Pass the Proposals
As the University begins to shake off the cobwebs after Thanksgiving Break, we find that things are getting pretty hectic. Quizzes and papers loom and final exams lurk on the horizon. And, oh yes, the fate of the honor system as we know it hangs in the balance.
Just over a week ago, the Honor System Review Commission released its extensive report. It wasn't a fluffy piece of self-congratulation. It was a hard-hitting diagnosis that recognized that there is a dark shadow cast over the future of the system we've signed on to. The proposals were sweeping, and would change the fundamental way we deal with our honor code.
Now the Honor Committee is moving on the report. The Committee is seeking feedback to figure out what proposals to put to a student vote, and will try to turn out a substantial vote in the spring to approve or shoot down the proposals. Those proposals are big. They would change the system from a legalistic, confrontational one to a more administrative one. That might not sound big. It is. Read the report and you'll see that.
Every student group should study the Commission's report and offer its own perspective. Groups should give public endorsements for or against the proposed reforms. Student publications, Student Council, Greek and cultural organizations should disseminate the report's information to their members, gauge their opinions, and pronounce institutional endorsements if necessary. This is a community matter, and the whole community has a right and even an obligation to get involved.
Just because the Honor Committee is in charge of educating members of the University community on the system doesn't mean they have to do it by themselves -- or that they should.
We'll start by highlighting our own institutional opinion on the Commission's report. The proposals contained in the report are just and necessary and should be enacted in full. They all should go to a vote by the student body.
Students should look at the entire package as a whole. The Commission's recommendations focus on eliminating the criminal prosecution atmosphere of honor trials. The current procedure is fraught with regulations, rules and guidelines. Anyone looking at the system from the outside or getting involved for the first time is almost certain to be boggled and confused by the amount of time required and hoops to jump through just to get to a trial.
The proposed changes aim to get rid of the overly legalistic system in exchange for one that will focus on one thing -- the truth.
The Review Commission's proposals would bring about a newer, cleaner system. The process would be less intimidating. Accused students wouldn't need to seek legal aid, but would simply tell their side of the story. The proposals eliminate courtroom fixtures, such as opening arguments and adversarial contests between counsels. Above all, the new system would be easier to understand and therefore easier to believe in.
Some of the proposals will be contentious. Nonetheless, the current system is unlikely to survive as it is. These proposals may be the only way for the system to continue.
Today, many students and faculty do not believe our honor system works as it should. If people don't trust the system, the system can't create a community of trust.
In order to restore the community's faith, drastic changes are required. The Commission has given us a solution, and we should push the proposed changes to a vote. The alternative is to have the entire system scrapped in favor of one with much more administrative oversight. Let's show the University that student self-governance still works, and that we are capable of managing our honor system. Let's restore the faith of faculty and administrators that those who lie, cheat or steal are not going to be permitted to take a degree from the University. Let's put the proposed reforms into action.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Signing off from the 135th term
By Editorial Board | December 20, 2024At the end of our term, we thought it fitting to share with you which of our 28 editorials have been our favorites.
EDITORIAL: End the Batten Curve
By Editorial Board | December 5, 2024The Batten School must allow professors to design grading systems tailored to the needs of their own students.
EDITORIAL: Repressive classroom agendas cost students their education
By Editorial Board | December 2, 2024Religiously-oriented education is one of the most obvious manifestations of this regional specificity and one of the greatest drivers of censorship.
