Although Honor Committee members did not discuss the relationship between the Board of Visitors and the upcoming honor referenda during their meeting last night, several representatives expressed strong opinions on the issue.
According to a document obtained by The Cavalier Daily, the Board requested at a 1999 meeting that the Committee make significant changes to the honor system in return for an agreement to litigate a pending honor case.
The document, an official memorandum summarizing a meeting between the Board's Special Committee and 1998-99 Honor Committee members, also states that if such changes did not receive student approval, the Board would make the changes it saw necessary by decree.
"There is no relationship between that meeting and the changes being made now," graduate Education Rep. Jim Haley said.
"Personally, I think the idea that the changes were quote 'scripted' is ridiculous, given the time the Committee has put into this," Committee Chairwoman for Investigations Ginny Rothschild said.
The proposed changes to the honor constitution and bylaws stem from the Honor System Review Commission report, released last November.
The four proposed constitutional amendments include changing the role of oral advocates at trial, eliminating consideration of the seriousness clause in cases of academic fraud, changing the composition of juries and changing the vote required for a guilty verdict.
"The BOV is ultimately responsible for everything at the University, but in my tenure, members of the Board have expressed strong support of student self-governance," Committee Chairman Thomas Hall said.
"I don't think the Board is interested in [single-handedly] changing the honor system," Hall said in response to the possibility of the Board ordering changes by decree regardless of the will of students. "I think under [BOV member] Gordon Rainey's leadership, the BOV will take a hands-off approach," he said.
Other Committee members were less relaxed about the contents of the memo.
"The fact that it was in writing lends some substance to the threat," Law School Rep. Dan Smith said. The Committee is "chartered legally and we derive our power from the BOV. So at any point they wanted to, they could close us down."
In response to the apparently secretive nature of the agreement between the Board's Special Committee and Honor Committee members, Smith said, "yeah it ... bothers me." It could be considered "an indication that we are not capable of governing ourselves," he said.
Read More
New School of Data Science building opens with remarks and ceremony
By Cecilia Mould | 22 hours agoThe four-story, 61,000 square-foot building includes four classrooms and two seminar rooms, as well as a two-story central hub for hosting events.
Democratic Futures Project fellow Félix Maradiaga announces campaign to end arbitrary detention
By Caroline Hagood | 22 hours agoA public website for the campaign launched Friday, which Maradiaga says is the first step towards raising awareness.
HRL preassigns 25 percent of returning resident advisors for 2024-25 academic year
By Cecilia Mould | YesterdaySome SRs are upset with this change, with two SRs saying that it has somewhat reduced the relative autonomy they have had when choosing their staff in past years.
