It’s rarely good news when journalists are in the headlines — especially when it involves… It’s rarely good news when journalists are in the headlines — especially when it involves one of the top journalism schools in the country.

Last Thursday, a story broke regarding allegations of cheating in the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism. According to an article in the Washington Post, students brought forth allegations against an undisclosed number of classmates who committed undisclosed acts of misconduct on their final exam.

And as if this story wasn’t already dripping with irony, the final exam in question was in an ethics class.

Students in the ethics course, called “Critical Issues in Journalism,” were given 48 hours to long onto a Columbia Web site to take their final exam. From the time the students logged onto the site, they had 90 minutes to complete two essay questions.

Forgive us for pointing out the obvious, but this isn’t the most bulletproof method of giving a test with regards to cheating. What’s to stop students from logging on, showing their classmates the questions and then proceeding to take their exam while friends run off and do some last minute studying. Sure, it’s an ethics class, but some students — even, apparently, at Columbia — have no sense of ethics.

Samuel Freedman, the class’ instructor, as well as other administrators — who are, themselves, journalists — declined to comment and instead directed reporters to the school’s director of communications and special events. You got it — journalists sending journalists to public relations representatives. Pretty funny, huh?

On Friday, the day after the story broke, the Graduate School of Journalism held a meeting to discuss the events that had transpired. There were no clear decisions or disclosures of information made after the meeting. Obviously, the school knows how insanely important this situation is considering the current state of journalism in the United States and the university’s status as a top journalism school.

Following the meeting, administrators held a mandatory meeting with the class in question. In the meeting, students asked administrators why they weren’t being more immediately proactive in resolving the case. Other students begged classmates who cheated to step forward and give themselves up.

We understand the students’ concern and desire to quickly resolve the potentially damaging blemish on the Columbia journalism program, but the school has a lot at stake, and it’s important that they act responsibly, making sure they have covered everything when it is time to go public. Still, we look for officials to make an announcement soon, as dragging this on will only make the situation worse.

If anything, this is an example of how seriously ethical violations are taken in the world of journalism. Despite recent criticisms we are still a community with integrity.

The format of the ethics exam was flawed, and although it’s unfortunate to admit it, there are people who will always find a way to cheat, even in premier universities. Hopefully, the resolution of this dilemma will reflect the high standards of ethics that many journalists hold to. After the meetings, Freedman assigned a third take-home question that will hopefully serve to balance any unfairness in the exam.

“You are the executive editor at a newspaper. 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,” the question reads.

You may wonder if the student(s) who cheated on the ethics exam learned anything in class. One thing’s for sure: They’ve gotten an education in ethics now. While some students expressed anxiety about their expensive graduate program being “dishonored,” others admitted that they learned more about ethics in the past week than they had all semester. Let’s just hope this isn’t the only positive thing that comes out of this story.