At its meeting last night, the Honor Committee discussed ideas on the "informed retraction" amendment proposal that it also considered at its annual retreat last weekend. If passed by the committee, this constitutional change could be put to a referendum vote as early as this spring in order to be implemented in the Honor System.
"The retreat went really well and we have a focus group working on drafting" the informed retraction proposal, Chairman Thomas Hall said.
The informed retraction would allow a student who knew a charge had been initiated against him to submit a written retraction acknowledging the offense and agreeing to make reparations to those affected by his actions. The student also would have to take a leave of absence from the University for reflection and rehabilitation. The retraction must be made before trial in order to prevent expulsion.
As the system currently works, a student may register a conscientious retraction if he believes he may have committed an offense, but cannot do so once a charge has been filed against him.
"At the retreat there was a slim majority [in favor of pursuing the idea] and we're compromising on something to present to students in the upcoming spring elections," said Architecture Representative Brian Winterhalter, who also first proposed the informed retraction.
The Committee has been discussing variations on the informed retraction idea for much of this semester.
"I think it is a wonderful idea," said Brian Smith, chairman of the Diversity Awareness sub-committee. "The Committee is really trying to make the Honor System stronger by encouraging more student participation in the system."
However, some Committee members strongly oppose the idea.
"The Honor System is U.Va.'s most important tradition and we hope that the student body and the Honor Committee can find better ways to solve the problems facing the system than undermining the single sanction," Commerce School Representative Brad Buchanan and Vice Chairwoman for Education Katie Gillespie both stated.
The purpose of the informed retraction, according to the current draft proposal, is "to provide an opportunity for investigated students to act honorably and admit to their honor offenses while reaffirming their commitment to the community of trust."
The Committee still has not agreed on all the specifics of the informed retraction, but members developed a detailed outline of the proposal at their retreat.
Issues still under debate include how long students should have after being informed of charges before they can file an informed retraction, how students should present the retraction to the Committee, how long students should leave school for rehabilitation and whether students who have graduated or transferred should be eligible for informed retraction.
"Due to lack of initiations and jury nullification, it is clear that a significant portion of our community is not comfortable with the current system," Winterhalter said. There must be a change to the honor system, he said.
The focus group working on the informed retraction proposal plans to finish drawing up a new draft sometime this week.
Read More
Police forcefully clear encampment near University Chapel, detain protesters
By Thomas Baxter and Finn Trainer | 21 hours agoThe University declared the encampment an unlawful assembly at 2:44 p.m.
Student Council passes appointment bill, approves new CIOs at final meeting of semester
By Arshiya Pant | YesterdayMendoza Gonzalez also said she will be meeting with Kenyon R. Bonner, vice president and chief student affairs officer, to discuss further strategies for the Student Council Endowment Fund.
Professors speak about leading productive dialogue on Israel-Hamas war
By Lexie Stadler | 2 days agoThe event was hosted by the University’s Task Force on Religious Diversity and Belonging, which is designed to ensure that the University is welcoming to community members from all religions and cultures.
