HOOS AGAINST the single sanction? Not the Students for Preservation of Honor, that's for sure. While the Honor Committee engages in a contentious internal debate over the future of the single sanction and the honor system as a whole, students have begun to assert their opinions. Yet underlying the discussion about tradition, fairness and verdict consistency is a facet of the topic no one is talking about. Put bluntly, the single sanction undermines the very core of the University's mandate: education.
Why are we in Charlottesville? Why do our parents pay thousands of dollars for us to go to class, socialize and exert insane amounts of energy working with various organizations? The answer is obvious -- we are here to learn. We are here to learn just as much about ourselves as we are to learn about history and engineering and biology. Everything about the University is geared toward that goal of growth; it is why we have a tradition of student self-governance and over 500 registered student groups.
Part of learning is making mistakes and improving upon yourself so you don't make them again. It does not follow, then, that we have a one-strike-and-you're-out policy overarching this milieu of all-encompassing education. By denying students a second chance, the single sanction cheapens the University's mission.
It is important to remember that many people brought up on honor charges are not filled with malicious intent or simply too lazy to do their work. In fact, according to Honor Committee statistics, of the 30 cases that went to trial last year, 17 were international students -- for comparison, a whopping 4.6 percent ofUniversity undergraduates are international. International students not only have to contend with the normal stresses of college, but also must adapt to a new country and new definitions of collaboration versus cheating. It is not surprising, then, that international students disproportionately fall into traps and are not only kicked out of the University but deported as well.
Statistics on international student convictions are the most compelling way to illustrate that an honor offense should be seen in a contextual light. However, we should also remember that there are myriad other reasons for an honor offense to be a growing experience and not an academic death sentence. Lying, cheating or stealing is never excusable, but strains, pressures and general confusion as to exactly what constitutes cheating can cause someone who otherwise poses no threat to the community of trust to commit an honor violation. They deserve to be taught a harsh lesson, but not necessarily kicked out.
Interestingly, the Honor Committee actually acknowledges that certain extenuating circumstances warrant a flexible sanctioning system. According to David Hobbs, Vice-Chair for Investigations, a student who believes he or she was not acting in a normal state of mind when committing an offense (for example, if both parents died and the student fell behind and cheated) can admit guilt and enter apsychological evaluation. Per the Committee's bylaws, if the independent psychological panel finds a contributory mental disorder, it can either dismiss the charges or,if they decide the student still poses a significant risk to the community of trust, "the Panel may impose upon such student a suspension and/or other restrictions or conditions."
Since there are contingencies built in for extraordinary circumstances, it is the height of hypocrisy for the honor system to treat all non-psychological cases as if they had no context. Moreover, a system in which expulsion is still a possible sanction does not allow someone who willfully violates the honor code with no legitimate explanation to get off with only a slap on the wrist.
The arguments for maintaining the single sanction mostly revolve around preservation of a system which has survived for over 150 years and the idea that you cannot apply a multiple sanction consistently. To the first point, it is simply defused by demonstrating that changing the single sanction is a way of preserving the honor system. Only 36 percent of respondents to a 2002 Honor Committee survey said they would definitely initiate a case if they saw an honor violation, while 56 percent said they would be more likely to initiate if there were multiple sanctions. Since the honor system does not work unless people are reporting infractions, the single sanction is counter-productive.
The questions of fairness and consistency in a multiple sanction system are the strongest criticisms available to the pro-single sanction camp. However, this assumes that sentencing subjectivity is negative, whereas in fact letting a jury consider multiple sanctions yields a greater degree of proportionality in which the punishment fits the crime. While two juries may come up with different sanctions when hearing the same case, the chances of them being wildly divergent -- say, expulsion versus academic probation -- is much less likely than the chances of a two-semester suspension versus a one-semester suspension. Those small discrepancies are not enough of an indictment to allow the unfettered continuance of a system which cuts at the University's educational mandate, hinders the number of initiated cases and treats every accused in the same context-less vacuum.
There has been no perfect alternative to single sanction offered as of yet, though there is an internal single sanction ad hoc committee working on one. But one committee cannot alone fight the forces of the status quo. More and more, it needs to be the students raising the call for change, the call for the end of single sanction. We are here to learn and grow, and it is high time the honor system did the same.
Elliot Haspel is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at ehaspel@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
