assesement xwriteups x
You can find the essay prompts in the syllabus on iLearn. Overall, there are 9 topics to choose from. Detailed prompts can be found in the syllabus on pages 6-11. You will also find details regarding the formatting and the contents of the essays (see page 4, section E).
I believe that an integral part of the course is for you to think about applications of the material to real-world contexts. That is, why many of the essay prompts ask you to do exactly that.
It also means, however, that assessing the essays on an objective basis is difficult. I would therefore like to give you a bit more of a guidance.
What I am looking for are two things: analytical rigor and creativity.
I define analytical rigor as the ability to apply materials from class or elsewhere (feel free to include any relevant knowledge that you may have about a field/topic) to the problem at hand. This implies that the concepts and ideas have direct relevance to the problem and its solution and are used in a consistent way.
I define creativity as the ability to come up with novel ideas and solutions that go beyond what we have done in class. For instance, talking about a concept in class for domain X and using it for domain Y would still be a demonstration of analytical rigor (knowledge transfer), but it would not be very creative.
SoBA Mission Statement
Our mission is to develop diverse leaders, propel research-based innovation and promote the sustainable growth of Inland Southern California within the global economy. We harness the powerful resources of UC and our location at the nexus of commerce to create a laboratory for education, research, and productive partnerships across economic enterprises.
The strategic activities that propel our mission include:
· Conducting basic and applied research in management that explores and informs the creation, development and management of growth;
· Providing degree programs that prepare our students to be effective managers and responsible community leaders with a deep understanding of the dynamics of growth in both a regional and global context;
· Partnering with business and community leaders through a shared commitment to exemplary growth; and
· Delivering educational programs to executives and the public at large that respond to the needs of our local, state, national, and international communities.
Undergraduate Program – Learning Goals
Problem Solving Skills
Students will be able to use a variety of theoretical perspectives to identify and critically evaluate implications of business decisions for organizational stakeholders (e.g., customers, colleagues, employees, stockholders, suppliers, foreign governments, communities, cultures, regulatory agencies) and the natural environment.
Professional Integrity / Ethical Reasoning Skills
Students will be able to recognize ethical issues, demonstrate familiarity with alternative frameworks for ethical reasoning, and discern trade-offs and implications of employing different ethical frames of reference when making business decisions.
Global Context Skills
Students will be conversant with major economic, social, political, and technological trends and conditions influencing foreign investment and development of the global economy and demonstrate an understanding of the cultural, interpersonal and analytical competencies required for engaging in global business activities.
Written Communication Skills
Students will demonstrate proficiency in written communications by creating written document that are clearly written, with appropriate content and conclusions.
In contrast to the standard rational model of economic behavior, behavioral economics takes into account individuals’ limited cognitive abilities and limited willpower. Because of this, people often make decisions that depart systematically from the predictions derived from the standard rational model. Behavioral economics attempts to understand these departures by incorporating psychological findings and insights into economic analysis.
The course focuses on seminal and current research findings and covers topics, such as: Why economic decisions are driven largely by emotions? How do expectations shape perceptions and subsequent decisions? What are the negative consequences of monetary incentives on motivation and task completion?
This highly interdisciplinary course is relevant for students with interests in General
Management, Behavioral Finance, Entrepreneurship, Social Entrepreneurship, and Marketing.
This class has two main learning objectives:
· To introduce the students to the range of cases where people (consumers, employees, managers, and investors) make decisions that are inconsistent with standard economic theory, and the assumptions of rational decision making. This is the lens of behavioral economics.
· To help students think creatively about the applications of behavioral economics principles for the development of new products, technology based products, public policies, and to understand how business and social policy strategies could be modified with a deeper understanding of the effects the principles have on consumers, employees, managers, and investors.
Upper-division standing or consent of instructor plus curiosity about human nature and a desire to better understand our choices and decisions and an interest in ways to improve them.
There is no class textbook. Instead all required readings are made accessible via the school’s subscriptions to academic journals and/or on iLearn.
Classes have a lecture component and a combination of exercises (individually as well as in group settings), discussions, and demonstrations. It is assumed that students complete the assigned readings before class. To incentivize class readings, there are ten online quizzes: one quiz for each week of classes.
There are two closed-book midterm exams and one closed-book final exam. There are also two 600-word write-ups on topics, which can be chosen by students from a list of 9. Attendance is taken in class and (quality) class participation is rewarded.
A. Class participation
B. Weekly online quizzes (total)
C. Midterm exam 1
D. Midterm exam 2
E. Two 600-word write-ups
F. Final exam
Grades will be posted throughout the term on iLearn. If you find any problem with your score, you must inform the instructor within one week from the time this score is posted. After one week, scores will not be reviewed.
In the case of score dispute, the entire exam or assignment will be reviewed, not just the question(s) in dispute. The score could go up, down, or remain the same.
Final grades will be curved based on all grade components (A – F).
A. Class participation:
All students are expected to come to class being prepared for and actively involved in discussing the assigned readings listed in the schedule part of the syllabus. The class participation credit will be awarded based on a student’s participation and attendance throughout the whole term, including the first class.
For class participation credit, attendance is only a necessary but not a sufficient condition. Also, quality of inputs is much more important than quantity. Particularly useful input furthers the understanding of your fellow students and as such is targeted towards them rather than towards the professor. Quality input may also be based on providing real-world examples of concepts covered in class, relating concepts to one’s own experience, or offering novel applications.
Please note that I will reserve the right to cold-call on students, i.e., to ask students for their input even if their hands are not raised. Should you not be prepared for a class, please let me know at the beginning of class, so I will not cold call you. Of course, this will count against you, but not nearly as much as bluffing your way through my questions.
B. Weekly online quizzes:
There will be online quizzes due every week, including week 1 (before class). The main motivation for these quizzes is to provide incentives to students to do the class readings on time, ensuring that we have informative and meaningful discussions during classes.
Each week, quizzes are due Mondays at noon, unless otherwise noted. Submissions after that deadline will not be graded and will not receive course credit.
C. / D. Midterm exam 1 and 2:
Midterm exams will cover the entire course material up to the time of the exam (i.e., for midterm exam 1, weeks 1 to 3, and for midterm exam 2, weeks 4 to 6) and consist of a number of short essay questions and multiple-choice questions.
E. Two 600-word write-ups:
There is a write-up topic available every week, except week 1, so in total there are nine topics, of which you need to choose two. The write-ups are an integral part of the course and should lead to a more informed and lively discussion of the material in class.
1. You must submit at least one write-up by 2/3 (noon), and the second write-up by 3/9 (noon). You may, of course, finish the write-ups sooner.
2. You can find the essay topics in the section “Readings and Assignments” (pages 6-12) in the bottom section of each week’s description. The write-up topics are labeled “Write-Up 1,” “Write-Up 2,” etc. You can choose any of the 9 topics for your submissions, but please note that you can’t write on the same topic twice, i.e., the two essays have to be on two different topics.
3. Write-ups have a strict word limit of 600 words. You will be penalized for exceeding the word limit. However, please note that very short submissions (typically around 450 words and less) tend to do poorly as well.
4. Please include the word count at the top of the document (e.g., “Word Count: 576”).
5. Please omit the standard introduction and conclusion paragraphs. Instead jump right into the topic. Also, assume that you talk to someone who has done the readings, so no need to define concepts and/or refer to academic literature.
6. Please upload the essays as Word files via iLearn (no PDFs). Do NOT enter any assignment notes. Please use double spacing and 12-point fonts with margins of 1 inch all around. Name the file with your full name and topic number (e.g., John Doe 2 x).
I will grade essays out of 15 points, where 15 is “exceptional” (will be given VERY rarely), 14 is “nearly perfect” and 1 is “unacceptable” (you didn’t answer the question). Most grades will range from 9 to 12, with 11-12 implying that the essay was very good.
Computers and cell phones: I allow the use of laptops and tablets in class to allow students to take notes during lectures. However, the use of these devices must be limited to class activities during lectures (no emails, facebook, chatting, etc.). This also implies that the use of smartphones is not allowed during class.
Timeliness: Please arrive on time. As an extra inventive, I will take attendance at the beginning of class, and attendance will be one factor of class participation. We will start promptly and, in return, I promise to let you out early if that section of class allows.
Scoring: Scores will be posted throughout the quarter on iLearn. If you dispute a score, you must inform me within one week from the time the score is posted. After one week, scores will not be reviewed. In case of a score dispute, I will re-assess the entire assignment/exam, not only the question(s) in dispute. As a result, your score may go up, down, or remain the same.
Details are subject to change. We may fall behind schedule, but we will catch up.
1: 1/4 & 1/6
Introduction to Behavioral Economics
Quiz 1 (due 1/6, noon)
2: 1/11 & 1/13
Incentives & Motivation
3: 1/18 & 1/20
No Class / Midterm Exam 1
4: 1/25 & 1/27
Competition & Markets
5: 2/1 & 2/3
Dishonesty & Cheating
Quiz 5 (one essay due 2/3, noon)
6: 2/8 & 2/10
Grey Marketing & Revenge / Midterm Exam 2
7: 2/15 & 2/17
No Class/ Decision Making in Groups
8: 2/22 & 2/24
9: 2/29 & 3/2
Psychology of Money
10: 3/7 & 3/9
Welfare Inferences & Well-Being / Recap & Q&A
Quiz 10 (second essay due 3/9, noon)
Readings and assignments
Week 1 01/04 & 01/06
Introduction to Behavioral Economics
Theory: Standard rational model of economic decisions, bounded rationality Application: How do we value things?
Angner, E. (2012). A Course in Behavioral Economics. Basingstoke: Pelgrave (pages 11-27).
Bouchand, J.-P. (2008). Economics needs a scientific revolution. Nature, 455,
Conlisk, J. (1996). Why bounded rationality? Journal of Economic Literature, 34, 669-700.
Johnson, E. J., & Goldstein, D. (2003). Do defaults save lives? Science, 302, 1338-1339.
Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. American Economic Review, 93, 1449-1475.
Kahneman, D., &Tversky, A. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business, 59, S251-S278.
Thaler, R., &Sunstein, C. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review, 93, 175-179.
Due: Wednesday 01/06 at noon
Week 2 01/11 & 01/13
Incentives & Motivation
Theory: Learning, crowding out of motivation, and the W-effect
Application: How do we motivate people to exercise and to comply with treatments?
Ariely, D., Bracha, A., & Meier, S. (2009). Doing good or doing well? Image motivation and monetary incentives in behaving prosocially. American Economic Review, 99, 544-555.
Charness, G., &Gneezy, U. (2009). Incentives to exercise. Econometrica, 77, 909-931.
Falk, A., &Kosfeld, M. (2006). The hidden cost of control. American Economic Review, 96, 1611-1630.
Frey, B S., &Jegen, R. (2001). Motivation crowding theory: A survey of empirical evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys, 5, 589–611.
Gneezy, U., Meier, S., & Rey-Biel, P. (2011). When and why incentives (don’t) work to modify behavior. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25, 191210.
Gneezy, U., &Rustichini, A. (2000). A fine is a price. Journal of Legal Studies, 39, 1-18.
Gneezy, U., &Rustichini, A. (2000). Pay enough or don’t pay at all. Quarterly Journal of Economics, August, 791-810.
Due: Monday 01/11 at noon
One of the lessons of this section is that incentives matter. Find an example of
bad incentives in the real world and suggest ways to fix the problem. Explain why you think your approach is better.
Week 3 01/18 & 01/20
No Class (01/18) / Midterm Exam 1 (01/20)
Theory: Social norms, social and work related exchanges, and backward sloping demand curves
Application: How do we get people to engage?
Aggarwal, P. (2004). The effects of brand relationship norms on consumer attitudes and behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 87-101.
Fehr, E., &Fischbacher, U. (2004). Third party punishment and social norms. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 63-87.
Goodnow, J. J. (1998). Beyond the overall balance: The significant of particular tasks and procedures for perceptions of fairness in distributions of household work. Social Justice Research, 11, 359-376.
Heyman, J., &Ariely, D. (2004). A tale of two markets. Psychological Science, 15, 787-793.
Maciejovsky, B., Budescu, D. V., &Ariely, D. (2009). The researcher as a consumer of scientific publications: How do name-ordering conventions affect inferences about contribution credit? Marketing Science, 28, 589598.
McGraw, A. P., Tetlock, P. E., &Kristel, O. V. (2003). The limits of fungibility: Relational schemata and the value of things. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 219-229.
McGraw, A. P., &Tetlock, P. E. (2005). Taboo trade-offs, relational framing, and the acceptability of exchanges. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15, 2-15.
Due: Monday 01/18 at noon
One of the lessons of this section is that communal sharing and market pricing often are at conflict. Find an example from the realm of consumer experiences where the perceptions of consumers are at odds with (some of) the practices of the companies involved (e.g., consumers perceive their bank as a communal institution, however, the bank introduced steep fees for late payments). Discuss how the company at hand can mitigate the tension that you have identified between consumers’ perceptions and the business practices involved. Do not use the bank example, but come up with your own example.
Week 4 01/25 & 01/27
Competition & Markets
Theory: Competition and informational efficiency
Application: Do market prices reflect the biases of their traders?
Balafoutas, L., & Sutter, M. (2012). Affirmative action policies promote women and do not harm efficiency in the lab. Science, 335, 579-582.
Budescu, D. V., &Maciejovsky, B. (2005). The effect of payoff feedback and information pooling on reasoning errors: Evidence from experimental
markets. Management Science, 51, 1829-1843.
Gneezy, U., Leonard, K. L., & List, J. A. (2009). Gender differences in competition: Evidence from a matrilineal and a patriarchal society. Econometrica, 77, 1637-1664.
Gneezy, U., Niederle, M., &Rustichini, A. (2003). Performance in competitive environments: Gender differences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, August, 1049-1074.
Gneezy, U., &Rustichini, A. (2004). Gender and competition at a young age.
American Economic Review – Papers and Proceedings, May, 377-381.
Kirchler, E., &Maciejovsky, B. (2002). Simultaneous over- and underconfidence: Evidence from experimental asset markets. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 25, 65-85.
Maciejovsky, B., &Budescu, D. V. (2013). Markets as a structural solution to knowledge-sharing dilemmas. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120, 154-167.
Due: Monday 01/25 at noon
One of the lessons of this section is that gender differences might be persuasive in competitive settings. Discuss ways how you could mitigate the negative effect of competition on the career progression of women in corporate settings.
Week 5 02/01 & 02/03
Dishonesty & Cheating
Theory: Consumer dishonesty, tax evasion, cheating, interventions, and medium effects
Application: Why do people cheat and what are the implications?
Bazerman, M. H., Loewenstein, G., & Moore, D. A. (2002). Why good accountants do bad audits. Harvard Business Review, November, 96-103.
Cummings, R., Martinez-Vazquez, J., McKee, M., &Torgler, B. (2009). Tax morale affects tax compliance: Evidence from surveys and an artefactual field experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 70, 447-457.
Epley, N., Mak, D., &Idson, L. C. (2006). Bonus or rebate?: The impact of income framing on spending and saving. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19, 213-227.
Hsee, C. K., Yu, F., Zhang, J., & Zhang, Y. (2003). Medium Maximization. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 1-14.
Maciejovsky, B., Kirchler, E., &Schwarzenberger, H. (2007). Misperception of chance and loss repair: On the dynamics of tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28, 678-691.
Mazar, N., On, M., &Ariely, D. (2008). The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of self-concept maintenance. Journal of Marketing Research, 45, 633-644.
Shu, L., Mazar, N., Gino, F., Ariely, D., &Bazerman, M. H. Signing at the beginning makes ethics salient and decreases dishonest self-reports in comparison to signing at the end. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, 109, 15197-15200.
Due: Monday 02/01 at noon
Due: At least 1 essay is due by 02/03 at noon (choose any of the 9 topics)
One of the lessons of this section is that people tend to cheat a bit – but not too much – if they can. One of the big puzzles, however, is that people tend to pay their taxes at much higher rates than would have been warranted by the deterrence approach of standard economics that takes into account objective audit rates and penalties. Discuss what factors might be responsible for people’s relatively high tax compliance and discuss ways of how the IRS could further increase compliance.
Week 6 02/08 & 02/10
Grey Marketing & Revenge / Midterm Exam 2 (02/10)
Theory: Corporate dishonesty, free money, gray marketing, long-term effects of dishonesty, and consumer revenge
Application: What are the outcomes for long-term deceptive practices by companies?
Dana, J., &Loewenstein, G. (2003). A social scientist perspective on gifts to physicians from industry. Journal of the American Medical Association, 290, 252-255.
Knutson, B. (2004). Sweet revenge? Science, 305, 1246-1247.
Kruger, A. B., & Mas, A. (2004). Strikes, scabs, and tread separations: Labor strife and the production of defective Bridgestone/Firestone tires. Journal of Political Economy, 112, 253-289.
McGovern, G., & Moon, Y. (2007). Companies and the customers who hate them. Harvard Business Review, 85, 78-84.
Wirtz, J. & Kum, D. (2004). Consumer cheating on service guarantees. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32, 159-175.
Due: Monday 02/08 at noon
One of the lessons of this section is that customer dissatisfaction has severe market implications. The tendency that negative experiences are shared at a higher rate than positive experiences on social media is called “negativity bias.” Discuss ways of how consumers can be motivated to share their experiences in a more balanced fashion, such that not only negative but also positive experiences are posted.
Week 7 02/15 & 02/17
No Class (02/15) / Making Decisions in Groups
Theory: Benefits and disadvantages of making decisions in groups, conformity, authority, and following the emerging group norms
Application: What are some technological tools that could help us make groups behave better?
Bonner, B. L., & Baumann, M. R. (2012). Leveraging member expertise to improve knowledge transfer and demonstrability in groups. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 337-350.
Charness, G., & Sutter, M. (2012). Groups make better self-interested decisions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26, 157-176.
Laughlin, P. R. (2011). Group Problem Solving. Princeton: Princeton University Press, Chapter 1 and Chapter 5.
Lightle, J. P., Kagel, J. H., &Arkes, H. (2009). Information exchange in group decision making: The hidden profile problem reconsidered. Management Science, 55, 568-581.
Maciejovsky, B., &Budescu, D. V. (2007). Collective induction without cooperation? Learning and knowledge transfer in cooperative groups and competitive auctions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 854-870.
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 81-93.
Tindale, R. S., Kameda, T., &Hinsz, V. B. (2003). Group decision making. In: M. A. Hogg and J. Cooper (eds.), Sage Handbook of Social Psychology.
London: Sage, pp. 381-403.
Due: Monday 02/15 at noon
One of the lessons of this section is that groups outperform an equal number of individuals for intellective tasks (those with a demonstrably correct solution). For judgmental tasks (those without a demonstrably correct solution), groups do not outperform individuals. Discuss why we observe these differential effects. What are possible ways of improving the decisions of groups for judgmental problems?
Week 8 02/22 & 02/24
Other Regarding Preferences
Theory: Cooperation, fairness, and trust
Application: How can we measure social capital?
Bardsley, N. (2008). Dictator game giving: Altruism or artefact? Experimental Economics, 11, 122-133.
Camerer, C. (2003). Dictator, ultimatum, and trust games. Behavioral
Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction. Princeton: Princeton University Press, Chapter 2: pp. 43-113.
Dana, J., Cain, D. M., & Dawes, R. (2006). What you don’t know won’t hurt me: Costly (but quiet) exit in a dictator game. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 193-201.
Fehr, E. &Gaechter, S. (2000).Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14, 159-181.
Fehr, E. (2002). Why social preferences matter: The impact of non-selfish motives on competition, cooperation and incentives. Economic Journal, 112, C1-C33.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., &Thaler, R. (1986). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market. American Economic Review,
Small, D. A., &Loewenstein, G. (2003). Helping a victim or helping the victim: Altruism and identifiability. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26, 5-16.
Due: Monday 02/22 at noon
One of the lessons of this section is that people care not only about their own outcomes but also about the outcomes of others. Discuss whether you think that the importance of fairness is incompatible with the idea of price discrimination (for example, to charge lower ticket prices to students for events). How can companies use fairness to advertise/sell their products and services and maintain/increase customer loyalty?
Week 9 02/29 & 03/02
Psychology of Money
Theory: Fairness, opportunity cost, and the psychology of free Application: How do people think about payment?
Benartzi, S., &Thaler, R. H. (2007). Heuristics and biases in retirement savings behavior. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21, 81-104.
Benartzi, S., &Thaler, R. H. (2004). Save more tomorrow: Using behavioral economics to increase employee savings. Journal of Political Economy, 112, S164-S187.
Frederick, S., Novemsky, N., Wang, J., Dhar, R., &Nowlis, S. (2009).
Opportunity cost neglect. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 553-561.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., &Thaler, R. H. (1986). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market. American Economic Review, 76, 728-741.
Shampanier, D., Mazar, N., &Ariely, D. (2007). Zero as a special price: The true value of free products. Marketing Science, 26, 742-757.
Simonsohn, U., &Loewenstein, G. (2006). Mistake #37: The impact of previously faced prices on housing demand. Economic Journal, 116, 175199.
Vohs, K. D., Mead, N. L., & Goode, M. R. (2006). The psychological consequences of money. Science, 314, 1154-1156.
Due: Monday 02/29 at noon
One of the lessons of this section is that fairness matters. Find an example of how it matters in the real world (e.g., on a virtual marketplace) and design a mechanism (e.g., a feedback system) that ensures the persistence of fairness in that setting. Please come up with your own example.
Week 10 03/07 & 03/09
Welfare Inferences & Well-Being / Recap and Q&A
Theory: Happiness, well-being, and hedonic adaptation Application: How can we increase our well-being?
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., &Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323-370.
Crum, A. J., & Langer, E. J. (2007). Mind-set matters: Exercise and the placebo effect. Psychological Science, 18, 165-171.
Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Dread risk, September 11, and fatal traffic accidents. Psychological Science, 15, 286-287.
Layard, R. (2006). Happiness and public policy: A challenge to the profession. Economic Journal, 116, C24-C33.
Kenney, R. L. (2008). Personal decisions are the leading cause of death. Operations Research, 56, 1335-1347.
Rosenbaum, J. E. (2009). Patient teenagers? A comparison of the sexual behavior of virginity pledgers and matched nonpledgers. Pediatrics, 123, e109-e120.
Wilkinson, W. (2007). In Pursuit of Happiness Research: Is It Reliable? What Does It Imply for Policy? Cato Institute: Policy Analysis, No. 590.
Due: Monday 03/07 at noon
Due: The second essay (choose any topic not chosen for first essay) is due by
03/09 at noon
One of the lessons of this section is that self-reported happiness varies widely across countries, often even between comparable countries. Discuss how selfreported happiness changes across time for individuals. What are the major drivers of happiness and how can advertisers use perceptions of happiness to sell products/services?
At the University of California, Riverside (UCR) honesty and integrity are fundamental values that guide and inform us as individuals and as a community. The academic culture requires that each student take responsibility for learning and for producing work that reflect their intellectual potential, curiosity, and capability. Students must represent themselves truthfully, claim only work that is their own, acknowledge their use of others’ words, research results, and ideas, using the methods accepted by the appropriate academic disciplines and engage honestly in all academic assignments. Misunderstanding of the appropriate academic conduct will not be accepted as an excuse for academic misconduct. If a student is in doubt about appropriate academic conduct in a particular situation, he or she should consult with the instructor in the course to avoid the serious charge of academic misconduct.
To ensure the highest standard of academic integrity, all students should be familiar with the guidelines posted at: