Amid constitutional controversy and issues surrounding efficiency and effectiveness within the Virginia Tech Undergraduate Honor System, former Associate Chief Justice Amanda Beringer was promoted to the position of chief justice, through what some have said is an unconstitutional action, following the resignation of former Chief Justice Greg Sagstetter. Sagstetter resigned Jan. 23 after expressing concern about the long-term viability of the honor system.
Sagstetter's resignation was followed by those of former Associate Chief Justice Lindsey Aitcheson and three other associate justices, leaving only four remaining members on the nine-person student panel. Additionally, two associate justices wrote letters of complaint in response to the decision to appoint Beringer, stating their concerns about the relationship between faculty and students in honor system proceedings.
Aitcheson said her resignation resulted from the refusal of faculty members of the Virginia Tech Undergraduate Honor System Review Board to listen to student concerns during the Jan. 26 board meeting.
"We were systematically silenced by the faculty," Aitcheson said. "The faculty told us to stop talking, and pushed Amanda Beringer into the position because she was willing to maintain the status quo."
Controversy has arisen in light of the resignations and subsequent appointment of new members over the authority of the Review Board and Provost's Office as is required by Virginia Tech's Undergraduate Honor System constitution. Several students have asserted that Beringer's appointment is unconstitutional because quorum was not met during the Review Board meeting.
"Through precedent, it has been established that the honor system cannot do anything without a quorum," Aitcheson said. "They just appointed Amanda Beringer."
Alan McDaniel, chair of the Honor Review Board, said it was not foreseen that there would be a resignation this term, and noted that the process for appointing a chief justice midterm is not sufficiently specified in the honor system constitution. He added that quorum is not required in making decisions unrelated to cases -- a majority vote of present members is taken in these situations.
In a letter dated Jan. 24, Ronald Daniel, associate provost for undergraduate education, wrote to Sagstetter, "I concur with the arrangements you have made with Associate Justice Amanda Beringer to assume the role of chief justice for the remainder of the academic year."
Sagstetter denied that he made any such arrangements or that he has the constitutional authority to do so.
Later that same day, Neal Kegley, operations manager for the honor system, sent an e-mail to members of the honor system stating that Beringer's appointment was recommended by Sagstetter and approved by the provost and the chair of the Review Board.
"This issue is not up for discussion or debate," Kegley wrote in the e-mail.
In response, Sagstetter attempted to issue a point of clarification concerning his resignation and Beringer's appointment during the Jan. 26 Review Board meeting.
Aitcheson said Sagstetter was denied entry into the meeting by McDaniel.
"On Friday, Dr. McDaniel pulled him outside and basically said 'Greg, you can only say that you resigned -- you cannot make your point of clarification,'" Aitcheson said. "Greg came in and was not allowed to say what he needed to say."
Sagstetter and Aitcheson said these recent events illustrate growing problems in the honor system. They both noted a substantial divide in the Review Board between students and faculty.
Sagstetter said commissions were established in 1999 and 2001 to review the activity of the honor system and noted that his recommendations for change were largely the same as those put forth by these previous commissions.
According to Sagstetter, insufficient action was taken in response to these recommendations, resulting in the systemic flaws and inefficiencies within the Virginia Tech Undergraduate Honor System today.
Sagstetter also cited concerns about due process.
"We were canceling at least 25 percent of our panels," Sagstetter said. "I would call that a broken system."
Aitcheson added that there is a lack of proper education in regard to the honor system, and echoed Sagstetter's sentiment:
"I think the honor system is completely non-functional and is being led by a girl who was unconstitutionally elected," Aitcheson said.
Beringer was not willing to comment on the circumstances surrounding her appointment, but said the honor system remains strong.
"The honor system is moving forward as it was before," Beringer said.
David Ford, Virginia Tech's vice provost for academic affairs, added that the honor system is healthy and fully functional.
"We have students who are serving in the leadership roles for those who resigned and cases that have been turned in are being addressed," Ford said.
Sagstetter maintained that there were serious flaws within the system and that the Review Board is not conducting its affairs in a constitutional manner.
"I am of the opinion that the system is in a state of failure," Sagstetter said.
Earlier this month, Virginia Tech's Commission on Student Affairs passed a resolution expressing serious concern over the current status of the honor system in response to the situation. The resolution provides for the establishment of a committee made up of students, faculty and staff not already involved in the honor system to review the current system and make recommendations.
Editor's Note: A correction was made in the online version of this article Feb. 12, 2007.
Read More
U.Va. loses over $60 million in federal research cuts
By Bertie Azqueta | YesterdayThe impacted grants include three from the NIH, seven from the NEH, one from the United States Agency for International Development and four from the State Department.
Department of Education reverses course, awards Federal Executive Institute to U.Va.
By Ford McCracken | 4 days agoThe ED had previously awarded the institute to Charlottesville City Schools.
Students reflect on the life and legacy of Pope Francis
By Bertie Azqueta | 5 days agoAt the University, students shared a range of perspectives on his legacy of reform, inclusivity and his impact on the global Catholic community.
