In his guest viewpoint (“A wolf in sanction reform’s clothing,” 2/10/2009), Justin Starr demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the proposal by Hoos Against Single Sanction. Starr would have us believe that the purpose of the proposal is to punish every trivial, meaningless white lie that students commit daily at the University. He purports that the Honor Committee, under the rule of the proposal, would conduct a veritable witch hunt to convict students guilty only of common mistakes. What Starr fails to recognize is that his nightmare of an honor system is the current reality: every semester, honor convicts students guilty of nothing more than haphazard mistakes or oversights. The proposal from HASS would serve only to penalize these students with something less than a termination of their education at the University. Rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all punishment of being expelled from school, the proposal would require honor juries to consider multiple options so that the punishment can fit the crime. Any reasonable person would agree that a system more forgiving of minimal offenses would be in the best interest of any student at this University.
Read More
P.U.M.P.K.I.N. SOCIETY: Happy Halloween 2025
By P.U.M.P.K.I.N. Society | October 31, 2025We Would Like To Recognize The Volunteers, Pavilion Residents And Residents Of The Lawn And Range For Their Efforts To Ensure A Safe And Fun Trick-Or-Treating On The Lawn Event This Year
LETTER: The Jefferson Council understates faculty criticism of the presidential search
By Jeri Seidman | October 23, 2025That is factually inaccurate. In fact, faculty did protest.
A statement by 211 concerned faculty on the presidential and provost search committees
By Concerned Faculty | October 4, 2025As members of the faculty, we remind the Board that, at the end of the day, an academic community is an exercise in shared governance for the good of the whole.
