IN THE wake of multiple instances of cheating at the University, many professors have been encouraged to handle cheating with their own brand of punishment, because it is difficult for professors to play by the rules concerning a violation of honor policies. Therefore, the Honor Committee should better inform faculty on what can and can't be done to enforce the honor system. Additionally, the administration and students should come up with different policies for professors to deal with student violation of the honor system within their own classes.
As was reported in this paper, the only information about honor that is given to a professor prior to coming to teach at the University is a paragraph in their acceptance letter explaining that professors have a responsibility to uphold the honor system within the University. Outside of that message, there is no clarity offered to new members about the faculty's role in the honor system.
This limited information does not significantly aid professors when they are forced to deal with an honor offense. There are no such initiation letters for teaching assistants, making it even more difficult for TAs to understand and fully enforce the honor system outside of limited information from training and Honor Committee member discussions. Even Karen Ryan, associate dean in the College of Arts and Sciences, has admitted in a previous Cavalier Daily article that "there's not a lot of clarity" with the honor policy. Important information pertaining to faculty limitations in dealing with honor offenses, such as the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act that allows students to keep their educational records private, is not sufficiently clear.
As Astronomy Prof. Charles Tolbert pointed out in an interview, the current honor policy allows students to finish the course in which they were accused of cheating, and "if found guilty, he loses credit in all his current courses as opposed to the course he took earlier." When the student is forced to leave the University, he or she loses credit for current coursework -- but not necessarily for the class the student cheated in if the honor proceedings about the incident concluded in a later semester. This matters because even after students are expelled for honor offenses, they can receive transfer credit at other schools for their course work. It is deplorable that a professor who understands the inner workings of his or her own class cannot enforce their own policies on cheating if the Honor Committee concludes a student's guilt.
The administration must address and change the faculty's limited choices regarding the faculty grading option within the honor system, expanding it to allow professors to fail the student from the course once the student is found guilty of an honor violation by the Honor Committee. But currently, other than the professor's option of failing a student on that particular assignment or exam, there is little that can be done by a professor for that course regarding an honor violation.
Before the Honor Committee allowed faculty initiations of cases, the standard practice was to give the paper on which a student was accused of cheating to students (usually graduate teacher assistants). The professor was not involved after that point. The ability of the professor to initiate an honor charge since then has been a significant improvement both to faculty's discretion in conjunction with honor system and to students' rights to privacy. But faculty initiations are not enough. The University has a responsibility to let professors pass or fail their own students in their class once there is conclusive evidence against the student.
Whether students who violate the community of trust deserve a different punishment than being forced to leave the University is debatable, but the faculty grading option should be expanded to include entire courses, not just the offending assignment. Students who feel that their class grade is unjust can still appeal the grades to a dean, as they can appeal any grade for any reason, even after being expelled. Additionally, if the honor trial concludes that the student did not violate the honor system, the student can use this evidence to restore his or her original grade in the class. However, once the Honor Committee finds the student guilty, whatever grade the student received in the class that he or she cheated in should be referred back to the professor.
When the student body and the administration decide to clarify the honor policy and the role of the professor within the honor system, the University should understand that the professor is in control. Therefore, the professor should be the one eventually in charge of the grades of those who conclusively violate the honor code.
Adam Silverberg is a Cavalier Daily Viewpoint writer.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Elect Honor representatives committed to transparency
By Editorial Board | February 20, 2025Each candidate has looked to the past to gain a comprehensive understanding of the Honor system and has also exhibited forward-thinking solutions to the Committee’s present challenges.
EDITORIAL: Choose UJC representatives who believe in internal reform
By Editorial Board | February 20, 2025All four of these candidates articulated innovative and practical ideas to better promote the internal sustainability of UJC.
EDITORIAL: Elect Student Council representatives that advocate for students
By Editorial Board | February 20, 2025Furthermore, each of these candidates passionately established their focus on the protection of student resources through bargaining with administration.
