Recent Honor Code review offers praise for existing policies
By Tyler Leard, Staff Writer
After a lengthy process of review, the Honor Code Review Commission’s report generally offered praise for the changes enacted by the revised Honor Code of 2006, although it highlighted room for improvement in several areas.
The revised Honor Code system was implemented in 2006 in an attempt to review and update the system and implantation of the Honor Code
Christopher Zappe
“The commission was trying to ask, given the revisions, what is the intended purpose, how well is the Honor Code working? Generally, we were pleased with the results, although there is improvement to be made in some areas,” said Provost Christopher Zappe.
Professor Lisa Portmess, one of the co-chairs of the Honor Code Review Commission, also commented on the report.
“We’ve seen lots of improvement…in many areas from six years ago,” she said.
Portmess touted some of the improvements that have resulted from the revised code. In particular, the introduction of Preliminary Conferences to resolve Honor Code violations before submitting the case to a hearing has proved to be very effective.
Eighty-six percent of cases involving alleged violations of the Honor Code are currently resolved in preliminary conferencing, according to the report. In addition, the ability of students to have a faculty advisor during their hearings has served to increase their bearing and composure during that event.
The revised code also gives greater flexibility in assigning punishments for violations.
Lisa Portmess
“Every situation, every violation, has a different set of circumstances surrounding the event. The new system gives much greater flexibility with regards to this” said Portmess.
However, this flexibility makes it more difficult to institute an even standard of punishment for violators, which the report found to be the greatest problem with the revised system.
The Honor Code Review Commission has advised for the development of guidelines to make punishment for equal violations more consistent. Similarly, differing faculty policies and enforcement regarding the Honor Code were mentioned as an issue, although the report admits less can be done regarding that issue.
The report also drew light on some disturbing issues, including the fact that eighteen percent of violations occur in 300- or 400-level classes. Additionally, 40 percent of students said that the Honor Code has no impact on their academic behavior.
To deal with these issues, the report proposed increasing the amount of Honor Code education to upperclassmen and increasing school awareness of the Honor Code.
Some of these proposals, such as placing the Honor Code pledge in classrooms, have already taken effect.
The report also acknowledged the challenges brought to the Honor Code by technology, which serves to make cheating infinitely easier and harder to trace. To counter this threat, the report proposes a vital “need for reengagement with and affirmation of the principles of academic integrity and honesty embodied in the Honor Code.”
