Student Senate 2/24: Honor Code AI Policy Proposal Approved, Proctoring Amendment Rejected
Student Senate voted to approve a proposed change to the Honor Code establishing an AI policy and rejected a proposal to allow professors to choose to proctor exams. (Grace Jurchak/The Gettysburgian)
By Brandon Fey, News Editor
Officer Reports
President Michael Woods ’25 announced that there is an expo of new furniture options for the West Quad, which is undergoing renovations. He encouraged senators to vote on furniture selections during the meeting’s adjournment.
Vice President Abby Ruggiero ’26 stated that Senators are encouraged to attend different committee meetings.
Treasurer Jack Thompson ’27 reported that the Senate has $26,782.36 on hand.
Secretary Olivia Taylor ’25 thanked all who attended the Senate Open on Friday.
Inclusion Officer Oliver Eckloff ’27 announced that Alpha Phi Alpha will present “Abolish the N-Word” in the Mara auditorium at 5 p.m. on Thursday.
Senate Advisor Jon Allen announced that student organizations are now permitted to hang advertisement banners over the balcony in the CUB. They must be brought to OSAGL at least two business days ahead of time per the banner policy.
In addition, he said that in the next two weeks, he will discuss OSAGL’s conversations about allowing fraternity and sorority recruitment to begin during the second semester of students’ first year.
He also announced that to support the new finance major, the College will be converting the CUB 212 conference room into a finance lab to host Bloomberg Terminals. This location was selected for accessibility and visibility on tours. This project will require reducing the space of CUB 210, though he is looking for a space large enough for Senate committee meetings. Allen encouraged students to share with him their questions and comments about the project.
Committee Reports
The Academic and Career Affairs Committee, which meets Sundays at 7 p.m. in Glatfelter 007,
is looking to create a student advising group with representatives with different experiences.
The College Life Advisory Committee, which meets Thursdays at 11:30 in Cub 212, announced that it is exploring some of the ideas proposed at the Senate Shark Tank.
The Opinions Committee, which meets Mondays at 4:30 p.m. in CUB 230, is working on the project to fund a new stairmaster in the Jaeger Center.
The Outreach Committee, which meets Thursdays at 7 p.m. in CUB 212, plans to hold Senate tabling after spring break.
The Wellness and Safety Committee, which meets Thursdays at 6:00 pm in CUB 206, is focusing on campus food quality for this semester.
Club Reports and Announcements
President Woods announced that Dining Services will hold a Servo Mardi Gras dinner on Tuesday March 4.
Senate Advisor Jon Allen announced that Student Programming Staff will sponsor “glow golf” on Friday in the basement classrooms of Glatfelter Hall.
Student Concerns
President Woods commented on the progress that has been made on previous student concerns:
- Associate Vice President of Facilities Planning and Management Jim Biesecker was highly receptive to both Senate opinions late meeting regarding campus laundry and plans to soon visit the Senate to discuss.
- Biesecker asked for a list of female product machines that need to be refilled on campus.
- Per prior inquiry, Woods provided a complete list of Bullet Hole items considered as sides for breakfast meals:
- Chobani yogurt
- Oatmeal
- Breakfast meat
- Cereal
- Apple sauce
- Whole fresh fruit
- Utz chips
- Muffin
- Fruit cocktail
- Cottage cheese cup
- Dining Services has been seating large visiting groups in the Atrium of Servo, and signs would be posted ahead of time for the students if a group cannot all fit in that space.
- Per the concern about the Bullet Hole’s to-go vending machines, students will only be charged if the machine doors open.
- Facilities Services are working on heating and laundry issues.
The floor was then opened for students to voice new concerns:
- There was a complaint about cables fraying on the Jaeger Center’s tricep machines.
- The two rightmost dryers in Hazlett Hall are reportedly not working well.
First Adjournment
A 10-minute intermission was allowed for Senators to vote on the furniture displayed for the West Quad housing.
New Business
The Honor Commision, represented by Margaret Matheson ’25, Maimuna Mustafiz and Morgan Unger ’25, visited the Senate to propose two new amendments to the Honor Code.
The first amendment was that the Honor Commission delegates responsibility for artificial intelligence policy to individual faculty members per their policies written in syllabi, or through spoken or written instructions. The Honor Commission will not process Honor Code violations concerning the use of AI, if no instructions were provided for a class assignment.
The second amendment stated that while faculty members are encouraged to not proctor their exams, they would be allowed to proctor exams in-person after having discussed this with their students. The representatives stated that the proctoring policy has not been revised in over 10 years, and the greater availability of electronics has increased cheating, creating more responsibility for students to report cheating. They reported that over half of the students and faculty believe that professors should be able to choose whether they would like to be proctor or not.
The amendments had already been approved by a faculty vote of 98-8 with 3 abstentions, making the Senate vote the final step in their approval process per the Honor Commission’s Constitution.
Because the Senate was voting on behalf of another organization, it could not amend the amendments, and required only a simple majority vote. If approved, the amendments would not take effect until next semester.
Some senators expressed concerns over the consideration of a professor’s “verbal communication” as legitimate instruction, though the Honor Commission explained that verbal instruction would depend on the situation and there is no preference given to either the word of the faculty member or student, as cases are resolved purely by evidence.
The Honor Commission reported that there had been 52 cases about cheating during exams in the fall 2024 semester. Of them, only 11 were peer-reported. 70-80% of plagiarism cases have been due to AI usage.
When processing AI-related cases, the Honor Commission relies on the professor’s expertise on the subject matter in determining the authenticity of student response. They also examine the sources used by accused students. This is designed to place the burden of proof on the professor, rather than penalizing the student.
The Honor Commission representatives explained that before an official hearing, they held a preliminary conference for the accused student, class professor and an administrator from the Center for Student Success. A hearing only takes place if there is not a unanimous vote on the student’s innocence.
The AI amendment was approved by the Senate
The following debate focused the second proposed amendment on faculty proctoring.
Some suggested that the presence of faculty during a test would be beneficial for students to ask questions.
It was also mentioned that several professors have already been proctoring in violation of the Honor Code, to which others responded that concerns with current proctoring should have been reported per the Honor Code’s guidelines.
Some senators raised philosophical arguments against the new amendments, stating that the student self-proctoring policy builds shared trust and is part of school tradition.
Others responded that the policy needs to be adapted with the time, describing the amount of information available to students on their phones as comparable to that of the “Library of Alexandria.” He also said that higher cheating numbers have been representative of a collapse in mutual trust.
One senator said that students learn because they choose to do so, and should not be concerned about cheating by other students.
Another stated that proctoring is fair to the student body, as cheating can artificially inflate grading curves for those who took the time to study honestly.
It was also stated that students should not be required to report cheating by their peers, as students have shown their reluctance to do so.
One senator referred to the absence of faculty proctoring as the “last remaining sovereignty for the students.”
Vice President Ruggiero stated that it is not the fault of the Honor Commission that students have not been reporting professor proctoring, and cited this as a reason why students should not be expected to report each other.
The Honor Commission announced that it has received no reports of faculty proctoring this semester.
One senator asked about the discrepancy between light punishments for tenured faculty as opposed to more severe penalties for students.
The Honor Commission responded that tenured faculty are not above the authority of administrators who tend to enact stricter penalties than are assumed. They also said that student violations are not reflected on permanent transcripts, and are documented by the College, available for the student should an employer or graduate school request to see them.
A motion was introduced to reject the second proposed amendment. This motion passed with a considerable majority in a voice vote, thus terminating the proctoring amendment.
