Honor Committee discusses panelist questioning policy in new sanctioning framework
By Lexie Stadler | 6 days agoThe Committee discussed two potential approaches for determining the relevance of panelist questions.
The Committee discussed two potential approaches for determining the relevance of panelist questions.
The Committee is currently training support officers on the updated process.
The proposal raised questions about its alignment with the Committee’s Constitution, specifically regarding representative voting rights..
Will Hancock, vice chair for the undergraduate community and third-year College student, has led planning for the outreach event, which will host informal student discussions on academic integrity.
Sunday’s meeting marked the first of the Committee’s voting days — where proposed bylaw changes would only be voted on on set dates.
The change would allow the Counsel for the Community to outline their arguments for which sanctions should be employed.
Students who were accused of Honor violations had the option to continue case processings over the summer or wait until after July 1.
Howard introduced a new student engagement initiative — the creation of a monthly, opt-in newsletter from the Committee.
For the Committee to vote on changes, they must meet quorum, meaning 20 of the 30 representatives must be present.
University President Jim Ryan previously voiced concerns at a Board meeting last December about the lack of protocol for University responses to social and political issues.