Journalism School Probes Possible Cheating on Ethics Exam
Talk Is Tense at Columbia, but Some See Incident as Real-Life Lesson

By Robin Shulman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, December 3, 2006; A11

NEW YORK -- It was an ethics exam in a journalism class, and someone may have cheated.

Ironic? Yes. Unfortunate? Certainly. But what made the incident particularly notable was where and when it took place: at Columbia University, one of the premier journalism schools in the country, at a time when media ethics are much in question.

On Friday, Columbia's Graduate School of Journalism convened a meeting to discuss misconduct in the final exam for the required ethics course "Critical Issues in Journalism."

But the school was so wary of making specific accusations that, afterward, it was not even clear what misconduct had taken place.

Students had been given a 48-hour period to sign onto a Columbia Web site to take the final exam. They then had 90 minutes to answer two essay questions.

But at least one student reported cheating to the school's administrators -- without giving any names, said students who attended the meeting.

RadarOnline.com first reported about the investigation on Thursday, and the New York Times ran a story Friday. The Romenesko blog, which focuses on stories about the news media, linked to both Friday morning.

That afternoon, when the journalism school's deans convened the tense meeting, mandatory for all those enrolled in the course, about a dozen upset students lined up at a microphone to ask why deans were not doing more to apprehend the culprit, and to plead with other students to turn in the cheater in their midst, said students who attended.

After the meeting, students milled outside the school, discussing the problem with a level of anxiety that seemed to say more about the precarious state of journalism -- in an era of Jayson Blair-style fabrications and shrinking newspaper jobs -- than about one or several graduate students cheating on a test.

"It's going to affect us for years to come," said Jack Gillum, 23. "Columbia's going to have this badge of dishonor."

"If people did cheat, it makes me really angry," he added, noting that he pays much of his $43,422 yearly tuition and fees by himself and does not want his degree to be devalued.

"There's kind of a palpable fear: What's going to happen when you go for a job interview?" said Caroline Preston, 26.

But other students said the investigation has provided them with the best practical education they could have wanted.

"In the past week I've learned more about ethics than in the past semester," said Kate Grace, 26, as she ticked off recent lessons in anonymous sourcing, rumor and hype.

Peter O'Dowd, 25, said he learned what it is like when the tables are turned and the journalist becomes the news: what it is like to be interviewed, deal with leaks and avoid talking to reporters.

The teacher of the ethics class, Samuel Freedman, declined to comment for this article. And a reporter seeking to talk to several deans, themselves journalists, was referred instead to Barbara Fasciani, the school's director of communications and special events.

"What has happened is there's been some difficulty with the way the exam has been administered," said Fasciani. Confidentiality issues prevent her from saying more, she said. "There was some kind of snag with the timing, how it was sent out and how students were taking it," she said.

Asked if the school was investigating whether one student cheated by offering exam questions to another, she said: "It may be."

In any event, an extra take-home question has been devised to adjust for any unfairness in the exam. The new essay topic, like the school's real-life conundrum, involves a report of cheating by an unnamed individual, followed by rumors and uncertainty.

"You are the executive editor of a newspaper," begins Exam Essay Question III, forwarded to a reporter by a student. "You receive a tip from a credible source that one or more unspecified articles in recent editions of the newspaper contain fabricated material. No more details are given." No one admits responsibility. What do you do?