OSI Case #12-5848
Chancellor’s Office of Special Investigations65 Court Street - Room 922 • Brooklyn, NY 11201Telephone: 718 935 3800; Fax: 718 935 3931
RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION
Student A, 16-year-old, male, 11
Student A’s OSI interview:
Student A was interviewed on July 30, 2012 by Investigators Boyles and Hughes,in the presence of Father A.
To begin, Student A confirmed that he had used his iPhoneto disseminate test information during multiple June 2012 Regents exams; he explainedthat he did not get caught until the day that the LOTE exam was given.
Regarding hisunderstanding of Stuyvesant’s cell phone policy, Student A stated that Mr. Teitel advisesstudents that he “doesn’t check bags;” however, “if a teacher sees a phone, they’llconfiscate it.” He further acknowledged that Mr. Teitel has “outlined” this policy“multiple times.”When asked why he decided to cheat on the exams, Student A expressed that hewanted to garner “good will” amongst his classmates. He explained that he is “good” inPhysics, “okay” in U.S. History, and” “not good at all” in Spanish; as such, he was“hoping” that one of the classmates whom he helped on the Physics or U.S. History examwould be motivated to assist him during the LOTE exam.When questioned, Student A explained that the first conversation he had with anyclassmates about potentially cheating was held “face-to-face” on Tuesday, June 12, 2012.Following this, Student A and Students E and F communicated about the plan via textmessaging.
When asked about the eventual number of students involved, Student Aasserted that the number of students who received his texts “grew and grew.” Student Aclaimed that, although the plan to cheat was “maybe mentioned” on Facebook, no detailsabout the plan were disclosed online.With regard to how he actually planned to cheat, Student A explained toInvestigators Boyles and Hughes that each Regents exam is proctored by two separateindividuals, the second of whom takes the place of the first mid-way through the three-hour exam. According to Student A, the first Regents exam he took was the Physicsexam: his proctors were Mr. Francis, followed by an unidentified female.
Initially, Student A asserted that, because he was “familiar with” Mr. Francis and“knew he was hard [an observant proctor],” he “didn’t utilize [his] cell phone” until Ms.George came to relieve Mr. Francis of his proctoring post. When Investigators Boyles
A summary of Father A’s brief interview statements follows the summary of Student A’s statements.
For reference, the “LOTE” is the “Language Other Than English” exam; it was administered on June 18, 2012.Although it is a city-wide (and not a state-wide) test, a student’s performance on the LOTE affects whether he or shereceives an Advanced Regents diploma.
All attempts to contact and interview Students E and F were unsuccessful.
Mr. Francis has been identified as Hugh Francis, ELA teacher; based on the proctoring schedule provided to OSI byAssistant Principal and testing coordinator Randi Damesek, it is believed that the female proctor is Biology teacherShangaza George.