of the Center for Academic Integrity, former CS4 professor Rex Dwyer alleged that Larimore " a member of the CAI " failed to punish students that according to him were identifiably guilty in the case.
As such, Dwyer wrote, Larimore's position on the CAI's Board of Directors is a "mockery of [the organization's] stated mission to 'identify, affirm, and promote the values of academic integrity among students.'"
Though the CAI, an umbrella organization that seeks to prevent academic dishonesty across campuses nationwide, told The Dartmouth that it does not share Dwyer's sentiment, the letter does highlight the lingering animosity generated by the CS4 incident which, two months after it was officially concluded, continues to elicit impassioned responses.
"I am not at all concerned with professor Dwyer's opinion of me," Larimore said. "It's not a surprise that this continues to be an issue for him."
Larimore also said that Dwyer's allegations of misconduct are unfounded.
"He's entitled to disagreement with an outcome, but the process was very, very focused on ensuring fairness. I think the case was handled in an entirely appropriate manner. We took seriously the allegations brought forward by professor Dywer and handled them very carefully," he explained.
At the CAI, where Larimore has been a Board member since his years as a Ph.D. student at Stanford University, president Jeanne M. Wilson took a similar approach toward Dwyer's allegations.
"I can tell you that I do not know enough of the facts to tell you what happened, but this organization is not the emergency personnel who come in and clean up," she said, continuing:
"We have faith, frankly, in our Board member that he would do the best under the circumstances. We are looking for a preventative role, we are not the integrity police."
Larimore's handling of the cheating allegations, Wilson stressed, is not antithetical to the CAI's central mission of promoting academic honesty, as Dwyer said in his letter.
Dwyer's letter had a particularly harsh tone.
"Eventually, I was called into the hearing room and questioned for perhaps twenty minutes. Although I had spent fifty or more hours documenting what had occurred and had written perhaps fifteen memos describing the specific violations of particular groups of students, one of the first questions asked to me was 'Could you please give us some examples of things that you would consider cheating?'
"I have no idea what lies students may have told about me in that room," he continued.
Dwyer also conveyed a sense of alarm in the letter:
"You need to be informed of this not merely as a matter of general interest, but because the chairman of the committee perpetuating this whitewash was James Larimore, a member of the CAI's board," it read.
But what is also interesting about Dwyer's letter is the renewed suggestion that identifying at least some of the students who allegedly cheated was potentially achievable.
"My solution [to the homework problem] included certain unique features not present in the homework assignment," Dwyer wrote.
"One of these is my use of the word 'daisy' instead of 'pansy.' Even if a tutor had allowed these students to view a printed copy of my solution, it is rather unlikely that they would have noticed my error in using the word 'daisy.'"
Dwyer was also able to record extracts from the Computer Science department's web server logs, which locate the sites where students accessed Dwyer's Web page with the solution.
The listings include public computers, residential buildings and fraternity houses. But according to Larimore, this evidence was not enough to convict students.
"There's a big difference between being able to identify a house as a location and identifying an individual who was sitting at a keyboard at any particular time, and [Dwyer] ought to understand that," he said.
For reasons of confidentiality, CS department Chair Scot Drysdale declined to interpret the evidence presented in the hearings, but did say that Kiewit refused to disclose the computer from which each Web hit came out of concern for privacy.
He added, "I don't know what the COS knows, so I'm in no position and have no desire to second guess them. I have confidence that they did their job and that the outcome was what it should have been."
Although the CAI has no intention of rebuking Larimore, one consequence of the CS4 cheating case that will involve the CAI is an audit that organization will conduct of Dartmouth's attitudes toward the Honor Code. Following the allegations of possible cheating, Larimore said he perceived a need for renewed discussion about what academic integrity means to the campus.
"We have extended an invitation to [Executive Director of CAI Sally Cole] to come up and meet with students and faculty and work with ways to inform and educate students about the honor principle."
"It seemed to me that Dartmouth would certainly benefit from informing students and faculty and visiting faculty about academic honesty," he continued. The review will likely begin this summer, Larimore said.
